HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-0902 Council Mtg PACKET 1'
Important: Any citizen attending council meetings may speak on any item on the
agenda, unless it is the subject of a public hearing which has been closed. If you
wish to speak, please fill out the Speaker Request form located near the
entrance to the Council Chambers. The chair will recognize you and inform you
as to the amount of time allotted to you. The time granted will be dependent to
some extent on the nature of the item under discussion, the number of people who
wish to be heard, and the length of the agenda.
AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL
September 2, 1997
I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: 7:00 p.m., Civic Center Council Chambers.
ll. ROLL CALL
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Regular meeting minutes of August 19, 1997, and
Study Session of August 26, 1997.
IV. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS:
1. „ Presentation of 30-year Service Award to Electric Customer Service
K Technician Jim Smith.
Mayor's Proclamation of September 2-5 as "Back to School Safety Week.”
V. CONSENT AGENDA:
1. Minutes of boards, commissions and committees.
2. Monthly Departmental Reports - August, 1997.
3. City Administrator's Monthly Report - August, 1997.
4. Confirmation of Mayor's appointment of Don Bieghler as City Band Director
as recommended by the Band Board.
5. Request by Public Works Director for a street cut on the alley off 2nd
Street.
VI. PUBLIC FORUM: Business from the audience not included on the agenda.
(Limited to 5 minutes per speaker and 15 minutes total.)
Council Meeting Pkt.
BARBARA CHRISTENSEN
CITY RECORDER
I
1
VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS: (Testimony limited to 5 minutes per speaker. All hearings
must conclude by 9:30 p.m. or be continued to a subsequent meeting).
1. Planning Action 94-117. A request for a Site Review and Outline Plan
Approval for a 7-lot multi-family townhouse project on Church Street, West
of North Main (Norbert and Phyllis Bischof, applicants).
2. Planning Action 97-067. A request for an amendment to Ashland Land Use
Ordinance Removing the Requirement for Annual Reviews for Traveler's
Accommodations.
VIII. ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS:
1. First readiM by title only of "An Ordinance Amending Chapter 18.62 of the
Ashland Municipal Code - Land Use Ordinance, Adopting New Hillside
Development Standards."
2. First reading by title only of "An Ordinance Amending Sections 18.24.030.K
and 18.28.030.J of the Ashland Municipal Code - Land Use Ordinance,
Removing the Requirement for Annual Reviews for Traveler's
Accommodations."
Second reading by title only of "An Ordinance Repealing the Sunset Clause
for the Chronic Nuisance (Party House) Ordinance."
4. Contract with David M. Griffith & Associates, Ltd. for City Administrator
recruitment services.
IX. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS
X. ADJOURNMENT
MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL
August 19, 1997
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Gold n called the meeting to order at 7:07pm, Civic Center Council Chambers.
ROLL CAI L
Councilors laws, Hauck, Hagen, Wheeldon and DeBoer were present. Councilor Reid was absent.
APPROVAI J OF MINUTES
The Regular meeting minutes of August 5, 1997 were approved as presented with the following change:
Bottom of e 8 - regarding the letter read aloud by the Mayor from Patricia Duncan, should reflect that
skateboards re only allowed on sidewalks under the present ordinan ce.
OATH OF OFFICE
1. Administration of Oath of Office to Police Chief Scott Fleuter by Judge Allen G. Drescher.
Judge Allen C. Drescher administered the Oath of Office to Police Chief Scott Fleuter. Mayor Golden
welcomed new Police Chief Scott Fleuter aboard.
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS:
1. Presentation of Retirement and Service Award to City Band Director Raoul Maddox.
Mayor Golden reflected that Raoul Maddox has brought joy to the citizens of Ashland for 21 years through
the Ashland City Band, and although the Band will continue on without Raoul he has added a special spirit
and excitement to the Thursday evening Band concerts. She remarked how Raoul had joined together with
the City Band to raise money to travel to Guanajuato, Mexico, and what a wonderful job they did while
there. The Mayor presented a Service Award for Meritorious Achievement to Raoul Maddox for his 21
years as Band Director.
Raoul Maddox thanked the Mayor and said the City Band is part of a tradition that makes Ashland unique.
He said he was hopeful that by the end of the week the City Band will have selected a new Director.
2. Introduction and Special Presentation by the Ashland Historic Commission.
Councilor Steve Hauck as the Historic Commission liaison introduced Chairperson Jim Lewis and Keith
Chambers to make a presentation on behalf of the Historic Commission.
Jim Lewis introduced himself and the group. He thanked Sonja Akerman and Mark Knox as the staff
liaisons for their help. He said that some of the issues dealt with recently include a Review Board where
the Historic Commission deals with city planning decisions within the Historic District and invited anyone
who has interest in building or history in general to attend a meeting any Thursday at 3pm in the City
Planning Department. He explained there is in the works a nomination for National Historic Places for the
Railroad District. Regarding the Downtown Design standards and changes, sub-committees have been
Cur Coon&Meeffie 8/19197 1
formed with people from downtown, Historic Commission members and staff. He referenced a "History of
Ashland" book by Marjorie O'Hara which gives a good perspective on the history of the area.
Keith Chambers explained there are eight commissioners, all volunteers. He values the support of council
members as they work to try to continue in the rich historic tradition that Ashland has. He said he has
been on the commission since 1990 and received really good support and education from the city Planning
staff. He praised Sonja Akerman and Mark Knox for their expertise and Bill Molnar and John McLaughlin
prior to them. He feels the Historic Commission is a very important commission which points to a large
and growing,number of successes.
Mayor Golden thanked them for their presentation and for the work done by the commission. She feels the
Historic Commission is extraordinary in its endeavor to keep a beautiful face on Ashland to preserve the
past. She noted a thriving and vibrant downtown area.
Keith Chambers noted as an aside that two professors visiting from one of Korea's major universities were
interested in the possibility of developing a linkage with a US university in the west. He said they were
particularly interested in a link with Southern Oregon University, as they feel that is a unique community.
He also mentioned that following his recent trip to Nabari, Japan, the City of Nabari may be interested in a
link with Southern Oregon University.
CONSENT AGENDA:
1. Minutes of boards, commissions and committees.
2. Monthly Departmental Reports - July, 1997.
3. Approval of$1 increase in tie-down fees at Ashland Municipal Airport.
4. Memorandum from Community Development re: Railroad District - National Register Grant
Approval.
Councilors Hauck/Hagen mis Consent Agenda. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed.
PUBLIC FORUM: Business from the audience not included on the agenda. (Limited to 5 minutes per
speaker and 15 minutes total.)
OPEN: 7:30pm
There being no speakers from the audience the Mayor closed the Public Forum at 7:30pm.
NEW & MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
1. Request by Brent Thompson for co-sponsorship of a conference in Ashland in October dealing
with growth management, which is being organized by the Oregon Natural Resources Council.
Brent Thompson explained that he had been approached by Betty McArdle with regard to coordinating a
conference on October 17 and 18 in Portland on issues of growth, population, consumption and
sustainability, in Oregon. He summarized that population growth and related consumption are important
environmental issues that are poorly handled by the environmental movement and that for the past year,
interested Oregonians have been meeting regarding these issues. He explained the group feels that
2 Ciq CouncE Meedug 8/19/97
accommodating growth and associated population consumption is a flawed strategy and will not keep
Oregon as Oregon. He said that the goals of the conference are to educate activists to better understand
population and growth-related issues, provide methods and techniques for those activists to address
population and growth issues directly, and provide networks to serve as a springboard for the creation and
execution of model efforts to address these issues in Oregon and elsewhere. Thompson explained that
sponsors of the conference include the Weedon Foundation, Oregon Natural Resources Council, Oregon
Environmental Council, Association of Oregon Recyclers, Oregon Trout, Institute for Sustainable Culture,
Sierra Club, Portland Audubon Society, Planned Parenthood of Columbia/Willamette, National Wildlife
Federation, Orlo, Environmental Building Supplies, Oregon League of Conservation, Klamath County
League of Women Voters, and Pacific Rivers Council. He defined the process of becoming a sponsor and
for $2,500 one can become a co-host, $1,000 as a benefactor, or $500 as a patron.
Councilor Steve Hauck questioned whether anyone on the council would be interested in attending the
conference.
Councilor Alan DeBoer asked whether the City of Ashland has sponsored such conferences in the past. He
felt this kind of conference is also open for corporate or individual sponsorship, and didn't feel this was in
the best interests of the citizens of Ashland to spend $500 for the conference. He questioned if other
municipalities are sponsoring the conference, including Portland.
Councilor Ken Hagen feels that as we face such a wide variety of growth issues he is in total support of the
conference. He thinks the City has a responsibility to look at the growth issue in a holistic way and this is
a good first step.
Brent Thompson said that validation given to a conference by a local government entity is very important to
making a conference such as this a success. He did not know if other municipalities were sponsoring the
conference.
Councilor Carole Wheeldon asked if Brent Thompson would be part of a debriefing if the City of Ashland
invested time and money to attend the conference. She feels that for Ashland to co-sponsor with a number
of cities is the only way marginal issues are going to receive an investigation for a relatively small amount
of money. She feels if the City does decide to sponsor the conference a committee should be created from
staff members and citizens to attend the event.
Brent Thompson confirmed he will be attending the conference.
Councilor Steve Hauck said that he supports the conference and that this is a practical way of gathering
information and might bring some benefit to the City. He also feels that if Ashland is the first city to
sponsor the conference other cities may follow suit.
Councilor Don Laws said that this conference does have on its agenda some specific policies and laws in
the State that would be of direct concern to the city.
Councilors Hagen/Wheeldon m/s to provide $500 in the patron category and arrange a group to
attend conference. Roll Call Vote: Hagen, Laws, Wheeldon, Hauck, YES. DeBoer, NO. Motion
passed.
City Council Meeting 8119/97 3
1
2. Acceptance of Winburn Way bridge design and schedule for construction.
Assistant City Administrator Greg Scoles indicated the public process is not complete on the Ashland Creek
Flood Restoration project but nearing completion with respect to the Winburn Way crossing. He described
the elevations are based on considerable discussions with the public in 6 public meetings and the project is
moving ahead quickly. He emphasized they anticipated having construction complete sometime in late
November. He stated that the discussion at hand was to bring the issue back before council to determine if
there were any problems before moving ahead to complete the final design of the project. Scoles said they
are anticipating ordering the conspan bridge which is the arch structure spanning underneath the bridge
itself, and there will be opportunities for modifications in the design as the project moves forward. He said
that engineering cost estimates are not complete yet, but there will be some alternative bid packages as part
of the proposal to choose some aspects of the design in the event it becomes too expensive. He stated that
FEMA is recommending approval of $150,000 application which will be applied towards the bridge.
Councilor Carole Wheeldon inquired as to the $450,000 to $900,000 range of the budget.
Assistant City Administrator Greg Scoles confirmed the conspan arch, which is the backbone of the bridge,
are in 6-foot wide sections and in this case would be 32 feet wide and 7 feet tall, and there will be 12
sections as part of the crossing. That particular item add up to about $100,000. The retaining walls for
the creek, railings, light fixtures, and roadway, all adds up to over half a million dollars. He stated that
demolition must also taken into consideration, which will include taking the old culvert out, protecting the
existing buildings, and moving the creek over to a better alignment which will cost about $500,000.
Mayor Golden questioned the idea of filling in the old culvert and not actually removing it, and inquired if
something had altered since the meetings.
Greg Scoles confirmed that the structural engineer was in the culvert recently trying to determine the best
method for construction, and one of the thoughts is to remove most of the culvert. He said that a buttress
is in a portion of the basement of Lithia Stationers, which is a situation you have to be careful with. It is
likely that most of the culvert will be removed, and some of the culvert goes where the new bridge footings
will go.
Mayor Golden questioned that because the City is having to redo what was there pulling the culvert out is
not covered by FEMA.
Greg Scoles confirmed that no money would be forthcoming from FEMA on this project. He related that
the hydraulic analysis and modeling is complete to address any potential 50 or 100-year storms and a 100-
year storm runs at about 3,000 cubic feet per second. The existing culvert can handle 800 to 1,000 cubic
feet per second, so the new structure will be designed to handle 3,000 cubic feet per second, as long as the
flood wall along a portion of the park is utilized.
Mayor Golden clarified that currently Lithia Creek runs at approximately 50 cubic feet per second and the
Rogue River at about 2,500 cubic feet per second, to give a better perspective of how much the volume
changes.
City Administrator Brian Almquist pointed out the interesting pedestrian areas on either side of the creek
with public seating and viewing areas, which is a nice new feature.
4 City CouneL Meeting 8/19/97
Councilor Carole Wheeldon questioned whether this plan would affect the parking lot.
Greg Scoles clarified that the plan is a complete site plan and the areas outside of that are protected in a
more temporary manner. He said that some rip rap may be put in to protect the creek banks through the
Calle area as it trains the creek back over, which would be a temporary fix until the Parks Department
finishes their planning process and determines what best to do with the parking lot and the Calle. He said
there will be one more meeting on Thursday night (8/21) to talk about hydraulic modeling. He said
following that meeting there will be another presentation to the council.
Councilor Alan DeBoer commented that Greg Scoles and his staff had done a wonderful job and concurred
that it is important to complete the bridge before the rainy season.
Councilor Ken Hagen said that overall the design is good but questioned the pedestrian crossings given the
design and nature of the planters.
Greg Scoles confirmed that the planters shown on the drawing would be raised so that would help restrict
crossing somewhat. He said they are designed and will be high enough to be used as seats.
Councilor Don Laws commented that this is not an open-ended project in terms of money and the upper
end of the Bond authorization has been voted on and has a tentative budget. He said that this will enable
adjustments to be made as the City discovers costs but will stay well within the authorized total.
Greg Scoles confirmed there had been considerable public comment about the design and modification.
Councilor Wheeldon inquired as to the concept of council looking at the costs of all the projects, of which
this is a big part of the bond project. She asked where the City stood on costs of other projects, to which
Greg Scoles replied that no Bonds have been sold yet and before they are sold, a public hearing will be
held.
City Administrator Brian Almquist confirmed the City is on budget with all the projects.
Councilors Laws/DeBoer m/s accept design of Winburn Way Bridge with modifications being worked
on and to authorize staff to proceed. Voice Vote all AYES. Motion passed.
OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS
Councilor Ken Hagen received a letter from Joan Dean of 220 Harrison Street which he handed to the
Mayor to read.
Mayor Golden read aloud the letter dated July 14, 1997 which addressed the issue of unsafe bicycling on
the boulevard, and the possibility of updating the City Code regarding bicycling. SJiq,addressed the issue
of parking in town which is almost impossible during the tourist season. why Ashland does
not have a trolley car like Jacksonville to provide access to downtown, parks d tours of historical sites,
which would reduce the number of cars in downtown by having park and ' e stations jo}n�the outskirts of
Ashland. -
1 r`r--
City Council Meding 8119/97 5
J
Councilor Carole Wheeldon said that she was the councilor who suggested the idea of a trolley car years
ago.
Councilor Ken Hagen said that it is a good idea to pursue especially for those unable to walk.
Councilor Don Laws said that council had talked about having an ongoing transportation body to coordinate
all of the bodies. He said that all of the subjects raised in the letter have been discussed in the past, which
are very real and ongoing questions that need to be addressed again.
Councilor Alan DeBoer said he supported forming a Transportation Commission and rolling the Bicycle
Commission into TPAC to have parking and transportation issues dealt with as a whole.
Councilor Carole Wheeldon said there is a need for a body that draws from the various groups and the
downtown plan and the issue of parking needs to be examined again. She feels it should be a group that is
not focused on any single aspect, and if a multimodal environment is to be promoted it needs to be
addressed.
Councilor Stephen Hauck concurred that drawing from the existing commissions is a good idea and
representatives of each group should be pulled into one big group to deal with it all together.
Mayor Cathy Golden suggested discussing transportation issues at a study session.
City Administrator Brian Almquist said Mayor and Council should consider a meeting to discuss the
transition for the City Administrator. After conferring with Mayor and Council members' calendars, it was
agreed to set a Special Study Session for August 26 at 4:OOpm in Council Chambers to discuss the issue of
the transition of the City Administrator while Mike Casey is in Ashland. Individual meetings will be held
with each council member and the Mayor prior to the Study Session.
ADJOURNMENT
Meeting was adjourned at 8:20 p.m.
Frances Berteau, Executive Secretary Catherine M. Golden, Mayor
6 City caauA Mahn[8119M
MI J'U'.�i m. 'r• i„a :�k + �m'f ,i �S ni t�� � n\ pp > /a fyti
�Y V ";�V�ir y� v�{• jJr�—V _lr,/'iW e � .y—' J•Vr '!',•V V '4�u: �V, V i /�` :E"A•}'V .t,�'V + J'V. 9 /
/ ^ � 4�y/ 5..'a%f�v�f 3 %/S” Tr,J!�I'/4F Y 1(• "✓. %'��tw Y :.j3x.M '.�,a+['•9 Y w�r� \ "�` r�k`R'!''€t /I�� �:� a1
PROCLAMATION. . - ,r
n+ e 4 4
' WHEREAS, children, college students and school staff will be returning to school ,
r this fall of 1997; and
WHEREAS, the City of Ashland is committed 6-&dviding safe multimodal
transportation for all of its citizens; and r ° "
WHEREAS the City of Ashland encourages bicycle riding and reminds bicyclists to
wear their.helmets and obey the rules of-the road; and fs?
r.
-> WHEREAS, drivers should watch for school buses and children crossing streets; and
� r, lid:
WHEREAS, children under the age of nine cannot judge distance, motion or speed;
may be inattentive or distracted; and may think that when they see a
car, the driver sees them; and
iIl�Jif:�e -
r� _WHEREAS, BB 2462 has been signed by the Governor of the State of Oregon and ]�.:~.•,•
defines "when children are present" to mean at any time and on any.
day when children are in a place where they are or can reasonably be
expected to be visible to a person operating a motor vehicle that is
passing a school ground or a school.crosswalk. �l{yy�
NOW, THEREFORE, I, Catherine M. Golden, Mayor of the City of Ashland, do
j> hereby proclaim the week.of September 2 through September 5, 1997 as
.
" BACK TO SCHOOL SAFETY WEEK
in the City of Ashland, Oregon, and I call upon all motorists to contribute to
improving the safety of school children, college students and school staff by being
aware of them and graciously yielding the right of way.
Dated this 2nd day of Sentember, 1997.
i6: «
., Barbara Christensen, City Recorder
�'l'�lr • " Catherine M. Golden, Mayors{{t '
J�iL a9 rrf t` as lv4 l a (1�) a ++-
r—�
i,,'�?- "�• rf .ultl.l.�• S mw4e s 1 ?�a.,o ..-�+,i. 1:5/bM.,
r. : .: � \ •�:-t::• :2..1 �\4? ..,v... .. I1 tV'Y �i�F),f ..hi .. 6'�la �:/+ l�='� .�. . ..ni ��:�H 5��� cr.Gil '.•�G rs V .
ASHLAND HISTORIC COMMISSION
Minutes
August 6, 1997
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at the Ashland Community Center by Chairperson Jim
Lewis at 7:40 p.m. Members present were Jim Lewis, Terry Skibby, Dale Shostrom, Keith
Chambers and Larry Cardinale. Also present was Associate Planner Mark Knox and
Secretary Sonja Akerman. Members Curt Anderson, Vava Bailey, Joyce Cowan and Carol
Abrahamson were absent.
APPROVALOF MINUTES
Shostrom moved and Skibby seconded to approve the July 2, 1997 Minutes as submitted.
The motion was unanimously passed.
STAFF REPORTS
Planning Action 97-075
Conditional Use Permit
40 North Main Street
Christopher R. McIntosh
Knox explained this application is for the expansion and alteration of the Espresso Bar
which is on the southeast corner of Water and North Main Streets. The applicant proposes
to expand the use to allow a portable smokeless BBQ and food service. The Espresso Bar
was originally approved as a temporary use. The BBQ would be stored off site during the
off season, however, if it is successful, the owner would like to operate it year round. This
would add 171 square feet, bringing the site to a total of 471 square feet. McIntosh
proposes to build a redwood enclosure around the unit. Knox said Staff is recommending
denial of this proposal because it goes beyond the temporary use threshold in creating more
of a permanent site. The expansion competes with the attempt of the Conditional Use
Permit chapter limiting the product sale. He also stated the use competes with other
merchants in the area which have fixed overhead and maintain building space.
Chris McIntosh explained he wouldn't set up the BBQ until next year if it is approved. It
will be fully enclosed in a redwood arbor, which will be 6'10"high on the Water Street side,
which is the same height as the existing arbor. He said he has spoken with other merchants
in the area and has come up with a menu of mainly finger foods which won't conflict with
their businesses.
Shostrom asked where the public access would be located to purchase the food. McIntosh
replied customers would order from the Espresso Bar as they do now for drinks. Skibby
questioned the operation in the enclosure and McIntosh said according to the Health
Department, the BBQ needs to be completely self-contained, which includes three sinks.
McIntosh related he has been pleased with everybody's reaction to his proposal.
Knox stated the Commission needs to think about long term things as Staff believes this
expansion would have an impact on the marketability of businesses in downtown buildings.
The original application was adequate for a temporary use. The new use would have
impacts.
Cardinale said he feels the proposal detracts from the historic nature of the street. The
original use was temporary, but it is becoming more permanent. He concurs with Staff and
stated he can't support the application. Shostrom stated the proposed enclosure blocks the
openness of the site. He likes the airiness of the structure that exists now. Skibby agreed
and added the new structure will stand out. Lewis noted the deck was a nice expansion of
the Espresso Bar, but with the BBQ, it will no longer be temporary.
Chambers complimented McIntosh for his thorough presentation. He said the Espresso Bar
has a positive ambiance, but feels the expansion is a little questionable, as it is almost taking
advantage of the Conditional Use Permit process. He added the location is wrong for an
expansion.
Cardinale moved to recommend denial of this application, as it is not going to add to the
historic nature of the streetscape, it is becoming more of a permanent structure, and it is
not in accordance with the vision of the Comprehensive Plan. Chambers seconded the
motion and it passed unanimously.
Planning Action 97-081
Variance
111 "B"Street
Joe Collonge
Knox gave the Staff Report, explaining the applicant proposes to remove the existing garage
and replace the structure with a 479 square foot caretaker's unit. The existing house is a
one-unit traveller's accommodation. Currently, the owner's quarters are located in the
basement, which offers poor living conditions. A Variance is being requested to reduce the
side and rear yard setbacks for the proposed cottage. It will have a three foot side yard
setback and a five foot front yard setback to the porch (this unit will front on Pioneer
Street). Staff feels the cottage has been attractively designed and is compatible with the
area; however, although the porch is nice looking, it is not usable. The Variance is being
requested to deviate from the standard setbacks. Staff is recommending denial because the
new unit would start competing with the streetscape and it is believed the building could be
moved back a few feet, keeping it more in line with the existing house. There is a tree in
the back yard, but Staff feels it is insignificant and could be removed.
When questioned by Skibby on the location, Knox said the garage is located five feet from
Pioneer Street. The porch would begin where the garage is. Although this proposed unit
Ashland Historic Commission
Minutes
August 6, 1997 Page 2
would be a nice addition to the neighborhood, Lewis said he agrees with Staff. Knox then
clarified parking will consist of two stacked spaces on site and one off-street credit.
Architect Phil Schwimmer stated the owner's intentions are to improve the streetscape by
removing the unattractive garage and replacing it with a compatible cottage, and to save the
tree in the back yard which provides privacy. The property is caught in a commercial area
and faces the Old Armory and Cantwell's on one side and a bank and Town Hall on the
other side. He explained the entire house (Fiddle Faddle Inn) is rented as one traveller's
accommodation unit. The owner would be caretaker of the yard. The porches and bay of
the Fiddle Family Inn protrude into the setback area and the proposed cottage would be
in this line. The porch was designed to be an entryway only. The owner did not want it to
be useable because of its proximity to the commercial area which is not open to residential
use. The existing garage is ugly and does not match the home. Also, there are no adjacent
residences on this side of Pioneer Street. The owner feels the loss of the tree would be
significant for the residential use and privacy.
Skibby asked Knox what front setback would satisfy Staff. Knox replied ten feet would
probably work, with an overhang. Staff feels the porch is not necessary and that a stoop
would work and be enough. The cottage would be too close and dominate the street the
way it is proposed.
Chambers noted the design is attractive but it is too close to the street. He feels it would
be obtrusive to people walking down the sidewalk. Lewis agreed the design is nice and said
it would be an asset to the neighborhood, but he would like to see it pushed back so it could
be built. He also thinks the Historic District would gain by having a nice little cottage
rather than adding on to the existing house for the needed space. The streetscape is
important and the cottage would just be too close.
The Commission questioned the overhang as drawn. Schwimmer said it was meant to mimic
the existing house which is 2-2'/2 feet. Cardinale said the overhang concept, as drawn, was
too wide for the cottage.
Chambers moved and Skibby seconded to recommend denial of the cottage as presented
based on the close front yard setback and the narrow unusable porch. It is the Commission
belief there are options which can be used to increase the setback and alter the porch design
in order to decrease the reduction of the Variance requested. The motion passed
unanimously.
Planning Action 97-072
Conditional Use Permit and Site Review
440 East Main Street
Steve Morasch
Knox related this proposal includes the removal and relocation of the two existing motor
fuel islands, and replacing them with two adjoining dispensing islands. The two island
Ashland Historic Commission
Minutes
August 6, 1997 Page 3
canopies would be replaced with one large canopy which would be 36' x 55'. The
underground tanks would also be removed and replaced as mandated by Federal and State
environmental regulations. This application is an expansion of a non-conforming use and
non-conforming structure. Also proposed is a change in the entrance/exit patterns through
a reconfiguration of the fueling stations. It is the interpretation of Staff that since one of
the fueling islands has not been used for several years, it is considered abandoned.
Therefore, the gas station is limited to the one active fuel island with the two existing
fueling locations. Staff also feels there would be problems with the traffic and increased use
on that corner. Knox said gas stations are not permitted in downtown and Staff has the
discretion to not allow non-conforming uses to expand. The proposed canopy is similar in
size to other gas stations out by the freeway. Since this is the entryway to downtown, Staff
does not feel the proposed canopy or the landscape come close to the standards.
Knox then showed slides of gas stations in other communities that have made efforts to
blend in more with the surrounding areas. He stated the City understands the need to
improve the site, but not to mimic the older buildings across the street. Staff would like to
see the proposed canopy eliminated, an increase in landscaping, and the minimization of
asphalt. What is being proposed is not much better than what exists. Also, the lighting
would cause glare issues which are not currently there. Staff wants the applicant to come
back with something better.
Attorney Steve Morasch, 1211 S.W.Sth, Portland 97204,spoke for Western Stations (Astro).
He first quoted a segment from Kurt Vonnegut's commencement address at MIT which
stressed the importance of wearing sunscreen. Although Ashland doesn't get as much rain
as other areas in Oregon, hot weather in Ashland can cause problems also. It is vital for
Astro employees to be protected from inclement weather, whether it is rain, snow, ice or
sun. A canopy would protect both the customer and the employee. Since they are not
dealing with an historic structure, the designers looked at surrounding buildings and came
up with a compatible design for the canopy. The existing canopies are 20' x 30' and the
proposed canopy is 30' x 55'. It will be the same height. He pointed out the differences
between the existing and proposed canopies. He also presented a perspective of what the
proposed canopy will look like.
I
Referring to the lights, Skibby said they will stand out day and night. Morasch stated there
will be recessed lights in the canopy and will only be turned on at night. Skibby pointed out
the existing lighting is completely exposed.
Glen, Vice President of Western Stations, stated the purpose of the lighting is to convey
safety. The lights will not be seen and they will be an improvement of what is there now.
When questioned by Skibby, he answered the lights will be on a timer system.
Lewis asked if the canopy is a standard design for the Astro stations. Glen said there is no
standard plan because when his company was established in 1970, existing stations were
bought. He said canopies are being added at all their stations in order to protect the entire
facility.
Ashland Historic Commission
Minutes
August 6, 1997 Page 4
Morasch noted part of the development is to change the sign to wood. The standard bright
yellow color will not be used.
Knox informed the representatives of Astro the City would like to keep the street lighting
standard as in the downtown area. In addition to the canopy lighting, he only located three
street lights on the plan.
Lewis asked if there was a way to condense the size of the canopy. Dave Kimmel, project
designer, answered it would be difficult because of the significant amount of traffic from two
sides. Since they anticipate the same traffic flow,they have put a little more width between
the islands. The intent is to get all on-site improvements to include pedestrian traffic also
and to encourage the traffic circulation flow.
Morasch stated the proposed landscaping exceeds the requirements by 20%. They have
proposed juniper because it is draught tolerant He also said since raised beds are
prohibited, they have not proposed any. They will also be ringing the property with street
trees.
At 10:00, Skibby moved and Shostrom seconded to extend the meeting to 10:30. The motion
passed unanimously.
Shostrom commented the plan does not show the topography elevations. The ground slopes
downhill from Main to Lithia. Kimmel said the intent is to flatten out the land because it
is not good to fill tanks on a slope. He also noted the plants that were chosen go with the
site and flattened area.
Chambers commented the citizens of Ashland recognize and appreciate the historic nature
of downtown. This is a major corner and he doesn't feel the proposed canopy would be
appropriate for the area. After viewing the slides, he said he believes a more creative
solution could be accomplished. He thanked Knox for the slide presentation.
Shostrom said he is concerned with the scale of the canopies that exist versus the proposed
canopy, which is 60% larger when the two existing ones are combined into one. When
asked about the width of the canopy roof, Kimmel answered it will be 3'/2 feet thick.
Shostrom commented that adds to the visibility of the canopy. It seems to him, the width
could be reduced to minimize the impact.
Skibby expressed his concern with the mimicking design of the canopy using the cornices of
the building across the street, and questioned the compatibility. He also said that because
of the orientation and angle of the property, the massing is a change in the viewscape and
light. Lewis commented he is concerned with the gross size of the canopy. He likes the
addition of the trees surrounding the site. He also remarked this triangular lot is a visual
open area now and he feels a gas station with a low impact design would be an asset. A
smaller canopy would be better and less obtrusive.
Ashland Historic Commission
Minutes
August 6, 1997 Page 5
Chambers said the proposed design does not appear to meet the criteria of a Conditional
Use Permit. It is a massive expansion of a non-conforming use. He challenged Western
Stations to rethink the design concept of less presence.
Chambers then moved to recommend denial of this application to the Planning Commission
because the design is not in conformance with the following specific Conditional Use Permit
criteria in Chapter 18.104.050: 1) Similarity in scale, bulk, and coverage, 3) architectural
compatibility with the impact area, and 6) the development of adjacent properties as envisioned
in the Comprehensive Plan. Skibby seconded the motion and it passed unanimously.
At 10:30,Skibby moved and Chambers seconded to extend the meeting until 11:00. The motion
was unanimously passed.
BUILDING PERMITS
Permits reviewed by members of the Historic Commission and issued during the month of
July follow:
31 Water Street Lloyd Haines Fire Damage Repair
4 Hillcrest Street Sara Johnson Deck/Front Porch
142 Sixth Street Stephanie Johnson Partial Demolition SFR
70 Water Street Ann Clouse Flood Damage Repair
115 Fork Street Larry Medinger Replae Garage
320 Iowa Street Wayne & Joan Brown Garage Remodel
437 Fourth Street Joe Garfas Remodel
447 Scenic Drive Floyd Flood Addition
461 Allison Street Sarah Swales Remodel/Addition
370 Lithia Way Agnes Korn Reroof
835 Blaine Street Keith & Ann Chambers Remodel/Deck
307 Meade Street Cynthia Ceteras Carport/Screen Porch
286 Vista Street Sid & Karen DeBoer Demolition SFR*
142 Sixth Street Stephanie Johnson Remodel/Addition
253 East Main Street Zeus Juice Sign
37 Third Street Siskiyou Adventures Sign
20 South First Street The Living Gallery Sign
* Disapproved
REVIEW BOARD
Following is the schedule (until the next meeting) for the Review Board, which meets every
Thursday from 3:00 to at least 3:30 p.m. in the Planning Department:
August 7 Skibby and Cowan
August 14 Abrahamson, Lewis and Skibby
Ashland Historic Commission
Minutes
August 6, 1997 Page 6
August 21 Skibby and Shostrom
August 28 Cowan, Abrahamson and Skibby
OLD BUSINESS
Project Assignments for Planning Actions
PA k Address Person(s) Assigned
96-063 62-66 East Main Street Terry Skibby
96-058 264 Van Ness Avenue Jim Lewis
96-086 685 "A"Street Curt Anderson/Jim Lewis
96-110 499 Iowa Street Joyce Cowan
96-112 249 "A"Street Jim Lewis
96-139 545 "A"Street Terry Skibby
97-014 20 South First Street Joyce Cowan
96-143/97-030 136 North Second Street Terry Skibby
97-018 661 "B"Street Jim Lewis
97-032 174 Church Street Vava Bailey
97-039 78 Sixth Street Jim Lewis
97-053 565 "A"Street Jim Lewis
OLD BUSINESS
August 19 City Council Meeeting
Knox reminded the Commissioners they would be introduced at the August 19th City
Council meeting and how important it is for all to attend. Discussion ensued on which
members would speak.
NEW BUSINESS
Flood Restoration Meeting
Knox emphasized the significance of the bridge replacement on Winburn Way and stated
there would be a meeting the following night. Lewis added this is a very important area in
Ashland Historic Commission
Minutes
August 6, 1997 Page 7
the Historic District. Lithia Park is on the National Register and the Plaza area has been
designated eligible for placement on the National Register. He said he planned to attend
the meeting.
Election of Officers
Chambers moved and Cardinale seconded to retain the current officers. Chairperson is
Lewis, Vice Chair is Skibby, Planning Commission Liaison is Skibby. We still need a City
Council Liaison. The motion passed unanimously.
Letter from Kay Atwood
Skibby emphasized the importantance of adding Hargadine Cemetery to the National
Register and the Commission agreed. Skibby moved and Shostrom seconded to proceed
with the acquisition of funding for Kay Atwood to research Hargadine Cemetery. The
motion passsed unanimously. Knox will write a letter to Community Development Director
John McLaughlin and Finance Director Jill Turner.
ADJOURNMENT
It was the unanimous decision of the Commission to adjourn the meeting at 11:00 p.m.
I
Ashland Historic Commission
Minutes
August 6, 1997 Page 8
MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
August 26, 1997
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Golden called meeting to order at 4:05 p.m., Council Chambers.
Attendance: Mayor Golden, Councilors: Hauck, Reid, Hagen, laws, Wheeldon and DeBoer
Staff: Jill Turner, Paul Nolte, Ken Mickelson, Paula Brown, Pete Lovrovich, Keith Woodley, Greg Scoles and Brian
Almquist.
A. Appointment of Interim City Administrator
City Administrator Brian Almquist submitted recommendation of Assistant City Administrator Greg Scoles, to
council for Interim City Administrator. General consensus by council that this recommendation could be brought
forward at the next regular council meeting for approval.
It was noted that the Interim position should be effective by November 1, 1997 and Almquist recommended that
salary be set at the first step of the City Administrator salary range.
B. Recruitment Timetable
Mike Casey, consultant retained by city to recruit new City Administrator explained the timetable involved in the
recruitment. Commented that he had already begun gathering input from Department Heads and community
members for the profile that would be used in the recruitment.
Golden commented on the importance of interviewing Department Heads and individuals who might be able to give
pertinent profile information for recruitment.
Casey continued to cover all the aspects involved in the recruitment process. Noted that compensation would depend
on qualifications, experience and if the city had a fixed salary range. His firm would be putting together a flyer for
distribution and doing the initial screening of candidates.
Golden suggested that council submit questions that could be used in the recruitment process and to include Chairs of
Committees and Boards into the recruitment process.
Councilor Reid suggested that a draft profile be submitted to council and then distributed to Department Heads and
various chairs of boards and commissions for input.
Casey explained to council that he will report to council in December with update on status of the recruitment. He
will also be in attendance at the community development process of the recruitment and any other times that the
council would desire.
Casey recommended that current City Administrator Brian Almquist remove himself from the development of the
profile for the new City Administrator.
Almquist submitted to council the portion of the Ashland Municipal Code that described the duties of the City
Administrator. Almquist pointed out that the duties include management of the utility system for the City.
Council discussed whether to include the portion of these duties dealing with utility management into the recruitment
process for the new city administrator. Reid suggested that the council have an opportunity to discuss how to deal
with the question of including this portion of the job description in the duties of the new city administrator.
Council Study Session 5-26-97 1
Casey clarified for council his firms commitment to the excellence of recruitment. Confirmed their knowledge of the
territory and the number contacts they have throughout the country.
Reid questioned the costs involved and if money was available in the budget to cover these additional costs.
Requested that Jill Turner, Finance Director report at a later time to council on this.
DeBoer requested a salary range on salaries that accompany the organizational chart.
DeBoer stated that he did not believe that the city was bound to do a nationwide search and questioned if any
Department Head may be interested in the position. Mayor Golden voiced the importance of a nationwide search for
recruitment.
Citizen spoke regarding concern that there would not be an opportunity for public input in developing the profile for
the new city administrator. Golden explained that there is opportunity for input through contact of council members,
department heads or chairs of boards and commissions.
Reid commented that there will be a draft profile available at city hall for those that may be interested. Casey stated
that the draft profile will be available by September 3rd.
Councilor Hagen suggested that the local media be alerted that the draft profile will be on the next council agenda for
approval. It was determined that a call to the local media by Mayor Golden to encourage an article would be
appropriate.
Almquist stated his wish to continue representing the city in the area of BPA Contracts, negotiations and regional
issues. Explained to council the importance of having someone involved in the BPA contract negotiation. Requested
input from council as to whether they would like him to represent the city in regional meetings regarding contract
issues. He would also like to know whether council would like him to follow the restructuring issue with the '99
Legislature.
Council agreed on the importance of having someone with the knowledge involved in all of these aspects. Golden
expressed her desire to explore getting current management, Director of Electric Department Pete Lovrovich along
with Dick Wanderschied and discuss ideas regarding pulling this together. After this was done, then to bring these
ideas back to the council for discussion.
Wheeldon requested that the council have a meeting after the final profile had been completed to allow discussion.
Laws felt that there was no need to hold a meeting to discuss vision or direction. Laws believes that council has the
vision and that it does not all rest with the current City Administrator. Council reached general concensus that a
team building session would be helpful
Meeting was adjourned at 5:05 p.m.
Council Study Session 8-26-97 2
TRAFFIC SAFETY
Commission
City Council Chamber
7:00 p.m.
June 26, 1997
Members Present: Chris Schumacher; Don Laws; Bob Goeckerman; Susan Beardsley;
and Joanne Navickas. Staff Present: Police Officer Brent Jensen,
Pam Barlow & Caralyn Dusenberry.
I. CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 p.m., Council Chambers
Chairman Laws called the meeting order at 7:01 p.m.
I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: May 22, 1997
Chairman Laws stated the minutes would stand as presented.
III. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION
A. Public Forum
B. Review of Traffic Requests/Projects Pending
Discussion was held on the parking space located in front of the Chamber
of Commerce. Barlow recommended to the Chamber that their employees
and volunteers use the same parking procedures as delivery vehicles
(flashers etc.). Starbucks' manager agreed to put up a sign asking their
customers not to park in the Chambers' spot.
Discussion was held on parking at Subway's sandwich shop and the
Morning Glory Restaurant.
Discussion was held on speed in residential areas and the East Main Street
improvement project. Barlow stated the signs "Children Playing" is not a
MUTCD recognized sign.
C. Traffic Safety Projects:
--Ashland Traffic Safety Manual: Update
Barlow stated that an SOU graduate contacted her and is a project
she can do
PAGE ]_— (c:traf\minutes\june97.Min)
. r I
--Crosswalk Awareness/Committee Projects: Report
Barlow stated the Commission discussed a project for "back to
school crosswalk awareness." A meeting will be held Tuesday, July
1st, 10 a.m. in Barlow's office.
D. Three 15-Minute Parking Spaces in Library Parking Lot
Barlow told Commission a letter from Bob Wilson was in their packet. She
stated there are currently 12 spaces in the Library parking lot. Barlow
recommended 15-minute parking (rather than the requested 20 minutes) to
be in conformance with the other parking lots in the downtown area.
Discussion was held on the current time limits and the signage situation.
After discussion Beardsley moved to have two 2-hour parking spots on
Gresham, and two 15-minute spaces be placed within Library parking lot.
Motion was seconded by Navickas. Motion approved
E. Coolidge St.:- Remove Part of Existing "No Parking
Barlow stated there are a couple problems with the removal of the existing
"No Parking." There is a new doctor's office in the area which generates a
lot of parking. Discussion was held on the parking and transportation
through the neighborhood. Navickas moved the approval of the "No
Parking" area at 70 Coolidge. Goeckerman seconded motion. Motion
approved.
F. Motorcycle Parking Space by Ashland Fudge Co
Barlow met with the owner of Ashland Fudge Company and discussed the
motorcycle space placed as the first parking space on N. Main in front of
Ashland Fudge Company. Discussion was held on this area for parking
and the placement of a crosswalk. Discussion was held on the crossing at
the Fire Department.
G. Van Ness & Laurel: 4-way Stop (Speed control)
Officer Jensen stated that in his patrolling he did not see any speeding in
the area of Van Ness and Laurel Streets. Discussion was held on speeders
going down Van Ness. Barlow stated a new traffic count would be obtained
from the Engineering Division. This will be brought back to the
Commission.
PAGE 2—(c:traf\minutes\june97.Min)
H. Miscellaneous:
3i
4th of July Parade.;
The Subcommittee will be doing this project.
Enhanced Bus Shelter Project
The bus shelter project is still in the works. RVTD will transfer the
Federal funds they have received to the City, and Ashland will
construct this project. There are four sites for this project. Laws
stated Almquist has tried to contact RVTD in reference to this project
but they have not returned his calls. Barlow stated she has talked
to them and RVTD will be reorganizing and will get the project
transferred to the City.
Pedestrian Safety Improvements at Fire Station #1
Discussed above.
Special Vehicle Permit:
Barlow distributed a proposed application (see attached) to operate
a horse and carriage. Devon, owner/applicant, FAXed a copy of the
carriage he will be using. Discussion was held on current permit
issued. Beardsley moved,that the Commission approve the permit.
Navickas seconded motion. Motion approved. Laws requested the
applicant be told: "good luck to these folks."
1. Goal Setting
Following is a list of discussed goals for the Traffic Safety Commission.
1. Back to School Safety program for students.
2. Crosswalk awareness/Safety Chicken.
3. The Ashland Neighborhood Traffic Safety Manual.
4. Handicap access sub-committee.
5. Revisit the curb extension projects.
6. Grant program from ODOT for sidewalks.
7. Pedestrian informational signing on the Greenway path.
8. Crossings need to be signed at the Railroad Bikepath.
9. Map of Ashland showing pedestrian walkways and safety issues.
Laws stated he would be willing to serve on a subcommittee for setting
PAGE 3— (c:traf\minutes\june97.Min)
goals and he would like to have a representative from the Bicycle
Commission and the Parks Commission. (This would be for tourist use.)
Laws asked that these be reflected on by Commissioner's before the next
meeting. This item will be placed on the next meeting agenda.
Traffic Safety Education Committee (sub-committee's new name).
J. Other
Bill Barchet requested diagonal parking on 'C' Street, one side for additional
parking spaces. Barlow displayed over-head that showed there would be
no increase in parking if diagonal parking was placed. No action needed.
IV. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS
Barlow stated a joint meeting with the Bicycle Commission will be held in Talent
with the BTA Director. Traffic Safety Commissioners.are welcome to attend.
V. - ADJOURN
There being no further business the meeting 8:30 p.m.
spectfully bmitted,
araly Dusenberry
Administrative Secretary
Public Works Administration
PAGE 4- (c:traf\minutes\june97.Min)
TRAFFIC SAFETY
Commission
City Council Chamber
July 31,1997
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman/Councilor Don Laws; Christine Schumacher; Dan Shulters;
and Joanne Navickas. Staff present: Pam Barlow; Officer Brent
Jensen and Caralyn Dusenberry.
I. CALL TO ORDER:
Chairman Laws called the meeting to order at 7:04 p.m.
I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: June 26, 1997
Schumacher stated she was not present at the June 26th meeting. Laws stated the minutes
would stand approved as corrected.
III. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION
A. Public Forum:
Barlow stated Pedicab owner was present and his permit review needed to be
placed on the agenda.
B. Review of Traffic Requests/Projects Pending
Barlow gave an overview of the list of traffic requests/projects pending. Laws
asked Barlow to send a letter to Jennifer Carr stating there would be no action
taken and that the Traffic Safety Commission would monitor the situation.
Discussion was held on the remainder of the list.
C. Coolidge St • Appeal of No Parking Removal:
Jack Evans, 70 Coolidge, stated Coolidge is dangerous with parking being placed
back on his side of the street. He disbursed a summary (see attached) of his
concerns. He read and reviewed the written summary. He stated they have lived
their since 1980. They had to provide off-street parking for their business which
was obtained through a Conditional Use Permit. Evans showed photos to the
PAGE 1— (c:t[af\minutes%july97.Min)
Commission. He referred to a Memo dated July 25th, prepared by Barlow, and
gave his comments on the memo.
Laws asked what his Comprehensive Plan referrals were exactly. He said Coolidge
is a collector street. Laws asked if the action the TSC made was against the
ordinance. Evans stated he did not know.
Pam Evans, 70 Coolidge, stated three examples of incidents in reference to safety
issues on Coolidge. She stated this is very dangerous and would like the "No
Parking" reinstated.
Councilor Laws requested Barlow to comment. She displayed an overhead
showing plat of the street area and discussed with the Commission her contact
with residences in the immediate area. Barlow stated the issue in this case is what
is the best way of using the public right-of-way. Discussion was held by the
Commission in reference to parking, turning the corner and UPS trucks passing.
Adam Hanks, 75 Coolidge, stated he moved into the neighborhood in October of
last year. The medical center has parking problems in that their employees park
on the street and they have a handicap parking space on the street. Laws asked
if there was a parking problem in front of Adams home and he said the rental next
door has several cars and they park in front of their home.
Mary Ann Massey, 80 Coolidge, stated she had talked to Barlow about the parking
situation. She was made aware that she can obtain a permit and paint the curb
by her driveway yellow. Her concern is the speeding vehicles. She stated the
doctor's office has a lot more vehicles than the previous business.
Schumacher requested clarification as to why the TSC removed the "No Parking"
signs from the one side of the street. Laws stated Barlow requested the change.
The "No Parking" signs were placed in 1990.
Laws stated the decision made by TSC at the last meeting made some residents
unhappy and some glad. Discussion was held on the handicap parking space
being placed on the street instead of in the parking lot. Discussion was held on
the average daily traffic (ADT) counts at the lower part of Coolidge. Discussion
was held on removing a parking space and which would allow am turn space at
the entrance of Coolidge. Laws requested Barlow look into the handicap parking
space being placed on the street in front of the medical office. Schumacher
moved that there be "No Parking" on the first space on Coolidge and Barlow follow
up on the handicap space. Navickas seconded motion. Motion approved.
PAGE 2— (c:traf\minutes\july97.Min)
C. Pedicab Permit:
Pedicab operator Justin Strriad requested an extension of his route for operating
his pedicab. Discussion was held on his current route and adding additional area
to give customers view of historical areas. Discussion was held on issuing a
temporary permit. Shulters moved a temporary permit be issued until the TSC
.September meeting. Motions seconded and approved.
D. Van Ness & Laurel: 4-way Stop (Speed control
Laws stated this would not be addressed at this meeting.
E. Sleepy Hollow: No Parking on Oak for vision clearance:
Barlow displayed a topo on the overhead and discussion was held by the
Commission in reference to vision clearance for Sleepy Hollow. Laws moved and
Shulters seconded motion to approve Barlow's recommendation for a"No Parking"
sign.
F. Yield on Frances at Oregon Street:
Barlow stated she talked to the neighbors and distributed flyers in reference to the
placement of a "Yield" sign. Barlow stated that everyone she talked to had no
objections to the placement of the sign. Schumacher moved that a "Yield" sign be
placed on Frances at Oregon Street. Navickas seconded motion. Motion
approved.
G. Traffic Safety Education Committee:
--Ashland Traffic Safety Manual: Update
--Crosswalk Awareness/Committee Projects: Report
Barlow stated a subcommittee meeting was held and they worked on "back to
school" ideas.
--Halloween Safety materials
Committee discussed distributing reflective bags to students for use on Halloween.
Safety Chicken could distribute the bags. Laws requested we try the bag
distribution project.
H. Miscellaneous:
PAGE 3— (c:traf\minutes%july97.Min)
Barlow stated Lindsey Heard gave the Public Works Department the following
requests: a lane change on North Mountain and East Main; also move a "No
Parking Bike Lane" sign in order to allow buses to be able to make an easier turn;
and handicap parking space be moved to extend area for bus loading zone.
Discussion was held on signing and marking. It was the consensus of the TSC
that Barlow implement these requests.
Enhanced Bus Shelter Project
Barlow stated the bus shelter project is not dead but is slowly moving toward
Ashland.
Ped Safety Improvements at Fire Station #1
Barlow stated she had talked to Amy Lesh, U.S. Forest Service, in reference to
traffic problems at the Fire Station #1 location. Discussion was held on traffic
control in this area.
Safe Cycling Brochures, LID Brochure, Back to School Info
Barlow stated there are 1,000 safe cycling brochures on hand. She has made
distributions downtown. The L.I.D. brochure has been revised. Information on
"back to school" will be in the utility billing insert.
I. Goal Setting:
Laws stated this will be addressed on a meeting by meeting basis.
J. Other:
The Traffic Safety Conference flyer was distributed to Commissioners. Laws stated
any Commissioners that would like to attend need to talk to Barlow.
IV. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS
V. ADJOURN
There being no further business the meeting adjourned at 9:03 p.m.
R pectfully su i ted,
Caralyn usenberry )✓/
Administrative Secretary
Public Works Administration
PAGE 4— (c:traf\minutes\ju1y97.Min(
--Bicycle Lockers: Update:
Discussion was held on bike lockers. John McLaughlin, Hagen
and Barlow will meet to prepare an order for eight (8) bike lockers
(a full circle).
Siskiyou Boulevard:
Hagen reported on jurisdictional transfer issue for both Hwy 99
and Hwy 66.
ODOT is estimating maintenance costs for the next 30 years
which would come along with the transfer in ownership. This
would include modernization which could be done, then, to City
standards.
The pavement overlay for North Mail from the railroad to
Gresham will occur in 1998. This will include a wider outside
lane.
D. Visit from BTA President:
--Joint meeting w/County July 10th:
This joint meeting will also be the Commission's regular meeting
(July 17th meeting will be cancelled).
--Request for housing:
Ellsworth will provide housing for the BTA Director.
E. Bicycle Safety Education: Committee Report:
The education committee has been on hold. Rickert stated youth has
been the target and wondered if a neighborhood program could help
involve adults. He has seen many cases of adults encouraging poor
safety behavior and is very concerned.
Powell stated the national Youth Sports program will include
approximately 100 Ashland youth.
Ellsworth recommended notices be sent home with school kids and she
also feels it is important to reach the parents. Hagen stated the cross-
country team did a City-wide notification for $500.
Committee is committed to getting a program to happen. Ellsworth
stated Bob Budessa is happy to have Ashland involved.
PAGE 2—(c:bike\minutes\june97.Min)
F. Community Bicycle Program: Status:
Hagen stated lots of bikes are being vandalized which takes a lot of
maintenance. Tuesday and Thursday's are repair days at the
Community Food Store. More bikes are being donated. Wednesday at
EVO's is repairs. The program began with 32 bikes and they are down
in the teens for number of bikes available.
Ellsworth stated some of the youth are very committed and involved in
the program.Hagen stated they are going to do a raffle for donations to
raise money. They need $125.00 each to fix bikes. There is a huge
demand for the bikes and it is hoped they will be in the parade.
