HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-1215 Council Mtg PACKET r 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 December 15, 1998 Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 E. Main Street 1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: 7:00 p.m., Civic Center Council Chambers. II. ROLL CALL: 111. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Regular meeting minutes of December 1, 1998, and executive meeting minutes of December 1, 1998. IV. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS: ,Y Mayor's Proclamation declaring January 9, 1999, as "Christmas Tree / Recycle Day in Ashland." V. CONSENT AGENDA: 1. Minutes of Boards, Commissions and Committees. 2. Monthly Departmental Reports. 3. Confirmation of Mayor's appointment of Lowe Ann Belford to Senior Program Board for a term to expire April 30, 2000. 4. Confirmation of Mayor's reappointments of Darrel Jarvis, Tom Giordano, Darrell Boldt, Dale Shostrom and Carol Horn Davis to Building Appeals Board for terms to expire December 31, 1999. 5. Approval of Liquor License Application from Julie T. Aldwell/Tera M. Wood dba/Whistle Stop Cafe & Catering Company. Vl. 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. Public Hearing, Staff recommendation and City Council motion regarding the City's long-term water supply. V Council Meeting Pkt. BARBARA CHRISTENSEN CITY RECORDER r VII. PUBLIC FORUM: Business from the audience not included on the agenda. (Limited to 5 minutes per speaker and 15 minutes total.) VIII. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: 1. Presentation and Council action regarding the implementation of measures for changes to the Local Improvement District (LID) process. IX. NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS: 1. Council Meeting Look Ahead. 2. Update from City Administrator regarding Y2K. X. ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS: ,Y Reading by title only of "A Resolution Dedicating Property for Park / Purposes pursuant to Article XIX, Section 3, of the City Charter (Rob Cain property located immediately above Granite Pit on Granite Street)." XI. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS: XII. ADJOURNMENT: !Reminder 11 : Study Session on Friday, December 18, 1998 'at 12:30 p.m. in Council Chambers.. to discuss 1) g Citizen Survey; and 2) Strategic Plannin MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL December 1, 1998 Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 E. Main Street PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Shaw called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m., in the Civic Center Council Chambers. ROLL CALL Councilors Laws, Reid, Hauck, Hanson, and DeBoer were present. Councilor Wheeldon was absent. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Minutes of the Regular meeting minutes of November 17, 1998 were approved with amendment to page 1, last paragraph, second sentence; "costs were not included'. Executive meeting minutes of November 17, 1998 were approved as presented. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS 1. Acceptance of League of Oregon Cities 1998 Cities Award for Excellence for participation with Oregon Municipal Energy and Conservation Agency (OMECA). Mayor Shaw read out loud award of excellence. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Minutes of Boards, Commissions and Committees. 2 Quarterly Financial Report for three months ended September 30, 1998. 3 Confirmation of Mayor's Appointment of Howard Braham to Conservation Commission for term to expire April 30, 1999. Mayor Shaw requested that item #2 be pulled and placed under New Business. Councilors Reid/Hauck m/s to approve Consent Agenda items #1 and #3. All AYES. Motion passed. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Consideration of a Resolution Amending appropriations within the 1998-99 Budget. Director of Finance Jill Turner explained for council that the items in section three of proposed resolution requires that a public hearing be held for input by public. OPEN: 7:20 p.m. CLOSED: 7:20 p.m. PUBLIC FORUM (None) UNFINISHED BUSINESS (None) NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS 1. Council Meeting Look Ahead. Self explanatory, no comments made. 2. 1998/99 Construction and Major Project Activity Summary #2. Public Works Director Paula Brown submitted timeline synopsis and overview of the construction and major projects activity underway by the Public Works Department. Explained that the timeline shows all of the engineering projects and wastewater treatment project. City Council Meeting 12-01-98 Page 1 Commented that there are big projects ongoing, one of which is the Comprehensive Water Supply Needs Assessment Plan. Stated that the next study session with council is next Monday night, with the decision scheduled for December 15'". Stated they are getting very close to finalizing the plan and are gathering all the final numbers. Explained that another large master plan underway is the Storm Drain Master Plan, which has had to take a back seat due to time constraints. Informed council that they had received the aerial photos which had just been received today. Confirmed for council that during the storm drains have passed their testing during the recent rain storms and that no problems have been reported, other than problems associated with leaf back-up. Reported on the Central Ashland Bike Path, which is being administered by ODOT and construction is being completed by Ledford Construction. Stated that weather has beaten them again and they are all but complete. The only stretch that is not complete, is behind the area of the B Street yard. Sewer Treatment Plant Upgrade is doing very well despite a considerable amount of rock that has been found. This has put the project a little behind. They have also found that one of the main connection lines is not where they thought it was, and a change order has been submitted. Fuel tanks improvements at the Airport are in the process. Tanks have been ordered and expect to meet the December 22" deadline, primarily because we will not take fuel deliveries after that point. Stated that they will make sure there is an alternative way for making fuel available for pilots and the city yard. Reported that on the traffic calming of Oak Street. Also, the same firm that did the assessment on Oak Street completed a report on B Street, which came back with a good prognosis. The firm stated that what the city is doing doesn't appear to have any red flags. Commented on other miscellaneous projects that were submitted in memo to council on construction and project activities. Reported that the interviews are being conducted for GIS and going smoothly. Stated on the Crowson Reservoir Loop and a test run will be done sometime in December. This is out for bid and construction will begin in January and completion in May 1999. City Administrator explained to council that he met with RVTD staff regarding bus routes, and was informed that RVTD will let all jurisdictions know in January what the changes will be. Freeman was told that RVTD expects to lose 1/3 of operating revenue, and that there isn't anything known at this time regarding changes. Brown explained that there may be some disruptions due to construction on the Ashland Street water line for a short time span. Referred to summary memo handed out to council and explained how timeline reads on how things are planned or completed. Stated that there is no new information on negotiations for Talent Irrigation water supply. Confirmed that new update on projects will be submitted to council in three months. 3. Consideration of a Request by the YMCA to waive the building permit fees for the new aquatic center. Councilor DeBoer declared that he is on the Building Committee for the YMCA, and also serves as a trustee for the foundation. Stated that he is not declaring a conflict. Ken Ogden, Lisa Molnar and Dick Bernard/540 YMCA/Presented themselves to council for questions. City Administrator, Mike Freeman, explained that the waiver, not including System Development Charges, would be $5,000. The costs involving System Development Charges had not been calculated and was not available. City Council Meeting 12-01-98 Page 2 Explained that the $5,000 would include fees for plan check, fire permit, permitting, mechanical inspection, electrical, and state sur-charge. Mayor Shaw noted that she was in favor or waiving these fees. Stated that she felt there has been a precedence set in the past for this and the costs being requested to waive, are costs incurred to the city. Felt that the System Development Charges is money that is set aside so future generations are not faced with problems associated with this particular generation. Councilor Laws noted that he voted to do this in 1988, and was not sure if the waiver was for the full program or forjust the first phase. Councilor Hanson/Hauck m/s to approve request by YMCA to waive fees for staff time and which are not out of pocket expenses for the new aquatic center. Voice vote: all AYES. Motion passed. 4. Quarterly Financial Report for three months ended September 30, 1998. Mayor Shaw concerned that the quarterly financial report showed that the departments were closing in on the 25% alarm bell for this time of the year. Questioned the statement in memo from Finance regarding Fire Department at 26.09%, which will probably require a transfer of appropriations before year end. Questioned why the statement later in the memo, noted that Ambulance is bringing in more money than expected . Director of Finance, Jill Turner explained that there has been an increase in usage along with an increase in overtime. Turner explained that if you look at the city as a whole, there is always more overtime during the summer months for departments with minimum staffing requirements, so there is more than 25% during this time period of the departments total for the year. Explained that additionally, there was an unexpected expense for health insurance costs. Turner clarified for council that the Ambulance Fund is separated from the Fire Department, and that the allocation will only be as good as what comes through on the time sheet. Continued to clarify other expenses, including charges for services, involving other departments. Turner explained that the reason Conservation expenses are up in Personnel and Materials again involves the same issues. Noted that there will probably be another transfer of appropriations toward the end of the year and making some final adjustments. City Administrator noted that this discussion usually takes place at more than half-way through the year, and that summer programs spike significantly during the summer months and slow down during the winter months. Turner noted that department heads are aware that they working under tight situations and are making appropriate changes. Explained that Central Services expenses are also typical mainly because of the amount of annual dues that are spent at this time of the year. ORDINANCES. RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS 1. Second reading by title only of "An Ordinance Adopting the Transportation System Plan (excluding Chapter 10, 11 and 12) as Part of the Transportation Element of the Ashland Comprehensive Plan, and Repealing Resolution 91-39 Regarding Street Capacity." Councilors Hauck/Reid m/s to approve Ordinance #2835. DISCUSSION: Councilor Reid commented that she was not clear on the changes and the deletion that was made to ordinance at the last council meeting. Councilor Laws clarified that there were individuals that spoke against the interchange, and that it was obvious to council that there are people who see this as a negative. Felt that it wasn't worth getting people excited about this one way or the other. Hauck pointed out that this plan would include things that we have some chance of accomplishing during the twenty year period City Council Meeting 12-01-98 Page 3 1 and that by including the interchange only covered over all the other good things that were trying to be accomplished. Reid commented that she felt it was important to not give individuals a false sense of security that the city is in charge of this, when the State of Oregon has control of property that can facilitate this interchange. This, together with the state college leaves the city in a less than favorable position. Reid concerned with misleading the community on something that may not happen. Mayor Shaw commented that there may also be a false sense of anxiety. Councilor DeBoer commented that the interchange should be included in the plan, just because it is a possibility and is in our City Master Transportation Plan. Council discussion regarding Robert's Rule of Order in regards to voting procedure by council members. Roll Call vote: Laws, Reid and Hauck, YES; Hanson and DeBoer, NO. Motion passed 3-2. 2. Reading by title only of "A Resolution Declaring the Canvass of the Vote of the Election Held in and for the City of Ashland, Oregon, on November 3, 1998, and Mayoral Proclamation." Councilors m/s to approve Resolution # 98-28. Roll Call vote: DeBoer, Hanson, Hauck, Reid and Laws; YES. Motion passed. 3. Reading by title only of "A Resolution Amending Appropriations Within the '98-'99 Budget." Councilors m/s to approve Resolution #98-29. Roll Call vote: Hanson, Reid, DeBoer, Laws and Hauck; YES. Motion passed. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS Councilor DeBoer pointed out that the Rogue Valley Area Commission on Transportation will be having a meeting right after the next council meeting in January. Noted that he will not be an official liaison at that time and reminded Mayor that an appointment may need to be done. City Attorney Paul Nolte, clarified for council that in the city ordinance it states that when a question or motion is put to a vote by the chair, each member present shall vote for or against the same unless, the council excuses that member from so doing. ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjourned at 8:03 p.m. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder Catherine M. Shaw, Mayor City Council Meeting 12-01-98 Page 4 l11 / u 1 l 1 1 / 1 r l. I 1` V r 1 /-V d r IJr` d I „ d 1/ d /y n n ,~v _//t, t_< All 1 / _ wl f \ , _ e ) ; ✓ / ° %w .s 'C•„ 9 t :J' III` 1 1 {~D n ii. I I C (j "13 TH ANNUAL CHRISTMAS TREE RECYCLE DA Y" :<a>, . c11'4cll WHEREAS, solid waste disposal and a dwindling capacity in our landfills is a ('11 critical national problem; and £ s~l~~ ~~i p ~(s1_' WHEREAS, garden waste contributes a significant volume in our landfills; and .,_y ;e_r r WHEREAS, Troop 112 of the Boy Scouts of America with assistance from the q((i~~- yl Ashland Parks Department, picked up and chipped over 6,000 ,?ji Christmas trees last year; and .ice t Christmas trees last year; and ;rr WHEREAS, the chipped material was used on park trails and as mulch for plants and did not enter the waste stream"; and WHEREAS, the Ashland Host Lions and Early Bird Lions are supporting this ,till ,rpll effort by donating volunteer power and equipment to transport the (((}(,;r :,,,1 w-. pick-up crews. 'cy' ° NOW THEREFORE, I, Catherine M. Shaw, Mayor of the City of Ashland, do "huo' hereby proclaim Saturday, January 9, 1999 as: (I# IM1 ,:I 1.1 Ami "CHRISTMAS TREE RECYCLE DAY IN ASHLAND" ' ((IE: 5;c,3r and hereby urge all citizens to set out their tree near the curb on Friday, January 8, to be picked up on Saturday, January 9, between 9:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., nt-may, II IM1y`=•" ~O and to consider making a donation to assist the Troop in their community service((((, {'l activities. 