The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2012-0821 Council Mtg PACKET\ CITY OF ASHLAND Important: Any citizen may orally address the Council on non-agenda items during the Public Fomm. Any citizen may submit written comments to the Council on any item on the Agenda,unless it is the subject of a public hearing and the record is closed. Time permitting,the Presiding Officer may allow oral testimony. 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,if any. The time granted will be dependent to some extent on the nature of the item under discussion,the number of people who wish to speak,and the length of the agenda. AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL August 21, 2012 Council Chambers 1175 E. Main Street Note: Items on the Agenda not considered due to time constraints are automatically continued to the next regularly scheduled Council meeting [AMC 2.04.030.E.] 7:00 p.m. Regular Meeting I. CALL TO ORDER II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. ROLL CALL IV. MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Study Session of August 6, 2012 2. Executive Session of August 6, 2012 3. Joint Meeting of August 7, 2012 4. Business Meeting of August 7, 2012 V1. ` /SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS&AWARDS V 1. Mayor's Proclamation declaring August 25, 2012, as Teenage Suicide Awareness Day VII. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approval of Commission, Committee, and Board Minutes 2. Annual renewal of liquor licenses 3. Appointment of Paula Sohl to the ad hoc Steering Committee on Homelessness 4. Approval of F A Assist :e_ o Firefighters Gran re Ratific n of labor contracwith the Ashland Firefighters Associa ' n IAFF Local#1269 6 Approv9l e�f3l�Pda lcy VIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Persons wishing to speak are to submit a "speaker request form" prior to the commencement of the public hearing. All hearings must conclude by 9:00 p.m., be continued to a subsequent meeting, or be extended to 9:30 p.m. by a two-thirds vote of council{AMC §2.04.050}) 1. Acceptance of an offer for a land exchange with James C. Miller, adjacent to the Ashland Gun Club IX. PUBLIC FORUM Business fromthe audience not included on the agenda. (Total time allowed for Public Forum is 15 minutes. The Mayor will set time limits to enable all people wishing to speak to complete their testimony.) [15 minutes maximum] COUNCIL NfEETINGS ARE BROADCAST LIVE ON CHANNEL 9 VISIT THE CITY OF ASHLAND'S WEB SITE AT W W W.ASHLAND.OR.US X. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None. XI. NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS 1. Approval of final design for downtown plaza XII. ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS 1 Second reading of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance amending AMC 14.08.030 connection outside city, inside urban growth boundary and adding AMC 14.09.020 sewer lateral ownership" 2. Renewal of a motion to approve first reading by title only of the ordinance titled, "An ordinance amending section 18.32.025 of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance to provide for the relocation or redevelopment of four financial institutions' existing, non-conforming drive-up uses in Ashland's Historic Interest Area' and move it on to second reading. XIII. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS/REPORTS FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS None. XIV. ADJOURNMENT In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Administrator's office at(541)488-6002(TTY phone number 1-800-735-2900). Notification 72 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting(28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title 1), COUNCIL MEETINGS ARE BROADCAST LIVE ON CHANNEL 9 VISIT THE CITY OF ASHLAND'S WEB SITE AT WWW.ASHLAND.OR.US CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION Augusl 6, 2012 Page I oft MINUTES FOR THE STUDY SESSION ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL August 6,2012 Siskiyou Room,51 Winburn Way Mayor Stromberg called the meeting to order at 5:39 p.m. in the Siskiyou Room. Councilor Slattery, Morris,Chapman, Silbiger, Lemhouse, and Voisin were present. 1. Look Ahead review City Administrator Dave Kanner reviewed items on the Look Ahead. 2. Discussion of issues surrounding short-term vacation rentals Community Development Director Bill Molnar explained the Ashland Land Use ordinance prohibited short-term vacation rentals in a single-family district. Staff annually sent enforcement letters and this year notified 40 properties operating illegally. Of the letters sent, 50% advertised the primary home on sight instead of smaller units on the property. There were two issues, one was commercial, and multi- family zoned areas that provided accommodations for less than 30-day leases and entailed land use process and the other that a single-family zone allowed only month-to-month or longer leases. Typically, the homes were owned by people locally and most likely more lucrative than month-to-month leases. Council had concerns with safety, achieving a fair balance between vacation home rentals and the Bed and Breakfast industry, losing rental stock, neighborhood impacts, increased stress on the infrastructure, and collecting taxes on short-term vacation rentals. Other comments disagreed with a first one in the neighborhood gets one precedence, the 500-foot rule, the four person limitation, and thought the cost of obtaining a conditional use permit could be a deterrent. Council suggested waiting for the Housing Needs Report from the Housing Commission August 21, 2012 before proceeding. Council thought the Planning Commission should evaluate the ordinance first, have the Housing Commission participate, and forward their recommendations to Council. Council majority agreed the City should continue to enforce the ordinance during this time. Opposing comments thought enforcement was inconsistent and unfair and suggested a moratorium until possible changes to the ordinance occurred. 3. Discussion of Plaza Use policy Management Analyst Anne Seltzer provided history on issuing permits for Plaza use and noted five issues requiring Council input: 1) Fees Council agreed with the staff recommendation not to charge a fee and retain the current policy of issuing permits and managing a calendar of events at the Plaza. 2) Time Staff recommended limiting performance type events to 2 hours to alleviate possessive use with vigils and ceremonies exempted. Council was concerned that set up time might impede actual performance time and directed staff to draft options. Staff would also address other concerns that the 64 square foot space restriction was too small. 3) Frequency Limit Staff recommendation would limit repeat performance activity to four times a month, not on the same day each week, and applicants could only book space one month in advance. These changes would eliminate monopolizing use of the Plaza. CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION August 6, 2012 Page 2 of Council suggested a cutoff for reserving time so performers that tended to reserve the same night weekly had the opportunity to reserve that time if there were no other performances scheduled even if they had exceeded four performances a month. Another option would let an applicant reserve Plaza space two months in advance but automatically cancel events during the second month if another performer applied for the same time. Staff would research options. 4) Amplification The Plaza was zoned C-1 commercial and did not allow amplification. Council directed staff to review adding an exemption for the Plaza in the C-1 zone to allow amplification. 5) Selling Merchandise Staff recommended prohibiting selling merchandise on the Plaza, including non-profits and fundraisers. Council directed staff to research the possibility of allowing non-profits to sell merchandise for fundraising purposes at the Plaza but prohibit commercial activity for personal profit. Councilor Lemhouse was interested in exploring an option that would allow the Lithia Artisan Market to sell in the Plaza or parking spaces around the Plaza once a month. Councilor Voisin left the meeting at 7:02 p.m. Councilor Slattery made a request to Council to allocate staff time to explore cost, legal, and liability issues associated with the City's direct participation in the initiation of a day use center for homeless and at risk homeless people. This was not an approval of an idea or funding,just a request to utilize staff on a fact-finding mission. Council wanted a definition of the center, what it would provide and involve, and expressed concern funding a center initially. Opposing comments did not think it was appropriate for the City to get involved. The majority of Council supported moving forward. Meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Dana Smith Assistant to the City Recorder Joint City Council/ACI I Board Annual Meeting August 7,2012 Page I of 2 MINUTES FOR THE ANNUAL JOINT MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL/ASHLAND COMMUNITY HOSPITAL BOARD August 7,2012 Council Chambers 1175 E. Main Street Councilor Voisin called the meeting to order at 6:45 p.m. Mayor Stromberg arrived at 6:50 p.m. Councilor Morris, Lemhouse, Slattery, Silbiger and Chapman were present. CEO Mark Marchetti and Board Director Doug Gentry were introduced and presented the annual report. Mr. Marchetti commented on the challenges that the Ashland Community Hospital (ACH) has dealt with over the past few years. Despite these challenges, the hospital has been able to add services, increase volumes, improve productivity and reduce costs. He went on to explain the need to affiliate with another hospital or healthcare organization as it was in the best interest of the long-term survival and growth of ACH. He stated that Huron Healthcare Consulting worked closely with the Board of Directors and Senior Leadership Team which lead to the following goals: Maintenance of broad range of inpatient and outpatient services; long-term financial support for services at ACH; support for ACH's core value of patient-centered care; commitment to the maintenance of employment at the hospital; support for the local primary care and specialty physicians and maintenance of ACH identity. The work with Huron created a Confidential Information Memorandum (CIM) document, which was distributed to 23 potential partners. After carefully analysis, the Board entered into a ninety- day period of exclusive negotiations and due diligence with Dignity Health. This process continues and it is hoped that it will be completed with the next two months at which time, with Council's support a binding Memorandum of Understanding will be signed formalizing ACH membership with Dignity Health. Mr. Marchetti presented statistical data related to the fiscal year ending June 30, 2012 for ACH. The hospital generated gross revenue of$94.3 million, which resulted in $48.5 million in net revenue following deductions for contractual adjustments, charity care and bad debt. ACH had.a total operating expense of$51.6 million and when combined with some non-operating revenue, resulted in a loss for the year of approximately $2.5 million. The many accomplishments for ACH were noted along with significant capital purchases. Mr. Marchetti stated that the hospital industry is capital intensive and must remain current with equipment, systems, and technology in order to remain competitive in providing patients and physicians with the highest quality healthcare. He noted the increasing federal government reporting requirements on hospitals related to quality and patient satisfaction. The HCAHPS Program (Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems) is the survey methodology for measure patient perception of the hospital Joint City Council/ACH Board Annual Meeting August 7,2012 Page 2 of 2 experience. Participation in the survey process is required of all hospital participating in the Medicare Program. ACH remains committed to the community it services and continue to operate student services in elementary and middle schools in Ashland and Talent. The hospital and its Foundation have support community organizations and activities through grants, sponsorships and participation in community celebrations and events. Mr. Marchetti responded to questions by council that ACH does not currently offer abortion services, invitro (due to need of proper equipment) and that ACH does not interfere with doctor patient decisions. He stated that the new Memorandum of Understanding does not propose an established council liaison on the Community Board and that the Board of Directors and Dignity Health are working toward holding a public meeting in the near future. Meeting was adjourned at 7:07 p.m. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder John Stromberg, Mayor ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING August 8, 2012 Page I of 6 MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL August 7,2012 Council Chambers 1175 E.Main Street CALL TO ORDER Mayor Stromberg called the meeting to order at 7:07 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers. ROLL CALL Councilor Voisin, Morris, Slattery, Silbiger, and Chapman were present. MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS City Recorder Barbara Christensen announced vacancies on the Public Arts Commission, Tree Commission, and the Audit Committee. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the Study Session of July 16, 2012, Executive Sessions (2) of July 16, 2012 and Business Meeting of July 17, 2012 were approved as presented. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS Mayor Stromberg recognized Dr. Jim Shames as Oregon Doctor of the Year for his work in collaborating with medical facilities in Jackson County regarding opiate drug abuse. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approval of Commission,Committee,and Board Minutes 2. Award of construction contract to apparent low bidder for the police station remodel 3. Approval of contract with Columbia Helicopters, Inc.for timber harvesting and log hauling services 4. A resolution requesting that the City of Ashland be included in the Jackson County enterprise zone and designating tax lots to be included in the enterprise zone 5. Renewal of the ambulance operator's license 6. Approval of a liquor license application for Lisa Dunagan dba Ashland Envy 7. Approval of a liquor license application for James Mills dba Caldera Brewery and Public House 8. Appointment of Marni Koopman to the Conservation Commission 9. Award of contract to apparent low bidder for the Nevada/Oak Street sewer bypass project 10. Intergovernmental agreements with Emergency Communications of Southern Oregon to provide emergency dispatch services to Ashland 11. Approval of a special procurement for graphic design services from Karin Onkka 12. Confirmation of Mayoral appointment of Mark Holden as Director of Information Technology and Electric Utility 13. Intergovernmental agreement between Jackson County and the City of Ashland and funding for sobering unit services Councilor Silbiger pulled Consent Agenda item #4 and declared a potential conflict of interest due to a financial interest he had with one of the properties listed on the draft property list. Councilor Slattery/Morris m/s to approve Consent Agenda items with the exception of item #4. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. Councilor Slattery/Chapman m/s to approve Consent Agenda item #4. Voice Vote: all AYES. Councilor Silbiger abstained from voting. ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING August 8, 2012 Page 2 of 6 PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. First reading of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance amending Section 18.32.025 of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance to provide for the relocation or redevelopment of four financial institutions' existing non-conforming drive-up uses in Ashland's historic interest area" Community Development Director Bill Molnar explained the Planning Commission or Council generally requested code amendments and although it was in the code, it was unusual to have an independent application come forward. This request would amend the ordinance to permit four drive-up uses in the Historic District to redevelop on site or relocate to new sites within the historic area. The banks in question were Umqua Bank, Wells Fargo Bank, Chase Bank, and U.S. Bank. The Planning Commission reviewed the application and recommended the following: • Make redevelopment or relocation of the(4)drive-up uses a Special Permitted Use • Require public hearing before Planning Commission—Type II Procedure • Subject to the following standards: • Locate drive-up on a non-street facing building elevation, accessed from alley or driveway • Do not enter/exit drive-up from a major street or through a primary building elevation • Do not place drive-up aisle between the building and the street other than an alley • No demolition of or exterior changes to historic resource to accommodate a drive-up • No more than one drive-up window or lane per location • All drive-up components must be removed within 60-days of discontinuation • Limit redevelopment or relocation to existing financial institutions Public Hearing Open: 7:20 p.m. Mark Knox 485 West Nevada Street/Richard Katz Ashland Food Coop/Applicants/Explained the ordinance would reduce a current situation between the customers and management of Umqua Bank and the Ashland Food Coop. In addition, it would provide the opportunity for the Wells Fargo and Chase Bank properties to redevelop and create more streetscape and better pedestrian streetscapes and limit impacts on main arterials. The goal was retaining historic fayade and pattern in the downtown area with access off a secondary street or hidden. Councilor Voisin was unclear how the ordinance would encourage the other properties to redevelop. Mr. Knox responded the development process was very expensive, discretionary, and included criteria that tended to block development efforts and the ordinance would change that. He had one bank contact him regarding redevelopment in the past. The code recognized that redevelopment should occur with existing uses under certain provisions and the Planning Commission had provided those provisions for this application. Councilor Slattery was curious why the client was Ashland Food Coop and not a bank. Mr. Katz explained over the past six years the Ashland Food Coop had unsuccessfully looked at ways to deal with their growth issues. Umqua Bank had discussed selling their property to the Ashland Food Coop but had concerns regarding conditional use permits and other requirements that would prevent the sale. The ordinance amendment would create potential and incentive and put the banks in a position to change their properties. Mr. Knox clarified there was no agreement with Umqua Bank and the Ashland Food Coop. Catherine Shaw/886 Oak Street/Explained this was not a planning action but more likely a pre-emptive strike to level the Chase Bank building and rebuild it with something more commensurate with the downtown. She did not agree the ordinance would encourage banks to redevelop when they could have during better economic times. Additionally, they could implement the standards the Planning Commission provided immediately without altering the ordinance. The banks were not asking for this change. This was about the Ashland Food Coop wanting more parking and this was why it came through the "back door." The Ashland Food Coop wanted the property across from the Post Office. She stressed why land use code and process was important and encouraged Council to retain them. ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING August 8, 2012 Page 3 of 6 Colin Swales/143 8th Street/Agreed with Ms. Shaw's testimony and saw no evidence that banks were requesting this redevelopment. In addition, planning costs were less expensive than the applicant reported. Alleyways were streets and.the Street Standards did not designate alleyways for drive-up uses. The Planning Commissioners that approved'amending the ordinance were new and lacked a depth of knowledge with land use laws. He did not think banks wanted to retain their drive-up uses when online banking was more efficient. He stated the ordinance was a "bait and switch" to allow a planning application for additional parking and encouraged Council to deny the request. Public Hearing Closed: 7:53 p.m. Mr. Molnar explained the Comprehensive Plan set forth goals and specific policies and the Land Use code created implementing actions through code language. The initial Comprehensive Plan and transportation element had stronger language regarding drive-up uses. The Comprehensive Plan did not prohibit drive-up use but emphasized the focus should be in terns of scale of development, pedestrian environment, and increasing multi modal. Councilor Morris motioned to approve First Reading of by title only of the ordinance titled, "An Ordinance amending Section 18.32.025 of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance to provide for the relocation or redevelopment of four financial institutions' existing, non-conforming drive-up uses in Ashland's Historic Interest Area" and move it to Second Reading. Motion died for lack of a second. PUBLIC FORUM Allan Sandler/750 A Street/Explained a group of homeless people in Ashland were initiating an operating agreement under the State of Oregon for an LLC. The purpose was to design a working model for housing as a place to help community without charging. In turn for this help, they hoped to receive support from the community to help their effort. He hoped the concept would flourish and asked Council for their encouragement and support of what they were doing. Andrew Kubik/1251 Munson Drive/Spoke regarding the Plaza re-design. The Plaza had successfully served as a gathering place since 1911. He cautioned the re-design would not modify certain behavior occurring in the Plaza area. However, the Plaza would benefit from an annual spring sprucing like painting, planting, improving the landscape, all budgetary items considered annually. If$250,000 was actually available for a Plaza re-design, annualizing that sum and devoting$10,000 per year if needed might be an option. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. First Reading of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance amending AMC 14.08.030 connection outside city, inside urban growth boundary and adding AMC 14.09.020 Sewer Lateral Ownership" Public Works Director Mike Faught explained the ordinance would codify an existing sewer lateral policy requiring property owners to pay for maintenance and replacement of their sections of sewer lateral that went into the public right of way. Additionally, staff was recommending changing responsibility for determination of sewer failure outside city limits within the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) from Jackson County to the appropriate regulatory authority. Staff looked at the six-year sewer project in the Capital Improvement Project (CIP) and determined the total number of sewer laterals was 246 at $2,500 to replace each for a total of$615,000 or $102,500 per year with a sewer rate impact of 2.5%. Councilor Silbiger/Chapman m/s to approve First Reading of ordinance and move to Second Reading. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Voisin, Chapman, Lemhouse, Slattery, Morris, and Silbiger, YES. Motion passed. ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING August 8, 2012 Page 4 of 6 ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS 1 Second reading of an ordinance titled,"An ordinance adding a new element `Chapter XIV—Regional Plan' to the City of Ashland Comprehensive Plan to incorporate applicable portions of the Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Problem Solving Plan and to acknowledge revised population allocations by Jackson County for the City of Ashland" Councilor Lemhouse/Voisin m/s to approve Ordinance #3069. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Lemhouse, Silbiger, Slattery, Morris,and Voisin,YES; Councilor Chapman, NO. Motion passed 5-1. 2. Second reading of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance amending the general regulations chapter (18.68) if the Ashland Land Use Ordinance to establish setback requirements for chicken coops and chicken runs" Councilor Voisin/Lemhouse m/s to approve Ordinance #3070 amending the General Regulations Chapter 18.68 to establish setback requirements for chicken coops and chicken runs. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Slattery, Voisin, Lemhouse, Silbiger, Chapman, and Morris, YES. Motion passed. Councilor Lemhouse/Morris m/s to approve Ordinance#3071 establishing provisions with the Health and Sanitation Chapter 9.08 for the keeping of chickens within residential districts. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Lemhouse, Silbiger, Voisin, Morris, Slattery, and Chapman, YES. Motion passed. 3. Second reading of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance enabling City Council to refer to the voter of Ashland in the November 6, 2012 general election a ballot question on instructing the US Congress to approve a constitutional amendment granting Congress and the State authority to regulate campaign contributions and expenditures and to determine the nature and extent of the privileges of entities other than natural persons" City Attorney Dave Lohman explained the City did not have an enabling ordinance that allowed Council to refer a ballot measure to the voters on matters outside the jurisdiction of the City. Nor did they have the ability to enable citizens to petition to place an advisory measure on the ballot when the measure was outside the City's jurisdiction. This ordinance would allow referrals by the Council or initiative petitions. Norma Anderson/815 Pavilion Place/Expressed her shock at the amount of money being spent on the Presidential campaign. This was now a government of the corporations by the corporations and for the corporations and not democracy. She asked if Ashland could voice an expression for democracy like the historical hope of a government of the people, by the people that will not perish. Mr. Lohman read the following changes to the ordinance: • Title change: An Ordinance enabling advisory elections on matters beyond the scope of the City's jurisdiction. • Change to the third WHEREAS clause: WHEREAS a City ordinance could additionally provide for advisory elections on matters beyond the scope of the City's power to enact legislation; and • Change to the fourth WHEREAS clause: WHEREAS,the City Council wishes to afford the electors of Ashland the opportunity to express their views on matters beyond the City's jurisdiction by means of advisory elections placed on the ballot by Council referral or by initiative petition and, in particular,the Council wishes to allow Ashland electors in the November 6,2012 election to determine by popular vote whether to urge the U.S. Congress to seek to overturn the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission,558 U.S. 50 (2010) through a constitutional amendment making constitutional rights available only to natural persons and granting to Congress and the States authority to regulate campaign contributions and expenditures. ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING August 8, 2012 Page 5 of 6 • SECTION 1: City Council may, by resolution, place on election ballots City advisory measures, questions, or propositions on matters beyond the scope of the City's power to enact legislation. • SECTION 2: By initiative petition,electors registered in the City of Ashland may place on election ballots City advisory measures,questions,or propositions on matters beyond the scope of the City's power to enact legislation.The procedures for placing such advisory measures, questions,or propositions on election ballots by initiative petition shall be those set forth in current Oregon Revised Statutes 250.255 to 250.355 or in subsequent revisions thereof. • SECTION 3: The immediate effectiveness of this ordinance is necessary to enable inclusion on the November 6,2012 election ballot of an advisory question on efforts to re-establish public confidence in the integrity of local,state and federal elections and therefore to preserve public health, peace,and safety.An emergency is hereby declared to exist and this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect after its passage and approval by the Mayor. • SECTION 5: Provisions of this Ordinance shall be incorporated in the City code,and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "code,""article,""section,' or another word,and the sections of this Ordinance may be renumbered, re-lettered provided however,that any Whereas clauses and boilerplate provisions(i.e.,Sections 4 and 5) need not be codified,and the City Recorder is authorized to correct any cross-references and any typographical errors. Councilor Lemhouse/Slattery m/s to approve Ordinance#3072 as amended. DISCUSSION: Councilor Lemhouse thought it was appropriate for citizens to have the ability to bring forward petitions. Councilor Silbiger confirmed the nature of the emergency was passing the ordinance in time for the November ballot and questioned how it would hold up if challenged in court. Mr. Lohman responded the courts were generous in allowing an elected body to determine what constituted an emergency. Councilor Chapman supported the ordinance but would vote no because of the emergency clause and fourth whereas clause. He did not think it should tie into a resolution Council had not yet voted on. Mr. Lohman explained if Council did not pass this ordinance, the resolution to add the advisory question on the November ballot regarding campaign contributions would not pass either. He went on to confirm the sunset clause was no longer in the ordinance. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Slattery, Morris, Voisin, Lemhouse, and Silbiger, YES; Councilor Chapman, NO. Motion passed 5-1. 4. A resolution titled, "A resolution of the City of Ashland, Jackson County, Oregon, to submit to Ashland Electors at the November 6, 2012 General Election an advisory question on instructing the U.S. Congress to approve a constitutional amendment granting Congress and the States authority to regulate campaign contributions and expenditures and to determine the nature and extent of the privileges and entities other than natural persons" City Attorney Dave Lohman explained the resolution would put the advisory question on the ballot in time for the November 6, 2012 election. Evan Lasley/110 7th Street/Wanted the public to understand this was an opportunity for public discussion and action. Many members of Congress privately agreed with regulating campaign contributions and expenditures but when discussed, passed it over due to the undermining influence of corporate lobbying upon the political and election system. He thanked Council for moving forward and giving the voters a chance to speak. Mr. Lohman noted a scribner's error in the title. Councilor Voisin/Lemhouse m/s to approve Resolution #2012-27. DISCUSSION: Councilor Chapman would not support the motion, addressed Exhibit "A," and noted an error in the language under the explanatory statement. He added the resolution should have come through citizens' initiative. Councilor Lemhouse/Slattery m/s to amend the second to the last paragraph in Exhibit "A" to clarify what a "No" vote would mean in regards to the measure. DISCUSSION: Mr. Lohman proposed the following language: "A "NO"vote would not instruct Congress to change the federal Constitution as to the ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING August 8, 2012 Page 6 of 6 status of legislatively-created entities or the inability to legislatively set campaign finance limitations and disclosure requirements." Roll Call Vote: Councilor Voisin, Morris, Lemhouse, Slattery, Silbiger, Chapman,YES. Motion passed. Roll Call Vote on main motion: Councilor Voisin, Morris, Lemhouse, Slattery, and Silbiger, YES; Councilor Chapman,NO. Motion passed 5-1. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS/REPORTS FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS 1. Discussion regarding a request from the Conservation Commission that Councilor Voisin recommend on their behalf the architects for the downtown plaza re-design project include SITES' sustainability standards for environmental sustainability within their plans. Councilor Voisin explained the Conservation Commission did not want to stop the Plaza re-design project but wanted sustainability added as a component to the project and incorporate SITE'S sustainable standards with the architect's plans. Conservation Commissioner Mark Weir added the Commission was unaware of the re-design until recently. Council was concerned the Conservation Commission was not initially involved or informed of the re-design. The majority was not opposed to adding SITE'S but wanted more information on how the SITE's document related to a clean-up project and if it was standard procedure for the Commission to apply this to all City projects. Mr. Weir explained the re-design could fall under increased sustainability planning and the Commission was asking the City to follow some of guidelines available for projects of this nature. Opposing comments from Council noted that the SITE's document had little information pertinent to the re-design and the architects were already incorporating sustainability methods through plant choice, watering, and reducing the hardscape. Councilor Voisin motioned that Council encourage the Plaza design project to include a sustainability component with milestones based on the SITE'S document. Motion died for lack of a second. Councilor Lemhouse/Slattery m/s to direct staff to provide feedback in regards to what adopting SITE'S points as it pertains to the Plaza re-design. DISCUSSION: Councilor Lemhouse needed more information about the SITE'S document before making a final decision. Councilor Slattery agreed and added the Conservation Commission should present specific points when recommending the project include sustainability components. Additionally, Council was unfamiliar with the SITE'S document. Councilor Voisin clarified the Commission was not intending to obstruct or stop the Plaza re-design and only wanted to add the quality of sustainability. Councilor Chapman left the meeting at 8:52 p.m. prior to the vote. Councilor Lemhouse clarified Council was not arguing about obstructing the project and reiterated the need for more information regarding the SITE'S document and how it applied to the re-design. Councilor Slattery added the term "sustainability" had huge application, and wanted further clarification on which part the Commission recommended. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 8:53 p.m. Barbara Christensen,City Recorder John Stromberg, Mayor c- � � +tl� -; v � 1��I�TY rJ4� •^ rJl��..- ^1� �I� 1 r��'v ilk Q Y�i�� rJi��' jY-� PROCLAMATION 1 - • • • - 1 • ')ail�.'' ••� 1 �� 1 . experience �1�1� _. • IY and is the second leading cause of death amongst young peop le rl. J��•� �1.- .1� te; - • • . • ' 1" 11 • • I S! and 25%v r • .�QQ Ja higher than the state rate. 0 VIR Public awareness and education is the key to preventing further suffering and J)�:� lkl%i loss of life. AMR N11 t ugg 0 On August 25, 2012, there will be a Teenage Suicide Awareness Day held at the Jackson County Fairgrounds. THEREFORE, the City Council jJ1'A and Mayor, on behalf of the citizens of Ashland, do i� _ j Teenage and I urge all le • -1 • • _ • 1 . 1 • 1 suicide — to offer support to those who have lost loved ones. LIN Dated this 21st day of August, 2012 ll. John Stromberg, Mayor it� 'I � !�! \Z'��' 1' •_• ffUIN p 1' �j, rl Barbara Christensen, City Recorder / �_ r vti.� 1 / i _� /tl �.`I � � 1 Otii t _ /t�l �. �. � 1'� - C I T Y OF ASHLAND ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES July 10,2012 CALL TO ORDER Chair Melanie Mindlin called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street. Commissioners Present: Staff Present: Troy J.Brown,Jr. Bill Molnar,Community Development Director Michael Dawkins Derek Severson,Associate Planner Eric Heesacker April Lucas,Administrative Supervisor Richard Kaplan Pam Marsh Debbie Miller Melanie Mindlin Absent Members: Council Liaison: None Dennis Slattery,absent ANNOUCEMENTS Community Development Director Bill Molnar updated the Commission on the plaza improvement project. He stated a preferred concept plan was presented at the second series of public workshops and the City Council is scheduled to review the plan at their July 16 study session. He stated the plan outlines more hardscape pavement and seating will be increased significantly, and while some trees need to be removed,the overall number of trees is increasing. Mr. Molnar also announced the City Council will be discussing the potential legalization of vacation rentals at their August study session,and they are likely to defer this item to the Planning Commission for review and recommendation. CONSENT AGENDA A. Approval of Minutes. 1. June 12,2012 Regular Meeting. 2. June 26,2012 Special Meeting. Commissioners Kaplan/Miller m/s to approve the Consent Agenda.Voice Vote:all AYES.Motion passed 7-0. PUBLIC FORUM No one came forward to speak. UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Approval of Findings for PA-2012-00573,RIPS Legislative Amendment. Commissioners Marsh/Brown m/s to approve the Findings for PA-2012-00573.Voice Vote: all AYES.Motion passed 7-0. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. PLANNING ACTION: #2012.00575 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 1155 East Main Street APPLICANT: City of Ashland/Ashland Police Department DESCRIPTION:The Planning Commission will re-open the public hearing on a request for Site Review approval to construct a 3,016 square foot addition and associated site improvements for the Ashland Police Department Ashland Planning Commission July 10, 2012 Page 1 of 5 located at 1155 East Main Street. Re-opening of the hearing will allow consideration of new information with regard to the accessibility of the entry walkway.COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Employment;ZONING: E-1; ASSESSOR'S MAP#: 391E 10; TAX LOT#:900. Ex Pane Contact No ex parte contact was reported.Commissioner Mindlin noted she was not present for initial hearing but has reviewed the materials and feels confident participating. Staff Report Associate Planner Derek Severson reviewed the existing Conditions regarding the entrance to the building.He stated as originally proposed,the applicants showed a stepped walkway; however during the Planning Commission's deliberations a condition was approved for no stairs to be added. He stated the concern was that stairs would be an impediment for wheelchair access. Fallowing the Planning Commission hearing,the applicants approached staff and asked for reconsideration of this element. Mr.Severson stated it has been determined that the removal of the steps would require either a ramp with switchbacks, or a sloped ramp that does not meet ADA standards. Questions of Staff Mr. Molnar clarified this issued has been discussed with the City's building official and the existing accessible route does meet the requirements.He added a sloped ramp would be okay as long as they understand the slope is too great for this to be a second ADA ramp. Mr.Molnar stated staff does not support a switchback design for the ramp. Deliberations&Decision Commissioner Miller voiced her support for retaining the stairs. She stated the stairs look nicer and a ramp out front is not essential since they already have an ADA accessible route from the building to the parking lot. Commissioner Kaplan stated he is also in favor of the steps. He stated if the ramp cannot meet ADA requirements it should not be installed,and they should not be enticing persons in wheelchairs to use an unsafe ramp.Commissioner Brawn stated when he proposed this condition he did not know the slope was that great. In light of the new information, he voiced support for the steps and agreed with Kaplan that if it looks like an accessible ramp, people will use it as such. Commissioners Miller/Kaplan m/s to remove the ramp condition and incorporate the proposed grading plan design. Roll Call Vote: Commissioners Dawkins, Kaplan, Heesacker, Brown,Marsh,Miller and Mindlin,YES.Motion passed 7-0. B. PLANNING ACTION: PA-2012-00740 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 160 Lithia Way APPLICANT: DRRAM L.L.C. (Doug&Dionne Irvine) DESCRIPTION:A request for Site Review and Conditional Use Permit approval to construct a new 13,800 square foot,three-story mixed-use building in the vacant,private parking lot located at 160 Lithia Way.The proposed building will consist of commercial restaurant space on the ground floor,five hotel units on the second floor,and five residential apartments on the third floor.The application also includes requests for a Conditional Use Permit to exceed 40 feet in height in order to provide architectural relief in the fayade,an Exception to the Site Design& Use Standards with regard to plaza space requirements,and a Tree Removal Permit to remove ten trees greater than six-inches in diameter at breast height(d.b.h.).COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Downtown Commercial; ZONING:C-1-1);ASSESSOR'S MAP#: 391 E 09 BA;TAX LOT#: 10800. Commissioner Mindlin read aloud the public hearing procedures for land use hearings. Ex Parte Contact Commissioner Heesacker reported a site visit.Commission Dawkins reported a site visit and clarified he attended the Tree Commission hearing on this item.Commissioners Marsh, Kaplan,Miller and Mindlin noted they are familiar with the site. Staff Report Associate Planner Derek Severson stated the application before the Commission is a request for site review and Conditional use permit approval to construct a 13,800 sq.ft.three story,mixed use building at 160 Lithia Way. He stated the proposed building will have commercial space on the first floor,five hotel units on the second floor,and five residences on the third floor. He stated Ashland Planning Commission July 10, 2012 Page 2 of 5 the applicants have requested one exception pertaining to the plaza space requirement;one conditional use permit for the hotel use;one conditional use permit for the building height;and a tree removal permit to remove all 10 trees on the site. Mr.Severson provided more detail of the application and reviewed the applicant's plan submittals. Regarding the conditional use permit for the building height, Mr.Severson explained there is an outright 40 ft.height allowance and applicants can go up to 55 ft.with the conditional use permit. He added the 6 foot parapet at the top of the building was specifically requested by the Historic Commission to emphasize the sense of entry. Mr.Severson commented on the applicant's request for a partial exception to the plaza space requirement. He noted the current standard and stated the applicant's have proposed to provide 60%(or roughly 800 sq.ft.)of the required plaza space with this development. Mr.Severson reviewed the proposed outdoor seating area and commented on the plaza space that would be provided along the existing corridor between the Jasmine Building and this site. He stated the applicants assert,and staff agrees,that if you were to increase the plaza space along the frontage of the building,it would push the building out of line with the facades of the other adjacent buildings. However he requested the Commission discuss whether the proposed design meets the intent of providing people-friendly spaces,and he provided an example of the plaza space area in the Clear Creek Development. Mr.Severson concluded his presentation and stated staff is supportive of the application with the proposed conditions of approval. Questions of Staff Staff was asked to comment on the adequacy of parking. Mr. Severson explained then:are typically no parking requirements in the downtown,except for hotels, motels and hostels. He stated the proposed parking spaces at the back of the building meet the parking requirement and will be utilized by the hotel. Comment was made that Will Dodge Way is often used as a delivery route,and it was questioned how this development might impact that alleyway. It was noted that delivery vehicles block off the alley at times,and people parked behind the Kendrick and Jasmine buildings must wait for the