G. PD Bicycle Improvements: Gee:
Clements stated the "ZAP" Bicycle Company representative showed the
Police Department a bicycle with a motor that can be kicked in when
needed. Discussion was held on this type of bicycle.
H. Review and Update Action List:
Councilor Hagen stated the Railroad Bikepath was discussed earlier,
and police bicycle's were discussed earlier as well as education. Barlow
stated four easels have been purchased using this years budget.
Discussion was held on the National Bike Commute day. Ashland's
"Bike to Work Day" would be set for the third week and the banner
would be displayed at the same time.
Discussion was held on promoting employees to ride bikes to work.
Hagen reviewed the City of Ceres, California's program which
reimbursed employees one dollar for each day they road their bike to
work. Discussion was held on this subject. The first big step would be
to provide bike lockers. Hagen recommended we continue to pursue
ideas for an employee bike-to-work program.
I. Innovations Video: Return & circulate:
Ellsworth stated she has this video. Hagen stated this is a very
impressive video which shows cyclists going all the way around the
world. Barlow stated she has a video that discusses the public process
which would be educational for the bike commissioners.
J. Set July/August Schedule:
The July meeting will be held July 10th, 12 noon, Talent Community
Center. This will be a joint meeting with the County and the BTA
(Bicycle Transportation Alliance) Executive Director Karen Frost Mecey.
PAGE 3- (c:bike\minutes\june97.Min)
K. Other:
Hagen stated at the last City Council meeting there were skateboarders
in attendance requesting they be allowed to use the public streets.
Clements stated the general iripression he received was the
skateboarders request'be responded to within a month. Clements met
with City Administrator Brian Almquist and they will be contacting a
couple persons to head up a committee to address this issue. Clements
would like to try to get a very small committee so that work can be
accomplished. A couple meetings will be held at which time the kids,
along with their parents, will be encouraged.to attend. They will request
specific ideas and areas for skateboarding. City Hall has received
several telephone calls in which citizens were against skateboards being
allowed on City streets. The request from Council was that input from
the Traffic Safety Commission and Bicycle Commission be give through
one representative from each Commission. Discussion was held on the
goals for this committee. Tom Powell and Russ Rickert volunteered to
represent the Bicycle Commission.
IV. COMMENTS: Commission or Spectators:
Barlow gave a thanks to the Traffic Safety Commission for donating funds to
the Bike Commission to purchase 1,000 "Safe Cycling" manuals.
The north section of the Bikepath (along the railroad from Helman to Jackson
Road) will be the next section to apply for grant funding. Discussion was held
on this section of the bikepath.
V. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS:
VI. ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business the meeting adjourned at 6:30 p.m.
Respectfully s miffed,
aral n usenber
Y rY
Administrative Secretary
Public Works Administration
PAGF: 4— (c:bike\minutes\june97.Min)
B T A Meeting
Thursday, July 10th, 1997
Talent, Oregon
PRESENT: Karen Mecey, BTA President; Bob Lindstrom, Local Advocate; Bill
Duhame, Jackson County BTA; Paul Dietrich, Wheelman Treasure;
Aileen Aidee, BCG, Jackson County; Susan Meyers, Medford Staff
Bicycle; Darrel Gee, Ashland Bike Commission; Daily Tidings
Newspaper; Russ Rickert, Ashland Bike Commission; Karen Smith,
Jackson County Staff; Tyler Deke, RVCOG; Larry Hobbs, Ashland Bike
Commission; Tom Powell, Ashland Bike Commission; and Pam Barlow,
Staff, Ashland Bike Commission.
Karen Mecey, President of the Oregon Bicycle Transportation Alliance thanked
attendees for their warm welcome. The purpose of her Portland to Ashland ride was
to "Put a face on the BTA" with face to face outreach. The BTA is a citizen voice for
bicyclists. She would like it to be a State rather than a Portland metropolitan area
organization. The organization is about seven years old and began as a response to
Gulf War. Their first project was getting Tri-met to allow bikes on buses. They have
also worked on widening the sidewalks on Portland's bridges.
Mecey described the BFA - "Bicycle Federation of Oregon" which dissolved due to
organizational problems.
The BTA has one thousand two hundred total members, 300 outside metro area.
Their organizational design is being strengthened; they are working to create a
stronger network and are seeking personal and professional memberships.
Mecey described the lower cost "Living Lightly" memberships.
Mecey gave a Legislature update; they have a goal of hiring part-time lobbyist.
BTA has made five trips down to southern Oregon and needs ongoing presence here.
They have introduced a Bill to redefine bicyclists' nights; making it OK for bicyclists to
pass motorized vehicles on the right when bikes are in a bicycle lane. "Due care" is
required of bikes.
She would like the Oregon Bike & Pedestrian Advisory Committee to have a seat at
the table on determining expenditures of State Traffic Safety funds (a pass through
from the Federal Highway program).
Bike Fatalities Study: Oregon has a higher fatalities average than the U.S. average.
3.8 million per year deaths U.S.
Portland/Eugene 3.2; Oregon 41; Medford 61
(Accidents have gone down over the last 10 years.)
By way of illustrating the benefit of good bicycling facilities, Mecey noted that Davis,
California has had no deaths in last 10 years. (With 30% of the population riding
bikes).
N^n'
"Bikes Belong" campaign - (support of NEXTEA)
Taxpayers polled showed support of using gas tax for bikes = 67%
Ashland Bicycle Commission collected signatures in support of NEXTEA during
bicycle commute day.
Open Forum:
Darrel: BTA to date has been upstate focus
Suggest S.O. Regional office
There is a lot of educational work to do with police agencies
Karen: Board member Ray Thomas does a legal clinic focusing on bicyclists'
interests i.e. Portland messengers, working on Portland PD, Tri-met has
drivers' training.
Dan
Thorndyke: Ashland resident, Medford attorney, avid cyclist
Be pro-active
Sees County police as issue, State Police OK
Sandy DePiero, County Sheriffs Department, offered to send letters.
(Community Affairs Department.)
Russ: Karen Mecey involved in "bikes on roadway" signs.
ODOT does not do "bikes on roadway" signs.
Karen suggested she can work with the local ODOT office.
BTA: Hawthorn Boulevard in Portland: how they added bike lanes.
Four narrow lanes.
Skateboards discussed.
Safety Education challenge discussed.
BTA wants bicycles integrated in body of DMV manual not as appendix in back.
Early education needed as well i.e. Davis, Netherlands
Infrastructure markings are all on ground
Bicycles are more integrated
City/County Maintenance Director:
Bike lanes turn into trash lanes
Problem with farmers tractors putting mud and clods in bike lanes.
idea: BTA letter to fruit growers league, Bear Creek orchards
Bill
Duhame: One percent allocation of funds - how does it apply? Requirements
needed.
Mecey: One percent is a floor not a ceiling; spending 1% per year does not
exempt pedestrian facilities and bike lanes on new projects.
Alliances need to be formed with pedestrian coalitions.
Bob
Lindstrom:Feds are putting more money in land and water (park land protection)
May be open to ISTEA support
NEXTEA on hold Sen. Warner, etc. oppose parity
18% to bikes in Federal Transportation budget in
Moynihan bill; Wyden signed on increases in ISTEA
Political/lobbying issues discussed.
Re pectfully su fitted,
am Ba ow Caralyn Dusenberry
Public Works Administration
Y AGENDA
ASHLAND AIRPORT COMMISSION
WAS t -
Noon, Wednesday, June 4th, 1997
AT THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS
1175 East Main Street
MEMBERS PRESENT: Bill Skillman; Donald Fitch; Ken Ehlers; John Yeamans; Paul
Mace; Alan DeBoer and Lillian Insley. Staff Present: Jim
Olson, Pam Barlow and Caralyn Dusenberry
I. CALL TO ORDER: 12:00 Noon, COUNCIL CHAMBERS
Chairman Mace called the meeting to order at 12 noon.
A. Welcome Guests:
Donald Fetch and Ken Ehlers were introduced as newly appointed
members of the Airport Commission.
Fetch is an ultra-light pilot. Born and raised in Ashland. Went through
schools in Ashland then moved to California and returned two years ago.
Ehlers is an optometrist in the City of Ashland. He moved here in 1989.
He also is a pilot.
Mace stated the other appointee is Jennifer Hall. DeBoer said there were
several applicants and he thanked those who had applied for
appointment to the Airport Commission.
B. Public Request for Additional Agenda Items:
None.
II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Wednesday, May 7th, 1997:
Yeamans requested a change on page 5 in which the wording tends to imply Al
Alsing paid for the weather station. This was paid for out of the Ashland Airport
Association funds and not by Alsing personally.
PAGE 1— (c:aixp\minutes\june97.Min)
Skinner stated another correction: Shafer is quoted as having a hangar for 25
years when it should state his lease is for 25 years.
Mace stated the minutes would be adopted as corrected.
III. OLD BUSINESS:
A. Pending Projects:
--Flight Patterns: Update:
Barlow stated the application has been returned to the F.A.A. for their
approval. The F.A.A. will initiate notification to all appropriate agencies.
Skinner asked if there was a date the change would be official. Barlow
will check on date the change will take effect. Mace stated he was
puzzled that it was raised to 2900 feet. Skinner stated it is his
understanding that this is done in an even number segment. What he
recalls is that the recommendation was to go with 800 or 1,000.
--Status of Compass Rose:
Hamilton stated the compass rose is coming. They need good weather
for this project.
--Green Hangar Repairs:
Mace stated Commissioner Jacobson was not present to report on the
hangar repairs.
B. Maintenance Issues: Staff:
-Slurry Seal Apron:
Barlow stated the crack seal on the apron and runway has been
completed by Jackson County at a cost of $3,578 dollars. The slurry
seal in its entirety is budgeted for next year.
Olson stated we will compare prices between slurry seal and pavement
overlay. A one inch overlay may be close to the same price. He said
there may be a need for additional structural support.
--Fuel Tanks: Subcommittee:
DeBoer stated they are going to turn the fuel tank issue back to the City
PAGE 2— (c:airp\minutes\june97.Min)
and request an RFP be prepared. He said the information they have
obtained indicates that the three tanks cannot all be replaced. It would
be too expensive. Mace asked how the jet fuel tank would be replaced.
DeBoer stated this needs to be in the RFP. This will be brought back to
the Commission before being publicized. Deadline for completion of
project is December, 1998. Olson stated this needs to be done as
quickly as possible. DeBoer stated in-ground tanks may be a better
option. Yeamans stated it is his understanding that the City has more
tanks than just the Airport. Olson stated the City is looking for technical
advice and will be hiring a consultant. There are several options beyond
the City's expertise. The next step will be to write the RFP and Olson will
have it ready for review at the next meeting.
--Airport Waterline: Status
Bids for the Airport Water Main project were opened last week. Seven
bids were received. Low bid was in the amount of $77,568.83, $1,700
under the Engineer's estimate. This project is expected to begin the
latter part of June. Oregon Division of State Lands said no permit is
required to cross Neil Creek. We are waiting for the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers to respond to the creek crossing application.
Yeamans recommended the hangar lease holders waiting for the go
ahead to construct be contacted and given the water line construction
dates. Barlow stated Tara Labs will not be building a hangar at this time.
Skinner stated Gibbens needs to be notified. Mace asked Barlow to
check into this situation and report back at the next meeting as to who
will be building hangars. If they are not going to build then notification
needs to be made that a hangar spot will be available.
--Tree Trimming: Status
The City is a couple weeks away from obtaining bids for the tree
trimming at the Airport. The time frame to begin the trimming will be
approximately a month and one half.
C. Hanaar Leases: 30 day Vacation Notice Requirement:
Barlow stated the City Attorney does not feel the hangar leases need to
have the 30-day notice reiterated. Mace recommended a notice be sent
to current hangar lease owners stating the O.R.S. and the 30-day notice
if and when they plan to vacate their hangar. It was the consensus of
the Commission that this be placed in all future hangar leases.
PAGE 3— (c:airp\minutes\june97.Min)
IV. NEW BUSINESS:
A. Financial Report: Annual Fee Increases:
DeBoer read the rental rates from the info in the packet. Discussion was
held on increasing the daily tie-down rate. After discussion Yeamans
moved that the daily tie-down fee be increased to $5 with $1 earmarked
for diffusing the cost of the weather computer. Skillman seconded
motion. Motion approved.
Yeamans stated he talked to Medford in reference to their rates. They
do not round their numbers. Ashland's monthly tie-down is $30 and
other airport charge $32-48.
Discussion was held on enclosing hangars. DeBoer stated in his
conversation with the City Administrator, the City would need
commitment from the hangar renters. After discussion Skillman moved
that the construction for new closed T-hangars be pursued. Ehlers
seconded motion. Approximately 11 or 12 hangars would be placed.
Discussion was held on current hangar renters enclosing their hangars,
and they be given first opportunity to rent new closed hangars when
built. Skinner stated he would place a notice requesting input from
persons interested in renting closed hangars. Motion approved.
Mace requested staff report back on the building of new hangars.
Barlow stated $15,000 has been spent out of the budgeted amount of
$19,000 for maintenance. The contingency will be carried over with
$4200.00 not spent.
Skinner stated the roof leak in the maintenance hangar is caused by a
drain getting plugged. They will work at keeping the drain unplugged.
The flood expenses will not be charged against the Airport Fund.
Discussion was held on the heat pump system (air conditioning) in the
office not being sufficient to meet the needs for the building. System is
too small and can only heat or cool one half of the building at one time.
To upgrade the heat pump system would cost approximately $4,000.
Skinner stated when they put on the new addition the heat pump system
was not large enough to cool entire building.
Insley stated the restrooms need to be cleaned and repaired. Mace
recommended a professional cleaning job be done before the
PAGE 4— (c:airp\minutes\june57.min)
Commission looks at repairs. Mace asked Barlow to have this done.
Yeamans stated he did not realize the heat in the building was from the
heat pump serving half the building. Skinner stated he will get some bids
for window covers. It was the general consensus of the Commission that
this should be done. Barlow stated that there is $500 remaining in the
Airport Commission budget line item.
Skinner asked if the City would have their janitor crew clean the Airport
restrooms once per week. Barlow will look into this item.
B. CAP Hangar Lease Status: Skillman:
Barlow stated she understands there will be a lease the same as the
current one. The C.A.P. responsibilities for maintaining the outside
perimeter are not defined in the current lease and need to be identified.
C. County Planning Actions Review:
Barlow displayed an overhead showing the Commission the location of
property in which a building application (conditional use permit) has been
submitted to Jackson County. The concerns are that it increases
residential development in the airport zone. A response back from
Jackson County'states that there is a public hearing set for this
application because it has been appealed. June 20th, 1:30 p.m.,
Jackson County Court House is-for the hearing. Barlow stated she will
copy the packet of information from Jackson County and mail it to the
Commission members. Yeamans and Mace will attend the Public
Hearing in order to express their concerns in reference to the Ashland
Airport.
Discussion was held on Craven's proposed application with Jackson
County. Barlow read letter from Oregon Aeronautics in response to the
proposed application. Mace stated an airplane crashed on the same
ridge where the building is proposed to be built.
D. Other:
BarloWstated Ann Crook, Oregon Aeronautics, talked to her in
reference to the Albany Airport struggling to remain an airport. It may be
closing. Ashland Airport Commission has been requested to respond in
support of the Albany airport. Erick Titleman is the engineer in the Public
Works Department in Albany as the contact person for the Airport.
PAGE 5-(c:airp\minutes\june97.Min)
V. AIRPORT MANAGER REPORT/FBO REPORT/AIRPORT ASSOCIATION:
A. Status of Airport--Skinner:
Skinner stated things are running smoothly. Transient activity is
increasing. Over 7,000 gallons of fuel were pumped in May. The Airport
Appreciation Day was a huge success and he thanked Clark Hamilton for
all his work and time. It was a very, very nice day and lots of good
comments were received, even weeks after the event.
B. Review of Safety Reports--Skinner:
Clean-up is doing pretty well following the construction. Areas still need
sweeping. The street sweeper has been doing well keeping the runway
cleared. He recommended a volunteer crew be organized to touch up
stripping and lettering on the runway. It is marked up where the crack
sealing has been done.
Yeamans stated the corner hangar by Dead Indian Memorial Road needs
attention to the cut dirt slope. It will wash down and flood with any extra
water. Olson stated an erosion control fabric will be placed on this
slope.
Skinner stated crews need to notify him when they are working in the
Airport area.
Barlow stated she talked to the Parks Department in reference to planting
at the Airport and they stated plants and grasses need watering which
would increase the erosion. Yeamans recommended concrete. DeBoer
stated the builders of the hangars did not take adequate angle around
their hangars which is the major cause of the problem.
C. Airport Association:
-Airport Day. Summary of event/critique:
Mace stated that Hamilton worked above and beyond the call of duty.
Airport Appreciation Day was safer than ever. Mace stated Fitch made a
video of the events of that day. Discussion was held on this being used
for next years promotion of the annual event. Skinner stated there were
350+ persons that received rides that day. Mace stated it was
perpetually smooth running throughout the day. Glen needs to be
thanked for the sound system. There is more demand for flights than the
ability to provide them for this event. There were five or six noise
PAGE 6- (c:airy\minutes\june97.Min)
"A ,
complaints in the first portion of the day. The noise complaints were in
reference to those already flying before the events of the day. It was
discussed that maybe next year the starting time would be changed to
10 a.m. instead of starting at 9 a.m.
-Weather Service Connection: Funding
VI. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS:
A. Other:
The debate over the F-16's for City of Ashland's Fourth of July
celebration will be decided by a vote from the public. Newspaper stated
ballots will be counted the 20th of June.
B. Summer Meeting Schedule: July 2 or 9? August 6?:
Next meeting-will be held on the regular first Wednesday of the month,
July 2nd. Whether the August meeting will be held or not will be decided
at the July meeting.
VII. ADJOURN:
There being no further business the meeting adjourned at 1:32 p.m.
Respectfully sLibmitted,
Caralyn usenberry
Administrative Secretary
Public Works Administration
PAGE 7- (c:aizp\minutes\june97.Min)
...............
�Y
AGENDA
ASHLAND AIRPORT COMMISSION
Noon, Wednesday, July 2nd, 1997
AT THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS
1175 East Main Street
MEMBERS PRESENT: Kenneth Fitch, Donald Ehlers, Jennifer Hall, John Yeamans,
Alan DeBoer, and Marry Jacobson. Staff present: Pam
Barlow and Caralyn Dusenberry
I. CALL TO ORDER: 12:00 Noon, COUNCIL CHAMBERS
John Yeamans called the meeting to order at 12:02 p.m.
A. Welcome Guests, New Commissioner
Yeamans welcomed newly appointed Commission member Jennifer Hall. She is
a pilot and has an airplane at the Ashland Airport. She will be glad to help in any
way she can.
B. Public Request for Additional Agenda Items
Deboer stated the City has been asked to proceed on a proposal to build 12
additional open hangars. DeBoer presented Commission a copy of the proposal.
II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Wednesday, June 4th, 1997
Correction to the minutes: Change "Fetch" to "Fitch." Yeamans stated the minutes are
approved as corrected.
III. OLD BUSINESS
A. Pending Proiects:
—Flight Patterns: update
Barlow stated she has not had an opportunity to call the F.A.A. She will call them
and find out what is happening. Twenty-nine hundred feet AGL was the approved
flight pattern elevation. Discussion was held on this subject. DeBoer stated a
flyer needs to be made and distributed. Skinner recommended notification be
made.
—Status of compass rose
Neither Hamilton nor Insley were present to report on this item.
—Green Hangar Repairs
Jacobson stated he has not had time to complete this job.
PAGE 1 (c:airp\minutes\july97.Min)
B. Maintenance Issues: Staff
-Slurry Seal apron
Acting Public Works Director Jim Olson will look at the cost comparison of doing
a one inch overlay versus doing the slurry seal. The overlay may be comparable
in cost and would be more effective.
—Fuel Tanks: Update
--Airport Waterline: Status
Barlow stated a permit from the State to cross the creek has been issued.
Construction is moving forward.
--Tree Trimming: Status
There is a red-tailed hawk nest in the tree to be trimmed. Trimming will be
delayed until the birds have fledged.
Pending Projects:
DeBoer requested "New Hangars" be added to the list of pending projects.
DeBoer stated the hangars obtained through the lottery are moving forward. Tara
Labs will be building the smaller hangar at the site by the CAP. Discussion was
held on types of materials for hangars.
DeBoer stated $4,000 was received from the lottery winners. This money was
paid to go towards their share of the asphalt paving which was paid for by current
hangar holders. Discussion was held on using this money for landscaping. This
could be coordinated with the issuance of building permits.
Hall asked the procedure in addressing hangar holders requests. Yeamans
stated a written request is sent to the City and then brought to the Airport
Commission to be approved.
Discussion was held on placing a footpath to Ashland Hills. The bridge will be
installed when the perimeter walkway is constructed.
Discussion was held on different items that grant funds may'cover. Barlow stated
the problem is the City having 10%for a match for funding approved. Discussion
was held on building a bicycle/walking path next to the fence. Skinner suggested
the path cross the creek where they are putting in the water line.
Discussion was held on the City placing a sewer service line at the Airport. A
grant program for building hangars is not likely.
Fitch stated he would like the Airport to have a little more information on the
Internet program. Discussion was held on this subject. AIRNOW is what is on
the WEB with a listing of several airports with information about each one. There
is also a five day Medford weather forecast on the Internet. Discussion was held
on placing a page for the Ashland Airport on the City's web site. There would be
no additional expenses this way.
T.'AGE 2- )c:airp\minutes\ju1y97.Min)
IV. NEW BUSINESS
A. Financial Report
Barlow stated a preliminary 1996-97 financial summary report will be given at the
next Commission meeting.
Yeamans stated there are a lot of projects that are moving along real well and the
Airport Commission is appreciative.
B. CAP Hangar Lease Status: Update
The CAP hangar lease expires July 31, 1997. DeBoer asked for any objections
to the current lease. Discussion was held on additional terms to the lease which
would include keeping the outside area of hangar clean.
C. County Planning Actions Review
Barlow stated several Jackson County Planning reviews have come through the
City. No information has been received from Jackson County regarding Bill
Craven's development proposal. Barlow reviewed other planning action requests
that were in the packet.
DeBoer recommended a letter be sent in reference to the placement of a tower.
Discussion was held on the tower location. Yeamans stated he is not a "fan" in
placing towers next to the Freeway since many pilots follow 1-5. Discussion was
held on the KCMX tower location. After discussion Ehlers moved and Fitch
seconded motion that the Commission support O.D.O.T.'s letter. Motion
approved.
D. '97-'98 Goal Setting
Possible goals were:
Fuel tank placement.
Construction of more hangars.
Improvements to taxiway.
E. Other
V. AIRPORT MANAGER REPORT/FBO REPORT/AIRPORT ASSOCIATION
A. Status of Airport--Skinner
Skinner stated activity has been increasing with the good weather.A Bonanza fly-
in will be coming for the weekend. He asked if there was more advertising this
year because of the increase of tourists throughout the area.
Skinner has been working with the Contractor on the water line construction. He
said the Construction company has been doing a good job and have been easy
to work with.
Skinner stated open hangars are not as popular as they have been in the past.
He is at the bottom of his waiting list of people requesting hangars. He does not
PAGE 3- (c:airP\minutes\july97.Min)
have vacant hangar yet but if and when he does he would like the City to
advertise the vacant hangar(s).
Discussion was held on electricity being available to the newly enclosed hangars
and current electrical use in present hangars. DeBoer asked Skinner to contact
the contractor (that enclosed Al Alsing's hangar) and have them give the City a
cost estimate for enclosing the remaining open hangars.
B. Review of Safety Reports--Skinner
Skinner stated there have been no safety problems. The monthly report is in the
Commission packets. He would like the City to touch-up some of the striping and
markings on the runway. He thinks this should be listed as a summer project.
The "Ashland" sign at the entrance of the Airport also needs to be painted. After
the construction there will probably need to be some clean-up in the area.
The weed problem on the ramps is under control since the crack-sealing.
C. Airport Association
Yeamans stated after the stress of Airport Day he had a question in reference to
the rates. Skinner stated he did not see anything in writing from the City and
would like to have this as soon as possible.
DeBoer stated the $500 budgeted for the Airport Commission could be used for
the weather computer. Skinner stated the weather station has generated $35.
DeBoer stated when the next bill is due to take it out of the Airport Commission
budget.
VI. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS
A. Other
DeBoer asked that a list of the previous Airport Commission goals be brought to
the next meeting.
Yeamans recommended new Commission members review the Airport Master
Plan.
B. Summer Meeting Schedule: August 6?
The next regular meeting will be held August 6th.
VII. ADJOURN
There being no further business the meeting adjourned at 1:04 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
'"Ys"O
Caralyn usenberry
Administrative Secretary ;
Public Works Administration
PAGE 4- (c:airP\minutes\july97.Min) -
BICYCLE COMMISSION
Thursday, June 19th, 1997
Council Chambers
1175 East Main Street
MEMBERS PRESENT: Tom Powell; Larry Hobbs; Russ Rickert; Janine Ellsworth;
and Councilor Ken Hagen. Staff present: Acting Chief of
Police Mel Clements, Pam Barlow and Caralyn
Dusenberry.
I. CALL TO ORDER:
Councilor Hagen called the meeting to order at 4:30 p.m.
II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: May 17, 1997:
Minute stand approved as presented.
III. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION:
A. Public Forum:
B. 4th of July Parade Ideas/Committee:
Ellsworth stated the Bicycle Commission's Fourth of July Parade
participation will be a joint project with the Community Food Store.
Hagen stated there will be bike trailers, commuter bikes, tandem bikes,
cargo/kids and all types are encouraged to be in the parade.
Ellsworth will contact Keough Noyes or Rees Jones and Sarada in
reference to bringing tandem bike. Bike shops will be contacted and
encouraged to participate. Hobbs will prepare signs. Hagen stated two
persons are needed to carry the Bicycle Commission banner.
An effort will be made to coordinate with the Community Bike Program.
Rickert will work with publicity.
C. Facility Development:
--Status of RR Bikepath ISTEA & CMAQ grants:
The RR Bikepath project will be bid by ODOT on July 24th.
PAGE 1— (c:bike\minutes\june97.Min)
City of Ashland
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
July 28, 1997
ATTENDANCE:
Present: Al Alsing, Bob Bennett, Teri Coppedge, JoAnne Eggers, Laurie MacGraw,
Council Liaison Carole Wheeldon, Director Ken Mickelsen
Absent: None
I. CALL TO ORDER Chair Coppedge called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. at the
Department Office, 340 S. Pioneer Street.
II. ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS TO THE AGENDA None
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. Regular Meeting of June 30, 1997
Commissioner Eggers noted that the spelling of the names of three individuals who
spoke at the meeting needed to be corrected: Kerry KenCairn, Cyndi Dion, and Dona
Zimmerman. Commissioner Alsing made a motion to approve the minutes of the
Regular Meeting of June 30, 1997 as corrected. Commissioner Bennett seconded.
The vote was: 4 yes - 1 abstain (MacGraw)
B. SSvecial Meeting of July 9. 1997
Commissioner Eggers noted that the spelling of Debbie Whitall's name needed to be
corrected. Commissioner MacGraw made a motion to approve the minutes of the
Special Meeting of July 9, 1997 as corrected. Commissioner Bennett seconded.
The vote was: 5 yes - 0 no
IV. REVIEW OF FINANCES
A. Approval of previous month's disbursements
Commissioner MacGraw made a motion to approve the previous month's disbursements
as indicated by CK#s 16538 - 17931 in the amount of $477,305.41. Commissioner
Alsing seconded.
The vote was: 5 yes - 0 no
V. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
A. Open Forum - Beth Miller from S.O. Songwriters' Association
Ms. Miller was present in the audience to address the Commission on its policy related
to Bandshell rentals. She said that her organization, the S.O. Songwriters' Association,
had recently been working with Department office staff concerning scheduling a
performance that they would like to present at the Bandshell. She said that she felt that
rules and regulations pertaining to Bandshell rental, particularly the 1 1/2 hour time limit
r
Regular Meeting - July 28, 1997 Page 2
Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission
Open Forum - continued
for length of performance, were too restrictive. She said that her organization was
disappointed that office staff had not been more flexible towards modifying the time
limit rule, and, as a result, the organization had to schedule two different performances
on different days. Because the performances were scheduled a few days from the date
of this meeting, she said that it was too late for the Commission to modify their policy
for this year. However, she stated that prior to next summer, her organization would
like the opportunity to speak to the Commission about Bandshell policy, particularly
concerning the time limit.
Commissioners briefly discussed the topic and indicated that traditionally the
Commission would briefly review reservation policies when it was preparing its budget
for the following fiscal year. They indicated to Ms. Miller that they would ask staff to
notify her group some time this winter so that discussion of Bandshell rental policies
could be discussed prior to next summer. Ms. Miller thanked the Commission for their
time.
VI. OLD BUSINESS
A. Review and approval of skateboard facility design for Water Street Park site
Rueben Davis was present in the audience as spokesperson for the citizen based
skateboard park group which has been working with the Commission on the concept of
developing a skateboard facility as Water Street Park. He gave a brief presentation of
the status of the project including the final design concept.
Following Mr. Davis' presentation, Chair Coppedge asked for comment from
Commissioners. Commissioner Eggers indicated that Mr. Davis had mentioned that one
of the reasons that the Water Street site had been selected was because it was the area
which had the "fewest neighbors". She asked why that was one of the criteria for site
selection. Mr. Davis responded that park facilities do attract people who are engaged in
activities that create "hanging out and noise." He said that in talking to various parks
and recreation directors they had indicated that selecting a site which was not surrounded
by homes would be preferable for this kind of park facility. Other Commissioners posed
some general questions then Chair Coppedge asked for public comment.
Ann Stein (55 W. Hersey) was present in the audience representing a homeowners
association for the condominiums just down from Water Street Park. Ms. Stein
indicated that she felt that the Commission's addressing this item tonight was premature
in that the homeowners association had filed a request to appeal with the Planning
Department about having such a facility placed in the floodplain corridor. She indicated
that because of an error in the Planning Department's mailing list, the condominium
owners had not been property notified when the Planning Commission was reviewing
whether or not to grant a Physical and Environmental Constraints Permit. She said that
Planning would not be addressing their appeal until September.
Regular Meeting - July 28, 1997 Page 3
Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission
Skateboard facility - continued
For clarification of process, Director Mickelsen said that the Planning Commission's
role is to determine whether or not the facility is constructed in such a manner as to
meet the City ordinance related to building in the floodplain; whereas, the Parks
Commission's role is to determine the appropriate use of park land. He indicated that if
the Commission chose to move forward with approving the construction of the
skateboard facility at Water Street Park this evening, the decision would be contingent
upon the Planning Commission completing its business related to the City ordinance
concerning building in the floodplain.
Commissioner Coppedge said that she was surprised that the condominium owners had
just recently heard that the Commission was considering constructing a skateboard
facility at the park. Addressing Mr. Davis, she said that she remembered that when first
hearing the proposal from the skateboard committee that the Commission had asked
them to speak to the neighbors so that any concerns which they might have could be
addressed early in the process. Mr. Davis said that when working with the Planning
Department it had been indicated that they would be notifying neighbors as part of the
planning process and that it was unnecessary for the skateboard committee to do that.
He apologized to the Commission and the neighbors for not following through with
talking with the neighbors sooner.
As discussion progressed, skateboard enthusiasts, their supporters, and some parents in
the audience spoke to their desire to have such a facility built to accommodate the rising
interest in the sport. They pointed out that the interest in skateboarding as a sport has
grown dramatically over the past few years that that many young people in town would
like a facility in which to develop their skills; that it is no different from other
recreational facilities which are provided throughout the community. The emphasis of
their comments was that skatingboarding is a sport, not a lifestyle.
The condominium owners and others present who opposed the idea of constructing the
facility at Water Street Park spoke to attracting more people into an area which was
already congested, traffic safety concerns, additional noise and disruption to the
neighborhood, and the behavior of the people who would come to use the facility.
Cate Hartzell (881 E. Main) suggested that because the neighbors had not had the
opportunity to address their concerns earlier in the process, perhaps the Commission
would consider postponing its decision for at least a month to provide the opportunity
for the skateboard committee and the neighbors to sit down and address some of the
concerns.
Following some further discussion, Chair Coppedge said that she accepted Mr. Davis'
apology to the Commission for not having addressed neighbors' concerns earlier. She
said that as a Commissioner she seconded that apology to the neighbors. She said that
in her opinion there appeared to be two sets of concern; first, the location of the facility
in an area already highly developed, and, secondly, the behavior of persons who would
come to use the facility. Commissioner Eggers suggested that postponing a Commission
decision until September or until the Planning Commission appeal had been resolved
would give everyone the opportunity to address their concerns.
Regular Meeting - July 28, 1997 Page 4
Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission
Skateboard facility - continued
MOTION Commissioner MacGraw made a motion to table a decision related to constructing the
skateboard facility at Water Street Park and to have staff schedule a meeting with the
skateboard committee and interested neighbors in the near future to discuss the
neighbors' concerns prior to the Planning Commission meeting which was scheduled in
September. Commissioner Bennett seconded.
Commissioner Alsing spoke in support of such a meeting and indicated that he also
believed that more communication with the neighbors should have happened sooner.
The vote was: 5 yes - 0 no
B. Contract with Otak, Inc. for consulting work in upper Lithia Park
Having reviewed a scope of work and projected not-to-exceed cost for a proposed
contract with Otak, Inc. for consulting services related to the impact of the 1997 flood
on upper Lithia Park, Commissioners discussed several items to clarify various points.
Among the items which Commissioners wanted clarified or modified were: 1) that such
phrases as "adaptive management strategies" and "stream habitat unit distribution" be
clarified, 2) that the phrase "where possible" be deleted from the section related to
"preferred options" toward addressing the landslides, and 3) that when mapping the area
that the scale be noted and that it preferably be standard scale used throughout the
industry. In response to questions, Director Mickelsen clarified that the overall cost for
the scope of work does not include survey work; that the estimated cost of up to
$10,000 for surveying fees is outside of the scope of work. He explained that Mr.
Fishman indicated that at this time he could not be more specific regarding the amount
of surveying which would be needed but that he did not anticipate that it would be more
than $10,000. Director Mickelsen indicated that it would be stipulated in the contract
that if addition monies for surveying were needed beyond $10,000 that further
authorization would be needed from the Commission.
MOTION Commissioner Eggers made a motion to approve the scope of work as modified and the
cost of services as proposed by Otak, Inc. for Ashland Creek Restoration, Project N4 -
Uoper Lithia Park Evaluation and to authorize the Chair and Director to sign the
contract. Commissioner Alsing seconded.
In discussion of the motion, referring to Cate Hartzell's comment about eliminating the
phrase "where possible" about making "preferred option" recommendations to the
Commission regarding landslides, Commissioner MacGraw indicated that there were
other places within the scope of work which also included the phrase. She said that she
believed for the consulting services to be valuable to the Commission that all aspects of
the scope of work should have some kind of "preferred option" recommendation and
suggested that the phase be eliminated throughout the scope of work. Commissioners
Eggers and Alsing agreed to include that suggestion in the modifications which would be
made and covered by the motion.
The vote was: 5 yes - 0 no
, 7
Regular Meeting - July 28, 1997 Page 5
Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission
C. Televised Commission meetings
In response to a request that the Commission consider televising its meetings on the
Cable Access channel, Commissioners discussed that option. In a memorandum,
Director Mickelsen indicated that he had contacted Pete Belcastro of Cable Access and
that he had been quoted a cost of $2,500 annually to broadcast the 12 regular monthly
meetings and that, to accommodate other programming, those meetings would need to be
scheduled on either the 3rd or 4th Monday of each month. Mr. Belcastro was present to
address any questions which the Commission might have.
In lengthy discussion, Commissioners reviewed what they felt to be the pro's and con's
of meeting at the Council Chambers so that the meetings could be televised.
Commissioners Coppedge and Alsing indicated that they would not like loosing the
informal atmosphere allowed by holding meetings at the Department office because they
believed that Commissioners and the public were able to interact more freely in the
informal environment. Commissioner Coppedge said that she sometimes felt that the
structure necessary for televised meetings could be formal to the point of being
intimidating to members of the public who wanted to speak. Commissioner Eggers
indicated that she liked several things about having the meetings televised. Among those
were having a regular meeting date each month and that the public to be able to follow
and stay informed about Commission business whithout having to attend all meetings.
She said that she believed that the Commission could still structure its meetings in a
friendly, informal manner if it choose to do so.
MOTION Following the free-flowing discussion among Commissioners, Councillor Wheeldon,
Pete Belcastro, and Cate Hartzell, Commissioner Bennett made a motion to contract with
S.O.U. to broadcast the twelve regular monthly meetings of the Commission on Cable
Access for a fee of $2,500. Commissioner MacGraw seconded.
The vote was: 4 yes - 1 no (Alsing)
In discussion following the motion, Commissioners indicated that they would review
their personal schedules to determine whether or not the 3rd or 4th Mondays of each
month would be preferable to them and that the Commission's first televised meeting
would be its Regular Meeting in October 1997.
VII. NEW BUSINESS
A. Authorization to advertise for bids for 000l remodeling
MOTION In discussion it was clarified that the item referred to replacing the filtration system at
the Meyer Pool which is included in the 1997-98 budget for capital improvements.
Commissioner Alsing made a motion to authorize advertising for bids for the filtration
system. Commissioner MacGraw seconded.
The vote was: 5 yes - 0 no
• Regular Meeting - July 28, 1997 Page 6
Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission
B. Proposal by Commissioner Coppedge for team building session
Having reviewed the memorandum from Commissioner Coppedge which suggested that
Commissioners schedule a workshop which would be facilitated by Interface Network,
Inc. from Portland which would cover such items as improving Commission
communication, procedures and performance, Commissioners discussed the concept.
Commissioners were supportive of the concept overall. Each Commissioner outlined
objectives which they would like to see achieved in such a session as it related to
Commissioners interaction among themselves and with Department staff and the basic
procedures that the Commission uses to conduct its business.
Related to using Interface Network to provide the service, Commissioner Eggers
indicated that she had contacted several persons locally who would be knowledgeable
about local agencies or firms which could provide the facilitation service. She said that
in her conversations that Pacific Non-Profit Network had been recommended to her
highly. She asked that the Commission consider using this local firm rather than an out
of town firm.
MOTION Commissioner MacGraw made a motion to authorize Chair Coppedge and Director
Mickelsen to proceed with setting up a workshop for the Commission as generally
discussed. Commissioner Alsing seconded.
In discussion of the motion, Commissioner Eggers indicated that she would like to work
with the Chair and Director to select the firm which would be used. Commissioners
MacGraw and Alsing agreed to modify the motion to include Commissioner Eggers.
The vote was: 5 yes - 0 no
C. Land Negotiations
MOTION Commissioner Alsing made a motion to proceed with the purchase of the property
owned by Mr. Schweiger as discussed in Executive Session. Commissioner MacGraw
seconded.
The vote was: 5 yes - 0 no
VIII. COMMUNICATIONS and STAFF REPORTS
Director Mickelsen reported that he had attended a recent City focus meeting related to
the flood and what would be done with the Winburn Way crossing. He indicated that it
was his understanding that the Council has decided to use the concept of a pre-fabricated
bridge. Still undecided was what the architectural design would be; how it would look
aesthetically and fit into the area. Because the topic was appearance and aesthetics, the
City has asked that the Parks Department assist with setting up a public involvement
meeting in which people could work informally with the Otak team and landscape
architect Brian McCarthy to develop a concept for how the bridge would look. He said
that he had agreed to assist the City by helping to facilitate the meeting. He clarified
that it would be a City focus meeting, not a Commission meeting.
MOTION Commissioner Bennett made a motion to extend the meeting until 10:15 p.m.
Commissioner Eggers seconded. The motion passed unanimously.
L
Regular Meeting - July 28, 1997 Page 7
Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission
IX. ITEMS FROM COMMISSIONERS
Commissioner Alsing said that he had a suggestion concerning how the portion of the
agenda related to "approval of previous month's disbursements" was conducted. He said
that he believed that that portion of each month's meeting could proceed more quickly if
Commissioners telephoned the Department's Business Manager prior to the meeting if
they had any particular questions about disbursements. He suggested that
Commissioners would still be informed and have their questions answered but it would
allow the Commission to take care of its routine business more quickly.
Commissioner Eggers said that she had been contacted by Gary Schrodt concerning
some dead and dying trees down near the sewage treatment plant. She said that she
believes that Mr. Schrodt and Department staff have had some discussion but that he still
is not satisfied. Director Mickelsen said that he would have Horticulturist Donn Todt
speak with Mr. Schrodt again to see if the issue could be clarified more fully or to have
Mr. Schrodt's concerns addressed more fully.
X. UPCOMING MEETING DATE(S) and PROPOSED AGENDA ITEMS
Commissioners confirmed the following two meeting dates: the Special Meeting on
Flood Restoration Planning set for July 31, 1997 @ 6:45 p.m. at the Hunter Park
Building and the Regular Meeting set for August 25, 1997 at 7:00 p.m. at the
Department Office.
XI. ADJOURNMENT With no further business, Chair Coppedge adjourned
the meeting.
Respectfully LL.subm
1�j
Ann Benedict, Business Manager
Ashland Parks and Recreation Department
ASHLAND CONSERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES
JUNE 25, 1997
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Members in attendance were Moats, Buck, Evans, Hagen,Tuck, McCory, Chapman, Otte and Amarotico. Staff present were
Wanderscheid,Amrhien and Pearce. Minutes were approved with corrections.
PUBLIC FORUM
Cathy Cartmill and Stu Smith from the City Conservation staff were present. Devon Strong requested support from the
commission in a grant proposal for commercial composting facility. Staff requested Strong submit a short concept paper
outlining what the proposal would require from the City. This proposal will be submitted to the subcommittee for review prior to
full Commission review.
ASHLAND SANITARY AND RECYCLING UPDATE
1996 per Capita Diversion Rate-Amrhein received a list from DEQ as to who received material from Jackson County. She will
continue to work on the final tally of material received.
Drywall Recycling-Amrhein has gathered some baseline data from the Eugene area. Eugene is interested in knowing when we
finally find a place to take the material. There is no local market. Currently the haul and disposal cost would exceed what the
cost of local disposal would be. Amrhein will continue to research.
Chapman gave a summary on the Green Building Seminar. Drywall and scrap lumber discussion continues with the contractor
representative.Currently Shakespeare's program continues because they pay the haul fee.
OLD BUSINESS
a. Subcommittee Reports-1)NRG/H20-This subcommittee has not met since the last full commission meeting.
2)Education/Schools/Precycle-Buck reported a letter has been sent to Dagget outlining the school surveys and introducing the
idea of a collaborative effort on the schools project including looking for grant monies,milk carton recycling and continuing
each schools efforts. Tuck will chair this project. A meeting will be organized for August to introduce the idea to teachers and
administration.The subcommittee requested funds from the full Commission to cater the August meeting. Hagen informed the
subcommittee to submit their request in writing to be reviewed by the full Commission at the July meeting.Staff will help with
the invitations and mailing.3)Solid Waste-There are currently six commitments to accept solid waste (fruits,vegetables,coffee
grounds)from restaurants. Businesses which will donate have not yet signed up. The cost is$13.20 per cart which is the
standard cost for pick up of waste and will begin as a weekly pickup. Initially it will be an extra cost but as the businesses
organize themselves the cost should levelize if not be reduced. Staff suggested keeping Dana Rayburn in the loop. McCory
asked about tax incentives.Additional logistics are still being worked out. Otte suggested including in the permit process for
new food services a wet recycle area in addition to existing requirements for recycling. 4)Tree Free- Evans is continuing to
create the list of sources and to encourage the buying consortium.
B.Jefferson Monthly Article-Tuck supported the use of including examples to keep the articles from not being too vague. Next
is Evans; due July 16th.August will be Tuck.
C. 1997 Class Schedule Ad-Each commissioner was given copies of the ads to share as they see fit. Discussion included
attendance at the classes that have already been taught,giveaways,utility bill stuffer.
D.July 4th Parade Update-The concept is a timeline of efficient resource use. Discussion included volunteers for the parade,
coordinating all the necessary parts,the best use of L.E.S.S.,scheduling a workday.
E. Styrofoam Ordinance Update- Hagen is still working on the revision.
F. City Council Meeting Presentation Update-The presentation was well received.
G. Draft Classroom Use Policy-The policy was read. Otte moved to adopt the policy as read. Evans seconded. Motion was
carried unanimously.
H.Adopt a Street Update-The subcommittee met with Karen Smith from the county to discuss the proposed program.
Wanderscheid added information regarding the county administering the program with the City limits, purchasing signs through
the County,choosing which streets to start the program. The committee will meet again and report at the next meeting.
NEW BUSINESS
A. Energy Conservation Issue Paper-The issue paper was handed out. Please read the paper for the next meeting. NRG/H2O
might meet to discuss the paper prior to the next full commission meeting.
B. Neighborhood Eco-Teams-Staff reproted they had met with Jeff Golden and Dave Groshong witht he idea of establishing
Neighborhood Eco-Teams. The concept is an existing progrm in other U.S.cities and continued resource reduction results. The
group is currenly discussing the project with Rogue Valley Transit Distric and may look for sponsors which would enable the
project to possibly be a Medford/Ashland project.Tuck introducted another program known as First Step. This is a sustainablity
certification program. This program has practical guidelines which could be used in extablishing our local sustainablitity
guidelines.There will be a Natural Step workshop in Portland in the near future.Tuck will reserach where,when and how much
regarding the workshop and present the information at the next full commission meeting, Evans discussed the Sphere of
Sustainability standards.
C. Class Evaluation Form -The form was reviewed and approved.
D. Purchase of Compost Bins-Staff stated the proposal is to purchase 30 bins at$8 each.The full commission supported the
purchase. Otte requested a monthly statement of account.
COMMISSION ITEMS
Buck stated there was no additional information on the green cleaning products project.Amrhein stated there would be an art-
from-trash exhibit at the Schneider Museum in October. Moats stated the Bring Back the Train Committee has met.This is a
regional group which is looking at an alternative form of local transportation. An example of this transportation mode will be
here as an exhibit.Ashland is supporting the project through funding. There will be biweekly meetings of the Train committee
and Moats will continue to report.
ADJOURNMENT
Meeting adjourned at 8:50 p.m.
MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
August 20, 1997
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Golden called the meeting to order at 12:37 pm.
In Attendance: Councilor Laws, Hauck, Hagen, Wheeldon and DeBoer(Reid was absent). Also present were staff
members Brian Almquist, Greg Scoles, Paula Brown,John Maclaughlin, Dick Wanderscheid, Fran Berteau, Derek
Severson, and Pete Lovrovich; architect Gary Afseth; Damon Fouts of The Ashland Daily Tidings; and Planning
Commissioner Marilyn Briggs.
A. Plan for Dealing with Space Needs at City Hall
City Administrator Almquist began by mentioning the space needs study summary which was distributed to
councilors at the August 19'" council meeting. This summary detailed the possibilities of expanding city hall with
a partial third story to allow current staffing there to continue while adding a new building at the Council Chambers
site on East Main to accommodate Public Works, Engineering and Computers. This summary also dealt with means
to finance this plan using available resources. Almquist then introduced Gary Afseth who has been working with
the various city departments since 1993 to deal with the space needs issue. Almquist stated that Afseth's work had
indicated that a third floor was necessary at city hall, and some of that project has begun with the addition of the
elevator to meet Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements. The elevator will be installed in such a
manner as to be ready to provide service for a third floor when one is added. Almquist also indicated that this will
require the city offices to relocate out of city hall for approximately 9 months during construction,probably in 2003-
2004.
Architect Gary Afseth discussed the space planning process and explained how questionnaires had been used with
staff in 1993 to determine space requirements of 16,500-17,800 square feet. It was noted that this requirement
included space needed for Public Works & Engineering staff. City hall is approximately 7300 square feet. Now
in 1997, Afseth has again been asked to examine space needs but only for those departments currently housed in
city hall. This time, no questionnaire was used; instead meetings were conducted with staff and department heads
to review the 1993 report. Current space needs were now determined to be 10,900 square feet, meaning an
additional 3600 square feet of space are needed to efficiently house the staff currently in city hall. Afseth felt that
this much additional space was within the realm of possibility with the addition of a partial third floor.
Afseth went on to show various elevations of the proposed renovation, explaining what could be done to bring the
city hall building up to code,comply with ADA and stay within the requirements for maintaining the historical status
of the building while expanding to gain the needed space. He noted that these elevations were only conceptual
drawings and further meetings with department heads would be needed to get their input and work out complete
details. His plan called for removal of both current stairways, reducing the number of entrances to the building
to one (1) and making it more of a focal point; making a single "spine" corridor down the center of the building
connected to one stairway at either end and all tied into the elevator. The ground floor would house Finance,
Utilities and the City Recorder. The second floor would gain an additional 1000 square feet and contain Community
Development. The third floor, approximately 2200 square feet, would have the Mayor's office and the
Administrator and City Attorney. The roof structure, which is currently very deep (6'/e' of dead space) would be
removed and replaced to better advantage of the space and allow for the third floor and shared elevator with OSF.
Explanation continued, noting the need to maintain the integrity of the historic structure while subordinating the
addition to the existing portion. Said the third floor would have a 5tfn' setback and 42" railing with potential for
some garden space. Also said first floor storefront windows would be replaced with some that were more in
keeping with the second floor to give a consistent appearance and add some seismic/structural integrity.
(Ashland City Council Study Session Minutes/Space Needs 8/20/97) 1
1
Mayor Golden made note of her concerns that the third floor views would be of a wall; she explained that, for her,
the view was one of the great benefits of her office.
Discussion continued concerning the entry as a small arcade with room for displays. Councilor Laws suggested that
it not be presented in a way to encourage people to sit or loiter.
Councilor Laws questioned why, if the added space was to increase efficiency, had the plan continued use of a 1.5
efficiency multiplier. Afseth explained that this multiplier was the relationship of net area to gross area and
provided an estimation of the efficient use of space by indicating how much of the overall space was consumed by
walls, mechanical space or dead space. The 1993 study used a 1.35 multiplier. The current city hall is at 1.5 and
this index was used as the basis for the proposed renovation. Afseth indicated that as a public building, the nature
of the space assigns certain areas to the public, and the need to connect to the stairs and elevator also lead to the
continued use of this index.
Councilor Hagen noted that he was underwhelmed by the elevations. Mayor Golden indicated that the plans seemed
more institutional than historic, and questioned making the windows smaller. Afseth responded that the drawings
were only conceptual, and reiterated the need to subordinate the addition to the existing historic structure.
Councilor Hagen questioned the entrance design and indicated that he was uncomfortable with the third floor
elevator exiting into open space, exposing those exiting the elevator to the weather. He noted that the city hall is
the heart of the city, and the appearance should be strengthened accordingly. Afseth suggested that the entry way
could be opened more. Councilor Hagen suggested a clock tower at the corner, to be visible from the plaza.
Planning Commissioner Marilyn Briggs suggested an entry at the corner near the current planning entrance, rather
than near Ashland Bakery Cafe as indicated on the elevations. She felt a clock tower could be added to mimic the
elevator and thus better balance the overall structure. Afseth indicated that this would be difficult as an entry other
than off of the central corridor would require reorientation of the whole design and also might be difficult in light
of requirements for maintaining historic status.
Councilor Hagen indicated that the overall plan being presented was close to being acceptable, and suggested looking
into what kind of leeway the state might allow in terms of requirements for historic buildings.
Councilor DeBoer indicated that he disliked the idea of a third story, and suggested that he'd like a comparison of
the cost of a full third story versus the partial and the cost for merely complying with ADA without adding a 3rd
floor.
Councilor Wheeldon suggested that a more distinct entry was needed; said that no attempt to imitate the current
structure should be made. Here there was some discussion of"looking like a city hall", with Wheeldon indicating
that the redesign could appear distinct and significantly important without copying a standard city hall style or being
institutional.