1((lsf_ II Ili Dated this 15th day of December, 1998. r Barbara Christensen, Recorder dll` V1 +I , g Catherine M. Shaw, Mayor ~e~ r 3 if/ as v J a _ I r t t t/ a/ , a s 1 l a ( n O n ^m / - A ~~"t /lI 1 1\ U/Ip , 111 /II k ~ 11I+ ~ I 111 //4 11' , ~ 1114 `IO F10//M j~ v NO/M ) f 1/ y 111 il `1 111 p//y x Mfy I ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION HEARINGS BOARD MINUTES NOVEMBER 10, 1998 CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Vice Chair Anna Howe at 1:30 p.m. Other Commissioners present were Mike Morris and Chris Hearn. There were no absent members. Staff present were Bill Molnar, Maria Harris and Susan Yates. APPROVAL OF MINUTES AND FINDINGS The Minutes and Findings of the October 13, 1998 Hearings Board cannot be approved as there are not enough voting members present. TYPE II PUBLIC HEARINGS PLANNING ACTION 98-094 REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND SITE REVIEW FOR THE EXPANSION OF NOW CONFORMING STRUCTURE AS WELL AS A 150 SQ. FT. EXPANSION OF AN EXISTING MEDICAL OFFICE 521 NORTH MAIN STREET APPLICATION: SCOTT YOUNG, MD STAFF REPORT Harris said the hearing was originally scheduled for the October Hearings Board as a Type I but was called up by a neighbor for a public hearing. A Conditional Use Permit is required because the applicant is requesting that the front yard setback be non-conforming and because it is an expansion of a medical office that was previously approved as a Conditional Use Permit. A Site Review is required because they are proposing to add onto a commercial building. The history of the application is included in the Staff Report. The request for the addition is being made in order to expand the surgical theater and create additional storage space. CUP Requirements - When North Main was re-done a few years ago by the Oregon Dept. of Transportation, they took some of the applicant's front yard along North Main, thus reducing the front yard setback to six and one-half feet. The new addition will reduce the front yard setback to five feet. Since the addition is toward the North Main side of the property, it is Staffs opinion this will be a minimum impact in terms of building structure. Site Design Requirements - Before the Historic Commission reviewed the application, it was Staffs opinion, though the information was limited, the proposed addition met the Site Design requirements. The Historic Commission reviewed it and concurred but asked a condition be added about the foundation. They want the corner to wrap around so when looking at the front of the building, it would give the appearance there is a continuous foundation. The applicant did not address the two locust trees near the vicinity of the proposed addition. The Staff report is asking that every effort be made to save as many healthy existing trees and shrubs as possible. The applicant can further clarify this issue today. CUP Expansion of the Medical Office Use - Harris referred to Criteria 3, comparing the adverse material impacts of the proposed use compared to the target use of the zone. The target use of the property is two multi-family units. The office was approved previously so the use itself is not in question. The question is the impact of the 150 square foot addition. Staff believes the primary impact is the traffic impact. Medical offices have a much higher trip per day than do multi-family units. The only indication in the applicant's findings regarding this impact is that there would be no additional employees. The addition seems small physically, but one question Staff has raised is: Will the expansion facilitate more client trips? It is not clear in the expansion of the surgical theater if there will be more tables now or if the tables will be spread out to facilitate easier maneuvering. Would that mean more people coming into the office on a daily basis? Will there be more employee hours with a higher amount of time spent by the physicians using this office or a higher rotation? These items have not been clearly addressed in the application. Howe entered the letter from Mr. and Mrs. Evans into the record. Included are the comments from the applicant's pre-application conference. Howe said the pre-app conference takes a very strong view from Staff it is improper to expand the CUP because the handicap parking is a major issue along with some other negative comments, yet the final Staff Report has a completely different slant. Harris responded that the pre-app conference is an informal meeting. The Staff comments looked at the site in total. The City Attorney said the Hearings Board is limited to looking at the impact of the expansion but he said it does not have to be looked at in a vacuum and ignore any problems existing on the site today. Some of the comments in the pre-app were directed toward the code compliance issues. If there are code compliance issues, they need to be dealt with in a separate way. Molnar recalled there was an issue with the apartment approved with the initial application. Was it being used as an apartment or was it being used as part of the medical building as either a conference room or as an accessory medical use? As of this date, while the residential use might be limited, it is Staffs interpretation that it is being used as a residential use and not as part of the medical facility. If indeed the apartment was being used for medical, then the impact would be far beyond the 150 square foot expansion. Molnar remembered at some point in the process, either Engineering or Traffic Safety approved marking the handicap space at curbside Oust up from the intersection). Some of the neighbors have said that has caused more curbside parking further up into the neighborhood that might have been a couple spaces closer to the intersection had the handicap space been marked on the applicant's property. Molnar said there is excess parking in the lot to go back to potentially putting the space back in the parking lot and freeing up the curbside parking for overflow parking resulting from the medical office. Molnar read the City Attorney's interpretation from an e-mail. PUBLIC HEARING RICHARD STEVENS, 363 W. Sixth Street, Medford, said he is representing the property owner and applicant. He is aware of the pre-app comments and Evans' letter which is based on the pre-app conference and done without the advantage of a formal application and findings of fact which have been prepared and submitted in support of the application addressing the applicable criteria. The pre-app comments give the Hearings Board a limited view and they should take a limited examination of those comments. Stevens said they concur with the Staff Report. He believes they have met the criteria. The non- conforming status of the property was not created by the property owner but is a result of a public works ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 2 HEARINGS BOARD NOVEMBER 10, 1998 MINUTES project making the property and the structure non-conforming. The Historic Commission has reviewed the application and their added condition is agreeable to the applicant. No tree loss will be experienced as a result of this application and the locust trees will be maintained. The purpose of the expansion is to enlarge the surgical theater and that purpose is to allow Dr. Young to use modern technology in a room that is now too cramped and too small. Secondly, Dr. Young needs additional storage for the equipment. He would like to get the laundry facilities out of the break room and better utilize the space. They are not expanding the physical operation at the present time. There will be no larger patient load. The doctor's procedures will expand in length and result in fewer patients on a daily basis. The employee hours are fairly set and should not change. They do not see any need to expand the parking facilities. Evans has raised issues with the criteria, items C, #'s 2, 5 and 7. Those relate to the criteria addressed by the applicant in their findings of fact. Number 2 deals with generation of traffic and affects on the surrounding street. The 150 square foot expansion will not generate any additional traffic for this operation. It is simply to allow more convenient use of the surgical theater and introduce new technologies to accommodate the patients coming to the facility at the present time. There will be no additional traffic, parking, pedestrians or employees. Stevens addressed criteria C 5 (generation of noise, light and glare). There should be no change of the present exterior lighting, glare, noise level, or traffic. Evans will not see the expansion of the structure from his residence. Criteria C 7, Stevens noted, need additional standards articulated in order to answer. DARRELL BOLDT and SCOTT YOUNG were available for questions. Morris asked how many patients are seen a day. Young said on a surgery day it might only be two patients but on a maximum day about 30 patients, sometimes a few more. Boldt said he met with Knox during the pre-app and he was asking for a review of several things. The actual application has been scaled down since the pre-app. Howe asked how many doctors use the office. Young said there have been two, it is now one but could be two again. Howe asked the patient load with two doctors. Young said it could have been up to 60 patients per day though that would be a heavy day.. Howe wondered how close are the locust trees to the new addition., Young said the addition is designed not to harm the locust .trees. The addition is about three to four feet away after construction. Boldt submitted some photos. Howe said the applicant is asking to exacerbate the non-conformity by going into the setback another foot. We have heard that in the past there is handicap parking on the street and not as close to the office and more difficult for people on a slope to get out of their car. Young responded that the wheelchair request was made because that is the easiest way for a disabled person to get out of a vehicle. Coolidge is angled up and the parking lot is angled sideways. It is safer on the street. There have been no complaints from patients. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 3 HEARINGS BOARD NOVEMBER 10, 1998 MINUTES JACK EVANS, P. O. BOX 1293, Ashland, stated he and his wife own 70 Coolidge Street which is directly across from the building in question. Evans said the pre-app was done in March which stated all the problems with the application. He said if you look at the traffic figures, it is an increase of 672 percent. The parking lot has some slow days but there are a lot of heavy days with the parking lot completely full. Cars are parked on both sides of the street and beyond Rock Street. He asked the Hearings Board to remember not to make their decision in a vacuum. He is skeptical of the applicant saying there would be no more traffic impact. He would like to see this application stopped. PATTY BRUNO, 521 North Main, Office Coordinator, stated she works 40 hours a week and does not plan on increasing her hours worked. The are running out of space for charts. The paperwork has increased because of managed care requirements. They are required to keep two years of files in their office and all records have to be kept for a minimum of ten years. They need added storage space for equipment. She does not see there will be any increase in the number of patients or amount of traffic. BILL SAVARO, RN, 521 North Main, said he works for Dr. Young and his major objective is to increase his efficiency in patient care. Having an increase in the operating room space directly relates to that. Rebuttal Stevens responded that he is a consultant, not an attorney. The parking requirements of the code have been met - one parking space required for 350 square feet of medical space. He does not know where the 672 percent increase came from. Howe said it is included in Evans' letter and Harris said he is referring to traffic counts. Stevens said the street has a capacity for 6 to 8,000 trips per day. In addition, the whole area needs to be viewed because other medical offices will influence expansion of traffic. No new noise levels will be created with this application. The upstairs has never been used for Dr. Young's practice. It is not part of the application. Staff Comments Harris read the Historic Commission's condition. "That a foundation of the new addition shall have a corner return of 32 inches to 48 inches to provide the appearance of a continuous foundation." Harris explained Staff did not in fact recommend approval of the application but has left it up to the Hearings Board. She added that the applicant is required to have eight spaces and they currently have nine. COMMISSIONERS' MOTION AND DISCUSSION Hearn moved to approve subject to the conditions along with the new condition of approval. Strike Condition 2 and use Harris' wording from above. Strike #2 and use her specific one. Morris seconded the motion. After reviewing the criteria, Hearn said this is a review of an expansion and he believes the traffic concerns have been answered. He does not see how enlarging the operating room will generate more traffic. He believes the application meets the criteria. The motion carried unanimously. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 4 HEARINGS BOARD NOVEMBER 10, 1998 MINUTES TYPE I PLANNING ACTIONS PLANNING ACTION 98-107 REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP OF A FOUR- UNIT TRAVELER'S ACCOMMODATION PLUS OWNER'S QUARTERS. 570 SISKIYOU BOULEVARD APPLICANT: BARBARA SIMARD This action was approved. PLANNING ACTION 98-113 REQUEST FOR FINAL PLAN APPROVAL OF A 24-LOT, 24-UNIT MULTI-FAMILY SUBDIVISION UNDER THE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OPTION FOR THE PROPERTY 458 AND 460 CLAY STREET APPLICANT: GREGG ADAMS This action was approved. ADJOURNMENT - The meeting was adjourned at 2:45 p.m. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 5 HEARINGS BOARD NOVEMBER 10, 1998 MINUTES ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 10, 1998 CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Vice Chair Anna Howe. Other Commissioners present were Russ Chapman, Mike Gardiner, John Fields, Mike Morris, Marilyn Briggs, and Chris Hearn. Steve Armitage and Alex Amarotico were absent. Staff present were Bill Molnar, Maria Harris and Susan Yates. APPROVAL OF MINUTES AND FINDINGS October 27, 1998 Minutes - Chapman made a change on page 2 to read: Chapman felt the cost of transit equipment, as shown in the consultant's report was too high. If the City decided to investigate its own intra-city service, Chapman would be glad to work on a feasibility committee. Hearn moved to approve the Minutes of October 13,1998 and October 27, 1998 as amended, Gardiner seconded and the minutes were approved. PUBLIC FORUM - No one came forth to speak TYPE II PUBLIC HEARING PLANNING ACTION 98-075 REQUEST FOR SITE REVIEW AND LANDSCAPING COVERAGE VARIANCE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A TWO-STORY OFFICE/COMMERCIAL/RESIDENTIAL BUILDING. ALSO INCLUDES A VARIANCE TO THE OFF-STREET PARKING SECTION OF THE LAND USE ORDINANCE ALLOWING FOR A REDUCTION IN THE TOTAL NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES, AS WELL AS A STACKED PARKING CONFIGURATION. APPLICANT: MARK AND REBECCA REITINGER Site Visits and Ex Parte Contacts Gardiner had a site visit but was not at the July meeting but he read the minutes. He did not listen to the tapes. Howe, Briggs, Chapman and Hearn had site visits. Fields had a site visit. He works with Jerome White and Doyle Brightenburg and he has discussed with them neighborhood parking and design standards. There have been no specific conversations about this project. Morris had a site visit but was not present at the last hearing on this issue. He did not listen to the tapes. Molnar said there has been a revision to the application and it was re-noticed. STAFF REPORT Molnar said the main issue at the July meeting was the parking variance. Eight spaces were required and three were being provided in the rear off the alley with a stacked configuration for a total of six spaces and the handicap space provided at curbside on Fourth Street. The ordinance only recognizes three spaces. In reviewing the minutes and past Commissioner discussion on this matter, the Commission had problems with the parking variance and felt the impacts on the existing area of on- street parking is too great and the Commission had moved to deny the request. The applicant was given an opportunity to revise the plan and address the concerns raised by the Commissioners. The overall building design and height has remained the same. There has been a 650 square foot reduction in internal floor area. The majority of the space was removed from the first floor. The second floor has been reduced 150 square feet. Since the writing of the Staff Report, Staff has been uncertain where the reduction came from since the floor plans are identical. The applicant may have miscalculated the second floor or included the balcony areas. With the reduction the total parking requirement has been reduced from eight spaces to six spaces. The same stacked configuration has been proposed with the allotment of the handicap space on Fourth. The existing use of the property (pottery shop) is non-conforming because it is pre-existing, legal non- conforming use but with no parking on the site right now. If another retail business wanted to occupy the existing 1472 square feet, it would not trigger a planning application review. Staff feels there are unique or unusual circumstances about the site in terms of lot configuration. The Historic Commission concurred it does represent an attractive building design. It allows for mixed use with residential and office. space. On the other hand, the proposal only provides 50 percent of the parking required. The neighbors have expressed concerns about the additional demand placed on parking along A Street. Staff concluded the application comes down to Criteria B--the potential impacts of the parking variance, specifically on existing curbside parking for the immediate area, with the impacts outweighing the benefits. Should the Commission decide to approve the application, Staff has recommended eight Conditions. Two Conditions were suggested at the Historic Commission: 1) If the application is approved, the demolition permit would be approved concurrently with the building permit (that would be in case the project never went forward), 2) That the final building design details be submitted for review by the Historic Commission and approval by the Planning Director, specifically, the depth of architectural features such as cornice features or trim need to be shown. This would be reviewed by the Historic Commission and approved by Staff Advisor. PUBLIC HEARING REBECCA REITINGER and MARK REITINGER1898 Tolman Creek Road showed overheads of their project. They are showing the same front facade with 2700 square feet of office space which will require six parking spaces. This project will benefit economic development. It will be an owner occupied building. The project will provide new spaces for the community. There is no way to increase the parking. The original square footage