vehicles to move before they can get out. Comment was made questioning the plaza space requirement when no one else downtown is required to do this.Mr.Severson explained large scale developments(buildings over 10,000 sq.ft. in size)are required to provide 10%plaza space and the intent is to mitigate the impact of large buildings and provide interface and space for human engagement. He clarified the Jasmine building,which is adjacent to this site,was required to provide plaza space and is the only building over 10,000 sq.ft. that has been built downtown since this requirement went into effect. Mr. Molnar added when this standard was looked at in the early 1990s,they were primarily looking at spaces outside of the downtown along major arterials,since most of the lots downtown are narrow and will not hit the 10,000 sq.ft.threshold even if they build to the maximum height allowance.Comment was made suggesting this one-size fits all requirement for plaza space might need to be evaluated in terms of how to apply this downtown. Applicant's Presentation Mark Knox,Applicants Representative/Mr. Knox thanked staff for their thorough presentation and noted the obstacles with this site,including the utilities and curvature of the road. He stated they have been working on this project for one and half years and believe they have produced a very nice building.Mr. Knox noted the City's policies and standards for infilling parking lots, and stated since this property was previously owned by the City it became a catchall for new development utilities along Lithia Way. He explained all of the nearby buildings utilities(storm drainage,sewer lines,etc.)extend through this lot without easements,and it has been complicated to work through this. Mr. Knox stated the design of the building was evaluated by the Historic Commission and they were very supportive of this application. He commented on the plaza space requirement and stated these standards have a good intent, but sometimes they create a situation where they don't produce the desired results. He stated meeting the 10%plaza requirement would have really manipulated the design,and they believe their proposal meets the intent and is better product. Jerome White,Project Architect/Mr.White clarified the height of the building is 40 ft.to the cupola,and they are asking for an exception for the center portion above it.He commented on the public space design along the side of the building and stated Ashland Planning Commission July 10, 2012 Page 3 of 5 they have incorporated most of the elements displayed on the Clear Creek example. In regards to the plaza space out front,Mr. White stated be believes the large portion of front sidewalk could be counted towards this requirement. Mr.Knox added the 15 ft. sidewalks this building is providing allows for sidewalk tables and dining,which is exactly the definition of public space. He stated if you count this area they exceed the 10%requirement. He stated there was discussion early on in this project about whether to build two buildings on this lot instead of one in order to avoid these standards,but the property owner wanted this building to be right and was willing to apply for the additional variance requests.Mr. Knox stated they have created something that looks better, is better for the business to function,and hopes the Commission realizes this. Doug Irvine, Property Owner/Mr. Irvine stated he wanted to create something beautiful and something the community could be proud of. He commented on the proposed use and explained the first floor will be a tasting room and gourmet market for local wineries and artisans to sell their products. He added the wine industry and tourism is growing in Southern Oregon and they are trying to create opportunities for the shoulder season. He noted the small boutique hotel on the second floor and residential units on the third,and stated their goal was to create a fun,unique, beautiful building that the community would be proud of,and believes they have succeeded. Questions of the Applicant Comment was made questioning if they could do something with the pedestrian environment out back to make it better. Mr. Knox commented on the design of the back of the building and stated they wanted to provide an attractive fagade. He noted the imbedded sidewalk and enclosed trash enclosures, but wished there could have been more they could have done with the utilities. He explained they looked into merging these, but the City does not have the equipment to accommodate that size of transformer. He added while the residences have entrances in the front and back,the front door for the residences and the hotel is on Lithia Way. Comment was made questioning if it is possible to provide more plants at the back entry. Mr.White stated it is tight back there and while they did include landscaping,the location of the transformers was an issue. It was questioned if the applicant will ask the City to designate a loading zone in front of the building on Lithia Way.Mr. Knox stated they would like to talk with the Public Works Department and the Transportation Commission about this. He stated in addition to being a hotel guest check-in,mid-block is a good location for a 10-minute loading zone. Comment was made that this fits in with the alleyway issues mentioned earlier. The applicants were asked to comment on the round element in the walkway.Mr.White stated the landscape architect recommended the offset in the circular seating area between this building and the Jasmine building and believes it gives it more intrigue,as well as getting it away from the comer of the building. Comment was made suggesting the architect run the central pilasters all the way up to the top of the building,and to raise the seating wall height to provide for a better seating area. Public Testimony Dr.Vanston Shaw/180 Lithia Way,#208/Stated he is the president of the condo association for the Jasmine Building and has a balcony that will face this building. Dr.Shaw voiced his support for the building as proposed and thinks it is a nice design. He explained his concern is regarding the alley access and stated the only saving grace the Jasmine Building residences have had is being able to use the existing parking lot as ingress and egress,as the alley is often blocked on both ends. He stated this might be an enforcement issue, but believes the hotel parking in back will be a problem. He stated the delivery vehicles impact him as a resident,will impact the hotel and everyone else that parks in the alley,and recommended there be a comprehensive look at this.Dr. Shaw commented on the plaza space along the side of the building and noted he currently maintains the Jasmine Building's walkway. He voiced his support for the design features on the walkway and stated he is not bothered by the offset circular seating area. Applicant's Rebuttal Mark Knox/Stated when the City owned this property the intent was to sell it as an affordable housing project. Mr.Knox stated the design took access off Lithia Way and down into a sublevel parking lot,and while this would have worked it would have Ashland Planning Commission July 10, 2012 Page 4 of 5 been disastrous. He noted one side of the building has to act as the back, and noted the need for utilities and trash enclosures as well as parking for guests.He stated it has been challenging to provide all the best urban amenities and recommended the function of the alley be looked at comprehensively and at the leadership of the City. Commissioner Mindlin closed the public hearing and the record at 8:30 p.m. Questions of Staff Commissioner Dawkins stated he is troubled by the delivery situation and asked if there is any way they can resolve this.Mr. Molnar provided some history and explained the City previously went through a process in which the property owners,fire department, building official,and police department looked at what could be done to improve the environment. He stated the City Council issued a directive to make the alley one-way and to limit where deliveries could occur. He stated it sounds like the deliveries are still a problem and this is an enforcement issue. Mr. Molnar stated the plan has always been to infill this site and stated this would be a good time to reinstitute neighborhood discussion about what options could be reviewed. He added the Transportation Commission has expressed interest in loading zones along Lithia Way and this would be a good time for them to bring this back up. Deliberations&Decision Commissioners Dawkins/Marsh m/s to approve Planning Action#2012-00740 with conditions as presented by staff. DISCUSSION:Commissioner Marsh asked if this includes a condition for a loading zone out front.Commissioner Dawkins stated he strongly suggests this be done, but it is not their purview to require this.Commissioner Brown requested a friendly amendment to add a condition for the seating wall height to be increased and also for the two pilasters to run all the way up the building.Commissioners Dawkins and Marsh stated they are more comfortable directing the architect to look into this,rather than including it as a condition of approval. Commissioner Marsh stated this is a beautiful building and will positively change the feel of Lithia Way,and recommended the plaza space requirements for downtown buildings be looked at. Commissioner Mindlin voiced her support for the building design, but stated she would have liked to have seen something more for the public spaces. She stated it would have been nice for the residences to have more outdoor space and stated the public space at the opposite end of the building is a long ways away.Commissioner Marsh noted the hotel guests will be coming and going through the alley and the owners will have an interest in making sure the alleyway is as comfortable and convenient as possible. Roll Call Vote: Commissioners Kaplan, Dawkins,Heesacker,Brown,Marsh,Miller and Mindlin,YES.Motion passed 7-0. Commissioner Dawkins recommended they look into requiring energy savings measures on future building applications. OTHER BUSINESS A. Bi-Annual Attendance Report(January—June 2012) Informational item only.Several commissioners voiced concern with the Transportation Commission/Planning Commission joint meetings counting towards their absence record. It was stated the regular and study session dates are established at the beginning of the year and the commissioners can plan their travel around these,but they were not told about the joint meetings very far in advance. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, April Lucas,Administrative Supervisor Ashland Planning Commission July 10, 2012 Page 5 of 5 CITY OF ASHLAND ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES July 24,2012 CALL TO ORDER Chair Melanie Mindlin called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street. Commissioners Present: Staff Present: Troy J. Brown,Jr. Bill Molnar,Community Development Director Michael Dawkins Maria Hams, Planning Manager Eric Heesacker Brandon Goldman,Senior Planner Richard Kaplan April Lucas,Administrative Supervisor Pam Marsh (arrived at r.30 p.m) Debbie Miller Melanie Mindlin Absent Members: Council Liaison: None Dennis Slattery,absent ANNOUCEMENTS Community Development Director Bill Molnar commented on the City Council's study session on the plaza design.He stated the Council directed staff to consider some of the concepts they presented and to move ahead with a final design.He noted there were some reservations about the type of seating and comfort level, but the overall concept was supported. Commissioners Dawkins noted he had spoken with the councilors and encouraged the use of pavers for the ground treatment,which would allow water to penetrate through and be healthier for the trees. Mr. Molnar announced the City Council passed first reading of the changes to the wireless communication standards,and will be holding a public hearing for the changes to the drive-up ordinance in August.Commissioner Dawkins noted the keeping of chickens ordinance is coming back to the Commission and the Council asked them to look at including other animals.Commissioner Kaplan expressed concern with poor attendance at a Planning Commission hearing on changes,which is what happened last time.Mr. Molnar noted staff could contact the individuals who participate in the first round of hearings and encourage them to provide input. PUBLIC FORUM No one came forward to speak. UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Approval of Findings for PA•2012.00265,Drive-Up Uses Amendment. Ex Parte Contact No ex parte contact was reported. Commissioners Brown/Miller mis to approve the Findings for Planning Action#2012-00265. Roll Call Vote: Commissioners Heesacker,Miller,Dawkins,Brown and Kaplan,YES.[Mindlin abstained].Motion passed 5-0. B. Approval of Findings for PA-2012-00575, 1155 East Main Street. Ex Parte Contact No ex parte contact was reported. Ashland Planning Commission July 24, 2012 Page 1 of 3 Commissioners Kaplan/Dawkins m/s to approve the Findings for Planning Action#2012-00575. Roll Call Vote: Commissioners Heesacker,Miller,Dawkins,Brown and Kaplan,YES.]Mindlin abstained].Motion passed 5-0. PRESENTATION A. Grey Water Presentation by Building Official Michael Grubbs&Plumbing Inspector Rick Hackstock. Commissioner Mindlin announced the grey water presentation has been postponed. DISCUSSION ITEM A. Manufactured Dwelling Standards/SOU Student Report Planning Manager Maria Hams provided a short presentation on the SOU students'report on manufactured dwelling standards.She stated the students in the Planning Issues class looked at the City's manufactured housing standards in the context of affordable housing and provided the following recommendations to the City: 1) Revise the required size and dimensions for units. 2) Allow flexibility for siding and roofing materials. 3) Eliminate the garage/storage building requirements. 4) In developments,use the setbacks of the zoning district. 5) Reduce the required deck/patio size in developments. 6) Reduce the required site size for development. Ms. Harris explained the students report highlighted the significant advancements in the manufactured housing industry and put forth the fallowing findings: 1)manufactured housing is high quality because it is built to undergo the stress of being transported,2)there is less construction time and less costs, 3)manufactured homes can be built to be very energy efficient,and 4)there is less construction waste compared to conventional building. Ms. Harris provided some background data on the City's issuance of manufactured housing building permits and stated in the past 11 years 22 manufactured home permits were issued; 20 of those were to replace or install new units in existing parks,and two were to place the homes on a standard single family lot. Ms. Hams noted Ashland has three manufactured housing parks:Wingspread,Tolman Creek Park,and the park at Walker Ave/Siskiyou Blvd/Ashland St.,and explained state law identifies manufactured housing as a needed housing type and requires jurisdictions to allow manufactured housing in stand-alone lots and in parks in at least one zone. Ms. Harris stated staff believes some of the changes recommended by the students are policy changes and questioned if the Commission wanted to incorporate these revisions into the unified code project.She added this seems to fit into the same category of smaller policy changes and could be easily incorporated into the unified code project if the Commission wanted to do this. Commission Discussion Staff clarified manufactured housing is currently allowed in R2 and R3 zones;and also clarified the difference between mobile homes and manufactured homes as defined in Chapter 18.08 of the land use ordinance. Commissioner Kaplan noted he attended the students'presentation before the Housing Commission and stated they should not be discouraging people who want to use this type of construction. Mr.Molnar asked Commissioner Mindlin if she has seen manufactured housing being used in cottage housing developments. Mindlin gave her opinion that manufactured housing is not as cost effective as some might anticipate,however she supports looking into relaxing the City's requirements and stated this is a fairness issue. Commissioner Marsh commented that they should not care how the house is constructed as long as it meets the established standards. Ms. Hams asked the Commission if they were interested in incorporating this into the unified code project and received general consensus that this is worth pursuing.Commissioner Mindlin voiced concern with putting this forward as an affordable housing measure, but stated from a fairness standpoint this is a legitimate thing to do. Ashland Planning Commission July 24, 2012 Page 2 of 3 ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 7:50 p.m.and the commissioners were invited to stay and watch a short film titled"For the Love of Cities"by Peter Kageyama. Respectfully submitted, April Lucas,Administrative Supervisor Ashland Planning Commission July 24, 2012 Page 3 of 3 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication August 21 , 2012 Business Meeting Annual Renewal of Liquor Licenses FROM: Barbara Christensen, City Recorder, christeb @ashland.or.us SUMMARY Approve annual renewals on liquor licenses as requested by Oregon State Liquor Commission. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: There are approximately 100 applications that will need to be renewed between September and October 2012 as their license expires on September 30, 2012. Staff has reviewed the submitted list by OLCC for licenses that are eligible for renewal. All businesses that have current business licenses, current city's food and beverage tax (or have payment arrangements) and have no renewal fees owed, will be approved as they are made current. The Police Chief has reviewed the list of businesses and does not have any reason to oppose the renewal of any of these licenses. OLCC have provided a deadline date of September 5, 2012 for submitting a written renewal recommendation. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: N/A STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Approve the OLCC renewal list for liquor licenses in ASHLAND that staff has determined are eligible for license renewal. SUGGESTED MOTION: Motion to approve OLCC renewal list for liquor licenses in ASHLAND that staff has determined is eligible for license renewal as an item under Consent Agenda. ATTACHMENTS: OLCC License Renewal List Page 1 of I 07/02/2012 Local Government Notification: Renewing Licenses Page 1 of 4 Dist. License License # Tradename Participant Premises Address Local Government: ASHLAND 4 160576 7-ELEVEN STORE#2362-18154A CHERRY,RONALD O 1281 SISKIYOU BLVD,ASHLAND, OR CHERRY, RENATE R 160924 AGAVE OCAT INC F-COM 92 N MAIN ST,ASHLAND,OR 158955 ALBERTSON'S#573 NEW ALBERTSON'S INC 0 2301 ASHLAND ST,ASHLAND,OR 161295 ALEX'S PLAZA RESTAURANT& C&QT LLC F-COM 35 N MAIN ST,ASHLAND, OR BAR 158487 AMUSE RESTAURANT AMUSE RESTAURANT INC L 15 N FIRST ST,ASHLAND,OR 158478 ASHLAND ARCO ASHLAND FUEL INC O 2380 HWY 66,ASHLAND,OR 160262 ASHLAND FOOD COOPERATIVE ASHLAND FOOD COOPERATIVE 0 237 N 1ST ST,ASHLAND,OR 158476 ASHLAND GRILLA BITES ASHLAND GRILLA BITES INC L 47 N MAIN ST,ASHLAND,OR 157539 ASHLAND SHELL NEWCOMBE ENTERPRISES INC 0 2495 ASHLAND ST,ASHLAND, OR 160093 ASHLAND SPRINGS HOTEL MARK ANTHONY HISTORIC F-COM 212 E MAIN ST,ASHLAND, OR PROPERTYLLC 160771 ASHLAND SPRINGS HOTEL MARK ANTHONY HISTORIC 0 212 E MAIN ST,ASHLAND,OR PROPERTY LLC 158865 ASHLAND TEXACO NATIONAL NAFT CORPORATION O 2371 ASHLAND,ASHLAND,OR 158762 ASHLAND WINE CELLAR RAZZANO,TESS L L 38 LITHIA WAY,ASHLAND,OR RAZZANO, LORN P 169680 ASHLAND WINE CELLAR ASHLAND WINE AND SPIRITS LLC 0 38 LITHIA WAY,ASHLAND, OR 159774 BEASY'S ON THE CREEK BEASY BOB INC F-COM 51 WATER ST#333,ASHLAND, OR 160877 BEASY'S ON THE CREEK BEASY BOB INC O 51 WATER ST#333,ASHLAND, OR 161579 BEAU CLUB DREISZUS, ROBERT L F-COM 347 E MAIN ST,ASHLAND,OR DREISZUS,ANNRAE T 158565 BI-MART#608 BI-MART CORP 0 2280 ASHLAND ST,ASHLAND,OR 160610 BLUE MENEDES,GEORGE F-COM 5 GRANITE ST,ASHLAND,OR MENEDES, GLORIA R 161162 BONSAI TERIYAKI II SUTAE CORPORATION L 2305 ASHLAND ST#A,ASHLAND, OR 160925 BOULEVARD COFFEE STRATFORD LLC BP 555 SISKIYOU BLVD,ASHLAND, OR 158685 BROTHER'S RESTAURANT - DURANT NEWTON ENTERPRISES F-COM 95 N MAIN,ASHLAND,OR INC 158368 CAFE 116 REAL CAFE LLC L 116 LITHIA WAY,ASHLAND,OR 160979 CALDERA BREWING COMPANY CALDERA BREWING CO BP 540 CLOVER LN,ASHLAND,OR 160418 CALDERA TAP HOUSE CALDERA BREWING COMPANY F-COM 31 B WATER ST,ASHLAND, OR 160980 CALDERA TAP HOUSE CALDERA BREWING CO BP 31B WATER ST,ASHLAND,OR ()UT 1 - R GF 169547 CHATEAULIN PADJA INC F-COM 50&52 E MAIN ST,ASHLAND, OR V1ff�5169548 CHATEAULIN PADJA INC 0 50&52 E MAIN ST,ASHLAND,OR 159256 CHEVRON FOOD MART COLVIN OIL COMPANY INC 0 2500 ASHLAND ST,ASHLAND,OR 160538 CHOZU BATH AND TEA GARDEN CHOI BATH AND TEA GARDEN L 832 AST,ASHLAND, OR LLC 07/02/2012 Local Government Notification: Renewing Licenses Page 2 of 4 Dist. License License # Tradename Participant Premises Address Local Government: ASHLAND 4 160539 CHOZU BATH AND TEA GARDEN CHOZU BATH AND TEA GARDEN 0 832 A ST,ASHLAND, OR po f LLC 9j,QAM90807 COQUINA COQUINA LLC 0 , 542 A ST,ASHLAND, OR 17'- 161261 COQUINA COQUINA LLC F-COM 542 A ST,ASHLAND, OR 158908 CREEKSIDE PIZZA BISTRO P D H INC F-COM 92 1/2 N MAIN ST,ASHLAND,OR 158766 CUCINA BIAZZI HEART FRIENDLY INC F-COM 568 E MAIN ST,ASHLAND,OR 160450 DRAGONFLY GROOVEWORKS LLC F-COM 241 HARGADINE ST,ASHLAND, OR 160434 EL PARAISO MEXICAN CUISINE NUNEZ,JESUS F-COM 545 CLOVER LN,ASHLAND,OR NUNEZ, RUTILA 161190 ELKS LODGE#944 ASHLAND ELKS LODGE#944,ASHLAND F-CLU 255 E MAIN ST,ASHLAND, OR 158470 GREENLEAF RESTAURANT ASHLAND HOMESTEAD CO 0 49 N MAIN ST,ASHLAND, OR 158471 GREENLEAF RESTAURANT ASHLAND HOMESTEAD CO L 49 N MAIN ST,ASHLAND,OR 160059 HANA SUSHI HANA SUSHI LLC L 29 N MAIN ST,ASHLAND,OR 160862 HOUSE OF THAI CUISINE HOUSE OF THAI CUISINE INC L 1667 SISKIYOU BLVD,ASHLAND, OR 160468 KOBE RESTAURANT HARTO INC F-COM 96 N MAIN ST,ASHLAND,OR 161031 LA CASA DEL PUEBLO DE LA CRUZ FAMILY MEXICAN F-COM 1209 SISKIYOU BLVD,ASHLAND, J RESTAURANTSINC OR ltJ't"S` OR OP -cC MOLDER, SUK CHA a �(1f6000011 LIQUID ASSETS WINE BAR RELIABLE RESOURCES INC O 96 N MAIN#201,ASHLAND,OR /J 160045 LIQUID ASSETS WINE BAR