B. Plan for Dealing with Space Needs at the Council Chambers Site
Afseth discussed this plan further as a marriage of his work in 1993 and 1997, noting that the 17,000 square feet
was still needed to house the full staff; the 10000 additional feet will satisfy only the current staff at city hall; 7000
more is needed for Computers, Public Works and Engineering. As such, the plan includes an additional building
at the East Main Street Council Chambers site. This would be of the same design as discussed in 1993, but the
wing of offices previously proposed for city hall personnel has been removed.
I
i
(Ashland City Council Study SessionMinutes/Space Needs 8/20/97) 2
C. Discussion of Financing Space Needs Plan
Here, available funds and cost were discussed by Almquist, and it was indicated that the new building at East Main
could be constructed with available funds and leave the city in a position to perform the renovation of city hall in
2003-2004. The new building would cost approximately$592,000 and the complete city hall renovation would be
approximately $1.25 million.
Councilor Laws what projected staffing increases had been considered in preparing this plan, and it was indicated
that staff increases would be minimal. Councilor Hauck noted that the amount saved by Public Works/Engineering
on space rent for 271h N. Main should be included in calculations.
Councilor Laws indicated that his response was generally positive. Councilor DeBoer suggested an "add. alternate"
option be included when bids were sought to find the additional cost of constructing the new building with an office
wing for anticipated later needs. Mayor Golden stated that she felt this wouldn't be seen as prudent as it would be
preparing for continued increases in bureaucracy and trying to anticipate needs that are 40 years down the road.
ADJOURNED
Discussion ended. Councilors were reminded that a special study session had been called for next Tuesday, August
26th at 4pm to deal with the hiring of a new City Administrator. The meeting was adjourned at 1:50 pm.
(Ashland City Council Study Session Minutes/Space Needs 8/20/97) 3
CITY OF ASHLAND
•'-1 OF Ash�q`%
Department of Public Works
a
Public Works Administration .
~ ` d
MEMORANDUM ', .REGG
DATE: August 29, 1997
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Paula C. Brown, PE, Public Works Director / City Engineer
RE: REQUEST TO CUT MORATORIUM PROTECTED PAVEMENT
ALLEY ADJACENT TO 239 SECOND STREET
Background:
Mr. Eric Ritchey, representing the homeowner, Barbara Burton, has requested
permission to cut the surface of the alley adjacent to 239 Second Street to install a new
sanitary sewer service from the home to the connection in the street. The existing sewer
line has experienced several deficiencies. That portion of the alley was paved on July
20, 1993, and is protected by moratorium until July 20, 1998.
Summary:
Mr. Ritchey is aware of the requirements to saw cut the asphalt, trenching and
replacement of the sewer line, connection to the City's service, backfill and asphalt
replacement requirements. He will comply with all of the permitting and inspection
requirements, per his letter (attached). There has been no opposition voiced toward this
request.
Recommendation:
It is recommended Council approve the request to cut the asphalt along the alley to
allow for replacement of the sewer line.
CITY OF ASHLAND
Department of Public Works
Engineering Division
MEMORANDUM ''..-REGO
a,
DATE: August 22, 1997
TO: Paula Brown, Public Works Director/City Engineer
FROM: James H. Olson, Assistant City Engineer
RE: Request to Cut Moratorium Protected Pavement
Mr. Eric Ritchey has requested permission to open cut the surface of the alley adjacent
to 239 Second Street. That portion of the alley was paved on July 20, 1993, and is
protected-by a moratorium until July 20, 1998. Council permission is being requested
to cut the pavement to install a new sanitary sewer service from the house to the street.
Would you please schedule this request for the September 2nd City Council meeting?
No opposition has been voiced toward the request and it has staff support.
Attachment: Letter
Map
CC 67ehr175
(c:lengineeNitchey.mem)
8/20/97
I
To: Jim Olson j 1
From: Eric Ritchey
U AUG 2 2 P97 '
Company: MR. ROOTER
Regarding: Alley cut- 239 N 2nd St.
CITY Y OF ASHLAND
LA; i]
Dear Mr. Olson,
Per our discussion on Tuesday August 19th, I am requesting permission to cut a section of
asphalt approximately 50 feet in length and 2 feet in width in the alley next to 239 N 2nd
St.
We would need to cut right next to the house running parallel to the house and at the very
edge of the asphalt in the alley from the Northeast corner of the house to the sidewalk.
There is a possibility that we will need to excavate to the city main depending on the extent
of the damage to the sewer line.
I understand and agree to meet all backfill and asphalt replacement requirements.
We have inspected the customers sewer line and have found that the pipe has collapsed
close to the sidewalk and has several other deficiencies along the way. I anticipate having
to replace the sewer line very soon.
We are licensed, bonded and insured.
We will comply to all permit and inspection requirements.
Thank You very much,
Eric B. Ritchey
MR. ROOTER
1-800-592-6243
I
f
I N I M I 'Ft I to I 80 1 n' I OJ I al I O
9 E : ]E:E : : E ] £ :t2t2 iat 8 ::] iCC6a: : . . .:i:: : [[] :E :C E a; 1 t ::a C grB eA$�
yy - p S ff i �. Sw Fiat • tt
6 [ [ - Yi � i 6� +' ytt t ! Eil { { Fa f. {sp ``yyqq SS �Tegg a I. 4
i'P75i1SSSsdllis)S : F:::} 7 [S3C1 S: [. ypjp$�fllrY tt7E � : tii irT-
3 1 31 : t ii C : : a:t E :: :E ; t :is
d
itCS66 :[• ]: : : t._ . _:]CC] [1 : :: t : i [: E :1::1
{ _ g FS it ! ! S • i dEt Gyf ( :ii sggF ` \�
— s �$9i ?ri;� ei[ t� [ � i � $ il;irdtf ! 3st { tiasif! E •� —
CD
•
r _
�I "' y • •[ -mot- [! fi!/i`� :,tea ][ E] ] a a : : it
i\I._
t •
�� _ O � O ` \p-,J — tti 11 • )S3 1 i4ii{ 91f}�9 { i� —
IF `• : tit :aa :iata: • : E
I, � a S t' �•� { . �i Iii .✓✓✓r---"' SSS1�3 �lii FiSiii
CD
7 �iyx• \ — I!•r\� ,y .— '= 13 {i4 P% Sifflit �➢ 6 U
(, _-1� �'I -. I ,— ' ). a..T l�`1.�' ` ftilpiEl : 9f•i L
— i �—• �'�—� 1 :[C: i : 6t C: :ttd : iii::::: id ]CEC ! C :
1 ]
• I r ''mss—...,r.' � i = r + i- ` 1
Q F , • - i3a{ f� 5 ,p. I . ,�y gi;il6df r- " [I
1 � � — saias::a � ! f'��it`���i9l 3li� SSl�iiei•tl��? ! i.5 �
t i
E t t a E3
` St F4 f43
� ii'13 [ 1 { { /i'ilSl ? ! � i� YYS : eelf ivt[ri ;
N I r7 1 d 1 N TO I t\ I co I tT
JCA
PART. PLAT
P-33-1993 4
/ CS 13482
a��. ;f . , i.s 14603
2 a 14603MOI
0.36 4c
.-4 A , PARCEL 3 \0 14601
4 / // //0 //
c\�� ,as / / / PCM94-10 ID94C
9 B .. ,,,r.JCO
/ / > / s /00 14601 M 1 1 �
,`g {� / / ! / S q �PCOM 75-023
/ / sue/ / / 3 .
j In �2 / / >� L C5I
/ rs.
9
/ 5 4
`SCyy�
/ y F _3
/ 9 5j/ � / 0/
125
\ 1 3
/ 23 2q 25 zpo 47 31 8 32 /��l
/
/ 4�b
e e /a/19
l i l
// //p / _ s> 2 i 20/ /./ / 44
d / / 9 B / / / � 23/
> /6s �� / / 25
6pJ0 p UQ r / 2> 2B/29
40 /
\/\ Y
\/app cs / / / 9 B/ > 6 /
s
4 / 6(5 ..
v \\ \ 9-- / / / D/ 4c 0.15
\ � 29 Q /q \ ` r• /
2g po,
es CIO
296
� I _
,< SCALE V=100'
t ..
CITY OF ASHLAND
Office of the Mayors w
0
MEMORANDUM �kEGO
DATE: August 27, 1997
TO: City Council Members
FROM: Cathy Golden, Mayor Y
RE: APPOINTMENT OF DON BIEGHLER AS DIRECTOR OF CITY BAND
concur with the recommendation of retired Ashland City Band Director Raoul Maddox
and would like to request City Council confirmation of the appointment of Don Bieghler
as Director of the Ashland City Band.
°CITY OF ASHLAND °"
+` OF
Department of Community Development
Planning Division
MEMORANDUM REGO" ,
DATE: August 28, 1997
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: John McLaughlin, Director of Community Development
RE: Appeal of Planning Action 94-117 - Church Street
On page la of the packet of information for this action is a memo I prepared for you
prior to the council meeting of June 13, 1997. The memo outlined the general staff
concerns with the project, and while we believe that this could be an approvable project
for this site, the information was either incomplete, contradictory, or confusing, and we
recommended denial. The applicant attempted to provide additional information the
day of the hearing, addressing staff's concerns.
That night, the Council had considerable discussion about wanting all information prior
to opening the public hearing for this project, and instructed the applicant to provide all
necessary information by July 7, 1997, and the public hearing would be held on
September 2, 1997.
The applicant indicates that they have provided the following items:
• A letter from Allen Drescher addressing the alley access (page 1b).
0 A site plan modified and colored to show the landscaping and footprints of
the buildings, with a 32.5'wide strip of land.
• A compilation of figures by the project surveyor indicating landscape
percentages.
While the applicant has attempted to provide the necessary information, it fails to clearly
address the issues or provide the factual evidence necessary to make this entire project
approvable. Our concerns lie in the fact that during the afternoon, just prior to the
council meeting of June 13, Bill Molnar and myself met with Mr. and Mrs. Bischoff, and
their agent, Ryan Langmeyer. During that meeting, we raised many of the issues with
i
which we had concerns, and outlined much of the necessary information needed to
clearly address the issues. Again, during the meeting with the Council, Staff addressed
several of the issues, ranging from discrepancies between the surveyors lot coverage
calculations and the site plan, to changes in parking configurations that did not appear to
meet ordinance requirements. Concern was also raised that the submitted site plan does
not match the dimensions indicated on the structure elevations.
I
Regarding the submitted information, the letter from Allen Drescher regarding alley
access does little to clarify the issue. He states that in his opinion, there is "a prescriptive
easement to use this alley. This means that the alley can be used in the future to the same
extent as it has been used in the past. " However, his opinion does not say that the alley
can be used for the development of new residential uses increasing the trips on the alley.
We do not believe that the issue of alley access, as raised by the neighbors, has been
adequately addressed.
Regarding the modified site plan, this was the plan submitted the night of the council
meeting on June 13. A new site plan was not submitted with the revised information.
The plan indicates a seven-unit development, but with a colored flap of paper covering
two of the units, apparently indicating these two units as Phase II of the proposal. The
Bischoff's letter of July 3, 1997 (page Al) includes some discussion of Phase I and II,
and that only Phase I is presented for approval. It is not clear if there are two distinct
phases, and where the dividing line is. Or if there is only one 5-unit project, with the
i option to come back to modify to 7-units in the future. With this uncertainty in the site
plan, Staff cannot adequately review the proposal.
i
Regarding the surveyor's information, it is based on the seven-unit design, with Phase I
I being five units. Again, it is not clear where the dividing line between the two phases
occurs. Further, in the surveyor's letter (page A2), he refers to reducing the sidewalk
widths within the development from 2.5'to 2',although the submitted site plan does not
reflect this sidewalk change, nor was this sidewalk width reviewed or approved by the
j Planning Commission. The surveyor's report also includes calculations for the project
including a 32.5'strip of land referred to as the "WOODS" property. While this
additional land appears to ensure lot coverage is met, it is not clear how this 32.5' strip
integrates with the project - will there be a lot line adjustment?, will this area be
landscaped (no landscape plan for this area has been submitted, as required by
ordinance)? Again, the failure to clearly provide a consistent plan and project indicating
compliance with the ordinance requirements makes it difficult for staff to review the
request.
As stated in the previous memo, this project has been in the process since 1994. Major
and minor changes have occurred over this time, and many different people have been
involved in the preparation of the plans. Staff has spent a considerable amount of time
meeting with the applicants, Realtors, designers, builders, and interested neighbors
Planning Action 94-117
Memo to Council, Sept.2, 1997
regarding the property, yet we have not received a "complete" package of information
clearly indicating that this project meets all ordinance requirements of the Site Review
Chapter and Performance Standards.
Again, we believe that this project has many merits, and is clearly appropriate for this
site. But the failure to address the necessary details to ensure ordinance compliance
leads us to once again recommend denial of the project. It is our opinion that there is
no "quick fix"at this point, but rather a comprehensive reapplication is necessary. We
would recommend that the applicant hire the appropriate professionals, appoint a project
representative, and reapply complying with all requirements. We believe that some of
the confusion over the years for this project has arisen due to the many changes in
project representatives, from different realtors, to the project designer, to the applicant
himself. A clear path of communication between the City, neighborhood, and the
applicant's representative needs to be established in order to facilitate the approval of
this project.
Planning Action 94-117
Memo to Coancil, Sept.2,1997
f
Contents of Record for Ashland Planning Action 94-117
i APPEAL OF A REQUEST FOR SITE REVIEW AND OUTLINE
PLAN APPROVALFOR A SEVEN-LOT,MULTI-FAMILY
PROJECT (TOWNHOUSES) UNDER THE PERFORMANCE
i STANDARDS OPTIONS FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED ON
CHURCH STREET (THE VACANTLOTS BEHIND THE
BARD'S INN ADDITION ON CHURCH STREET).
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: MULTI-FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL;ZONING: R-2; MAP #: 39 1E 09BB; TAX
i LOTS: 4300, 4900, 5000 AND A PORTION OF 4200.
APPLICANT: NORBERT & PHYLLIS BISCHOFF
I
i
Letter to Council from Norbert and Phyliss Bishoff
(Applicant - dated July 3, 1997) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Al
i
Letter from James Hibbs, Surveyor, to Senior Planner
Bill Molnar - dated July 7, 1997 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A2
Revised Lot Coverage Calculations from James Hibbs -
dated July 3, 1997 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A3-A4
Minutes from Council Meeting on June 17, 1997 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A5-A8
Public Hearing Notice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Memorandum from John McLaughlin explaining history
of Planning Action 94-117 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . la
Letter from Allen G. Drescher to John McLaughlin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . lb
-- Criteria for Outline Plan Approval . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
i Criteria for Site Review Approval . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Letter to Council from Norbert and Phyliss Bishoff
(Applicant - dated 4/3/97) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-5
Memo from Director of Community Development
i postponing September 1996 Public Hearing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
City Council minutes 9/3/96 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7-8
I Letter from surrounding neighbors in support of
mediation (6/30/95) . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Lot coverage calculations submitted by the neighbors
indicating non-compliance with required standard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
! Letter from neighbors appealing planning action
94-117 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Letter from David Fisse listing issues of concern . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Approval letter and Commission's Findings,
Conclusions and Orders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13-18
- Memorandum from City Attorney regarding request by
David Fisse to reopen hearing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
- Planning Commission minutes from 12/13/94 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20-24
- Historic Commission minutes from 12/7/94 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
- Planning Staff report addendum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27-30
-- Notice of Public Hearing before Commission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
-- Letter to Mr. Hedges from Staff regarding incomplete
application . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32-33
-- Planning Department Staff Report 10/11/94 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34-38
- Planning Commission minutes from 10/11/94 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
-- Historic Commission minutes from 10/4/97 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40-43
-- Applicant's Findings of Fact 11/10/94 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44-48
- Project Site Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
-- Project exterior elevations and material list . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50-54
Project's proposed CC&R's . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55-62
- Miscellaneous letters from neighbors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63-65
I
3 July,1997 JUL ' 7 1997
Ashland City Council
20 Bast Main Street
Ashland,Oregon 97520
PAX Transmission:541-489-5311
Dear Members of the City Council:
This letter is an addendum to our earlier letter to you of 3 April 1997.We stand by the points made in the
earlier letter, however wish to add the following observations in this addendum. We apologize that the
supporting documentation for the"Church Street Commons"project did not arrive at the Planning
Department the required number of days in advance of your Council meeting of 17 June.
We have been assured that the following materials will be handed in or will have been received by the
Planning Department on 7 July.These documents are in addition to all those already received by the
Planning Department and presented as well as approved by the Historical and Planning Commissiions_
I
1.A letter from Mr.Allan Drescher concerning the access to the Commons via the alley from Church
j Street to High Street.
i
2. A site plan modified and colored by Mr.Ryan Langmeyer to show both the landscaping area and
the footprints of the buildings together with a 32.5 foot strip of land to show the extent of the
seven unit project.
l
3.A table of figures from Mr.James Hibbs,our surveyor,which shows computations on the
percentages of landscaping to total area in both Phase One and Phase Two, as well as for the
total project.
As we mentioned in our previous letter, we tried to reach a compromise with some neighbors,but the real
issue appears to be the number of units.About seven years ago we willingly aided one neighbor to get access
over our alley land to their B&B, and would gladly do so for others as long as they would reciprocate for
our Phase Two unity 6 and 7. We would like to five in peace with our neighbors and achieve an
understanding with them without going to court.Thus, we would like to ask you if you could facilitate
mediation of this disagreement on the alley access.
In the meantime we present only Phase One of our proposal for your approval.Phase One by itself renders
i moot the issue of alley access raised in the appeal concerning this project. We hope that you find that this
plan for Church Street may offer a fine transition from Bard's Inn to the surrounding neighborhood.
Sincerely,
I �
,5
Norbert and Phyllis Bischof
468 Michigan Avenue
Berkeley, California 94707
RL
Zd Wd85:11 L66S S0 'Inr 64VZVZS0TS : *0N 3NOHd dOHJSIH d+N WMU
LJIFRIARIASSOC 5037722782 P. 01 f�
JUL - 7 1997
L.J. FRIAR AND ASSOCIATES
® CONSULTING LAND SURVEYORS
4"WE9r BrN"EET
MEDFORD.OREGON 9761
LARRY J.FR1AA PHONEIFAX
JAMES E.HIBBS 541-7x.zm
July 7 1997
Bill Molnar
Ashland Planning Department
FAX: (541) 488-5311
RE: CHURCH STREET COMMONS
Dear Bill :
Per our phone conversation this morning, I submit this letter for
the record on which map I used for the area calculations . The
first area calculations which were submitted at the June 17
Council Meeting were based on the Site Plan submitted at that
meeting drawn by Ryan Langmeyer. Per those calculations, which
were based on 2 . 5 foot wide interior sidewalks, Phase 1 alone had
35.7% landscaping. There was an error on the Phase 1 landscaping
area on Page 1 . The area listed was 6372 sq. ft . , but should have
been 6211 sq. ft. However, the percentage was correct . The area
calculations you received this morning reflect additional
landscaping due to the interior sidewalks being reduced to 2 feet
in width. The drawing stated above submitted to the June 17
Council Meeting was the basis for the new calculations . I simply
multiplied the amount of sidewalk area submitted to the council
by 0. 80 to arrive at the new sidewalk areas and added the
sidewalk savings into the landscaping area.
Sincerely,
ames E. Hibbs, PL92234
copy : file 94-292
AZ
LJIFRIRRLASSOC 5037722782 P. 02
JUL - 7 1997
July 3, 1997
Norbert Bischof
. 468 Michigan Avenue
Berkeley, CA 94707
FAX: (510) 524-2479
RE: CHURCH STREET COMMONS
Dear Norbert:
Per our phone conversation this afternoon, the sidewalks were
reduced to 2 feet in width per your instructions and the area
breakdowns are as follows:
This section does not include any property from the "WOODS"
property.
ITEM AREA, SQ FT $ OF TOTAL
PROJECT
TOTAL AREA 22912 100.0
BUILDINGS, GARAGES & PORCHES 8088 35.3
ALLEYS 3837 16.7
GRASS-CRETE 1025 4 .5
CONCRETE PARKING AREAS & DRIVEWAYS 1123 4. 9
POOL AREA 689 3.0
SIDEWALKS .623 2.7
LANDSCAPING 7527 32. 9
PHASE 1
TOTAL AREA 17411 100. 0
V33LDINGS, GARAGES PORCHES 5878 33.8
GRASS-CRETE 651 3.7
POOL AREA 689 4. 0
SIDEWALKS 533 3.1
LANDSCAPING 6343 36.4
A3
LJ1FRIAR1RSS0C 5037722782 P. 03
PAGE 2 JUL 7 1997
PHASE 2
TOTAL AREA 5501 100. 0
BUILDINGS, GARAGES & PORCHES 2210 40.2
GRASS-CRETE 374 6, 8
SIDEWALKS 90 1. 6
LANDSCAPING 1184 21. 5
This section includes 32.5 feet of the "WOODS" property.
ITEM AREA, SQ FT % OF TOTAL
PROJECT
TOTAL AREA 25307 100.0
BUILDINGS, GARAGES & PORCHES 8088 31. 9
ALLEYS 4097 16.2
GRASS-CRETE 1025 4 . 1
CONCRETE PARKING AREAS & DRIVEWAYS 1123 4 .4
POOL AREA 689 2 .7
SIDEWALKS 623 2. 5
LANDSCAPING 9662 38 .2
gBB.SFi_].
TOTAL AREA 17411 100.0
BUILDINGS, GARAGES & PORCHES 5878 33. 8
GRASS-CRETE 651 3.7
POOL AREA 689 4 . 0
SIDEWALKS 533 3.1
LANDSCAPING 6343 36. 4
PHASE 2
TOTAL AREA 7896 100.0
BUILDINGS, GARAGES & PORCHES 2210 28.0
GRASS-CRETE 374 4 .7
SIDEWALKS 90 1. 1
LANDSCAPING 3319 42.0
Si*cerely,
James E. Hibbs, PLS2234
copy: file 94-292
Bill Molnar & John McGlaughlin
I
Questions regarding how Talent Irrigation District fit into this design and if there was any
continued discussion regarding putting effluent into the TID irrigation system. Scoles
explained that the effluent would be going onto the Imperatice property rather than into the
j TID system. City Administrator Almquist reported that at a previous TID board meeting,
there was general consensus by members to not allow effluent discharge into their irrigation
system.
i CONSENT AGENDA
1. Minutes of boards, commissions and committees.
i 2. Monthly Departmental Reports - May, 1997.
3. City Administrator's Monthly Report - May, 1997.
4. Confirmation of Mayor's appointment of Paula Brown, P.E., as Public Works
Director.
5. Confirmation of Mayor's appointment of Dan Jackson, D.D.S. to the Hospital
Board.
Councilor Wheeldon requested that item #3 be pulled.
i Councilors Hauck/Reid m/s to approve consent agenda items #1, #2, #4 and #5. Voice
vote: all AYES. Motion passed.
Councilor Wheeldon questioned if the appointment of City Administrator Brian Almquist to
the Jackson County Public Safety Coordinating Council was a result of previous discussion
by council regarding consolidation of law enforcement. City Administrator Almquist
.clarified that this had to do with early release and community correction. State law requires
that each county has a coordinating council and must have one city manager on the council.
This had nothing to do with previous discussion, but is only a matter of his turn to take on
this position.
Councilors Hauck/Wheeldon m/s to approve consent agenda item #3. Voice vote: all
AYES. Motion passed.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Planning Action 94-117. A request for a Site Review and Outline Plan Approval
for a 7-lot multi-family townhouse project on Church Street, West of North Main
(Norbert and Phyll"'Bischof, applicants).
Mayor Golden read the guidelines and procedures for Land Use Public Hearings.
PUBLIC HEARING OPEN: 7:45 p.m.
EXPARTE CONTACT:
Councilors Reid, Hauck and DeBoer reported site visits.
i City Council Meeting 6-17-97 4
i
i
I
AS
STAFF REPORT:
Planning Director John McLaughlin reported that this is an application for an outline plan
approval under the performance standard options. Criteria and notice was mailed out to all
surrounding property owners. This also involves an application for a site review and the
criteria was included in the information mailed out to property owners.
The application was approved by the Planning Commission in December 1994 and appealed
by the neighborhood soon afterward. The appeal dealt specifically on the-legal access off of
an alley, which they did not feel was clear. Also, that the application did not meet lot
coverage standards, that the calculations provided by the applicant were incorrect. The
applicant requested a delay in the appeal hearing to pursue mediation with the neighborhood.
The mediation was not successful, and a hearing was requested in July 1996. Planning staff
delayed this request, based on failure to address issues raised by the neighborhood, as part of
their appeal.
McLaughlin brought attention to a letter from the applicant which requested a hearing in
April 1997. Based on staff concern that additional information still needed to be provided,
staff allowed a June 1997 hearing by the council. McLaughlin reported that there is very
little new information that addresses the concerns raised by the planning staff in the past two
years. This led to the recommendation by staff of denial for this request. That it failed to
meet lot coverage or that the issue of alley access is not clear.
McLaughlin explained the project as a 7-unit multi-family development, with R2 zoning and
base density for the project area, which does not include density bonuses. This is an
appropriate level of density for the downtown area, according to the comprehensive plan.
Design is traditional and compatible with the neighborhood.
Staff met with the applicant yesterday and went over the same concerns as previously
discussed. The applicant responded with a map, which requested removal from
consideration, two units from the back portion of the property accessing off the alley at
issue. The applicant believes that by removing that portion of the application, they would
comply with the 35% landscaping requirement.
McLaughlin voiced continued concern regarding receiving last minute additional information
from applicant. The applicant,just prior to this evenings public hearing, provided additional
information from their surveyor about lot coverage, which indicated discrepancies on
calculation figures. Stated that there had been no map submitted from the surveyor showing
how these calculations were formulated, or a map which matches what was submitted with
the design.
Additional concerns with the map indicates redesign issues regarding parking off of the alley.
Because the map was submitted so late with these revised parking spaces, staff has not had
an opportunity to review. Staff has had continued concern and issue with their ability to
determine whether the project meets the minimum standard requirements.
City Council Meeting 6-17-97 5
�6
Councilor Reid questioned the procedure for requesting that the hearing be moved to another
date, in order for all information to be collected. Commented that there had been previous
discussion that the planning for multi-family residential had to be complete before submitting
for approval.
Discussion regarding meeting minimum requirement of density and how this would be
handled. McLaughlin explained that current information is not adequate enough to answer
these questions. City ordinance requires that there be complete landscaping plans meeting all
requirements, in order for approval.
�
City Attorne Y Nolte explained to council they could hear the appeal on the plan that was
approved by the Planning Commission. Council could go as far into the Public Hearing as
they like, in order to determine if all information is available. They could then continue the
Public Hearing to a later date, when additional information that is required is submitted.
McLaughlin clarified for council that the applicant waived the 120 days when they agreed to
go into mediation and it has now been over two years. If continuance is requested, applicant
would need to be requested to continue waiver of the 120 days.
Discussion by council on waiting for all information before proceeding with hearing.
Concern that this has been on the table for two years, but that information has only just come
forward in the past two days. It was suggested that there needs to be clarity for applicant, if
public hearing is rescheduled, that information required will need to be provided by a
designated date.
l Councilor Deboer felt there is a responsibility to the applicant to make a decision. Mayor
Golden explained that when partial information is submitted for council review, it becomes
more complicated in the decision making process. Councilor Laws pointed out that the
responsibility by the council is to the appellant. The appellant is entitled to a hearing, unless
they are willing to grant a postponement.
Nolte advised council if they want to make a continuance, this needs to be done through a
motion, with a time constraint included.
Councilors Reid/Hauck m/s that information be provided to the Planting Department
by July 7th and continuance of the public hearing be rescheduled to August 5th.
i DISCUSSION: Deboer disagrees with motion. Stated that the applicant requested the
I hearing and that the applicant takes the risk of decision by the council with whatever
information was provided. Believes there is a timeline. Neighbors voiced concern that
they have waited for a long period of time for this hearing. Comment was made on risk
by applicant, that without complete information provided to council, appeal could be
denied.
i
City Council Meeting 6-17-97 6
Al
Councilors Reid/Hagen m/s to temporarily adjourn meeting to allow neighbors at
meeting a time for private discussion regarding continuance of hearing. Voice vote; all
AYES. Motion passed.
Motion by Councilor Reid to amend her motion for continuance of the hearing to
September 2nd council meeting, but information provided to Planning Department
remain as July 7, 1997. DISCUSSION: Reid felt it would be advantageous for all
participants that information be presented at one meeting. It was clarified that if public
testimony were to be taken at this time, it would open up the public hearing process.
Councilor Hauck felt the burden lies with the applicant to make their case, and they
should be ready to present the information that is necessary for the council to make a
decision. He would be willing to go forward at this time toward making a decision and
to see if the applicants are able to make their case with information that is provided.
Roll call vote: Laws, Reid, Wheeldon, DeBoer, YES; Hauck, NO; Hagen absent from
the room. Motion passed, 41.
PUBLIC FORUM
Bob Sullivan/525 Sheridan/Spoke.regarding due process on the testimony taken during the
last council meeting on an LID formation and the setting of a public hearing. Stated that he
was not aware that council could allow an open hearing on this item. Felt there is too much
criticism directed at developers through.the Local Improvement District process. Finds it
difficult to work with the city.
Informed council that there is additional property owners signing in favor of this LID.
Commented on the increase of taxes that have continued to be levied against this property.
Does not want to declare "open space" without changing the system of taxing. Stated there
is a need for a storm drain system in Ashland, feels there is necessity for curbs and such that
will accommodate water flow.
Councilor Wheeldon requested additional discussion by council on the LID process. It
suggested that this be done at a future council study session.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
1. Consideration of request for water service on Dead Indian Road for property
located outside the city limits but within the Urban Growth Boundary.
City Attorney clarified for council that "failed" would meet the intent and definition of
contamination. Comparison of current limit of sewer line to 100 feet of the premises and
proposed water line was discussed. Nolte explained that this is the same standard as in the
sewer connection, but that DEQ has indicated they may change the standards for sewer to
300 feet.
City Council Meeting 6-17-97 7
A8
i .
i
CITY OF ASHLAND
Department of Community Development
y _
Planning Division
e� p
MEMORANDUM '• REGO�,.'
4 IIJ
DATE: June 13, 1997
TO: Honorable Mayor and Council
FROM: John McLaughlin, Director of Community Development
RE: History of Planning Action 94-117
I
In December 1994, the Planning Commission approved a request to construct a 7-unit
townhouse development. Several neighbors appealed the Commission's decision,
contending the project did not meet lot coverage standards for the zoning district and
that the property owner did not have rights to cross a portion of the private alley closest
to High Street.
Prior to the appeal being scheduled before the Council, the applicant requested that the
hearing be postponed in order to explore mediation with the neighborhood. The
Planning Department was not involved with any subsequent attempts at mediating the
neighborhood's concerns with the project. At this time, it is apparent that all attempts at
mediation have been abandoned.
In September 1996, a public hearing was scheduled before the Council to consider the
neighbors original appeal of the project. A week before the scheduled hearing, the
Planning Staff delayed the hearing because the applicant had failed to submit additional
evidence addressing the primary issues of the appeal. Since that time, the neighbors have
i entered into the record lot coverage calculations, prepared by a cartographer through the
use of a computer-aided design system, which appear to confirm that the project fails to
comply with maximum lot coverage standards for the zoning district.
Staff is anxious to reach a final decision on the project. The main issues of the
neighborhood, lot coverage and access, have been laid out on the table for over two
f years. Staff has had many discussions with the applicant regarding the type of
information needed to address or refute neighborhood concerns. At this time, no
additional information has been provided by the applicant other than the two page letter
noted in the record. While the applicant's letter discusses alternatives for resolving the
issues of the appeal, especially in light of the applicant's recent acquisition,of the
property at 120 High Street, a revised site plan with lot coverage calculations has not
1- C(
been included.
Given the length of time that has expired since the Commission's decision and the fact
that the two primary issues of the appeal have yet to be clearly addressed, Staff believes
that the Council should deny the application, upholding the appeal of the neighborhood.
While we believe the applicant has generally provided a good design for a seven-unit
development, the unanswered questions regarding lot coverage and access do not allow
approval of the project. We believe that denying the application will end this episode of
the project, and require the applicant to start the process over with the Planning
Commission, with an opportunity to redesign the project in accord with all legal
requirements. This would also provide an opportunity for the applicant and the
neighbors to meet to reconcile any other matters of concern.
Again, Staffs position is that this project has many merits, especially in the area of the
design of the units and appropriate infill near the downtown area. However, we do not
believe that what has been submitted allows the Council to approve the project, and the
reluctance of the applicant to provide this information for the past two years leads us to
a recommendation of denial.
JRESCHER & ARNOLL
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
300 E.MAIN • P.O. BOX 760
ASHLAND, OREGON 97520
ALLEN G.DRESCHER, P.C. TELEPHONE (541)482-4935
I G.PHILIP ARNOLD June 11, 1997 FAX(541) 482-4941
i
I John McLaughlin
Ashland Planning Department
City Hall
Ashland, Oregon 97520
Re: Church Street Commons
Dear Mr. McLaughlin:
I have been asked to give my opinion with regard . to
access from Church Street to the above project along an
alley that has been in use for many years but which is not
ki dedicated to the City as an alley, nor is there any
recorded easement for use of the alley.
I know of my own personal knowledge that this alley
has been used by neighbors and the general public for
pedestrian, bicycle , and vehicular use for many years
because I lived about one block from the alley from 1979 to
1992 and used it myself during those years .
In addition, I am in receipt of copies of letters
from other persons indicating that the alley has been used
by themselves and others from as far back as 1905 to the
present time.
It is my opinion that the general public has acquired
a prescriptive easement to use this alley. This means that
' the alley can be used in the future to the same extent as
it has been used in the past.
with a copy of this letter to Paul Nolte, I am
providing him with the enclosures, and he can give you his
opinion as to the nature of a prescriptive easement over
the existing alley and the extent to which it can be used.
� Ver my Yours,
� AGD/amy
encl.
Bush Hedges Allen Drescher, P.C.
Paul Nolte
i
1h
Notice is hereby given that a PUBLIC HE NG on the follOWing A copy of the application, ocuments and evidence relied upon by the applicant
request with respect to the ASHLAND LAND USE ORDINANCE and applicable criteria are a.dileble for inspection at no cost and will be provided at
will be held before the ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL on June 17, reasonable cost, if requested. A copy of the Staff Report will be available for
inspection seven days prior to the hearing and will be provided at reasonable cost,if
1997 at 7:00 p.m. at the ASHLAND CIVIC CENTER, 1175 East requested. All materials are available at the Ashland Planning Department,City Hall,
Main Street, Ashland, Oregon. 20 East Main Street, Ashland, Oregon 97520.
The ordinance criteria applicable to this application are attached to this notice. During the Public Hearing. the Mayor shall allow testimony from the applicant and
Oregon law states that failure to raise an objection concerning this application,either those in attendance concerning this request. The Mayor shall have the right to limit
in person or by letter,or failure to provide sufficient specificity to afford the decision the length of testimony and require that comments be restricted to the applicable
maker an opportunity to respond to the issue,precludes your right of appeal to the criteria. Unless there is a continuance, if a participant so requests before the
Land Use Board of Appeals(LUBA)on that issue. Failure to specify which ordinance conclusion of the hearing,the record shall remain open for at least seven days after
criterion the objection is based on also precludes your right of appeal to LUBA on the hearing. If you have questions or comments concerning this request,please feel
that criterion. free to contact Susan Yates at the Ashland Planning Department,City Hell,at 488-
5305.
a-o 1
\, S
j \
fa,,, �—
b y
S S pal
�✓ � es RG� `p9 �..��
I�
t It>`
-.`l, i NOrctN cri`f [wrt2
Vie-W 'fY MAP »cam r
PLANNING ACTION 94-117 is a request for a Site Review and Outline Plan Approval
for a seven-lot, multi-family project (townhouses) under the Performance Standards
Options for the property located on Church Street (the vacant lots behind the new Bard's
Inn addition on Church Street). Comprehensive Plan Designation: Multi-Family
Residential; Zoning: R-2; Assessor's Map #: 391E 9BB; Tax Lots: 4300, 4900, 5000 and
a portion of Lot 4200.
APPLICANT Norbert & Phyllis Bischof
1
i
CRITERIA FOR OUTLINE PLAN APPROVAL
I
The Planning Commission shall approve the outline plan when it
finds the following criteria have been met:
a. That the development meets all applicable ordinance
i
requirements of the City of Ashland.
b. That adequate key City facilities can be provided
including water, sewer, paved access to and through the
development, electricity, urban storm drainage, police
and fire protection and adequate transportation; and
that the development will not cause a City facility to
operate beyond capacity.
I
C. That the existing and natural features of the land;
such as wetlands, floodplain corridors, ponds, large
I trees, rock outcroppings, etc. , have been identified in
I the plan of the development and significant features
l have been included in the open space, common areas, and
unbuildable areas.
d. That the development of the land will not prevent
4 adjacent land from being developed for the uses shown
{ in the Comprehensive Plan.
e. That there are adequate provisions for the maintenance
of open space and common areas, if required or
provided, and that if developments are done in phases
that the early phases have the same or higher ratio of
amenities as proposed in the entire project.
I f. That the proposed density meets the base and bonus
density standards established under this Chapter.
I
I
I
I
I
I
SITE REVIEW
18.72.050 Criteria for Approval. The following criteria shall be used to approve or
deny a site plan:
A. All applicable City ordinances have been met and will be met by the
proposed development.
B. All requirements of the Site Review Chapter have been met.
C. The site design complies with the guidelines adopted by the City Council
for implementation of this Chapter.
D. That adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, paved access
to and through the development, electricity, urban storm drainage, and
adequate transportation can and will be provided to and through the
subject property. (Ord. 2655, 1991 )
3
FROM N+P BISCHOF PHONE NO. 5105242479 Apr. 06 1997 11:51PM P2
I
3 April, 1997
Ashland City Council
20 East Main Street
Ashland, Oregon 97520
Dear Council Members:
This letter is a request for a bearing to be scheduled as soon as possible
concerning our "Church Street Commons" proposal. The City's Historical
and Planning Commissions each gave their unanimous approval of this
I proposal over a year ago. Subsequently, however, the project was held up
after some neighbors forwarded an appeal to the Planning Department.
This appeal, signed by three neighbors, has not previously been heard
before you because we wanted to work with the neighbors to see if we
could meet their stated concerns, namely High Street alley access and the
35% landscaping requirements. A number of meetings took place between
ourselves, our representatives, and some of these neighbors, as well as
follow-up telephone conversations. These were cordial meetings, but it
became clear to us that the real issue was the number of units, not the stated
objections of the appeal. We offered to explore going to six units on the
existing land if the neighbors would drop their objections, including the
issue of the High Street alley access. But after this meeting, we got a call in
October stating that unless we drop from 7 to 5 units in our proposal, there
could be no agreement.
I
This we could not accept since it would require totally redesigning our
i project and starting over from the beginning. Consequently we decided to
acquire the adjoining property, 120 High Street, and are in the process of
repairing this venerable but neglected house at great expense. This
additional property lies next to the High Street alley and should strengthen
our case against both objections, access and 35% landscaping.
I While our first calculations included the pool as part of landscaping we
have recently been advised by staff not to do so due to a possible conflict in
city regulations. Thus to now meet the 35% rule without counting the pool
I as part of landscaping we asked our surveyer, Mr.Hibbs, to make a new
map of the footprint of this project. This map shows how we plan to
economize on landscaping on the old footprint and to add a 20 foot strip of
land from the 120 High Street property to meet and exceed the 35% rule.
This new land allows units 6 and 7 to move over some distance, thereby
creating more space between our planned units and our neighbors.
` 4
FROM N+P B(SCHOF PHONE NO. : 5105242479 Rpr. 06 1997 11:52PM P3
As far as access is concerned, phase 1, consisting of units 1 through 5, can
be reached over our own land of the Church Street alley. Access to phase 2
consisting of units 6 and 7 can now be gained more easily since we own
more of the High Streit alley than any other neighbor. We own nearly all
of the Church Street alley, so much so that this alley could be considered a
private driveway. Nevertheless, we are content to have adjoining neighbors
continue to use both our alley properties even without easements, as long as
they reciprocate_ This we hope the City may promote as a peaceful and
equitable solution.
Mr. Allen Drescher, acting as our lawyer, met with a group of neighbors,
and after study of the High Street alley history and its open community
access well back into the last century, told us that there is "no legal
impediment" to High Street alley access. Therefore, having received
Historical and Planning Commission approval and having considered the
neighbors' appeal, we are resubmitting, after considerable expense and loss
of time, our modified plans for the Church Street Commons. In addition to
the modifications discussed in paragraph four above we also request that
units one through five be allowed to move up to five feet forward per city
regulation 18.68.110. This phase I construction could be authorized now
since the objections of the appeal do not apply. Phase 2 could also be
authorized separately with final approval given when the lot line
adjustment has been completed adding enough land to satisfy the city.
In conclusion, we trust that you will find in our proposal a project that not
only meets the required standards, but also is an attractive project that
provides for the enhancement of one of Ashland's Historic Neighborhoods.
Thank you for your time and attention.
Yours sincerely,
r I
Norbert and Phyllis Bischof
468 Michigan Avenue
Berkeley, California 94707
cc: D. Boldt
A. Drescher
M. Hedges
J. Hibbs
R. Langmeyer
5
I
J
CITY OF ASHLAND 1,• of AS
Department of Community Development a.
i
Planning Divisions.
MEMORANDUM •'*FOREGO
i -
.?.
DATE: September 12, 1996
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
I
!I FROM: John McLaughlin, Director of Community Development
i RE: Planning Action 94-117 -- Postponed Hearing
The public hearing scheduled for this planning action has been postponed indefinitely in
order for the applicant to address a series of issues raised by neighbors. Upon the
i applicant submitting satisfactory information discussing these concerns, the application
will be rescheduled for a public hearing. At that time, public notice will be mailed to
surrounding neighbors advising them of the date and time of the hearing before the
Council.
i
I
i
I
lI
I
I
I
6
I
MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL
September 3, 1996
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Golden called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m., Civic Center Council Chambers.
ROLL CALL
Councilors Laws, Reid, Hauck, Hagen, Wheeldon and Thompson were present.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes of the Regular meeting of August 20, 1996 were approved with the following
amendment, page 9 item 2) should read "Possible study of expansion and estimate of cost".
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS
Certificate for Excellence in Financial Reporting for the City of Ashland by the Government
Finance Officers Association.
Joanne Stumpf presented to the Finance Director, Jill Turner and the City of Ashland the
Award for excellence.
Turner introduced Marty Levine, chairman of the Audit Committee. Levine explained some
of the responsibilities of the Audit Committee.
CONSENT AGENDA
1. Minutes of boards, commissions, and committees.
2. Monthly departmental reports for August, 1996.
3. City Administrator's Monthly Report - August, 1996.
4. Request by Senior Program Director for approval to submit a grant application
for an addition to the building on Holmes Avenue.
Councilors Hagen/Hauck m/s to approve consent agenda. Voice vote: all AYES. Motion
passed.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Appeal from a decision of the Planning Commission approving P.Ar94-117,_a;
request for a Site Review and Outline Plan for a 7-lot X project ofi'Cl f,i?ct '
0�,StFeet; west of North Main Street (Norbert Bischoff, applicant). (Continued"to
September 17 at request of applicant.)
Public Hearing scheduled for this planning action was postponed until the next Council
meeting scheduled for September 17, 1996 at 7 p.m. to allow for the clarification of certain
items by the applicant.
Council meeting 9-03-96 1
1
I
2. Proposed revision of Systems Development Charges.
Finance Director, Jill Turner presented a report on Systems Development Charges. Also
called Fiscal Impact Fees which are charges that are based on the cost associated with
growth. System Development Charges try to allocate the growth portion so that the new
residences pay for growth and existing residents pay for their proper share. 'Turner presented
a slide that pointed out that System Development Charges are 7.3% of the total Capital
Improvement Funding Summary. Turner gave brief history on System Development
Charges. Commented on the amount of hard work and effort by the SDC Committee.
Turner explained that the System Development Charges can be of two different t
P Y P g types. One
would be a reimbursement fee, which is where the capitol project is already completed and
the current citizens are reimbursed for the extra capacity that they put into that project. The
second type is a improvement fee, which are based on projects that are expected to be done
and the extra capacity that will be served by that new project. The methodology for
calculating are dissimilar and they each have their own specific way that those monies can be
used.
City Administrator Brian Almquist read letter from John Nicholson which indicated his
disagreement with the opinion of the SDC Committee recommendations.
Mayor Golden read to the public the Systems Development Charges Minority Report. The
report noted water supply, water distribution, transportation and Parks. It was determined
that the committee's reasoning was flawed in regards to water supply. It makes the
assumption, that because a future water supply has not been identified at this time, new
growth should not be paying for that water supply that it will need. It makes the assumption
that new growth will not need water, instead of that its sources is still uncertain.
It was noted that in regards to water distribution, when upsizing waterlines the resulting
unused capacity will ultimately be used by growth. This additional growth should not be
given a free ride by way of only having to pay the incremental cost, the savings should be
shared.
The report indicated that the committee also flawed with Transportation and Parks. In
transportation the assumption was that because specific transportation projects have not been
identified, there will be minimal cost for added capacity and improvement of transportation
systems needed as a result of growth. Donated park land is included in the calculation of
I average cost of park land, which assumes the same level of donation in the future. The
consumer index is used as the basis for active parks, rather than the actual price inflation of
I
land within Ashland.
iCouncilor Reid commented that it should be made clearer the delineation between current
residents, new construction and new building.
Council meeting 9-03-96 2
i R
� V
June 30 , 1995 R�-CF/
vF
0109
Mr. and Mrs. Norbert Bischof
468 Michigan
Berkeley, California 94709
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Bischof:
We understand that Bill Molnar of the Ashland City
Planning Department has suggested mediation between you and
the Neighborhood Coalition regarding the proposed townhouse
project ( "Church Street Commons" ) . We believe that this
method would produce a solution which would be beneficial to
everyone concerned. We would be happy with the choice of an
independent mediator if you are not comfortable meeting with
US.
We sincerely hope that you will consider this
suggestion. Please contact any of the following regarding
this:
Mark Jenne (503 482-0789)
Dennis Jarvl (503 482-5242)
Winn Frankland (503 482-0122)
C O^AkA V C
cc: Bill Molnar, Ashland Planning Department
Ashland Planning Commission
9
CHURCH STREET COMMOI 'LANDSCAPE PERCENTAGE CALC' iTION RESULTS 24 JAN 95
Polygon Sq.Feet Percent Description
0 22 ,970. 57 100.00 TOTAL LOT
1 217 .97 0.95 LANDSCAPING
2 395. 52 1.72 LANDSCAPING
3 300. 58 1. 31 LANDSCAPING
4 792 .87 3 .45 LANDSCAPING
5 2 . 10 0. 01 LANDSCAPING
6 316.98 1. 38 LANDSCAPING
7 169 . 51 0.74 LANDSCAPING
8 9 . 37 0. 04 LANDSCAPING
i 9 369 . 89 1. 61 LANDSCAPING
10 54 . 74 0. 24 LANDSCAPING
j 11 9 . 32 0. 04 LANDSCAPING
12 64 . 09 0. 28 LANDSCAPING
13 45. 93 0. 20 LANDSCAPING
14 15. 47 0. 07 LANDSCAPING
15 2 , 239. 46 9 . 75 LANDSCAPING
16 15. 38 0. 07 LANDSCAPING
17 48 . 90 0. 21 LANDSCAPING
18 263 .79 1. 15 LANDSCAPING
19 151.99 0. 66 LANDSCAPING
20 49. 40 0. 22 LANDSCAPING
21 14 .22 0. 06 LANDSCAPING
22 279 . 51 1. 22 LANDSCAPING
23 5. 16 0. 02 LANDSCAPING
24 17 , 138 .44 74 . 61 BUILDING/HARDSC
SUMMARY
LANDSCAPING 25. 39%
BUILDING/HARDSCAPE 74 . 61%
,I App
To: Ashland Planning Commission HAND DELIVERED
Re: Planning Action 94-117 APPEAL
We, homeowners and occupants of homes affected by the proposed multi-
family unit development project identified as Planning Action 94-117, wish to
appeal the decision of the Ashland Planning Commission to accept the above
named project. Our opposition includes, but is not limited to, the following
points:
1) INACCURACY OF SITE PLAN
Our findings indicate that the architectural drawings rendered by Mr. David
Larsen and submitted for project 94-117 have more than one dozen property
line dimensions which are not to scale. These are serious flaws that challenge
the AIA standards and present an inaccurate representation of the project and
of the density calculation requirements of 35% open space and 65% building.
2) DISCREPANCY CONCERNING INGRESS AND EGRESS
Apparently there has been an assumption on the part of the Ashland Planning
Department and the Ashland Planning Commission that legal permission has
been granted for residents of the proposed project to use the alleyways from
Church to High Streets for ingress and egress. The property owners along
certain sections of the Church to High Street alleyways have not granted such
permission.
3) PROCEDURAL FLAW
The persons listed below were not notified of the December 13, 1994 Planning
Commission meeting at which time this proposal was presented.
1. Candace Benton
2. Dennis Jarvi
Public Notice requirements 18.108.080 have thus been directly violated.
It is our understanding that we may voice additional concerns at the appeal
hearing.
Since this appeal results from the failure of the Planning Commission to
identify the plan discrepancies and ingress and egress issues, we request that
the $250 appeal fee be refunded.
Respectfully submitted
Lisa Schumacher ... ........ /
.. ... ....... . �� . Date .`�.�Cr�('j�f
Dennis Jarvi ......... ti z
..max P.... .... ..................:........ Date .. . ?: . f. .. .
Mary Maher ...(r .... ... Date .. ....
Gail Barham Q ....................................... Date.... /� X995
II
i
David Fisse
Northwest Design
Queen Anne Bed & Breakfast
Re: Bischof Project, 7 dwellings on Church Street
i
December 27, 1994
I
City of Ashland Planning Dept.
Attn.: Bill Molnar
Dear Mr. Molnar:
After two discussions over the phone, & two personal visits, one with you and one with
planner Kelly Madding, I have felt it necessary to put my feelings in writing!!
I have several concerns about the above mentioned project that my wife and I believe
will adversely affect us.
The plans submitted and approved by your department were loaded with
inconsistencies, inaccuracies, omissions, improper and not to scale dimensions!!
Two main items of concern are:
1) Parking layout, turn around & maneuvering. Apparently you have different standards
for different designers. For example, on the Pelton House project, that Planner Mark
Knox is handling, he would not allow me less than 24' back up and turn around space.
When I questioned you of this matter on the Bischof project, you said 20'-24' was O.K.!!
2) Solar Access. For some strange reason, (according to the plans) you have allowed
more than the 6' shadow allowance on the north property line of my residence, the
Queen Anne.
I have been extremely upset since I heard from a neighbor that the planning department
has approved the plans for the Bischof Project. Should the above mentioned project be
adopted, I see no choice but to personally hold the City of Ashland responsible and
liable for any damages, (including attorney's fees) be it physical, mental, financial, or
inconvenience.
Concerned neighbors and I would like to relocate the meeting scheduled for January 3rd
at 8:30 am. to the Queen Anne. at 125 N. Main. We feel it would be beneficial for all
parties involved to attend.
Your immediate response is of the utmost importance.
fF
cc: Kathy Golden, Mayor City of Ashland.
12
CITY OF ASHLAND , CITY HALL
ASHLAND.OREGON 97549
• telephone(code 503)492.7211
January 12, 1995
RE: Planning Action # 94-117
Dear M.H. Hedges:
At its meeting of December 13, 1994, the Ashland Planning Commission approved
your request for a Site Review, Outline Plan Approval, and a Solar Waiver for the
property located on Church Street -- Assessor's Map # 39 1 E 13B, Tax Lot(s)
2000.