of the building was computed in error. The first floor has been reduced with the crawl space at the rear. If the existing building is renovated or nothing is done to it except increase its use, five parking spaces would be needed and none provided or required. There is a larger difference in the parking required for the renovated building But either plan cannot meet the requirement. PETER BRUNNER, 245 Van Ness, broker with Brunner &White, 77 N. Main Street stated he is opposed to the approval of the variance. He gave a handout to the Commissioners showing colored in tax lots. He will be coming before the Planning Commission within the next three.months for a mixed use building. He had photos showing parking on A Street on a fairly typical day with the parking spaces mostly filled. Parking is a major concern on A Street. He feels the parking impacts of the proposed project will definitely be more negative than beneficial. Brunner believes the proposal is entirely self-imposed by the applicant. He would have liked a second apartment at 545 A Street but he could not provide parking. He would like to see the applicant held to the same standard as he is. JEROME WHITE, architect, 545 A Street, (resides at 253 3id Street) read his statement. He opposes the project because of density and practicality of the proposed parking arrangement. He had a handout for ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 2 REGULAR MEETING NOVEMBER 10, 1998 MINUTES the Commissioners showing a chart of densities. Hearn asked White how he would feel about the applicant remodeling the existing building. White sees there is a way to provide four stacked parking spaces and he could live with the remodeled building. DOYLE BRIGHTENBURG, 350 Phelps Street, works at 545 A Street, works across the street from the proposed development. He read a prepared statement. He believes the variance for parking goes too far over the line of common sense. CYNTHIA WHITE, 245 Van Ness, read a statement. She opposes the project because the size of the building does not conform to the scale of the lot. Had they not paid too much for the property initially, the proposal might be more economically feasible. She believes the parking needs along A should be considered and the future requests for parking variances. She does not believe there are unique and unusual circumstances. Rebuttal Becky Reitenger agrees with many of the comments made by those in opposition. However, she believes by developing the property, it will decrease the impact on the neighborhood. It will be a greater benefit than intensifying the use of the existing building. Chapman asked if two of the proposed spaces are phantom spaces or can they really exist? Reitenger believes they can exist. Gardiner said the regulations for a parking space are 9'x 18' and will not fit even with the compact requirements. Reitinger said the request is to make them all compact spaces. Gardiner added the Planning Commission is not here to make an optional plan for the applicant. COMMISSIONERS' DISCUSSION AND MOTION Gardiner moved to deny the motion. He agreed with Chapman that some of parking spaces will be non- spots. Chapman seconded the motion. Gardiner believes the criteria for a variance have not been met. By building the size building they are asking, they have created the need for a variance. Briggs appreciates how the applicants have reduced the size of the building. She believes the building is handsome and does not feel uncomfortable with the variance in this case. She believes they are providing parking. Chapman wished Reitinger could purchase a variance by buying bus passes for their employees or providing on-site bicycles. This is a situation where we are letting the requirements of cars influence our decision. He believes the conditions have been willfully self-imposed due to the size of the building. Morris noticed about a quarter of the lot will be for parking. Briggs said the lot and the ordinance are not compatible but they are still trying to do something handsome. To keep it in a residential feel, she does not see how they cannot grant the variance. She does not believe they are setting some impossible precedence. Fields owns the building across the street. He has been involved in commercial development on A ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 3 REGULAR MEETING NOVEMBER 10, 1998 MINUTES Street for the past 15 years. He respects the Reitengers but the bottom line is the criteria defining the density of what the neighbors see. The variance procedure is really close but he believes it is too dense. Too much development on too small a lot. Howe mentioned that at a previous meeting for the prior proposal, she sees value in supporting buildings in the Historic District. If we go for just the gems that will exclude the value of keeping buildings that are not architecturally significant. She was thrilled that they might keep the original building and fix it up. Hearn does not believe we can dictate or legislate what people build. Hearn, Howe, Chapman, Gardiner, Morris, Fields voted in favor of denial denial and Briggs and Morris voted "no". ADJOURNMENT - The meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 4 REGULAR MEETING NOVEMBER 10, 1998 MINUTES ASHLAND CONSERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES October 28, 1998 CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Kari Tuck at 7:08 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. Members present were Bruce Moats, Russ Chapman, Kirk Evans, Kari Tuck, Russ Otte, Ashley Henry and Karen Amarotico. Staff present was Sonja Akerman from the City. No members were absent. John McCory resigned. APPROVAL OF MINUTES In the September 23, 1998 Minutes, Moats clarified (under Water Subcommittee) he would like more time to think about the TAP pipeline because it is a decision that needs to be thoroughly studied. He wishes Ashland had a year to make the decision rather than having to make it by December. He said it is true Ashland's problem is not supply but storage. The minutes were then approved as clarified. OLD BUSINESS Sustainable Ashland Video Preview - Joe Brett stated he is within five to seven days of having the rough cut completed. At that time, he will make copies for each commission member so they can critique it. Moats will be the contact person for commission feedback. PUBLIC FORUM Landon Hilliard invited the Conservation Commission to the Friday night town cruise bicycle ride. Participants meet at 5:00 p.m. at the Plaza and ride for a half hour. This is to promote getting bike lanes on Siskiyou Boulevard. Hilliard said there are many Ashland citizens who would like to turn Ashland into a bike town. He stressed the town cruise is peaceful and lawful. One lane is closed to the bicyclists. Tuck asked about the bike lane by the railroad tracks. Hilliard answered it should have been completed, but the contractor is far behind schedule. The bike lane will begin at the Railroad Park and continue to Tolman Creek Road. ASHLAND SANITARY & RECYCLING UPDATE Chapman reported five people who had signed up for booths at the Recycle Fair canceled the day before. Ashland Sanitary is thinking it should perhaps try something else, perhaps have a green store event or booth on the last Saturday of each month. There could be worm bins, biomass products display, compost bins for sale at half price, etc. They are open to suggestions. Chapman also stated Dan Murphy will be going to DEG in Salem on October 30'" to get a revised Green Schools application. Amarotico asked Chapman for an update on the market reports. Chapman replied the Pacific Rim is affecting the market. Asia and Russia are so strapped for cash, for instance, they are not even buying scrap metal, they are selling what they have at depressed prices. It is a difficult market with a depressed demand. NEW BUSINESS Sustainable Business Project Update - Ross Finney gave the Commission an update on the work he has done since SOU started in September. Most of his information so far is from the Bay Area Green Business program and the Green Star Program of Alaska. He would like to put together a program for Ashland using the best portions of programs he is researching. The Conservation Commission needs to decide how it wants to be involved with this process. Tuck asked who would oversee the program. Finney stated Wanderscheid had previously indicated City staff would most likely be designated. Henry remarked if businesses are going to receive this status, it will be important to have someone check on them. Finney wondered if the Chamber of Commerce should be involved and if there would be administrative staff available. Henry stated she would like to be involved in setting up the criteria. Finney declared he will put together a draft check list and e-mail it to the members so he will have feedback at the next meeting. Otte commented he would like to use the "carrot" approach with the businesses rather than the "stick" approach. MORE OLD BUSINESS Water Subcommittee - Moats reported he didn't have an update on the latest WAG meeting. Both he and Henry were unable to attend. He said he had heard snow manufacturing and water banking had been eliminated. The next meeting will be November 9" or 10'". He also related the Chamber of Commerce is sponsoring a public meeting on this on November 10'". Green Schools Subcommittee - Tuck stated Murphy had given the committee some information. They will need to promote the program and interact with the schools in getting qualified. Otte conveyed the science teacher at the high school (Jim Hartman) has revamped the curriculum and is moving in the right direction. Jefferson Monthly Article - Amarotico's article on Ken Hagen was commended. Henry volunteered to write the next article. Styrofoam Ordinance Amendment -The Commission had nothing to add to the memo which will be forwarded to the Council. Update on Tree Commission Meeting- Chapman reported he had attended the October 8" meeting. The Tree Commission will come up with project(s). Amarotico volunteered to attend the November 5'" meeting. Memorial Tree Update - Tuck stated the Parks Department has a policy whereby no plaques are allowed in City parks. Trees can be planted, however. It was the unanimous decision of the Commission to check into the possibility of planting a tree and placing a plaque in honor of Hagen either by the Council Chambers or at the Recycle Depot. Forest CommissionlSmart Wood Update - Amarotico reported she, Chapman and Tuck attended the last Forest Commission meeting. Steve Gretzinger presented the Smart Wood Program with more detail. Tuck related it was mentioned the Ashland Watershed may get certified. NEW BUSINESS (again) Change November Meetinq Date - The next meeting will be December 10". Continuance of Living Light/v- The Commission feels it is beneficial to write the articles in order to keep the Conservation Commission in the public. Moats moved and Evans seconded to commit writing the articles for another year. The motion passed unanimously. COMMISSION ITEMS Henry stated through her job she coordinates Ashland Middle School in the study of such matters as salmon spawning and water quality testing. She said if any commission member would like to participate, it would be a good experience. Evans said he would like genetic diversity and genetic alteration of food sources to be put on the next agenda. ADJOURNMENT - The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. Ashland Conservation Commission 2 Minutes October 28, 1998 MINUTES FOR THE SPECIAL STUDY SESSION ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL December 7, 1998 Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 E. Main Street Mayor Shaw called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.. Attending: Councilors Hauck, Wheeldon, Reid, Hanson and DeBoer; Staff: Freeman, Scoles, Brown, Turner, and Wanderscheid. 1. Comprehensive Water Supply Plan Director of Public Works, Paula Brown, noted correction to memo submitted for the study session under Option 45. In second paragraph, the word "not" should be stricken out. Brown gave brief synopsis of proposed presentation on water alternatives being presented by Carollo Engineers. Explained that the special study session on Ashland's long term water future was designed to provide the City Council with a great deal of complex information in a fairly short period of time. Bob Eimstad and Ken Wilkins from Carollo Engineers presented an overview to council. Presentation included the following: 1) Basis for Study; 2) Concepts; 3) Alternatives; 4) Cost Comparisons; and 5) Summary & Questions. Explained that this was a follow-up from workshop No. 2 which would include baseline demand for planning and restatement of water supply and demand condition. Water-Supply Alternatives would include project concepts, infrastructure, costs, and implementation issues. Graph outlining baseline demand w/conservation and curtailment for 1997-1998 noted curtailment in summer time and showed inadequate supply in summer months. Supply and demand comparison graph identified basis of demand in three categories, 1) No new conservation/No curtailment; 2) Conservation; and 3) Conservation + 10% curtailment. Water supply components included looking at reclamation, TID pipeline (due to leakage issues), TAP pipeline (linking Medford to Talent/Phoenix), and co-op projects with TID. Reclamation project concept included supply to large irrigation customers, and estimated supply of 75-250 MG (million gallons) in summer months with 20-60% of 2050 drought year deficit. Noted that the intent was to meet demand for potable water. Map showing what would be the required reclamation infrastructure was shown. Stated that new pipelines would need to be built to keep the different water levels separate and a larger amount of piping would be needed depending on how large the area of use was. Noted benefits and drawbacks to reclamation implementation. The benefits were as follows: 1) re-use of water; and 2) high reliability and sustainability; which was an important issue for this community. The drawbacks were as follows: 1) New distribution infrastructure=high unit cost; 2) Restricted use - irrigation only (not potable water); and 3) Public acceptability. TID pipeline project concept, which is the piping of the westside canal, included new supply for irrigation or domestic use, estimated supply of 105-300 MG in summer months, and 25-70% of annual deficit. Commented that the BOR (Bureau of of Reclamation) and TID (Talent Irrigation District) have tried to estimate the amount of water that is lost due to leakage, but have not completed their study. Explained that the TID pipeline infrastructure would provide new turnouts for existing customers and would be beneficial to in-stream habitat. Council Study Session 12/07/98 Page I Presented the benefits and drawbacks to the TID pipeline implementation. The benefits are as follows: 1) Maximize TID supply; which would save water through more efficient use of water and 2) Existing connection to city infrastructure. The drawbacks are as follows: 1) Available drought supply is uncertain, and capital costs are fixed which may mean spending up front; 2) Habitat impact with new pipeline, as the canal currently functions as a habitat for wildlife; 3) Multiple agency coordination; and 4) Water right re-allocation, which would mean water right issues. TAP pipeline project concept included new potable water supply, supply 0-2000 MG in summer months or year- round, which could be variable, and up to 450% of annual deficit. Noted that bringing in potable water from Medford would mean acquiring water rights from Lost Creek Reservoir. Presented illustration of infrastructure for the TAP pipeline. Presented benefits and drawbacks to the TAP pipeline implementation. The benefits are as follows: 1) Redundant/Reliable supply; and 2) Potable supply. The drawbacks are as follows: 1) Reliance on Medford for supply, which is a community concern; and 2) Doesn't encourage water conservation/reclamation. It was noted that the long-term redundancy would provide no incentive for conservation. Cooperative projects with T/D included water marketing, which would mean the city buying water from TID irrigators during drought, re-allocating water rights and type of usage, which would mean that the city would buy land within the TID service area and re-allocate water right place of use and type of use. Noted that there are no water rights available currently, and that these were the only options. Also noted that there could be some up-front costs involved in buying water from TID irrigators. Councilor Reid questioned whether anyone had explored the possibility of changing the usage on current land used for crops. It was explained that there is plenty of land not currently being used for crops that is available. Presented the benefits and drawbacks for the implementation issues on the components for reclamation, TID pipeline, TAP pipeline and Co-op projects. Reclamation benefits included: 1) Reliable/Sustainable; and 2) Re-use of water. Drawbacks included: 1) New infrastructure costly; and 2) Restricted use. T/D pipeline benefits included: 1) Maximize TID supply. Drawbacks included: 1) Drought supply uncertain; and 2) Water right re-allocation. TAP pipeline benefits included: 1) Redundant/reliable; and 2) Meets long term needs. Drawbacks included: 1) Doesn't encourage