RELIABLE RESOURCES INC F-COM 96 N MAIN#201,ASHLAND,OR 160313 LOFT AMERICAN BRASSERIE& GLINKMAN,VALERIE F-COM 18 CALLE GUANAJUATO, BAR ASHLAND,OR VIDALO SINGH LLC 159891 LOUIE'S BAR&GRILL LOUIE'S BAR&GRILL LLC "r-CUM 41 N MAIN ST,ASHLAND,OR 159194 MARKET OF CHOICE#11 MARKET OF CHOICE INC 0 1475 SISKIYOU BLVD,ASHLAND, OR 159236 MARTINO'S MACARONI INC F-COM 58 E MAIN ST,ASHLAND,OR 160255 MARTOLLI'S HAND TOSSED PIZZA BRADFORD PIZZA INC O 38 E MAIN ST,ASHLAND,OR 160886 MARTOLLI'S HAND TOSSED PIZZA BRADFORD PIZZA INC L 38 E MAIN ST,ASHLAND,OR 159535 MCCALL HOUSE MCCALL MCLAUGHLIN LLC L 153 OAK ST,ASHLAND,OR 165157 MCMILLAN'S HONG KONG BAR MCMILLANS HONG KONG BAR LLC F-COM 23 N MAIN,ASHLAND,OR 160028 MIHAMA TERIYAKI GRILL MIHAMA INC L 1253 SISKIYOU BLVD,ASHLAND, OR 159634 MINUTE MARKET#5 K&H ENTERPRISES INC 0 304 N MAIN ST,ASHLAND,OR 159604 MINUTE MARKET#6 K&H ENTERPRISES INC 0 1690 SISKIYOU BLVD,ASHLAND, OR 001- L 11 , 1 PAWL OR MORNING GLORY GROTH, PATRICIA A F-COM 1149 SISKIYOU BLVD,ASHLAND, OR 159388 NEW GOLDEN DYNASTY NEW GOLDEN DYNASTY INC L 1415 SISKIYOU BLVD,ASHLAND, RESTAURANT OR 07/02/2012 Local Government Notification: Renewing Licenses Page 3 of 4 Dist. License License # Tradename Participant Premises Address Local Government: ASHLAND 4 144116 NOBLE CAFE&ROASTERY NOBLE COFFEE ROASTING LLC L 281 4TH ST,ASHLAND, OR 163492 NORTHWEST PIZZA ANANANA LLC L 1585 SISKIYOU BLVD,ASHLAND, OR 161532 O'RYAN'S IRISH PUB KOOBA GROUP LLC F-COM 137 E MAIN ST,ASHLAND, OR 159477 OAK KNOLL GOLF CLUB CITY OF ASHLAND L 3070 HWY 66,ASHLAND,OR 159507 OAK TREE NORTHWEST ASHCO INC F-COM 2510 HWY 66,ASHLAND, OR 158935 OMAR'S OMAR'S INC F-COM 1380 SISKIYOU,ASHLAND, OR 160554 OREGON CABARET THEATRE OREGON CABARET THEATRE INC L 241 HARGADINE ST,ASHLAND, OR 161218 OREGON SHAKESPEAR FESTIVAL OREGON SHAKESPEAR FEST L 15 S PIONEER,ASHLAND, OR ASSN 160589 PADDY BRANNAN'S IRISH PUB PADDY BRANNAN'S LLC F-COM 23 S 2ND ST,ASHLAND,OR 161662 PANDA GARDEN YU,XIAO XIA F-COM 1757 ASHLAND ST,ASHLAND, OR 159319 PANGEA&SPLENDID FARE PANGEA GRILLS&WRAPS INC L 272 E MAIN ST,ASHLAND, OR CATERING 159935 PASTA PIATTI PASTA PIATTI INC L 358 E MAIN ST,ASHLAND,OR 159936 PASTA PIATTI PASTA PIATTI INC 0 358 E MAIN ST,ASHLAND,OR 160174 PEERLESS RESTAURANT PEERLESS GARDEN GRILLE& 0 265 4TH ST,ASHLAND,OR BISTRO 160308 PEERLESS RESTAURANT PEERLESS GARDEN GRILLE& F-COM 265 4TH ST,ASHLAND,OR BISTRO 159996 PLAZA INN&SUITES AT PLAZA HOSPITALITY LLC L 98 CENTRAL AVE,ASHLAND,OR ASHLAND CREEK 160027 PLAZA INN&SUITES AT PLAZA HOSPITALITY LLC 0 98 CENTRAL AVE,ASHLAND,OR ASHLAND CREEK 161074 RED ZONE SPORTS BAR N GRILL K&L ENTERPRISES LLC F-COM 303 E MAIN ST,ASHLAND,OR 159290 RITE AID#5385 THRIFTY PAYLESS INC 0 2341 ASHLAND ST,ASHLAND,OR 161615 RUBY'S NEIGHBORHOOD DOG WEST COAST LLC F-COM 163 N PIONEER ST,ASHLAND,OR RESTAURANT 158914 SAFEWAY STORE#4292 SAFEWAY INC 0 565 SISKIYOU BLVD,ASHLAND, OR 169854 SAUCE BOUCHER, BRAD K L 1640 ASHLAND ST,ASHLAND,OR 160191 SENOR SAM'S SENOR SAM'S OF ASHLAND INC L 1634 ASHLAND ST,ASHLAND,OR 160409 SESAME ASIAN KITCHEN BEAM CONSULTING&VENTURES F-COM 21 WINBURN WAY,ASHLAND, OR LLC 159665 SHOP N KART WAREHOUSE S AND J REED INC 0 2268 ASHLAND ST,ASHLAND,OR FOODS 158807 SISKIYOU SHELL KHOSROABADI, KEN O 1515 SISKIYOU,ASHLAND,OR POORKHOMAMI,BAHMAN 159886 SMITHFIELDS RESTAURANT& BERKSHIRE ENTERPRISES LLC F-COM 36 S 2ND ST,ASHLAND, OR BAR 160952 SOUTHERN OREGON SOUTHERN OREGON UNIVERSITY L 1250 SISKIYOU BLVD,ASHLAND. UNIVERSITY OR 160515 STANDING STONE BREWING CO STANDING STONE BREWING CO F-COM 101 OAK ST,ASHLAND,OR 160516 STANDING STONE BREWING CO STANDING STONE BREWING CO BP 101 OAK ST,ASHLAND, OR 159057 STOP N SHOP MARKET SELENA ASSOCIATES INC 0 110 LITHIA WAY,ASHLAND,OR 164442 TABU TB3 INC F-COM 76 N PIONEER,ASHLAND,OR 161251 TAJ INDIAN CUISINE TAJ INDIAN CUISINE LLC L 31 WATER ST,ASHLAND, OR 07/02/2012 Local Government Notification: Renewing Licenses Page 4 of 4 Dist. License License # Tradename Participant Premises Address Local Government: ASHLAND 4 159505 TAROKO TAROKO LLC F-COM 62 E MAIN ST,ASHLAND,OR 160613 THAI PEPPER PEPPER INC F-COM 84 N MAIN ST,ASHLAND, OR 158511 THE BLACK SHEEP PUB& BLACK SHEEP ENTERPRISES INC F-COM 51 N MAIN ST,ASHLAND,OR RESTAURANT 159929 THE GREAT AMERICAN PIZZA CO THEY INC L 1448 ASHLAND ST,ASHLAND,OR 160465 THE PLAYWRIGHT PEEK AND FIN LLC F-COM 258 A ST#3,ASHLAND,OR 160077 THE WINCHESTER INN MPM INVESTMENTS O 35 S SECOND ST,ASHLAND,OR (7�T 160091 THE WINCHESTER INN MPM INVESTMENTS F-COM 35 S SECOND ST,ASHLAND,OR O� ,4160341 VINYL CLUB BOHN,JOHN T F-COM 130 WILL DODGE WY,ASHLAND, i� OR DEL ROSARIO, LORI R 161165 WATER STREET CAFE RUFF HILL LLC L 40 N MAIN,ASHLAND, OR 159588 WILD GOOSE CAFE&BAR JOLLY DOG TAG INC F-COM 2365 HWY 66,ASHLAND, OR 160499 WILEY'S WORLD PASTA SHOPPE GRETCHEN'S ORGANIC PASTA INC L 1606 ASHLAND ST,ASHLAND, OR &EATERY 159329 YUAN YUAN RESTAURANT GAN, DANIEL L 2270 ASHLAND ST,ASHLAND,OR HUANG,JIEXIA CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication August 21 , 2012 Business Meeting Appointment of Paula Sohl to the ad hoc Steering Committee on Homelessness FROM: Linda Reid, Housing Program Specialist, Planning, reidl @ashland.or.us SUMMARY Confirmation of the Mayor's appointment of Paula Sohl to the ad hoc Steering Committee on Homelessness. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: This is the confirmation by the City Council of the Mayor's appointment to the ad hoc Steering Committee on Homelessness based on application received and the Mayor's meeting with the applicant. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: N/A STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends approval of the Mayor's appointment. SUGGESTED MOTION: Move to approve the Mayor's appointment of Paula Sohl to the ad hoc Steering Committee on Homelessness. ATTACHMENTS: Application Received Page 1 of 1 INFAW, cp CITY OF s ASHLAND za,z APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO CITY COMMISSION/COMMITTEE Please type or print answers to the following questions and submit to the City Recorder at City Hall,20 E Main Street, or email christeb(aashland or us. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact the City Recorder at 488-5307. Attach additional sheets if necessary. Name El �k \ 0,-50 V�+� Requesting to serve on: _ � I r` �_ 1�_� SS (Commission/Committee) Address 4,0 5crytk 4�- Occupation " G{e�ob yl- Phone: Home1?Lf f � Work Email Fax 1. Education Background What schools have you attended? What degrees do you hold? 5, D j ✓_ What additional training or education have you had that would apply to this position? 2. Related Experience What prior work experience have you had that would help you if you were appointed to this position? N 1 u C" O- Do you feel it would be advantageous for you to have furt4er training in this field,such as attending conferences or seminars?Why?_� �r, 3. Interests Why are you applying for this position? Q. '�P-Q di n( , f -Ctlw✓t 4. Availability Are you available to attend special meetings, in addition to the regularly scheduled meetings? Do you prefer day or evening meetings? 5. Additional Information How long have you lived in this community? $ Please use the space below to summarize any additional qualifications you have for this position ��rv► � a`PO vL- VLJ nA r )� Cie 0( . to Signature CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication August 21 , 2012 Business Meeting FEMA Assistance to Firefighters Grant Requests FROM: John Karns, fire chief, Ashland Fire and Rescue, kamsj @ashland.or.us SUMMARY A new application period for the FEMA Assistance to Firefighters Grant (AFG) program has opened up. Ashland Fire & Rescue wished to apply for several grants for the department and is the lead for a regional grant request. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: The Department of Homeland Security, through FEMA, has an Assistance to Firefighters Grant program that has been in place for a number of years. This grant program gives departments an opportunity to acquire equipment, personnel, and training that they would otherwise not be able to fund. Ashland Fire& Rescue has been awarded a number of grants. Ashland Fire & Rescue wished to apply for the following grants: • $57,578 for technical and rope rescue equipment. Per National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) standards, many components of our rescue equipment cache have a service life and shall not be used after expiration. • $3,584 for personal protective equipment related to technical and rope rescue responses. • $13,635 for medical physicals for members. AFG is now requiring members that operate vehicles funded under their grant program to participate in a wellness and fitness program. • $850,000 for a quint style aerial apparatus. • $238,728 for a regional rescue tool purchase. This grant would provide new electric rescue tools (typically used for extrications of patients from vehicles involved in an accident) for Ashland Fire and Rescue, Jackson County Fire District 5, and Greensprings Fire Department. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: All AFG grants require a 10% match. STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends the approval of grant applications to the AFG program. SUGGESTED MOTION: Move to approve Ashland Fire & Rescue's grant application submittals for the AFG program. ATTACHMENTS: None Page 1 of 1 �r, CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication August 21 , 2012 Business Meeting Ratification of Labor Contract with the Ashland Firefighters Association, IAFF Local # 1269. FROM: Tina Gray, Human Resource Manager, grayt @ashland.or.us SUMMARY The Ashland Firefighter's Association is one of five collective bargaining units at the City. Negotiations on a successor three-year contract with the firefighters began on April 26, 2012, and a tentative agreement was reached in just two bargaining sessions. The contract calls for a 2% cost of living adjustment in the first year and 3% increases in the second and third years, as well as increases in paramedic incentive pay. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: The current labor contract with the Ashland Firefighter's Association expired on June 30, 2012. The City reached tentative agreements over two negotiation sessions with this bargaining group. Concessions were made by both parties which are in the best interest of the City. During the last contract period, the union did not receive a wage increase during two of the three years. While it was necessary during the recession for the City to freeze wages, it did lead to the union slipping behind other comparable agencies—especially in the incentive pay for paramedic certification. The new labor agreement takes steps to bring the compensation for Ashland firefighters up with the average of comparable cities serving a similar population base. The agreement calls for: • A 2% Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) retroactive to July 1, 2012, and an increase in the paramedic incentive of 1.5% • For the second and third year of the contract, a 3% COLA, and increase in the paramedic incentive .of 1.5%per year. • Additional shift granted for funeral leave. • Mileage reimbursement for station transfers in personal vehicle. • Minor language changes intended to clarify or reflect current business practices. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: A 2% COLA is included in the FY 2013 budget for the firefighters, which equates to $55,580 in total cost (salary plus benefit roll-up). The new agreement calls for an additional 1.5% increase to the paramedic incentive that was not included in the budget, resulting in a shortfall of$41,685. If the Fire Department cannot absorb the additional cost in their budget, money may need to be transferred from contingency to cover the increase in cost. Page I of 2 lopyrVAI&, CITY OF ASHLAND STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends that the Council authorize the City Administrator and Mayor to sign the labor contract, ratifying the tentative agreements reached in negotiations. SUGGESTED MOTIONS: I move approval of the labor agreement between the City of Ashland and the Ashland Firefighter's Association, and I authorize the City Administrator and Mayor to sign the labor contract, ratifying the tentative agreements reached in negotiations ATTACHMENTS: None. Page 2 of 2 11FAW, CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication August 21 , 2012 Study Session Plaza Use Policy FROM: Ann Seltzer, Management Analyst, seltzera @ashland.or.us SUMMARY The number of requests for permits to use the Plaza for organized events continues to rise. The current permitting practice lacks clarity on the criteria to grant or deny a permit for the use of the Plaza. The attached draft policy provides guidance for both applicants and for City staff. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: At the August 6, 2012 City Council study session Council discussed modifications to the draft policy. In addition, Council asked staff to research existing code and identify needed changes that would allow amplification for activities on the Plaza. Based on Council input, the following underlined changes are have been added. 1) Page 2. Time: "Performance-type events are limited to a maximum of two hours, exclusive of set-up and take-down time." 2) Page 2. Frequency Limit: "No applicant can obtain a Plaza permit for repeat (or essentially the same) activity or event more than four times per month. Additionally, the repeat activity may not occur on the same day of the week within a four week period. However, if the Plaza is available (a permit has not been issued to another applicant) for the repeat activity applicant's preferred day of the week within seven days of the activity, the applicant may request the preferred date and the existing permit will be modified" 3) Page 2. Use of Canopies, Tables and Podiums: "An applicant may use one eight foot canopy, up to two six-foot tables and a podium. The combined square footage of the canopy, tables and podium cannot exceed sixty-four square feet. The size, location and purpose of any proposed canopy, table or podium must be set forth in the permit application. Tables and canopy shall be attended by the applicant or designee for the duration of the event." "Canopies, tents and displays, including unattended displays, in excess of sixty-four square feet may be permitted for ceremonies and remembrances." 4) Page 2. Selling Merchandise: Commercial activity such as selling merchandise for profit is prohibited on the Plaza. Page t of 2 pl I111 CITY OF ASHLAND FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: N/A STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REOUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends Council adopt the Plaza Use Policy. SUGGESTED MOTION: I move to adopt the Plaza Use Policy as presented. ATTACHMENTS: DRAFT Plaza Use Permit Page 2 of 2 �r, CITY OF ASHLAND DRAFT Plaza Use Policy Purpose The purpose of this policy is to clarify the use of the Plaza for scheduled events and performances; to minimize conflict between individual and group Plaza users, and to minimize safety risks to Plaza users and the general public. In addition, securing a Plaza permit assists staff with planning and prevents conflicting performances and scheduling. Scope This policy applies to uses of the Plaza for a scheduled event intended to attract an audience or convene a group of participants, except events for which a Special Event Permit is required under the City's Special Events Policy. All events, scheduled or impromptu, on the Plaza shall not impede pedestrian traffic flow, block or otherwise obstruct entrances or exits at crosswalks or endanger the public in any way. The Plaza can safely accommodate up to 75 persons without people spilling into the streets and blocking traffic flow. Events or gatherings that attract more than 75 participants to the Plaza at one time without having a Special Events Permit are subject to closure by the Ashland Police Department. All events on the Plaza are subject to all provisions of the Ashland Municipal Code. Permit Groups or individuals wishing to use the Plaza for a scheduled event shall obtain a Plaza use permit. Permits are required for events such as performances, vigils, ceremonies, fundraisers etc. Permit applications are available online at www.ashland.or.us or by calling (541) 488-6002. A Plaza permit application must be submitted at least 14 days in advance of the proposed event. Once the permit is approved by the City Administrator and the Chief of Police, the applicant will be notified and may pick up the approved permit at City Hall, Monday through Friday from 9:00 am to 4:00 pm. Admin/Permits/Plaza Use Permit Page 1 A Plaza permit does not grant exclusive use of the Plaza. A Plaza permit is not required for events that have secured a Special Event Permit. Fees There shall be no fee for a Plaza Permit. Time Performance-type events are limited to a maximum of two hours, exclusive of set-up and take-down time.: Events such as ceremonies, remembrances, and vigils such as Flag Day, Hiroshima/Nagasake, candlelight ceremonies or similar types of events are not limited to two hours and generally are approved for the length of time requested in the permit. Frequency Limit No applicant can obtain a Plaza permit for repeat (or essentially the same) activity or event more than four times per month. Additionally, the repeat activity may not occur on the same day of the week within a four week period. However, if the Plaza is available (a permit has not been issued to another applicant) for the repeat activity applicant's preferred day of the week within seven days of the activity, the applicant may request the preferred date and the existing permit will be modified.-. Use of Canopies, Tables and Podiums An applicant may use one eight foot canopy, up to two six foot tables and a podium. The combined square footage of the canopy, tables and podium cannot exceed sixty-four square feet. The size, location and purpose of any proposed canopy, table or podium must be set forth in the permit application. Tables and canopy shall be attended by the applicant or designee for the duration of the event. Canopies, tents and displays, including unattended displays, in excess of sixty-four square feet may be permitted for ceremonies and remembrances. Amplification No amplification of sound is allowed on the Plaza except for events that have secured a Special Event Permit. Selling Merchandise Admin/Permits/Plaza Use Permit Page 2 Commercial activity such as selling merchandise for private profit is prohibited on the Plaza. The selling of merehandise is pfohibited on the Plaza. This applies to all en4ities ineludifig nen Sanitation and Recycling Permit holders shall dispose of and, if possible, recycle all debris from the event. Other Prohibited Activities • Serving food • Cooking/Open Flame (exception for candle light vigils) • Electrical equipment, generators, amplifiers etc. • Use of/or service of alcohol • Commercial activity of any kind Criteria for Approval/Denial of application In issuing a permit for Plaza use, the City considers whether: • The application indicates the requirements above have been or appear reasonably likely to be met; • Another event is scheduled for the same time and day/weekend; • The event is reasonably likely to cause injury to persons or property; • The event will substantially interfere with the safe and orderly movement of pedestrians; and • The Plaza is adequate for the size and nature of the event • The application shows the applicant has rectified any problems that arose under a previous Plaza permit Non-Compliance Any event on the Plaza, whether scheduled or unscheduled, that unreasonably impedes pedestrian flow, blocks traffic on surrounding streets or violates the provisions of this policy related to amplification, selling merchandise, sanitation and other prohibited activities may be subject to immediate closure by the Ashland Policy Department. Admin/Permits/Plaza Use Permit Page 3 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication August 21, 2012 Business Meeting Acceptance of an Offer for a Land Exchange with James C. Miller, adjacent to the Ashland Gun Club FROM: Scott A. Fleury, Engineering Services Manager, Public Works Department, fleurys @ashland.or.us SUMMARY On May 21, 2012, the City received a written offer from James C. Miller to exchange and sell certain property he owns along Emigrant Creek Road, adjacent to the Ashland Gun Club (AGC). He proposes to deed to the City approximately 12 acres of land located southerly of Emigrant Creek in exchange for approximately 3.8 acres of City land located northerly of the creek, plus $65,000.00. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: Miller Property Status: The recent soil sampling conducted by JBR Environmental Consultants, Inc. brought to light the fact that heavy lead deposits are present on the majority of the 12 acres of land located between Emigrant Creek and the City of Ashland property currently under lease to AGC. The deposits are the results of years of shotgun firing from the club's trap and skeet ranges, as both of these ranges are directed toward the Miller property. We have learned that shotgun pellets can travel 750 feet or more. The distance from the shotgun firing line to Mr. Miller's south property line is about 300 feet, less than one half of the maximum range. Although steel shot has been required for the past year, years of usage prior to 2012 have left the Miller property with a large accumulation of lead shot on the ground surface As a possible solution to this problem, Mr. Miller has offered to exchange and sell to the City the portion of his property lying south of Emigrant Creek. He has offered to exchange 12 acres of his land for 3.8 acres of City land, plus $65,000.00. Prior to referring this offer to the Council, staff contacted H & S Appraisal, LLC to request a preliminary evaluation of the Miller property. H & S Appraisal, LLC is based in Bend, and is the same firm that provided the appraisals for the Hersey/Wimer right-of- way acquisitions. The preliminary evaluation was completed on June 15, 2012, and is attached. In his report Tom Harris summarizes by stating that the City would be effectively paying $7,927.00 per acre, which falls within the value range established by his research. In addition, the City would acquire 1,500 feet of creek frontage and a Talent Irrigation District(TID) water right for 4.5 acres of land. In determining the value of this property, it is important that the current lead-laden condition of the land NOT be a factor in its evaluation. The land must be valued as if it were free of lead contamination to avoid the appearance of collusion on the part of the City. Jackson County Process: All of the properties being considered for exchange are located outside of the City of Ashland urban growth boundary and are subject to the Jackson County Land Development Ordinances (LDO). The Pagel U3 Ar, CITY OF ASHLAND proposed action is considered to be a property line adjustment and is addressed in Section 3.4 of the LDO. Property line adjustments allow the relocation of all or a portion of a common boundary line between abutting properties without creating additional lots or parcels. Property line adjustments are permitted in any zoning district or across zoning districts with no minimum parcel size requirements, and are processed by the County as a type 1 or type 2 permit. The process requires the filing of a survey of the new common boundary line; however, it is recommended that the entire 12 acre parcel be surveyed with boundary markers set at all boundary angles and corners. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: Funds are available for this purchase from the City Facilities account. The anticipated total cost is as follows: 1. Land purchase $65,000.00 2. Surveying and plat preparation $ 8,000.00 3. County fees (estimated) $ 2.500.00 Estimated Total: $75,500.00 STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends that the Council accept the offer of a land exchange/sale with James Miller for the following reasons: I. As long as the property is actively being used as a gun range, the lead is not considered to be a hazard and no action other than as specified by best management practices is required. However, once this usage stops, the lead can be declared a hazard and DEQ may require an immediate cleanup. If the City were to gain ownership of this property, its use would be a City of Ashland determination rather than that of a third party or regulatory agency. 2. Eliminates a potential suit against the City and the AGC for immediate cleanup of his property. 3. The property has a TID water right on 4.5 acres of the total 12 acres of land. If the City chose not to use that right on the property in its current location, that right could be transferred to other City properties such as the Cemetery property on Ashland Street. 4. The 12 acre Miller property could be appended to the current AGC Lease thereby expanding their responsibility for lead harvesting, management, and ultimate cleanup. 5. With the addition of the Miller property the City would have a larger property, which would be valuable in the mitigation of a wetland area which encroaches into some of the AGC gun ranges. In summary, purchasing the Miller property is a fair and equitable solution to a potential legal liability for the City. With the ownership of the property, the City has control of the lead harvesting, the schedule and magnitude of an ultimate cleanup, as well as the current and future use of the property. The City will also acquire 4.5 acres of water rights, which can be used on the Lithia Springs property or transferred to another City owned parcel. The Miller property will also provide additional flexibility in possible wetland mitigations. SUGGESTED MOTION: I move to accept the offer of a land exchange/sale as proffered by James C. Miller on May 16, 2012. Page 2 of 3 CITY OF ASHLAND ATTACHMENTS: 1. James C. Miller offer of May 16, 2012 2. Appraisal report dated June 15, 2012 3. Map of Property exchange Page 3 of 3 �r, i 16, May 2012 Joe Kellerman—Attorney Subject:Ashland Gun Club City of Ashland MAY 2 z zo(2 Attention:Jim Olson Mike Morrison Q &` f"S111aff,'I 4J y 1 1. 1 would be open to a trade—purchase of the lands that lie south of Emlgrant Creek In my tax lot 400,39s-2e-07, 2. In return I would receive lands that the City owns north of Emigrant Creek In their tax lot 400,39s-1e-12 and tax lot 800,39s-2e-07 and any other little pieces of land that lie in north of Emigrant Creek. 3. So that no one gets undue creek advantage. The property line should reflect the existing land ownership creek side boundary—by making the deeded property line reflect the high water mark, plus 10 feet. Example—the City would retain ownership in their tax lot 400,traded property that would include the entire creek(both sides when traded)up to the high water mark, plus 10 feet. 4. The City would bear the cost of relocating and building the fences where necessary. All fences will be built to my specifications. 5. The City would be responsible for all costs in the transfer of properties including the lot line I adjustments that would be required and any costs connected with TID in change of diversion point. 6. Miller property is Irrigated land which would give the City access to T.I.D. water for future park projects or can be used for public bathroom facilities. 7. By trading lands it would relieve the City from any lead clean up on Miller traded land and the costs there of. Miller would insist that he be given a statement relieving him, his heirs and or future owners of his lands of any liability what so ever in regards to clean up or otherwise if such ever was necessary. Also if required by DEQ or any other agencies. Miller would waive j any immediate clean up costs or damage claims provided the liability Issue is dealt with. 8. A change of water diversion point would be necessary which Miller would give the City an easement for relocation. Cost to be bonne by City. 9. For Miller Irrigated property and other lands south of Emigrant Creek. Purchase price $65,000.00 plus trade. 10. City bears cost of any required survey. i 11. Miller will bear cost of land acreage calculations. 12. If required,City will bear any costs of necessary rezoning. 13. Land acreages involved calculated by registered surveyor, Harold Center are: Miller—12 acres(of which 4.5 are irrigated) tax lot 400, 39s-2e-07 City—Westerly spots—3.2 acres—tax lot 400,39s-1e-12 City—Easterly spots—0.3 acres—tax lot 800,39s-2e-07 I i City—Easterly spots—0.3 acres—Gov lot 5, 39s-2e-07 nes C. Miller i 1 /l L [MIGRANT oeu CD CD, co ----- - – — i .mr: ---.ems --- o O ° � •� �T ,gar �� 1 v - '•� .:i , to cnO'` lr s J oc V - � �'� u'ai ' t•., oa :x w� ' O N¢ ° Oo L`t l/Y i19 11 x+13 ,o f l�l N IL Q jL �r U lfl r 0 c`eo vI) U) O nt U o C) ai O } IAJt - e% 1 Z r) N° n .VCISS H & S APPRAISAL LLC 20935 Arid Avenue Telephone (541) 385.6000 Cell: (541)815.1673 Bend, Oregon 97701 June 15, 2012 Jim Olsen Engineering Services Manager 20 E. Main Street Ashland, Oregon Re: James C. Miller Property exchange —sale I have completed a preliminary work file to help the City decide whether it should pursue the Miller offer dated 16 May 2012. Due to time constraints I am unable to complete an appraisal at this time. However, the information I have gathered suggests the Miller offer is reasonable and reasonable support should be obtainable in the form of an appraisal. Please note that my preliminary work is not sufficient to support an appraisal and this letter must not be construed to be an appraisal. The letter is a summary of my preliminary effort to help the City determine whether it should proceed with the Mr. Miller's proposal. My completed preliminary work includes the following: (1) A physical inspection of the property together with Mike Morrison, ' Public Works Superintendent, was completed on June 6, 2012. (2) 1 have fast- reviewed all of Jackson County's Class 500 to 600 sales data in townships 381 E, 381 W, 391 E and 391 W recorded between 1/09 and 6-13-12. (3) 1 selected several sales that I believe to be representative of the market in which the Miller property would be competitive. These have not been verified by me, but I believe they will prove to be arms length transactions involving the smaller acreage EFU land market. (4) 1 have viewed soil maps and soil classifications for the Miller property as well as for each of Seven EFU zoned land sales I selected from those the county shows to have sold. (5) 1 have talked to Jim Miller via telephone to ask the basis of his offer and to request any special consideration I might give to the property that is not readily apparent from a physical inspection. (6) NEITHER HAVE I CONSIDERED, nor am I currently addressing the effect that possible contamination may have on the property's Fair Market Value. My recommendation is based on assumption the property is free of significant contamination. For the City's intended purposes, this should be a mandatory assumption. The property is zoned EFU and soils are primarily Farming Use capability class 4. The part currently owned by the City that is proposed for exchange is the same zone and soil class as the Miller property. As per the Miller proposal 3.80 acres are to be exchanged for 12 acres (4.5 irrigated) leaving 8.20 acres (including 4.5 acres irrigation water right) for which the City effectively pays $65,000. ($7,927 per acre). I RESPONSE TO REVIEW OF THE VIK SITE 32 A APPRAISAL Recommendation: The proposal appears to be reasonable as the dollar amounts fall within the value range indicate by currently available data. In addition, the property controls about 1,500 feet of creek frontage that should add plottage value to the City's entire contiguous holdings. Please call if you have further questions or need more information. Resume is attached. Sincer T.R. (Tom) Harris Oregon C-000090 H&S Appraisal LLC 20935 Arid Avenue Bend Oregon -2- RESPONSE TO REVIEW OF THE VIK SITE 32 A APPRAISAL THOMAS R. HARRIS PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS BUSINESS ADDRESS H&S APPRAISAL LLC Office: (541)385-6000 20935 ARID AVENUE e-mail:trharris @pacifier.com BEND, OREGON 97701 REAL ESTATE EXPERIENCE 10106 to Present-H&S Appraisal LLC. Bend, Oregon Appraisal and Consulting Services, commercial, industrial and eminent domain assignments, all real property types. 9198 to 10/06- H&H Appraisal Services Inc. Redmond. Oregon Appraisal and Consulting Services specializing in appraisals for eminent domain purposes. 5186 to 9198- Real Property Consultants, Portland Oregon—Appraisal and consulting services;commercial, industrial,agricultural and residential properties,servicing mortgage and banking clients and specializing in appraisals for eminent domain purposes. 51834186-Community First Federal Savings Vancouver.Wash -Vice President- Vancouver,Washington: Manager, Loan Service Operations, including appraisal supervision and management; Manager, commercial loan department; loan committee member. 71795183-Willamette Savings Association, Portland. Oregon-Vice President. Chief Appraiser, Manager, Project Loan(Special Credits)Department; Manager, REO Department; Loan Committee member. 7172-1179 U.S. National Bank of Oregon. Portland. Oregon-Senior Real Estate Appraiser; residential, agricultural,commercial and industrial properties,appraisal review;statewide supervision of all US Bank commercial/industrial appraisers. i 3166-7172 Bank of America. San Jose and Chico. Calif. -Staff Appraiser—residential,commercial, industrial, and agricultural property appraisals; annual farm budgets for farming operations;crop/livestock inspections and reporting for agricultural credit lines. FORMAL EDUCATION California State Polytechnic College, 1961-65, San Luis Obispo, California-B.S. Degree in Agricultural Business Management Oregon Certified General Appraiser Number C-000090 Washington Certified General Appraiser Number C-1100956(currently inactive) -3- RESPONSE TO REVIEW OF THE VIK SITE 32 A APPRAISAL PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS (Continued) CONTINUING EDUCATION COURSES AND SEMINARS 2011 - 2011-12 National USPAP Update-Armbrust 2011 - Uniform Data Set—Armbrust 2011 - The Cost Approach-McKissock 2011 - Land and Site Valuation-McKissock 2010 - 2009-2010 National USPAP Update-Armbrust 2009 - Current Legal and Market Trends that Affect Appraisers(Part 1) 2009 - Current Legal and Market Trends that Affect Appraisers(Part 2) 2009 - REO and Foreclosures(McKissock) 2009 - 2008-2009 National USPAP Update Equivalent 2009 - Registered Appraiser Assistants&Supervising Appraiser Training 2009 - Supporting Adjustments-Armbrust 2007 - N.A.R.I.E.S Examination and inspection of Sites and Buildings 2007 - 7-Hour Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice 2006 - ODOT RAN Training Conference(ODOT) 2005 - 2-4 Family Finesse—Appraising Multiple Family(McKissock) 2005 - National USPAP Update Equivalent(McKissock) 2005 - Appraising High Value Residential Properties(McKissock) 2003 - Appraisal Review Overview(WaDOT) 2003 - 7- Hour Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice 2003 - Eminent Domain &Government Takings 2003—Seminar Group 2001 - Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice 2001 Eminent Domain &Government Takings 2000 - Complaint Processing and Resolution 1999 - Manufactured Housing 1998 Eminent Domain 1996 ASFMRA-Valuation of Farm Forestry and Christmas Trees 1995 Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice 1995 - AIREA Industrial Valuation Seminar 1993 AIREA Fair Lending and The Appraiser 1991 IRWA Course 400(Uniform Standards) 1990 FIRREA Seminar; Reporting Standards 1988 AIREA Examination 2-1;Case Studies 1988 AIREA Examination 1A-1;Appraisal Principles 1988 AIREA Examination 1A-2; Basic Valuation 1988 AIREA Course SPP; Uniform Standards of Professional Practice 1987 - AIREA Examination 1B-A; Capitalization Theory 1987 AIREA Examination 1B-B; Capitalization Theory 1987 Construction Cost Seminar 1987 R41(c)Seminar j 1986 - R41(b)Seminar 1978 - AIREA Feasibility Analysis Seminar 1978 - AIREA Course VI; Industrial Property Valuation 1976 - AIREA Course II; Case Studies 1975 - Report Writing Seminar/R-2 Examination 1973 - AIREA Course 1B; Capitalization Theory 1970 - AIREA Course 1A; Principles of Real Estate -4- RESPONSE TO REVIEW OF THE VIK SITE 32 A APPRAISAL CLIENT LIST COMMERCIAL & INDUSTRIAL CLIENTS FINANCIAL CLIENTS Southern Pacific Railroad U. S. National Bank Cavenham Timber Company First Interstate Bank James River Company Washington Federal Savings Nichols Boat Company Evergreen Federal S&L,Grants Pass DSU - Peterbuilt-GMC, Inc First Federal Savings, McMinnville Lucky Distribution Security First National Bank Midas Muffler Company Bank of America Portland Fixture Company Far West Savings-RTC Buck Ambulance Company Western Savings& Loan Bick Snow Ford Benjamin Franklin Savings& Loan Pacific Carbide Company Resolution Trust Corporation(RTC) Frito Lay Company Chicago Title Company The Westwind Group FADA Marshall and Stevens Valuation Services FSLIC Witham Truck Center, Medford Or. Verex Mortgage Insurance Co. Tualatin Valley Bank j Willamette Savings& Loan Western Bank GOVERNMENTAL and ATTORNEY CLIENTS Oregon Department of Transportation City of Portland, Oregon Washington Dept of Transportation City of Gresham, Oregon Oregon Department of Justice City of Bend, Oregon Oregon Department of Aviation. City of Redmond, Oregon Federal Highway Administration Portland Metro Farm Credit Services Portland TriMet U. S. Forest Service Nature Conservancy General Services Administration Miller-Nash Attorneys Federal Aviation Administration Stoel Rives Attorneys Multnomah County, Oregon Brophy Mills Schmor Gerking&Brophy Washington County, Oregon Garvey, Schubert Barer Klamath County, Oregon Right-of Way Associates, Inc. Douglas County, Oregon Universal Field Services, Inc. Union County, Oregon David Evans and Associates Crook County,Oregon Oregon Parks and Recreation Bend Metro Parks and Recreation Brooks Resources Corporation HDR Engineering -5- CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication August 21 , 2012, Business Meeting Approval of Final Design for the Downtown Plaza FROM: Dave Kanner, city administrator, dave.kanner @ashland.or.us SUMMARY At its May 1, 2012, meeting, the Council directed staff to issue a request for proposals (RFP) for a landscape architect to improve the landscaping and furnishings on the downtown plaza. The local landscape architecture firm Covey/Pardee was hired pursuant to that RFP, and a preliminary concept plan, developed with extensive public input, was presented to the Council on July 16. After reviewing the concept plan, which calls for increasing the hardscape in the plaza to reflect how the plaza is actually used, and increasing the amount of seating by using seat walls, the Council directed that a final plan be developed. The final plan adds benches to some of the seat walls, shrinks one of the seat walls that appeared to be too large in the concept plan and calls for concrete pavers rather than scored concrete. If the final plan is approved by the Council, staff anticipates beginning construction work on the plaza in January 2013. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: The downtown plaza is, in essence, Ashland's living room. It is in all likelihood the one place in the city in which every visitor and every resident sets foot. However,just as the carpeting and the furniture in a living room must be refreshed from time to time, so too is the plaza (arguably) in need of renovation. In fact, historical photos clearly show that the plaza has gone through a renovation of some kind every 15 to 20 years. The plaza today is a deteriorating asset; fundamentally no different than a rutted street that must be repaved or a leaking roof that must be replaced. In the words of the City's Public Arts Commission, "Improving the plaza's appeal is integrally tied to the city's continued vitality, livability and sense of place. The plaza should...also become a contemporary usable gathering space for citizens and tourists alike." In May of this year, at Council direction, staff issued an RFP for landscape design, with the following scope of services: 1. A plan for creating more resilient landscaping in the Plaza. 2. Recommend a revised seating layout, including recommendations regarding the type of furnishings to be provided in the Plaza. 3. A plan for providing"rooms"within the Plaza that offer differing but complementary uses. 4. In developing the plan, the selected consultant will be expected to meet with key stakeholders to solicit their input before creating the final plan. Page I of 3 Wr, CITY OF ASHLAND Pursuant to the RFP, the City contracted with the local landscape architecture firm Covey/Pardee. The firm's first order of business was to hold two public open houses at which citizens were asked to provide input into the design process. In addition, each of the City's boards and commissions was asked to provide input and four commissions did so: The Planning, Historic, Tree and Public Art Commissions. Their input is attached to this Council Communication. Covey/Pardee immediately noted, and our Parks Department agreed, that because of pedestrian patterns in the plaza and the way the plaza is actually used, the spaces on the east and north ends that had at one time been grassy areas have become too compacted and tree roots are too close to surface level for replanting. It was also determined that a Modesto Ash tree at the south end of the plaza is nearly dead and must be removed, and that the root ball of a large Liquid Amber at the north end has pushed out of the ground and threatens the surrounding sidewalks and street. Consensus arose during these public input sessions as well as at two subsequent public input sessions (attended by more than 80 citizens) that the plaza would be better served by replacing the compacted turf areas with hardscape and increasing the'number of trees to provide additional shade during the summer months. This consensus was reflected in the initial concept plan presented to the Council on July 16, at which time the Council raised several specific concerns. 1. The absence of benches with backs. All seating in the concept plan was provided by seat walls. 2. The size of one particular seat wall that ran north-south behind what the plan envisioned as a "stage" area. 3. The use of scored concrete rather than pavers. 4. The project cost. A preliminary estimate (including a project contingency) totaled $227,000. In response to these concerns the final plans call for six benches (actually bench seats and backs attached to the seat walls) as opposed to the five benches currently in the plaza. The size of the large north-south seat wall has been shrunk and the final plan calls for concrete pavers. In addition, by having city staff do most of the site prep work, including concrete demolition, grading and some landscape planting, the cost estimate is reduced to $170,000, of which more than $28,000 is project contingency and which is well within available funds. This cost can be reduced further by using scored concrete instead of pavers. At its August 7 meeting, the Council requested information—in response to input from the Conservation Commission—on the applicability of SITES Sustainability Standards to this project should it go forward. SITES appears to be intended for projects that are much, much larger and more complex than this one (e.g., the SOU student housing project), however a separate memo is attached that addresses the Council's request. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: Funding for this project would come from transient occupancy taxes that are, by Council resolution, set aside for downtown improvements, as well as transient occupancy tax money that had been set aside for economic development. There is more than enough funding available for this project. STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends Council approval of the final design for the downtown plaza and requests direction to move forward with developing construction documents and plans to undertake construction this winter. Page 2 of 3 Ir, CITY OF ASHLAND SUGGESTED MOTION: I move approval of the final design for the downtown plaza as presented by Covey/Pardee and direct staff to work with Covey/Pardee on construction documents and bid packages, with the goal of undertaking the designed improvements to the plaza beginning in January 2013. ATTACHMENTS: Input from the Planning, Historic, Tree and Public Arts Commissions Memo regarding SITES Sustainability Standards Preliminary opinion of probably project costs Final design presentation Photo submitted by Councilor Silbiger Page 3 of 3 • plaza buildings and, wherever possible, open up views towards the mountains and Grizzly Peak. 6. Integrate artistic elements into the design of seating, waste cans, bike racks, information booth, and kiosk. 