The Findings, Conclusions and Orders document, adopted at the January 10, 1995
meeting, is enclosed.
Please note the followin circl items:
,—�
1. A final map prepared by a registered surveyor must be submitted within one
year of the date of preliminary approval; otherwise, approval becomes
invalid.
2. A final plan must be submitted within 18 months of the date of preliminary
approval; otherwise, approval becomes invalid.
03. There is a 15 day appeal period which must elapse before a building permit
/ may be issued.
All of the conditions imposed by the Planning Commission must be fully met
before an occupancy permit may be issued.
Planning Commission approval is valid for a period of one year only, after
which time a new application would have to be submitted.
Please feel free to call me at 488-5305 if you have any questions.
incer y,
ill Molnar
Senior Planner
cc: Property Owner, People Who Testified, People Who Submitted Letters
(3
;
I
BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION
i December 13, 1994
I
IN THE MATTER OF PLANNING ACTION 194-117, REQUEST FOR )
SITE REVIEW AND OUTLINE PLAN APPROVAL FOR A SEVEN-LOT ) FINDINGS,
MULTI-FAMILY PROJECT (TOWNHOUSES) UNDER THE PERFORMANCE ) CONCLUSIONS
STANDARDS OPTIONS, FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED ON CHURCH ) AND ORDERS
STREET (THE VACANT LOTS BEHIND THE NEW BARDS INN )
ADDITION ON CHURCH STREET) . ALSO INCLUDES A REQUEST FOR )
A SOLAR WAIVER TO ALLOW A SHADOW IN EXCESS OF CITY )
REQUIREMENTS. )
APPLICANT: M.H. HEDGES )
--------------------------------------------------------
RECITALS:
j 1) Tax lot 2000 of 391E 13B is located at and is zoned
2) The proposal is to construct a seven-lot, seven-unit 'multi-family
project. A solar waiver is also requested to allow a shadow in excess of
City requirements. All applicable application materials are on file at
the Department of Community Development.
3) The criteria for Site Review approval are outlined in section 18.72
of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance are as follows:
A. All applicable City ordinances have been met or will be met by the
proposed development.
B. All requirements of the Site Review Chapter have been met or will
be met.
C. The development complies with the Site Design Standards adopted by
the City Council for implementation of this Chapter. .
D. That adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, paved
access to and through the development, electricity, urban storm
drainage, and adequate transportation can and will be provided to
and through the subject property.
The criteria for a multi-family project developed under the Performance
Standards Option are outlined in section 18.88 of the Ashland Land Use
Ordinance and are as follows:
a) That the development meets all applicable ordinance requirements of
the City of Ashland.
� b) That adequate key City facilities can be provided including water,
sewer, paved access to and through the development, electricity, urban
storm drainage, police and fire protection and adequate transportation;
and that the development will not cause a City facility to operate
i
� �4
beyond capacity.
C) That the existing and natural features of the land; such as
wetlands, floodplain corridors, ponds, large trees, rock outcroppings,
etc. , have been identified in. the plan of the development and
significant features have been included in the open space, common areas,
and unbuildable areas.
d) That the development of the land will not prevent adjacent land
from being developed for the uses shown in the Comprehensive Plan.
e) That there are adequate provisions for the maintenance of open
space and common areas, if required or provided, and that if
developments are done in phases that the early phases have the same or
higher ratio of amenities as proposed in the entire project.
f) That the proposed density meets the base and bonus density
standards established under this Chapter.
4) The Planning Commission, following proper public notice, held a
Public Hearing on December 13, 1994, at that time testimony was received
and exhibits were presented. The Planning Commission approved the
application as subject to conditions pertaining to the appropriate
development of the site.
Now, therefore, The Planning Commission of the City of Ashland
finds, concludes and recommends as follows:
SECTION 1. EXHIBITS
For the purposes of reference to these Findings, the attached index
of exhibits, data, and testimony will be used.
Staff Exhibits lettered with an "S"
Proponent's Exhibits, lettered with a "P"
Opponent's Exhibits, lettered with an "O"
Hearing Minutes, Notices, Miscellaneous Exhibits lettered with an
"M"
SECTION 2 . CONCLUSORY FINDINGS
2. 1 The Planning Commission finds that it has received all
information necessary to make a decision based on the Staff
Report, public hearing testimony and the exhibits received.
2.2 The Planning Commission finds that the proposal to construct
a seven-lot multi-family project meets all criteria for approval
outlined in the Site Design and Use chapter 18.72 and Performance
Standards Options chapter 18.88.
�r
i
i
2.3 The Commission finds that the proposal complies with City
requirements for Site Review approval. The site plan shows that in
excess of 35 percent of the total lot area will be landscaped in
accordance with the requirement of the R-2 zoning district. Street
trees shall be installed along the Church Street and the private
alley, one for every 30 feet of frontage.
The design of the project meets the City's Site Design and Use
Standards for multi-family development within the Ashland Historic
Interest Area. The three residential units along Church Street are
i oriented toward the street. The front door of each unit has access
from the new public sidewalk from individual concrete walks.
Parking for the project is located 'off the private alley and is
situated to the side and rear of the residences.
The landscaping plan includes a variety of deciduous and evergreen
shrubs. The majority of existing, healthy trees will be retained as
is reasonably possible. These include two large spruce trees at the
i northern section of the property, a redwood, fir and pear tree.
Temporary, protective fencing shall be installed around the root
i zones of each tree prior to site preparation &nd building
construction to in assist in maintaining the trees health during
development.
2 .4 The Commission finds that the exterior design of the project
is consistent with City design standards for development within the
Ashland Historic District.
The Commission finds that building heights are compatible with
neighboring structures and fit in with the overall streetscape. The
applicant has submitted a profile of the project as it would be
seen from Church Street. Surrounding buildings have been included,
demonstrating the proposed height of the new units relative to
neighboring buildings on the same side of the street. Based on this
information, the Commission finds the height of the project to be
consistent with the neighboring buildings along Church Street.
The Commission finds the design of each residential unit in
agreement with design standards for the Historic District. The
architecture of the units incorporates a vernacular style found
throughout the District. Elements of the project's design, such as
steep pitched roofs, dormers, double-hung windows, and covered
entries meet the City's requirements for massing, setbacks, roof
shapes, rhythm of entries, platforms and directional expression.
Building sizes have been broken up into several masses by
incorporating a series of jogs, off-sets and step backs.
2 .5 The Commission finds that City facilities are adequate to
serve the project. Sewer, water and electric service are available
to the site and are located adjacent to the property along Church
Street and within the public right-of-way. Storm sewer will be
collected on-site and piped to Church Street. Catch basins will be
installed within the private alley to collect additional runoff.
16
I
The Commission finds that adequate transportation, facilities are
available to the property to serve the project. Testimony
concerning the impact of additional traffic generated by the
project upon Church and High Streets and the private alley has been
made part of the record. Project residents can access the
development from both Church and High Streets. Because the
project's parking spaces are divided between the lower section of
the alley and upper section of the alley, it is assumed that
vehicle trips generated by the seven units will be distributed
equally between the two alley entrances/exits. It is estimated that
the project will generate approximately 56 daily trips (ADT) , with
about 30 percent (18) going to Medford. The Commission finds that
the 56 trips estimated is a national average and, due to the
project's unique location, finds it highly probable that there
would be a lower number of trips per day because the project is
located near the downtown. Of the total number of trips generated,
only ten percent (three trips) of the trips would occur during the
peak daily hour. Consequently, the Commission finds that existing
transportation facilities are adequate to accommodate the estimated
levels of traffic generated by the project.
2 . 6 The Commission finds that the request for a solar waiver for
the property west of the project site (tax lots 4700 & 4800) is not
required for this application. The solar setback is measured from
the highest shadow producing point of a structure to the northern
property lone. The common property line is in excess of 45 degrees
southeast of a line drawn east-west and intersecting the northern
most point of the lot. Consequently, the Commission finds that it
is not defined as a northern property line under 18.70.020 D. and
not subject to solar setback requirements.
SECTION 3 . DECISION
3 .1 Based on the record of the Public Hearing on this matter, the
Planning Commission concludes that the proposal for a seven-lot, seven-
unit multi-family development is supported by evidence in the record.
Therefore, based on our overall conclusions, and upon the proposal being
subject to each of the following conditions, we approve Planning Action
#94-117.
1) That all proposals of the applicant be conditions of approval
unless otherwise modified here.
2) That all landscaping as shown on the approved plan be installed
prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy.
3) That 1 street tree, minimum of 1.5 inches diameter at breast
height, be installed every 30 feet along Church Street and the abutting
private road, prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy.
4) That protective, temporary fencing be installed around the root
zone of trees identified on the landscaping plan for protection prior to
site. preparation (i.e. grading or excavation) or construction.
�7
i
I
5) That all paving improvements to the private alley be completed
I prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy.
6) That six of the required off-street parking spaces (spaces 5, 6,
I 8, 13, 14 & 15) be constructed of grasscrete/pavers prior to issuance of
a certificate of occupancy.
7) That an irrigation system plan be submitted at the time of a
building permit for review and approval of the Staff Advisor.
8) That all requirements of the Ashland Electric Department be met,
including_ the dedication of public utility easements. Property
owner/developer responsible for excavation, backfilling and compaction
as well as the relocation of the power box in front of the parcel, if
requested by owner/developer.
I
9) That a drainage plan be submitted at the time of a building
permit for review and approval by the Ashland Engineering Division.
10) That all requirements of the Ashland Fire Department be met
prior to the use of combustible materials. These requirements may
include the installation of interior sprinkler systems if warranted due
to the lack of sufficient hydrant flows.
11) That portions of the private alley be widened and paved as
indicated on the site plan prior to the issuance of a certificate of
occupancy for any new residence.
12) That the driveway serving the single car garage off of Church
Street have a maximum width of 91 .
13) That an "opportunity to recycle" site be located on the site in
accordance with the requirements of Ashland Sanitary and shown on the
plan prior to the issuance of a building permit.
14) That an exterior color plan for the units be provided at the
time of submission for a building permit for review by the Historic
Commission and approval of the Staff Advisor. Slight changes in exterior
colors which distinguish individual units from one another must be
considered in order to increase the compatibility of the project's scale
with surrounding development.
I
I
1 Planning Comm rloon Approval / Date
I
' 18
i
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF ASHLAND
20 EAST MAIN STREET
(503) 482-3211, EXT: 59
MEMORANDUM
January 10, 1995
To: Planning Commission
From: Paul Nolte
Subject: Request to Reopen Hearing, Planning Action 94-117, Church Street
Townhouses
David Fisse has submitted a letter and has had numerous contacts with the planning
department protesting the commission's decision regarding the above-described
planning action. As I understand the situation, the commission has made its decision
and is scheduled to adopt findings supporting the decision at the meeting scheduled
for this evening.
The issues raised by Mr. Fisse are issues which can only be raised during the hearing
which has already occurred. There is no process under the code to reopen the
hearing at this time or to request the commission to reconsider its decision. Except
for alternative three set forth below, if the commission were to hear the issues raised
by Mr. Fisse, it would violate the due process rights of the applicant.
The commission has three alternatives:
1. Advise Mr. Fisse his remedy is to appeal the commission's decision to the council
as provided in the code.
2. Allow Mr. Fisse to address the commission but only under the circumstances
where his comments and information cannot become part of the record nor can it be
considered in the commission's adoption of findings. In such case, an appeal is still
possible as noted in alternative one.
3. Postpone the adoption of findings, create standards for the reopening of hearings
or reconsideration of decisions, require Mr. Fisse to apply for a reopening or
reconsideration addressing the standards, give notice to the applicant and all parties
of the hearing date for the time at which the commission will determine if it will reopen
or reconsider. Keep in mind that the 120-day clock keeps ticking if the commission
decides to create this new process.
(p:plenninplficce.mem)
i
i
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
i MINUTES
DECEMBER 13, 1994
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Barbara Jarvis at 7:05 p.m. Other Commissioners
present were Ron Bass, Peter Finkle, Jim Hibbert, Tom Giordano, Jenifer Carr and Hal
Cloer. Absent Commissioners were Bingham and Armitage. Staff present were
McLaughlin, Molnar, Knox, and Yates.
I
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Giordano moved to approve the Findings of the November 8, 1994 meeting. Cloer
seconded the motion and the Minutes and Findings were approved.
I PUBLIC FORUM
Jarvis announced the appointment of Ron Bass to the Planning Commission and
welcomed him.
Hibbert received a call from Barbara Ryberg asking him to invite the Planning
Commissioners to a visioning meeting on March 11, 1995.
TYPE II PUBLIC HEARING
PLANNING ACTION 94-117
REQUEST FOR A SITE REVIEW AND OUTLINE PLAN APPROVAL FOR A SEVEN-
LOT, MUTLI-FAMILY PROJECT (TOWNHOUSE) UNDER THE PERFORMANCE
STANDARDS OPTIONS FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED ON CHURCH STREET
(THE VACANT LOTS BEHIND THE NEW BARD'S INN ADDITION ON CHURCH
STREET). ALSO INCLUDE A REQUEST FOR A SOLAR WAIVER TO ALLOW FOR
A SHADOW IN EXCESS OF CITY REQUIREMENTS.
APPLICANT: M. H. HEDGES
Site Visits and Ex Parte Contacts
Al Commissioners had a site visit.
STAFF REPORT
The applicant is proposing to construct seven townhouse units with common areas
between the units with those areas to be maintained by the homeowner's association.
All units are two-story, three bedroom and approximately 1700 square feet. There will
be a lap pool for use by those who live in the development.
I
t 20
The applicants submitted a revised site plan that showed removal of concrete patios
and walkways and the addition of lawn area. After a recent survey of the property,
the applicant found there is about 500 square feet of additional land with the project
and they.are not required to come up with a density bonus.
The Historic Commission and Staff had concerns about design and scale. The length
of the building along Church Street is approximately 80 feet. The applicant submitted
a profile of the project as viewed from Church Street. The building height will be
approximately 24 feet. (Patricia Sprague's building is 23 feet.) There are offsets to the
building facade with the use of dormers and entryways. The Historic recommended
approval of the current design. Staff has also recommended approval with the added
14 Conditions.
Finkle wondered how the trees would fit along the street. Molnar showed where the
four street trees would be located and noted the existing trees that the Tree
Commission asked to be preserved and incorporated into the design. .A Condition
has been included to add a few similar street trees along the alley to give it a tree-lined
appearance. There is an adequate amount of landscaping shown.
PUBLIC HEARING
NORBERT BISCHOF, 468 Michigan Avenue, Berkeley, CA, stated this project should
be a nice transition from the Bard's Inn to the neighborhood. He felt he benefited
from the Historic Commission's suggestions and those suggestions have led to a
much better project.
Cloer wondered, given the issue of affordable housing in Ashland, what would these
units be likely to sell for. Bischof hoped below $200,000. He will have to see what the
construction costs will be.
DAVE LARSON, the designer of the project, was available for questions.
LISA SCHUMACHER, 122 High Street, uses the alley to get to her parking garage.
She is very concerned about the two units situated on the alley besides the increased
use of alley. Right now it is quiet and private. This development seems like it will be
creating too many houses and too many cars. There are lots of children in the
neighborhood. In response to Commissioner's questions, Schumacher said that there
is more traffic in the summer because of the traveller's accommodations on No. Main.
The cars travel slowly, but they don't stop at the ends of the alley. Finkle asked If
Schumacher thought a mirror would make a difference in terms of safety. She did not
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 2
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
DECEMBER 13,1994
ZI
I '
I
I
know.
i
MARY MAHER, 56 Church Street, lives across the street from the proposed
development. This project will greatly impact her property. She will be looking at of
mass of 80 feet. Traffic on Church Street will be a mess. She predicted there would
be accidents because of cars entering Church Street off the alley. Did anyone on the
Commission see how this development would be compatible with her home?
DENNIS JARVI, 117 High Street, spoke with all his neighbors all the way to the north
side of project on High Street. Most people he talked to didn't feel it was worth
coming to this meeting because they thought a decision had already been made
before a vote of the Commissioners. Several neighbors were concerned about traffic
coming out of the alley onto High Street and the amount of traffic it will generate.
There is a blind spot where the alley enters onto High. There are lots of school
children that walk along High. Jarvi would like to see fewer units built. He was also
concerned with energy efficiency and a water shortage in Ashland. The lap pool will
be a big water user. He would like to make sure Staff has taken a look at how much
water will be used.
Finkle wondered where the traffic issues are dealt with--is it Traffic Safety? McLaughlin
said that Traffic Safety does not deal with private alleys. This would be more of a
vision clearance problem where the alley meets the street. It is possible that some
improvements could be made to improve that intersection.
Jarvi mentioned that there is a power pole and a large maple tree and the visibility to
the left is limited. On-street parking reaches all the way to the alley on High. High
Street is crowned, making driving on the street more difficult.
McLaughlin explained that this project will generate approximately 56 vehicle trips per
day. About 30 percent will go to Medford (18 trips). One house will access right onto
Church Street reducing alley trips to 48 per day. Some vehicles will be coming into
town by way of Church Street. McLaughlin added that he did not believe there would
be speeding traffic through the alley because the homeowners will not want speeding
traffic either and they may also have children.
Staff Response
It was determined that a solar waiver would not be needed because calculations show
a shadow would not require a Variance.
ASHLAND PLANHtNG COMMISSION 3
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
DECEMBER 13,1994
1
Z2
Applicant's Rebuttal
LARSON, in rebuttal, discussed access to the alley He said the upper two residences
will have access to High Street by way of the alley. The majority of the residents will
probably use Church Street. The alley width will be increased to 20 feet. The
traveller's accommodations create more traffic than the proposed project. Many
people will walk to the downtown rather than use their car. The corner (where the
alley turns) will have the fence removed and a low retaining wall added, thus
eliminating obstructions or visibility problems. All requirements for visibility have been
met.
COMMISSIONERS DISCUSSION AND MOTION
Giordano likes the project and believes it makes a nice transition from the Bard's Inn
to the neighborhood. However, density is a concern—it seems like a much of the site
has been taken up by buildings. The landscaped areas do not seem too usable. The
front yards are adequate, but the area around the pool and between the buildings
looks tight. The project could succeed if the landscaping plan would go into-more
detail. Instead of any larger landscaped areas, there are just bits and pieces of yard
throughout the project that are not usable. Giordano is not as concerned about the
traffic because he believes it will be spread out with vehicles travelling in different
directions.
Jarvis read the testimony request form from by Gail Barham, 117 N. Main. She is
concerned with traffic.
Hibbert empathized with the neighbors as this project will create additional traffic but it
should not be very much traffic during the day. The property is zoned R-2 and allows
for the proposed building at the proposed density. The water supply is adequate;
storage is the problem during drought years. There is no legal means at this time to
solve the growth problem.
Carr liked the way the buildings were broken up. She feels badly if people were
misled at the time they purchased their property, but it is important to remember that
the R-2 zone runs to the end of the block and If a project meets the criteria and
ordinances, a developer is allowed to develop. The Commissioners make their
decisions based on the project meeting the criteria.
Finkle noted that the height of the project is compatible with the neighboring homes.
He is happy that the blind corner (within the alley) will be more open and he is hopeful
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 4
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
DECEMBER 13,1994
23
I
I
that there will be an awareness of the alley entrances to the street even though they
seem to meet all City requirements.
I Cwer asked Giordano to elaborate on what can be done with landscaping. Giordano
replied that the elimination of one unit would open things up greatly.
Bass thought the project is a good transition between Bard's Inn and the
neighborhood. The 56 vehicle trips per day mentioned by McLaughlin is a national
average, however, this project is located in a unique area and it is highly probable
there will be a lower number of trips per day because the project is located near the
I downtown. The way the project is situated on the site, it divides the traffic into three
potentially different routes.
Jarvis explained to the neighbors that she had not made up her mind on how she
would vote on this project before she came to the meeting. She and the rest of the
Commissioners try to listen to everyone and weigh all the testimony. She is impressed
by the front part of the buildings because of the way the mass has been broken up,
the setbacks are suitable, and the project creates an attractive transition. After having
spent time on the Transportation Planning Advisory Committee (TPAC), she knows
that smaller traffic areas such as alleys are conducive to slower speeds. She would
also encourage the developer to do a little better job of landscaping.
Carr moved to approve Planning Action 94-117 for a Site Review and Outline Plan
Approval with the attached Conditions. The request for a solar variance can be
stricken and is no longer a part of the application. Hibbert seconded the motion and it
carried unanimously.
PLANNING ACTION 94-127
REQUEST FOR AMENDMENTS TO THE ASHLAND LAND USE ORDINANCE
CHAPTER 18.76 PARTITIONS.
j APPLICANT: CITY OF ASHLAND
STAFF REPORT
After becoming aware of some problems with flag lots as outlined in the Staff Report,
Staff drafted an ordinance, reviewed it at a Study Session in October and reviewed it
with the City Attorney. The City Attorney made some changes as seen in the draft
ordinance. Knox reviewed each section of the ordinance with the Commissioners.
j The three portions being modified are the standard partitions, flag lot, and the
definition of flag lots.
I
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 5
REGULAR MEEIING
MINUTES
iDECEMUER 13,1994
I
I
I
�4I
i
addition is that he needs more shooting space and he needs high ceilings for his
photography work.
Ron Thurner, 1170 Bellview Avenue, stated if the deed restriction is important to put on
now, he does not see that the plans would come before the Historic Commission again if
changed to residential use.
Knox recommended the designer draw up alternate sketches for the Review Board depicting
the recessed doors and windows. Harriff asked about the purpose of having a six foot
balcony. Molnar stated it is not necessarily a personal staff preference, but there is
extensive literature on the subject and planners have to look at long term influences.
Harriff asked if the six foot balcony condition could be placed on the property if it were
converted to a residence, and at that time, the doors and windows could be set back.
Langmeyer said he would offer to reset them at the time of residential conversion.
Harriff stated be felt the smaller balcony offsets the bulk of the building. Chambers related
.the Historic Commission has a responsibility that is longer term. He likes the design of the
building, but said it would fit in better on Fourth Street. Skibby disagreed, stating the site
is in a transition area, and asserted he felt comfortable with the design.
Skibby moved to recommend approval of this application with the condition the windows
and doors be set in two feet at the time of a residential conversion in order to make the
balcony a depth of no less than six feet. The motion passed with Lewis, Skibby, Mitchell
and Harriff voting aye, and Ennis, Chambers and Cardinale voting nay.
(Ennis left the meeting at this point- 8.30 p.m.)
PA 94-117
Site Review, Outline Plan Approval and Solar Waiver
Church Street
M.H. Hedges
Molnar explained this was heard at the October Historic Commission meeting, but was
delayed before it went to the Planning Commission meeting. The Commission had
expressed concerns about the scale of the project as it related to Church Street. Since that
time, the property has been surveyed and it was found to be 400 square feet larger, so the
permitted density is seven units outright, without bonus points. The lap pool, however, is
still part of the project The percentage of lot coverage has changed with the reduction of
impervious surfaces (private front concrete areas and walkways have been removed). While
the scale has not changed much along Church Street, the designer has submitted a
streetscape drawing of the area from North Main Street to High Street.
Harriff stated the submitted streetscape has reduced his concerns. Designer David Larsen
verified the streetscape was drawn to scale. He also said the center building has been set
back a bit, lawn areas will still be in front, and the elevation along Church Street has been
Ashland Historic Commission
Minutes
December 7, 1994 Z C Page 3
scaled down to 66 feet. Skibby declared he also felt more comfortable with the project after
I
seeing the streetscape.
Density was discussed. Lewis stated it is difficult to predict the impact of the project on the
rear of the property. Mitchell said the design and massing do not seem that large, especially
compared with the Bard's Inn. Although Harriff likes the design, he said he does feel for
the neighbors. Skibby agreed, but added it is already a busy area because it is so close to
North Main Street.
Mark Jenne, 92 Church Street, asked about the color: Larsen said each unit or every other
unit will be painted a different color. All the trim will probably be the same color. He
noted they will be using historic colors. Jenne remarked he was certainly calmed somewhat
by the elevations, as he likes the design. He declared, however, that the neighbor directly
across the street was ill and she had asked him to voice her concerns about the density on
Church Street. (Mary Maher, the neighbor, had written letters to that effect and were
included in the packet.)
Skibby noted the houses around the comer on High Street are fairly close together.
Mitchell and Chambers both expressed concern that after projects are approved by the
Historic and Planning Commissions, there are instances whereby the plans change quite a
bit and they are not brought back to the respective commissions for review.
When asked about the conditions, Molnar clarified all the conditions of the applicant will
be incorporated into the conditions of approval.
Harriff moved and Cardinale seconded to recommend approval of this project to the
Planning Commission. The motion passed unanimously.
BUILDING PERMITS
Permits reviewed by members of the Historic Commission and issued during the month of
November follow:
200 Meade Street Owen/Roxanne Jones Revisions
147 Strawberry Lane Alex Reid Deck
267 Eighth Street Kenneth McCulloh Foundation
208 Oak Street Lance Pugh Remodel
.212 Van Ness Avenue Myran Heidson Partial Reroof
135 Oak Street Gateway Real Estate Sign
5 North Main Street Gateway Real Estate Sign
250 North Pioneer Street Valley of the Rogue Bank Sign (2)
I�
Ashland Historic Commission
Minutes
f` December 7, 1994 2 6 Page 4
t.
ASHLAND PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
Addendum
December 13, 1994
PLANNING ACTION: 94-117
APPLICANT: M. H. Hedges
LOCATION: Church Street, southwest of the intersection of Church and North Main
Street.
ZONE DESIGNATION: R-2
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Multi-Family Residential
REQUEST:
I. Additional Information
A revised site plan has been submitted that includes changes to landscaping
coverage and the orientation of individual parking spaces at the rear of the
project. A number of concrete patios and walkways have been replaced with lawn
and a variety of plantings. Several parking spaces along the access road will be
improved with grass pavers, while the others are shown to be surfaced with
concrete.
A profile of the project as viewed from Church Street has been included to
illustrate the dimensional proportions of the project in relationship to adjacent
buildings to either side. This information allows one to compare the height and
mass of the project with the neighboring Bard's Inn and residential structures
southwest of the development. Also, a three-dimensional perspective depicts the
three units proposed to be constructed along the Church Street frontage.
II. Project Impact
Several issues were raised in the original staff report that could not be adequately
addressed without additional information. A recent survey of the property has
resulted in a slight adjustment of the total project area from 22,416 (.51 acres) to
22,912 (.525). This is significant in that it changes the base density for the parcel
to 7.08 units. As a consequence, no additional density bonus is needed to allow
for a 7th unit. However, as with the original proposal, a private lap pool will be
constructed for use by residents of the project.
The site plan has been amended and lot coverage figures have been included
which comply with the 35 percent landscaping requirement of the R-2 zoning
district. While no specific text or calculations have been submitted that explain
27
I
I
i
i
these changes, it appears it has been accomplished by deleting several concrete
walkways and patios and replacing these features with lawn, shrubs and flowering
plants. In either case, the project is very close to the maximum allowable lot
coverage for the zoning district. The Site Design and Use chapter does permit the
Commission to require modifications to landscaping which are found necessary to
ensure the project's aesthetic appearance in comparison to developments in the
surrounding neighborhood.
Historic District Site Design Standards
This project was reviewed before the Historic Commission at their meeting on
October 4, 1994, and a copy of the minutes from that meeting have been
included in the record. While the Historic Commission was satisfied with the
building's architecture, concern was expressed over the scale of the project,
specifically along Church Street. Other than the Bard's Inn, surrounding buildings
consist of separate detached residences on individual lots. The proposed building
elevation along Church Street will be approximately 80 feet in length without
separations. The design of individual units, however, incorporates a series of jogs
and offsets, as well as many human scale features (i.e. bay windows, dormers,
porches, etc.) to break up the building into varied masses.
The determination of whether or not the project is compatible in scale to
surrounding development in the neighborhood is by no means an exact science.
The burden of proof lies with the applicant to show that the design is consistent
with surrounding historic development patterns. Based on the information
presented at the initial Historic Commission meeting, which did not include the
streetscape view and three dimensional perspective, the Historic Commission
believed that the scale of the project along Church Street was not in keeping with
the surrounding neighborhood. It was recommended that the design be modified
in order to reduce and break-up the continuous length of the building facade
along the street.
I
jIII. Conclusions and Recommendations
I
Infill development within Ashland's Historic District that is consistent with the
City's Site Design Standards ensures the long term preservation of the district as a
significant community resource. Large new developments involve design issues of
scale and neighborhood compatibility and must be reviewed in context of the
surrounding area. This requires detailed information showing changes to the
streetscape and three-dimensional renderings that display the project's volume,
i
PA94-117 Ashland Planning Department -- Staff Report
M. H. Hedges December 13, 1994
Page 2
Z8
massing and scale.
Additional information has been provided by the project designer which will be
reviewed before the Historic Commission and their recommendation will be
forwarded onto the Commission. Should the Planning Commission choose to
approve the application, Staff recommends that the following conditions of
approval be attached:
1) That all proposals of the applicant be conditions of approval unless
otherwise modified here.
2) That all landscaping as shown on the approved plan be installed prior to
the issuance of a certificate of occupancy.
3) That 1 street tree, minimum of 1.5 inches diameter at breast height, be
installed every 30 feet along Church Street and the abutting private road, prior to
the issuance'of a certificate of occupancy.
4) That protective, temporary fencing be installed around the root zone of
trees identified on the landscaping plan for protection prior to site preparation
(i.e. grading or excavation) or construction.
5) That all paving improvements to the private alley be completed prior to the
issuance of a certificate of occupancy.
6) That six of the required off-street parking spaces (spaces 5, 6, 8, 13, 14 &
15) be constructed of grasscrete/pavers prior to issuance of a certificate of
occupancy.
7) That an irrigation system plan be submitted at the time of a building permit
for review and approval of the Staff Advisor.
8) That all requirements of the Ashland Electric Department be met,
including the dedication of public utility easements. Property owner/developer
responsible for excavation, backfilling and compaction as well as the relocation of
the power box in front of the parcel, if requested by owner/developer.
9) That a drainage plan be submitted at the time of a building permit for
review and approval by the Ashland Engineering Division.
10) That all requirements of the Ashland Fire Department be met prior to the
use of combustible materials. These requirements may include the installation of
PA94-117 Ashland Planning Department -- Staff Report
M. H. Hedges December 13, 1994
Page 3
29
i
i
i
interior sprinkler systems if warranted due to the lack of sufficient hydrant flows.
11) That portions of the private alley be widened and paved as indicated on
the site plan prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any new
residence.
12) That the driveway serving the single car garage off of Church Street have a
maximum width of 9'.
13) That an "opportunity to recycle" site be located on the site in accordance
with the requirements of Ashland Sanitary and shown on the plan prior to the
issuance of a building permit.
14) That an exterior color plan for the units be provided at the time of
submission for a building permit for review by the Historic Commission and
approval of the Staff Advisor. Slight changes in exterior colors which distinguish
individual units from one another must be considered in order to increase the
compatibility of the project's scale with surrounding development.
I
I
' PA94-117 Ashland Planning Department -- Staff Report
M. H. Hedges December 13, 1994
Page 4
I
Notice is hereby given that a PUBLIC HEAF i on the following A copy of the application,all ,menu and evidence relied upon by the applicant
request with respect to the ASHLAND LAND USE ORDINANCE and applicable criteria are availaule for inspection at no cost and will be provided at
will be held before the ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION on reasonable cast, if requested. A copy of the Staff Report will be available for
Inspection seven days prior to the hearing and will be provided at reasonable cost,if
December 13, 1994 at 7:00 p.m. at the ASHLAND CIVIC requested. All materials are available at the Ashland planning Department,City Hall,
CENTER, 1175 East Main Street, Ashland, Oregon. 20 East Main Street.Ashland,Oregon 97520.
The ordinance criteria applicable to this application are attached to this notice. During the Public Hearing, the Chair shall allow testimony from the applicant and
Oregon law states that failure to raise an objection concerning this application, those in attendance concerning this request. The Chair shall have the right to limit
either in person or by letter,or failure to provide sufficient specificity to afford the the length of testimony and require that comments be restricted to the applicable
decision maker an opportunity to respond to the Issue, precludes your right of criteria. Unless there is a continuance, if a participant so requests before the
appeal to the Lend Use Board of Appeals (LUBA)on that issue. Failure to specify conclusion of the hearing,the record shall remain open for at least seven days after
which ordinance criterion the objection Is based on also precludes your right of the hearing. If you have questions or comments concerning this request,please feel
appeal to LUBA on that criterion, free to contact Susan Yates at the Ashland Planning Department,City Hall,at 488.
5305.
tb I-
v
/; ti
( � t
/ NoaTF4 orr`f ewteQ
yIG W Irby MA4P 4417 s"'t
{
NOTE: This Planning Action will also be heard by the Ashland Historic Commission on December 7,1994
in the Ashland Community Center located at 59 Winburn Way at 7:30 p.m.
NOTE: This Planning Action will also be heard by the Ashland Tree Commission on December 8, 1994 in ,
the Council Chambers located at 1175 East Main Street at7:00,P.M.
PLANNING ACTION 94-117 is a request for a Site Review and Outline Plan Approval
for a seven-lot, multi-family project (townhouses) under the Performance Standards
Options for the property located on Church Street (the vacant lots behind the new
Bard's Inn addition on Church Street). Also includesa request for a solar waiver to
allow for a shadow in excess of City requirements. Comprehensive Plan Designation:
Multi-Family Residential; Zoning: R-2; Assessor's Map #: 9BB; Tax Lots: 4300, 4900,
5,000 and a portion of Lot 4200.
APPLICANT: M. H. Hedges 3�
CITY OF ASHLAND CITY HALL
ilt 1A
ASHLAND,OREGON 97520
i
telephone(code 509)402.9211
October 21, 1994
M.H. Hedges
77 N. Main
Ashland, OR 97520
Re: Planning Action 94-117
Dear Mr. Hedges:
This letter is to inform you that the above referenced application has been delayed due
to application materials being submitted less than 30 days before the public hearing. The
next Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for December 13, 1994. All materials
relied on to make a decision must be submitted to the Planning Department by 3:00 p.m.
- November 11, 1994.
The Planning Staff is concerned with the overall lack of coordination among individuals
involved with this application. While you are listed as the applicant, we have had no
contact with you during the process. On the other hand, we have met individually or
spoken on the phone with Norbert Bishoff, Peter Brunner, Steve Morjig and Dave
Larson. It needs to made clear who the point of contact is for this project, so the
Planning Staff knows who to contact when questions concerning the project arise.
Several issues were raised by surrounding property owners at the Historic Commission
meeting. While it is impossible to satisfactorily address every concern, you should be
prepared to discuss what steps have been taken to minimize impacts on surrounding
properties. There was considerable discussion about the project's scale in relationship to
other residential development along Church Street. We strongly suggest that information
be provided describing how the project complies with City Design Standards for
development within the Historic District.
The project designer, Mr. Larson, has done a good job in presenting a design which
reflects traditional architecture in the neighborhood. However, given the prominent
location adjacent to the City's downtown core, additional concerns will surely be raised
other than those related to design. Therefore it is essential that the proposal be
presented in a thorough well coordinated manner.
I
1
' 32
as eel a to contact me if you have any questions.
L e
Planner
c: Norbert Bishoff
Dave Larson
Peter Brunner
Steve Modig
i
i
I
f
i
33
i
ASHLAND PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
i
October 11, 1994
PLANNING ACTION: 94-117
APPLICANT: M.H. Hedges
LOCATION: Church Street (Behind Bard's Inn)
ZONE DESIGNATION: R-2
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Multifamily Residential
i ORDINANCE REFERENCE: 18.24 R-2 Residential District
18.72 Site design and Use Standards
18.88 Performance Standards
18.92 Off-street Parking
REQUEST: Site Review and Outline Plan approval for a seven-lot, multi-family project
(townhouses) under the Performance Standards Options.
I. Relevant Facts
1) Background - History of Application:
There are no other planning actions of record for this site..
2) Detailed Description of the Site and Proposal:
The project area is approximately 1/2 acre in size (22,416 sq. ft.) and
slopes gently to the east toward the intersection of Church and Main
Streets. Several mature trees are located on the site, including most notably
two large spruces at the back of the lot adjacent to the paved driveway. In
addition, a redwood, fir and existing pear tree have been noted on the site
plan.
The project is situated adjacent to Ashland's Downtown Commercial
district, while the front half of the property nearest Church Street is within
the boundaries of Ashland's Downtown Plan. Surrounding uses include a
mixture of commercial businesses, traveller's accommodations and single
and multi-family residences.
The project involves the construction of seven townhouse style residences.
jFive of the seven units will be connected by common walls, with three of
I
34
f
the units being located parallel to Church Street. The other two attached
units will be located at the rear of lot. Parking for the development is
primarily located off the existing, paved private driveway. Off-street parking
is provided by single and double car garages, as well as six standard
spaces.
All units will be two stories in height, have a single story garage and
consist of three-bedrooms and 2 1/2 bathrooms. Individual patios are
provided for each unit, while a lap pool, gazebo with changing rooms and
lawn area are proposed for common use by all residents of the project. A
concrete walkway will be wind through the development, linking each unit
with the new public sidewalk to be constructed along Church Street.
IL Project Impact
Site Review
Site Review approval requires that the project comply with the City's Site Design
and Use Standards for multi-family development, as well as with Ashland's
Historic District design standards. The project designer has presented a design
which attempts to incorporate the vernacular style found in Ashland's historic
neighborhoods. Elements of the project's architecture, such as steep pitched roofs,
horizontal siding, dormers, double hung windows, covered entries, and breaks in
building mass are combined in the attempt to create the historic vernacular style.
The average building height for the three units proposed along Church Street
would be approximately 24.5 feet, while the high point at the top of gable 1299
feet. In comparison, there is a single story residence adjacent to the site an ene
and one half and two story buildings across Church Street. The Bard's Inn,
located on the abutting parcel, has an average building height of 32 feet, and
measures 36 feet high to the top of the highest gable. In addition, the real estate
office at the corner of North Main and Church Street and Brother's restaurant are
16 feet and 32.8 feet in height respectively.
Lot coverage
Staff has estimated that approximately 72 percent of the project site will be
covered by impervious surfaces, such as buildings, parking, driveways, outdoor
patios and walkways and the lap pool. This exceeds the 65 percent lot coverage
allowed by ordinance. It appears that patio areas and walkways have been
included in the applicant's calculations for landscaping. More precise figures need
to be provided to insure that the project complies with lot coverage requirements
PA94-117 Ashland Planning Department -- Staff Report
M.H. Hedges October 11, 1994
Page 2
�5
i
i
for the zone.
Off-street parkin
Other than one single car garage along Church Street, the remainder of the
required parking spaces will be accessed from the private alley to the side and
rear of the property. Staff is concerned that adequate back-up space has not been
provided for several of the spaces. Specifically, the current design relies on using
the parking areas of two adjacent traveller's accommodations for back-up space.
This design does not comply with the design standards outlined in the ordinance.
Further, no evidence has been provided showing that easements have been
granted by neighboring property owners allowing for the use of their property for
such a purpose.
i
Solar access
That current proposal requires a solar waiver to allow for a shadow from the
building's roof to be cast on the abutting property to the north. While the waiver
requested is minimal, no signed waiver form has been provided with the owner's
signatures of the affected property. This information must be provide prior to
approving the application, or the building height must be adjusted to comply with
the ordinance.
Performance Standards Subdivision
In addition to Site Review approval, the application requires approval of a multi-
family subdivision under the Performance Standards chapter. This will allow each
unit to be on a separate tax lot and under individual ownership. The landscaped
areas and walkways through the development, which incudes the lap pool area,
gazebo and changing room will be owned in common and maintained through the
homeowner's association.
The base density for the project site = 6.95 units. The application proposes to
gain the necessary density bonus for a 7th unit by providing a lap pool for project
residents. Development which incorporate a major recreational facility, such as a
tennis court, swimming pool, playground or similar facility, can reduce the
demand placed on existing recreational services available to the general public. A
six percent density bonus may be awarded if one percent of the total project cost
is devoted to providing a major recreational facility. To be eligible for the bonus,
the estimated cost of the project must be submitted accompanied by the cost of
the lap pool prepared by an architect or engineer. This information has not been
included with the application, however, it appears that the project would likely
meet this requirement.
PA94-117 Ashland Planning Department -- Staff Report
t M.H. Hedges October 11, 1994
Page 3
36
III. Procedural - Required Burden of Proof
The criteria for Site Review approval are described under section 18.72 of the
Land Use Ordinance and are as follows:
A. All applicable City ordinances have been met or will be met by the proposed
development.
B. All requirements of the Site Review Chapter have been met or will be met.
C. The development complies with the Site Design Standards adopted by the City
Council for implementation of this Chapter.
D. That adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, paved access to and
through the development, electricity, urban storm drainage, and adequate
transportation can and will be provided to and through the subject property.
Further, the criteria for approval of a multi-family subdivision under the
Performance Standards Option are as follows:
a) That the development meets all applicable ordinance requirements of the City of
Ashland.
b) That adequate key City facilities can be provided including water, sewer, paved
access to and through the development, electricity, urban storm drainage, police and
fire protection and adequate transportation; and that the development will not cause
a City facility to operate beyond capacity.
c) That the existing and natural features of the land; such as wetlands, floodplain
corridors, ponds, large trees, rock outcroppings, etc., have been identified in the plan
of the development and significant features have been included in the open space,
common areas, and unbuildable areas.
d) That the development of the land will not prevent adjacent land from being
developed for the uses shown in the Comprehensive Plan.
e) That there are adequate provisions for the maintenance of open space and
common areas, if required or provided, and that if developments are done in phases
that the early phases have the same or higher ratio of amenities as proposed in the
entire project.
fl That the proposed density meets the base and bonus density standards
PA94-117 Ashland Planning Department -- Staff Report
M.H. Hedges October 11, 1994
Page 4
39
J
established under this Chapter.
I
IV. Conclusions and Recommendations
Staff believes that there are design issues that need to be addressed before a
decision can be made. Additional information must be submitted concerning the
project's lot coverage, the backup area for several parking spaces and density
bonus eligibility. We recommend that the approval of the application be delayed
in order to allow the applicant time to address these concerns.
PA94-117 Ashland Planning Department -- Staff Report
M.H. Hedges October 11, 1994
Page 5
38
and discourage cul-de-sacs or dead end streets.
Jarvis noted that people get used to cul-de-sacs. In the future, perhaps these future
connections should be left open so people don't get used to cul-de-sacs. McLaughlin
said it is clear that Kirk Lane and Munson Drive will continue because they have a
hammerhead and knuckle.
A statement could be required in the CC&R's that a street would be extended or a
connection made so when people purchased their homes, they would be aware of this
situation.
PUBLIC HEARING
CAROLYN EIDMAN, 541 Fordyce, had asked for postponement of the meeting on
Monday, October 3rd. She said no one was notified on Evan Lane and some were
missed on Fordyce. Eidman has contacted 69 people and she has a petition but she
told everyone there would be not meeting tonight. The Commissioners agreed to
continue this hearing until the November Regular Meeting.
PLANNING ACTION 94-117
HEDGES
This action has been postponed until next month.
OTHER
North Mountain Plan
Information was included in the packets for those who were unable to attend the Study
Session. The plan was not discussed at this (October 11, 1994) meeting.
Suggested Educational Tics (Brent Thompson's letter)
Thompson felt perhaps an opportunity was lost for education or just to get people to a
meeting last month when there was no meeting because of lack of planning actions.
Hibbert thought it could be difficult to draw a good portion of the population to a
meeting and he is not sure what it would take to get them out.
Armitage did not know what benefit could be derived from drawing the public to a
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 7
REGULAR MEETING
OCTOBER 11,1994
MINUTES
39
i
Ennis questioned the area between the grate and new wall. Afseth said it will be a planter.
e grate will be raised a little to accommodate the new ramp. Ennis also asked about the
ide area and the Chautauqua Walk. Afseth answered the stairway will be c ed and
narro ed from 15 feet to 10 feet to create a softer transition to the brick ra er than just
a straig line. This will blend in more with the landscaping. Ennis stated ' tll change the
traffic flo and Afseth agreed. Chambers wondered if this would give t public a restricted
feeling. Afs th said they are only adding 100 square feet more th the old addition that
was removed. a said he felt it will create a larger visual space d will average out well.
Also, OSFA is co fortable with it. When asked about the ra Afseth said it will provide
ADA access to Ma aroni's and to the Camps Building.
I Skibby said he felt this as a good design and would el comfortable approving the plan.
Chambers questioned Mol r about the propose deck and if it will be located on public
or private property. Molnar id he assumed ' will be on private property, but that will
need to be cleared up in the fin survey. He pprised the Commission the OSFA theaters
are located on City property and t e land ' leased. Any encroachment on City property,
however, could be approved by the it ouncil.
Skibby asked about the center rail n th stairway, and Afseth said it will probably be
replaced due to ADA requireme .
Chambers asked Afseth if the had considered a alter deck and giving two feet back to
the walkway. Afseth said i as discussed at length ith OSFA and the landscapers, who
all felt ten feet would be triple. Of course, they wool e willing to take another look.
Ron Thurner, 1170 Ilview Avenue, said he would like to dress the issue of seismic
retrofitting of the b tlding. Afseth said this is being done now. he. Site Review is Phase
II of the project, hile Phase I consisted of interior strengtheni of the walls against
earthquake forc s. Afseth also noted the building will be receiving a w roof. Phase 1 is
almost compl e.
Skibby in ed to recommend approval of this action. Ennis amended the in 'on, stating
the Hist is Commission would like to add the owner and architect consider wi ing the
walkw two to three more feet in order to allow a smoother traffic flow. Skibby reed
to this amendment. Cardinale seconded the motion and it passed unanimously.
PA 94-117
Site Review and Outline Plan Approval
Church Street
M.H. Hedges
Molnar explained this application is for a seven-unit, seven-lot, multi-family townhouse
I subdivision. Each unit will be on its own tax lot, while the open space will be owned in
common. Five of the seven units will be connected by common walls. The architect has
i
i
Ashland Historic Commission
Minutes
f October 4, 1994 A Page 2
made the structures compatible with those on the opposite side of Church Street. The
majority of the parking will be off the alley behind the Bard's Inn Annex. There are five
existing large trees on the property which will be retained. A lap pool will be constructed
in the open space area. The height of the buildings seems to be a concern of the neighbors
along Church Street. The highest gable will be 29 feet. Molnar noted the building heights
in the area, from approximately 16 feet (Pat Sprague's Real Estate Office) to Bard's Inn
Annex at around 36 feet. He explained 35 feet is the maximum height in a residential zone.
Harriff asked about building heights on Church Street. Molnar said the Pat Sprague Annex
is around 25 feet and the single story houses are probably around 16 feet. The proposed
heights of the townhouses average 241/2 feet.
Molnar continued, stating Staff is recommending this action be continued and heard at the
November meeting. Concerns include 1) lot coverage (65% is allowed in an R-2 zone, 72%
is being proposed), 2) design configuration for backup and parking areas off alley, 3) density
(6.95 or 6 units are allowed, 7 units are requested - however, the lap pool, which is part of
lot coverage, may be used for density bonus), and 4) solar waiver potentially needed for one
of the units. Currently, there is not enough information.
Lewis stated he feels the project would look more friendly if there was a separation between
the buildings. Harriff agreed and said the Church Street side seems imposing. He
suggested cutting back to six units, as it would fit better into the neighborhood. The scale
and massing should be reduced. Ennis said he also agreed, but stated the project itself is
well designed. He suggested reorienting the buildings, and also said the neighbors would
get a better perspective if they could see a three dimensional view of the project, as the
lines of the buildings are broken up and not in a straight line.
The Commission agreed if taken individually, the designs are very nice.
Harriff asked the designer, David Larsen, if he had explored separating the buildings.
Larsen answered there is energy savings involved in having fewer exterior walls. The yards,
fences and trees will also break up the design. Ennis commented he felt the tower on the
corner would be too much and that he has seen too many of them lately.
Mary Maher, 56 Church Street, stated she is concerned with the massiveness of the project.
It is disheartening because she is not a developer. When she bought her house, she said she
checked with the Planning Office about the lot across the street and was told since it was
zoned residential and in the Historic District, it could not be anything massive. She said she
is very distressed and added the developer never talked with any of the neighbors.
David Larsen responded the owners are not developers, but want to do something that will
fit into the neighborhood. Steve Morjig, 610 Chestnut, said he may be the contractor for
the project and that he was under the impression the owner had spoken with a number of
neighbors.
Ashland Historic Commission
Minutes
October 4, 1994 41 Page 3
Ron Thurner asked Molnar about density bonus points and related his understanding was
that fractions did not count; therefore, there would only be six units that could be approved.
Molnar confirmed fractions don't count, but asserted it is possible to gain bonus points using
energy conservation and water conservation in the project. He noted that even though the
height restriction will be met, scale and massing need to be addressed, especially with
respect to the Site Design and Use Standards in the Historic District.
Larsen explained the townhouses are 22 feet wide and the actual second floor is built into
the roof structure. He said he worked within the codes, but he is willing to look at options.
He added the garages are all roof top gardens.
Winn Frankland, 122 High Street, concurred about the massing. She said this lot is not
much bigger than hers, and if she would have known about this project, she would not have
bought her house. The access to her carport is through the alley and she is concerned about
the increased traffic.
Dennis Jarvi, 117 High Street, said nobody was apprised of this project. Some had heard
there would be four units, but this is the first they heard of seven units. The neighbors are
concerned with kids and traffic.
Morjig suggested the neighbors get together and send a letter of their concerns to the
owner.
Ennis recommended the garage with unit 1 be flipped with unit 2, and perhaps unit 3 pulled
over. Larsen said he dealt with what was there. The driveway cut was existing and the
transformer box for Bard's Inn needed to be taken into consideration.
Mark Jenne, 92 Church Street, said he does not have much appreciation for economic
hardship in this case, as the owner of the lot will make money with five or six units. He
does like the architecture. He also does not object to the alley units, but he does object to
the Church Street side. You will see a long unbroken building, which is not in character
with Ashland. If the middle structure on the Church Street side were removed, he could
live with it.
Lisa Schumaker, 122 High Street, conveyed she also is concerned with the alleyway and the
density of traffic in the area. She said she would not like to have that many.cars and kids
in the alley. She would like to see less units to deal with the density. Lewis stated these
concerns should be brought to the Planning Commission meeting.
Thurner said he would like to amplify the comment about the project meeting the standards.
The Planning and Historic Commissions have a great deal of latitude because it is in the
Historic District. The Site Design Standards apply. Obviously, there are quite a few
outstanding issues not addressed at this time. A change of 2% could dramatically alter the
design of the project. He wanted assurance it would come before the Historic Commission
again if it is continued. Molnar stated the Commission needs to give clear design
Ashland Historic Commission
Minutes
October 4, 1994 42- Page 4
recommendations, and Staff has not attached conditions yet. Therefore, if the Planning
Commission agrees to a continuance, this will come before the Historic Commission again
in November.
Morjig stated some of the areas of concern are ready to be addressed now. Larsen
indicated he had redone the landscaping and the lot coverage is now down to 62%. The
patios have been removed and replaced with lawn. He noted the building footprint covers
only 33% of the total area.
Harriff maintained he liked a lot of the design elements and he does not want to see the
design replaced with something ugly. However, he feels that too much is being crammed
in and the increased traffic will crowd the alley. If one unit were to be removed, it would
help. His concerns are with the density and massiveness of the project. Larsen noted the
alley width has been doubled.
Ennis said since the Commission is agreeing on the overall architectural design, he wants
it to be clear this is separate from the Planning issues.
Chambers moved to generally recommend approval of the overall nature of the design, but
that the Commission is recommending a continuance based on the factors of streetscape on
Church Street, which could be alleviated by eliminating the center unit to be more in scale
with the residential nature of the street. Harriff seconded the motion and it passed
unanimously.
(Chambers and Mobtar left at this lime - 9:30 p.m.)
BbiLDING PERMITS .
Permits revie d by members of the Historic Commission.and issued during the month of
September follow.