conservation/reclamation. Co-op Project benefits included: 1) Flexibility of supply. Drawbacks included: 1) Drought supply uncertain; and 2) Water right re-allocation. Stated that all of the water supply alternatives included the requirement that they meet the 2050 deficit, conservation, and 10% curtailment potential. Submitted several alternatives. Alternative # 1: Reclamation with TID Co-op noted distribution infrastructure for irrigation with reclaimed or TID supply, co-op supply must provide 200 MG minimum, and most of co-op supply for domestic use. Benefits for Alternative #l: Reclamation and Co-op were as follows: 1) Maximize use of existing supply; and 2) High reliability from reclaimed water. Drawbacks were as follows: 1) Co-op supply during drought uncertain; 2) Unit cost high for combined project; and 3) Water right change for co-op supply. Alternative #2: TID pipeline with TID/Co-op noted pipeline supply for domestic or irrigation use; 105 MG firth supply, new distribution system for irrigation with TID water, and co-op supply target 350 MG; 200 for irrigation. Benefits for Alternative 92: TID pipeline and Co-op were as follows: 1) Maximize TID supply; and 2) Irrigate with TID water instead of potable water. Drawbacks were as follows: 1) Supply available through co-op uncertain; 2) Drought supply somewhat uncertain; and 3) Multiple agency coordination (BOR, TID, and Oregon Water Resources). Council Study Session 12/07/98 Page 2 Alternative #3: TID pipeline with Co-op and Reclamation noted pipeline supply for domestic use; 105 MG firm supply, re-allocate water right from city-owned land - 150 MG firm supply, and reclamation supply target of 200 MG. Benefits for Alternative #3: TID pipeline with Co-op and Reclamation were as follows: 1) Maximize use of existing supplies; and 2) Positive environmental benefits. Drawbacks were as follows: 1) High unit cost for combined alternative; and 2) Co-op supply during drought uncertain. Alternative #4: TAP pipeline Buy-in and Use noted buy-in to TAP pipeline and extend to Ashland, redundant supply for domestic or irrigation use, and target supply of 450-2000 MG. Benefits for Alternative #4: TAP pipeline buy-in and use were as follows: 1) Redundant/reliable long term supply. Drawbacks were as follows: 1) Disincentive for conservation or reclamation; and 2) Reliance on Medford. Alternative #5: TAP pipeline and water rights re-allocation noted extending pipeline to Ashland, co-op supply for domestic use, and TAP supply of 300 MG, co-op supply of 150 MG. Benefits for Alternative #5: TAP pipeline and water rights re-allocation were as follows: 1) Redundant/reliable long term supply. Drawbacks were as follows: 1) Disincentive for conservation or reclamation or other options; and 2) Reliance on Medford. Alternative #6A, 6B: TAP pipeline buy-in only with TID Co-op noted pay costs to up size TAP; no extension to Ashland - "Contingency Alternative", co-op supply for domestic or irrigation use, and total co-op supply of 450 MG; 200 MG minimum for potable supply. Benefits for Alternative 46A, 6B: TAP pipeline buy-in only with TID Co-op were as follows: 1) Maximum flexibility; and 2) Maximized use of existing supply. Noted that this allows for flexibility to explore other alternatives. Drawbacks were as follows: 1) No immediate redundant supply; 2) Added costs for separate irrigation distribution; 3) Multi-agency coordination; and 4) High cost. Noted that it would take a couple of years to build a pipeline if this alternative was chosen. Alternative Cost Summary was submitted as follows for all alternatives: Supply Target MG Total Project Cost Total Unit Cost $ Mil $/Mil Gal 1) Reclamation w/co-op 250 (Domestic) 11.7 3,700 200 (Irrigation) 2) TID pipeline w/co-op 250 (Domestic) 17.3 4,800 200 (Irrigation) *Note: Alternative #3 was not shown as the costs were too high for target costs. 4) TAP buy-in and Use 450-2,000 (Domestic) 7.4-12.9 1,500-1,300 5) TAP pipeline w/co-op 450 (Domestic) 8.9 2,800 6A, 6B) TAP buy-in only w/ co-op & Reclamation 200-450 (Domestic) 8.7-12.9 2,400-3,500 6C) TAP buy-in only w/co-op & Reclamation 250 (Domestic) 15.2 4,400 Council Study Session 12/07/98 Page 3 Presented a proposal by the Medford Water Commission as Alternative #7: Medford Water Commission Proposal which noted extending TAP pipeline to Ashland, cooperative agreement to provide back-up supply to Talent, and TAP supply of 100 MG; Talent 200 MG; TID co-op supply of 150 MG. Explained that this would involve 600 acre feet of water rights that the City of Talent has targeted as a back-up supply in emergencies. Commented that the proposal had also been sent to the City of Talent, but no discussion had taken place with their council or administration. Presented the public involvement in the planning process which included numerous WAG (Water Advisory Group) meetings, three city council presentations, individual input from concerned citizens, community water form sponsored by Chamber of Commerce, and public hearing/decision which is scheduled for December 15, 1998. Commented on the WAG findings and conclusions which included all project alternatives as viable, no consensus on a preferred alternative, and the evaluation criteria that WAG developed. Stated that they had not been able to reach a consensus with WAG. Carollo recommended that the city should participate in the TAP project (Alternative 6A) and up sizing pipeline to 24", purchase rights to 450 MG from Lost Creek Reservoir, not to extend pipeline to Ashland, and to pursue other supply options in the near term. Explained that the recommendations did not come from an engineers outlook and that their recommendation came from listening to lots of concerns regarding keeping Ashland self-sustaining and preserving the policy of water conservation. Commented that there was concern that if the pipeline was extended to Ashland now, it would change the nature of Ashland. Director of Finance, Jill Turner presented the impact on water rates based on each alternative. Noted that Alternative #7, which was received late, would fall in the graph between Alternative #6A and 4A. The calculation of the impact assumed 75% of capitol costs paid in System Development Charges, 25% through rates, and 100% operating costs paid through rates. Impact was based on current rates, and what the impact on water customers for current water use would be. Councilor Wheeldon questioned council that were involved in the previous discussion and decision, on keeping effluent in Ashland, about how they came to their decision. Hauck explained that the overall costs were all about the same and that he felt it was important to keep our resources. Laws felt that in the future when more water was needed, water reclamation technology would be available to treat effluent for water usage. Reid stated that it would be a resource to the community and to wildlife habitat in the creek, and was seen as too valuable to lose given the possibility for re-use as technologies develop. Mayor Shaw commented on how inexpensive, reliable and easy the study had shown it to be to connect with Medford, and voiced concerns on the decision to keep the resources in Ashland. Reid noted how the wetlands demonstration site played a dramatic role in keeping the effluent here. And stated that Ashland should be viewed as a part of the greater whole of the Rogue River basin. Mayor Shaw pointed out that previous discussions of returning water to the Creek hadn't raised the issue that Ashland would still be considered the point source and would need to meet water quality standards. Also commented that while she supports the wetlands project, previous information submitted to council showed that the size of the wetlands would need to be enormous to make it work. City Administrator Mike Freeman noted for council that a large portion of the costs for reclamation would be for infrastructure (a redundant piping system) and outside of that costs wouldn't vary much. Carollo representative Bob Eimstad explained for Councilor Wheeldon that they had looked at constructing a separate reservoir downstream, and found that the current reservoir would need to be higher and larger. That construction would be environmentally difficult and that Reeder Reservoir has a life span that goes beyond the planning period of the current study. Council Study Session 12/07/98 Page 4 Discussed the effect of a separate reservoir on flooding, noting that it might improve the situation. Also noted that discussions have occurred in the Water Advisory Group about the possibility of relying on Medford for water so as to leave all of Ashland's water in the creek for fish. Eimstad explained that reclamation impacted conservation in that 20% conservation would be challenged and made more difficult. It would reduce overall deficit by including conservation, can't double count the 20% conservation. Commented that there is no change involving the Imperatice property other than there would need to be a change in water rights for spray irrigation. Eimstad clarified Alternative #5, building the TAP line to Ashland and that better use of TID water for cooperative projects would allow use of water from Imperatice property rather than using TAP water. The intention is to not build additional separate infrastructure but to use the water rights that the City already has for a combination of irrigation and domestic purposes. Eimstad clarified that the reclamation schematic map provided in the Comprehensive Water Supply Plan did not show all of the large water users. Clarification on whether Ashland would lose water rights if not used within specific time frame. It was explained that municipal water rights cannot be canceled and this would not be a drawback or problem. Wheeldon questioned whether there were any incentive programs offered by the federal government that could play into funding "innovative" City projects. Wilkins commented that there may be money available if the project could be tied with fish habitat or an infrastructure project under the Safe Drinking Water Act. Emphasized that any Safe Drinking Water Act monies would be in the form of very low interest loans. Ed Olson and Jack Day/Medford Water Commission came forward to answer questions by council regarding Alternative V. Mayor Shaw noted her appreciation of their proposal. Day commented on how Medford was viewed as wanting to have control, which he disputed. Commented that it really involved significant cost savings to Ashland customers. Laws commented on concerns that commission wasn't interested in having Ashland participate in an interne, and the possibility of losing the power of conservation incentives. Day explained that the commission wasn't interested in having control, that they are nothing more than a wholesale water supplier. How a customer uses their supply of water is that customer's business. Ashland would place an order for a certain amount of supply, the commission would provide the supply, and how Ashland controlled that would not be the commission's concern. Olson explained that the Medford Water Commission is a chartered organization through the City of Medford, and that all commissioners are placed on the commission through the city charter of Medford. The commission encourages liaisons to participate with the commission. Stated that this proposal had not been discussed with the City of Talent and encouraged city officials to do so. Felt this was an opportunity to develop regional water resources and improve flow in Bear Creek. Noted that when Ashland has the highest need for water (historically September-October), is the time when the commission has a surplus supply. Stated that the reality is that there is large surplus of water available during drought times for Ashland. Olson stated that he saw this as a benefit for a regional system, and that reliability is important and would help with the City of Talent's system as well. Noted that the pipeline would need to be oversized if this option is chosen. DeBoer questioned what would happen if the Water Treatment Plant went down, what would the time frame be for getting water to Ashland in an emergency situation. Eimstad explained that alternatives #4 and #5 would provide water if the treatment plant went down. Discussed emergency options, including piping in water or using firehoses, but noted that if there was a true emergency situation, the temporary answer would be to truck in water. Council Study Session 12/07/98 Page 5 Laws commented on how we were operating on the assumption of the water need for 2050, and-questioned the reliability of these scenarios. Suggested that the suggested planning figure may not be what will be needed and felt that cutbacks in conservation/curtailment were not realistic in this community. Eimstad explained that there was a need to follow growth projections and rates used in the Comprehensive Plan and felt that the report reflected a very aggressive conservation method. Discussion ended with encouragement to the public to speak with councilors or participate in Public Hearing scheduled for December 15, 1998. Meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. Submitted by, Barbara Christensen City Recorder Council Study Session 12/07/98 Page 6 Monthly Building Activity Report: 09/98 Page 1 # Units Value SINGLE/MULTI-FAMILY & TOURIST ACCOMODATIONS: Building: ACCESSORY RES UNIT 1 44,600 ADDITION 3 56,844 AWNING 1 2,000 DECK 1 5,564 DEMOLITION OF SFR 5 0 EXTENSION TO 9510006 1 0 EXTERIOR STAIRWAY 1 2,500 FENCE 6 5,150 FOUNDATION 1 4,500 GUEST HOUSE 1 48,000 INT. SPRINKLER SYS. 3 39,750 INTERIOR REMODEL 2 20,000 REMODEL 2 5,300 REMODEL & ADDITION 5 232,401 REMODEL & DECK 1 12,000 REROOF 1 7,850 REROOF & WINDOWS 1 3,200 REROOFING 1 1,700 RETAINING WALL 1 1,500 ROOF REMODEL 1 2,500 SFR 8 1,276,492 SPECIAL INSPECTION 2 0 TRIPLEX 1 201,840 WINDOWS/DOOR 1 2,000 Subtotal: $ 1,975,691 Electrical: 1 BRANCH CIRCUIT FOR FURN 1 100 ALARM SYSTEM 2 1,102 ALTERATION OF SERVICE 1 950 SECURITY SYS/INTERCOM 1 2,500 SERVICE CHANGE 3 2,825 SUB-PANEL/SERVICE/BR CIRC 1 1,500 SUBPANEL & 6 BR CIR 1 400 Subtotal: $ 9,377 Mechanical: ENTRY VOIDING 9809091 -1 -1,575 J Monthly Building Activity Report: 09/98 Page 2 # Units Value SINGLE/MULTI-FAMILY & TOURIST ACCOMODATIONS: Mechanical: GAS LINE, GS FURNACE 1 1,452 GAS LINE/FURN/AC/2 BR CIR 1 5,000 GAS LINE/FURNACE 1 695 GAS LINE/FURNACE/1 BR CIR 1 3,140 GAS LINE/FURNACE/AC 1 3,000 GAS LINE/GAS FURNACE 3 6,575 GAS LINE/GAS RANGE 1 650 GAS LINE/GAS STOVE 1 2,200 GAS LINE/GAS WALL UNIT 1 600 GAS LINE/WTR HTR/DRYER/RG 1 500 GFAU/LINE/VENT/EXT DUCT 1 2,563 TWO CHIMNEY LINERS 1 3,300 VOIDED ON 09/29/98 1 1,575 WOODSTOVE 4 5,950 Subtotal: $ 35,625 Plumbing: 2 SINKS/2 HOSEBIBS 1 300 ADD LAVATORY 14 1,400 ADD LAVATORY/WATER CLOSET 4 8,000 BACKFLOW DEVICE 9 8,440 EXTEND WATER PIPE 1 50 REPLACE PLUMBING FIXTURES 1 2,430 SEWER LINE 2 3,800 WATER & SEWER LINES 1 700 WATER LINE 1 350 Subtotal: $ 25,470 ***Total: $ 2,046,163 COMMERCIAL: Building: ' CONV SFR TO 1/2 MEDICAL 1 52,000 DISC ANTENNA 1 2,600 GARAGE REMODEL 1 1,000 INT. SPRINKLER SYS. 1 11,500 OFFICE/MANUFACTURING BLDG 1 300,000 REROOF 1 33,050 RESTROOMS@SKATEBOARD PARK 1 12,556 Monthly Building Activity Report: 09/98 Page 3 # Units Value COMMERCIAL: Building: SCREENING WALL 1 8,000 SPECIAL INSPECTION 1 0 STRAWBALE CLASSROOM 1 130,000 TENANT IMPROVEMENT 1 200,000 WAREHOUSE 1 130,000 WINDOWS 1 2,500 Subtotal: $ 683,206 Electrical: SECURITY SYSTEM 1 2,300 Subtotal: $ 2,300 Mechanical: CLASS I HOOD 1 2,500 ENTRY VOIDING 9808042 -1 -3,139 GAS FURNACE 1 5,000 Subtotal: $ 4,361 Plumbing: DRAIN LINE 1 5,000 WATER/SEWER LINE 1 200 Subtotal: $ 5,200 ***Total: $ 895,067 J Monthly Building Activity Report: 09/98 Page 4 Total this month: 134 $ 2,941,230 Total this month last year: 100 $ 2,689,110 Total year to date: 314 $ 7,525,577 Total last year: 275 $ 7,726,981 This month This month This year last year Total Fees: 33,640 28,050 85,840 Total Inspections: 776 733 2338 • NEW CONSTRUCTION: 9/98 . RESIDENTIAL PAGE NO. 1 12/08/98 ADDRESS #UNITS CONTRACTOR VALUATION ACCESSORY RES UNIT 47 FOURTH ST MEDINGER CONST. CO. INC. 44600.00 Subtotal 44600.00 GUEST HOUSE 25 GRANITE ST SHOSTROM BROS.LTD. 48000.00 Subtotal 48000.00 SFR 230 STRAWBERRY LN LAURSEN, ERIC - 300000.00 CONSTRUCTION 676 ASHLAND CREEK DRIVE M. ROCK 180000.00 659 FORDYCE ST BEAR CREEK CONSTRUCTION 83122.00 1603 PEACHEY RD MEYERS CONSTRUCTION 135000.00 769 MOUNTAIN AV N MEDINGER CONST. CO. INC. 141000.00 1605 PEACHEY RD MEYERS CONSTRUCTION 135000.00 125 OAK MEADOWS PL GREENEWOOD HOMES 172370.00 2620 TAKELMA WY MUNSON CONSTRUCTION 130000.00 Subtotal 1276492.00 TRIPLEX 784 PARK ST CCH CONSTRUCTION 201840.00 Subtotal 201840.00 Total 1570932.00 NEW CONSTRUCTION: 9/98 COMMERCIAL PAGE NO. 1 12/08/98 ADDRESS #UNITS CONTRACTOR VALUATION OFFICE/MANUFACTURING BLDG 280 HERSEY ST W TONEY, JERRY CONST. INC. 300000.00 Subtotal 300000.00 RESTROOMS@SKATEBOARD PARK 230 WATER ST OWNER 12556.00 Subtotal 12556.00 STRAWBALE CLASSROOM 60 MORSE AV HALVERSON CONSTRUCTION 130000.00 Subtotal 130000.00 WAREHOUSE 415 WILLIAMSON WY ACME WEST 130000.00 Subtotal 130000.00 Total 572556.00 CITY OF ASHLAND y"pF'ASy Office of the Mayor v - . tia y MEMORANDUM o REG0 DATE: December 9, 1998 TO: All City Council Members FROM: Cathy Shaw, Mayor (b RE: APPOINTMENT OF LOWE ANN BELFORD TO SENIOR PROGRAM I would like to recommend and seek approval of the appointment of Lowe Ann Belford to the Senior Program for a term to expire April 30, 2000. This position was created by the recent resignation of Betty Seymour. The position was advertised in the Daily Tidings 11/9,11/14 and in Revels 11112. A copy of the ad is attached, along with Ms. Belford's letter of interest, and the letters of two other interested applicants. Attachments YOUR CITY NEEDS YOU! The City of Ashland has one volunteer position on the Senior Program Board. The vacant position is for a term that will expire on April 30, 2000. If you are interested in being considered for this volunteer position, please submit your request in writing to Mayor Catherine Shaw at City Hall, 20 E. Main Street, before Friday, November 27, 1998. ~1~f -r ~T,V~J• Ui-~ 385 Kearney St. Ashland, OR 97520 November 16, 1998 Mayor Catherine Shaw City Hall 20 E. Main St. Ashland, OR 97520 Dear Mayor Shaw: Please consider my application for the volunteer position on the Senior Program Board. I am a 29 year resident of Ashland and a retiree of the classified staff at Southern Oregon University. Concern and interest are my only qualifications for this position (as my training was in secondary education). Prior to retirement my intentions were to volunteer at a nursing home, retirement center or similar. Upon making inquiries the first vacancy I encountered was with the Community Service Program and I've been a volunteer at the Ashland site of Loaves and Fishes ever since. I enjoy the people whom we serve and would be interested in doing anything Itm able to benefit the seniors in our area. Sincerely, d- Lowe Ann Belford 3 ill l}°lew Aza Dr. Asti1aklJ16R 9 s~O Mw,ve, mr eras RArgIC SN14i~/ MA~ v2 ,ash/a decd, c?