7. Bury electrical and other unsightly infrastructure components for a more pleasant view scape. Provide safe and efficient access to electricity for cultural performances and events. 8. • • • Public Art Commission Ashland Plaza Improvement Project Statement Ashland's downtown plaza can be part of the expression of our community identity and pride as a premier small arts city. The plaza is one of the first places visitors see when arriving to town, and also a place many residents drive, bicycle, or walk by every day. Improving the plaza's appeal is integrally tied to the city's continued vitality, livability, and sense of place. The PAC supports a complete and cohesive restructuring plan for hardscape and landscape improvements, to include public art elements,to enrich the experience of Ashland. The plaza should continue to honor our historic past, but also become a contemporary usable gathering space for citizens and tourists alike. This will play to the city's strength as a tourist destination and a place visitors return to, while also providing support to our existing businesses and attractive to the public in all seasons. To this end,the PAC envisions an artistic and creative approach to the improvement project and integrating public art into the plaza redesign. Public art enhances and builds upon the city's existing strong cultural.infrastructure, and promotes economic and cultural tourism. Creating a cohesive plaza improvement plan with each element working together to enhance • the appeal and use of the plaza presents many opportunities. The following are a few initial vision ideas the PAC respectfully asks the Council to take under consideration: 1. Plaza redesign is an opportunity to provide a city locus and enlarge the appeal of the plaza. Create a focal interest for the city with public art incorporated into the plan. 2. Incorporate aesthetic hardscapes with pavers and/or areas of mosaics coherently tied into crosswalks, pathways, walls etc. 3. Current site configuration is limiting in a number of ways for the different cultural events the city now hosts or allows on or near the plaza. Consider enlarging the usable plaza area to accommodate performances and events and their spectators. 4. Provide a welcoming environment to the public in all seasons with the development of a landscape plan with year round sustainable plant features. The landscape plan should rethink and investigate a number of changes for the plaza including but not limited to eg: eliminating grassy areas and replacing overgrown trees; altering the circulation plan; creating raised landscape beds for seasonal interest and shady spots with lower canopy trees; improving and/or adding water features; relocation of information booth; and, incorporating spaces for public art placement. 5. Ashland has a special quality because of its unique location in this narrow valley surrounded by mountains, and easy downtown access to the jewel of Lithia Park. • Capitalize on this by improving plaza views and access into Lithia Park and the historic C 1 7 Y OF -AS H LAND Memo DATE: June 26, 2012 TO: 'Covey Pardee Landscape Architects. FROM: Ashland Planning Commission Melanie Mindlin, Chair RE: Plaza Redesign The Ashland Planning Commission submits the following statement regarding the redesign of the Ashland plaza: First and foremost, the plaza design should support the basic function of the place -- to serve as a lively, well-used community gathering place for residents (of all kinds) and visitors. The plaza is not a passive park, nor should it be (as it is today) simply a thoroughfare from one commercial point to another. Rather it is (or should be) the central meeting point in downtown -- a place where friends meet up for coffee, family members regroup after shopping, or individuals sit to read a newspaper or people watch. Sometimes it will be the site of large gatherings or demonstrations. With these functions in mind, the design should include the following elements: • Minimal (if any) turf. It's a plaza, not a park. Use planters (walls and/or pots) to provide greenery and help define the space. Potted trees can provide a wonderful, full canopy. • A variety of seating options. Walls, moveable cafe tables and chairs, etc. Furniture is key to function. • Trash and recycling containers. Well-designed and even beautiful containers don't have to be relegated to the outskirts of the site. Instead, they can help define the space. • Thoughtful site planning. A layout that provides a sense of protection for people at tables, but doesn't obstruct views into or out of the plaza. The Planning Commission is very excited by the opportunities posed by the plaza redesign. We look forward to helping in any way we can as the project moves forward. PLANNING intrum OMMISSION Fax 541-552-205 �-, 51 Wlnhum Way Fax:541-552-2050 Ashland Oregon 97520 TTY: 800 735 290D www.ashland.orms plannlna(dlashland.or.us HISTORIC COMMISSION Meeting of July 3, 2012 PLAZA DESIGN COMMENTS The City of Ashland Historic Commission supports the proposed renovation to the plaza and the proposals which maintain the historic structures(Carter Fountain, Lithia Water Fountain,the Flag Pole and Information Booth). The Commission supports the incorporation of a stage and prefers the curvilinear seating design with the curving seat wall behind the circular stage and a curving seating wall on the east side. The Commission prefers the radial design to the concrete surfaces utilizing colored and scored concrete. Additionally, the Commission would like if some historical markers or plaques were included in the plan which tell the story of Ashland History, perhaps stamped into the concrete. Department of community Development Tel:541J1MUS 20 East Main St Fax:541{52.2050 Ashland,Omgon 97520 TTY: 800.735.2900 www.ashland.ocus Ink CITY OF ASH LAND - TREE COMMISSIONIf- To: CoveyPardee Landscape Architects RE: Plaza Design The City of Ashland's Tree Commission is extremely supportive of the efforts by CoveyPardee to reinvigorate the Plaza with site improvements. Ultimately we feel that that expanding the hardscape is critical to how the space-functions now and in the future. Below are a few suggestions the Tree Commission has while preparing a final plan: • Elevate the softscape in order to provide seating and keep foot traffic off the tree roots. • Consult an arborist to determine which of the remaining trees are best suited to survive construction and have the greatest chance to perform well given their existing location. This may require altering the hardscape pattern to accommodate the existing trees. • Explore the idea of containerizing a few trees to provide the greatest flexibility for the use of the space, in addition to preserving those likely to survive.The number of trees on site should equal (approx 5) or exceed the number currently on-site. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act,If you need special assistance to participate in this meeting,please contact the Community Development office at 541-488.5305(TTY phone Is 1-800-735.2900). Notification 48 hours prior to themeeting will cnafilu d,a Oity fn make reasonable arranoements to ensure accasslbility to the meeting(28 CFR 35.102.35.104 ADA Title 1). Landscape Design Services for the Plaza in Downtown Ashland Preliminary Opinion of Probable Construction Cost-Conceptual Design Phase Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Total General Conditions Mobilization 1 LS 3,500.00 3,500.00 Const. supervision, temp. facilities 1 LS 7,500.00 7,500.00 Site Work Final grading (laborer) 16 HR 50.00 800.00 Excavator& operator 12 HR 70.00 840.00 Haul-off&disposal 40 CY 20.00 800.00 Pavement Permeable concrete pavers(materials&installation) 4,785 SF 11.00 52,635.00 Seat Walls Footings 105 LF 26.00 2,730.00 Seat walls(ground-face block base) 445 FF 25.00 11,125.00 Seat wall cap(straight) 140 SF 45.00 6,300.00 Seat wall cap(curved) 70 SF 90.00 6,300.00 Irrigation&Planting Irrigation 1,500 SF 2.50 3,750.00 Topsoil @ shrubs&groundcover(8"depth) 40 CY 50.00 2,000.00 Shrubs&groundcover 1,500 SF 3.50 5,250.00 Trees(3"caliper) 7 LS 800.00 5,600.00 Site Furniture Benches-wall mounted 6 EA 2,500.00 15,000.00 Skateboard deterrents 30 EA 40.00 1,200.00 Tree grates(8'-0"diameter) 3 EA 2,000.00 6,000.00 Total $131,330.00 Contractor's Overhead&Profit @ 8% $10,506.40 Grand Total $141,836.40 Contingency 20% $28,367.28 8/15/2012 Covey Pardee Landscape Architects Page 1 of 1 Ali c 17— , � .. z _ ��'��Via.— �- ,� S'� � • -,,ra`s��._z�„e 1" 't.3�I K��L&P,' ',�. b hr+fin •, "'' � tiA r'� . •.ycy�-may., �.��y ��y�.�I7��r.'� y� i�Z v R Ashland Library r�1• _, :mss ; .:T:�. - ,►. z _ �. Q ' Opp .�� ► ��:� � 5. -'z :fir _. a� ` .. Ashland Library 1,. r \ _ .4 • � 1 1 �1 - S ANO i .v K y'. 1s� MW Ashland Library Bus Stop �_ r � Y t1c S OF i, y _ _ ,�f:,mil•' 4-:•i.�. - k - V. ..N i _A�l -M C - Y I SI L i r t a � one .y :..Iw � y •;'Z`/ , 7N-Y r It `'� •+- ..�,+a��//. •r ysr{. r2� Ar IR'k Ail- Ile y.. Ashland Food Co-op .i 1� �1 += 4 A-,Ht R FrA, 44 lcm RCC/SOU Higher Education Center Z� �, • Higher • • i!. Y k ' � PIN .._ 1 OSF New Theater Courtyard 9 ► 1�: "` l'' "��'s'' y�� • 111 �� ' f _� f { t� 1 rte•- f�"-yr - - - (•• ��• i ,a° �► • I ro 94 ry r "~fir ':?i �-1 � � � 1�/� , .�r.f • ,�'� • ' w ,fit , " .� �"r • i �� - � .p�.i� i ar r - OSF New Theater Courtyard � wt. �. }f ry''�,...+ � � .eta yf� � J'.`+'�.��• ril ��A+r�.-AIYa r�'rv� ��1 �� t^ , j"t��" �••.P. f�j. 17��•;-�y ..IlT �'•�1 •r•Y' �T,+• .7,��•7('b r',N*f yc. .1 v ..i Jy.�f�i` ♦ rT ':7' T !". •.• /�� y� r �.r � if• _y�1 �;' 1 �f , 'y} � •f{" +31 .f �"�f w•lY'I�'#' T•�, t7i`{', �.' . � • • - t > TI'L !1... f:7 f ��r' .y�,a�►, �" S`��lS .�a�''r�O:. >ir:.�I�!/r "r��'� '7,;1��'�, "� w � c ;r. •• 5 7 fy, '� �ir' A"j'� a �:+- �iy.�� •.. •' .ti f}•�•��f,'�✓jt••.. �.4q +si�ilit�t^ ••�, "'F j 711�� / !'►�.••+:•"'any " '''".-y �q•` 1 +: ti•:" `•�• -'R!�"•✓t'� r•,.rv' •i.x,: 15; _ . ,+�. rj:� i ., ;,x1�t'F•- +..� Mfr • ;,� - i. '`;-y� j•. -.G"i►h'r �'`' �.•�.'_e i..J�+.�y�'♦i7Sirt•ia II , •yt .�j �• �•�4� 1 A r �f� '"i y _ 0 'ice --�-� -� r ° k t� of lot _rte i«�< � �+ ' �5 .�j�� ! ,, .c. sc,� � .. v:��' `- =.. :f1'.', Fir. �i., r � _ i�� n �f - l .0 .� 4. �fTil"4 ��w �:T �rY - a r4 r � � ��{ Y � y `i - - � � ' .� .. - f` r4- u• { ,'�,. �, �,w' �rp: y �� - 'y,,,, r 7 � .�. h� -?°' w� �3 '� Y i �� '�" � r 3 �.. - - - l�'� �4 �' i o� �._ i1.: ii _ _ __/ �. r � � � � � • r _IL . � � • J l.: Y.a� � �1 �' `�' i l' fl '.X lit: r C �'. � �'. �.. (�—'. � � � � 4 � F s Perspective - looking southwest COT � T t n f Perspective - looking southwest VAid -Ilr�, ,3. . MINIM lir. '' f •�. _ 0 Perspective • • • southeast 1 i .1 3 ,yam u�p.. Perspective PP looking north SEAT WALL LOW SHRUBS& 1' 1 GROUNDCOVER '1 _ NEW BENCH r - FLAG POLE - • NEW TREE IN r, • ` TREE GRATE \\ 1 1 .�•.! \ NEW PAVING � • � t CARTER L1�SHRUBS& ✓ IRON M � GROUTZK. OVER SEAT WALL NEW BENCH `f O KIOSK SEAT WALL INFORM ION B TH O TRANSPLANTIAPANESE NORTH MAIN ST LOW SHRUBS& MAPLE&REPLACE w/ t GROUNDCOVER SHADFTREE i _ t Vu Nan e'dN i •t O I •� l ti I. _ r1 1 ......... � •O•.:tt•t..t.M tt•n?..i,�Mtt.\;....tM•.fit t F a..Mtl\t♦YM.t\t1 H\t .............. 1•1\..•l•!• H\!Y�t.\l..t\t�Htt f l.Ht\tr a tl Y.r..ftf..�.f.O....l....a....t..................t..........•.••r.•s.fi•. aral!...\t\.•Y flltt1, f..t..\f\.\I....Yf•..H•..11..\.i..\N.a.ItY\l lt...t t.t.. .. .N .1a l l .................. HN t. l'. Y!...aa... .»..�.. ............ 0 u......\ f a1]tttt!.......u.H..............!\. . ... . \1 \..N = .....f.l...f........f 11\ f ..••••• !:.•t ....tl.rf........u ..a•.safl.a. �. .. .yry } r< ... 1 c •. . _ - �� •.M p.• 'mil .s h 1 L yiy XYkb i ! h' -Y, t• • C f. I y. Y } 1 - Tf5.'Ai .ru. w''>i` 1' .n' `r�`q � y� t '1� � :b �'}� �}l � �'S7. '� •v�� —+f'-• .?.,_ . , 3•y ;�' .. c � �y. 'v JiBts. .T %" Y ACM Y� ,{ .. . _ �l(�/fHll Y i a u - _ CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication August 21, 2012 Business Meeting Second Reading of an Ordinance Amending Ashland Municipal Code (AMC) 14.08.030 Connection Outside City, Inside Urban Growth Boundary and Adding AMC 14.09.020 Sewer Lateral Ownership FROM: Michael R. Faught, Public Works Director, Public Works Department, faughtm @ashland.or.us SUMMARY Staff is recommending Council amend AMC 14.09, codifying an existing sewer lateral policy that requires property owners to pay for the maintenance and replacement of their sewer laterals. In addition, staff is recommending Council amend AMC 14.08.030 changing responsibility for determination of sewer system failure from Jackson County to "appropriate regulatory authority" for connection outside the City limits but within the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: August 7, 2012 The City Council approved the first reading of the proposed ordinance amending AMC 14.08 Connection Outside City, Inside Urban Growth Boundary and adding 14.09.020 Sewer Lateral Ownership. Previous Background Information Based on an internal sewer service policy, city staff has historically required Ashland residents to pay for maintenance and replacement of their sewer lateral from the house to the main which includes that section located within the public right-of-way. This policy requires home owners to obtain a right-of- way permit and pay for the cost of replacing the sewer lateral in the public right-of way at an estimated cost of$2,500. The one exception to this policy is a 1962 Greensprings Subdivision developer's agreement requiring the City to maintain the sewer lateral from the house to the main line for 250 homes in the subdivision. Issue Property owners have challenged the City's authority to require residents to maintain sewer lateral lines. Staff was unable to find previous Council action to support the internal sewer lateral policy, and the AMC is silent on responsibility for maintenance and/or replacement. Staff is proposing, for Council consideration, new AMC amendments that will codify the City's long- standing sewer lateral maintenance and replacement policy which places this responsibility on the property owners, who exclusively benefit from the use of their own sewer lateral. Page I of CITY OF -ASHLAND Staff has reviewed the sewer lateral ordinances for several Oregon cities and found that Ashland's internal policy of requiring property owners to maintain the sewer lateral from the property line to the sewer main (in the public right-of-way) is consistent with most Oregon municipalities. Medford has similar ordinance language placing responsibility for maintenance and replacement of sewer laterals with the property owner. This is also the case with most other cities in Oregon including Milwaukie, Grants Pass, Fairview, Ontario, McMinnville, Forest Grove, Pacific City and Bend for example. In contrast, Oregon City, North Bend, Rogue River, Netarts-Oceanside Sanitary District, Cottage Grove and Albany maintain the sewer lateral located in the public right-of-way. Staff previously reported to Council that Rogue Valley Sewer Services (RVSS) (Jacksonville, Talent and Phoenix) required property owners to maintain and replace their sewer lateral; however, when staff took a second look at their ordinance it became clear that RVSS requires maintenance but replaces the section of the sewer lateral located in the public right-of-way as funding allows. In addition to the proposed sewer lateral amendments, staff is recommending a housekeeping update to AMC 14.08.030. Under current code, one of the conditions of approval for connecting property outside the City but inside the UGB to the City sewer system is a determination that the property owner's sewer system has failed. Under current code, "Jackson County" is specifically named as the entity to make that determination. Jackson County no longer makes such determinations; DEQ does. Thus, the proposed new language directs an applicant to seek approval from an "appropriate regulatory authority." Similarly, the proposed amendments ensure the applicant's project does not conflict with "state or local laws,rules and regulations,"rather than limiting compliance only to Jackson County's comprehensive plan. Council Study Session At the June 18, 2012 Council Study Session, staff updated the Council on the current policy of requiring property owners to pay for the maintenance and replacement of their sewer laterals within the public-right-of-way. During that meeting, Council requested that staff research the following four questions: 1. Will the City or the property owner be required to replace a.sewer lateral when the City has a project (overlay, reconstruct, sewer lateral rehabilitation, etc.)? The proposed ordinance would require the property owner to pay for the replacement of sewer lateral regardless if it is a City project or a faulty sewer lateral. If the Council would prefer the City pay for the replacement of sewer laterals as part of a capital project then staff recommends limiting that to sewer rehabilitation projects. If that is the case, staff recommends adding the following language to the ordinance: In conjunction with a main line rehabilitation project, the City will reconstruct sewer laterals within the public right-of-way at no cost to the property owner provided sewer lateral reconstruction is incidental to and made necessary by the main line rehabilitation. The property owner will be responsible for the work if it is extended onto private property, or the City will perform the work and bill the owner. 2. Should the City create a policy requiring any person or agency damaging a sewer lateral to be responsible for repair? Staff believes a new policy is not needed because the requirement that anyone found to have damaged a sewer lateral is already responsible for repair costs. AMC Chapter 13.02 Public Page 2 of 4 PF& CITY OF ASHLAND Rights of Way Section 110 Liability states that"The permittee and owner of the benefitted property if different than the permittee shall be liable to any person who is injured or otherwise suffers damage by reason of any encroachment allowed in accordance with the provisions of this section. In addition, anyone working in the public right of way is required to get a Public Works permit. All work performed under a Public Works permit must be done by a contractor with comprehensive or commercial general liability insurance to cover all claims, actions, costs,judgments, and damages that may occur for work performed under the permit. 3. Is replacing a sewer lateral covered under homeowners insurance? Staff checked with a local insurance agent and found the standard homeowners insurance does not cover replacement of a sewer lateral once it leaves the house. The only exception is if the property owner purchases specific insurance to cover those utilities outside of the home. 4. What is the replacement policy for other City utilities? The City is responsible for the water service line from the main line up to and including the water meter; the electric service line up to and including the meter; and the AFN (according to a previous legal opinion from former City Attorney Paul Nolte) service line up to the property line. There is a difference; however, between most utilities and a sewer lateral in that the City has control of the product (water, electricity, or cable) going to the home. This is not the case with a sewer lateral as the homeowner can damage or plug a sewer lateral by dumping grease, foreign objects, and/or chemicals (concentrated bleach, drain cleaners, etc.). June 19, 2012 City Council Meeting At the June 19, 2012 City Council meeting, Council directed staff to bring back fiscal impacts to the City for replacing sewer laterals in conjunction with sewer rehabilitation projects. In order to estimate the fiscal impact of replacing sewer laterals with sewer rehabilitation projects, staff counted the number of sewer laterals that would need to be replaced based on the adopted six-year sewer capital improvement list (CIP) and the internal sewer rehabilitation project list and determined that 246 sewer laterals would need to be replaced. The cost to replace 246 sewer laterals is $615,000 (246 x $2,500=$615,000). The fiscal impact of adding sewer laterals to the six-year capital sewer rehabilitation project list is about $102,500 per year which translates to an approximate 2.5% sewer rate increase. The detailed annual fiscal impact is as follows: FY2013 $130,000 FY2014 $ 67,500 FY2015 $ 87,500 FY2016 $155,000 FY2017 $ 80,000 FY2018 $ 95,000 Total $615,000 Page 3 of 4 CITY OF ASHLAND FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: If the City Council codifies the existing sewer lateral policy there is no fiscal impact. If, on the other hand, the Council decides to replace sewer laterals with all sewer rehabilitation projects the fiscal impact is about $102,500 per year or a 2.5% sewer rate increase. The total, multi-year sewer system cost to maintain and replace the sewer lateral from the property line to the sewer main for 7,850 sewer laterals (excluding part of the Greensprings Development) is $19,625,000 or $2,500 each. STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends Council approve second reading of the ordinance. SUGGESTED MOTION: I move that Council approve the second reading of an Ordinance titled, "An Ordinance Amending Ashland Municipal Code (AMC) 14.08.030 Connection Outside City, Inside Urban Growth Boundary and adding AMC 14.09.020 Sewer Lateral Ownership. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Ordinance 2. AMC 14.09; AMC 18.72.070 (D); AMC 18.80.060 (B) 3. Greensprings Subdivision Map 4. Greensprings Subdivision Water and Sewer Agreement, Oak Knoll Page 4 of 4 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING AMC 14.08.030 CONNECTION - OUTSIDE CITY, INSIDE URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY AND ADDING AMC 14.09.020 SEWER LATERAL OWNERSHIP Annotated to show deletions and additions to the code sections being modified. Deletions are bold lined through and additions are bold underlined. WHEREAS, Article 2. Section I of the Ashland City Charter provides: Powers of the City. The City shall have all powers which the constitutions, statutes, and common law of the United States and of this State expressly or impliedly grant or allow municipalities, as fully as though this Charter specifically enumerated each of those powers, as well as all powers not inconsistent with the foregoing; and, in addition thereto, shall possess all powers hereinafter specifically granted. All the authority thereof shall have perpetual succession. WHEREAS, State requirements for allowing properties outside the City to be connected to the City's sewer main have changed, and the City of Ashland desires to amend the code to reflect current regulatory requirements for such connections. WHEREAS,the City of Ashland has historically conditioned permission to connect to the City's sewer main on commitments by property owners to maintain, repair or replace building sewer laterals from the building to the public Sewer Main. WHEREAS, the City of Ashland desires to codify historic practices to establish workable and uniform decision making. THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Chapter 14.08.030 is hereby amended to read as follows: 14.08.030 Connection - Outside City, Inside Urban Growth Boundary An occupied dwelling or building located outside the City of Ashland and inside the urban growth boundary may be connected to the sewer system when such connection is determined by the Ashland City Council to be in the best interest of the City of Ashland and to not be detrimental to the City's sewerage facilities. Such connection shall be made only upon the following conditions: A. The applicant for sewer service pays the sewer connection fee and the systems development charges established by the City Council. Ordinance No. Page 1 of 4 B. in the event a dwelling or building eapmeeted to the sewef .stem stib..,.,...,ndy feplane.] the Gity as leng as the use of the sewer system will net be inereased as deteffflined by the GB. The applicant °~e" be responsible for pays the full cost of extending the City of Ashland sewer main or line to the property for which sewer service is being requested. DC. The applicant shall-seeure secures, in writing, statements from the daeksen County appropriate regulatory authority that the existing sewage system has failed and that the provision of sewer by the City of Ashland does not conflict with the daeksen County Compr-ehensive Pinn, support a° n.. rules, ulnfio ° state and local laws, rules and regulations. ED. The applicant furnishes to the City a consent to the annexation of the land, signed by the owners of record and notarized so that it may be recorded by the City and binding on future owners of the land. FE. The applicant shall provides for th payment to the City by the owners, at the time of annexation, an amount equal to the current assessment for liabilities and indebtedness previously contracted by a public service district, such as Jackson County Fire District No. 5, multiplied by the number of years remaining on such indebtedness, so that the land may be withdrawn from such public service districts in accord with ORS 222.520 and at no present or future expense to the City. GF. The owner shall executes a deed restriction preventing the partitioning or subdivision of the land prior to annexation to the City. 14G. That The land is within the Urban Growth Boundary. H. In the event of connecting a replacement dwelling or building to the sewer system, the connection does not increase use of the sewer system as determined by the Director of Public Works. SECTION 2. Chapter 14.09.020 is hereby added to read as follows: 14.09.020 Sewer Lateral Ownership A. Definitions 1. "Building Sewer Lateral' refers to the extension of the sewer pipeline from the building drain to the public sewer main line. 2. "Sewer Maid' is the public sewer system, typically comprised of 6-inch and larger pipelines located within public right-of-ways or easements. Ordinance No. Page 2 of 4 3. "Sewer Connection" is the location where the sewer lateral connects to the Sewer Main, including any pipe fittings or materials used to make the connection. 4. "Property Owner" means any person, firm, partnership or corporation. 5. "Deficiency of a Service Lateral" means a defect (broken pipe, leaky joints, protruding service, etc.) in the service line or connection to the main line that results in infiltration, obstructs flow, creates a subsurface void, allows wastewater to exflltrate, or creates a risk of sanitary sewer overflows. B. Ownership and Responsibility 1. It shall be the responsibility of the property owner to repair or replace any building sewer lateral showing any defect including, but not limited to, leaks, breaks, settlement, or stoppages. Any loss or damage to any public facility caused either by improper installation or maintenance procedures will also be the property owner's responsibility. 2. The City reserves the right to cease water and/or sewer service to the property owner in the event that a significant deficiency is not corrected in a timely manner by the property owner after being notified by the City. 3. In the event that the City installs or relocates a building sewer lateral within a public right-of-way for purposes other than to correct deficiencies in the property owner's building sewer lateral, the city shall maintain the sewer lateral for one year from the date of final inspection. Maintenance after this date becomes the responsibility of the property owner. SECTION 3. Severability. The sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses of this ordinance are severable. The invalidity of one section, subsection, paragraph, or clause shall not affect the validity of the remaining sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses. SECTION 4. Codification. Provisions of this Ordinance shall be incorporated in the City Code and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "code", "article", "section", "chapter" or another word, and the sections of this Ordinance may be renumbered, or re-lettered, provided however that any Whereas clauses and boilerplate provisions (i.e. Sections 3-4) need not be codified and the City Recorder is authorized to correct any cross-references and any typographical errors. Ordinance No. Page 3 of 4 The foregoing ordinance was first read by title only in accordance with Article X, Section 2(C) of the City Charter on the day of 2012, and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of 12012. Barbara M. Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this_day of 2012. John Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: David H. Lohman, City Attorney Ordinance No. Page 4 of 4 ASHLAND MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 14.09 SEWER SYSTEM--REGULATIONS SECTIONs: 14.09.010 Phosphate Ban SECTION 14.09.010 Phosphate Ban The Council recognizes its authority and responsibility to plan and provide for control of sewerage, surface water, and water supply. The Council hereby finds that phosphorus loading of surface waters is currently a serious pollution problem affecting water quality in the Bear Creek Sub-basin and threatens future water quality in other surface waters of the region. Phosphate detergents contribute significant phosphorus loading to the treated wastewater released to surface water into Bear Creek. Phosphorous loading has become a pollution problem, and state standards will require additional wastewater treatment facilities at public expense beyond primary and secondary treatment facilities. This Ordinance is enacted to reduce phosphorus pollution at its source to maintain existing water quality and to enhance cost-effective wastewater treatment where phosphorus pollution has been identified as a serious pollution problem by the State of Oregon Environmental Quality Commission. A. Definitions. I. "Cleaning agent' means any product, including but not limited to soaps and detergents, containing a surfactant as a wetting or dirt emulsifying agent and used primarily for domestic or commercial cleaning purposes, including, but not limited to the cleansing of fabrics, dishes, food utensils, and household and commercial premises. Cleaning agent shall not mean foods, drugs, cosmetics, insecticides, fungicides and rodenticides, or cleaning agents exempt from this Ordinance. 2. "Phosphorus" means elemental phosphorus. 3. "Pelson" means any person, firm,partnership or corporation. B. Prohibition. No person may sell or distribute for sale within the City of Ashland City Limits, any cleaning agents containing more than 0.5 percent phosphorus by weight except cleaning agents used in automatic dishwashing machines shall not exceed 8.7 percent phosphorus by weight. C. Exemptions. This Ordinance shall not apply to any cleaning agent: 1. Used in dairy,beverage,or food processing equipment. 2. Used as an industrial sanitizer, brightener, acid cleaner or metal conditioner, including phosphoric acid products or trisodium phosphate. 3. Used in hospitals, veterinary hospitals or clinics,or health care facilities. 4. Used in agricultural production and the production of electronic components. 5. Used in a commercial laundry for laundry services provided to hospital or health care facility or for a veterinary hospital or clinic. 6. Used by industry for metal cleaning or conditioning. 7. Used in any laboratory, including a biological laboratory, research facility, chemical, electronics or engineering laboratory. 8. Used for cleaning hard surfaces, including household cleansers for windows, sinks, counters,stoves,tubs or other food preparation surfaces,and plumbing fixtures. 9. Used as a water softening chemical, antiscale chemical or corrosion inhibitor intended for use in closed systems, such as boilers, air conditioners, cooling towers or hot water systems. Page I of 2 ASHLAND MUNICIPAL CODE 10. For which the Council determines that imposition of this Ordinance will either: a. treats a significant hardship on the user;or b. be unreasonable because of the lack of an adequate substitute cleaning agent. D. Severability. The provisions of this Ordinance are severable. if any provision of this Ordinance or its application to any person or circumstance is held invalid,the invalidity shall not affect other provisions or application of this Ordinance which can be given without the invalid provision or application. E. Penalty. Any person violating any of the provisions of this chapter is, upon conviction, guilty of a Class lII Violation and shall be subject to the penalties as set forth in Section 1.08.020. (Ord.2623, 1991) (Ord 3029,amended,08/03/2010) Page 2 of 2 I SECTION 18.72.070 Criteria for Approval. The following criteria shall be used to approve or deny an application: A. All applicable City ordinances have been met or will be met by the proposed development. B. All requirements of the Site Review Chapter have been met or will be met. C. The development complies with the Site Design Standards adopted by the City Council for implementation of this Chapter. D. That adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, paved access to and through the development, electricity, urban storm drainage, and adequate transportation can and will be provided to and through the subject property. All improvements in the street right-of-way shall comply with the Street Standards in Chapter 18.88, Performance Standards Options. (Ord. 2655, 1991; Ord 2836 S6, 1999) I Page 1 of 1 SECTION 18.80.060 Improvements. A. Improvement procedure. In addition to other requirements, improvements installed by the subdivider either as a requirement of these regulations or at subdividers own option shall conform to the requirements of this Title and improvement standards and specifications followed by the City. The improvements shall be installed in accordance with the following procedure: 1. Work shall not begin until plans have been checked for adequacy and approved by the City. To the extent necessary for evaluation of the subdivision proposal,the plans may be required before approval of the final map. 2. Work shall not begin until the City has been notified in advance, and if work has been discontinued for any reason, it shall not be resumed until the City has been notified. 3. hmprovements shall be constructed under the inspection and to the satisfaction of the City. The City may require changes in typical sections and details if unusual conditions arise during construction to warrant the change in the public interest. 4. All underground utilities, sanitary sewers, and storm drains installed in streets shall be constructed prior to the surfacing of such streets. Stubs for service connections for all underground utilities and sanitary sewers shall be placed to such lengths as will obviate the necessity for disturbing the street improvements when service connections are made. 5. A reproducible map showing all public improvements as built shall be filed with the City Engineer upon completion of such improvements. B. Improvement requirements. huprovements to be installed at the expense of the land divider are as follows: 1. Interior streets. All interior streets shall be graded for the entire right-of-way width, and roadways shall be improved with paving, curbs, gutters, and drainage. The subdivider shall improve the extension of all subdivision streets to the center line of existing streets with which subdivision streets intersect. 2. Exterior unimproved streets. When part of a proposed subdivision or major land partition abuts an existing unimproved street, the property owner, or a representative, shall satisfy the minor land partition improvement requirements and sign an agreement in favor of improving said street in the future to full City standards as outlined in this Section. 3. Structures. Structures specified as necessary by the City,for drainage,access, and public safety shall be installed. 4. Sidewalks. Sidewalks may be required on one (1) or both sides of the street at the discretion of the Planning Commission. Such requirement shall be related to the general level and type of development in the area, the anticipated level of pedestrian traffic, and the safety and convenience of children and other pedestrians. S. Improvements to be installed or provided by subdividers include all items required by the Director of Public Works at the time of the subdivider's plat and construction plan and specification approval. 6. Sewers. Sanitary sewer facilities including laterals connecting with the existing City sewer system shall be installed to serve each lot. No septic tanks or cesspools will be permitted within the City. Storm water sewers shall be installed as required by the City. 7. Water. Water mains and services, fire hydrants of design, layout, and locations approved by the Director of Public Works as conforming to City standards shall be installed. 8. Street trees. Street trees unay be required by the Planning Commission and shall conform with a City street tree plan or specific requirements of the Commission relating to tree type, size and spacing. 9. Landscaping on lots where the al lowable percentage of lot disturbance has been exceeded. 10. Monuments. Upon completion of street improvements, monuments shall be re-established and protected in monument boxes at every street intersection and at all points of intersection, or at all points or curvature and points of tangency of street center lines. C. Underground utilities - required. All on site utility lines, including but not limited to electric, Page I of 2 communications, street lighting, and cable television, shall be installed underground, except as provided in "D" below. For the purpose of this section, appurtenances and associated equipment such as, but not limited to, surface-mounted transformers, pedestal-mounted terminal boxes and meter cabinets, terminations for concealed ducts in an underground system, and street lighting structures and fixtures may be placed above ground. This section does not apply to utility lines which do not provide service to the area being subdivided. D. Underground Utilities - Exceptions. Minor land partitions shall not be required to provide underground utilities, provided that all new service for residential uses shall have installed a service panel and stubbed conduit to convert to underground utilities at a future date. E. Underground Utilities - Cost. The developer shall deposit with the City the total fee required in Section 14.16.030 of this Code, and shall be responsible for all trenching and backfilling. (Ord.2148 S2, 1981)] F. Underground Utilities-Rules and Regulations. The City Council may, by resolution, adopt rules and regulations governing the installation and allocation of costs for underground utility extensions. (Ord.2148 S3, 1981) G. Safety Street Lighting. Safety street lighting shall be provided by the developer in new subdivisions and in private developments of five (5) acres or more. Developer shall bear all costs except wiring, maintenance and energy. All street lighting improvements shall be installed to the satisfaction of the Electric Superintendent in accordance with the specifications on file in the office of the Electric Superintendent. The amount and intensity of illumination provided for street lighting shall be in accordance with the standards established by the illuminating Engineering Society, American Standard Association,as approved by the Electric Department. Page 2 of 2 ll • �u4 d � m o • � t � * � JI N O N m II h W 00 ty„ a a Id � 0 0 C C N N C U� C7 75--09838 P. 3 AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF ASHLAND - B & G PROPERTIES, INC. WATER AND SEWER THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into this.;ZZ,,.;-�'day of 1975, between B & G PROPERTIES, INC. , an Oregon corporation, hereinafter referred to as "B & G" , and CITY OF ASHLAND, an Oregon municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Ashland" , WITNESSETH: RECITALS : 1 ., Oak Knoll-1 (described in Exhibit "A" attached) has been furnished water and sewer services by Ashland for a number of years pursuant to the terms pf agreement dated i May 1, 1962, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit "B" . 2 . B & G is the successor to the second party in the i agreement dated Kay 1, 1962 . It is the purpose of this i agreement to replace the agreement of May 1, 1962 , by this agreement . NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals and of the mutual covenants contained herein, it is agreed i by the parties hereto as follows : I The agreement dated May 1, 1962 is hereby rescinded and 71 - Agreement /1 c r✓�°.t TC' j`�)C' ��r? �D�� 7V 75-09838 shall no longer be operative from the date hereof. II For the purpose of this agreement the following terms have the following definitions ; 1 . Water service c'onne'ction: A pipe conveying water from a water main. to a parcel . of land . It consists of pipe , fittings, valves, meter and meter box . 2 . Water main: A pipe conveying water from a water transmission line to any number of water services . It consists of pipe, fittings and valves . 3. Water main appurtenances : Those items which are necessary for the proper operation of a water main under the particular circumstances and which include, but are not limited to, valve vaults, thrust rods or blocks , fire hydrants., flushing outlets , pressure regulators, and regulatory vaults . 4 . Sewer lateral : A pipe conveying sewage from a parcel of lan oar trunk. It consists of pipe , fittings and jointing material . 5 . Sewer trunk: A pipe conveying sewage from a number of sewer laterals to an interceptor . It consists of pipe, fittings and jointing material. 6 . Sewer trunk appurtenances : Those items which are necessary for the proper operation of a sewer trunk in i the particular circumstances and which include , but I are not limited to, manholes , cleanouts , thrust rods or blocks and pipe encasements . III Oak Knoll-1 shall be only for single-family dwelling units i and shall consist of not more than 118 lots . There are I i approximately 55 lots which have been developed and are presently connected to the water and sewer services of Ashland. i i 2 - Agreement . i '�5-09838 There are 44 vacant lots with water and sewer services installed and 19 lots without services installed all of which lots shall be entitled to Ashland water and sewer services upon compliance with the following terms and conditions : 1 . All extensions of water and sewer facilities shall be done in accord with Ashland' s regulations and subject to the inspection of the personnel of Ashland and approval in accordance with all applicable city, county and state standards before service shall be furnished to the particular lot in question. 2 . There is a differential in the connection charges which is determined by whether the connection is to a . water main or sewer trunk existing at the date of this agreement or whether the water main or sewer trunk are hereafter installed. The connection charges are as follows : A . In the case of water mains and sewer trunks in existence on the date of this agreement the connection charges shall be as follows : With respect to water, 3/4 inch -$375 .00 1 inch 515 . 00 1 112 inch '.67.S-00 2 inches 7.$5.:00 4 inches and over 100 .0.0 Cost + 3 - Agreement 75-09838 With respect to sewer, 4 inch lateral connection from trunk line to normal curb line $370 .00 6 inch lateral connection from trunk line to normal curb line 430 .00 8 inch lateral connection from trunk line to normal curb line 625 .00 10 inch or over lateral connection from trunk line to normal curb line Cost + 100.00 B. In the case of water mains and sewer trunks constructed after the date of this agreement, they shall be constructed by B & G at its expense . The connection charges shall be as follows : With respect to water (the service connection shall be made. by Ashland) as follows : Service size Rate 3/4. inch $275.00 1 inch 415 .00 1 1/2 inch 5.75 .00 2 inches 685 .00 . 4 inches and over COST With respect to sewer, the trunks and laterals shall be installed by B & G at its expense . i 3 . B & 0 agrees that in all conveyances of lots and property the conveyance shall contain a provision that the grantee covenants for himself, his heirs and assigns , to consent to the annexation to Ashland at any time Ashland may desire to annex such property . 