125 North Main Str Elaine Martens Remodel Basement
168 Meade Street Ted C Demolition SFR
250 Oak Street a Pugh Tenant Improvement
20 Heiman Street ar nn 12 Motel Units
521 North Main Stree Helping nds/Dr. Scott Young Sign
15 North First Stre Firefly Resta ant Sign
REVIEW BOARD
Following is the chedule (until the next meeting) for the Revi Board, which meets every
Thursday at 1 t from 3:00 to 3:30 p.m. in the Planning Depar nt:
Oc ber 6 Skibby and Cardinale
O tober 13 Skibby, Lewis and Wood
Ashland Historic Commission
Minutes
October 4, 1994 A-3 Page 5
i
N 0V 1 0 1994
Mr. & Mrs. Norbert Bischof
468 Michigan Ave.
Berkeley, Calif. 94707
September 9, 1994
Planning Commission
City of Ashland
20 E. Main Street
Ashland, Oregon 97520
RE: Approval of Site Design and Use Standard for "CHURCH STREET
00023 S", a planned unit Development located at; 39-1E-09-BB
Lots 4300, 4900, 5000, and a portion of lot 4200. ( The vacant
lots behind the New Bards Inn on Church Street).
18.88.030 3K
1 . our proposed project is a cluster of single Family Dwelling, to be built
in a Town-house style, using zero lot-lines to create a more efficient use
of land planning. " CHURCH SAP ", ( The project's name), proposal
is to effectively challenge the stereotypical, Multi-Family Developments,
by Architecturally designing slightly different exteriors and floor plans
for each unit. Thus we have helped to create a more unique appearance,
relative to the character and charm of the Historical neighborhood which
surrounds the project. We have also attempted to keep within those design
Styles of our neighborTigh ch°,,range-from'Iictotian to Craftman.
Privacy through Design and Landscaping is also a priority at "The
Commons". Each dwelling will have a private front and rear court yard,
visually seperated by traditionally inspired picked fences and planting
areas. Some of the units have also been provided roof-top gardens accesable
from the second floor master suites.
Within The Common Area of this project there will be attractive low
maintainance landscaping with a variety of trees and gently winding side-
walks. These walks connect all the dwellings to the lap pool located at
the rear and center of The Common Area.
2. Financing will be provided by a local Ashland Bank and will consist of 2
phases of Financing; Construction phase and Final phase, which each unit
then, is of course sold seperatly to individule buyers.
3. All land is presently owned out right by Developer Mr. Norbert Bischof
his wife Phillis Bischof. With exception to the small portion of lot 4200
which is in Escrow at this time.
4. A Declaration of covenants and a Hone-owners Association, will be created
to maintain the project and it's Common Areas. See Attached C,C,& R's
i
NOV 1 G
F I N D I N G S
Performance Standards options
For R-2 Residential Developments
PROJBCT NAME: CHURCH STREET C0
Location: 39-1E-09-BB Lots 4300, 4900, 5000,
and a portion of lot 4200
CIRDIINANCES
18.88.030 4 a-f Type 11 Procedure
4. a Zoning Requirements
18.88.070 A. All setbacks have been noted on the site plan and are
per code. The garages off the alleys are allowed to
be minimum setbacks of 6'-0" as per ordinance 18.88.070
..."except along alley".
Solar access was addressed and those shadows which cast
onto adjacent properties have been addressed and solar
easements have been signed and enclosed.
18.88.060 B. Church Street Cannons has provided single car garages
for each of the lower units and a double car garage
for each of the upper units (west).
Also provided are an additional 7 off street parking
spaces; 15 total parking spaces provided inc. garages.
18.92.020 C. With 5 Three Bedroom units, 10 parking spaces are
needed, 2 Two Bedroom units, 3.5 spaces are needed.
13.5 parking spaces required, 15 provided.
All the parking spaces are connected by walkways to
dwelling units or with connected garages.
18.72 110 In addition to meeting the criteria for performance
standard options " The Commons" reflects compliance with
the city of Ashland's site design standards. (see site plan)
The square footage of the project are as follows:
^L-1-
NOV 1 0
FINDINGS Cont.
18.72.110 cunt.
The square footage of the project are as follows:
22,.912 Total Lot.-Coverage 1D08
7,425 Building Footprint .324
2,187 Alley & Driveways 09,5 '
21325 Pool;- walks, & patios - 1010;
9,176 Landscaping .40
904 Grasscrete surface 041
Parking 895 Concrete surface .039
22,91.2 Total square Footage 100%
Landscaping, including private yards and common area comprise
49% of the total lot coverage.
18.72.120 A. Landscaping near the alley entrance or at the drive
approaches shall meet the vision clearance standards
of the section.
B. All fences in the front yards shall not exceed 42"
in height and fences in the privacy rear yards shall
not exceed 6'-6" in height.
18.92.140 There will be no light standards placed on this property, -
exterior lighting will be located on exterior walls of building
and not directed into any other residential lots.
4. b City Facilities
18.88.030 A. b This project is not contingent on adequate capacity of city
facilities according to Dennis Brants of Ashland's water
quality Superintendent and Jim Olson of Ashland's Engineering
Department. The existing facilities are adequate and are as
follows:
Water: 6" line, center of Church Street.
Sewer: 6" line, Church Street.
Paved Access: Yes, Church Street and access alley's.
Electricity: Overhead & underground, full service.
Storm Drains: 12" adjacent to project on Church Street.
l Transporation: Avaiable at the intersection of N. Main St. and Water St.
Fire Hydrant: Existiog location at the S.E. corner of High and Church
streets. Also a proposed location, if needed, at the
S.E. side of Church Street adjacent to the project
ill entrance.
i
'a
NOV 1 U i8y4
FINDINGS Cont.
18.88.050 A. Street standards provide to " THE COMMONS" will be
served by three street accesses. Four of the units will
be served by an existing and upgraded 20'-0" wide alley off
of Church Street, adjacent to the Bard's Inn parking lot.
A single unit, facing Church Street, will be served by an
existing curb'=cut. at, the_ S:F:: portion of. the prbject:_The
upper two units, at the N .W. portion of the project, will
use the existing alley to High Street and which connects
to the other alley access to Church Street. These are
deeded easements to all locations and properties.
B. None of these alley's exceed a 108 grade.
C. A proposed Fire Hydrant to be placed across Church Street
at the entrance to the project site, would address the
Fire Marshal's request for fire sprinklers in some units.
4, c Natural Features
A. Priority has been given to.. the existing mature trees on the
proposed project. All driveways and buildings have set back
the proper distance so as to preserve these 5 trees. All
..rn'
existing grades have been emphasizedth::retazn ng walls.
4. d Adjacant Properties
A. All properties within the impact area are developed at the
present time, with the exception of dewellings being remodeled
or renovated.
18.88.050 The proposed project should not have: an adverse affect on'the .
llveabih±y of-the surrounding area; -. when compared to the existing
development of the subject lot with the target use of the zone".
A. Church Street Commons provides a similarity in scale, size, and
coverage to the neighboring houses surrounding the projcet. It
also acts as a buffer between the commerical businesses on North
Main Street and the single family dwellings to the Southeast and
West.
B. "Generation of traffic and effects on surrounding streets", the
city of Ashland Planning Department uses the following numbers
for studying traffic impacts:
10 vehicle trips per day for single family dwellings
and multi-family dwelling units.
-3-
47
NOV 1 0 1991,
FINDINGS COW. (4. d)
The traffic generation would compute at 7 units times 10
vehicles per day for a total of 70 vehicle trips per day.
Considering also that the project is an easy walk to town,
Restaurants and the Theatre.-lt`is anticipated that the
resident would rather walk than drive, so this could easily
reduce that 70 vehicle trips a day figure.
C. Architectural compatibility with the impact area. Has been
addressed in the previously written description and has been
illustrated in the exterior elevations provided. Much thought
and attention has been given to those matters.
D. The quality of air should no be affected more than any other
residental area. There should be no activities associated with
this project other than initial construction. That would create
dust, odors or other pollutants other than `driving._An2lall --
on-site parking spaces are paved so no dust will be generated.
. .4: a Provisions 'for Maintenance
A. A Home Owner's Association will be created using C.C.&R's
( as submitted ) to maintian all exteriors of Residences.
fences and conmom areas. These will include weekly maintenance
of pool and landscaping, as well as insurance coverage for
pool liability.
4. f Base Density
18.88.040 A. Base densities allowed in and R-2 Zone. For Church
Church Street Commons. R-2 = 13.5 dwelling units per acre
or 3,227 SQ. Ft. per unit. The To coons" has %22•;912
SQ. Ft. thus allowing for 7_.10. units,_ Hence, according to`zoning.-regulations, bonus points are not required.
B. BONUS points calculations show that by having a common
area exceeding 25 of the project area and also providing
and active Recreational Feature such as the Lao Poo4. this•
should exceed any zonirig-regulations required-for this
R-2 zone.
CONCLUSION
The applicants have endeavored to comply with all the required
Standards in the Ashland land-use ordinance and the comprehensive
plan.We therefore, Respectfully Request approval of our 7 unit
multi-family residential project on Church Street.
-4-
4
I ,� y lid cpu¢cu rteesr. - -
. Dp ll \ ., i °•fit: • iF
'pT
CD
CD
a
111P rt
r,
- - 1'nl • ';Ih �
• � i 0 1 ' I V:.1
Q IT :1
;t� y
I 1I
rill
1 �1.
r�l I
�1 s
Fg �
if�
Z �a
S
I •":ems ^V
1 J Y{ Ji N'W
/ r [ % •�+x" l!1, r +' 1',91 1
I µ
� ;I
/
l .....
141 + � ,,' 'F: j•
41.
rjr
I �
� r
ME
`:'lu�il�, `Imp q� ;
I�> >Ill�b�
1 gill!y` IIII�' '�v,`l
iI Will
WNW r �
119 i�' .
f 12
!�I'�I!�!�� ' II�!r Ii�li6P9!Iltl; IIIIIli!ul.
i'� ff ,7{I1gyIIp'�.'
�) I
Ila ,I F,�i� tll!14 IP
Ifhl �n lR'II xx22��3 i�•f;l�il.
li"�III�-h'h1.
I _ Ir- - i:In MIIUpNMI VIIIW9Y��n
11 I
I
'�`''' I
Cy i ;I�fjl��l WTI;
' � �uiiuunn�l
I�
I I
i
i
� r -
G
' r
7 -,l
I
D
1 i
i 4 '
I�.
53
i
Jj� ca _ 3 (m
0. P > X
V.
V
L F 7z
L R � _
T U (C L �yK ..
zPJz p^
� a Z ' ir
54
NOV 1 0 1954
DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS, AND RESTRICTIONS
FOR CHURCH STREET COMMONS IN THE CITY OF ASHLAND,
JACKSON COUNTY, OREGON
KNOW By ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTT0; that we, the undersigned, do
hereby certify and declare that the following reservations, easements,
conditions, covenants, restrictions, and agreements shall become, and they
are hereby made, a part of all conveyances, leases, or rentals hereafter
made of real property within the confines of that certain tract known as
CHURCH STREET COMMONS, as the same is particularly described in that
certain plat duly and regularly filed with County Clerk of Jackson County,
Oregon, dated , 1994, and recorded in Volume ,
of the plat Records of Jackson County, on Page thereof, and as so
recordes, being specifically referred to hereby and by this reference made
a part thereof.
All lots and parcels of the real property in CHURCH STREET COMMONS here-
after conveyed, leased, or rented shall be subject to the following
reservations, easements, conditions, convenants, restrictions, and
agreements, to-wit: all of which arefor the purpose of enhancing and
protecting the value, desireability and attractiveness of said property.
These easements, convents, restrictions, conditions and reservations
shall constitute convenants to run with the land and shall be binding
upon all persons claiming under them and also that these conditions,
convenants, restrictions, easements and reservations shall inure to the
benefit of and be limitations upon all future owners of said property,
or any interest therein:
1
55
ARTICLE 1
DEFINITIONS
I
SECTION 1 . "Approval" shall mean and refer to written approval.
t
I
SECTION 2. "Association" shall mean and refer to CHURCH STREET COM10NS Homeowners
association, a non profit coroporation, organized pursuant to the laws of the
State of Oregon, its successors, and assigns.
SECTION 3. "Declarant" shall mean and refer to the undersigned, its
successors, heirs and assigns.
SECTION 4. "Lot" shall mean and refer to any separately designated plot of
land shown on recorded subdivision map of the CHURCH 'STREET COfM4ONS.
SECTION 5. "member" shall mean and refer to every person or entity who
holds membership in the Association.
SECTION 6. "Common Area" shall mean any area which is designated as such
in the subdivision plat"and this Declaration, which. hall be for the cmimsn
use and enjoyment of the members of the Association.
SECTION 7. "Owner" shall mean and refer to the record owner, whether one
or more persons or entities, of all or any part of said property but in the
case of a sale under contract, "Owner" shall mean the contract purchaser.
SECTION 8. "Restrictions" shall mean and refer to convenants, conditions and
restrictions herein set forth.
SECTION 9. "Rules" shall mean and refer to the Rules of the Association.
SECTION 10. "Said Property" shall mean and refer to that certain real
property referred herein as Exhibit "A", CHURCH STREET COMMONS.
2
6b
ARTICLE 11
PURPOSE
SECTION 1 .
The purpose of these conditions, convenants, restrictions, easements
and agreements is to insure the use of each lot and parcel of real property
located in CHURCH STREET COMMONS, Ashland, Oregon, for attractive
residential purposes only, to prevent nuisances, to prevent the impairment
of the attractiveness of the real property involved, and to secure to the
owner of each lot of real property in CHURCH STREET COMMONS the full benefit
and enjoyment of such lot, with no greater restriction upon the free and
undisturbed use of such lot or parcel or real property than is reasonably
necessary to insure :the same advantages to the owners of other lots in
CHURCH STREET COMMONS.
ARTICLE 111
PROPERTY RIGHTS
SECTION 1 . LOT OWNER.
Every lot owner shall have a right and easement of enjoyment to his
own separately recorded plot of land in CHURCH STREET COMMONS.
SECTION 2. Member.
Every member of the Assiciation shall have a right of enjoyment in
and to the "Common Area", and that right shall pass with the title to every
assessed lot in CHURCH STREET 0OM?4ONS. Said " Common Area" is specifically
set forth on the plat referred to herein.
SECTION 3. Association.
The Association shall elect officers to oversee and enforce the
convenants, conditions, agreements and restriction of CHURCH STREET COMMONS.
3
S1
i
ARTICLE 1V
EASEMENTS
SECTION 1 .
Declarant further reaffirms, declares and creates all of those public
and private utility easements as forth on the official plat of CHURCH STREET
COMMONS to be made of record simultaneously herewith.
SECTION 2.
Each individual lot owner shall bear all the expense of his utilization of
any of these easements as they pertain soley to his own use; and each lot.owner
hereby agrees to defend, indemnify and hold the other lot owners harmless from and
against any and all suits or causes of action or claims arising directly or indirectly
out of the use, utilization, construction or maintenance of the various utilities
allowed within the easements.
ARTICLE V
USE RESTRICTIONS
The following restrictions shall be applicable to the real property
described in Exhibit "A" and shall be for the benefit of and limitations upon
all present and future owners of said property or of any interest therein:
SECTION 1 .
No storage or repair of inoperative vehicles except in enclosed garages.
.SECTION 2.
No storage of trailers or recreational vehicles.
SECTION 3.
Fences bordering the "Common Area" shall be no taller than 42 inches
plus 6 inches for each on foot setback from the boundary line to the maximum
of 6 feet in height.
SI=ON 4.
No activity will be allowed that is obnoxious to the public.
SECTION 5.
No pets off the individual owner's lot or in common area except on a
leash.
sa
USE RESTRIMONS.. . .continued
SECTION 6.
Exterior satellite dishes, television antennaes, and anternnaes are
prohibited.
SECTION 7.
No camierical delivery, service or repair vehicles shall be permitted
except when actually engaged in the rendering of service to any resident in
the subdivision.
}
5
59
i
ARTICLE Vl
COMMON SPACE AREAS
SECTION 1 . OWNERSHIP.
Ownership of and title to the "Common Area" shall be vested in the
Association, and each member of the Association shall have a right of use to
said areas.
SECTION 2. MAINTENANCE.
The "Cannon Area" is to be maintained and governed by the
Association. No changes in landscaping, removal or trimming of the trees,
tables, pathways or the like will be permitted without permission from the
Association. This would include maintainance of the pool and it's mech8nical
functions.
SECTION 3. WALKWAYS
All walkways in the "Common Area" are for the use of the Association
members on an equal basis, subject to reasonable rules and regulations
pronulagated from time to time in writing by the Association.
SECTION 4. JURISDICPION.
The Association will have jurisdiction over activities permitted in the
"Coimnon Area."
SBMON 5. ASSESSMENTS.
All assessments levied by the Association shall be used exclusively to ?
promote the health, safety, recreation and welfare of the owners and for the
improvement and maintenance of the "Common Area".
SECTION 6. INSURANCE.
The Association shall procure adequate public liability insurance
covering all common areas insuring said property and all damage or injury
caused by the negligence of the Association.
SECTION 7. TAXES.
The Association shall pay any taxes levied on the "Common Area."
SECTION 8. BANK ACCOUNT.
The Association will open a bank account in which all assessments will
be deposited and from which levies such as insurance and taxes will be paid.
6
do
ARTICLE Vll
ASSOCIATION MEMBERSHIP
SECTION 1 . MEMBERSHIP.
Every person or entity who is a record owner of a fee or undivided fee
interest in any lot within CHURCH STREET COMMONS shall be a member of the
Association. No owner shall have more than one membership.
Membership shall be appurtenant to and may not be separated from
ownership of any lot which is subject to assessment by the Association as it.
relates the "Common Area."
SECTION 2. VOTING RIGHTS.
Each member shall be entitled to one vote per each lot in which they
hold interests. There shall be only one voting member per lot.
SECTION 3. ENFURCEMERr.
Enforcement of all convenants and restrictions pertaining to CHURCH
STREET COMMONS shall be the right and duty of the Homeowners Association.
SECTION 4. maintenance.
The Honeowners Association shall have the responsibility for the
maintenance of landscaping along the common use area that have been
created by either easement or title just as if the Association was the record
owner of". the property.
SECTION 5. By-LAWS.
The Association shall adopt By-laws, Rules, and Regulations of the
subdivision.
SECTION 6. IRRIGATION.
Maintenance of any irrigation water line to the "Common Area" will be
the responsibilty of the Association and paid for by such. Each individual
unit supplied with water by the city of Ashland shall be assessed monthly
by that district.
Such assessment for each unit shall be the sole responsibility of and be
paid for by the unit owner, and neither the Declarants nor the Association
shall have any liability or responsibility therefor.
7
61
ARTICLE Vlll
GENERAL CONDITIONS
SECTION 1 . GENERAL CONDITIONS.
Each and every one of these reservations, easements conditions,
convenants, restrictions, and agreements, is and all are for the benefit of each
owner of land in CHURCH STREET COMMONS, of any interest therein and shall
inure to and pass with each and every lot of such subdivision and shall bind
the respective heirs, successors, and assigns in interest of the present owner
thereof. In placing these reservations, easements, conditions, convenants,
restrictions, and agreements of record, it is intended to create convenants
which will run with the land and be binding upon each lot and other parcel
of real property lying within the platted area of CHURCH STREET COMMONS.
SECTION 2. ENFORCEMENT.
The provisions contained in the Declaration shall bind and inure to
the benefit of and be enforceable by the Declarant, and the Association and
the owner or owners of any lot of said property and their heirs. Failure by
Declarant or by the Association or by any of the Lot Owners to enforce any
such conditions, restrictions herein contained shall in no event be deemed a
waiver of the right to do so.
In case suit or action is instituted to enforce any of the provisions of
this agreement and convenants, the prevailing party shall be entitled to
recover from the other reasonable damages and attorney's fee.
SECTION 3. SEVERABILITY.
Invalidation of any one of these convenants or restrictions by
Judgment of Court order shall in no way affect any other provision which
shall remain in full force and effect.
SECTION 4. AMENDMENT.
The convenants and restrictions of this Declaration shall run with and
bind the land indefinitely from the date this Declaration is recorded.
Restrictions may be amended by 75 percent vote of the Association members.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the undersigned owner/developer has
hereunto set his or her hand this day of 1994.
8
G,Z
0 C T ° 3 1994
113 High Street
Ashland, Oregon 97520
October 3, 1994
Ashland Planning Department
City Hall
20 East Maiin Street
Ashland, Oregon 97520
Reference 18. 72 .050 Criteria for Approval, Ord 2655, 1991
Dear Ashland Planning Department:
Since I ' ll be away Oct 11, 1994, I hereby submit my concerns
regarding the above ordinance:
1 . Safety:
a. Drivers who make a left turn from the alley access onto
Church Street could endanger drivers turning right from Main
Street onto Church Street because of inadequate distance from the
alley access to the Main Street intersection. -
b. School children will face more danger while walking to
Briscoe School because of increased traffic on High Street.
2. Water and Sewer: The lap pool would be antithetic to water
and sewage conservation.
3. Open Space: Inadequate space for a healthy environment which
could be augmented by trees and shrubs in a larger space.
4. Architecture: The planned building is too massive in front
for the historical neighborhood, which could perhaps be remedied
by only four town houses rather than loading the area with seven.
Sincerely,
(0, �/.I� J,I - &
D. JUNE SMITH
63
i
56 Church Street
Ashland, OR 97520
September 28 , 1994 SEP 2 6 1994
City of Ashland Planning Commission
20 East Main Street
Ashland, OR 97520
RE: Planning Action 94-117
Dear members of the Planning Commission:
I received notice of the public hearing on Planning Action
94-117 , the massive seven townhouses which will be built
right across the street from my small cottage at 56 Church
Street .
I protest the massive nature of this project while at the same time
I know that it perhaps does fit all city regulations . Nonetheless ,
it is just another example of how money rules Ashland at this
time. Consider if you will : I own a small cottage and
coming out my front door I will face a mass of building as long as
my whole lot and longer. I invite each of you to stand on my front
porch and take a look. You will think you are in Baltimore. A
developer who cares for profit is building here, not a citizen
concerned for the future of a small town.
I bought my residence within the historic district because
I believed it would not have the building genre of suburb
hybrided with large city housing. I cannot imagine how this fits
the character of any historic district of a small town.
Before I purchased my home I went to City Hall and asked
a member of the staff on the Planning Commission, "Will
something massive be put in that lot across the street
from me?" He answered, "Oh, it can' t . It is zoned the
same as yours : R-2 . And it is in the Historic District . "
I guess over the four years since then things have changed
or was it misinformation or a lie? Or is it as this
morning' s article in the Oregonian says of Ashland,
" . . . impossible for the resident , a stage set . "
I object to this massive building project across the street from
my residence at 56 Church Street . I ask that the Church Street
side of it be greatly toned down.
Sincerely,,
Marw Maher
SEP 2 8 1884
56 Church Street
Ashland, OR 97520
September 28, 1994
City of Ashland Historic Commission
20 East Main Street
Ashland, OR 97520
RE: Planning Action: 94-117
Dear members of the Historic Commission:
Before I purchased my small cottage at 56 Church Street I went
to City Hall and asked a staff member of the Planning Commission
what would likely be built on the vacant lot across from this
house. I was told that it would surely be something like mine
as it was zoned as mine, R-2 , and it was in the Historic District
which did not allow massive building.
Now, four years later, that information was misinformation or
a lie or Ashland has simply changed its mind about the nature
of the Historic District and zoning regulations , bending them
this way or that .
I invite you to stand on my front porch and see what I will
see from there: a mass of buildings longer than my lot . It
will greatly effect the nature of my small cottage. I object
to the Church Street side of the the Church Street Commons
project .
SincerellAy,. /.
Mary aher
65
ASHLAND STREET TREE COMMISSION
SITE REVIEW
Applicant Cjiim Date q _Q3 _C;?LL
_1
Address �e,�„. ,( �i cQ s Zit to o� C GOmC mercial Residential_
Proposed Action: qq- I 1�
pu-v/ t�_ r9 u�Q cti�
Recommendation:
N➢acl ;ro � 4 312 e
S UAXo C. Y�.�.�Lo ,.�s G C2 t � A v�o lSrt IX CVt tA�
p l�iv�vi iii a- Grr S �AA _
Exts 4/LRu v, o+
� eMa-f.�t-a��d 1��.� a-• bo,-ist �r ret ¢,v�-k_c�ti
e U o-c-T 4 4v ra c {t
we grrrec ,zle (Ap ak"e of r!a„ts /0� z,e using eje. dr2-9t" /o(ehzel`
P�n,r4, CAoySj<� i5kcck"'i 7�y �Si FPftUr4 . t/uvt. '/ fPen I2eurziCr &.ierl' H ,,4 -
(ftio�jl,t evoro„P ,Gac/F 's o. < cf fA^yP
ry„ /P„ u i!r/
CPS^' l+ P /Qnc/J(4 PP (J/u,S .✓P l4UP seen /µFP /y G✓i/AA%r 6Aat/pi4 / �`�/ /
Street Tree Commission Representative Date
Follow-up:
{ bb
FROM : N+P BISCHOF PHONE NO. : 5105242479 Sep. 01 1997 01:00PM P1
30 August 1997
FAX Tramsmission: 541-488-5311
Ashland City Council
20 Fast Main Street
Ashland,Oregon 97520
Dear Members of the City Council:
Just as we prepared for a Labor Day Weekend trip to Ashland on late Thursday afternoon,August
28th,we received a FAXed copy of Director McLaughlin communication to you recommending
against our proposal for Church Street
We were of course quite disappointed,for we thought we had clearly resolved the two main questions
for the scaled-down five unit proposal: the 35:65%ratio and the alley access. Our surveyor,Mr.Jim
Hibbs,submitted a lemer on 7th July to the Planning Department stating that the 35%landscaping
requitement had been met fully,and he would have testified to that effect on Tuesday evening.The
alley access question we thought we had answered by requesting your approval for only the five units
contained within Phase One,and shown in a demarcation line approved originally by the Planning
Commission. Thus, the contested High Street alley would not be used for either ingress or egress. We
are frankly puzzled, therefore,that Mr. McLaughlin still refers to alley access as a problem. It might,
of course, be a potential problem for Phase Two of the project,but that we intended to address at a
later time_Similarly,the demarcation line between Phases One and Two was clearly shown on earlier
maps submitted by Mr. Hibbs together with exact figures showing the square footage of each phase.
Consequently,although we realized that the whole seven unit proposal needed more work,and
especially a clear resolution of the alley problem,we did believe that Phase One alone was ready for
your approval.The director,however,mentions several other problems: a lot line adjustment for Phase
One,more elevation figures,and that the Planning Commission had not adrressed a two-foot wide
walkway or the change in the parking spaces for Unit Five.While appearing minor to us,taken
together,these changes are enough for Mr.McLaughlin to recommend that we present them to the
Planning Commission first for its approval.
We accept his judgment,and thus request withdrawal from your consideration the original seven unit
Church Street project approved by the Planning Commission so as to allow us to present a modified
proposal for it the to your Planning Commission. In light of the director's letter, we ask to be excused
from Tuesday's meeting since we cannot justify our time away from meeting with our students. We do
thank you and your staff for the opportunity to work with you on the Church Street project.
Yours sincerely, ,
Phyllis B. and Norbert S. Bischof
468 Michigan Avenue
Berkeley,CA 94707
ca D. Boldt
M. Hedges
J. Hibbs
RUTH P1. PULLER PHILIP C. LARC. LCSw
758 b Street Ashland. Oregon 97520
Res. 541 482-8659
Office 541 482-5387
September 2, 1997
To: Ashland City Council
Re. : Repeal of Ordinance #2613 adopted 2/20/91
Attached is my letter to the Planning Commission, which voted-Eor repeal
on 7/8/97, and the following additions:
Tidings articles of 1/14/91 and 1/16/91
My notes of a conversation with Jackson County Health Officer - 6/9/97
On February 20, 1991, the City Council passed Ordinance #2613, requiring
an annual Type I review for B & Bs, "for at least the first three (3)
years, after which the Planning Ccmnission may approve, under a Type II
procedure, a permanent permit for the facility " (underlining added) .
This ordinance was in response to expressed public concern. Indeed, as
the Tidings articles prove, a Citizens Planning Advisory Comnittee was
formed to come up with recommendations for an ordinance. Its recommendations
did not please the Planning Department, so they were simply ignored. But
to assuage the concerns, the Ordinance was passed.
When a transfer of ownership of a B & B came up recently, I was notified, as
an owner of adjacent property. I checked with the City to see how the
ordinance had been working, and specifically, what inspections had shown at
the B & B. I was told that the ordinance had never been enforced since its
enactment!
Subsequently, in response to my complaint, the Planning Department, rather
than start enforcing the ordinance, decided to "solve" the problem by
repealing the ordinance.
There is no way of determining if there have been any problems or any lack
of compliance, since no reviews were ever conducted. To renal the ordinance
without ever enforcing it to see whether in fact it is needed or not, is an
act of bad faith. Clearly citizen concerns were answered with an ordinance,
which was less than what was wanted, and then the protections enacted were
systematically and uniformly ignored for 6� years. This ignorance is now
paraded as "experience" and "justification" for repealing the ordinance.
I also call your attention to Mr. Brett Thomas's remarks to me on the
potential for problems, insofar as no health inspection is done on smaller
B & Bs.
' r
RUTH N .,'TILLER = PHILIP C. LANG. LC5
758 B Street • Ashland. Oregon 97520
Res. 541 482-8659
Office 541 482-5587
July 8, 1997
To: Ashland Planning Commission
Re. : Planning Action 97-046
The request for hearing comes about because the application at hand raises
yet again issues of public policy and questions about their enforcement
in the form of ordinances presumably enacted to protect the larger public
interest.
The following attached materials are incorporated by reference.
Ashland Daily Tidings Article of 1/14/91
Ashland Daily Tidings Article of 1/16/91
Letter of John McLaughlin - 6/6/97
Traveller's Accomodations (Ordinance 2613, adopted 2/20/91)
Letter of Philip C. Lang to John McLoughlin,,--, 6/6/97
Site Review .-.(City.of Ashland)' - - _ _ . - -. • ,::.)
My letter of June 6th provides background information on how this matter
came up. :lMr 'McLaughlin's lengthy letter of June 6th, in response, details
what may be called the "official history" on this issue. It is defective
in two ways: (1) it does not contravene any of the points and concerns in
my letter, and, (2) it is historically incorrect, as shown in the attached
articles from the Tidings.
There was extensive citizen concern over the proliferation of traveller's
accomodations, particularly in historic/residential neighborhoods. What
these concerns would be should be obvious to everyone: noise, trash, traffic,
in brief, disturbance of the tranquility and residential nature of the neighborhoods.
In this instance, the response of "the powers that be" followed a pattern
applied elsewhere. A Citizens Planning Advisory Committee was formed to come
up with recommendations. It did so. These did not please the interests who
are also viewed as the constituency to be served by the planning apparatus.
Therefore, its recommendations were disregarded and discarded by the
Planning Director. The department shifted ground stating that really
representative input would be better served by a public hearing. Such hearings
have the virtue that everyone talks, and no one follows up - or is compelled
to follow up to incorporate any of the public's ideas into the ordinance that
is produced.
Planning proposed, and the City adopted Ordinance #2613 on 2/20/91, which,
although it did not deal with citizen concerns expressed through the
Advisory Committee, calmed the public by offering what it considered adequate
protection.
Planning Commission, re. : Action 97-046 - 7/8/97 - p. 2
The preceding is;.the actual history, documented by the Tidings articles.
The citizens, thus calmed, let the matter drop, assuming that the ordinance,
such as it was, would provide some answers to their concerns.
Six and one-half years later we come to find out that in fact the ordinance
was never enforced. When I expressed no small displeasure with this outcome,
which lends itself quite easily to being seen as "shining on the public",
the Planning Department came up with its next "solution": not to enforce
the ordinance, but simply to abolish it - which is on tonight's Commission
agenda.
The next development is easy to foresee, since it parallels similar ones
on other planning issues. More traveller's accomodations, implicitly
accepted by our economic and power elites as unquestionably "good" -(more
business, more tourists, more restaurant and tourist money, etc. etc.)
will soon be on the way. What seems to some as an adequate number of
such accomodations - and to some of us a superfluity will become only
a fraction of what can "really" be accomodated. Perhaps the citizens affected
will once again be troubled and complain. This time, however, the ground
will be cut out from under them by the recitation of "official history"
of the sort contained in Mr. MbLau�Uin's letter, namely: that citizens
concern;,had been attended to, that an ordinance for their protection had
been passed, that after 61f years of perfect compliance and no complaints
and problems, it was clear that the neighborhood's fears were unfounded,
and that indeed an expanded number of such facilities oould easily
be accomodated. No one will bother to mention the inconvenient fact that
the ordinance was never enforced, so that no one ever knew whether any
controls were necessary.
On the technical side, we are faced with an Orwellian situation in which it
is logically and legally impossible to approve this application.
The=_Site Review criteria state: (18.72.050) : "A. All applicable City ordinancgsl..:
have been met and will be met by the proposed development."
Since the Planning Department admits that it has never enforced the ordinance,
and has no intention of doing so, there is no way of knowing whether "applicable
City ordinances have been. . .and will be met."
The::governing ordinance (#2613) states that "Traveller's Acommodations are
subject to a Type 1 review for at least the first three (3) years. .. .
"Traveller's accommodations shall also be subject to the following. . .."(underlining adc
"Shall" means, in legalese "must" - in other words, a .use permit is conditioned
on a required meeting of the ordinance for at least the first three years,
verified by annual inspections. But no inspecti:ens .have been performed;
none are contemplated. The conditions for licensure have not been verifiably
met, therefore, the facility cannot be licensed.
The Planning Department responded to expressed citizen need by enacting an
ordinance. The City took upon itself the duty to protect its citizens by
dealing with its concerns through a formal approval process requiring regular
inspections as provided by ordinance. These have not been conducted in the
Planning Commission, re. : Action 97-046 - p. 3
past, nor are contemplated in the future. Section 6. of the Traveller's
Accommodation Ordinance states: "Transfer of business ownership of a
traveller's accomodation shall be subject to all requirements of this
section, and subject to Conditional Use Permit approtal and conformance
with the criteria of this section." (underlining added) .
Absenting enforcement, there is no verification that ordinance requirements
have been met in the past or currently. Therefore, no license can be issued
at this time.
Si c ely,
attachments as referenced in letter.
6/9/97
TO: File (B & B)
Re. : Health Dept. inspections
Spoke extensively with Brett Thomas of Jackson County Public Health
this A.M. re: B & B inspections.
A dozen years ago they inspected all acco odations. According to him,
the "Ashland people" got their legislator to change the law, exempting
B & Bs with two or fewer rooms and/or 6 or fewer guests, from such
inspections.
They do inspect the larger ones - 2X/year and issue certificates.
They understood that Ashland had passed an ordinance calling for
universal inspection of B & Bs licensed as Type 1 facilities, but they
had never received requests for such inspections - and, since they
are not required by state law, have not inspected the smaller facilities.
They had some concerns about not doing inspections - although the
facilities are smaller, and the scope of any problem would be far
smaller than, say, a restaurant or hotel - the likelihood of a
problem is greater, according to him, because of the informal, residential
nature of these facilities.
Fran: Brett Thomas, Jakcosn County Health Officer - 776-7316.
— `.-� c�- n u ODE v V W 7 ce • Jl."F�,;:.. ,
{{
0 -3 U`J —L
_ V CA
a yC- L .>> m
tv
CU pp E C
7 C p 7 V T C .8 3
C ^. S C E ^Y! - O
c M
T /�v. y�u Ems` 5 c 7 t �! ,w �
J
0 3 C E � � =L ` O C C O
� -. = f n V j-y •— U�.� n^J .JJ' L 'l •L -•� O O
_ cc -_ co
CO 5 G v: n U G i. `^ G O �/�r O
4.T :J E =
SScc MM J_ /�
Env '�" W i. s � � .y j �n:— r J yr +1 V yr �. •V
C k U U 7 O J L1�.c .- C C J .V.
3 0 ° F V ✓ Y c c Y T:J E e 1
�Y 3yQ0mcca �IOIw� Ci,L� ? � � r• Y ° v (' � 'n
IiO� Y•/1 � =Jt S uL .. _
Cq
7' Q
U M C V C V- Y=
N GO kp ._ ALL V 7 •� �
Y s�
cw
5E c
Y. 6e_ � Jj kp c ,? YY ` nr '7 � C � Z •° C
to rp
r Y + a.T. Y • .. C
O T°
a2S
l_U
—$ c � w p°p� �• DOE SiuUSb� scU
V E � �<F- ato � • E � ,
KIi 1611.1 Jl kiciI W?j. A I..,,.u. I•...,......^ ..
sultans from \Medford, alsotc\nfied ag,unsl the the future.'' -Kuplllas sand. ''I sec thus :u 1111
mmiseiunert ap ordmanca proving ttuMmK devclopmcnI."
naming that clears "It only affects the nc\vcomcr. II Itic new. - Strahl said he would do\'clop the fees using
e\clofxm fees that coiner docsn't come tstcaitsc of these fees, you an average from thc. last five years on how
clopmeni. don't need to do the devclnpmcnl.' Stxlerblurg much it cost the county to develop roads.
works director. %aid. "If I were a Josephine• Counrr resident, I In other business. Dan Marshall, the fire
.•d system develop- tsould welcome this because tdc%cIoFk•rsl \,111 chief of Jackson County Fire District S.said the
In the county and go there instead of here." district would wlthdra'% a request for annexa-
,certunts with the
.sane throughout she [kill Maus, csccutivc \,:c prc• ldcm of the tion of an areas tin the Old Siskiyou lit way
! r c the 1u commis- ('hanttx•r u1 \Icd(or(VJai kvm County, said the ,,Jill of Ashland. County Administrator Ilurke
,loci Ilic prlposed rhamtx•r favors the concept of the dctclol+lncnl Raymond Said ill of the area's residents signed
fees but is concerned the I('t•, t\ould dctct a petition calling for an election on the issue:
I {{xublic hearing dc\rfopment. Marshall said (tic dnslrct does not \want to
.11 .Ji,1xing system But ('ommissioner Sue Kupilla\Nand it ,suds pa)' for an election.
hamper economic uI Multnomah fount)' sho\ecd that nlrrea\ctl ' 'The commissioners also apprus•ed signing
system dcvelopnx•nl chatgcs tit lac t to,lcictl :Intl sending it letter lu the U.S. Army Corps of
toulg (o-shut the economic dc\'rlopnlems. Shc s:oil the count\ Engineers supfxnring Completion of the I'.IA
.au1 Ham Roll, had worked slut the urihnanrc ,I a puhhc Creek Dam full-lxxtl allcrnautr.
d City agrees to new B & B rules
LA
By Monica Alltvtn urns have hri n .LUtc,l tit `.tiue nrlghlxuhtxxl's.
At old Of 1heTiding% � , hanging thin Ibnlll\ .Jul lesulung nil e ionnncr
he All- / / , . tallied aunt,.)+heir. hr s.o,l
t 'rreA The. Ashlaxl City Council atiiTecJ unununt'ai1)' \IcLau);111uI .:11,1 .1,111 Inc` toe„11\ndet Ills impacts
;;'I4, he Tuesday night to amendments w Ashland's land use tit noise, ti,Itil, .111,1 othel L,:tot\ In n•\n•\,nlg cvcl)'
ordinance regarding bed and breakfasts. apple anon In mull) I.untl\ er(.1\
u)• „I Pie ordinance regulating tied and bw ALtsts, or Cotim llllt.Ill Rol, W11111hop, %%tw t\,1, I Incnit cr of
AsoT>` Irlveler's accommodations, "as attended to fit
n nhr f'lennnp. t •tool\slot Ix•nae lonung [hr count ill,
.I n4,, it caster for staff use\plain arm] for appllc.uns bl atltiress .lgtei.l ih.11 n\ elx.w ueli) horfl.sxis could Ix•
. .•I [tit- during the condmorial use permit prt\css, senior ,111111i\\i,l III IIH' I+It\ i\\. [ltt' ..n dnll.inh C t\,1\ 11 good
t reek planner John McLaughlin told tilt- iouni 11, The , ,,n11•I,rtn1\, , hr \.u.l The ,out, 11 \.ar.l o�died ,tall
wdl tit amendnients apply b,structures in R - end R I tones. to droll an ordinance o'ilh 111c nudilWillions.
tun Suns, prc`ldcnt of, the Ashland Lodging As In other huwu•ss, the council voted In approve a
stk'tation and o\vncr of the Fos hots' tied and hreal, parking space variance and con d11H1t1al Use r"mil fill
last, said the Inthustry supported tire pro(xv,ed anlend :1 onc.lx•dnxnn structure at Wk Stsklyou lilt,d. the
x.11 ntcmt. The utduslry didn't ohyk.1 to regulation :old t pli.ants \%crc David and C :uolcn Jha\%.
\up(x+rled an)dnng Ihal would make the utdusuy tx•I 1 tiontc wort already had been kill"gnlelc(l:m the site
Po.ld ter. tie said Ix tote the applicants apfx•alcd in the staff and Plan-
!!Iihm Mn,l Contllcts \kith earlier versions 111 the ning Commission. llic comtnlissnat, after two tic
the I,rofxned antcndntcmt utvohed l licit and
+rcakfasls, vUll'S,11:Id Jg1CCd ht rC (flit r11end dCru 111 llf the rCIIUC,I
he said "Whatever dls.tgrccmcnu there for it parking variance.
1:1,1 ` \\cre tit the pngxl\4,J ordutanie ha\'c realty Men ver\ I'hc Council also accepted a mionmmendalion from
11111 nunor '' he %md. Slafl and the Planning Conumis`N111 1koth the Historic Commission and building depart-
%%(.[I( oil of[lit-if \\a\'s toeonie up with a i ompnnnl\i, item that a fire-damaged house al it'll R St. Ix•
:tile .In hr \.ud_ dcnu,lishcd.
I!” has \\' ux•n,tx-r of the C 1t1n•JS Planning f'oslfxax•d was (tic second rc;uling of nn ordinance
e
14,1111 \d\r\ora ('onultrttcr. `:ud the conunnlrc vuied tin to prol»Ins the Sale of Cleaning agents that Conl:un
11 hr ,uu11unlsl) w rccomnlcnd that the prtlfxtwd ordinance phosphorous. An :uhirmc)' representing the soap and
' ,eJl\ ,1111clidilicnis tx• sent hack t, swill for lumber rc\'ic\\. detergent industt' ask rd the council w Ixnst(xate the
III It- I he i elms»nlcc \\-IN IOM crud 111,11 the m,Justn' has leading unnl further information could Ile suhnulled.
kill i.n,\,n to .11le, ( the Ir\.da111y of A011.11Id•` nrlghtxa Wnne11 lnlonnaunn ntav N. suhntime(1 hcforc Ihr
ho„Is, ,Ind 111.11 should tic eddn•s%i d it .111% IR'” .0 rouncll bold\ :ulolltel n•a,hng .11 It second meeting In
I .e\ dnl.il, e. he `.ud 1. nn.un u.oellrl '` ,t„ oni11o,la M:urh
Illlnnl •
. I nl
I !
,�trd
' Calendar
�I
.. .Ilh\ Government \:I.,I;,I1:..t ,. N,.,rn.u1 (:rntn, II\II (1rr:hAtn Ro.nn. i\.bland Hl.ut, h
I.Ih1:11\, dRti r.U.% in 77q ;INJ,
\,111mnl l'br\\ flub, H I'm SIA. I.+.
Illi�l I ILV 11:111' ILu�h,.ur i'.dt. . li ldhS.+ir , lit +-u1Axl 11111.1
. tiek.11l ,\ \I -IN.' :,Ink Sul\I„n\ o1 I
A.
1' 111 -- IA m( ('fly ('imn.d, .n ax; AI t; %.lit It I nr.nlr R.nnn, I it\t 1': '•
r I tie. I Alenl t 11\' Hall C'.,une11 ChAmtvr,, '1 In to a 1.m - Aduh Cluldrrn of li)trl'.In ('hnteh, tr.3:
s 7U1 (; \tAni SL. TRICelt. Al,,,Iwh,\ and .ahrr dy\iun,uunal Other
' m - h.'A<on Srrvlrr D,\stet Lu1::Lt-\. 11:.I I'n•\b\irrLm rllw.h• x-/t
i -
.nld1 Il.,.. I • : I+u r. o.\ 1'ir, war se"inl \\'. :f,, .wit �..AI,.,u hnulr\.,lil t it Tt1NIGHI
o
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTIONS 18.24.030.K AND
18.28.030.J OF THE ASHLAND MUNICIPAL CODE - LAND USE
ORDINANCE, REMOVING THE REQUIREMENT FOR ANNUAL
REVIEWS FOR TRAVELERS ACCOMMODATIONS.
THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The first paragraph of Section 18.24.030.K of the Ashland Municipal
Code - Land Use Ordinance is amended as follows:
K. Travelers accommodations, PF0vIded that the laGility be subjeet to
an annual Type I review !of at least the first thFee (3) years,
which imme the Planning Gemmisslen May appFeve, undeF at Type
subject to the following:
SECTION 2. The first paragraph of Section 18.28.030.J of the Ashland Municipal
Code - Land Use Ordinance is amended as follows:
J. Travelers accommodations, pFovided that the facility be subjeet to
an annual Type I Feview 110F at least the fIFSt thFee (3) yeaFS,
aeeommodat"ons shall else be subject to the following:
The foregoing ordinance was first read by title only in accordance with Article X,
Section 2(C) of the City Charter on the 2nd day of September, 1997,
and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this _ day of 19_
Barbara Christensen, City Recorder
SIGNED and APPROVED this day of 1997.
Catherine M. Golden, Mayor
Approved as to form:
Paul Nolte, City Attorney
TYPE III PLANNING ACTION
PLANNING ACTION 97-067
REQUEST FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE ASHLAND LAND USE ORDINANCE, CHAPTER 18,
PERTAINING TO TRAVELLER'S ACCOMMODATIONS. SUCH AMENDMENT WOULD REPEAL THE
EXISTING PROVISION WHICH REQUIRES AN ANNUAL REVIEW FOR THE FIRST THREE YEARS
FOR ALL NEW TRAVELLER'S ACCOMMODATIONS AND UPON THE TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP
OF AN EXISTING ESTABLISHMENT.
STAFF REPORT
There is currently a requirement that after a traveller's accommodation is approved there is a an annual
review for three years before permanent approval is granted. Staff's recommendation is to eliminate this
language. No notice has been sent to the B&B owners since 1990 requiring an annual review. Overall,
the traveller's accommodations have worked well. There is a lack of history in terms of complaints.
From 1982 until 1990, Staff could not find one example where anyone requested a public hearing to
review a problem. In the early 1990's a revocation hearing was held because of a complaint. Staff feels
the current language is a remnant of past concerns and given the time it takes to conduct the reviews
and due to the fact the department has a full-time enforcement person, Staff has recommended the
repeal of this language.
Philip Lang has eluded to the annual review process starting around 1990 or 1991. The revisions made
the code in that time were changes to the maximum number of units, a better definition of "business
owner occupied" and establishment of a residence being at least 20 years old to qualify as a B&B.
Staff is asking the Commission make a recommendation to the Council to approve the language change
to the ordinance.
Jarvis said in the past, conditions have been added if neighbors have concerns about traffic, parking,
etc. The condition will often state that a review will be done in a year to make sure there are no
problems. This type of condition can still be added.
PUBLIC HEARING
TERI KOERNER, 87 Third Street, owns Southern Oregon Reservation Association. She is not here to
represent the B&B owners. She was involved in working on the ordinance requiring annual reviews.
There was a concern there would be some sort of public outcry about traveller's accommodations. The
public outcry never happened. It seems unfair for this business which, once established, be singled out
with this blanket review requirement. As the industry has changed, it is good to review this ordinance
and see the traveller's accommodations have a proven track record that does not really necessitate an
annual review process. If there are complaints about an accommodation, it is often worked out among
neighbors.
Armitage wondered why there were not more B&B representatives at the meeting. Koerner notified the
president of the Chamber of Commerce and the Traveller's Accommodation Guild. She speculated they
were probably home checking in visitors.
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 2
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
JULY 8, 1997
i
I
i
i
I
PHILIP LANG, talked about history as he found it in the Tidings. There was a public outcry that
everyone wanted this three year review. It is not being enforced. The City was to enforce it for the
citizens. An ordinance was adopted which is not enforced. It seems callous and cynical to revoke this
wording because of the neighbors who were concerned.
COMMISSIONERS DISCUSSION AND MOTION
Bass said as a former B&B owner, if there have been no complaints, why bother to carry out an annual
review. Staff is responding to that by repealing the language. Had there been complaints, it would have
come to the attention of the City.
Bass is concerned about the concept of not notifying the B&B owners. Molnar explained that generally,
legislative amendments require notification in the newspaper. If this moves for Council review, the B&B
owners will be notified.
Hearn said, philosophically, this is non-enforcement of the ordinance. That forces everyone to look at the
legitimacy of the underlying laws and look at the historical perspective. The ordinance has reached a
maturity and its time has passed and the ordinance should be modif ied.
Armitage moved to recommend approval to PA97-067 and move it along to the City Council. The
motion was seconded and carried unanimously.
OTHER
Jenifer Carr was present as a member of the audience. Jarvis thanked Carr for her many years of
service and her contribution to the Planning Commission.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 8:00 p.m.
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 3
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
JULY 8, 1997
i
ASHLAND PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
July 8, 1997
i
PLANNING ACTION: 97-067
APPLICANT: City of Ashland
ORDINANCE REFERENCE: 18.24.030.K. Traveller's Accommodations - R-2
18.28.030.J. Traveller's Accommodations - R-
3
REQUEST: Modification of the ordinance requirements for a traveller's accommodation,
removing the requirement that the use be subject to an annual review for three years prior to
obtaining a permanent approval.
I. Relevant Facts
1) Background - History of Application:
This issue was brought to the attention of the Planning Staff by a letter sent
from Mr. Philip Lang.
2) Detailed Description of the Site and Proposal:
The current ordinance language in both 18.24.030.K. and 18.28.030.J. is as
follows:
Travelers accommodations, provided that the facility be subject to an
annual Type I review for at least the first three (3) years, after which time
the Planning Commission may approve, under at Type II procedure, a
permanent permit for the facility. Travelers accommodations shall also be
subject to the following:
As will be explained below, it is staff's opinion that given current practices, the
review process is unnecessary. We would recommend the following
modification:
Travelers accommodations, provided that the facility be subject to an
annual Type 1 review for- at least the first three (3) years, after- whieh time
the Planning Commission may approve, under- at Type 11 Or-oeedur-"
permanent permit for the facility. Travelers accommodations shall also be
i
subject to the following:
II. Background and Proposal Impact
The City began approving the use of individual rooms in private homes for tourist
accommodations as early as 1977, through approval of "tourist homes" as part of a
Central Housing Program coordinated with the Chamber of Commerce. Following
that, specific conditional use permit approvals were granted for "travellers
accommodations," beginning in 1981. In late 1981, and early 1982, the City began
discussions on the establishment of specific travellers accommodation policies and
ordinances. With the original travellers accommodation approvals, there was a
requirement which only granted 12 month approvals, with no opportunity for
permanent approval. Basically, the applicant's were required to show that there was
still a need for additional tourist rooms, due to a shortage of motel rooms. The
ordinance and process did not recognize that B&B's would become a significant form
of tourist housing in their own right. The renewal process was also utilized to ensure
that the accommodations were appropriate for the neighborhoods. These types of uses
were new to residential districts, and the City was justifiably cautious in their approval
of the uses.