~ Main S f f.- _ Sv e c f : S~ v! /o / /mil o~f rCLfNS p~ r Deal- U / - - - - Nd- /Jane recent/ beep f~ae`aware D~ d- l~aGartGy ovl Qa rd Qn< &mvd ~KP ~o dPP the hior P~ ra M *o r -A!L7 va-c a "off - JM va~ t Ca -i o A s~ 25i ~ I row iBJot~ vice ~~e src~Er2t ~e7%re~l Or a.,/ ~sac(,z t4 off' 0 the d e r o aid QVl ~g 5ef VecQ 60 ve I/aJe ~ov~rcr~o~C~©verhn?~~f~ ,Sei~Ja~ d 13d9a rQe ;Uvl!;Or, A 1 CL~vr Q're~~/~ ('Z~eres~~e~C~n 2gS~s~~H~ tit pr,ojra~vrs •fl~~f Zvil~(//vtsvre 9eryiee ~d- Se rl i d N 5 ! a J e -/uT U rr e /ova l of (pie` ~°o ru ~65 c vsl y e s ui r t lz yr~ v fV dlL 411V r lv Gh~~ce ~ O e e v5e -the- ~ud1 ar~~fe►~ I've- ) of w ej r f GYt~Sf w hl Oaa es'at~ ~ri ✓e v51F C 1^~;J>,e v~~ h.QY ~h~~ ,$in cere~ , _ zcn,> Pl~ jA~ -'4o'0 "oll loll CITY OF ASHLAND ~y`OFAS/y Office of the Mayor OREGO~..m' . MEMORANDUM TO: City Council Members FROM: Mayor Catherine M. Shaw DATE: December 3, 1998 RE: REAPPOINTMENTS TO BUILDING APPEALS BOARD I would like to recommend and seek council approval of the reappointments of Darrel R. Jarvis, Tom Giordano, Darrell Boldt, Carol Horn Davis and Dale Shostrom to the Building Appeals Board for terms to expire December 31, 1999. In response to the advertisement in the Daily Tidings one reply from A. Arthur Krigel was received, a copy of which is attached. A copy of the advertisement as it appeared in the Daily Tidings is also attached. Enc: ~j.of 4y~ tt, OI Your. [ [ I Applications are being accepted for open positions on the Building Appeals Board. These volunteer positions have one-year terms expiring December 31, 1999. The deadline for applications Is November 27. If you are interested in applying, please submit your letter of interest with your rdsum6 to Mayor Catherine Shaw, City Hall, 20 E. Main Street, Ashland, OR 97520. A. Arnold Krigd 698 South Mountain Ave. Ashland, OR 97520 5414820937 'i Tuesday, November 17, 1998# Mayor Catherine Shaw ` City Hall 20 E Main Street Ashland, OR 97520 Dear Mayor Shaw; I and my wife, Renee just moved to Ashland from Peekskill, NY on October 26, 1998 and would like to get involved in the community. I am interested in applying for a volunteer position on the Building Appeals Board which was advertised in last weeks paper. I retired on August 1, 1998 after 36 years in the architectural design and the construction industry in New York City.. I am a registered Architect in New York State and during the first third of my career worked for a number of well known architectural firms designing schools, corporate headquarters, office buildings and industrial plants. During the middle third of my career I worked for major corporations building industrial plants and laboratories.. During the last 14 years I worked for a major construction management firm in New York City building hi-rise office buildings, hi-rise residential buildings and schools. Since both my wife and I want to participate in the Ashland community, what better way than to get involved in City issues. We are renovating our house on S. Mountain Ave and are staying at the Windmill Inn if you wish to contact us. Our room is 391, and the phone is 482 0937. Very Truly Yo J A. Arnold Krigel M City Council Communication December 15, 1998 Submitted by: Barbara Approved by: Mike Freeman Title: Liquor License Application from Julie T. Aldwell/Tera M. Wood dba/Whistle Stop Cafe & Catering Company. Synopsis: Approval of Oregon Liquor License as provided by OLCC. Recommendation: The City Recorder and Ashland Police Department recommend approval of this application. Background Information: New application. A background investigation has been completed on the applicant by Ashland Police Department. ny OF ASy City of Ashland City Hall -'•.OREGOa •City Recorder's Office 20 E. Main St. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder Ashland, Oregon 97520 (541) 488-5307 (phone) (541) 488-5311 (f=) December 15, 1998 TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Barbara Christensen, City Recorder/Treasurer SUBJECT: Liquor License Application Application has been received from Julie T. Alwell/Tera M. Wood for a LIQUOR license for an ESTABLISHMENT, Whistle Stop Cafe & Catering Company at 258 A Street #313, Ashland. OLCC and the Ashland Police Department has completed the necessary background investigation and approval of this application is recommended. Respectfully submitted, Barbara Christensen City Recorder City Council Communication December 15, 1998 Submitted by: Paula Brown r/ Approved by: Mike Freeman, i ^ Title: Public hearing, staff recommendation and City Council motion regarding the City's long-term water supply. Synopsis: Carollo Engineers was hired in July 1998 to develop a long-term (50 year) water supply study for the City. This is not a new issue as there have been two prior water supply studies to determine the long term water possibilities for Ashland. While the City currently has an adequate water supply during non-drought years, the construction of the water pipeline intertie (TAP Pipeline Intertie) from Medford to Talent has required an accelerated decision process. The City's possible involvement in the TAP Intertie project needs to be determined by January 1999. Talent and Phoenix will be constructing a pipeline to transport treated water from the City of Medford's water treatment facilities. They are in the final design stage and are planning a pipe size consistent with their water needs to the year 2050. The three cities have offered an opportunity for Ashland to be included by providing a larger pipe size that will provide at least a portion of Ashland's needs. For the past three years Ashland has been a part of the design feasibility and initial environmental analysis of the TAP Intertie project. At this point, Ashland needs to make a decision regarding its participation in the construction and pipe size determination for the TAP Intertie no later than the first of the new year (1999) to remain a viable part of the multi-city option. As such, the City Council requested that staff comprehensively evaluate all of the water supply options available to the City to meet the water needs to the year 2050. Recommendation: At its December 7 special Study Session, the City's consultant, Carollo Engineers recommended that the City pursue option 6A which is: ➢ Participate in oversizing the intertie pipeline from 18" to 24" to Talent only; ➢ Purchase 450 MG of Lost Creek water rights; ➢ Pursue other short-tern water supply options (i.e. Talent Co-op, TID Co-op, etc.). The staff has carefully considered the options available and for many reasons recommends that the City Council adopt the following course of action: ➢ Participate in oversizing the intertie pipeline from 18" to 24" to Talent only; ➢ Begin investigation of Lost Creek water rights - determine the strategy for the purchase of water rights, timing of the purchase and quantity; ➢ Initiate the process of changing the City's TID water rights from the Imperatrice property for beneficial use in the City; ➢ Begin discussions with the City of Talent to determine if the Medford Water Commission as presented at the December 7 Study Session is beneficial to all parties; ➢ Continue the City's conservation programs in an effort to meet the goals outlined in the consultant report (i.e. 20 % peak day demand reduction in summer). Background Information: See December 7 staff report to City Council and Carollo Technical memo's 1&2 and presentation Ashland Chamber of Commerce 110 East Main 51. P.O. Box 1360 Ashland, Oregon 97520-0046 TO: Mayor & City Council (541) 482-3486 FROM: Rick Nagel, Chamber President al;P4 RE: Board Position on Water Supply Issue DATE: December 15, 1998 After months of research and discussion and a Community Issues Forum on our water supply options, the Ashland Chamber Board at their November 12, 1998 meeting decided to take a position on the issue. The Board feels that the water inter-tie to Talent and Phoenix is a good solution to a possible emergency situation that could develop in the watershed endangering our sole water supply for Ashland. While the Board felt it was important to secure the water rights necessary along with the inter-tie, they also felt it was important for the City to utilize the other three options whenever and wherever possible as the need arises keeping costs a consideration. The importance of keeping Ashland businesses and residents fully functional in the case of a disaster whether that meant fire, earthquake or flood, was the primary consideration the Board used when making this decision as well as taking into account our future water demands. The Chamber Board thinks that the expenditure for the inter-tie is an affordable insurance policy for our City and that it needs to be made immediately to correspond with Talent and Phoenix deadlines which will result in cost savings to all three communities. Therefore, we ask you, the Ashland City Council, to endorse the water inter-tie option. Thank you for your study and evaluation of this very important issue facing our City. ~\t M1 Ecological Landscaping Consulting Site Planning Permaculture RICK LANDT Environmental Planner To: City Councilors From: Rick Landt Date: 15 Dec 98 Re: My Concerns Related to the Consideration of Ashland's Water Options I have the following thoughts I would like to share with you: 1) Water, compelled by the strongest force on earth, gravity, runs downhill. To move towards sustainability, and to save money on maintenance costs, like electricity, I recommend focusing on options that take advantage of gravity, not work against it. Water will always run downhill, while electricity costs will almost surely go up in the future. Also in an emergency like a worst case Y2K scenario, a gravity system would be much easier to get back on line than a pumping system. 2) Beck did a study ten years ago on our water supply. None of the options in the Beck report are currently on the table for discussion. I believe they should be. Beck is currently doing a study of the electrical system. To my way of thinking, we should be looking to either seriously consider Beck's report or find someone else to do the electrical study, whose results will continue to have some validity ten years down the road. 3) I am well aware of environmental problems with dams. And I know that looking at each individual situation is helpful and enlightening. In this case, with Reeder Reservoir already in place, no anadromous fish are affected on the East and West forks of Ashland Creek, since their passage is already blocked. Additionally, although no one wants to see a beautiful stretch of creek inundated if it can be avoided, at least the environmental affects are clearly visible. With electricity, the pollution and other destruction of the environment is in someone else's back yard. And it is just as real and may be more destructive than the environmental affects of a system close to home. It is responsible to consider all environmental affects, not just the ones easily visible. In general, I am not an advocate of dams. Specifically in this instance, after all the environmental costs are considered, I believe it may be a viable option. Have the environmental costs, near and far, been considered for all options? 4) Although Ashland already conserves more water than most American towns, there remain many opportunities for further significant water conservation, especially in the consumption of water for irrigation. This is especially important because the irrigation season coincides with the time of year when supplies are most limited. Thank you for taking the time to consider these thoughts. P.O. Box 874 • Ashland, Oregon 97520 • (503) 488-0311 9 Landscape Contractor's License #5812 Average Water Usage by Account in Million Gallons Commercial/ - Year Month Commercial Governmental Industrial Municipal Multi-Family Residential Residential I nr ation P Total 1993 7 38.1 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 68.2 0.0 29.7 137.1 8 40.6 0.0 1.6 0.0 0.0 65.5 0.0 0731.9 139.6 9 42.3 0.0 1.7 0.0 0.0 65.9 0.0 Z1. 0 38.1 148.1 10 36.3 0.0 2.4 0.0 0.0 48.7 0.0 15.4 102.8 11 28.9 0.0 3.3 0.0 0.0 28.9 0.0 2.2 63.4 12 23.3 0.0 1.9 0.0 0.0 25.4 0.0 2.1 52.6 1994 1 22.0 0.0 1.8 0.0 0.0 24.2 0.0 2.0 50.0 2 22.0 0.0 1.2 0.0 0.0 21.6 0.0 0.1 45.0 - 3 10.0 2.9 2.3 0.8 7.5 24.2 1.4 0.2 49.3 i 4 11.1 3.3 1.2 0.3 10.9 28.6 0.1 1.0 56.5 5 13.3 3.7 0.5 0.4 12.1 34.5 0.1 7.0 71.6 6 16.6 3.7 0.7 0.6 15.0 52.3 0.1 31. 120.3`. 7 19'3 4.3 0.6 0.7 19.9 82.1 1.8 39.7 168.4 8 21.4 5.0 1.1 0.9 19.0 80.3 2.0 E 36.8 166.6 9 18.5 4.1 1.3 0.7 16.4 58.5 1.8 21.9 123.4 10 14.1 5.1 0.7 0.6 13.2 38.1 1.3 9.0 82.1 11 10.3 4.1 0.8 0.4 10.9 26.3 0.7 1.6 55.0 12 9.1 2.9 1.4 0.3 9.9 23.3 0.4 0.3 47.7_, 1995 1 8.2 3.1 1.5 0.2 8.9 23.1 0.4 0.3 45.6 2 7.9 4.1 1.3 0.3 9.8 22.1 0.4 0.1 45.9 3 9.4 3.4 1.4 0.3 9.9 23.6 0.5 0.5 49.0 4 9.7 3.8 1.3 0.2 9.7 23.8 0.6 0.2 49.2 5 11.1 4.4 0.5 0.4 10.3 26.2 0.6 0.4 53.9 6 13.6 4.6 0.2 0.6 12.3 39.5 1.0 8.7 80.6.-. 7 18.1 4.5 0.0 0.7 15.6 55.6 1.9 16.1 112.5 8 17.4 4.8 0.5 0.7 14.5 60.4 2.0 17J %,17 1 117.4 9 17.6 5.5 0.8 0.8 16.2 64.6 2.3 17.5 125.3 10 15.0 6.0 0.8 0.8 13.7 43.0 1.8 9.3 90.4 11 11.5 4.4 0.6 0.5 11.1 30.9 1.0 62.9 12 8.5 3.4 0.1 0.4 8.9 22.1 0.5 0.1 - 44.1 1996 1 8.5 2.4 0.0 0.8 8.3 23.7 0.4 0.1 ".0 2 8.2 4.3 0.0 1.0 9.0 22.4 0.4 0.0 45.4 3 9.3 3.8 0.0 0.9 9.2 23.5 0.4 0.1 47.3 4 10.3 3.9 0.0 0.5 10.2 26.5 0.6 0.4 52.3 5 12.1 4.6 0.1 1.2 11.9 34.6 0.8 2.7 98.1 6 13.9 4.7 0.3 0.6 15.1 49.1 1.2 24.4 109.2- 7 19.0 5.0 0.0 0.8 19.0 73.1 2.1 4v°I. 25.4 144.5 8 19.9 4.1 0.0 0.7 20.7 79.5 2.5 ✓ 28.1 155.7 9 19.0 3.4 0.0 0.8 16.9 63.7 2.2 24.7 130.8 10 14.8 4.4 0.0 0.6 17.0 44.9 1.7 0.1 93.6 11 10.8 4.1 0.0 0.5 12.3 26.4 0.8 1. 56.9 12 10.1 2.8 0.0 0.5 12.2 26.9 0.4 -0.1 52.8 1997 1 7.8 2.5 0.0 1.6 10.1 22.4 0.4 0.2 45.2 2 7.2 2.9 0.0 2.0 9.5 19.8 0.3 0.2 42.0 3 8.0 3.1 0.0 2.1 10.7 21.6 0.4 0.1 46.0 4 10.3 3.2 0.1 0.7 12.3 26.7 0.6 0.5 54.5 5 10.8 3.8 0.1 0.5 13.0 35.2 0.9 3.9 68.2 6 14.8 4.2 0.2 0.6 17.0 48.5 1.5 p7 30.1 117.0. 7 16.5 3.9 0.1 1.1 19.3 65.5 1.9 " / 38.8 147.1 8 19.6 . 4.3 0.0 1.1 20.4 75.0 2.6 ~i 34.6 157.6 9 17.6 3.8 0.1 0.8 18.4 56.6 2.3 22.5 122.0 10 14.1 4.4 0.1 0.6 14.9 37.4 1.5 8.1 81.0 11 10.3 3.9 0.3 0.6 12.4 26.6 0.8 5.4 60.2 12 9.4 2.9 0.5 0.6 12.7 25.8 0.5 0.2 52.5_. 1998 1 8.7 2.7 0.5 0.7 11.6 25.8 0.5 0.1 50.7 2 7.4 3.5 0.4 0.8 11.7 22.5 0.4 0.1 46.7 3 8.6 3.3 0.5 0.8 12.1 23.6 0.4 0.2 49.5 4 9.3 3.0 0.5 1.2 12.1 24.4 0.6 1.0 52.1 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 .0.0 • 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 "0.0 0.0 p.0 0.0 8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 W:%ProiocnASHLWD4676a001Db-walw.wb3 P"4 o15 09Ju696 0957 AM M x G Ashland Daily Tidings/Denise B ;ity workers Brenda Hammers and Mike Turk lay irrigation pipe today at North Mountain Park's athletic fiel' N. Mountain Park takes sha p 'he public Monday gets a land schools, resource agencies, and conser- well as representatives of Northwest Biol vation groups. cal Consulting and Terra Wave Consulti Kok at park's natural areas The tour, to be held at the park where two environmental firms that have been L Ja Hersey Street meets North Mountain Av- valved in stream restoration projects, he sa y Kate Symes D l enue, will begin at the electric substation Much of the restoration work will co :haand Dally Tidings with an update on the developmentof,athlet- later; but because of community involvem Plans for athletic fields have been delayed is fields. and park volunteers, activities will co it stream restoration is getting underway Grading of the fields is completed and utll- alive right away. "There will be a pulse," the North Mountain Park natural area pro- ities are being installed, said Ashland Parks said. ct. The Ashland Parks and Recreation Com- Department Director Ken Mickelson. The de- "It's already ready in some respects," ission Monday plans to update the public partment had anticipated planting. grass this said. 1 the park. fall; but due to:a'.wet,spring it will delay the Park backers hope to get the public m Ashland residents will get their first . planting until nextspring. involved in future developments. lance to voice opinions or just find out The tour then will move to,the old farm- Ashland school teachers are currently )out developments going on at the park at house at 6:45 pan:. for an informal orienta- veloping a pilot curriculum using the p is informational tour. It is set to begin at tion. The farmhouse is to become the park's and other natural areas in Ashland. K 30 p.m. resource center..