As the local B & B industry began to mature, and the investments necessary to
improve properties for travellers accommodations became better understood, the City
agreed in 1982 to modify the policy of an annual renewal to a 3-year review with an
opportunity for permanent approval after three years. When the land use ordinance
was amended in 1985, this review/approval process became an explicit portion of the
code. With the early B&B's, the concept was to utilize an extra bedroom for nightly
rentals, and basically "share your home." As more stringent health regulations were
adopted at the state level for travellers accommodations, the financial investment
became more pronounced. Separate, commercial kitchens were necessary for food
preparation, sometimes separate bathrooms were required, improved parking spaces,
alley paving, and increased landscaping requirements were imposed by the City. As
the investment in the property became more apparent, so did the need for the property
owners to have a more secure future regarding their operations.
As stated above, early approvals required annual reviews, which were filed by the
applicants. From 1982 through 1990, the City provided "blanket" annual reviews for
all travellers accommodations, sending notice to hundreds of surrounding property
owners, and essentially receiving no comments in opposition. In order to reduce
unnecessary paperwork and decrease costs, the department stopped the blanket process
after 1990, placing the burden to apply for annual reviews back on the owners. We
also entered into an ordinance modification process with the community and B & B
PA97-067 Ashland Planning Department — Staff Report
City of Ashland July 8, 1997
Page 2
industry which resulted in ordinance amendments in 1991 limiting the number of total
units per site and further defining business owners.
As Ashland has worked through the approval process for travellers accommodations
for the past 20 years, we have found that the approvals we have granted have
integrated well into neighborhoods and have resulted in very few problems. While we
do not routinely require annual approvals, we do respond to neighborhood concerns
regarding the operation of travellers accommodations. Further, during the change of
ownership of a travellers accommodation, we do require the new owner to file for a
conditional use permit, and we notify the surrounding properties of the ownership
change. This provides an opportunity for the surrounding properties to become aware
of a new owner in their neighborhood, as well as provide an opportunity to raise
concerns regarding the operation of the accommodation, should there be a problem.
In fact, as Ashland has come to embrace B&B's in the neighborhoods, the concern has
changed complete direction. While past concerns centered on the loss of rental
housing and the change of neighborhood character with overnight guests, present
concerns are the change in neighborhood character should the B&B change back into
monthly rentals, with the increase in cars, greater trips generated, and increased
impacts.
While we believe that the removal of the three-year renewal requirement removes an
unnecessary land use process, we do not believe that it reduces the City's opportunity
for review. Should a travellers accommodation raise specific concerns in a
neighborhood during its initial hearing, the Commission may still add a condition
requiring an annual review to determine compliance with requirements or to address
neighborhood issues. The process becomes more application specific, rather than
broad brush.
III. Procedural - Renuired Burden of Proof
This proposed ordinance amendment is a legislative amendment governed by section
18.108.170 of the land use ordinance.
IV. Conclusions and Recommendations
Based on our past knowledge of the travelers accommodation review process, the
success of the industry in integrating successfully into residential neighborhoods, and
the provisions allowed under the ordinance for revocation of conditional use permits
and notice of ownership changes, the Planning Department recommends removing the
three-year review requirement for travellers accommodations. Given the past record of
few or no complaints, this review process appears to be an unnecessary land use
process which results in little benefit for the community, compared to the effort needed
PA97-067 Ashland Planning Department -- Staff Report
City of Ashland July 8, 1997
Page 3
to prepare the hundreds of notices. It is our opinion that the review section of the
code is a remnant of a time when the impacts of travellers accommodations on
surrounding neighborhoods were unknown, and the City felt compelled to conduct an
annual review process. While it is not necessary in each application, the Commission
may still decide that an annual review may be necessary for a particular application,
and they maintain the discretion to require the review as a condition of approval.
PA97-067 Ashland Planning Department -- Staff Report
City of Ashland July 8, 1997
I
Page 4
CITY OF ASHLAND CITY HALL
ASHLAND,OREGON WSZO
June 6, 1997
Mr. Philip Lang
758 B-Street
Ashland, OR 97520
RE: Your letter 6/6/97 and PA97-046
Mr. Lang:
Thank you for your letter. It appears that you are requesting a public hearing on the above
reference planning action (change of ownership of a travellers accommodation at 111 3rd
Street) not because you have any issue with the approval or operation of the travellers
accommodation, but rather because you take issue with the planning department's actions .
regarding section 18.24.030.K. This section states that "...the facility shall be subject to an
annual Type I review for at least the first three (3) years, after which time the Planning
Commission may approve, under a Type II procedure, a permanent permit..."
Your letter attempts to provide background supporting your position, stating that "due to
proliferation of B&B's in the late 80's and early 90's...ordinance 2613 was adopted on
2/20/91...providing an annual Type 1 review..." I would argue that your presentation of the
history is incorrect.
The City began approving the use of individual rooms in private homes for tourist
accommodations as early as 1977, through approval of "tourist homes" as part of a Central
Housing Program coordinated with the Chamber of Commerce. Following that, specific
conditional use permit approvals were granted for "travellers accommodations," beginning in
1981. In late 1981, and early 1982, the City began discussions on the establishment of
specific travellers accommodation policies and ordinances. With the original travellers
accommodation approvals, there was a requirement which only granted 12 month approvals,
with no opportunity for permanent approval.
As the local B & B industry began to mature, and the investments necessary to improve
properties for travellers accommodations became better understood, the City agreed in 1982
to modify the policy of an annual renewal to a 3-year review with an opportunity for
permanent approval after three years. When the land use ordinance was amended in 1985,
this review/approval process became an explicit portion of the code.
I present this information in opposition to your statement that the three-year review
I
1
requirement came about from public concern raised during a travellers ordinance amendment
process in late 1990/early 1991, when in fact it has been in place since 1982. From
reviewing the file from that 1991 ordinance amendment process, no mention was made
regarding the three-year review requirement, either from the public, industry, or staff. In
fact, there was very little public comment, outside of the B & B industry, over any of the
recommendations or changes as part of this ordinance amendment process.
Regarding the Planning Department's actions involving this section of the ordinance, as I
stated, early approvals required annual reviews, which were filed by the applicants. From
1982 through 1990, the City provided "blanket" annual reviews for all travellers
accommodations, sending notice to hundreds of surrounding property owners, and essentially
receiving no comments in opposition. In order to reduce unnecessary paperwork and
decrease costs, the department stopped the blanket process after 1990, placing the burden to
apply for annual reviews back on the owners. We also entered into an ordinance _
modification pra=s with the community-and B & B industry which resulted in ordinance
amendments in 1991 limiting the number of total units per site and further defining business
owners.
As Ashland has worked through the approval process for travellers accommodations for the
past 20 years, we have found that the approvals we have granted have integrated well into
neighborhoods and have resulted in very few problems. While we do not routinely require
annual approvals, we do respond to neighborhood concerns regarding the operation of
travellers accommodations. Further, during the change of ownership of a travellers
accommodation, we do require the new owner to file for a conditional use permit, and we
notify the surrounding properties of the ownership change. This provides an opportunity for
the surrounding properties to become aware of a new owner in their_neighborhood, as well
as provide an opportunity to raise concerns regarding the operation of the accommodation,
should there be a problem.
Therefore, based on our past knowledge of the review process, the success of the industry in
integrating successfully into residential neighborhoods, and the provisions allowed under the
ordinance for revocation of conditional use permits and notice of ownership changes, the
Planning Department will be recommending an ordinance change to the Planning
Commission and Counc;ll re^!c-Ang the tbres year review requirement for trvellers
accommodations. Given the past record of few or no complaints, this review process
appears to be an unnecessary land use process which results in little benefit for the
community, compared to the effort needed to prepare the hundreds of notices. It is our
opinion that the review section of the code is a remnant of a time when the impacts of
travellers accommodations on surrounding neighborhoods was unknown, and the City felt
compelled to conduct an annual review process. While it is not necessary in each
application, the Commission may still decide that an annual review may be necessary for a
particular application, and they maintain the discretion to require the review as a condition of
approval.
In conclusion, to respond to the final portion of your letter, the Planning Department will not
agree to your request to enforce the three-year review requirements. As stated above, we
will be recommending an ordinance amendment removing that requirement. Further, if you
find it necessary, I encourage you to utilize your options for a public hearing on the change
of ownership for the travellers accommodation at 111 3rd Street. While your arguments
appear to have little relationship to the application, I would not wish to deny you your
opportunity to speak to the Commission.
I look forward to seeing you at the upcoming public hearings.
6;ohn ncerely,
G
Mcl
Director of Community Development
c: Mayor and Council Ashland Lodging Association
Brian Almquist, City Administrator Paul Nolte, City Attorney
Ms. Rosemary Silva Ashland Planning Commission
attached: Copy of 6/6/97 letter from Lang to McLaughlin
I
RUTH M. MILLER PHILIP C. LANG. 1.CSw'
758 B Street • Ashland. Oregon 97520
Res. 541 482.8659
Office 541 482-5387
June 6, 1997
Mr. John Macloughlin, Director
Ashland Planning Department
20 East Main
Ashland, Oregon 97520
Re. : Planning Action #97-046
On June 2nd, I filed a request for public hearing on the above planning
action, involving transfer of ownership of a B & B (Col. Silsby's) at
111-3rd Street Ashland to a Rosemary Silva.
Since that time I have had a conversation with Mark Knox of the Planning
Department, Paul Noltg;: Ashland City attorney, and my own private counsel.
I am also meeting with Ms. Silva this coming Sunday at 10 A.M. She will have
a copy of this letter before her when we speak.
BACKGROUND
With the proliferation of B & Bs in the late 80s and early 90s, residents
of neighborhoods were concerned that B & Bs be regulated to prevent their
disturbing the dignified and peaceful quality of the residential neighborhoods
(such as mine) in which they were located.
As a result Ordinance 2613 was adopted on 2/20/91. Since there was much
public concern, this ordinance was designed to assuage it, by providing an
annual Type 1 review for "at least the first three (3) years"after which
the Planning Commission may approve, under a type'll procedure, -a permanent
permit for the facility." In addition, a host of limitations and requirements
were imposed, all of which were designed to protect the surrounding neighborhood
and residences.
When the transfer of ownership of Col. Silsby's came up, I checked with the
Planning Department, on enforcement of this ordinance. The answers I got,
subsequently confirmed by Mark Knox in the conversation of 6/4/97, was that
there had been no enforcement. None of the B & Bs had been subjected to
the inspections and review required by the ordinance.
At that point, I filed a request for hearing on this transfer of ownership.
I have spoken with Mr. Nolte, Ashland City Attorney about this matter.
The argument that the City is depending on "citizen enforcement" is indefensible.
The City cannot enforce every little regulation about hedge heights, fence
heights and other matters but in this instance far more was involved.
Mr.. Jogn MacLoughlin - June 5, 1997 - p. 2
The ordinance was a response to strongly expressed concerns by citizen-residents.
It was meant to assuage these concerns. Now it appears that weiwere simply being
"shined on", since there have been no enforcement attempts. Moreover, the
enforcement, as written in the ordinance is not permissive, but required.
It seems that the Planning Department has decided that citizens need to show
probable cause before they will investigate the conformity of B & Bs to
.an ordinance designed to protect the general public.
As a result of consultation with counsel, with Mr. Nolte, and consideration
for Ms. Silva and my own concerns, I am suggesting the following options:
If the Planning Department will agree, in writing (essentially a consent decree)
to enforce Ordinance 2613, both with respect to appropriate B & Bs now in
operation, for 111-3rd Street, and all future B & B renewals/transfers, I
will drop my public hearing request.
The alternative is as follows:
1) I will follow-through on my hearing request. And I will not be the only
one present. This is an issue that raises the hackles of many residents
of this neighborhood and others where B & Bs are located.
2) I will file a Writ of Mandamus in the Jackson County Courts, requesting that
the City be compelled to enforce its- own regulations, and pointing out
that not to do so is a violation of public trust and the understanding we
had on this matter.
Neither of these actions will bring positive publicity to a city administration,
a Department, and a Planning Commission that already has serious public
confidence difficulties.
I also suggest that Mr. Knox's "fix" - which is that the ordinance will be
repealed (1) is an unwise course.
I look forward to hearing from you. .
Aincely,LANG
CC: Brian Ahlmquist, City Administrator
Paul Nolte, City Attorney
Mayor Catherine Golden
Ms. Rosemary Silva
Attachment: Copy of Ordinance 2613 re: B & Bs
+.+ -
vf
`= SITE REVIEW
d
18.72.050" Criteria for Approval: The following criteria shall be used to approve or
deny a site la -
A. All applicable City ordinances have been met and will be met by the
proposed :development.
B. All requirements of the Site Review Chapter have been met.
The she design complies with the guidelines adopted by the City Council
for implementation of this Chapter.
D That adequate capacity of City facilities for.water, sewer, paved access
to and through the development, electricity, urban storm drainage, and
adequate transportation can and will be provided to, and through the
subject property: (Ord. 2655, 1991)
Y •;. .'. _
. 'G C Y ft' S• w�'.:R"GbrrrY "Y Imo.. %.Y ut�+ _�+.,E�_ _"! v...r a-.._ ..l' ibJ
,•i��' k\ , ' " ; ! fir
} _ I
j�T 4
i
f£
T .. ; %^'• . .,. .e:- :_ . ', -. ,ice
TRAVELLER'S ACCOMMODATIONS
Traveller's Accommodations are subject to a Type I Conditional Use Permit in the
R-2 and R-3 zones. (Ordinance 2613, 2/20/91
Travelers accommodations, provided that the facility be subject to an
annual Type I review for at least the first three (3) years, after which
time the Planning Commission may approve, under a type-ffl. procedure,
4--[ a permanent permit for the facility. Travelers accommodations shall
also be subject to the following:
1. That all residences used for travelers accommodation be business-
owner occupied. The business-owner shall be required to reside
on the property occupied by the accommodation, and occupancy
shall be determined as the travellers accommodation location
being the primary residence of the owner during operation of the
accommodation. "Business-owner" shall be defined as a person
or persons who own the property and accommodation outright; or
who have entered into a lease agreement with the property
owner(s) allowing for the operation of the accommodation. Such
lease agreement to specifically state that the property owner is
not involved in the day to day operation or financial management
of the accommodation, and that the business-owner is wholly
responsible for all operations associated with the accommodation,
and has actual ownership of the business.
2. That each accommodation unit shall have 1 off-street parking
space, and the owners shall have 2 parking spaces. All spaces
shall be in conformance with the requirements of the Off-Street
Parking section of this Title.
3. That only one ground or wall sign, constructed of a non-plastic
material, non-interior illuminated of 6 sq. ft. maximum size be
allowed. Any exterior illumination of signage shall be installed
such that it does not directly illuminate any residential structures
adjacent or nearby the traveller's accommodation in violation of
18.72.110.
4. That the number of accommodation units allowed shall be
determined by the following criteria:
a. That the total number of units, including the owner's unit,
shall be determined by dividing the total square footage of
the lot by 1800 sq. ft. Contiguous lots under the same
ownership may be combined to increase lot area and.the
number of units, but not.in excess of the maximum
established by this ordinance. The maximum number of
accommodation units shall not exceed 9 per approved
travellers accommodation with primary lot frontage on
arterial streets. The maximum number of units shall be 7 per
approved travellers accommodation with primary lot frontage
on designated collector streets; or for traveller's
accommodations not having primary frontage on an arterial
and within 200 feet of an arterial. Street designations shall
be as determined by the Ashland Comprehensive Plan.
Distances shall be measured via public street or alley access
to the site from the collector or arterial.
b. Excluding the business-owner's unit and the area of the
structure it will occupy, there must be at least 400 sq. ft. of
gross interior floor space remaining per unit.
5. That the primary residence on the site be at.least 20 years old.
The primary residence may be altered and adapted for traveller's
accommodation use, including expansion of floor area. Additional
structures may be allowed to accommodate additional units, but
must be in conformance with all setbacks and lot coverages of the
underlying zone.
6. - Transfer of business-ownership of a travellers accommodation
shall be subject to all requirements of this section, and subject to
Conditional Use Permit approval and conformance with the criteria
of this section. All traveller's accommodations receiving their
initial approvals prior to the effective date of this ordinance shall
be considered as approved, conforming uses, with all previous
approvals, conditions and requirements remaining in effect upon
change of business-ownership. Any further modifications beyond
the existing approvals shall be in conformance with all
requirements of this section.
7. An annual inspection by the Jackson County Health Department
shall be required for all travellers accommodations regardless of
the number of guest rooms. Proof of such inspections shall be
provided by the owners to the City on an annual basis.
8. That the property on which the travellers accommodation is
operated is located within 200 feet of a collector or arterial street
as designated in the City's Comprehensive Plan. Distances shall
be measured via public street or alley access to the site from the
collector or arterial. (Ord. 2613 S1, 1991)
RUTH M. MILLER = _ PHILIP C. LANG. LCSk
rt 1
`` try �. TT•- �v•"
City of Ashland
Planning Exhibit 758 b Street • Ashland. Oregon 97520
E111sly 0-Z-1 - Res. 541 482-8659
pA# —00 Office 541 482-5387
DATE I
July 8, 1997
To: Ashland Planning Commission
Re. : Planning Action 97-046
The request for hearing comes;.about because the application at hand raises
yet again issues of public policy and questions about their enforcement
in the form of ordinances presumably enacted to protect the larger public
interest.
The following attached materials are incorporated by reference.
Ashland Daily Tidings Article of 1/14/91
Ashland Daily Tidings Article of 1/16/91
Letter of John McLaughlin - 6/6/97
Traveller's:: Accomodations (Ordinance 2613, adopted 2/20/91)
Letter of Philip C. Lang to John McLoucjhlin, - 6/6/97
Site Review -(city.-of.AAshland)'.-
My letter of June 6th provides background information on how this matter
came up. oMr 'McLaughlin's lengthy letter of June 6th, in response, details
what may be called the "official history" on this issue. It is defective
in two ways: (1) it does not contravene any of the points and concerns in
my letter, and, (2) it is historically incorrect, as shown in the attached
articles from the Tidings.
There was extensive citizen concern over the proliferation of traveller's
accomodations, particularly in historic/residential neighborhoods. What
these concerns.would be should be obvious to everyone: noise, trash, traffic,
in brief, disturbance of the tranquility and residential nature of the neighborhoods
In this instance, the response of "the powers that be" followed a pattern
applied elsewhere. A Citizens Planning Advisory Committee was formed to come
up with recommendations. It did so. These did not please the interests who
are also viewed as the constituency to be served by the planning apparatus.
Therefore, its recommendations were disregarded and discarded by the
Planning Director. The department shifted ground stating that really
representative input would be better served by a public hearing. Such hearings
have the virtue that everyone talks, and no one follows up - or is compelled
to follow up to incorporate any of the public's ideas into the ordinance that
is produced.
Planning proposed, and the City adopted Ordinance #2613 on 2/20/91, which,
jalthough it..did not deal with citizen concerns expressed through the
Advisory Committee, calmed the public by offering what it considered adequate
protection.
Planning Commission, re. : Action 97-046 - 7/8/97 - p. 2
The preceding is;.the actual history, documented by the Tidings articles.
The citizens, thus calmed, let the matter drop, assuming that the ordinance,
such as it was, would provide some answers::to their concerns.
Six and one-half years later we come to find out that in fact the ordinance
was never enforced. When I expressed no small displeasure with this outcome,
which lends itself quite easily to being seen as "shining on the public",
the Planning Department came up with its next "solution": not to enforce
the ordinance, but simply to abolish it - which is on tonight's Commission
agenda.
The next development is easy to foresee, since it parallels similar ones
on other planning issues. More traveller's accomodations, implicitly
accepted by our economic and power elites as unquestionably "good" - more
business, more tourists, more restaurant and tourist money, etc. etc.)
will soon be on the way. What seems to some as an adequate number of
�
such accomodations - and to some of us a superfluity will become only
a fraction of what can "really" be accomodated. Perhaps the citizens affected
will once again be troubled and complain. This time, however, the ground
will be cut out from undee them by the recitation of 'official history"
of the sort contained in Mr. MaLau#Uin's letter, namely: that citizens
concern.-:had been attended to, that an ordinance for their protection had
been passed, that after 611 years of perfect compliance and no complaints
and problems, it was clear that the neighborhood's fears were unfounded,
and that indeed an expanded number of such €acilities oodId easily
be accomodated. No one will bother to mention the inconvenient fact that
the ordinance was never enforced, so that no one ever knew whether any
controls were necessary.
On the technical side, we are faced with an Orwellian situation in which it
is logically..and legally impossible to approve this application.
The-_Site Review criteria state: (18.72.050) : "A. All applicable City ordinancgsi..�. .
have been met and will be met by the proposed development."
Since the Planning Department admits that it has never enforced the ordinance,
and has no intention of doing so, there is no way of knowing whether "applicable
City ordinances have been...and will be met."
The:,governing ordinance 02613) states that "Traveller's Acoomodations are
subject to a Type 1 review for at least the first three (3) years. ...
"Traveller's accommodations shall also be subject to the following.. .."(Underlining ad
"Shall" means, in legalese "must" - in other words, a.use permit is conditioned
on a required meeting of the ordinance for at least the first three years, e
verified by annual inspections. But no inspections have been performed;
none are contemplated. The conditions for licensure have not been verifiably
met, therefore, the facility cannot be licensed.
The Planning Department responded to expressed citizen need by enacting an
ordinance. The City took upon itself the duty to protect its citizens by
dealing with its concerns through a formal approval process requiring regular
inspections as provided by ordinance. These have not been conducted in the
Planning Commission, re. : Action 97-046 - p. 3
past, nor are contemplated in the future. Section 6. of the Traveller's
Accommodation Ordinance states: "Transfer of business ownership of a
traveller's accomodation shall be subject to all requirements of this
section, and subject to Conditional Use Permit approltal and conformance
with the criteria of this section." (underlining added) .
Absenting enforcement, there is no verification that ordinance requirements
have been met in the past or currently. Therefore, no license can be issued
at this time.
Si c ely,
attachments as referenced in letter.
r u %./ Ff'l. %%d U m ! 7 a L G .. Q .5 V 1 �. q ' , ■
s
C x 0 C -
L p g u-].
O: T7 U7 + L aJ q L
GLy
4
sC 3 J L tl
J C L ❑C i OGy C C •1
7 r E
r cc
yE� � 3 � u > E x
�G. i • CC Ug,H �J CVLy •` •� A A/
S k.. to !V7 T7q � E ` O :.. Y � � L � ` O A• ,�V 1�
y Z
L C.7 v a u i, ^ W n` rr O
cc
qJ w
r4ny aC � � • ci � • 77
(.'
CQ tam VJ e u Y y J J Y � ti yL
Pi
Ino 1A W) !� -1; 21 :atzl�!) . . fa
L
'^ vy� Z • 4
3
� � ;..
C$�
CU C Er
LU
� o u . � ei Lu 3y = 04"
V E : _q <F 'aril _ • E �
K101a10 J\UC 1,:w{:, J I",,.u, 1:..,.......r, .• ..
Ric .' u las slop. se"c
sullant from \ dforc alsotcufIcd al.unst the proving ecoxc development.
,ommis ocrs ap- ordinance.
Uu, a. stn
3lrahl said he would develop the fees using
;wining that clears 'it only affects the nc\%canter. 11 the new
r\)clapers tees that corner da;o't cone hecausc of these fees.you an average from the, last five years on how'
c opment. don't need to do the dcvcfol'tolcot," Saxlcrhurg much n ail the county to develop roads.
warkx dirccnx, said. "If I were a joscph 1,c ('aunty resident, I In other hwanesa, Dan Marshall, the fire
-,I system develttp- %%ouid welcome this bccausc utcirltpersl \%111 chief of jackson County Fire District 5,said the
,n the county and to there instead of here.' district would w'llhdraw a request for annexa-
'lcenients with the 11111 1falls. eaecuuve \'ncc pfc•Snf<•nt of the tlon of an areas on file OIll Slskiyou Hi sway
.0`ic throughout the Chanitwr of Medfor-(Wackso+n ('tom}'. sand the , with of Ashland. County Admimstraux Burke
1 rclum to carllmtS-
.I rctfic prupascd Ictcslnhw f n`ortnhentcdconcept
Ihel fees cwtuldhdcter a petiitiion calling forfan eleefi n (n the issue:
Jcvclhut is Marshall said the district docS not want 111
``lublic hearing
,a\ for all election.
.n actclpling system liul CammtSSUntcr Sur Kuplll,ts said a slut I
! h.tmper cicmomic of \ttdtnomah County showed Thal urnaall ' The cununlSSUnlen also approved signing
SpSfcm development rhaiges tit lacl I„slc•rcd and sending a letter to the U.S. Army Corps of
t.a1ld Hartvut thte, hadtio\nlic J \\illili�hthc11on1 item said 011. \In1h11c Creekelkun full-livolFalternati fin of the EIA
d
City agrees to new B & B rules
a g •
(.. 11v Monica Alleven //��/ Ions llavt• hccn .Ia11rd tit .,air nril;hlxah,wwl's.
.1r old Of The Tldlnfli , hangi of thin In.1h111n .utd lrsulunh tit .t i tnuncr
, lalllcd aun,,phcIc. he ..u,l
1 (reek Pic- Ashland City Council agreed unanlnu,cisly \1cL;niphln1 ,•11,1 .1.111 uu., to„aoldet the Impacts
q�llc he Tlxxtay night to amendments to Ashland'\ land use of nolsc. 11.1111, .and olhcl 1.1, wls III Ic\w\.mll lave n"
ordinance regarding hed and brcakfaSIN application tit multi fuinll\ .tic.,.
of it the ordinance regulating bed and hn•JAla.ts. of Count 11111.111 ttoh Willlilwp, \\ho \\.1, a Incoltwr of
. k!,o:Tt, traveler's acecmlmtwfations, was amended tt make 11 Ihr P1,uunrlp 1 i•nunn.loll Iw tore r+1nn1I'. the council.
it'rick k c:wierf ixstaf ftoexplainarxI forappltcanlsu, address igiccd Ih.11 , ,al,r11I. Ilw,In nrI{�hh,+rh,als could he
e during the condntonal use lx•rm ,n11111.1n, i \\as a )'ow,d planner john \tcl.aughlln told (tic cuuncll. tole , ,,1111.1„II11,,, hr ..11,1 I lit- , oun,
11 \,ac,110 d11cc t .t.111
:.,1\ of :uncndnunts apply It struclures m R-.' .and R-1 ioncs h, droll :In tidlnance \vidt (hc nuwhlii atltns.
titl,. Jun Sens, prre\ldent of the Ashlan,I LIwiging AS hl other husiness. the council Voted tt approve a
: niI aw luntm and (mncr of the Fox liollw hed and hrcak Ilarl,ml;space variance and conditional use Permit fill
l+ur. last. said the induatry supported the pn+lwoscd amend :I Inc-t cdrowxn iuucnlre at 117 i S1sAtyuu Blvd. The
I 11 ti,+1 lmcnlc 1 tic ItOu sin pipit t Ibjccl It rr{;UI:I1 it Mitt ;Ipp,11.11115 \N crc I)a\'Id alld ( :trill\'tl SI1JW-
Iw 111, supported :ulcthint; Ili:u would❑take 1110 Industry tie[ Sortie \York already had I+een completed'al the site
I•f� ter. he s:ltd I+iltte the Applicants Appealed n, the staff and Plan-
`;11,,n Most co1,fl1c1s with earlier \OSttns of the nutf; Contnussltn. Ilic contnussltn. after two tie
!• Ihr I+rofx,sed anicndntcnls Involved 1101%idual hed and %o cs,had agreed to recommend dcolal of the request
I+rcaklasts. he said "\\'hatevcr dlSatncnlcnls thric for a parking varlancc.
•,�I1,f s \\cic tit the prlgwscol ordinance Itioc rcall\ been \cr\' I'11c cl1II1C11 also accepted a recommendation from
I }I I„1, minor." tic ..std Stall and the 1'lann1119 Colmlllssulil tw,th the historic Ctnlnussull and building depart-
rr', ..inl ,tit tit lhclruav.toct(oc till \c11h :1r1ntpr twill Ise. ntcnt that J firedanlagcd house a1 1hh H St. tx•
.n'Ii stn hr salt dcnudishcd.
nlc•nd,c-r of (tit. ('Miens Plamm1l: Postponed w'as [tic second reading of nn ordinance
: font .\Jvt.oty Conunrllce. \aIll the conunrticc voled In to prohibit the sale of cleaning agents that contain
ill hr ,uunu,uslN d,n•ron11nencf that Ihr pnllx,.a•d anlm;ulcr phosphorous. An allurncy rcprcxnong the Saap and
idh ,unendmcnt. Ix• sent hack to stall tot lumber revic\\. detergent In asked the council ul Ixlsgxnx the
:1111'' I lac ctnunnnee \\.I.ctnccrord 111.11 the uulu.nv 11:1. tcadlnF 111,111 further information could Ix• submitted.
:I A111 Lto\\n u, etle\ I the II\.tbllnp tl :\shLuut'. nrlf;hlw,t Willicn utlonmallon nlae N. subnurted before the
ho,.l,. .110 Ihal \h„uld lie addic•ssc,l In anY nv\\ oI council holds anolhel madnll: ai n\ second uu•cnul; tit
0111.01k C. he .,std I, ., m.Il\ Ire\rllrr s a„ol1,n10,1A \1:Ir11
I f,llon
Calendar
Government .\:�,.+;>11� \�\,m.m l:rnln. 11\tl (Irfil \, -\, -INS Ashland Ht Jn, h
fl :\,I: 1,J \: I., l Jt\. •IXS IA. ,e ]74 1. rl
SL\, I: Sir , I'I"11 .nn La
Ill m
111\11'{11. 1.11 .\ 11 . -IN: :.IhI Sul v1„n, ul (hJdh.�a Sr\u.,l :\,
, Irnl\
IJIr'I i,11, 1JIf1,1 (llv (',wrtx d, .nIX; ,I 1:
I
ll ' l (lland,cra III I„v I,r1, - Aduh l'11111r<n 1,1 M1<n.ul < hurh. 'IX? N(,X
MAt'll
S.I_ I■ICrl1. Ak olwh,% 'J1111 •,Ihfl dy,lun,11ullJl Other
S<r\',i< 1)1%111it Ch \1'\,.
In,:ti I1.., �.f +.r. • , n, F... u1n< it\,nn, \\ �... , .�r.l S.,l,\.,:� Ie uA.,.n`I
1'0NI(711 1 ._
RUTH M. MILLER - PHILIP C. LANG. i,csw
r{r ,
d
City of Ashlan
planning Exhiblit 756 B Street • Ashland. Oregon 97520
Res. 541 482-8659
PA# 5T Office 541 482-5587 .
July 8, 1997
To: Ashland Planning Commission
Re. : Proposed revocation of Ordinance #2613, asopted 2/20/91 regarding
Traveller's Accommodations
I am submitting my letter of this date, written on an appeal of a proposed
transfer of a B. & B. license. All the arguments presented there are
relevant to this matter.
I wish to add the following:
Clearly the response to a complaint that an ordinance to protect the
larger constituency wad^oMforced is not to commence enforcing the
ordinance, but to repeal it!
Lacking enforcement of the ordinance, there is no way to know whether it
was/isrreQessaxy or not. Had the Planning Department enforced the ordinance,
and been bkbughb . forward data and experience showing that it was
not necessary, its move to revoke the ordinance would have some
credibility. As it is, absenting such enforcement, it is exposed as
the callous and cynical frustration of a perceived public need that it is.
The application of such "principles" of government to other areas of
governmental responsibility would be both tragic and comical: eliminate
health inspections of such establishments. Anyone who gets food poisoning
can file a complaint ("citizen enforcement") , and perhaps it will be
investigated. Actually, the idea is not far fetched at .all. The Jackson
County Health Dept. informs me that a dozen years or so ago, Ashland's
legislators changed the law, exempting B & Bs with two or fewer rooms
and/or 6 or fewer guests, from such inspections. The passage of ordinancd
#2613 reinstated the health inspection requirement, but since it has never
been enforced, the public is not protected from unsanitary/unsafe food
practices Either. The Health Dept. informs me that even though the
facilities are smaller, and so the the extent of any problem would be less,
the likelihood of such a problem is greater, because of the informal,
residential nature of such facilities.
PHILIP C. LANG
TRAVELERS Fregonese went over the memo and explained staff' s fears.
ACCOMMODATIONS Staff felt that future applicants
POLICY needed some kind of direction.
Hansen stated she had heard from the motel industry that they were
in dire straits at present. She was wondering if bed and breakfasts
were encroaching upon their business and if it would ever get to the
point where the number of bed and breakfasts would have to be limited.
Greene wanted to know whether we required the applicants to address
public need during a Conditional Use. Wanderscheid stated no, that
State statutes and case laws determined that it was not a legal
requirement for a Conditional Use Permit.
APC, 11/12/81, Page 15
Jim Beaver, owner of Chanticleer Bed & Breakfast, 120 Gresham St. ,
stated he would be in favor of the proposed policy, however, he
believed that a performance standards approach with respect to lot
size, house size, etc. would be better than picking an arbitrary
number like 4. He stated it takes a great deal of management to
run one of these operations. He did not feel they were in competition
with motels, because they were offering a different type of service.
He definitely supported that they be owner-occupied. He invited the
Planning Commission to their open house on Friday, November 20, 1981 ,
before they made any decisions on this policy.
Gloria Thorpe, owner of the Ashland Motel, Siskiyou Blvd. , stated
that she did not see that bed and breakfasts were causing problems
with motels because they served a different category. All motels
had it bad this time of year. She was concerned about the total
number of them, however.
Fregonese stated he was concerned that perhaps there ought to be
something in the policy that would require travelers accommodations
to be located on collectors or arterials. In answer to this, Reid
stated she did not agree, because if someone wanted to rent one or
two rooms out of a neighborhood that was low impact, that requiring
all of them to be on collectors or arterials did not seem wise to her.
Beaver stated that the current legislation had exempted one and two
room bed and breakfasts from health codes, and they will never be
inspected by the State in the future.
Jack Evans, 70 Coolidge, owner of the Coach House, stated he was
considering adding 3 more rooms because of the precedent of two other
bed and breakfasts. He believed that each application should be
judged on its own merits and not by some arbitrary number, such as 4.
Elliott Reinert, Chamber of Commerce, stated he believed the per-
formance standards approach was a good way. He did not agree with
Thorpe that the total number should be limited, but rather the economy
and demand ought to govern that. He believed there was enough busi-
ness here and more bed and breakfasts and motels were only keeping
people in Ashland instead of forcing them to go to Medford and spend
their money there.
Hansen wondered if Reinert would recommend that they have standards
for one and two room bed and breakfasts also. Reinert stated yes.
Beaver stated he would hope that either the City or an organization
could be self-policing. He believed that a bad experience at a bed
and breakfast in Ashland would reflect on all of them.
Reinert wanted to reiterate that he felt owner-occupation of the units
was very necessary and it ought to be part of the travelers accommo-
dations policy.
APC, 11/12/81, Page 16
Barnes stated he was also concerned about this and how to assess
how many units could be put on a site. He was concerned that the
second lives of these uses would be as college rooming houses,
boarding houses, fraternity houses, and they ought to
be concerned about that.
Reid wanted to know if .one was sold, could it be rented out. Greene
stated he saw no way to stop it and it could definitely be a problem
regarding enforcement.
Fregonese stated boarding houses were a conditional use, but, due to
some recent experiences, it would be very difficult to enforce, in
his opinion, someone wishing to rent out rooms as a boarding house.
Wanderscheid stated that if the Planning Commission agreed upon
Sections 1, 3 and 4 of the policy, staff could come up with some
performance standards and resubmit the policy for the next meeting.
This was agreeable to the Planning Commission and they directed staff
to do so.
TRAVELERS' ACCOMMODATIONS POLICY
1) That all residences proposed for travelers' accommodations be owner—occupied.
2) That each rental unit have one off—street parking space, and the owner' s
unit have two parking spaces.
3) That only one non—illuminated wood sign of 6 sq. ft. maximum size be allowed.
4) That the number of rental units allowed would be determined by the following
criteria:
a) The total number of units allowed, including the manager' s unit, is
determined by dividing the total square footage of the lot by 259U sq. ft.
i
b) Excluding the manager' s apartment, there must be at least 400 sq. ft.
of interior space per rental unit.
This policy would only apply to travelers ' accommodations which are proposed
in residential zones.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE REPEALING THE SUNSET CLAUSE FOR THE
CHRONIC NUISANCE (PARTY HOUSE) ORDINANCE
THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Section 9.18.090 of the Ashland Municipal Code is repealed.
The foregoing ordinance was first READ on the day of
1997, and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of 1997.
Barbara Christensen, City Recorder
SIGNED and APPROVED this day of 1997.
Catherine M. Golden, Mayor
Approved as to form:
Paul Nolte, City Attorney
PAGE 1-ORDINANCE (P:ordlnuis.e,a)
r
Executive Recruitment Services
CITY ADMINISTRATOR
CITY OF ASHLAND
f
I
f
C
e i
C� 630 David M ..d.S &Associates,Ltd.
670 M. riff$uka 200 atw. rmk IIWOb 60061 (647)564-9270.W(847)S64-9136
v.
DAVID M.GRIFFITH 8 ASSOCIATES,LTD.
Professional Services for the Public Sector
630 Dundee Road,Suite 200
Northbrook Illinois 60062
DMG 047.5649270 1ax:847.5649136
August 13,1997
Mayor Catherine Golden and Council Members
City of Ashland
City Hall
20 East Main Street
Ashland,OR 97520
Dear Mayor Golden and Council Members:
Thank you for inviting David M. Griffith& Associates, Ltd. (DMG) to submit a proposal
to conduct the recruitment for your new City Administrator. The enclosed proposal
contains information about the search process, the project budget, and the qualifications
of the firm and our executive recruitment staff. Also enclosed is a listing of past
recruitment clients and a sample recruitment brochure.
DMG,established in 1976,with offices in 35 cities across the country,is uniquely qualified
to assist you on this assignment Our recruiters are the recognized leaders in the field of
executive search. Specializing in local government recruitment, we bring the experience
gained from handling hundreds of searches on behalf of cities, counties, and special
districts.With respect to this important assignment you should know:
➢ DMG has extensive experience in recruiting City Administrators and other key pro-
fessionals for cities,counties and special districts throughout the nation. In fact, dur-
ing the past two years, we have helped recruit Administrators/Managers in more
than 50 communities,including Eugene and Tualatin,Oregon;Kirkland,Washington;
Atherton and Sunnyvale, California; The Woodlands and West University Place,
Texas;Aurora,Colorado;and Jackson and Laramie,Wyoming.
➢ With clients throughout the state, who have used the broad range of consulting serv-
ices we provide,including the City of Ashland, DMG brings a good understanding of
the region and its people. This will be particularly helpful as we make the contacts
necessary to generate candidates who will work best in the Oregon environment.
I
DMG
Mayor Golden and Council Members
City of Ashland, OR
Page 2
➢ Mike Casey, Regional Director for Executive Recruitment Services, will take personal
responsibility for this assignment. Mr. Casey brings more than 25 years of experience
in local government management, consulting, and executive recruitment to your as-
signment. In addition, he is quite familiar with Ashland and Southern Oregon, hav-
ing lived and worked in the region for more than ten years prior to 1990.
Many search firms will suggest that they are the leader in the field. At DMG,we believe
the proof is our record of success with past clients. Over fifty percent of the search work
completed by our staff is repeat business. Past clients tell our story best. We have
included names and phone numbers of individuals who can verify the quality of our
work.
Again, thank you for inviting us to submit a proposal to assist in the recruitment of the
City Administrator. Should you have any questions or require additional information,
please feel free to call me.
Sinccer�ely,
ey y
' e Cas
Regional Director
Executive Recruitment Services
MC/nh
is
3.
R E R U I
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Approach and Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Approach to the Recruitment
Objectives
The Recruitment Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Key Steps
Optional Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Assessment Centers
Psychological Assessment
Salary Surveys and job Classification
Spousal Placement
Professional Fees, Expenses, and liming . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Summary and Guarantee
Executive Recruitment Staff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Client References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
David M. Griffith &Associates, Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
David M.Griffith&Associam.Ltd.
T
,
APPROACH AND OBJECTIVES -
■ Approach to the DcMtment
DMG recognizes that each of our clients is unique. We understand that the
mission, culture, and values of each organization we serve are different. As a
result, each recruitment we undertake is designed to identify the specific
expectations you have regarding the background and experience of the ideal
candidate..
The selection of a new City Administrator will have a long-term impact on the
City of Ashland. Our goal is to ensure that the recruitment respects the
distinctive character of your organization and the community it serves. To that -
end, we have established specific objectives for the recruitment process and have
refined an approach to executive search that has proven effective for hundreds of
clients.
■ Objectives
In order to ensure that the recruitment serves the needs of the City of Ashland, _
we have designed a recruitment process specifically tailored to meet your needs;
which encompasses the following broad objectives:
➢ Identify the critical personal and professional attributes you seek in the new
City Administrator
➢ Recruit individuals who meet or exceed the qualifications that have been es-
tablished for the position
➢ Conduct reference checks to verify the professional qualifications and back-
ground of each of the recommended finalists
➢ Assess the strengths and weaknesses of the top candidates, through personal
interviews and other screening techniques to ensure that the individuals who
best meet your needs are recommended as finalists
CChWd M.GfNrrth&Auociacc,Ltd.
City of Ashland,OR —7
THE RECRUITMENT PROCESS -
■ Key Steps
The recruitment process outlined below has been designed to recruit the most
qualified candidates for consideration for appointment as the City's new City
Administrator.
Step 1 — Develop Candidate Profile
In order to develop the profile of the ideal candidate for City Administrator, we
will meet with the Mayor and Council, and others as appropriate, to develop
information regarding specific issues and opportunities facing the City of
Ashland. The desired education, experience, and background of the sought-
after candidate will be determined. We will also work with you to identify the
management skills and style that are appropriate for the new City
Administrator. These discussions will result in a consensus-driven profile of
the ideal candidate. This profile will guide all subsequent recruitment efforts.
Step 2 — Develop Advertising Campaign
Based on the above discussions, an advertising campaign will be developed.
Emphasis will be placed on reaching the target market and controlling costs.
Professional publications,journals,and other sources will be used.
Step 3 — Candidate Recruiting
One of the most critical steps in any recruitment is the effort expended to identify
and recruit outstanding candidates. The focus of Mr.Casey's efforts will be on:
J ➢ Developing a list of outstanding potential candidates through our network
developed over several years
➢ Use of our knowledge of quality candidates from past recruitments
➢ Effective marketing of the position and the community to ensure quality can-
didates are attracted to the position r
r
In addition, a recruitment brochure will be developed on behalf of the City. The
brochure will discuss the recruitment process, the requirements of the position,
C� D"W M.GPorrth&Associates.Ltd.
City of Ashland,OR —2
Y
..fnr
the organization, and the community. The brochure will serve as the primary
marketing tool in the recruitment.
i
Step 4 — Screen Resumes
Resumes received on your behalf will be promptly acknowledged. Once the
closing date for the recruitment has passed, resumes will be screened against the
criteria identified by the Mayor and Council in our initial meetings. Candidates
whose qualifications most closely match or exceed those identified in the
recruitment profile will be invited to personal interviews.
Step 5 — Personal Interviews
Mr.Casey will personally interview the top 10-15 candidates. The interviews will
focus on an assessment of the candidate's skills,background,and experience. An
assessment of the candidate's strengths and weaknesses will be made. In
addition,candidates will be questioned regarding their motivation in seeking the
position and their level of interest in relocating to the area.
Step 6 — Conduct Detailed Reference Checks
Following interviews,reference checks will be conducted. Each candidate will be
subject to detailed professional reference checks. Not only will references
provided by the candidate be contacted, but others in a position to know about
the candidate will be sought out. These checks will be conducted in the strictest
of confidence to ensure the honesty of comments received. The objective
evaluation of candidates'professional qualifications will be emphasized.
Step 7 — Recruitment Report
Based upon the results of the preceding steps, a detailed recruitment report will
be prepared. The report will contain information about each of the recommended
finalists including:
• Current responsibilities
• Community characteristics
• Notable achievements
• Management style L
• Interest in the Position
r
➢ Reference comments
C� David M.Grdrah&Anodams,Lm.
City of Ashland,OR —3
ii
em
4
The resumes of the top candidates and alternates will be presented. In addition, F
the names and positions of all candidates will be included for your review. A
comprehensive briefing on the candidates will be provided to the Mayor and
Council on delivery of the report. Mr. Casey will recommend a specific group of
candidates for final consideration. The Mayor and Council will select finalists.
Lei
Step 8 — Finalist Interviews L
Once the Mayor and Council have selected finalists, we will work with you to
develop a selection process that will ensure the fairness of the recruitment. Mr.
Casey will notify finalists of their selection and work with your staff to arrange 1
and schedule the final selection process. Interview materials will be prepared for
your use including suggested questions and rating forms. Detailed information
on each candidate will also be provided. In addition, Mr.Casey will be present to
facilitate the process.
i
Step 9 — Negotiation Assistance
One of the most critical steps in the recruitment and selection of the next City
Administrator is negotiating compensation. Mr. Casey will be available to assist
the City of.Ashland and act as its representative. Successful negotiations will
ensure that the relationship starts on a positive note.
Step 10 — Complete Administrative Assistance
Throughout the recruitment,Mr. Casey will provide the Mayor and Council with
regular written status reports. In addition,we will keep candidates advised of the
status of the recruitment. Resumes will be acknowledged,and candidates will be
notified of their selection as finalists. Attention to keeping everyone informed of
the progress of the recruitment will do much to ensure its success.
r
r.
C
I-
I(_
t
L
i-
rr
i
I.
David M.GrNfrth&Associate,Ltd.
City of Ashland,OR —4
OPTIONAL SERVICES
F
L
Depending on the needs of the City, DMG can provide a number of optional
recruitment services in addition to those outlined above. Those services include:
➢ Goal Setting
➢ Assessment Centers
➢ Psychological Assessment r
E-
➢ Salary Surveys and Job Classification Analysis
I
➢ Spousal Placement j
r
■ Coal Setting
r
Conducted by our staff and lasting one-half to one day, these sessions are an
excellent method for communicating the employer's performance expectations for r
a specific period of time. They are most effective when conducted following the
recruitment with the successful candidate in attendance. L
■ Assessment Centers
Assessment centers are a process employing group exercises designed to identify
those individuals who possess leadership qualities, management skills, and
specific technical abilities. They are an excellent tool in determining the
communication and listening skills of individuals. Exercises are designed to
simulate actual situations found on the job.
■ Psychological Assessment
The psychological evaluation of the top candidate (contingent upon the offer of
employment) can be arranged. The evaluation is conducted in confidence.
Detailed information about personality, management style, and behavior under
stress is conveyed in a detailed written report.
i
i
E
r
CDavid M.Griffith&Assoclaar.Lad.
� ::ri
_ City of Ashland,OR —5
i
■ Salary Surveys and Job Classification
Salary surveys and job classification analysis are often prerequisites to a
l
successful recruitment. DMG's Archer System is a fully automated job II
classification and compensation system. The most advanced system of its type,
the Archer System can be used to support decisions in advance of undertaking a [
recruitment
C
■ Spousal Placement
This service recognizes that candidates today are often the partners of working
spouses. The difficulty of relocating is often exacerbated by the need of the
spouse to find new employment. DMG's placement assistance includes
introductions,advice,counseling,resume preparation,and networking.
David M.Griffith&Assxiam,Ltd.
City of Ashland, OR —6
1
?v
r
PROFESSIONAL FEES,
EXPENSES, AND TIMING
k
■ Professional Fees & Expenses
The project costs for professional services will be $14,000, plus reimbursement of
law actual out-of-pocket expenses for items such as placement of advertisements,
printing, postage, clerical services, long distance telephone charges, and travel.
For this recruitment we will cap expenses at $3,500. DMG is sensitive to the
pressures faced by local governments to contain costs. As such, we will work
with you to ensure that the recruitment is conducted in a cost effective manner.
i
■ Timing
Mr.Casey is prepared to proceed on this search immediately and can be available i
to meet with you within one week of our selection to conduct the search. We
anticipate that we can confirm finalists within 60 to 90 days of our initial
meetings. The schedule on the following page graphically displays the tasks and
their anticipated durations and the milestone dates for the search.
i
1
1
3
C� David M.GrM6&Assoclatm,Ltd.
City of Ashland,OR —7
■ Anticipated Recruitment Schedule
a
10 Task Ram W1 W2 3 W4 6 Wfi W9 1 W71 1 13 W1a
1 Kickoff Meeting
3 Draft Brochure '
3 Place Advertisements e
4 Review and Print Brochure
s Candidate Identification
6 Closing Date
F 12T Screen Resumes '
a Interview Candidates
6 Reference Checks
10 Presentation of Candidates
11 Finalists Interviews ,
Negotiate Employment Agreement - -
13 Announce New Incumbent
■ Summary and Guarantee
DMG is proud of the track record of success achieved by our recruitment staff.
The comprehensive recruitment process outlined within this proposal will result
in the selection of the best possible candidate for the position of City
Administrator.
In the unlikely event that none of the finalist candidates are chosen, we will
continue the search on your behalf at no added cost beyond direct expenses. In
s addition,if within the first year of employment the City Administrator resigns or
is dismissed for cause, we will conduct another search for direct expense only.
There will be no charge for professional services.
C� David M.Griffith&Acsodates.Ltd.
City of Ashland,OR —8
rF.
EXECUTIVE RECRUITMENT STAFF
■ Robert W. Murray —Vice President
Mr. Murray manages DMG's executive search practice. Since joining DMG in
1992 he and his staff have created the nations largest, most successful public
sector search practice. Mr. Murray has more than 24 years of experience in local
government, management consulting, and executive search. As the firm's senior
recruiter, Mr. Murray personally conducts the most complex search assignments
and is the firm's leading specialist in the recruitment of public executives.
Mr. Murray is experienced in conducting recruitments for large and small public
agencies throughout the United States. He has personally conducted over 200
searches. He has full responsibility for the success of each search.
In addition to his experience as an executive recruiter, Mr. Murray has also
designed and administered assessment centers for both general management and
public safety positions. He has also been a featured speaker and panelist at
numerous professional conferences,conventions,and seminars.
Mr. Murray previously served as the City Manager of the City of Olympia,
Washington. He has also served as an Assistant City Manager and has held
various positions in law enforcement.
Mr. Murray is a graduate of the University of California at Berkeley with
graduate studies in Public Administration at California State University at
Hayward.
■ Mike Casey-Regional Director
Mr. Casey has more than 25 years of experience in local government !
management, consulting and executive search. He has served six communities
in five states in key management positions, three of the as the city or county
manager. During that period, he served as an officer at the state level and as
member of the executive Board of the International City/County Management
Association.
David M.G;ifihh 6 Awoda[a.Ltd.
City of Ashland, OR —9
a-
As a consultant for another firm with a national practice, Mr. Casey provided
management advise to corporations in the private sector and to a broad range
of cities and counties including Boston, New Orleans, Las Vegas;and San Diego
and Fresno County on matters of critical importance to their operations,
including executive search.
Mr. Casey is a graduate of Coe College and holds a master's degree in Public
Administration from Pennsylvania State University,where he was the recipient
of the Cappazola Fellowship. He is also a graduate of Harvard University's
Executive Program for Senior State and Local Government Officials. F
F
■ Chuck Neumayer—Senior Manager F
Mr. Neumayer has more than 25 years of professional experience, fifteen with
state and local government agencies as a transportation and municipal engineer,
division manager,and as a director of public works. For the past ten years,he has
been a managing principal and regional vice president of private sector
consulting engineering services in offices in California, Arizona, Nevada, and
Washington. His consulting experience has been in providing professional
services primarily to state departments of transportation and local government
public works agencies. He is thoroughly familiar with the institutional
requirements of public sector agencies from direct experience as a department
head,working with boards and councils,as well as from having had the exposure
of working with these agencies in a customer/client relationship.
He has a bachelor of science degree in Civil Engineering from Iowa State
University and holds professional memberships in the American Public Works
Association, Institute of Transportation Engineers, Society of American Military
Engineers, Project Management Institute, and past memberships with the
Association of County Engineers in Washington and California, the California
Association of Self Help Counties, and conference participation with the League I
of Cities in Washington and California.
F
Mr. Neumayer has hired numerous staff at both technical and management
positions and has been actively involved with staff development programs
including the recent establishment and implementation of a Total Quality
Management(TQM) program.
i
i
C� David M.Gdflhh&Ass Iates.Ltd.
City of Ashland, OR —10
c
iS''
t
r
r
�t
■ Bobbi C. Peckham—Manager
Ms. Peckham has over fourteen years of public and private sector human
resources, and staff development experience. Ms. Peckham is responsible for
recruitments in a variety of fields. Her areas of experience and expertise include
the design and implementation of targeted recruitment advertising campaigns,
customized candidate sourcing and recruiting, interviews, and reference
inquiries. Over the past several years, she has conducted a number of searches
for City Managers, Association executives, finance, personnel, and utility
professionals.
Prior to joining DMG, Ms. Peckham was a member of the Executive Recruitment
practice at Ralph Andersen & Associates for over five years. She also provided
administrative support to the City Manager of Naperville, Illinois, as well as
serving in the City-owned electrical utility. Ms. Peckham received her bachelor's
degree in Organizational Behavior from the University of San Francisco.
■ Matt O'Beirne-Associate
Mr. O'Beirne brings over six years of public and private sector experience to
each engagement, including service as an Assistant Village Manager of a
community in Illinois. Mr. OBBeime is a graduate of Illinois State University
and holds a master's degree in Public Administration (MPA) from Northern
Illinois University, where he received the MPA programs Distinguished
Manuscript Award.
■ Nicole Koehler-Analyst
Ms. Koehler has nine years of experience in the public sector. During the
course of her career,she has worked in the Governor's office,senatorial offices,
and the California State Agency of Business, Transportation and Housing.
Most recently, Ms. Koehler worked for the Western Policy Center coordinating
fund-raisers and special events for political candidates, foreign dignitaries, and
government officials. At DMG, Ms. Koehler is responsible for conducting
detailed reference inquiries; identifying and recruiting candidate; and l
developing and maintaining an extensive candidate database.
Ms. Koehler is a graduate of the University of California, Davis with a bachelor
of arts degree in political science and organizational studies.
David M.GrN(M&Auoda[es,ltd.
City of Ashland, OR —]7
CLIENT REFERENCES
The following past clients can provide information pertaining to recent search
assignments conducted by DMG executive recruiters.
k
t'
Client: City of Eugene,Oregon
Position: City Manager
Contact. Warren Wong,Administrative Services Director
(541)687-5046
Client: City of Tualatin,Oregon
Position: City Manager
Contact. Mayor Lou Ogden
(503)692-2000
Client: Town of Atherton,California
Position: City Manager
Contact. Mayor Dianne Fisher
(415)688 6504
Client: City of Sunnyvale,California
Position: City Manager
Contact: David Nieto,Director of Human Resources
(408)730-7495
Client: The Woodlands,Texas
Position: Vice President&General Manager
Contact- Peggy Hausman,President
The Woodlands Community Services Corporation 4
1
Client. City of Laramie,Wyoming
Position: City Manager
Contact: Mayor Trudy McCraken,(307)745-7331 or
Kelly Arnold,City Manager,(307) 721-5228
Client: City of Kirkland Oregon
Position: City Manager
Contact Ann Pflug,Interim City Manager, (206)828-1100
i
x
F
David M.Griffith&AssocWta,ltd.
City of Ashland,OR —12
3 :}
Y
DAVID M. GRIFFITH
& ASSOCIATES, LTD.
DMG,founded in 1976,is recognized as the leading firm providing a broad range
of management,financial,operational,and human resource consulting services to
local and state governments throughout the country. Our clients include over
2,000 governments, universities, and other public sector and not-for-profit
organizations.
DMG provides services to clients throughout the United States from the firm's
central office in Chicago and regional offices located in Sacramento, California;
Columbus, Ohio; Raleigh, North Carolina; and Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. In
aaddition,the firm has local offices in 28 other cities and in Puerto Rico.
gOur staff of over 250 experienced consulting professionals, many of whom have
prior government experience, is uniquely qualified to understand and serve -
government officials and managers.
i
Consultants of DMG have been called upon to examine virtually every facet of
local government operations. Major public sector services offered by DMG
include:
➢ Executive recruitment
➢ Revenue enhancement(cost allocation,fee determination,impact fee analysis)
➢ Operations improvement
➢ Disaster grants management
➢ Human resources and personnel management
3
DMG's commitment to its clients is to provide the best services available and
nothing less. The quality of our services is evidenced by the fact that 70% of our
business is from repeat clients.
IL
CDavid M.GMrrch&Assodatc,Ltd. `
City of Ashland, OR —13
x oxmox •p,x
CITY OF ASHLAND °F �tia
Administration
Office of the City Administrator '�.°REGO .'
y O
MEMORANDUM
DATE: August 29, 1997
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Brian L. Almquist, City Administrator
RE: Monthly Report - August 1997
The following is a report of my principal activities for the past month and a status report on
the various City projects, and Council goals and notes to staff for 1996-97 and 1997-98.
I. PRINCIPAL ACTIVITIES:
1. Had breakfast with SOU President Steve Reno to discuss issues of mutual concern.
2. Met with Ron Hayhurst of Oregon Teleco to discuss services they have available to
facilitate telecommunications delivery.
3. Met with employees of the Police Department to announce the selection of a new Chief
of Police, and to review his qualifications.
4. Had lunch with the supervisors of the Public Works Department and new Director Paula
Brown to discuss status of projects and future of the department.
5. Met with Councilors DeBoer, Hagen and Hauck to discuss various city issues.
6. Met with staff to discuss alternate financing options for Central Ashland Bikeway.
7. Met with city department heads and supervisors to announce my retirement plans.
8. Held a press conference at RVTD with all local media to announce my retirement
effective November 1, 1997.
9. Chaired monthly meeting of the Oregon Utility Resource Coordinating Association in
Eugene.
10. Met with our BPA account representative John Lebens to review the customer
satisfaction survey and to discuss upcoming power sales contract negotiations.
11. Was interviewed by a police officer from Monterey, CA regarding the success of our
Retired Senior Volunteer Program.
12. Met with Paul Westerman and others from the Schofield/Sheridan LID area regarding
alternatives to full improvements.
13. Attended Police Sgt. Craig Hooper's retirement party.
14. Met with Councilors Wheeldon, Reid and Hauck regarding various city issues.
15. Attended a meeting at Ashland Hills Inn with ODOT, Senator Hannon, Rep. Uherbelau
and others to discuss status and funding issues for 1-5 Visitors Center/Rest Area.
16. Had breakfast with former Medford Manager Anderson.
17. Met with Realtor Donna Andrews and Paul Nolte regarding proposed lease of
property from Union Pacific Railroad.
18. Was interviewed by Steven Boyd of the Lithiagraph.
19. Attended City Employee Picnic at Lily Glen campground near Howard Prairie
Lake.
20. Met with Councilors Reid DeBoer and Laws regarding various city issues.
21. Attended monthly meeting of the Ashland Coalition at SOU.
22. Had lunch with Councilor Laws to discuss various city issues.
23. Met with Architect Gary Afseth to discuss upcoming Council study session on city hall
space needs.
24. Participated in City Council study session on city space needs.
25. Chaired meeting in Portland with attorneys for the Oregon Utility Resource
Coordination Association regarding a joint power contract proposal to BPA.
26. Met with Wes Vail regarding his proposal to display historic railroad cars in Ashland.
27. Attended Southern Oregon City Managers meeting in Medford.
28. Had breakfast with Mike Casey of David M. Griffith & Associates regarding
development of the profile for the City Administrator recruitment.
29. Met with airport FBO Bob Skinner and other staff to discuss renewal of lease.
30. Had coffee with Councilors Wheeldon, Hagen and Reid to discuss various city
2
issues.
31. Attended monthly Local Public Safety Coordinating Council meeting at the Talent
Work Release Center.
32. Participated in special council study session on issues relative to the transition to a
new administrator.
33. Attended meeting of OMEU/OMECA in Portland.
34. Participated in conference call with ODOT and other interested parties on the
status of the 1-5 Visitor Center/Rest Area.
11. STATUS OF VARIOUS CITY PROJECTS:
1. Indiana/Siskiyou Realignment. Construction began last week and is expected to be
completed in about 60 days.
2. Central Ashland Bikeway Project. In spite of a bid which exceeded estimates by over
$350,000, staff was able to receive Council approval to proceed with the bid award through
borrowing against future gas tax revenues and deferral of several less important projects.
Construction should begin in the next 45 days and take about 6 months to complete.
3. Mountain/E. Main Signalization. Work on the concrete portion of the project is about.
75% complete. Work on the signal installation will begin in the next few weeks, with most of the
work being performed by the Electric Dept. and Street Division crews.
111. STATUS OF UNCOMPLETED 1995-96 COUNCIL GOALS:
1. Resolve office building/space needs issue. Council decided at its August Study Session
to proceed with a scaled down building for Public Works, Computer Services and Fire
Administration at the East Main site. It was also decided to dedicate future resources to the City
Hall upgrade/third story addition and to modify the CIP accordingly.
IV. STATUS OF UNCOMPLETED 1996-97 COUNCIL GOALS:
1. Encourage alternative transportation modes through such means as completing
negotiations for bicycle access from Jackson Road to Crowson Road along the railroad tracks.
(A representative of Railtex will be in Ashland with the next few weeks. I plan on reviewing this
possibility with him at that time)
2. Reexamine growth management policies as they affect density,transportation,and city
services. (This will be part of the Comprehensive Plan periodic review process)
3
V. 1997-98 COUNCIL GOALS:
1. Continue to communicate the importance and practice of the "Valdez Principles" in all
aspects of City operations, especially related to flood restoration and control projects. Ensure
that the City supports the activities of the Watershed Partnership and City Forest Commission.
(Dick Wanderscheid presented the first annual report of progress at the July 1 Council meeting.
Framed copies of the Valdez Principles have been posted in all city departments. We will began
incorporating presentations at monthly safety meetings in each department)
2. Ensure that emergency water requirements are adequately addressed through the
examination of an intertie with Talent, Phoenix and the Medford Water Commission, additional
water from TID, or other sources. (Both these studies are in progress)
3. Re-examine flood plain and hillside areas in light of the recent flood event and modify
maps and ordinances appropriately. (In progress)
4. Review Fire Department space needs and acquire appropriate land as opportunities
arise. (Noted)
5. Position the Electric Utility to remain competitive in the coming deregulated electric utility
environment. (The 96/97 Budget includes funds for a cost-of-service study which will include a
look at "unbundling" of our rates. We also have an appropriation to install a dark fiber ring for a
SCATA load management computer program. This fiber ring will give us the capacity to provide
such services as CAN, Internet and many other consumer products)
VI. NOTES TO STAFF FROM 1996-97:
1. Administration will continue to explore purchase of land for a Transportation Center that
ensures the option for a future rail link. (I spoke with Oak Street Tank owner Gene Morris who
has an interest in moving his business, but who has also been unable to find suitable land in
town)
2. City Administrator to recontact Vogels about viability of purchase. (Ken Mickelsen and I
have met several times with the Vogels, the most recent of which was this week. We are
preparing a written offer and financing plan, but we are still substantially apart on the appraised
value and their asking price)
Brian L. Almquist
City Administrator
4
PISCO ERGO SUM
James F. Moore Jr.
1217 Park St.
Rshland, OR 97520 -
Phone (541)-482 8151
Ashland City Council September 1 , 1997
City Hall
Ashland OR, 97520
Re: City Administrator Recruitment
The methodology and standards for the selection of a new City Administrator has been a topic of
much discussion; both within the City government and amongst the various concerned citizen groups.
As a member of the citizenry of Ashland I offer my observations for choosing a new City Administrator.
In reviewing the goals of the Council for 1997 one is struck by the diversity of goals and the fact that
environmental concerns, especially those related to the "Valdez Principles" and January flood events,
suggest administrative skills not normally incorporated in the title of City Administrator.
In addition the City of Ashland has a budget far in excess of what would be expected of a city with a
population of less than 20,000 people. The fact that much of it's revenue is derived from other than
property taxes and it's dependence on utility-related revenues make it an unusual entity. It is also a city
that can be proud of it's citizen involvement. The recently adopted Citizens' Communication Committee
Recommendations are an indication of the level of participation. I would urge that the executive search
firm have a strong understanding of these specific characteristics which are not analogous to every city.
In addition I would hope that we recognize the need for an individual with a strong commitment to
fiscal responsibility and a past track record that incorporates a participative management style.
Finally, in thinking about what Ashland is, and what it can be, I came across the attached article in
the May/June 1997 Sierra Club magazine, Sierra. If you use it as a scorecard of what a city should be I
think you'll be presently surprised by how Ashland meets the "Twelve Gates".
Lastly, I hope you'll continue to involve the citizens in your selection process.
Good Luck
JIM
cc: Mayor Golden
twe ve ,
T.
,S}
to eo
cit
A dozen ways to build strong, livable,
and sustainable urban areas.
he gently rolling hills of Bedford,New York,only an hour from
midtown Manhattan,seemed an unlikely site for a talk on urban-
: l ism, looking more like a pastoral scene out of Currier and Ives
painting. But here in a church meeting-room next to the post .
office and firehouse, Bedford's citizens were rallying to save their
sl beloved town from encroaching urban ills like strip malls and .
parking lots. For advice they turned to architect and planner An-
dres Duany,one of the leaders of the"new urbanism"movement.New ur-
banism,it turns out,is very similar to old urbanism: it seeks to revive the
traditional city planning of an era when cities were designed around human
beings instead of automobiles.
In his frequent lectures, Duany blasts "planned unit development"—the
standard suburban subdivision with its worm-shaped cul-de-sacs,sidewalks
that no one ever walks on,and bottleneck-creating collector roads that feed
into already congested highway strips. He then shows slides of the old-fash-
ioned Main Street from Disney World;there are no cars in sight,just visi-
tors strolling. "People pay dearly for[his, Ay across the country and stay in
expensive hotels just to soak up this urban atmosphere,"he says. "But this
is all fake. Imagine how they would love it if these streets and houses were
real." Duany goes on to talk about some of America's favorite real places,
delightful walking towns like Narragansett, Rhode Island,and Annapolis,
t Maryland. Because today's building and zoning codes are woefully fixated
on traffic How,he points out,"such places would be illegal to build."
The fate of America's cities over the pas[50 years has been one of gradual
abandonment.What may be the biggest mass migration in the nation's his-
tory—the move to the suburbs—was set in motion by a series of federal and
state policies at the end of World War II,including GI-Bill subsidies to sub-
urban home-buyers and massive road-building projects,and furthered by
BY FRANCESCA LYMAN
SIERRA • 29
12 gates.
regional malls,industrial parks,trailer parks,and
mass-produced single-family homes that are opmcnt—i
mi[h archii
i' now so familiar."Dumb design"is what Van der Michael
Ryn calls these standardized solutions mindless designed a
mindless-
ly replicated everywhere,because they require section of C y extravagant energy use, auto dependence, and appron o of(
w
total disregard for the particulars of place. a consinue
�� : " I✓# Our cities and suburbs are so locked into
a series of
x u dumb design that it is hard to imagine a way out. into teams,
Government policies are riddled with subsidies door space
for cars (at the expense of transit and regional architects t
c _ planning) and suburban development. At the about every
T� t same time,those seeking to build in urban areas crime to sc
4 ) a3 o @en face higher costs for construction,energy, they chose
water,and waste disposal.Thousands of old in- wood,to c<
dustrial sites contaminated by [heir past use,
into a place
the so-called brownfields, linger on the urban Ohlone res
landscape for decades because it is easier—and way to the,
cheaper—for businesses and industry to relocate pened in a
to "greenfields," the open, often agricultural velopers has
Hismen Hin-Nu, an innovative and affordable housing complex in Oakland, spaces in suburbs and countryside.
California, was designed according to the desires of the residents. How can we undo what 50 years of urban D.
planning"progress"has done to our farmland,
speculative real estate development and savings-and-loan communities,and culture?The good news is that the work
chicanery.That wave continues to sweep over us with the has already started. Pick almost any city in America today,
building of thousands of suburban and regional shopping and chances are that people are working together to reclaim Individual 1
malls and industrial parks,all of which continue to pull in- it—through community gardens,recycling,habitat restora- surroundin:
vestments and consumer dollars away from cities,while de- tion,greenways,rezoning,and many other projects. No one Wright's crt
stroying farmland and wildlife habitat. city has done it all',but Chattanooga, Seattle,Jacksonville,
The motor for this migration was the postwar devotion to and a few others have undertaken comprehensive plans to-
the internal combustion engine,which led to the now ubi- dramatically reduce energy and resource use and increase ac-
quitous suburban miasma of malls,drive-in franchises,and cess to open space.Architects and city planners are beginning
subdivisions with prominent driveways to garages almost as to shape these visions of sustainability,and,perhaps more
large as the houses themselves.Residential areas are far dis- importantly,beginning to change the rules of urban design.
[ant from commercial buildings, making them almost im- In the old gospel song, there were 12 gates to the
possible to reach without an automobile. The iconic all- heavenly city. Here are 12 ideas that are gateways to a new
American Main Street, with its public space of shops and city.Walk through one or more,and help build a vibrant, "
markets and offices, is fractured in favor of monolithic dis- human community where you would want to live and
count houses in yesterday's pastures and woodlots. bring up your children.
Older, pre-automobile cities were inherently far more
ecological, in more ways than are obvious. Compact and Think in terms
dense,they allowed for greater efficiency,better use of space,
and more diverse housing types and income levels.And be- of Whole Systems
cause most major American cities were sited in fertile agri-
cultural areas,[here was—and often still is—great potential The modernist school of planners (who got us where we
for feeding them locally. (See"Food for Thought,"page 19.) are today) saw homes as"machines for living in"and de-
Cities are not necessarily bad for nature—unless they're sign in terms of function: architects creating facades,engi-
designed to ignore nature. "In many ways the environmen- neers creating electrical and plumbing systems, landscap-
tal crisis is a design crisis,"writes Sim Van der Ryn in Eco- ers doing the greenery, and traffic engineers dictating the
logical Design (Island Press, 1995),"a consequence of how connections between buildings and the rest of the urban
things are made,buildings are constructed,and landscapes environment. Thinking instead about whole systems en-
are used."Design decisions have become so severed from courages planners to include the landscape (or cityscape)
their ecological consequences,he says,that during the past and its inhabitants in their approach. It promotes the idea
50 years"we have reduced a complex and diverse landscape that many design solutions can spring from a given prob-
into an asphalt network stitched together from coast to coast lem. Rather than depending on specialists, the commu-
out ofa dozen or so crude design`templates'"—the strip malls, nity—which,after all,will have to live with any new devel-
30 • MAY/JUNE 1997
s,and opment—is involved as much as possible in the planning, dignified as a tree in the •.
it are with architects making its ideas and desires concrete. midst of nature." Green
to der Michael Pyatok is an architect of affordable housing who homes are rooted in the
dless- designed a unique,mixed-use building complex in a rundown natural and cultural charac �'- ;0
:quire section of Oakland,California,practicing this whole-systems teristics of their regions ;..
.. ?
and approach. He doesn't take all the credit,however. "We bull[ and are designed to save en-
a constituency from a community of coauthors,"he says. In ergy, water, and materials. _
I into a series of workshops, the prospective tenants divided up Instead of using wood clear
ty out. into teams,building models and shaping the indoor and out- cut from national forests
asidies door space to their liking. "They talked about the things they are constructed from
}
gional architects talk about,"Pyatok says,"and educated themselves recycled, reclaimed,or lo-
At the about everything from how to build community and prevent tally produced substitutes.
n areas crime to sustainable construction materials." For example, (See"Shopper, Spare That "
_nergy, they chose to use stucco and cement-based siding rather than Tree!" July/August 1996.)
old in- wood, to consume fewer trees.A central courtyard evolved One model is the Sustain-
st use; into a place for hanging out,available only to residents.The able Housing Demonstra- Green houses can also be archi-
urban Ohlone residents named the place Hismen Hin-Nu,"Door- tion Project in Cambridge, tecturally appealing.This Buck
�r—and way to the Sun."The development never would have hap- Massachusetts. It began Island, North Carolina, home
eloeate pened in a conventional situation,says Pyatok,because"de- as a drafty, poorly insulat- (above and lower left)was built
ultural velopers have preconceived notions aboutwhat people want." ed three-story woodframe to fit into the landscape and
urban with hazardous lead paint. use as many low-toxic, energy-
inland Design and build The architects preserved saving features as possible.
the foundation, sidewalls,
rework green ernes floors, roof. and shingles, finding that many 1920s-era
a today, materials contained fewer harmful substances than their
reclaim Individual houses,too,are being built in harmony with the modern counterparts.They retrofitted the rest with sustain-
restora- surrounding environment in accordance with Frank Lloyd ably produced woods and nontoxic wood alternatives.Com-
No one Wright's credo that a house should grow into the light"as posting toilets and a wastewater recycling system that feeds
;onville, indoor plants dramatically conserve water.
plans to An excess of water was the problem in the small
tease ac- =e town of Pattonsburg, Missouri. In 1993,ravaged by
,u 1;
_ginning one of the worst Hoods this century, the entire[own
Ps more was relocated with the help of federal disaster aid.En-
design. ¢ vironmental architect Bob Berkebile designed the
s to the + new homes m be within easy walking distance of each
to a new other,with carefully placed trees to cool them in the
Vibrant, ! lj summer and shelter them from winter winds.After a
live and series of community meetings, Pattonsburg adopted
a set of codes that includes energy efficiency require-
ments for all new buildings and passive solar orienta-
tion.for new homes.
ns Bring back industry
where we =
" and de- Industry was a big reason for the growth of cities,but
des,engi- when people started to abandon them after World War
landscap- II, industry soon fled as well,and cities have suffered
taring the ever since. Many are now trying to redevelop aban-
the urban doned industrial sites,or brownfrelds,and other areas
stems en- by bringing back industry in the form of"eco-indus-
cityscape) trial parks."In such complexes,based on ideas devel-
-s the idea = oped in Denmark, one facility's waste becomes
ven prob- another's feedstock. In its simplest form, this means
eommu- locating businesses so as to efficiently share resources,
lew devel- reusing.raw materials as much as possible and mini-
SIERRA - 31
12 gates
to native trees and plants.At Village Homes,in
Davis, California,planners Michael and Judy
Corbett grouped dwellings around an inter-
locking series of existing orchards, winding
bike paths, and narrow, pedestrian-friendly
streets. It helped that Davis is already devoted
Al..= to the bicycle; the city famously has more
h wheels than legs.
;l -
'''� IIII Encourage people
to walk
Pedestrians"create the place and the time for
casual encounters and the practical integration
of diverse places and people," says architect
Peter Calthorpe. "Without the pedestrian, a
community's common ground—its parks,side-
Annapolis, Maryland, is a famous walking town largely because its construe- walks,squares,and plazas—become useless ob-
tion luckily predated today's autocentric building codes. structions to the car."
Calthorpe is trying to popularize"pedestrian
mizing waste. Burlington,Vermont,is experimenting with pockets,"areas of high-density development built within a
recycling hospital-waste as compost,and in the Bronx,new quarter-mile of public transit.To this end,he has designed
furniture is being made out of discarded wooden pallets. regional plans for cities such.as Portland and San Diego
Chattanooga has replaced its diesel buses with what is now that direct new housing and jobs into mixed-use,transit-
the biggest fleet of electric buses in the country,manufac- oriented neighborhoods and downtowns.
tured at a plant within the city and contributing 35jobs and (While the new urbanist designers are making high-
substantial tax revenues to the community,while simulta- density,mixed-use,close-knit neighborhoods marketable as
neously reducing air pollution. high-end housing,they have come under fire for failing to
practice their urbanism in the heart of the city.Most of their
Res 'eet the law developments are new towns,"gentrified from scratch,"as
P ,.. Newsweek described them. Some new urbanist develop-
of the land ments like Calthorpe's Laguna West outside Sacramento, Port
v zra) „ • California,are served by bus routes but otherwise ended up walk
In 1890,in one of the first suburban developments,William as fairly conventional suburbs.)
Duzer Lawrence staked out sites for his houses in
Bronxyille,NewYork,paying less attention to lot
size or shape than to access to sunlight and rela-
tion to the woodland setting. Originally an artists' ` y
In ac
colony,what is now the Lawrence Park Historic X - ar
€u
District was designed before the invention of the we'a
bulldozer(thus sparing boulders and rocky crags, dens
as well as old trees) and before the advent of city its;; pactr
planning,with its fierce observance of uniform _ work
setbacks and other boundaries that pay little re- ' ters.
a
sped to natural formations. Houses here are built., many
on a steep and rocky terrain,almost sitting on top whol
of each other.Given the district's attractions,how- hood•
ever, no one seems to care. _ ing"c
Lawrence Park is connected by railroad to New City',
York City. Its narrow streets were intended for sittinz
horse and carriage rather than cars. To this day, Ste
one of its charms is that you don't need a car to - °' comp,
live there,and can walk to markets and shops. Above: Pedestrians bewarel Like many main drags, San Pablo Avenue is mo'
Today,architects and designers are returning to in El Cerrito, California, is built for cars. Below: an artist's vision of how aced
this model,using design motifs that pay homage light rail, landscaping, and trees might humanize the same scene. Mural
32 • MAY/JUNE 1997
es,in Set limits to
Judy
inter- i urban growth
tdng g ; TOMMY
endly LUKE Postwar zoning and planning codes—not to mention the
voted `
rI ' availability of cheap land—encouraged cities to spill out into
more A the surrounding countryside.One way to limit sprawl is to
€ create regional plans that channel building and development
g' back to the city or close to suburban transit stations. In Part-
le land, 1000 Friends of Oregon supported a study of alterna-
tive land use and transit options to counter a proposed$300-
1. million beltway around the west side of the city in 1992.The
plan,which architect Peter Calthorpe helped create,redi-
me for t - ,.� rects a projected population growth of 160,000 away from
gration ° standard sprawl and into high-density housing with com-
chitec[ "-" 1 mercial buildings and shops, within walking distance of
;rian, a ` planned light-rail and bus connections. "Portland is always
s,side-
cited for its wonderful, walkable downtown," says Keith
less ob- Bartholomew of 1000 Friends. "We're trying to build more
of this,places where people can get a quart of milk without
iestrian 1 using a quart of gas."
vithin a "' Another way to control sprawl is to permanently preserve
esigned r open space at the edge of the metropolitan region—the
t Diego \ greenbelt" approach. Portland also used this.strategy.
transit- Thanks again to 1000 Friends,Oregon has state-legislated
boundaries preventing urban and suburban development in
tg high- 2 rural and agricultural areas around its cities.With Portland's
etable as V, T - - -_ population projected to boom during the next 50 years,plan-
t;
wiling to yj(,-_ ners have been working to set aside 6,000 acres of new open
t of their "� s space and to guide growth within city limits.A few other
arch,"as �i states, including Florida, Georgia, Vermont, Maine, and
develop- Washington, have begun growth-management plans like
-amento, Portland's downtown has preserved a human scale that makes those Oregon and Hawaii undertook in the 1970s.
ended up walking—and shopping—a pleasure instead of a chore. In the past,environmentalists often supported lower-den-
sity development in the belief that it was"greener"and more
Humanize cities natural than city living. Fortunately,a growing number are
_ discovering the benefits of urbanism.The more energy you
a put into creating compact cities,argues Chris Beck of the
In addition to insisting on the need for open space and trees, Trust for Public Land's Oregon field office, the more open
argues Fred Kent,director of the Project for Public Spaces, space you save.
we also need to consider the ecologically sound aspects of In Sonoma County, California, four municipalities re-
- density and street life. Many cities are learning that com- cently voted by substantial margins to establish urban-
pactness promotes efficiency,creativity,and walking,and are growth boundaries,protecting the open space between the
working to revive old main streets and neighborhood cen- cities from leapfrog development."Part of the charm of these
ters. Urban planners,who in the past focused primarily on cities lies in the rural landscapes that surround them."says
managing traffic, are now beginning to look more at the Tim Frank, chair of the Sierra Club's Sprawl Campaign.
whole complex of functions of city streets and neighbor- "When you give people a chance to conserve that for their
hoods. Kent's own firm spends much of its time"humaniz- children,and pay lower taxes to boot—that's very popular."
ing"chrome-and-glass facades on city streets like New York 4a_
City's Sixth Avenue by adding shops, benches, landscaped Establish
sitting areas,and the like.
Steve Price,who redesigns streets and buildings on his greenmarkets
computer,argues that the minimalist modernist view of"less
venue I is more" is destructive. "More is more," he says. "People As more cities build mixed-use communities rather than
n of how ;uecd interesting things to look at in cities—flowerpots, subdivisions fed by highway strips, there is a chance to re-
murals,window displays." vive trot just pedestrian scale but local commerce. Farmers'
SIERRA • 33
12 gates1
f complex called Diggstown,which was transformed through
the addition of humanizing,historic touches like porches,
!� walkways,and lampposts. "It's really very exciting to see,"
a says Ray Gindroz,the project's principal architect."There's
a sense of self-esteem and community that wasn't there
- I before."Police report that drug use and the crime rate have
declined;in stark contrast to the desolate landscape of many
public housing projects,Gindroz reports that in Diggstown
` you see family reunions being held."
t �
Bring back
public space -�
Another casualty of modernist planning has been the tradi-
' r :5150`. I tional civic commons,which has been displaced by public -
/f space that is privatized in the extreme:the shopping mall,
, � I
u private club,and gated community.Many planners are now
r 7t0 trying to reintroduce truly public space, as in New York
Ib City's unique business/government Grand Central Part-
nership, which helped transform Bryant Park on 42nd =-
Street from a"needle park"into an oasis of green,a lunch Preserving if
and cultural mecca. Illinois, main
Fred Kent of the Project for Public Spaces cites a hugely
popular new neighborhood that has sprouted up around major areas
t. t New York City's Union Square as a result of the highly suc- high school
cessful farmers' market there. It's a symbiotic and organic tend views c
process,he says.The loft housing available in the neighbor- design of a I
hood was another catalyst,as was an important transit stop the city to it
Farmers'markets, like this one in San Francisco, can provide a and effective traffic engineering. Now there are a host of new front dt
sense of community as well as organic fruits and vegetables. renovations and new businesses. Urban planners need to
: .
build on the natural processes in communities,says Kent, p f
markets are booming across the country,their numbers in- rather than impose new projects on them. 1
creasing to 2,410,a 40 percent gain from 1994 to 1996.These One of the best examples of returning civic space to the
markets not only create a festive community atmosphere, public may be a plan for Portsmouth,Virginia, in which
but also give people access to fresh,often organic produce, Urban Design Associates of Pittsburgh redesigned several The harbors.
and even serve as tools for economic development.Oriented shaped partii
toward small entrepreneurs,these markets offerjob oppor- the commun;
tunities,and make shopping by bicycle or foot possible.The In Baltimore
main rule, according to Maureen Atkinson of the Urban r have become
Marketing Collaborative in Toronto: "Keep it funky. Don't ? .,-s , Jose and Aus
make it a mall." tive public am
r' vation have ai
Revive historic and signers,ecolo
the same time
local building styles Comb
Historic buildings have an undeniable appeal,partly because . <
they were often built to last, using materials and styles ap- co;
propriate to the regional climate.Coherent local building "
styles also serve to unite diverse people,says David Rice,ex- American citi.
ecutive director of the Norfolk Redevelopment and I Ious- it - criiment built
ing Authority. "in the best examples,"he says, "differences 'Iether. Postw.
among people—race,income,and social status—are less evi- .residential,cot
dent than the shared sense of community identity." New York City's Bryant Park, a former"needle park,"has been `ones linked b
Rice points to the redevelopment of a public housing reclaimed for a wide variety of public uses, Iais's to allow I
34 • MAY/JUNE 1997
through hood-serving commerce in residential
porches, q
r areas. In New York City, designers are
to see," "adaptively reusing"empty office building's
"There's as residential condos. Toronto recently
r !a, I
n't there " ra
f I
� commissioned a design firm to help it
rate have "reurbanize" itself, the new plan includes,
rx
Of many C - along with carefully orchestrated transit
gggstown and higher densities, a mix of residential
and commercial buildings.
'- '��' -/ - - _ •�. ONE CAN EASILY RESPOND to the challenge
of transforming today's cities like the
Maine farmer who was asked for directions
to Boston: "You can'[ et there from here."
thetradi- �° l7 { `�i� 'F But we don't reallyhae a choice,especially
by public with four out of five people in the United
ping mall, '7 b pr3r t=� J States now living in metro areas. The old
J
rs are now 1 �a� ph c, - dream of a suburban home on a.quarter
New York
pw acre is losing its luster, especially as the
ttral Part-
two-car garage isjoined by the two-hour
on 42nd [� 1. ;LeSy commute. It's time to replace that old vi-
-n,a lunch Preserving the best of the past, like these early-20th-century buildings in Galena, sion with a new sustainable one.
Illinois, maintains civic pride and increases a city's appeal. Building environmentally sustainable
s a hugely cities will be neither easy nor cheap. It will
up around major areas with public spaces linked to natural sites.A new require architects,planners,politicians,and ordinary citi-
highly suc- high school will include a green,open stretch that will ex- zens to shift their customary ways of thinking. But we won't
nd organic tend views of large city creek.A new ferry landing and re- be doing it alone.After all,building community means that
neighbor- design of park and portside tourist shops will reconnect you have lots of good company..
transit stop the city to its waterfront, and, say the architects, "create a
'e a host of new front door to the city." FRANCESCA LYMAN is teaching ecological urban design at the Coop-
ers need to er Union for dle Advancement of Science and Art in New York City.
says Kent, Restore the She is authorof The Greenhouse Trap(Beacon Press, 1990)and
is currently working on a children's book.
;pace to the �. local landscape
i, in which
;ned several The harbors,forests,valleys,and other natural settings that
The Sierra Club's "Sprawl Costs Us All" campaign is work-
shaped particular places and (formerly) imposed limits on ing to protect rural lands, promote efficient, compact, and
the community are now being rediscovered and highlighted. transit-oriented urban design, and redirect development
In Baltimore,Seattle,and San Francisco,old port facilities to inner cities. To get involved, contact Tim Frank at (818)
have become business and recreational hubs.while in San 799-6744 or tim.frank@sierraclub.org.
Jose and Austin, urban riverfronts have been made attrac- For further reading on livable cities,look for Cities in Our
tive public amenities.Creek restoration and wetlands preser- Future edited by Robert Geddes(Island Press, 1997);Home
r
vation have also become part of the repertoire of urban de- From Nowhere:Remaking Our Everyday World for the 21st
signers,ecologically important and aesthetically satisfying at Century by James H. Kunstler(Simon&Schuster, 1996);At
the same time. Road's End:Transportation and Land Use Choices for Com-
munities by Daniel Carlson et al.(Island Press, 1995);Eco-
City Dimensions Society, 1997)and Sustainable Cities:
Combine residential and
Concepts and Strategies for Eco-City Development edited
commercial buildings by Bob Walter,Lois Arkin,and Richard Crenshaw(Eco-Home
Media, 1992).A useful periodical for urban redesigners is
The Urban Ecologist, quarterly journal of Urban Ecology,
American cities once had shops, homes,apartments,gov- 405 14th St.,Suite 900,Oakland, CA 94612;(510)251-6330.
r. ernment buildings,and public squares all built closely to- For emphasis on environmental justice,see Race, Poverty,
gether. Postwar planning ended that tradition,separating and the Environment, a publication of Urban Habitat, Box
residential,commercial,and industrial areas into single-use 29908,Presidio Station,San Francisco,CA 94129-9908;(415)
k,"has been zones linked by highways.The solution is to amend zoning 561-3333;uhp @igeapc.org.
lass's to allow housing in commercial areas, and neighbor-
S I LIt It 35
u"oFae�yQ '
CITY OF ASHLAND
Administration = a
,0R EGO
�,.
MEMORANDUM
DATE: August 29, 1997
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Greg Scoles, Assistant City Administrator
RE: Status of Winburn Way Bridge Replaceme
The following is a brief summary of the current status of the Winburn Way Bridge
Replacement Project:
The project is on schedule and bid opening is targeted for Sept. 19,
1997, with substantial completion on Nov. 21, 1997.
Today, OTAK met with the City Staff and Parks Dept. Staff to discuss
project design issues and coordination efforts. There were a number of
issues discussed in these meetings including:
e
• EMg t_ S�checi . It appears that the project schedule
which has been discussed with the Council on previous
occasions (completion prior to Thanksgiving), can still be
met. In order to ensure a timely completion of the project,
incentives are being provided in the construction contract
which will reward, in a limited way, early completion.
• Proiect Desion. With a project of this type there are a
number of decisions which have to be made as to the
design of the structure. The final design of the project is a
refined version of the conceptual design which was
presented to the Council at the last meeting. The color
scheme (Ashland Buff) and concrete texture (both sand-
blast and brush finish) have been identified along with the„
type of ornamental railing system which will provide
protection along the bridge and the °training" walls. It
should be noted in the public meeting where the design
was reviewed, there was a comment about adding a
cantilevered design feature in the bridge railing. However,
the Project Engineers have indicated this feature would be
extremely difficult to design and build, due to the type of
construction proposed for this bridge. They also indicated
it would be cost prohibitive. In addition, based on public
comment and for sound engineering reasons the pavement
on the bridge will be designed to have an "arch-look" so
that it more resembles a bridge structure. For the most
part, the ideas expressed at the public meeting have been
incorporated into the project design.
• Uaht Poles and Luminaires. During the public review of the
bridge design the was considerable support for considering
a bridge lighting system which is similar the lights that are
located on the Atkinson Bridge (near the playground) or the
Perozzi Fountain. Since these type of fixtures would take
longer specify and would be difficult to bid on such a short
time frame, they have been eliminated from the bid
documents and will be negotiated with the successful
contractor at a later date.
• Environmental Issues. The project has a number of
elements which will help to enhance the environment in and
around the old culvert site. First the old 140' concrete
bottomed culvert will be replaced with a gravel bottomed
72' arched bridge system. This should help in fish passage
especially during low-flows. To be more fish-friendly the
design will include drop pools and other features in the
gravel bottom. In addition, the storm drain system is being
designed with a "stormceptor" which will allow for storm
run-off on Winburn way to go through a filtering manhole
prior to entering the creek. It will be designed so that
normal run-off will be fiftered of sift, sediments and hydro-
carbons. Furthermore, the Council's adopted Valdez
Principles will be incorporated into the construction
specifications for the project.
E..
Staff met with several of the plaza business owners in a separate meeting. Their
primary concern is that of parking. They proposed that the contractor be allowed to
park only on the Winburn Way side of the project. Other than the delivery and
placement of the ConSpan Bridge sections, that can be accommodated. Secondary
concerns with deliveries and trash pickups were also expressed, and should be able
to be worked ouL
The pace of this project is intense, and we are trying to ensure that it is accomplished
prior to next flood season. Should you have any questions regarding this project
please let me or Paula Brown know.
cc: Brian Almquist / Paula Brown
CITY OF ASHLAND {'o.1.0. �;
Office of the Mayor c;~ a
s
MEMORANDUM ".0 EGO , ''
DATE: August 28, 1997
TO: Alan DeBoer vI
FROM: Cathy Golden, Mayor (o`J
RE: HIRING OF CITY ADMINISTRATOR
Thank you for your input. I apologize if I might have seemed abrupt. My tone
reflected my frustrations at the moment.
While I am grateful for ideas from council regarding the hiring process of the City
Administrator this obligation falls under the duties of the Office of the Mayor. To
pretend that this is a group decision would be misleading. The mechanisms by which
the search occurs, for example nationwide versus in-house, is a decision which lies
with the Mayor's office. I agree with your premise of trying to provide advancement
opportunities for those within the city structure and in the past have promoted from
within. However, I felt I needed to be clear with you and the council that a position as
important as this must be put out for the best that the nation can offer. While we may
end up hiring from within our organization, to do so without first undertaking a
nationwide search would undermine the effectiveness of that individual.
Again, I apologize for being abrupt at the meeting but I didn't want to mislead the
council that this decision would come from that body.
As to the other two items in your discussion memo, those are appropriate to cover at
council level.
cc Council Members
Date: 28-Aug-97 09:53
From: AWDB @SMTP (Awdb) {Awdb @aol.com}
To: MAYOR
Subject: Last Meeting
Message-id: 884A0534015F3179
Re-sent-by: FRAN @fsl; on 28-Aug-97 09:53
I thought I would drop you a note of my reflections of our last two study
sessions. I was a little put off we you told me that we would be doing a
search, period. I thought the reason we have a study session is to discuss
issues. I am prepared to go with the majority, but it seemed more like an
order, not a discussion. Now that I have vented my frustrations, I feel
better.
Two other things neeed further discussion;
1) The decision to raise Greg to the base of the administrators pay is to
high. That base is 86,736, and is a significant jump from his present salary.
I would like to review the administrators minimum and maximum salary and in
the interim give Greg a token increase. I feel that our salary range is
adequate for an employee that has 27 years with the city, but not for a new
hire. I would like information from similar sized cities and cities with a
similar size budget.
2) We are making a huge mistake by not including the 2200 extra square feet
in the bid package for the new building. This should be done as an add
alternate and will give the council and citizens and clear picture of the
cost involved. It costs nothing extra to add in the bid. We talked at that
meeting about a trolley and your remark that the new council might have a
different opinion than the past. Since the remodel of the city hall isn't
scheduled for 5 years I suggest a new council might also have a different
opinion. We need to see the full cost options. I would also like to bring the
space needs committee back togther and share the costs and options with them
for a more current opinion. We also might encounter resistance at tacking on
a 3rd floor on the city hall. Keeping our options open is only prudent
management. Please distrubute this memo to the other councilors. Thankyou for
your time. . . .Alan DeBoer
0.
* =
CITY OF ASHLAND °' ""
o.y�pP
Department of Community Development Za
x
Planning Division
MEMORANDUM .°REGO 0 0,11
DATE: August 26, 1997
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: John McLaughlin, Director of Community Development
RE: Hillside Development Standards - First Reading
Attached is the Hillside Development Standards ordinance, reflecting the changes
requested by the Council at the recent public hearing. Minor grammatical and editing
changes were made throughout the document at the suggestion of the City Attorney.
Substantive changes include excepting the Historic District from complying with the
Building Design section of the standards (shaded text added - page 24), increasing
horizontal building planes from 35' to 36 (section d., page 25), defining "long pole"
supports on decks to "vertical supports in excess of 12 feet" (section f.,page 25), and
limiting the application of color restrictions to the construction of new dwelling units on
Hillside Lands.
The new wording on color selection requires that when an application for a Physical
Constraints Review Permit is made to construct a new dwelling on Hillside Land, the
color selected for the structure shall comply with the ordinance. A covenant is required
to be recorded on the property regarding color restrictions, ensuring future compliance.
Similarly, when new lots are created on Hillside Lands, either by subdivision or partition,
a covenant is required to be recorded on the property notifying the owners of the
ordinance requirements for color selection. Under the proposed wording, existing homes
are exempt from the requirement, even if they are substantially remodeled or square
footage is added requiring a development permit. From the discussion at the public
hearing, Staff believes that this best meets the concerns of the Council.
The City Attorney has also recommended changes in the language of the Penalties
section (page 30-31) to remain consistent with the Building Code and other ordinance
provisions.
Staff recommends approval of first reading of the ordinance.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 18.62 OF THE
ASHLAND MUNICIPAL CODE - LAND USE ORDINANCE,
ADOPTING NEW HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT
STANDARDS.
THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Chapter 18.62 of the Ashland Municipal Code - Land Use Ordinance is
replaced in it's entirety by Exhibit "A".
The foregoing ordinance was first read by title only in accordance with Article X,
Section 2(C) of the City Charter on the 2nd day of September, 1997,
and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this _ day of 19_.
Barbara Christensen, City Recorder
SIGNED and APPROVED this day of 1997.
Catherine M. Golden, Mayor
Appr ad as^^tollform:
Paul Nolte, City Attorney
Chapter 18.62
PHYSICAL & ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS
Sections:
16.62.010 Purpose and Intent.
18.62.020 Regulations.
18.62.030 Definitions.
16.62.040 Approval and Permit Required.
18.62.050 Land Classifications.
18.62.060 Official Maps.
18.62.070 Development Standards for Floodplain Corridor Lands.
18.62.075 Development Standards for Riparian Preserve Lands.
18.62.080 Development Standards for Hillside Lands.
18.62.090 Development Standards for Wildfire Lands.(Ord 2747, 1994)
16.62.100 Development Standards for Severe Constraint Lands.
18.62.010 Purpose and Intent. The purpose of this Chapter is to provide for safe, orderly and
beneficial development of districts characterized by diversity of physiographic conditions and
significant natural features; to limit alteration of topography and reduce encroachment upon,
or alteration of, any natural environment and; to provide for sensitive development in areas
that are constrained by various natural features. Physiographic conditions and significant
natural features can be considered to include, but are not limited to: slope of the land, natural
drainage ways, wetlands, soil characteristics, potential landslide areas, natural and wildlife
habitats,forested areas, significant trees, and significant natural vegetation.
18.62.020 Regulations. The type of regulation applicable to he land depends upon the
classification in which the land is placed, as provided in Section 18.62.050. If those
regulations conflict with other regulations of the City of Ashland's Municipal Code,the more
stringent of the two regulations shall govern.
18.62.030 Definitions. The following terms are hereby defined as they apply to this Chapter:
A. Architect - An architect licensed by the State of Oregon.
B. Average slope - average slope for a parcel of land or for an entire project,for
the purposes of determining the area to remain in a natural state shall be
calculated before grading using the following formula:
5 = .00229(I)(L)
A
Physical and Environmental Constraints Ordinance Revision
Hillside Standards
City Council Adopted Version - FIrst Reading (2.3) September 2, 1997
Page I
where "S" is the average percent of slope, ".00229" 15 the conversion factor for
Square feet; "I" is the contour interval in feet; "L" is the Summation of length of
the contour lines in scale feet; and "A" iS the area of the parcel or project in
acres.
B. Buildable area - That portion of an existing or proposed lot that iS free of
building restrictions. For the purpose of this ordinance, a buildable area cannot
contain any Setback areas, easements, and Similar building restrictions, and
cannot contain any land that is identified aS Floodplain Corridor Lands, or any
land that i5 greater than 35% Slope.
C. Cohesive Soils - Residual or transported Soils, usually originating from parent
rock which contains significant quantities of minerals which weather to clay.
Cohesive soils have a Plasticity Index of ten or more, based on laboratory
testing by AASHTO,or a site-specific Scientific analysis of a particular soil
material.
0. Development - Alteration of the land Surface by.
1. Earth-moving activities Such a5 grading, filling, Stripping,or cutting
involving more than 20 cubic yards on any lot, or earth-moving activity
disturbing a surface area greater than 1000 5q. ft. on any lot;
2. The removal of three or more living trees of over Six inches diameter at
breast height (d.b.h.), or the removal of five percent of the total number
of living (or dead trees) over six inches d.b.h., whichever is greater,on
any lot within five year period, or any form of commercial logging;
3. The removal of one or more living conifers greater than two feet d.b.h., or
living broadleaf trees greater than one foot d.b.h.;
4. Construction of a building, road, driveway, parking area, or other
Structure; except that additions to existing buildings of less than 300
5q. ft. to the existing building footprint Shall not be considered
development for Section 18.62.080.
5. Culverting or diversion of any Stream designated by this chapter.
E. Engineer - A registered professional engineer licensed by the State of Oregon.
F. Engineering Geologist - A registered professional engineering geologist licensed
by the State of Oregon.
G. Floodway Channel - The floodway channel as defined in the Flood Insurance
Study for Ashland, Oregon, published by the Federal Emergency Management
Agency on December 1, 1980.
Physical and Environmental Constraints Ordinance Revision
Hillside Standards
City Council Adopted Version - FIrst Reading (2.3) September 2, 1997
Page 2
H. Geotechnical Expert - An engineering geologist or an engineer with
demonstrable expertise in geologic hazards evaluation and geotechnical
engineering.
I. Gully - A drainage incision, commonly caused by erosion, which does not
experience regular or seasonal stream flow, but does act a5 a channel for runoff
during periods of high rainfall.
J. Landscape Professional - arborist certified by the International Society of
Arboriculture, landscape architect licensed by the State of Oregon, or other
expert with demonstrable expertise in tree and erosion control vegetation
maintenance, and erosion control vegetation methods.
K. Natural Grade - the
elevation of the ground /�
level in its natural /_ o
state, before �( NATURAL 6eADE
FINISHED bR.AD6
construction,filling, or COT O
excavation. (see graphic)
L. Natural State - all land
CUT AND FILL GP.OrS 56cT(ON
and water that remains
undeveloped and undisturbed. This means that grading, excavating,filling
and/or the construction of roadways, driveways, parking areas, and structures
are prohibited. Incidental minor grading for hiking trails, bicycle paths, picnic
areas and planting and landscaping which is in addition to and enhances the
natural environment is permitted. Further, vegetation removal for the purposes
of wildfire control in conjunction with an approved fire prevention and control
plan shall also be permitted.
M. Non-cohesive Soils - Residual or transported soils containing no or very little
clay, usually from crystalline granitic parent rock. Non-cohesive soils have a
f lasticity Index of less than ten, based on laboratory testing by AASHTO, or a
published scientific analysis of a particular soil type.
N. Professional Arbori5t - arborist certified by the International Society of
Arboriculture and licensed by the State of Oregon State Landscape
Contractors Board or Construction Contractors Board, or landscape architect
licensed by the State of Oregon.
0. Riparian - That area associated with a natural water course including its
wildlife and vegetation.
Physical and Environmental Constraints Ordinance Revision
Hillside Standards
City Council Adopted Version - First Reading (2.3) September 2, 1997
Page 3
P. 51ope - The deviation of a surface from the horizontal, usually expressed in
percent. (see graphic)
Q. Stripping - Any activity GQ.AD6 02. -SLOPE.•
which significantly pE ,
disturbs vegetated or
ago otherwise stabilized soil i i� �ea*IUL
surface, including - iI,C��
clearing and grubbing I
operations. Imo— 40 FaeT
I` H021TANTAL OISTANGG
R. Wildfire - Fire caused by CH) v
combustion of native SLOPE GALGULATION = H
vegetation, commonly �pEGREE of SLOPE = TANGENT of H
referred to as forest fire
or brush fire.
18.62.040 Approval and Permit Required.
A. A Physical Constraints Review Permit is required for any development, as
defined in 18.62.030.D, in areas identified as Floodplain Corridor Land, Riparian
Preserve, Hillside Land, or Severe Constraint land.
13. If a development is part of a Site Review, Performance 5tandards Development,
Conditional Use Permit, Subdivision, Partition, or other Planning Action,then
the Review shall be conducted simultaneously with the Planning Action.
C. If a development is exclusive of any other Planning Action, as noted in
Subsection B,then the Physical Constraints Review shall be processed as a
5taff Permit.
D. Where it appears that the proposal is part of a more extensive development
that would require a master site plan, or other planning action,the 5taff
Advisor shall require that all necessary applications be filed simultaneously.
E. Plans Required. The following plans shall be required for any development
requiring a Physical Constraints Review:
1. The plans shall contain the following:
a. Project name.
b. Vicinity map.
G. 5cale (the scale shall be at least one inch equals 50 feet or
larger) utilizing the largest scale that fits on 22" x 34" paper.
Multiple plans or layers shall be prepared at the same scale,
excluding detail drawings.
Physical and Environmental Constraints Ordinance Revision
Hillside Standards
City Council Adopted Version - First Reading (2.3) September 2, 1997
Page 4
4.
d. North arrow.
C. Date.
f. Street names and locations of all existing and proposed streets
within or on the boundary of the proposed development.
g. Lot layout with dimensions for all lot lines.
h. Location and use of all proposed and existing buildings,fences
and structures within the proposed development. Indicate which
buildings are to remain and which are to be removed.
i. Location and size of all public utilities affected by the proposed
development.
j. Location of drainage ways or public utility easements in and
adjacent to the proposed development. Location of all other
easements.
k. A
topographic Slope category areae are
map of the areas of uniform 51ope
site at a (within 5%)of the maximum
Indicated.
contour 35
interval ofa.