-.- ..Tuck and Linda hesney, both members The park project began in 1993 when the In addition 6o the active areas, the parks the resource team will speak about edu ty purchased 37.5 acres of floodplain farm department is working on'the natural areas tional opportunif e; at the park and t nd off North Mountain Avenue. Numerous of the park. Environmental consultants will about their world \ iblic meetings were held to examine alter- be on hand to talk about stream restoration We'll be tryling t0 catch people up itive uses for the land. and wetland enhancement. what's happeding and tell them 'what's As a result, 14 acres of land were allocated At about 7 p.m. the group will begin visit- come," said Chesney. r the natural area project. Implementation ing selected sites around the park, guided by For more informaticin on Monday's me the natural area will include restoration of the North Mountain Park resource team. ing or the Nbrth Mountain Park Project, c ;i I iI 777 CHAMB ER TO 1 r r v t: g OFCOMM CRATER! LAKE Now ERCEI ya.::`d:•~ x. >TFtE:Gp+ ~E. SCR' ~ t ~ ~A f sTATIONEFrv ' JJ j \ i! i p ~`IIJI WESTERN:AUTO SL- PL r~ 3ARD OS':It` N ►v ,[i•1S•{ a ~ i I ~s~wunt ®OOL SI A4 ~I'~Ili:.m TIRE ~M Tit 1 _ C- t _ ` J. (~y al l 1 i r . f..n.e: GAI ^ 1 ;~I 'r .r' . ~ .b ~1 t _t ~ ( hfre~~. - T; T '¢1~~..~ r--•r!. ~ .I 71^" ~-.i~ Frt~ • -1~.j-I. ~ r r wll ~_=~~~~1 go q 1'.~f 1 ~a f118 _ - i ~F ' 4~:i i. 'Ilr ' i y r A, i. 1 , t / t ~Y~~tr.Am L ;`J •..i..:::a ~'t j ---.R. c ~+a~rF Zyry x_i'3=, -~.i i ~ ~ j. ~ ~ r to 1 - C-x :a x t -L .1 c ri- .a_ y, . "ta'^'• ~ y Sw 'F - ""y 1;;~.J. ri S'+t.va•4 tea}. rl'.r f i- J~ f_ i`•~n.+t t I- a:r S" zr•+~` r J ~.1~ya w+[^ f` t • ~1 l~ , T .•'.F.f s Jr+.. tiv ..T.J51Y-"r°hi rnaC.4~3`,r Lti,Mrr4` Skip~'. 'U[< i u s '-'1" : , 1 s. r aw r tyty --;7- ,f"` y^ ^ yt4 f re_' e3 S.t is ((t / f ~Fr>4~`~t o f~y''yY:^'i "c ~ "J v "ti'~h. 4..};.t ~~t' •'•a~.a^ 't >r lr "A_ n~ ~,r: <1 • Y I 'f' l ¢ W °•~n {r'a ` d t d' t'^S 4 Yi hti t , ieu, ^f11 . tea i JS '4 •h g`+s,`. x` V f v _ _ A~~~ iy .~i ~s?i3~,+ 4eY h: 'dF ~fT .°`i .5 ri. s.~ t w`sS'.r•'C/ xMpAJ-' sC ~ Fc a' j x f C T ~1 r 1 1 ~ Jy}.' ~ ` t"`Y ~ r.y f +i ?.'f` i ~•~lt Y~~^' ya y s" v. .s d C'T rSP's. t>„ sJ3 r 1 J. n tl JJI.:F. ~T nr }''.,`hYj` fi~ t'p f ,,.r f e r ''fvz.. t l . • t,' r t. S • _ t a a n F 4 -4~ Y }1.`tic• r e4+°at' .a In~Y4a s~° sRYea n " e'. .$3 1 ( r t r •Y `r C i c r r: ti s v a a+( i. 3..+r ,fi a. '1 f d i~ rr k rfi r4 7n a51b.n e a r1~2 r J. S r°; r r4..rr 1 T> » f;. '~,F ~ -S•1+,rC'~'fs l < `s.J r t.`.'-.• ~ err t - ~ t v r F ~ + r r. '.tr ~ _ < x~ iW ~ ~.r c'~a ..7ltr;i Y~~~-!~z%r~Q~.a. A *4 ,~f,~ tt ~ t.• ati.ti. J.. i..: x~.n ~.-r.:.. ,ri - ~,.s#.., ~:w u Gr: .,lat.; ~,y'{ i,pl! c;f'[N.,11Ji:F I+1 i I:1 .15 1, r il 4c, l,( 1. 1 U Y,lr_. 11!5~ 4) ORE:. STATE:i Iik!V,. 0 i,.:1 1'1. 7o6 TOLMAN t::I1:1:1'k:. i{17 ASHLAND YDR i~,.r. ~ ~ '-,.I r.ri..._'-r ~ iU'`:II ,..:,.1.. MT19 VIEW CF.: It h: 11-.Hy. ~ ASHLAND ;i'f ASHLAND I:!E? i,:.p--i lr yt,lrj 4"T 5 I - - ASHI AI`.lE, Fll: r = ASHLAND OR MTN }•/.II':IA41 C1::1a1LI HI,"1' ASHLAND ST ASHLAND -OR g3oo.'3 149o EAST PrIAlM1I ST NA.TIONAI_. f'l;?f! a1r:I..I?I_.IFF 1490 E A.>.r;'T hll, I P•i 1' ASHLAND Of i75:'C" !iol:?0 In h . - G• ~ - _ t l U L I "J +1 7 t' tj 1-47 :c:omr RATE -rYFE REPI.-JI:T RATE' TOTA!.. ADI?R[3:.;0 MOR'z',ir. AV rj A f-II ANN PUBLIC br7 ' Ov I Lr t t, I ' IYOU CV {~i~~ (SG~/v~ W AI f::fl:'; t1i AC'J3lAhltr rU1:l ff lfrlrl `>HLAND C:!1=( A III- A Il F'(.It :815 SISIfIlycit ASHLAND C)R "(!-,,-"C; -+:i<=CrC "'ALL Lrl_I.•T 7 7 Ls l r . ,IS 1.,1 ('IAfI r f i:T.R: r'; ?jL~6v~ r tr..rrdr, run.,.TC r: 14 _ Gd ro ,'h , ! 1 ; ...1;I• .2A,:,l !MAIN aT I f . t~.~~~. (d~ L.`%Il ~f..i.i i~ I i1-r:-i:'~i '.f'::.; ritrJ)I Cii,:i: Clfi r l - I S TAP Inter-Tie testimony for City Council 12-15-98 John Fields 482-8442 I was invited to participate in the Water Advisory Group (WAG) led by Paula Brown and Corollo Engineers, our hired consultants. For the last three months, we have been trying to sort out the statistical information in an attempt to clarify a strategy for the City of Ashland's water resource planning for the next Fifty years. We asked the following questions: How much water do we have? How much do we need? We got a lot of answers, but when we question the politics of growth, and look for indicators for the quality of life; our engineers understandably bow out of the discussion, and withdraw from this murky debate. Throughout our lengthy discussions, I came to understand that the Inter-tie is a reasonable alternative when looking at its cost per million gallons of water delivered (the more water, the cheaper per unit). It spreads out the risk involved when we look at catastrophic fire in our watershed, or a landslide taking out our water treatment plant. Given this, one might logically conclude: "Great, let's hook up to the pipe and get on to all the other business waiting our attention". In tying into TAP we can supply up to 100% of our current water needs at relatively low rates. The problem has to do with neither "cheap" rates nor the measure of our commitment to the rest of the valley; but the fact that Ashland will grow to be a city of 40,000 people. This is the growth rate identified in our Comprehensive plan and is seen as a moderate rate when compared to Medford-Phoenix, which at the present rate will approach 250,000 people in 50 years. In the year 2050 Jackson County will most likely be well over 750,000 people. Once we approve the Inter-tie, we have tacitly agreed to a future that continues to promote an ultimately unsustainable pattern of growth. The devastation for those who appreciate Ashland for its sense of scale will be one of many irreplaceable qualities lost. As a developer, I am particularly sensitive to the momentum of growth as well as our dependency on it. The WAG never directly addressed the politics of growth during our discussions. Growth is not only the demand factor for new infrastructure, but creates the underlying emotional response. I think that we have plenty of information and statistics. Although I have learned an incredible amount about our water needs and storage deficit, I found the final effort to quantify these findings to make a decision, impossible. There is simply too much information. When we place it on a matrix, there are too many "apples and oranges" to compare. Given all the complexities, I end up with a different conclusion every time I evaluate the alternatives. In my evaluation process I have attempted to contrast the different alternatives. The following are some of the pertinent issues and unresolved points I been grappling with: • How expensive is reclamation? In present monitory terms it is very expensive, but what are the life-cycle costs of a reclamation facility? Can a case be made that this would make an environmentally "wise" investment? If so, we need to keep in mind these benefits. What are the environmental impacts of reclamation? i.e. salt build-up in soils, chemicals used in treatment, general toxicity and disposal of sludge. What I C~,ez are the benefits of reusing water, instead of new water? What are the impacts or benefits over the short and long term? The answer to these question will change over time. • What's the difference between Rogue River and Klamath water? Lost Creek Dam is already in place, and the pipe is coming to Talent, this reduces the new environmental impacts that this alternative can be held accountable for. The big picture of the Rogue River in-stream demand in the future is an unknown. How will our Federal water policies change? Water rates and delivery from Medford will go up in the future but will the MWC rates continue to be relatively inexpensive? What are the MWC's rights for renewal and changing the contract? Are we making more than a "moral stand" when we look at the environmental consequences and choose not to use Rogue water? TID could be more efficient than it is, yet I'm not convinced TID water is any more environmentally principled than TAP. The Klamath, it could be argued is less our watershed than the Rogue is. Both systems have unknown future demands that will effect their availability to us. When you compare the drinking water quality, TID water is inferior to Medford's. • How cheap is TAP? We are required to pay for the connection costs and the water rights up front. What is the cost per million/gallons for hooking up the pipe to the Ashland system and taking the minimum flow of water to make sure that the system does not deteriorate? What is the dollar amount for debts service (the compounded rate of interest of this investment in ten or fifteen years until we will really need it)? If this water is not needed immediately, how much does this add to our projected costs? • Are we committed to maintain our independent water supply and continue our conservation efforts? What is the current cost per unit of water we are receiving from Ashland's watershed compared to MWC's rates? If we enter into cost driven decision-making, I believe that we would end up abandoning our conservation commitment because it is not cost effective. We could even follow this reasoning to the conclusion that Medford water is cheaper than maintaining our reservoir and treatment plant. I don't believe that we will really need additional water for another 10 or 15 years. We can defer this even longer by increasing our conservation efforts and TID tradeoffs including watermarketing and water right re-allocations for additional supply. I think heavy curtailment in the event of a draught is an acceptable solution for the short term (ten years). There is new information that has been brought forward by the MWC regarding the Talent-Ashland pipe. This connection could provide Talent with a redundant water supply and could provide us with an exchange for their TID water rights. This could be a creative way to attain additional water supply, as well as increasing the viability and mutual benefit in connecting TAP to Ashland. Before hearing information regarding Talent's requirements, I am supporting TAP (buy-in only of an upgrade pipe size to Talent), and hooking up to our system at some time in the future, if and when needed. I think an emergency pipe could be installed in a reasonable timeframe. We should begin working on TID negotiations for water rights re-allocation, piping and metering efficiency, simultaneously develop a master plan for reclamation and irrigation distribution. The TID Co-op and reclamation system ties neatly to an eventual plan for establishing a strong re-use program. This will be a more expensive solution over the next twenty-five years but may be a long range, environmentally responsible one. The perceived and real costs should be reduced as water becomes more valuable. If we develop a master plan, and install the infrastructure in consort with other improvements, we have a greater opportunity to work towards a more sustainable future. We have the data from our engineers, yet I remain frustrated by the complexity of integrating this information into the decisions we have made in previous policies. Can we maintain Ashland's greatest resource, which I believe is its sense of place that is closely coupled with the human scale of a smaller population. What we do know is that growth is exerting continuous pressure on our entire infrastructure. Without comprehensive sustainable policies and a consensus in our planning strategy, Ashland's voters could be enticed to restrict growth by not maintaining improvement to our infrastructure. I can imagine a policy similar to that used in the Transportation goals passed down from the Federal government. It simply mandates a 10% reduction in vehicle miles traveled by year 2015, despite population increase. The underlying values in this discussion are how to develop responsibly. I believe that we are struggling with how to create a sustainable future. Water is one of many resources that are undervalued. In the beginning of this study I was looking at how we could avoid tying into TAP. I have now come to accept that it is a reasonable interim solution, but must be integrated into a strategy with our other policies. Materials and design of buildings, patterns of development as well as infrastructure requirements have to be integrated into a carefully crafted plan. These values weighed against broader social goals require careful balance. Unfortunately, the WAG has been unable to achieve meaningful consensus on what the , solution should be. It is very important that we integrate these decisions into our over-riding policies. It becomes the Council's prerogative to make the right decision. I hope my opinion in some way helps you shape yours. Sincerely, John Fields December 14,1998 Mayor Catherine Shaw, Councilors Don Laws, Susan Reid, Steve Hauck, Cameron Hanson, Carole Wheeldon, Alan DeBoer CITY OF ASHLAND, OREGON RE: Water Supply Planning Thank you for this opportunity to offer my perspective and recommendation on this critical issue. PROBLEM: We do not have enough local storage capacity to meet projected (50 year) water-use demand. SOLUTION: Provide additional supply (several options), conserve, and curtail demand. POTENTIALNEGA TIIB IMPACTS OF SOLVING THE PROBLEM: • Solution not sustainable beyond planning horizon of 50 years; • Urban encroachment offood-producing agricultural land; • Contradict national mandate and "Oregon Plan" to restore native fisheries. POTENTIALBENEFICIAL IMPACTS OF SOLVING THE PROBLEM: • Resource development and uses (land and water) that restore resources and ecosystems; • Economic efficiency and sustainability through collaboration and resourcefulness. Our solutions and problem-solving skills are our legacy. We are remarkably skillful in providing for our material needs. We are becoming more aware of the consequences of consumption. Our obligation is to apply our skills with our awareness to be more resourcefirl than consumptive. DISCUSSION: I offer the following to the discussion in response to questions raised and to insert my perspective. WASTEWATER REUSE: We can look to California and to the Middle East for examples. Proposition 204 the "Safe, Clean, Reliable Water Supply Act of 1996" approved $995 million in bonds to improve water quality and supply. This includes $170 million for wastewater treatment, recycling, and reclamation. One goal is to double (from 1 % to 2% of total water use) the amount of wastewater recycling and reclamation by providing grants for engineering and feasibility study along with loans for facility construction. According to "California Municipal Wastewater Reclamation in 1987" (1990, Calif. State Water Resources Control Board, Office of Water Recycling) 200 facilities produce 266,000 acre feet of beneficially-reused wastewater. While this is small in relative terms it is a large endeavor in absolute terms. This ten-year program will undoubtedly yield technological and economic breakthroughs that can benefit Ashland. At a wastewater conference this past summer an Israeli/Palestinian team was acquiring knowledge for a Palestinian agricultural cooperative to use wastewater as a resource for food production. An engineer from Morocco was developing a plan to treat and sell Casablanca's industrial wastewater. I believe we can depend on wastewater as a reliable resource. The technical annd economic challenges will be easier to solve than the psychological ones. TID PIPELINE: Agricultural irrigation conveyance losses in the Rogue Basin are estimated to be 35 million gallons per day (1996, Broad and Collins "Estimated Water Use and General Hydrologic Conditions for Oregon, 1985- 1990" USGS Water Resources Investigations Report 96-4080). Conveyance losses are a resource that can be economical to develop through cooperative effort. To dismiss this alternative as being too complicated because of "multi-agency coordination" or too expensive because of Ashland paying the entire bill, ignores the realities of the situation. Irrigation districts will be rebuilding conveyance infinslructures eventually for environmental and economic reasons. A cooperative effort presently is of short and long-term benefit to all. The multi-agency coordination is the most interesting part of this work to me as problem-solving through cooperation is the most important part of our work and legacy. TAP PIPELINE: It Lq hard to ignore an opportunity for the relatively economical option to increase future capacity by paying now to upsize our neighbor's present public works endeavor. As mentioned in the Medford Water Commission letter of December 3rd. "...the ultimate capacity of the TAP line will not be reached until 2050, so surplus water will be available until that period." This means that this resource could be