35.
not less ss
than two 35 / /.
feet nor ��' >o� 25
greater
than five
feet. The n ,�
topographic 35 35
map shall Buildable Area --all I
also include areas leeo than or perpendicular I5 measured
e ual to 35X. erpenAicular to contour
a slope lines
analysis,
indicating buildable areas, as shown in the graphic.
I. Location of all parking areas and spaces, ingress and egress on
the site, and on-site circulation.
M. Accurate locations of all existing natural features including, but
not limited to, all trees as required in 18.62.080.D.1, including
those of a caliper equal to or greater than six inches d.b.h.,
native shrub masses with a diameter of ten feet or greater,
natural drainage, swales, wetlands, ponds, springs, or creeks on
the site, and outcroppings of rocks, boulders, etc. Natural
features on adjacent properties potentially impacted by the
proposed development shall also be included, such as trees with
driplines extending across property lines. In forested areas, it is
necessary to identify only those trees which will be affected or
Physical and Environmental Constraints Ordinance Revision
Hillside Standards
City Council Adopted Version - FIrst Reading (2.3) September 2, 1947
Page 5
I
Y
A
removed by the proposed development. Indicate any
contemplated modifications to a natural feature.
M. The proposed method of erosion control, water runoff control,
and tree protection for the development a5 required by this
chapter.
o. Building envelopes for all existing and proposed new parcels that
contain only buildable area, as defined by this Chapter.
P. Location of all irrigation canals and major irrigation lines.
c(. Location of all areas of land disturbance, including cuts, fills,
driveways, building Sites, and other construction areas. Indicate
total area of disturbance,total percentage of project site
proposed for disturbance, and maximum depths and heights of
cuts and fill.
r. Location for storage or disposal of all excess materials resulting
from cuts associated with the proposed development.
5. Applicant name, firm preparing plans, person responsible for plan
preparation, and plan preparation dates shall be indicated on all
plans.
t. Proposed timeline for development based on estimated date of
approval, including completion dates for Specific tasks.
2. Additional plans and Studies as required in 5ection5 18.62.070,
18.62.080,18.62.090 and 16.62.100 of this Chapter.
F. Criteria for approval. A Physical Constraints Review Permit shall be issued by
the Staff Advisor when the Applicant demonstrates the following:
1. Through the application of the development Standards of this chapter,
the potential impacts to the property and nearby areas have been
considered, and adverse impacts have been minimized.
2. That the applicant has considered the potential hazards that the
development may create and implemented measures to mitigate the
potential hazards caused by the development.
3. That the applicant has taken all reasonable 5tepo to reduce the adveme
impact on the environment. Irreversible actions shall be considered more
Seriously than reversible actions. The Staff Advisor or Planning
Commio5ion shall consider the existing development of the Surrounding
area, and the maximum permitted development permitted by the Land
Use Ordinance.
Physical and Environmental Constraints Ordinance Revision
Hillside Standards
City Council Adopted Version -FIrst Reading (2.3) September 2, 1997
Page 6
G. The Staff Advisor or Planning Commission has the power to amend plans to
include any or all of the following conditions if it io deemed necessary to
mitigate any potential negative impact caused by the development:
1. Require the retention of trees, rocks, ponds, wetlands, springs, water
courses and other naturalfeatureo.
2. Rectuire plan revision or modification to mitigate poo5ible negative or
irreversible effect upon the topography or natural features that the
proposed development may cause.
3. Require a performance guarantee ao a condition of approval.
4. Kectuire Special evaluation by a recognized professional. A professional
consultant may be hired to evaluate proposals and make
recommendations if the hearing authority finds that outside expertise i5
needed. The profe55ional will have expertise in the Specific area or in the
potential adverse impacts on the area. A fee for these Services Shall be
charged to the applicant in addition to the application fee.
18.62.050 Land Classifications. The following factors Shall be used to determine the
cla55ifications of various lands and their constraints to building and development on them:
A. Floodplain Corridor Lands - Lands with potential Stream flow and flood hazard.
The following lands are classified ao Floodplain Corridor lands:
1. All land contained within the 100 year floodplain as defined by the
Federal Emergency Management Agency, in maps adopted by Chapter
15.10 of the Ashland Municipal Code.
2. All land within the area defined ao Floodplain Corridor land in maps
adopted by the Council ao provided for in section 18.62.060.
3. All lands which have physical or historical evidence of flooding in the
historical past.
4. All areas within 20 feet (horizontal distance) of any creek designated
for Riparian Preservation in 18.62.050.13 and depicted ao such on maps
adopted by the Council ao provided for in section 18.62.060.
5. All areas within ten feet (horizontal distance) of any drainage channel
depicted on maps adopted by the Council but not designated as
Riparian Preservation.
B. Marian Preservation - The following Floodplain Corridor Lando are also
designated for Riparian Preservation for the purposes of this section and ao
listed on the Physical and Environmental Constraints Overlay Maps: Tolman,
Hamilton, Clay, Bear, Kitchen, Ashland, Neil and Wrighto Creeks.
Physical and Environmental Constraints Ordinance Revision
Hillside Standards
City Council Adopted Version - First Reading (2.3) September 2, 1997
Page 7
C. Hillside Lando - Hillside Lands are lands which are subject to damage from
erooion and slope failure, and include areao which are highly vioible from other
portions of the city. The following lando are classified ao Hillside Lando:
1. All areao defined ao Hillside Lando on the Physical Constraints Overlay
map and which have a olope of 25 percent or greater.
D. Wildfire Lando - Lands with potential of wildfire. The following lando are
classified ao Wildfire Lands:
1. All areas defined ao wildfire lands on the Physical Conotrainto Overlay
map.
E. Severe Constraint Lando - Lando with severe development characteriotico
which generally limit normal development. The following lands are classified ao
Severe Constraint Lando:
1. All areas which are within the floodway channelo, ao defined in Chapter
15.10.
2. All lands with a slope greater than 35 percent.
F. Classifications Cumulative. The above claooificationo are cumulative in their
effect and, if a parcel of land falls under two or more claooificationo, it shall be
oubject to the regulationo of each claosification. Thooe reotrictiono applied
ohall pertain only to those portions of the land being developed and not
necesoarily to the whole parcel.
18.62.060 Official Mapo.
A. The City Council shall adopt official mapo denoting the above identified areas.
Substantial amendmento of these maps ohall be a Type 3 procedure.
B. Minor amendments of the maps to correct mapping errors when the
amendments are intended to more accurately reflect the mapping criteria
contained in thin chapter or in the findings of the Council in adopting an official
map may be processed ao a Type 1 procedure.
18 62 070 Development Standards for Floodplain Corridor Lands. For all land use actions
which could result in development of the Floodplain Corridor, the following is required in
addition to any requirements of Chapter 15.10:
A. Standards for fill in Floodplain Corridor lands:
1. Fill shall be designed as required by the Uniform Building Code, Chapter
70, where applicable.
2. The toe of the fill shall be kept at least ten feet outoide of floodway
channelo, as defined in section 15.10, and the fill shall not exceed the
angle of repooe of the material used for fill.
Physical and Environmental Constraints Ordinance Revision
Hillside Standards
City Council Adopted Version - First Reading (2.3) September 2, 1997
Page 8
3. The amount of fill in the Floodplain Corridor shall be kept to a minimum.
Fill and other material imported from off the lot that could displace
floodwater shall be limited to the following:
a. Poured concrete and other materials necessary to build
permitted structures on the lot.
b. Aggregate base and paving materials, and fill associated with
approved public and private street and driveway construction.
c. Plants and other landscaping and agricultural material.
J. A total of 50 cubic yards of other imported fill material.
C. The above limits on fill shall be measured from April 1989, and
shall not exceed the above amounts. These amounts are the
maximum cumulative fill that can be imported onto the site,
regardless of the number of permits issued.
4. If additional fill is necessary beyond the permitted amounts in (3) above,
then fill materials must be obtained on the lot from cutting or
excavation only to the extent necessary to create an elevated site for
permitted development. All additional fill material shall be obtained from
the portion of the lot in the Floodplain Corridor.
5. Adequate drainage shall be provided for the stability of the fill.
6. Fill to raise elevations for a building site shall be located as close to the
outside edge of the Floodplain Corridor as feasible.
B. Culverting or bridging of any waterway or creek identified on the official maps
adopted pursuant to section 18.62.060 must be designed by an engineer.
Stream crossings shall be designed to the standards of Chapter 15.10, or where
no floodway has been identified, to pass a one hundred (100) year flood without
any increase in the upstream flood height elevation. The engineer shall consider
in the design the probability that the culvert will be blocked by debris in a severe
flood, and accommodate expected overflow. Fill for culverting and bridging shall
be kept to the minimum necessary to achieve property access, but is exempt
from the limitations in section (A) above. Culverting or bridging of streams
identified as Riparian Preservation are subject to the requirements of
18.62.075.
C. Non-residential structures shall be flood-proof to the standards in Chapter
15.10 to one foot above the elevation contained in the maps adopted by chapter
15.10, or up to the elevation contained in the official maps adopted by section
18.62.060, whichever height is greater. Where no specific elevations exist, then
they must be floodproofed to an elevation of ten feet above the creek channel
on Ashland, Bear or Neil Creek, to five feet above the creek channel on all other
Riparian Preserve creeks defined in section 18.62.050.8; and three feet above
the stream channel on all other drainage ways identified on the official maps.
P. All residential structures shall be elevated so that the lowest habitable floor
shall be raised to one foot above the elevation contained in the maps adopted
in chapter 15.10, or to the elevation contained in the official maps adopted by
Physical and Environmental Constraints Ordinance Revision
Hillside Standards
City Council Adopted Version - Mrst Reading (2.3) September 2, 1997
Page 9
Section 15.62.060, whichever height iS greater. Where no Specific elevations
exist, then they must be constructed at an elevation of ten feet above the
creek channel on Ashland, Bear, or Neil Creek; to five feet above the creek
channel on all other Riparian Preserve creeks defined in Section 15.62.050.13;
and three feet above the Stream channel on all other drainage ways identified
on the official maps, or one foot above visible evidence of high flood water flow,
whichever iS greater. The elevation of the finished lowest habitable floor Shall be
certified to the city by an engineer or Surveyor prior to issuance of a certificate
of occupancy for the structure.
E. To the maximum extent feasible, structures Shall be placed on other than
Floodplain Corridor Lands. In the case where development iS permitted in the
Floodplain corridor area, then development shall be limited to that area which
would have the Shallowest flooding.
-F. Existing lots with buildable land outside the Floodplain Corridor shall locate all
residential structures outside the Corridor land, unless 50% or more of the lot
is within the Floodplain Corridor. For residential uses proposed for existing lots
that have more than 50% of the lot in Corridor land, structures may be located
on that portion of the floodplain corridor that is two feet or less below the
flood elevations on the official maps, but in no case closer than 20 feet to the
channel of a Riparian Preservation Creek. Construction shall be Subject to the
requirements in paragraph D above.
G. New non-residential uses may be located on that portion of Floodplain Corridor
lands that equal to or above the flood elevations on the official maps adopted
in section 15.62.060. Second story construction may be cantilevered over the
floodplain corridor for a distance of 20 feet if the clearance from finished grade
is at least ten feet in height, and iS supported by pillars that will have minimal
impact on the flow of floodwaters. The finished floor elevation may not be more
than two feet below the flood corridor elevations.
H. All lots modified by lot line adjustments, or new IotS created from lots which
contain Floodplain Corridor land must contain a building envelope on all lot(s)
which contains) buildable area of a Sufficient Size to accommodate the uses
permitted in the underling zone, unless the action is for open space or
conservation purposes. This section Shall apply even if the effect iS to prohibit
further division of lots that are larger than the minimum Size permitted in the
zoning ordinance.
I. Basements.
1. Habitable basements are not permitted for new or existing Structures or
additions located within the Floodplain Corridor.
2. Non-habitable basements, used for storage, parking, and similar uses
are permitted for residential Structures but must be flood-proofed to
the Standards of Chapter 15.10.
Physical and Environmental Constraints Ordinance Revision
Hillside Standards
City Council Adopted Version - First Reading (2.3) September 2, 1997
Page 10
J. Storage of petroleum products, pesticides,or other hazardous or toxic
chemicals is not permitted in Floodplain Corridor lands.
K. Fences constructed within 20 feet of any Riparian Preservation Creek
designated by this chapter shall be limited to wire or electric fence, or similar
fence that will not collect debris or obstruct flood waters, but not including wire
mesh or chain link fencing. Fences shall not be constructed across any
identified riparian drainage or riparian preservation creek. Fences shall not be
constructed within any designated floodway.
L. Decks and structures other than buildings, if constructed on Floodplain Corridor
Lands and at or below the levels specified in section 16.62.070.0 and D, shall be
flood-proofed to the standards contained in Chapter 15.10.
M. Local streets and utility connections to developments in and adjacent to the
Floodplain Corridor shall be located outside of the Floodplain Corridor, except for
crossing the Corridor, and except in the Bear Creek floodplain corridor as
outlined below:
1. Public street construction may be allowed within the Bear Creek
floodplain corridor as part of development following the adopted North Mountain
Neighborhood Plan. This exception shall only be permitted for that section of
the Bear Creek floodplain corridor between North Mountain Avenue and the
Nevada Street right-of-way. The new street shall be constructed in the general
location as indicated on the neighborhood plan map, and in the area generally
described as having the shallowest potential for flooding within the corridor.
2. Proposed development that is not in accord with the North Mountain
Neighborhood Plan shall not be permitted to utilize this exception.
18.62.075 Development Standards for Riparian Preservation lands.
A. All development in areas indicated for Riparian Preservation, as defined in
section 18.62.050([3), shall comply with the following standards:
1. Development shall be subject to all Development Standards for
Floodplain Corridor Lands (18.62.070)
2. Any tree over six inches d.b.h. shall be retained to the greatest extent
feasible.
3. Fill and Culverting shall be permitted only for streets, access, or utilities.
The crossing shall be at right angles to the creek channel to the
greatest extent possible. Fill shall be kept to a minimum.
4. The general topography of Riparian Preservation lands shall be retained.
18.62.080 Development Standards for Hillside Lands. It is the purpose of the
Development Standards for Hillside Lands to provide supplementary development regulations
to underlying zones to ensure that development occurs in such a manner as to protect the
Physical and Environmental Constraints Ordinance Revision
Hillside Standards
City Council Adopted Version -First Reading (2.3) September 2, 1997
Page 11
natural and topographic character and identity of these areas, environmental resources, the
aesthetic qualities and restorative value of lands, and the public health, safety, and general
welfare by insuring that development does not create soil erosion, sedimentation of lower
slopes, slide damage, flooding problems, and severe cutting or scarring. It is the intent of
these development Standards to encourage a sensitive form of development and to allow for a
reasonable use that complements the natural and visual character of the city.
A. General Requirements. All development shall occur on lands defined as having
buildable area. Slopes greater than 35% shall be considered unbuildable. All newly
created lots either by Subdivision or partition Shall contain a building envelope with a
slope of 35% or less. Existing parcels without adequate buildable area less than or
equal to 35% shall be considered buildable for one unit, but cannot be subdivided or
.,partitioned. Variances may be granted to this requirement only as provided in section
18.62.080.1.
1. New Streets, flag drives, and driveways shall be constructed on IandS of
less than or equal to 35% slope with the following exceptions:
a. The street iS indicated on the Citys Transportation Plan Map -
5treet Dedications.
b. The portion of the street, flag drive, or driveway on land greater
than 35% slope does not exceed a length of 100 feet.
2. Geotechnical Studies. For all applications on Hillside Lands involving
subdivisions or partitions, the following additional information iS required:
A geotechnical Study prepared by a geotechnical expert indicating that the site
is stable for the proposed use and development. The Study shall include the
following information:
a. Index map.
b. Project description to include location,topography, drainage,
vegetation, discussion of previous work and discussion of field
exploration methods.
C. Site geology, based on a 5urficial survey,to include Site geologic
maps, description of bedrock and surficial materials, including
artificial fill, locations of any faults,folds, etc..., and structural
data including bedding,jointing and shear zones, soil depth and
soil Structure.
d. Discuooion of any off-site geologic conditions that may pose a
potential hazard to the site, or that may be affected by on-Site
development.
Physical and Environmental Constraints Ordinance Revision
Hillside Standards
City Council Adopted Version - First Reading (2.3) September 2, 1997
Page 12
C. Suitability of Site for proposed development from a geologic
standpoint.
f. Specific recommendations for cut and fill slope stability, seepage
and drainage control or other design criteria to mitigate geologic
hazards.
g. If deemed necessary by the engineer or geologist to establish
whether an area to be affected by the proposed development is
stable, additional studies and supportive data shall include
cross-sections showing subsurface structure, graphic logs with
subsurface exploration, results of laboratory test and references.
h. Signature and registration number of the engineer and/or
geologist.
i. Additional information or analyses as necessary to evaluate the
site.
j. Inspection schedule for the project as required in
18.62.080.13.9.a.
k. Location of all irrigation canals and major irrigation pipelines.
B. Hillside Grading and Erosion Control. All development on lands classified as
hillside shall provide plano conforming with the following items:
1. All grading, retaining wall design, drainage, and erosion control plans for
development on Hillside Lands shall be designed by a geotechnical expert. All
cuts, grading or fills ohall conform to Chapter 70 of the Uniform Building Code.
Erosion control measures on the development site shall be required to minimize
the solids in runoff from disturbed areas.
2. For development other than single family homes on individual lots, all
grading, drainage improvements, or other land disturbances shall only occur
from May 1 to October 31. Excavation shall not occur during the remaining wet
months of the year. Erosion control measures shall be installed and functional
by October 31. Up to 30 day modificationo to the October 31 date, and 45 day
modification to the May 1 date may be made by the Planning Director, based
upon weather conditions and in consultation with the project geotechnical
expert. The modification of dates shall be the minimum necessary, based upon
evidence provided by the applicant,to accomplish the necessary project goals.
3. Retention in natural state. On all projects on Hillside Lands, an area
equal to 25% of the total project area, plus the percentage figure of the
average slope of the total project area, ohall be retained in a natural state.
Lands to be retained in a natural state ohall be protected from damage
through the use of temporary construction fencing or the functional equivalent.
Physical and Environmental Constraints Ordinance Revision
Hillside Standards
City Council Adopted Version - First Reading (2.3) September 2, 1997
Page 13
For example, on a 12,000 5G(. ft. lot with an average Slope of 29%,
25%+29%=54% of the total lot area Shall be retained in a natural State.
The retention in a natural state of areas greater than the minimum percentage
required here is encouraged.
4. Grading - cuts. On all cut slopes on areas classified as Hillside lands,
the following standards shall apply:
a. Cut slope angles shall be determined in relationship to the type
of materials of which they are composed. Where the soil permits, limit
the total area exposed to precipitation and erosion. Steep cut slopes
shall be retained with stacked rock, retaining walls, or functional
equivalent to
control
erosion and
provide slope
stability when Cut 51ope and 15, �,,..A�� _ ! Stocked Rock
necessary. Fill 5lope Maxmum x or Wall
slop. .
Where cut Requlrement5 Height 6' 7'Mm.m
slopes are :. ., Term.-i-11
�j���.�� Width
required to 20' riia:: ] ?i n
Maximum s'Maxim .
Fill Slop.
be laid back Ijd Terror
(1:1 or less Height Height
R.q.ir.a
Erasion Control
slope shall be �T_=` Netting
protected Not to Scale
with erosion
fi For Illustration Only
control
netting or
structural equivalent installed per manufacturers Specifications, and
revegetated.
b. Exposed cut slopes, such as those for streets, driveway
accesses, or yard areas, greater than seven feet in height shall be
terraced. Cut faces on a terraced section shall not exceed a maximum
height of five feet. Terrace widths shall be a minimum of three feet to
allow for the introduction of vegetation for erosion control. Total cut
slopes shall not exceed a maximum vertical height of 15 feet. (See
Graphic)
Physical and Environmental Constraints Ordinance Revision
Hillside Standards
City Council Adopted Version - First Reading (2.3) September 2, 1997
Page 14
The top of cut 51ope5 not utilizing structural retaining walls Shall be
located a minimum setback of one-half the height of the cut 5lope from
the nearest property
line.
i
Cut slopes for Reduce Effective Vlsual
structure foundations Bulk by Utilizing _
encouraging the 5tepped Foundations
reduction of effective rr
visual bulk, such as
Split pad or stepped
footings shall be !�,
exempted from the
height limitations of
this Section. (see
Graphic)
C. Revegetation of cut slope terraces Shall include the provision of a
planting plan, introduction of top Soil where necessary, and the use of
irrigation if necessary. The vegetation used for these areas shall be
native or species similar in resource value which will survive, help reduce
the visual impact of the cut slope, and assist in providing long term
slope stabilization. Trees, bush-type plantings and cascading vine-type
plantings may be appropriate.
5. Grading - fills. On all fill 51ope5 on lands classified a5 Hillside Lands,the
following Standards Shall apply:
a. Fill slope angles shall be determined in relationship to the type of
materials of which they are composed. Fill slopes shall not exceed a
total vertical height of 20 feet. The toe of the fill slope area not
utilizing Structural retaining shall be a minimum of six feet from the
nearest property line.
b. Fill slopes Shall be protected with an erosion control netting,
blanket or functional equivalent. Netting or blankets shall only be used
in conjunction with an organic mulch such as Straw or wood fiber. The
blanket must be applied so that it i5 in complete contact with the soil
so that erosion does not occur beneath it. Erosion netting or blankets
shall be Securely anchored to the 51ope in accordance with
manufacturer's recommendations.
Physical and Environmental Constraints Ordinance Revision
Hillside Standards
City Council Adopted Version - FSrst Reading (2.3) September 2, 1997
Page 15
C. Utilities. Whenever possible, utilities shall not be located or
installed on or in fill slopes. When determined that it necessary to
install utilities on fill slopes, all plans shall be designed by a geotechnical
expert.
d. Revegetation of fill slopes shall utilize native vegetation or
vegetation similar in resource value and which will survive and stabilize
the surface. Irrigation may be provided to ensure growth if necessary.
Evidence shall be required indicating long-term viability of the proposed
vegetation for the purposes of erosion control on disturbed areas.
6. Revegetation requirements. Where required by this chapter, all required
revegetation of cut and fill slopes shall be installed prior to the issuance of a
certificate of occupancy, signature of a required survey plat,or other time as
determined by the hearing authority. Vegetation shall be installed in such a
manner as to be substantially established within one year of installation.
7. Maintenance, Security, and Penalties for Erosion Control Measures.
a. Maintenance. All measures installed for the purposes of long-term
erosion control, including but not limited to vegetative cover, rock walls,
and landscaping, shall be maintained in perpetuity on all areas which
have been disturbed, including public rights-of-way. The applicant shall
provide evidence indicating the mechanisms in place to ensure
maintenance of measures.
b. Security. Except for individual lots existing prior to the July 1, 1996,
after an Erosion Control Plan is approved by the hearing authority and
prior to construction,the applicant shall provide a performance bond or
other financial guarantees in the amount of 120% of the value of the
erosion control measures necessary to stabilize the site. Any financial
guarantee instrument proposed other than a performance bond shall be
approved by the City Attorney. The financial guarantee instrument shall
be in effect for a period of at least one year, and shall be released when
the Planning Director and Public Works Director determine,jointly,that
the site has been stabilized. All or a portion of the security retained by
the City may be withheld for a period up to five years beyond the one
year maintenance period if it has been determined by the City that the
site has not been sufficiently stabilized against erosion.
8. Site Grading. The grading of a site on Hillside Lands shall consider the
sensitive nature of these areas; Grading plans shall be reviewed considering the
following factors:
Physical and Environmental Constraints Ordinance Revision
Hillside Standards
City Council Adopted Version - First Reading (2.3) September 2, 1997
Page 16
a. Terracing should be designed with small incremental steps,
avoiding wide step terracing and large areas of flat pads.
b. Retain existing grades to the greatest extent possible. Avoid an
artificial appearance by creating smooth flowing contours of varying
gradients. Avoid sharp cuts and fills and long, linear slopes that have
uniform grade.
G. Avoid hazardous or unstable portions of the site.
J. Building pads should be of minimum size to accommodate the
structure and a reasonable amount of yard space. Pads for tennis
courts, swimming pools and large lawns are discouraged. As much of
the remaining lot area as possible should be kept in the natural state of
the original slope.
9. Inspections and Final Report
a. Prior to the acceptance of a subdivision by the City, signature of
the final survey plat on partitions, or issuance of a certificate of
occupancy for individual structures,the project geotechnical expert shall
provide a final report indicating that the approved grading, drainage, and
erosion control measures were installed as per the approved plans, and
that all scheduled inspections, as per 16.62.080.A.2j were conducted
by the project geotechnical expert periodically throughout the project.
C. Surface and Groundwater Drainage. All development on Hillside Lands shall
conform to the following standards:
1. All facilities for the collection of stormwater runoff shall be required to
be constructed on the site and according to the following requirements:
a. Stormwater facilities shall include storm drain systems
associated with street construction, facilities for accommodating
drainage from driveways, parking areas and other impervious surfaces,
and roof drainage systems.
b. Stormwater facilities, when part of the overall site improvements,
shall be,to the greatest extent feasible,the first improvements
constructed on the development site.
C. Stormwater facilities shall be designed to divert surface water
away from cut faces or sloping surfaces of a fill.
Physical and Environmental Constraints Ordinance Revision
Hillside Standards
City Council Adopted Version - First Reading (2.3) September 2, 1997
Page 17
d. Existing natural drainage systems shall be utilized, as much as
possible, in their natural state, recognizing the erosion potential from
increased storm drainage..
e. Flow-retarding devices, such as detention ponds and recharge
berms, shall be used where practical to minimize increases in runoff
volume and peak flow rate due to development. Each facility shall
consider the needs for an emergency overflow system to safely carry any
overflow water to an acceptable disposal point.
f. 5tormwater facilities shall be designed, constructed and
maintained in a manner that will avoid erosion on-site and to adjacent
and downstream properties.
g. Alternate stormwater systems, such as dry well systems,
detention ponds, and leachfields, shall be designed by a registered
engineer or geotechnical expert and approved by the Gig`s Public Works
Department or City Building Official.
D. Tree Conservation, Protection and Removal. All development on Hillside Lands
shall conform to the following requirements:
1. Inventory of Existing Trees. A tree survey at the same scale as the
project site plan shall be prepared, which locates all trees greater than six
inches d.b.h., identified by d.b.h., species, approximate extent of tree canopy. In
addition,for areas proposed to be disturbed, existing tree base elevations shall
be provided. Dead or diseased trees shall be identified. Groups of trees in
close proximity (i.e. those within five feet of each other) may be designated as a
clump of trees,with the predominant species, estimated number and average
diameter indicated. All tree surveys shall be prepared by a professional
arborist, and shall have an accuracy of plus or minus two feet. The name,
signature, and address of the site surveyor responsible for the accuracy of the
survey shall be provided on the tree survey.
Portions of the lot or project area not proposed to be disturbed by development
need not be included in the inventory.
2. Evaluation of Suitability for Conservation. All trees indicated on the
inventory of existing trees shall also be identified as to their suitability for
conservation. When required by the hearing authority,the evaluation shall be
conducted by a professional arborist. Factors included in this determination
shall include:
Physical and Environmental Constraints Ordinance Revision
Hillside Standards
City Council Adopted Version - FIrst Reading (2.3) September 2, 1997
Page 18
a. Tree health. Healthy trees can better withstand the rigors of
development than non-vigorous trees.
b. Tree Structure. Trees with severe decay or Substantial defects
are more likely to result in damage to people and property.
G. Specieo. Species vary in their ability to tolerate impacts and
damage to their environment.
J. Potential longevity.
C. Variety. A variety of native tree 5pecie5 and ages.
f. Size. Large trees provide a greater protection for erosion and
shade than smaller trees.
3. Tree Conservation in Project Design. Significant trees (2' d.b.h. or
greater conifers and 1' d.b.h. or greater broadleaf) 5ha11 be protected and
incorporated into the project design whenever possible.
a. Streets,
driveways,
buildings. _ Site i'lanning
utilties, ReoponolVe to
parking areas,
and other site Tree Locations
dioturbance5 Existing site 4
Shall be located I with significant I
Such that the trees
maximum I 5encitive develonnent 1
number of option for property
existing trees
on the site are preserved, while recognizing and following the standards
for fuel reduction if the development 15 located in Wildfire Lands.
b. Building envelopes shall be located and sized to preserve the
maximum number of trees on site.
C. Layout of the project site utility and grading plan Shall avoid
disturbance of tree protection areas.
Physical and Environmental Constraints Ordinance Revision
Hillside Standards
City Council Adopted Version - First Reading (2.3) September 2, 1997
Page 19
4. Tree Protection. On •'
all properties where trees t
are required to be d o tree Conservation
preserved during the course l� .ti Guideline
of development,the
developer shall follow the 9_
following tree protection s
Protective Fencing
standards: s shouldk.o,equi al
metal staka or equivalent
a. All trees III'
Flagging Tape 1o•oianwar,
designated for ro Hi li , vr+pllne
conservation Shall P Aru r�.vw 4'minimum fence height
be clearly marked on
the project site.
Prior to the start of - a bona l'Pro ec on
`. hand Excavate
any clearing, Only-No Henry
stripping, Drlpllne Fence Dlameter Eq 'Pal or Park ng
stockpiling,
trenching, grading, compaction, paving or change in ground elevation, the
applicant shall install fencing at the drip line of all trees to be preserved
adjacent to or in the area to be altered. Temporary fencing shall be
established at the perimeter of the
dripline. Prior to grading or issuance of ,Dune
any permits,the Tree Canopy
fences may be inspected and their location ;
approved by the Staff Advisor. (see
graphic)
b. Construction site activities, including but not limited to parking,
material storage, soil compaction and concrete washout, shall be
arranged so as to prevent disturbances within tree protection areas.
C. No grading, stripping, compaction, or significant change in ground
elevation shall be permitted within the drip line of trees designated for
conservation unless indicated on the grading plans, as approved by the
City, and professional arborist. If grading or construction is approved
within the dripline, a professional arborist may be required to be present
during grading operations, and shall have authority to require protective
measures to protect the roots.
d. Changes in soil hydrology and site drainage within tree protection
areas shall be minimized. Excessive site run-off shall be directed to
Physical and Environmental Constraints Ordinance Revision
Hillside Standards
City Council Adopted Version - First Reading (2.3) September 2, 1997
Page 20
appropriate Storm drain facilities and away from trees designated for
conservation.
C. Should encroachment into a tree protection area occur which
causes irreparable damage, as determined by a professional arborist,to
trees, the project plan shall be revised to compensate for the loss.
Under no circumstances shall the developer be relieved of responsibility
for compliance with the provisions of this chapter.
5. Tree Removal. Development shall be designed to preserve the maximum
number of trees on a site, when balanced with other provisions of this chapter.
When justified by findings of fact, the hearing authority may approve the
removal of trees for one or more of the following conditions:
a. The tree is located within the building envelope.
b. The tree is located within a proposed street, driveway, or parking
area.
G. The tree is located within a water, sewer, or other public utility
easement.
d. The tree is determined by a professional arborist to be dead or
diseased, or it constitutes an unacceptable hazard to life or property
when evaluated by the standards in 18.62.080.1).2.
C. The tree io located within or adjacent to areas of cuts or fills
that are deemed threatening to the life of the tree, as determined by a
professional arborist.
6. Tree Replacement. Trees approved for removal, with the exception of
trees removed because they were determined to be diseased, dead, or a hazard,
shall be replaced in compliance with the following standards:
Physical and Environmental Constraints Ordinance Revision
Hillside Standards
City Council Adopted Version - FIrst Reading (2.3) September 2, 1997
Page 21
a. Replacement Tree I'lanting
trees Shall be
indicated on a tree Guideline
replanting plan.
Replacement trees
3'f kept
shall be of similar B•R..ein trtnk
resource value as Stake ant,Mt ee 1, V.
the trees removed. �etend a'k'bN"'
aM etake.°lav»poeelble
The replanting plan "n^a^0^^ °tk0.
.F— cu tN.W planting area eha M Ike M
shall include all tln the eLe of the rwaefl.sd any
locations for I r n°t"°°a'°ho1dbeuWJ for ea
Abed�IyhGy to contain rater.
replacement trees, i
and shall also , r Set top dr. uWn,,,dwek
indicate tree :; Free krlap from wk.aM
planting details. N kw ,.a
Set tree an° gr.,d
b. Replacement _
trees shall be
planted such that
the trees result in canopy equal to or greater than the tree canopy
present prior to development of the property. The canopy shall be
designed to mitigate of the impact of paved and developed areas, reduce
surface erosion and increase slope stability.. Replacement tree
locations shall consider impact on the wildfire prevention and control
plan. The hearing authority shall have the discretion to adjust the
proposed replacement tree canopy based upon site-specific evidence and
testimony.
G. The hearing authority may, instead of requiring replacement
trees, require implementation of a revegetation plan. This plan may be
substituted in heavily forested areas or in areas determined to be
appropriate as determined by a professional arboriot and approved by
the hearing authority. The developer shall be required to enter into a
written agreement with the City obligating the developer to comply with
the requirements of the revegetation program. A security deposit, not
exceeding the cost of the revegetation plan implementation, may be
required to ensure that the agreement is fulfilled.
d. Maintenance of replacement trees shall be the responsibility of
the property owner. Required replacement trees shall be continuously
maintained in a healthy manner. Trees that die within the first five
years after initial planting must be replaced in kind, after which a new
Physical and Environmental Constraints Ordinance Revision
Hillside Standards
City Council Adopted Version -First Reading (2.3) September 2, 1997
Page 22
five year replacement period shall begin. Replanting must occur within
30 days of notification unless otherwise noted.
7. Enforcement.
a. All tree removal shall be done in accord with the approved tree
removal and replacement plan. No trees designated for conservation
shall be removed without prior approval of the City of Ashland.
b. Should the developer or developers agent remove or destroy any
tree that has been designated for conservation,the developer may be
fined up to three times the current appraised value of the replacement
trees and cost of replacement or up to three times the current market
value, as established by a professional arborist, whichever is greater.
c. Should the developer or developers agent damage any tree that
has been designated for protection and conservation,the developer shall
be penalized $50.00 per scar. If necessary, a professional arborist's
report, prepared at the developer's expense, may be required to
determine the extent of the damage. Should the damage result in Ions
of appraised value greater than determined above, the higher of the two
values shall be used.
E. Building Location and Design Standards. All buildings and buildable areas
proposed for Hillside Lands shall be designed and constructed in compliance with the
following standards:
1. Building Envelopes. All newly
I.IT LINES created lots, either by subdivision or
C _._. partition, shall contain building
Mkot YARD LINE envelopes conforming to the following
ReAR, OPILPADLL standards:
YARD AR�` �Kr�].UIRED
YARD
I' a. The building envelope
shall contain a buildable area
COVERAGE with a slope of 35% or less.
b. Building envelopes and
�uaDlNC uNe lot design shall address the
FRONT retention of a percentage of
YARD I YARP LINKS
�{KrdKK) , (SeTexK LINKS> I RFI1UILm the lot in a natural state as
FRONT IOT UNIX ' FRONITYARD required in 18.62.080.8.3.
STR.e � T 21 O.W.
Physical and Environmental Constraints Ordinance Revision
Hillside Standards
City Council Adopted Version -First Reading (2.3) September 2, 1997
Page 23
G. Building envelopes shall be designed and located to maximize tree
conservation as required in 18.62.080.0.3.
J. Building envelope Retention of hillside
locations shall be located to character and natural
avoid ridgeline exposures, and slope by avoiding
locati
deli ned such that the roofline locatine
g one,
of a building within the envelope
does not project above the
ridgeline.
2. Building Design. To reduce the visual bulk of structures from public
rights of way, buildings on Hillside Lands,ex�ept3tg those tand�5 tivttlxitt the
de5lgna ed gtt>ric (715tr0 , shall incorporate the following into the building
design and indicate features on required building permits:
a. Hillside Building Height. The height of all structures shall be
measured vertically from the natural grade to the uppermost point of
the roof edge or peak, wall, parapet,
mansard, or other feature perpendicular
to that grade. Maximum Hilloide
Building Height hall be 30 feet. (see
ra hits
g p ) Permitted
i asp'
b. Cut buildings into hillsides to
reduce effective visual bulk. , 139
(1). Split pad or stepped
footings shall be incorporated
into building design to allow the
structure to more closely follow the slope.
(2). Reduce building mass by utilizing below grade rooms cut
into the natural slope.
C. A building stepback shall be Not N\\`dNow
required on all downhill building walls permitted
greater than 20 feet in height, as wYS\
measured above natural grade.
WOO
Stepbacko shall be a minimum of six
feet. No vertical walls on the downhill \
elevations of new buildings shall
Physical and Environmental Constraints Ordinance Revision
Hillside Standards
City Council Adopted Version -First Reading (2.3) September 2, 1997
Page 24
exceed a maximum height of 20 feet above natural grade. (see
graphic) i
d. Continuous horizontal building
planes Shall not exceed a maximum length
of feet. Planes longer than feet
Shall include a minimum offset of Six feet.
(see graphic)
C. Roof forms and roof Iinco for new I
structures 6' Minimum should be broken into a series � offset 38' l'
of smaller building components to reflect \ i Maximum
the irregular forms of the Surrounding
hillside. Long, linear unbroken roof lines
are discouraged. Large gable ends on
downhill elevation5 shall be
avoided, however Smaller i
gables may be permitted. Ne\9 c
(see graphic) �0!Ja0
i
f. Roofs of lower floor / orient RooF Na
/ F Slope with the QdG
levele may be used to / Hilleiol Gr
provide deck or outdoor /
space for upper floor levels.
The use of overhanging Hi
decks with ur�'C(ca1' 30' 20' Minimum
Supports In ezFeet3 of
Stcpback
...............:....... 6'
on downhill elevations
Shall be avoided.
g. Color'selection for new structures Shall be coordinated with the
predominant colors of the surrounding landscape to minimize contrast
between the 5tructure and the natural environment. Ttlevgcof very
light or bright colors Shall be avoided TPt�s prAY#6iolt shal( 71y a) yyi7
new dwelfi€g unit ce sCruete l nn F(lily ie G.arrds_ Color 5e€600011
rutrernerits email be recorded a c�rren tit an ttie proper Gy, Qatar
€eetion reuirerMerrt�shalt r eeordeei as a czuer#ant the tlrne r
.. .::
f ?ai Survey plat frx Ali SU W'I tarts AN partltloa 5 fc r neiv;Izst ar#
HitiStde LarcJS,..
F. Any development or partitioning which is proposed Hillside Lando must be shown
on a master plan at the time the final plan or plat i5 filed. All development
must comply with the master plan. Any improvements nece5sary for the
Physical and Environmental Constraints Ordinance Revision
Hillside Standards
City Council Adopted Version - First Reading (2.3) September 2, 1997
Page 25
implementation of the master plan (e.g., storm drains and gutters),which
involve two or more parcels of land must be constructed by the applicant prior
to any development occurring on the parcels.
G. All structures on Hillside Lands shall have foundations which have been
designed by an engineer or architect with demonstrable geotechnical design
experience.
H. All newly created lots or lots modified by a lot line adjustment must include a
building envelope on all lots that contains a buildable area less than 35% slope
of sufficient size to accommodate the uses permitted in the underlying zone,
unless the division or lot line adjustment is for open space or conservation
purposes.
I. Administrative Variance From Development Standards for Hillside Lands -
18.62.080. A variance under this section is not subject to the variance requirements
of section 18.100 and may be granted with respect to the development standards for
Hillside Lands if all of the following circumstances are found to exist:
1. There is demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements of
this chapter due to a unique or unusual aspect of the site or proposed use of the site;
2. The variance will result in equal or greater protection of the resources
protected under this chapter,
3. The variance is the minimum necessary to alleviate the difficulty, and
4. The variance is consistent with the stated Purpose and Intent of the
Physical and Environmental Constraints.Chapter and section 18.62.080.
Appeals of decisions involving administrative variances shall be processed as outlined in
18.108.070.
1862.090 Development 5tandards for Wildfire Lands.
A. Requirements for Subdivisions, Performance Standards Developments,or
Partitions.
1. A Fire Prevention and Control Plan shall be required with the submission
of any application for an outline plan approval of a Performance
5tandards Development, preliminary plat of a subdivision, or application
to partition land which contained areas designated Wildfire Hazard
areas.
2. The 5taff Advisor shall forward the Fire Prevention and Control Plan to
the Fire Chief within 3 days of the receipt of a completed application.
The Fire Chief shall review the Fire Prevention and Control Plan, and
submit a written report to the 5taff Advisor no less than 7 days before
Physical and Environmental Constraints Ordinance Revision
Hillside Standards
City Council Adopted Version - First Reading (2.3) September 2, 1997
Page 26
the scheduled hearing. The Fire Chiefs report shall be a part of the
record of the Planning Action.
3. The Fire Prevention and Control Plan, prepared at the Same scale as the
development plans, shall include the following items:
a. An analysis of the fire hazards on the site from wildfire, as
influenced by existing vegetation and topography.
b. A map showing the areas that are to be cleared of dead, dying,
or severely diseased vegetation.
G. A map of the areas that are to be thinned to reduce the
interlocking canopy of trees.
d. A tree management plan showing the location of all trees that
are to be preserved and removed on each lot. In the case of
heavily forested parcels, only trees scheduled for removal shall be
shown.
C. The areas of Primary and Secondary Fuel Breaks that are
required to be installed around each structure, as required by
16.62.090 B.
f. Roads and driveways sufficient for emergency vehicle access and
fire suppression activities, including the slope of all roads and
driveways within the Wildfire Lands area.
4. Criterion for Approval. The hearing authority shall approve the Fire
Prevention and Control Plan when, in addition to the findings required by
this chapter, the additional finding i5 made that the wildfire hazards
present on the property have been reduced to a reasonable degree,
balanced with the need to preserve and/or plant a sufficient number of
trees and plants for erosion prevention, wildlife habitat, and aesthetics.
5. The hearing authority may require, through the imposition of conditions
attached to the approval, the following requirements as deemed
appropriate for the development of the property:
a. Delineation of areas of heavy vegetation to be thinned and a
formal plan for such thinning.
b. Clearing of sufficient vegetation to reduce fuel load.
C. Removal of all dead and dying trees.
d. Relocation of structures and roads to reduce the risks of wildfire
and improve the chances of successful fire suppression.
6. The Fire Prevention and Control Plan shall be implemented during the
public improvements required of a subdivision or Performance Standards
Development, and shall be considered part of the subdivider's obligations
for land development. The Plan shall be implemented prior to the
issuance of any building permit for structures to be located on lots
created by partitions and for subdivisions or Performance Standards
developments not requiring public improvements. The Fire Chief, or
Physical and Environmental Constraints Ordinance Revision
Hillside Standards
City Council Adopted Version - First Reading (2.3) September 2, 1997
Page 27
designee, Shall inspect and approve the implementation of the Fire
Prevention and Control Plan, and the Plan shall not be considered fully
implemented until the Fire Chief has given written notice to the Staff
Advisor that the Plan was completed as approved by the hearing
authority.
7. In subdivisions or Performance Standards Developments, provisions for
the maintenance of the Fire Prevention and Control Plan shall be
included in the covenants, conditions and restrictions for the
development, and the City of Ashland shall be named as a beneficiary of
such covenants, restrictions, and conditions.
8. On lots created by partitions, the property owner shall be responsible for
maintaining the property in accord with the requirements of the Fire
Prevention and Control Plan approved by the hearing authority.
.B. Requirements for construction of all structures.
1. All new construction and any construction expanding the size of an
existing structure, shall have a "fuel break" as defined below.
2. A "fuel break" is defined as an area which is free of dead or dying
vegetation, and has native, fast-burning species sufficiently thinned so
that there is no interlocking canopy of this type of vegetation. Where
necessary for erosion control or aesthetic purposes, the fuel break may
be planted in slow-burning species. Establishment of a fuel break does
not involve stripping the ground of all native vegetation. "Fuel Breaks"
may include structures, and shall not limit distance between structures
and residences beyond that required by other sections of this title.
3. Primary Fuel Break - A primary fuel break will be installed, maintained
and shall extend a minimum of 30 feet, or to the property line, whichever
io less, in all directions around structures, excluding fences,on the
property. The goal within this area is to remove ground cover that will
produce flame lengths in excess of one foot. Such a fuel break shall be
increased by ten feet for each 10% increase in slope over 10%. Adjacent
property owners are encouraged to cooperate on the development of
primary fuel breaks.
4. Secondary Fuel Break - A secondary fuel break will be installed,
maintained and shall extend a minimum of 100 feet beyond the primary
fuel break where surrounding landscape is owned and under the control
of the property owner during construction. The goal of the secondary
fuel break io to reduce fuels so that the overall intenoity of any wildfire
is reduced through fuels control.
5. All structures shall be constructed or re-roofed with Class B or better
non-wood roof coverings, as determined by the Oregon Structural
Specialty Code. All re-roofing of existing structures in the Wildfire Lands
area for which at least 50% of the roofing area requires re-roofing shall
be done under approval of a zoning permit. No structure shall be
Physical and Environmental Constraints Ordinance Revision
Hillside Standards
City Council Adopted Version - First Reading (2.3) September 2, 1997
Page 28
constructed or re-roofed with wooden shingles, shakes, wood-product
material or other combustible roofing material, as defined in the City o
building code.
C. Fuel breaks in areas which are also Erosive or Slope Failure Lands shall be
included in the erosion control measures outlined in section 18.62.080.
D. Implementation.
1. For land which have been subdivided and required to comply with A. (6)
above, all requirements of the Plan shall be complied with prior to the
commencement of construction with combustible materials.
2. For all other structures,the vegetation control requirements of section
(B) above shall be complied with before the commencement of
construction with combustible materials on the lot. (Ord. 2657, 1991)
3. A5 of November 1, 1994, existing residences in subdivisions developed
outside of the Wildfire Lands Zone, but later included due to
amendments to the zone boundaries shall be exempt from the
requirements of this zone, with the exception of section 18.62.090 5.5.
above. All new residences shall comply with all standards for new
construction in section 18.62.090 B.
4. Subdivisions developed outside of the wildfire lands zone prior to
November 1, 1994, but later included as part of the zone boundary
amendment, shall not be required to prepare or implement Fire
Prevention and Control Plans outlined in section 18.62.090 A. (Ord
2747, 1994)
18.62.100 Development Standards for Severe Constraint Lands.
A. Severe Constraint Lands are extremely sensitive to development,grading, filling,
or vegetation removal and, whenever possible, alternative development should be
considered.
B. Development of floodways is not permitted except for bridges and road
crossings. Such crossings shall be designed to pass the 100 year flood without
raising the upstream flood height more than six inches.
C. Development on lands greater than 35% slope shall meet all requirements of
section 18.62.080 in addition to the requirements of this section.
C. Development of land or approval for a planning action shall be allowed only when
the following study has been accomplished. An engineering geologic study
approved by the Gig's Public Works Director and Planning Director establishes
that the site is stable for the proposed use and development. The study shall
include the following:
1. Index map.
2. Project description to include location,topography, drainage, vegetation,
discussion of previous work and discussion of field exploration methods.
3. Site geology, based on a surficial survey,to include site geologic maps,
description of bedrock and surficial materials, including artificial fill,
Physical and Environmental Constraints Ordinance Revision
Hillside Standards
City Council Adopted Version -First Reading (2.3) September 2, 1997
Page 29
locations of any faults, folds, etc., and structural data including bedding,
jointing and shear zones, soil depth and soil structure.
4. Discussion of any off-site geologic conditions that may pose a potential
hazard to the site, or that may be affected by on-site development.
5. Suitability of site for proposed development from a geologic standpoint.
6. Specific recommendations for cut slope stability, seepage and drainage
control or other design criteria to mitigate geologic hazards.
7. If deemed necessary by the engineer or geologist to establish whether an
area to be affected by the proposed development is stable, additional
studies and supportive data shall include cross-sections showing
subsurface structure, graphic logs with subsurface exploration, results
of laboratory test and references.
8. Signature and registration number of the engineer and/or geologist.
9. Additional information or analyses as necessary to evaluate the'site.
18.62.110 Density Transfer. Density may be transferred out of unbuildable areas to buildable
areas of a lot provided the following standards are met:
A. Partitions and subdivisions involving density transfer shall be processed under
Performance Standards, Chapter 18.88 of the Ashland Municipal Code.
B. A map shall be submitted showing the net buildable area to which the density
will be transferred.
C. A covenant shall be recorded limiting development on the area from which
density is transferred.
D. Density may not be transferred from one ownership to another but only within
the lot(s) owned by the same person.
E. Density may be transferred only on contiguous lots under common ownership.
F. The density of the buildable area may not be increased to more than two (2)
times the permitted density of the underlying zone. Fractional units are to be
rounded down to the next whole number. (Ord. 2528, 1989)
18.62.130 Penalties.
�q-fide-6r��«'C;i�e fr�lbwing�eettv3 are�n add It�can r the er�ireerner�.�ctian�Chat may tze
1 akin peniti w) tnay lie ir?�pbecl to cha p 1P�1t fry a urolation C>f t?i chap
'499 9 91
A.
when fi�ever arty l� being none contrary fro x116 prout6i�an�of this chapter i�r:
whene,:,ver erosion control measures,tree protection measures,wildfire control
measures, or floodplain corridor development measures are not being properly
maintained or are not functioning_ properly due to faulty installation or neglect,1116
dtrector 0 cc rr mwn3ty dOreicapmei or t i,e 3recLc�'�_de��gnee may carder the wear
Physical and Environmental Constraints Ordinance Revision
Hillside Standards
City Council Adopted Version - FSrst Reading (2.3) September 2, 1997
Page 30
i
sY.opped by TIC31;IGe rn wrtti�g ser+ted an arty persons ended to ohs datng ar ca�t�ng of
such t!uor[¢ b�done, � arty suct per�on�;shall imrsd�ataly�tr�p weM^k tan�f
authCr�zed by tie direct -or de�k��e tc� pried wtGi? the woi�iE.
B. :A46 Gilay 6,11011 lltl�,e Vie ig!40 6j9
I devetr nter?t under thie c!.A: r
and aEl=work ar construction for wttich a p ,it �5 rec�ltred under thfs chapter shalt he
subJec�o inepee�lon by tVe dlrecf;i+^of eommtrriity deueiopmentlar`the dtrector'S
designee; YVhen.�n Inep�eClrxv is made under thte ee�Gion ar•when It is necessary
make an Inspeotlon�enforce thle;cod6,or v+hen Ghe lrecto�^Ar des�nee has
rea9orEable rue to itielieue that t} re exit upon T I itl 3tde f anetndtil which ie
contra y tar ilk vuriativr zf this chapter which make the preih't i tan��e>dangerora
ar hazardous,t}�e dtreatpi,or desi�'nec may inter tiie:premisee> i-easartable times to
inspect or trx pc�f�rrrn t)te dutte�a tmptd by'l:},#s chapter 'fhedtreotOr ar designee
sh�il first make.a reasonelxle et`ftir�G to loci the owner or other persaty hawng aharg
of theprern�es and rsauest errtry� .
C. The City may refuse to accept any development permit application, may revoke
or suspend any development or building permit, or may deny occupancy on the property
until erosion control measures,tree protection measures, wildfire control measures,or
floodplain corridor development measures have been installed properly and are
maintained in accordance with the requirements of this chapter.
P. The owner of the property from which erosion occurs due to failure or neglect of
erosion control measures, together with any pereon or parties who cause such erosion
shall be responsible to mitigate the impacts of the erosion and prevent future erosion.
Physical and Environmental Constraints Ordinance Revision
Hillside Standards
City Council Adopted Version - First Reading (2.3) September 2, 1997
Page 31