available to Ashland presently while developing the other options for the future. Also, by our past actions as a culture, there is rational concern that additional capacity equals further undesirable urbanization of the Rogue Valley. If we provide this capacity there is still a way to assure the citizenry of responsible beneficial use. That capacity and the associated water rights can be purchased by Ashland and leased to in stream use through Oregon Water Trust, thereby retaining the rights through legally-recognized beneficial use. If we decide to change that use we have the system capacity. If we develop our other options in the meantime then we have a resource to sell or preserve to mitigate other activities. WATER STORAGE: As stated earlier our problem is not lack of water quantity, it is a lack of storage for use when most needed. Our most overlooked resource is the riparian ecosystem as a functioning whole. Seasonal peak stream flows care be moderated by a properly functioning system. To match the benefits of properly-functioning natural systems with an artificial system requires at least as much energy and labor. Our most wisely-leveraged public works investment is restoration of aquatic habitat. To provide for our needs beyond 50 years we must match our development investments with investments in reforestation and other natural water storage and treatment systems. A start would be the chipping, rather than burning, of woody debris for the watershed fire hazard reduction program. The technical feasibility has been demonstrated by the USFS and may not be as expensive as previously thought when factoring in benefits to water supply quality and quantity. In conclusion, I invite you to evaluate the water supply options in light of the above. Regardless of your decision I am at your service to help guide our actions more toward the beneficial. Sincerely, 7a= A 7 1234 Strawber v Lane Ashland, OR 97520 488-8840 ursa@,nind.net cc: Mike Freeman, David Fine -DEC-15-98 TUE 08:09 B.THOMPSON 503+488 0407 P.01 Brent Thompson P.O. Box 201 Ashland Oregon 97520 15 December 1998 Ashland City Council 20 East Main Ashland Or 97520 Re: Becoming part of the Medford water system Dear Mayor and Council, Regionalism would dictate that Ashland be a part of this system so we can "take our fair share" of the growth Jackson County will be forced to accommodate. But just as a bigger U.S. won't make for a better U.S. and a bigger Oregon won't make for a better Oregon, a bigger Ashland won't make for a better Ashland. As Councilors your primary job is to keep Ashland the best Ashland it can be. Providing for unending growth won't do that. Thus, you will serve Ashland best by rejecting alternatives that would increase the probabilities of Ashland growing Into a large community. Brent Thompson 488-0407 u Council Communication Department of Community Development Planning Division December 15, 1998 Submitted by: John McLaughlin Q Approved by: Mike Freeman W"L+ Title: Presentation and Council action regarding implementation measures for changes to the local improvement district (LID) process. Synopsis: At the regular city council meeting of September 1, 1998, the City Council accepted the Ad Hoc LID Committee report, and directed staff to address funding and ordinance implementation. The report essentially recommended that the City participate in LID's at approximately 40% of the total costs, and that an absolute cap be established for lots of $4,000. Other amendments regarding the assessment method and agreements were also proposed. As recommended, changes to the City's LID ordinance and a new resolution outlining the City's policies regarding LID's have been prepared. These essentially set into place the recommendations of the committee. Further, Jill Turner has prepared some financing options addressing the City's participation in local street improvements for the next 10 years. These include $233,000 transportation funds set aside, a 20 cent monthly increase in the storm water utility fee, a 30 cent monthly increase in the transportation utility fee, a $125 increase in the transportation SDC for new residential units, and an $88 increase in the storm water SDC for new residential units.. Finally, the last recommendation of the Committee was that for the five recent LID's where improvements have been completed but not assessed, that a 10% discount be provided on the final assessments. These LID's are Dogwood, Orange, Ann/Clinton, Fordyce, and Westwood. Staff recommends that Dogwood not be included in this list, as the improvement was requested by the neighborhood, changed a private street to a public street, and was not necessitated by development. It was previously a paved private drive that was converted to a public street. The public benefits of air quality, storm water quality, and improved driving surface generally realized by street improvements were not the case with this street. The main benefit was that the street is no longer wholly the responsibility of the Dogwood Street neighbors, but is now a public street maintained by the City. The four other streets are recommended to receive the 10% discount. Jill Turner has estimated this result in a total reduction for the four LID's of $59,000. Additionally, the 25% sidewalk match has been applied, further reducing the total by $20,900. The total discount through the combination of the 25% sidewalk match and 10% discount is $79,900. Recommendation: It is recommended that the Council move to direct the staff to bring back the resolution and ordinance implementing the recommendations of the Ad Hoc LID Committee for adoption, as well as the necessary steps to provide funding for meeting the City's match requirements. Further, if the Council wishes to provide a 10% discount to the four existing LID's, that the Council move to direct staff to implement the discount. Background Information: In April, 1998, the Ad Hoc LID Committee began meeting to prepare recommendations for changes to the City's local improvement district (LID) process. The final report of the committee was prepared in July, 1998 and presented to the City Council and ultimately accepted by the Council on September 9, 1998. The Council directed the staff to prepare the necessary ordinance and policy amendments as well as look at finding funding options to meet the City's 40% match requirements. The attached LID resolution outlines the City's participation in LID'S, indicating the City would be responsible for 60% of the cost for sidewalk improvements, 75% of the storm drain improvements, 20% of the street surface improvements, and 50% of the engineering and administrative costs. Further, the resolution states that "potential units" will be the method used for charging assessments against benefitted properties with an LID. A maximum assessment of $4,000 is also established for each potential unit, with the exception of city properties, or where the street improvement is necessary to allow approval of a subdivision or land partition. Finally, the resolution states that there will be a neighborhood planning process at the initial stage of the LID, allowing affected residents an opportunity to be involved in the process. The attached LID ordinance amendments include the recommendations of the committee, including the ability to remonstrate whether an agreement is in place or not, or whether the financial obligation has been met or not. Also included is the mechanism for allowing deferred assessments on potential lots, with payoff of those deferred assessments at the time of sale of the property. A list of streets proposed for improvement over the next 10 years is attached, with the estimated costs and city share of those costs. The total improvement costs are estimated to be approximately $3.2 million, with the City's share, after the 40+% match and pick-up of costs beyond the $4,000 cap being approximately $1.5 million. This list of streets is the prioritized local street list which we believe can be improved over the next 10 years. Collector streets, such as Grandview and Clay Street, are not included in this list, but will be eligible for the arterial assistance fund. There are additional streets, such as upper Granite that will be wholly the responsibility of the City and will be funded through other sources. Other streets that are a lower priority, such as Fox, Glenview, and upper Mary Jane, will addressed beyond the 10 year period. Total Street Improvement City Participation City Percentage Neighborhood Neighborhood Costs - Next 10 Years (based on LID of total cost Participation Percentage of formula) total cost $3,135,119 $1,522,540 48.56% $1,612,579 51.44% Implementation Measures for Ad Hoc LID Committee Recommendations Committee Background Information/ Council Action Proposed Action Proposal Implementation Measures Req'd That the City Develop process where City Approve "LID See Section 1 of the participate in participates at set percentages for Resolution" proposed LID the costs specific street improvement outlining City :Resolution. associated with components - 60% of sidewalk participation in the local street construction, 75% of storm drain percentages improvements. improvements, 20% of street surface recommended. € improvements, and 50% of Engineering and Administration costs. Average City participation in overall street improvement would be approximately 40%. That the The LID Ordinance currently is silent Approve "LID See Section 2 of the assessment on any preferred method, just stating Resolution" proposed LID method for local "The Council shall determine the amount outlining the use Resolution. street ! of the estimated assessment to be of a "potential improvements charged against each lot within a local :unit" method for improvement district according to the be based on a local street LID's. special and peculiar benefits accruing to potential unit" the lot from the improvement, and shall method rather spread the estimated assessments than "frontage ; accordingly." This language should foot." i remain to allow the Council flexibility for LID's other than local streets, and a separate resolution should be adopted clearly articulating the Council's policy that a unit approach be used in local street LID's. That the total i It should be recognized in the process :Include :See Section 2 of the number of that some properties within a local methodology for proposed LID "potential units" ! improvement district will have the ' determining Resolution. within a local opportunity for further development, "potential units" in improvement and the potential number of future lots "LID Resolution" district be should be determined when preparing adopted by determined ! assessments. Council. based on underlying a zoning. Committee Background Information/ Council Action i Proposed Action Proposal Implementation Measures Required The maximum The $4,000 cap would be initially i Adopt "LID See Section 3 of the `o assessment for established as part of the "LID :Resolution" proposed LID individual units Resolution", and would include [ setting $4,000 Resolution. should be provisions for annual adjustments cap and defining $4,000, based on the ENR to allow for "development excluding City inflation. "Development property" property". participation. would also be clarified. Initially, this is No maximum or property that requires the necessary participation by street improvement for further the City should partitioning or subdivision. This would be allowed for also include deferred street "development : improvements that were part of property" or city- previous subdivision approvals owned parcels. (similar to Waterline Road issue). . Large existing Recognizing that existing large Revise LID See Section 2 of the parcels with parcels may have high assessments Ordinance (AMC proposed LID potential for : based on future development 13.20) to allow for Ordinance further potential, the process would be deferment on amendments, development designed to only require payment of potential lots. ;specifically would only be the assessment on the existing lot, Interest would 13.20.145 Deferral assessed for with further assessments deferred accrue on of Assessment the existing unit, until the property owner takes action deferred Payments. and to create the new parcels. This assessments. assessments deferred assessment would be for potential lots recorded as a potential lien on the would be property. deferred. Require full On deferred assessments for potential Revise LID See Section 2 of the payment of LID lots, after the new lots are created, the Ordinance (AMC proposed LID assessments at deferred assessment would be due in i 13.20) to require Ordinance the time of sale full at the time of the first sale. If a full payments at ;amendments, of the lots. street improvement had been ; the time of lot sale specifically i completed, the actual cost would after new lot 13.20.143.F. used. If the street design had been creation. completed for improvements not Establish done, the cost would be the estimated notification cost plus 10%. Where no preliminary process with City design had been completed, the cost € Recorder to allow would be the maximum cap of $4,000, tracking of adjust annually for inflation. deferred assessments. . Committee Background Information/ Council Action Proposed Action Proposal Implementation Measures Required 3 Revise "pre- Allow for option of pay-off of Revise LID Change of title of signed" agreements, maintaining property "in Ordinance (AMC agreements will agreement favor" status for LID formation. Allow 's 13.20) to change occur on the actual process, remonstrances even if paid off. agreements to agreements. See allowing for Maintain option of using agreements "deferred Section 2 of the LID option for early rather than full improvements for transportation : Ordinance pay-off, and smaller developments (partitions, improvement amendments, requiring full € accessory units). Require the full agreements", specifically pay-off when payment of the assessment ($4,000 or require payment 13.20.145 for payoff agreement engineer's estimate + 10%) at the at time of first sale requirements required for new time of first property sale after the after signing of (additional language development. ! agreement was signed. ;agreement. Also :necessary).. See allow for i Section 1 of the LID $ remonstrances Ordinance, after pay-off. 13.20.050. C. for remonstrance issue. ...................................Q............................................................................... Maintain The affected properties within a i Adopt "LID See Section 4 of the neighborhood potential improvement district should Resolution" LID Resolution. involvement in be involved with all phases of the LID explicitly stating local street process, including initial street design, that a improvement cost allocations, and ultimate neighborhood process. :construction. It should also be planning process recognized that minimum street will be used with standards will be maintained (full the formation of paving, sidewalks, storm drains) but local improvement that modifications where possible will districts. t be accommodated. FINANCING Several different financing sources i Continue ; Estimates have been f have been identified for researching prepared for a 10-year i implementation of this program. funding options. plan, indicating an These range from utilizing local Prepare long-term i annual financial need resources (Street Department) for financial plan to of approximately 00 some street improvements, to address needs for ' City's to meet the 'City's 40 /o match preparing a long-range plan for air next 10-20 years. requirements. This quality improvements that would Program can be can be provided by a i increase eligibility for CMAQ funding. jump started by : 20 cent monthly Portions of the Sidewalk LID funding i infusion of increase in the Storm i would be eligible for use, as well as a existing funding Water Utility Fee, a 30 smaller percentage of Transportation for the first year or :cent monthly increase SDC money, if the Council so two, in the Transportation y~ E Utility Fee, a chooses. Short term dollars can be $1251unit increase in made available from existing funds to the Transportation begin the process while the Council SDC for new . continues researching other funding residential E options. development, and an $88/unit increase in E the Storm Water SDC i for new residential I development.. s RESOLUTION NO. 98- A RESOLUTION RELATING TO LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICTS (LIDs) AND ESTABLISHING: THE CITY'S PARTICIPATION IN LIDS; THE POTENTIAL UNIT METHOD TO DETERMINE ASSESSMENTS; THE MAXIMUM ASSESSMENT FOR RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND REQUIRED PROCESS TO INCLUDE NEIGHBORHOODS IN LID PLANNING. THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. City Participation in LIDs. A. Except as provided in paragraph B, the city shall contribute the following amounts to reduce assessments in any local improvement district (LID) formed after the date of this resolution to improve local streets serving a residential neighborhood: 60% of the total costs for sidewalk improvements; 75% of the total costs for storm drain improvements; 20% of the total costs for street surface improvements; and 50% of the total costs for engineering and administrative. B. Unless the council so directs by further resolution, no contribution will be made by the city under this section for LIDs formed after the date of this resolution if the LID improvements are required to be made by an owner or developer as a condition of approval for a subdivision or partition. SECTION 2. Potential Unit Method to Be Utilized. In determining the method to be utilized for charging assessments against benefitted properties in LIDs formed after the date of this resolution to improve local streets serving a residential neighborhood, the potential unit method, rather than the frontage foot method, shall be the preferred method. The potential unit method is that method which determines the maximum number of potential units on properties within a proposed local improvement district by taking into consideration the zoning, densities, topography, transportation, utilities and such other factors as necessary to evaluate the development potential of the properties. The planning department shall be responsible for initially determining the potential units for each property within a proposed LID. SECTION 3. Maximum Assessment on Residential Properties. A. The maximum amount any residentially zoned lot or potential lot may be assessed as a benefitted property within an LID formed after the date of this resolution to improve local streets serving a residential neighborhood is $4,000. This maximum amount shall be increased to account for inflation annually on April 1st, based on the Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index (ENR Index) for PAGE 1-RESOLUTION (p:ordlflod1mn.res) Seattle, Washington. The current index is established at [ xxx B. There shall be no maximum amount, however, on lots owned by the city or on properties where the LID improvements are required to be made by an owner or developer as a condition of approval for a subdivision or partition. SECTION 4. Neighborhood Planning Process. Prior to the formation of an LID, city staff shall notify the residents of the affected neighborhood of the possibility of the LID formation. Residents shall be given the opportunity to comment and make suggestions on initial street design and cost allocations. Minimum street standards shall be maintained, however, unless the council by resolution specifically authorizes specific changes for a particular project. SECTION 5. Resolution 9= regarding city participation in sidewalk local improvement districts is repealed. This resolution was read by title only in accordance with Ashland Municipal Code §2.04.090 duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of 1998. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of, 1998. Catherine M. Shaw, Mayor Reviewed as to form: Paul Nolte, City Attorney PAGE 2-RESOLUTION (p:ordlflodban.ms) ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 13.20.050.C AND ADDING SECTION 13.20.145 TO THE ASHLAND MUNICIPAL CODE TO VALIDATE REMONSTRANCES AND TO PROVIDE FOR DEFERRAL OF CERTAIN ASSESSMENTS. THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Annotated to show deletions and additions to the code sections being modified. Deletions are fined-threagh and additions are shaded. SECTION 1. Section 13.20.050.C of the Ashland Municipal Code is amended to read: 13.20.050 Hearing on Improvement Resolution. A. Testimony Considered. At the hearing regarding the improvement resolution, the council shall hear and consider testimony, both oral and written, on the improvement. B. Approval in Discretion of Council. The council may implement the improvement resolution and undertake completion of the improvement only if, in its sole discretion, the improvement is in the best interest of the city. The council's discretion shall not be limited by the fact that a majority of the benefitted property owners have requested or indicated their support for the improvement. C. Effect of Remonstrance. If at the hearing, the owners of two-thirds of the property to be specially assessed for the improvement, or the owners of property which will be assessed for two-thirds or more of the proposed assessment, deliver to the council a remonstrance to the improvement, then action on the improvement shall be suspended for a period of six months. Action on sidewalks or on improvements unanimously declared by the council to be needed at once because of an emergency shall not be subject to suspension by a remonstrance of the owners of the property to be specially assessed. Notwithstanding>any document or agreement obligating an owner; or the owner's successor in interest, to be in favor of improvements or in favors local improvement district, or any document or agreement waiving an owner's or successor's right to remonstrate against improvements or a local improvement district, such owner, or successor may remonstrate and such remonstration shall qualify, as a remonstrance under this section: SECTION 2. The following section 13.20.145 is added to the Ashland Municipal Code: 13 20.145 Deferrabof Assessment Payments# Amowner may'elecf to defe°r paymentpoftthe amountof specialkassessment for a local improvement assessed or~reassessed pursuani to this cha...q'4 he election shall be made by filing a claim for deferral with ;the city recorder: fhe effect of filing the claim shall be to defer payment of the amount of special assessment for local improvement on: potential units Potential units are those lots identified as such in the resolution fxing the fnal asses„sments fora local,imprgvement district Potential units are deter ihed~by usingkthe poter.unit riietho`d which establishes the mazirnumnumber ofpofential;iunitson properties within a p,,oposed local implement district6y taking' intocorsideratiothe zoning, d"ensities tSp®ggraphy, "tr-a`nspdrtation, utilities and such other factors as necessary to eval,Tlate the development pote`ntia'Irof the properties. The claim for deferral shall be effective for the calendar yearfor which it is filed and for each subsequent year until the occurrence1 one or more of the events described in this sections A In order to qualify for deferral of payment of special assessment for local' improvement amounts under this section, the owner must meet the following requirements at the time the claim for deferral is filed and thereafter so long as paymentnof the amount of sp_eeial assessment for local imprrovement is deferred;r 1 The owner filing the claim mpu t~ own the fee simple estate or be` reeordedi(ins, trument ofrsale. ourchasino~thefee simple estate under a V . , 2 Theiproperty with respect f,!, h the claim is filed must havea n assessment levied upon it for_potential units. Tihe deferment will only apply to the potential units, not lots or,pa_ r~cels, which gxistaas of the date final assessments are mposecl; " A claim for deferral under thisysection shall be in writing on a form prescnbetl by the city re .0 der;andashall. 1 ®eserilethe lot or parcelsuponpwhich the potential units exist. 2 Recite facts establishi: the.eligibility for the deferral under th_e provisions of.this section!, 3 Beavenfied by a wntten~declarationof the appli anttmaking the claim to the effect that the statements contained in the claimr ra e~tcue 4. Be.fled within30days after noticez6h C: The city, reeordei3shall show by an entry in tFie assessment hen reco d which proPertyrspecially assessed is accorded deferral under this section. D. InterestishaIl accrue onjWamount o„f~the deferred`special assessment i ~r$ ads x ~ ~'7Y°°.~ttiU L forlocaljimpro~vementatth`erate.estalilishetltin, the resolutionimposing' f nal)assessments.~ E` Thesliens~pfo;'defe rr e"d special assessent~fo~ local improwernent sfiall~ have the same pnontys special2assgssment (lens againstgreal property :.'"st •.~iw',..d"nY., 9Lixi wa3-., au= ,.r - a ' .+u.++dmxx F ; All deferred special'as-MAs ents~for°local improv ement; incl-tiding accrued mterest become oayable when,:_; 1. The property with respect to kkafdeferral of collection of special assessment for local improvement is claimed is sold, or a contract to sell is entered into, or some person other than the owner who claimed the deferral becomes the owner of thgproperty_, 2. V11hen any of the circumstances'lsted in subsection one ~ffim ccurs, ent for local impr„ including accrued interest, shall be due and payable on the sale or transfer of the property, Adae 4M*fi ovideIffifore e not paid on the hall elinquent as of that propertcomesulosure The foregoing ordina nce was firs t read by title only in accordance with Article X, Section 2(C) of the City Charter on the day of 1998, and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this _ day of , 1998. Barbara M. Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this - day of , 1998. Catherine M. Shaw, Mayor Reviewed as to form: Paul Nolte, City Attorney i o y 0 l7 L7 L7 T Z w 2 -1 1 ._71 G1 G7 T T N N c 3 0 U r0 'm o a Z 1" d ~c m .z °x 0 m E° m m m< u° m m m m y N r y y ~ N u n n ~ m ym 'm N ro m y N y d F~ y E m~ r r Z m 0 A m ,OT m !0. m y m m m m n~< m m g g ~ n y N N m O py~ m N N N O+ O N N O P U 0 0 0 U W J y O O O O N O O O O O O O O O O O O N W N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N W U W (D (D W m O O N W N N N O O O H H H H H H H H H H N N N H N N N U J U U U U U w 0~~~~~ 0 0 0 W m w W w w w U LL >P >P U ,fJ ~m m H U~'+U O ~ V M.. H. O1 ~ Wy N V Uy O~ V U m. V`J y y O N 'A W N W"A N A~ A N Oo V :(Op ~pW9j, O~~ U OYi N ppVl 'Ap O ~ N •ppA A b, Od, 'U [mJ N~ m 4N1 P O 'P m W 0~ Ol m U 'O W O r~.rJ ~r, r+rJ ~~~.VJ W N^ N AID rty(pn/~ A~ O > qp N QI 'O ~N y in Wr N m ~0 P A O O! > W N RD y` A , H J A p'f~ ii'! m m N Y m N ~ rn 1 . Ol N„W O ~ 1 N N NA AAA ~A~~~A~AAA W N H H ~ NNN~HNl ~ H H HNN N Y H .'N+} 4W A A~ W 0~ O V~ O~ N N p m N~ ~ Y~ tit (Ui~ J O H fJ ;pD~,[bn VNi O •Ol ~NQ~1 O ^ O^I O (p H A H+ N~ N N N A N K H rH0 WN W HJ (Hi~HI + w U pp W P V O~ A 0 0 0) J W ~ U A J A O W W 01 w O w N O AA A N O O W O m J W O W O p W A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A Co + + w O N~ N N N 0 0 0 + m + + N U J+ J J J N t!N U ~ o a a~ e k e a" o d e e v a N H H N H H H H H H N N H H H U N N OI w U W N O A O J O V U O (O O 1l~ W J O W J m J m A W U W m O O N A N w N J N~ W b IWp OI ONl N d O O O V O b+ w N O N AO OI m OI Ol U U OI O J J 01 J J J J J J N+_ N N W N N N N H H H N N i N N A H N J m N N O A N 0_ 0 O OI N N+ A A N A b m_ A W J J U W A N w w m O U W A A O O W w H N N H H N N ~ H + J m (Ap W b + OI O Ol N N N H W H H N H H m J N J J W J o o O O w O O O O O A A O O W W (pp H :{i - (sue 4t tNtppp b + O m (Jli b N H H N m m O O (A., O O O W O O N O O O m 0 O t~ tNfpp H H pN ~q N y U O 0 G 'O O A' m w mM1d1 , ~:W btOV U+,i'O W W V (A J~ N U V V A + 0U O 1 A HW O W M W, 0 'A O ~ ~ m m A m 0 EGO~v_ A AO O O W ,O y O J W~ A p W p A A A A U b A, !G V fP an d (m/~ W T N m N N P W W OW W+ 100 m f00 A N A U N m N N N N+ UW d° ee 2' ~ of a o`e d° e`e o 3e o ~ A o 3° 3` V ~ 1NT A W N ~ O 10 QD J O) N A W N O O O J 0I N A W N N O to X 0 to D n y 0-u 0 D o o cn v v~ A -V ^ m D D-Pv m to y ca 0 ' m `LT m N O p C n'O O w 3 C C m m c 1D m c c p g ~ -0 C Lt p < m p w m p• ~7? °c0 3 m o- o- w < o- m' 2 z 5 96 1D F m 3 a o. e ama o c c o p y m amp o O 0 p . 3 0 ;L 0 o o o 0»~ ~e ~e p p c w t0 N O C 0 0 a O 1D 0 d y fA m m N c m c - rn m 5 2 [n 0 2 to N C m o o 0~ m p a 0 w - 3 0 o m ZU m m w o M m 0 CO w m -3 w 3 w < 3 0 - m 0. » 0 -A o m o w d o 0 0. 0 c w m m w w m m' 'm 0 a w o m o 3 0 o a o o 'D. -+3ai m c1D0 -o"xm v o n0~ m 0 w p, g 71 p m 3 m ./o N O O 2 O C7 m 0 J N m m N m T O O. p w m 3 w 0 w o I 3 0 01 m Q f < 3 3 m v d v y A ww co G) ~T 'M O V N x N I') 7 C m V 3 .p. fl. N O J j. .m_. 7 m N W 3 3 v', ° m 3 o W c° n o X. ° v o c C w d D m o 'O_ m v Co o w< 3 0. m S 3 m m w O e co S 3 m ca 0 m m m m _ m m y c a D M. o m D m° m m w m S w ° p ° m 3 p w m 0 1p o. d O w D 3 w c _ 0 a o a a ~ vi x m o x m m m ~ 0 2' m N' w m m c p z m ~ 3 Q % w m m u m p c m 'n o. v o p ~ o ~ ~ n v so ~ ? ~ v CD m p m V m o n o 0 W N - N f~T - O w O ~ O O V O O ~ N ~ N + N N to co v D O ° Om -D m 0.9 0 O m m p 0 n •O -u mmm 2 co 2 0 M M_ 0 U) -I S cn U) O o -I ,a C 3 n 0 .Z0 m N A A .Z] ] 3 N N m 0 0 O N N y r ro N ~ y N r N CO + N O O A O m co O N S 0 !9 N Oa N N (a (a 10 • ♦ ♦ ♦ • ♦ ♦ ♦ • • ♦ ♦ ♦ • 0 • -n ♦ • ♦ • ♦ ♦ a C =0 C)c)xx--I CD _ip~ v_cnx;a3 Dso ;10 cx_1K fJ3 c vci Z CD -0 > SE O N O N =7 3 N 3 f~ N :3 0 (a CD 0 =r T O N, < = N (D N 1 3, 0 C CD m n O n O n 7 N m m C 7c f° d m N O N N N N K m N N CD d O 3 ~.a) 0 - (D 0 CD m (D 0-0 CD 3 O t CD w y D y < U. o -n o (O CL N CD N .0.. d K CD CD O m (O (3D O 0 a) 7 m (D X m 0 (D ~ N• O N ~ 7 -0 -0 .0 S ~ ND) o rOo~ m m 3 3a) <3 Iz- CnNCDG) U) 0 cO° CD m=mm mm' mod (n y d ry' 7 < y O w 0(D O 0 3yo m d o 7 -0 CD A 01 N 3 y O=5 (D (D v 7 y 00 W 7 C CD 'U 7 N C co ~d 10 O D) c u co m c y m m 0 a s n cn y c c c Z m o_ 61 6) •O [1 m 3 Cn .Z7 d o m r CL CD c CD CD 6- E! Nom, o cn v3 m 0 c CD c (0 3 (o 0 U O N A O• 7 m O CA O cn CL. I C v y 3 N C o y d co 0 a' o 0 O (p 7 D CD 7 D) .a m N O N 0 ~ 0) -p CD o m a m- ` o 0 OR o c c co C- m W co $ ~O o m ~O a 00 o m o w m 0 n < O cn N 3 = CD (D (O 3 3 m N CD 0 0 3 v c0 a 0 CD N l< r+ N CD x 3 m G n ° N O C N 7 ° p1 D L]. N C (p N Q. N O 7 0) C N December 15, 1998 Meeting Notes Water Plannine The staff recommendation is based on the following: ➢ This option preserves the City's long-term ability to participate in the TAP project. ➢ This option is fiscally prudent and results in lower rate and SDC increases to pay for it. ➢ This option allows the City to pursue TID alternatives in the near-term. ➢ This option allows the City to pursue discussions with Talent regarding their 600 acre feet of water which Ashland may be able to utilize. ➢ This option does not have negative environmental impacts. ➢ This option allows the City to delay the cost of constructing the connection to Talent when and if the City needs the additional water supply. Y2K Update ➢ Project A report due by the end of December. ➢ Critical systems to be replaced by June 30, 1999. ➢ Utility systems planning well underway. ➢ Ashland Coalition taking leadership role in community Y2K issues/communication. Ashland Coalition Y2K web site live on Dec. 31, 1998. Council Communication Department of Community Development Planning Division December 15, 1998 Submitted by: John McLau hli Approved by: Paul Nolte Approved by: Mike Freeman Title: A resolution dedicating property for park purposes pursuant to Article XIX, Section 3, of the City Charter (Rob Cain property located immediately above granite pit on Granite Street). Synopsis: In August, 1998, Mr. Cain received final plan approval for a subdivision on the old quarry site on Granite Street near Lithia Park. Only the disturbed quarry area was included in the residential development portion of the application. The upper area of the property, approximately 4.86 acres which includes the ditch trail, was proposed to be left as open space. Mr. Cain has proposed to dedicate this land to the City's open space program. The entire quarry site is listed on the City's open space plan for acquisition as open space. However, the City was unsuccessful in negotiating for purchase of the quarry at prior to Mr. Cain's and he moved forward with his subdivision proposal. Mr. Cain has been working with the both the City Parks and Planning Departments in proposing the dedicate the upper portion of the property for open space purposes. The Parks Commission preliminarily reviewed the request and responded positively towards the donation. It is expected that they will be approving the donation at their December 14, 1998 meeting. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the attached resolution accepting the donation from Mr. Cain and dedicating the land for park purposes. Background Information: The Granite Street quarry has been considered an eyesore for many years, and the City has made several attempts to purchase the land for open space purposes. However, we have not been successful. Mr. Cain has purchased the property and received subdivision approval for development of the disturbed quarry area. His approvals require the reclamation of the site with substantial landscape and erosion control improvements. Mr. Cain has been working since the beginning of his project to dedicate the upper undisturbed portion of the site to the City for open space purposes, recognizing the value to the City of this land. This generous donation will allow for the continuation of the ditch trail system in the future, and help ensure that the scenic vistas of Ashland's hillsides above Lithia Park are protected. J RESOLUTION NO. 98- A RESOLUTION DEDICATING PROPERTY FOR PARK PURPOSES PURSUANT TO ARTICLE XIX, SECTION 3, OF THE CITY CHARTER (ROB CAIN PROPERTY LOCATED IMMEDIATELY ABOVE GRANITE PIT ON GRANITE STREET) THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The land described on the attached Exhibit A is dedicated for park purposes pursuant to Article XIX, Section 3, of the Ashland City Charter. This resolution was read by title only in accordance with Ashland Municipal Code § 2.04.090 duly PASSED and ADOPTED this _ day of 1998. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this _ day of 1998. Catherine M. Shaw, Mayor Reviewed as to form: Paul Nolte, City Attorney PAGE 1-RESOLUTION DESIGNATING PROPERTY FOR PARK PURPOSES (Cain property - Granite Pit) (GWACWedlcste granite pit res.wpd) t T L e LAS,.,.... -:mnw ..1 L a1 1< - _ r. _ _ _ _ / (P nVa01 14zQ1 \ lam 14 CW 1900 Common Drive wui Lot 2 n i [ Z y $6 : ?n Lot 5 Q ' Z ,icR E5 ~RoPOSEA I• "s' u OvEN SP,4CE , r Lot Lot 1 1~6D /Cr4 710AI Lot 3 ~usnNG- CW4,+MY AREA