4 - Agreement I '7509838 A covenant in substantially the following language shall be in compliance with the terms of this agreement : The grantee for himself, his heirs , successors and assigns covenants and agrees that the property conveyed by this deed shall be subject to annexation by the city of Ashland. Grantee 's acceptance and recording of this deed shall be considered his application and consent to such annexation. Grantee further convenants that in the event of such annexation grantee shall satisfy the bonded indebtedness to any special service districts outstanding against grantee ' s property at the time of such annexation if withdrawal of said property from the special service district is required. The foregoing covenants shall be appurtenant to and run with the land until the 31st day of December, 1980 . 4 . In the event of annexation of Oak Knoll-I, no annexation fee shall be payable to Ashland. B & G does consent to the annexation of all land owned by it in Oak Knoll-I . In the event of annexation B & G shall satisfy the .bonded indebtedness to any special service. district outstanding against B & G' s property at the time of such annexation if Ashland chooses to withdraw the property from the special service district . IV. Oak Knoll-II is situated in the county of Jackson, state . of Oregon and is more particularly described on Exhibit "C" which is attached hereto and made a part hereof . Oak_ Knoll-II shall be developed so that there will not be more than 132 dwelling units on said property . The land embraced in Oak Knoll-II shall be used for no other purpose than dwelling units , unless permitted by Ashland. The units shall be developed in accordance with all city rules and regulations , I i 5 - Agreement 75-•09838 the same as though the property were situated within the City of .Ashland. If the property is developed as a planned unit development, such development shall be in accordance with . Ashland's regulations for planned unit developments . Ashland may consider the use of the entire parcel and the maximum density of 132 dwelling units in approving the planned unit development. The following rules , regulations and terms shall apply to the use of Oak Knoll-II and with being furnished water and sewer services by Ashland: .1 . Water facilities : A. Mains and reasonably necessary appurtenances shall be installed by B .$ G in accord with plans and specifications which have been submitted to Ashland for its review and approval in accord with all then existing city, county and state regulations , After they are installed, they shall become the 'property of Ashland, The 'service connection, The cost thereof -shall be in accord with the current charges of Ashland at the time connection is requested, The cost shall be paid to Ashland at the' time installation is requested, 2 , S�we tacilitiess A. The entire sewer facility, which. shall include trunks and laterals , shall be installed by 8' $ G subj-ect'to review and approva-U. an& kpeeafivat ©ns 6yr��fiiand in accord with d1l thieAoxisfring city county a d.fstate iules and regulations . During cons-iruction, Ashland shall have the right to inspect construction work if it so desires , After approval, the trunks and laterals shall become the property of Ashland and shall be maintained and replaced by Ashland as it deems necessary. 6 - Agreement, 75-09836 B. If 'a sewage pumping station is required, in the opinion of Ashland, to serve any portion of Oak Knoll-II, it shall be installed by B & G ,and at ita expense . It shall become the property of Ashland in accord with the foregoing provisions . 4 . To serve Oak Knoll-II with water it will be necessary for Ashland to extend its 12 inch water main from its' existing point of termination at Siskiyou Boulevard and Crowson Road to the water system t0 be built on Oak Knoll-II . B. & G shall pay to Ashland all installation costs and material costs of an 8 inch main and Ashland shall pay the excess of the material and installation costs over the costs thereof of an 8 inch main. It is estimated at this time the cost to B & G .would be approximately $ 32 ,900 .00 This project shall be either put out to bid by private contractors by Ashland or the work done by Ashland at its election.. In either event B & G shall deposit with Ashland the amount of the bid or Ashland' s estimate of the project cost before the work is commenced by Ashland or the, contract entered into between Ashland and the private contractor. Any properties connecting to this water main within :iA years of its completion, which fronts on Crowson Road between Siskiyou Boulevard and the point at which the water main leaves Crowson Road and turns toward Oak Knoll-II, shall be required to pay to Ashland the sum of $400 . 00 for each water connection . Ashland shall pay such sum over to B & G to compensate it in part for the cost of the extension of said water main. It should be noted, however, that at present the policies of Ashland do not permit extension of water services to users I outside the City of Ashland. B & G acknowledges this fact T - Agreement '75-098 $ and that there is not any present plan to change this policy . At completion of the construction of this water main, it shall become the property of Ashland. - 5 . B & G agrees that the deeds to all lots or property sold by it after the date of this agreement shall contain a covenant substantially in the language of the covenant set forth in paragraph 3, page 5 . The grantee shall further covenant that the owner at the time of annexation will pay to the city '1 cent for each square foot of land annexed to the city as an annexation fee . This covenant shall be substantially as follows : Grantee, for himself, .his heirs, successors and assigns, covenants and agrees that at the time the property is annexed to the city of Ashland the owner will pay to the city 1 cent for each square foot of land annexed to the city as -an annexation fee . The consent to annexation and agreement to pay the annexation fee and cost of withdrawing the property from special service districts applies also to B & G, and land owned by it in Oak Knoll-II at the time of annexation. V. Ashland has a sulphur water spring east of Crowson Road. The line from this spring crosses the land described herein which is owned by B & G. Ashland shall have the right to maintain this line and to go upon the land to accomplish this maintenance . If B & G finds it necessary to. move this line, it shall do so at its sole expense . VI . The following requirements apply to both Oak Knoll-I and Oak Knoll-II as described in Exhibits "A" and "C" and the continuance of water and sewer service to these properties is conditioned upon i full compliance with the following terms and conditions : 8 - Agreement i 7S-•09838 I . Before installation of any new facilities , the plans and specifications therefor shall be presented to Ashland for its review and approval in accordance with all city, county and state regulations . 2 . All water and sewer facilities shall be., upon com- pletion and acceptance by Ashland and upon receipt of "as-built" drawings, the property of Ashland and from that I time on Ashland shall maintain and replace such- lines as may be necessary. No sewer and water service will be fur- nished until the water and sewer facilities have been completed and become the property of Ashland in accordance with this i agreement. 3. All regulations , connection charges and rates are based upon the ordinances of the City of Ashland shall be as the ordin- ances presently read or as they may be changed in the future. In no case , however, shall a greater burden be placed on the property which is the subject of this agreement than upon other users out- side of Ashland who are similarly situated. 4 . Ashland shall have the right to enforce the payment of water and sewer charges by users as .th6y h£ve wi.th =re'spect•to .users •.of such services within Ashland. ' All city ordinances pertaining to the use of these services shall apply except as may be herein stated to the contrary. 5 . Ashland agrees to provide adequate water service for the users in Oak Knoll-I and Oak Knoll-II subject to limitations of water supply and subject to the condition that said water 9 - Agreement. 75-09838 : users are required to use water for domestic purposes only except when sufficient supply is available to permit lawn and household garden irrigation, and Ashland . is to be the sole judge of such available supply, and further subject to . the provisions of 224.010 et seq. ' Oregon Revised Statutes . fi. Streets and storm sewers shall be constructed after first submitting plans and specifications to Ashland for its review and approval in accord with all existing city, county, and state regu- lations and standard engineering practices . . Such streets and storm sewers shall be maintained by B $ G unless the property upon which they are situated is annexed by Ashland. 7. All utilities including sewer, water, telephone , electricity and cable TV shall be underground. VlI . It is the intention of the parties that the burdens imposed upon the land described in Exhibits "A" and "C" which are now owned by B $ G are intended to be burdens on the land and to run with the land and be fully binding upon the successors and assigns Of B F, G. VIII , This agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of B $ G, its successors and assigns . I i 10 Agreement I 75-09838 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunto set their hand the day and year first hereinabove written. B & 'G .PROPERTIES , INC. CITY O ASHLAND BY By President, r� May r BY By 7L �{ Sec etary Cir-Recorder STATE OF OREGON ) ss . County.' of. Jackson ) On this' P5V day of Tell- 1975, before me appeared GARY L. PRICKETT and JOSEPH BUTLER, both to me personally known, -who, being duly sworn did say that he the said GARY L. PRICKETT is the Mayor and he the said JOSEPH M. BUTLER is ,the City Recorder of the City of Ashland, the within raamgd municipal corporation, and the said GARY L. PRICKETT =' � a'dlYO, EPH M. BUTLER each acknowledged to me that the said ;:•:F3gree e was the free act of the city. k Notary Public for Oregon ..,,$ ,.,;ak='- :• o` My commission expires : i-.•..n� - MY COMMISSION EXefta AIK 144 b97� STATE OF OREGON ) ss . County of Jackson. ) On this day of 1975, before me appeared W. A. GRAFF and OTTO J%FRO MA ER, both to me personally known, who, being duly' swor did say that he the said W. A. GRAFF is the president and he the said OTTO J. FROHNMAYElj,.,is ..t)?e secretary of B .& G Properties, INc. and each ackrlpwledge5"d',.,to me that the said agreement was the free act ofsrd cor ation. � V ti } J, j c,';. No ary Public for Ore An uq� My commission expires : 11 - Agreement . .. EXHIBIT "A" 75-09838 OAK KNOLL - I 60-•QSENCI?:G at the corner common to Sections 11, 12 , 13 , and 14 , Township 39 South, Range 1 East, Willamette Meridian , Jackson County'; Oregon; thence along the .East boundary of said Section. 14, South 0 001' 10" West, 283 . 68 feet to an 8" diameter by 24" concrete monument with a bronze disk for the initial point of beginning; thence along the East boundary of said Section 14, South 0°02 ' 10" West, 1420 . 03 feet; thence South 32332 ' 20" West, 150 . 30 feet; thence South 63°21 ' West, 154 . 25 feet; thence South 26°39 ' East, .120 . 00 .feet;. thence South 63021' :Jest, 104 . 57 - feet; thence on the arc of a 160 . 00 foot ' -radius curve right (the chord bears South 13°10' 10" West, 140. 68 feet) a distance_ of 145. 66 feet; thence South 39015 ' Sdest, 7 : 33 feet; bears e on the arc of a 20 foot radius curve.•left, (the chord bears South 1329 ' 20" West, .24 . 50. feet) a distance of 26 . 36 feet; thence on th- arc O' a 190 foot radius curve right, (t-ha chord South 28'20' 40" East, feet) a distan ce of 49 .81 feet; thence South 69035.' West 60. 00 feet; thence South 76008 ' 21" West. 255. 24 feet to the Northeasterly boundary of Interstate Highway 5; thence North 266391 West along said Highway boundary 599 . 62 feet to an intersection with the West boundary of Donation Land Claim No. 52 of said Township and Range; thence along _said Claim boundary North 0000' 50" West, 265 . 29 feet; thence North 37054 ' East, 263 . 47 feet; thence South 52006' East 100 . 00 feet; thence North 37054 ' East,. 20 . 00 feet; thence North 5200'0 ' West 100. 00 feet; thence North 3205114,8" E, 57 .96 feet; thence North 14022 ' 43" East, 60. 50 feet; thence North 11°40 ' 39" ' East 65 . 75 feat; taence North 16 011 ' 56" East, 91.15 feet_; thence North 31'27 ' 06" East, 79 . 52 feet; thence North 38 047 ' 08 East, 49 . 57 'feet; thence North 57006 ' West, 159 . 20 feet; thence South 32054' West, 250. 87 feet; thence 7 . 47 feet along the arc of a curve left, (which arc has a radius of 13. 00 feet and a long chord of South 16 026 ' 35" West, 7 . 37 feet) ; thence South 89 059110" West, 60 . 00 feet to the .West boundary of Donation Land. Claim No.. 52 of said Township and Range; thence along said Claim boundary, North 0 000.' 50" West, 215 . 82 feet; thence North 89059 ' 10" East, 60 .00 feet; thence 77. 01 feet along the arc a curve left (which arc has a radius of 30 . 00 feet and a long chord of South 73`33 ' 25" East, 57 . 54-. feet) ; thence North 32054 ' East, 151. 22 feet; _ thence 39 . 86 feet along the arc of a curve left (which arc has a radius of 170 : 00 feet and a long chord of North 26011' East, 39 . 77 feet) , thence North 1902.8 ' East, 110. 49 feet; thence 101. 01 feet along the arc of a curve right (which has a' radius of 530 . 00 feet and a long chord of North 24 055 ' 35" East, 100 . 85 feet) ; thence North 54054 ' West, 131. 77 feet; ' thence North 35006 ' East, 558. 05 feet; thence South 54054 ' East, 108. 12 feet; thence North 31035 ' East, 208 .50 feet to the Southwesterly boundary of the GREENSPR NGS HIGHWAY; thence along said Highway boundary, South 58025 ' East, 282. 06 feet; thence along said Highway boundary 111. 88 feet along the arc of a curve right, (which arc has a radius of 686 . 20 feet and a long chord of South 53 044 ' 45" East, 111 . 76 feet) ; thence South 45008155" hest, 266.78 feet to the initial point of beginning. �� . Exhibit. "A" 75-09838 { ` EXHIBIT "C" .. OAK KNOLL-II Beginning at the most Northerly cornier of that tract of land described in Warranty Deed to Oak Knoll Land Corporation recorded February 7, 1963, in the Book 540 page 362, Deed Records of Jackson County, Oregon, which corner is on tha Ifest line of Section 13, Township 35 South, Range 1 .East of the Willamette Meridian in Jackson Ceunty,, Oregon, 1220. 0 feet North .0°02 °10" East of the Northwest corner. of Donation Land Claim No_ 541 said Township and Range and. from said point of beginni run' thence South 44°46 'East along the Easterly' line of said Oak Knoll Lard Corporation tract 1718.0 feet more or less, to the North line of said . Donation' Land Clain No; 54; thence West, along the North line of , said Donation Land Claim No. 54, 316.3E feet, more or less, to the Northwest corner of that. tract of land conveyed to James B. Smith, et ux, by deed recorded March 9, 19662 as No. 66-,0277171 Official Records of Jackson County, Oregon;. thence South, along the Nest line of said Smith tract, 437.03 feet, - more or less to the Northwesterly' right-of-way line of Crowson Road; thence. Southwesterly, along the Northwesterly right-of-way line of Crowson Road to its intersection with the Northeasterly right- of-7.2ay line of interstate Highway' No. 5; thence Northwesterly, along the Northeasterly; right-o£-way line of Interstate Highway No. 5 t its intersection with the West line of Donation Land Claim No. 52, -.said Township and Range ; thence North, along the Nest . 14 of said Donation Land Claim No. 52 to its intersection with the South right-of-way line of Oregon State Highway No. . 66; thence Easterly, along the South right- of-way line, of said Oregon State Highway No. 66 to its intersection with the West line of Section '12, said Township and Range; thence South along the West lines of said Sections 12 and 13, 1920 feet, more or . less to the point of beginning, in Jackson County, Oregon. COMMENCING at the west-northwest corner of Donation Land Claim No. 53 in Township 39 South, Range 1 East of the �'Jillamette Meridian in Jackson county, Oregon, thence South 89 0.47 ' East, along the north line of said claim, 177. 52 feet to the southwesterly right. of way line of Highway #66; thence North 3E;;56 ' West, along said line 282. 90 feet to the true point of. beginnir-g; thence South 163 . 80 feet; thence North 38 000 ' West 350. 00 feet; thence North 43 042 ' West 200. 0 feet; -thence North 64°12 ' West 60. 00 feet; thence South 67°13 ' West 221. 0,, feet to the west line of Section 13, said township and range; thence North 0°06', east, along said line, 371. 4 feet to the northwest corner thereo.i; . thence east along the north line of said section *50 . 0 feet to the southwesterly right of way line of said Highway -66; thence South 49`. 56' East 2.36. 52 feet; thence South 3 056 ' East 631. 37 feet to the true point of beginning. EXCEPTI'•iG from the above parcels that part lying within the boundaries of GREENSPRINGS SUBDIVISION and GPEENSPRIOGS SUBDIVISION' FXTENSIO'd NO. 1, according to the official plats thereof now of record in Jackson county, Oregon. (Oak Knoll-I. ) (Exhibit "A") Slate of Grcgon, Couniy Gf Ja6SGn--SS. The thin insimment received and filed a .� 3_� O'clo k �m, the _ day of _19� Recorded in RecoMs for Jackson County Oregon. County Clerk. f 3 By Cenuty Exhibit "C" -y... .a°. .. EXHIBIT n13 - .. ti , Lk THIrk A=Fte.NT, n-da an . �n.er»� int ttla let deg aE �&y, r, $ e .by *M between the GITY OF kSHId+Rti, a penfefpml ecrcperatiOZ ire t t� State' of Orecon, heraincfter known as the yirs4 ffartp, and Sip T T-PACIFIC. DZMOpWXT CWPOMT.I87, an Ora'gcoi *orpaTati:or,::6: liter known as the. Eeeoad Party, WITMSICfil i. 4l the 6ecoad. Party a its assign& are conttRplstif n;z , "Wo.ostabLishaent; of a retirenent development ad'aceat ;to tip 08k.. Go$f Coarms which is saw ide of the City of Ashland, aM it glnt`d that epproxinately 250 hoses are to be -caftetrueted Property,* principally for the purpose of salts to retiirea am > k it is aeeeesary that the developers have imm*Z and ,meter for said hoses, and v f,' it in the opinion of the'wewbere of the CoMM Comme11 " ;.Q tM City .of Ashland that such a development world be of great ^ !& U the First Party and the citiseas of Ashland; Ya} Vie. TNMRZF=q in consideration of the covenants and oonditiars r. stated, t1w parties do hereby agree as fbllwa, v1c..c ' The at Party doss hereby covenant and acres to constract, oaooae if refteembly posslbla after the exercising by Beef Party 7..' =•' '' of the Options to perehase the land for the above contfd»d develop- _ eft, tester mains- of a also sufficient to take care of the proposed !�r z;-4*vm16p=mt from' :he present end of the city aster lines to the lies of the o ,• .,: . property pr posed developmwnt ands saucer 1lAO irays t'na disposal pleat of the diret Party to the property fine bt tn� proposed development located on Highway 66 at the approximate loco: `: tyR Y- u ,yf �'- �Cxiri4La -kta�+ east af' tf►e foregoing inetalkatfoaa mhalX y3<tA £ 5 �e yn•; as fallaee A v", raB drat !'¢rtq shell jsmg for $T� 4i eaa$ . ti `,tion."r tM se"r main from- the Praaoat msia'of 4 > . - sastcfess of 4aimaa Creak &oaQ >,u •: $ ham 0oem¢t),p 6regam, for the r 4v= An�A t R it of tm health .&W welfare of the aitisead at y, - ". 1it66'$�9trQ -be adeguot6 aamagEe faoilitiaa .tQS. y-C 1 ,fu$ dsvoYepnotxt of the Ballviow . east or further s$tonsion of`said m � } t Of UW aitamet¢aar at the rgter a" A, 9l+ '6sesad Part), aft its It $s 6ont26pknted tMt t1. O®s$ 't the"lastallatian of said eater main ab&U bafttkW x §I'e'X and na✓100 (IY6p000-00).DGlgQrQ,.. 7Rttt4),ts ps--pestiasata GMra and em100 (OP-OW-00) ilaileVO� x r ' . It ib and ui ratsad tMt �"6f � Q[ d;Ran $Sa81 x 4 $ VitY " First Party that total .s�:� � # 04 VOAGO (6%;G 0.00) Dollars the ostimat § -; • ' y, Oft to to borm by Goosed Part.),p I® UkO amt•4 z L { z O"4 Is ZOOS tboffi the mkt deposited !t a I ea$atramtiem my anwant' aver aw above the antes] y r l bM tt$lV y dolivor" to t$O Soego PartYP +" t t" Best of eamAtrm um is greater than OBt#s�ato@,t Vie' t dw over wed above that doposited with the at i e$ 'd!ffild '}�:n'v,.•Y4, rstr{ tl�'�{-'t � sA,�f.•S.'EyF'ur�.t� R 3f�N�S�IFC � 1 1 C ''9 �}3 ''.r �' EP YFS" � '. 7 -!� 5 � [ - e?7 < � u t f r. v `"�h! X> i<`+4'•�� 5 r � 5.�. y rg+�� z >. C j ..s_.c i^1 =a,.'• c., 3. � ti r '�Y h r. ': �- - ,rj�"r•,`1��Y,��.�Qp3��.�Si`M� 7}y��ra3 �.c Lam'_t"t ��F �� '� `��`4F,�{'y�i r ax z-_'T'7��`�5,v � .€'r� t � ..�� y's -.a-z`_m Mew'.}_[ 1tc 1 X .•?l. "R3 ,+J.s L.��' '-L♦ r�' ['S�-..•>a Zi Fn g;V*lAt to rr 6"'Ri[4 tt4 -.S .tEa $oeond 11. 0 v �.5Ex __Y�S3 moat of the foregoing installations eh,ll`� ' &6 fcalotm e �y t 3 . 'ZRz� S'irat p¢reg eha12 pay for t� «9�t �f "^� 'Uem of r main fr= thi preaaat Min or: ��$•'� � �� ' .2 � of Tolman. Ceaet: Raad ;�ffi mast: "� � ,.rte • �� tyc Oragout fe: the rag s � i q -wit of the �aleh &a:1 wslfare of tom, be aBegmte savage f&ailitiom 6T a Qm . & t of the Bellview tea. t�3 -� cost of further extension cf'ae.S� 'mot r4" tE� e&tencies of tm water:9#�F 8� ri • ..lag t Party its s - (s) it i® eoataaplaw that 04, eseg �,? a �;� the lastaustion or said eater tams s --��¢¢�� non/yam �/q(y /5<�e q�� [.� 9...�;L 4 � �.• i S-<YT>-a♦�'+v .'4�:. � 'o7 03 ��Vw•WI, DallSY"©'��i Tl j�-�'��). � .• •}.si:.: tom. -. ..r .,;. . ..� e'i[. err +. Y;, }:.13 - [ °s pewpartimate ah&m of tkre S� 2 00 W F@- .000a00b ''w. a1- Yet 'i It to a L orott i�+ieri. t 1 ,` - - -• i. ,:-"Y.i rG'at,S F=.. .{ .tf� e: +,.ri for t ® ri•`a�'�g7°,.L� t o`�"�..�cGw l�th � eAPe�.' E�PtB '�`e�S tow .. c icoo.00/ Dollars the 00ti t1ft to be by fart$l Im t60 Is lean tba OMOTin $t deposited a f4LDM 9 d 6� }�,,` �,�.�q •- p '.gyp-�.:�p �(• vl 'ry _ Gms tiem m t �S oW above tho &Qtm6��16 yt i w�rusS3q�lm FS8Livered to O4OW cost oT ematrwtiam is greater thrm oot3s^. tcd ' ` .=t s dw ter a" m e that depci iced with the First Pw2 shell s axe" doIIreras within ten (10) days aftcr written dasand icr _2 dalivared" frogs the F1"rst Party to th, Second Party. k " It is agreed and understooCd that all rater gad. seear sa€e7a ,� eoriatraated by reason of the provisions. of. the. foragoing p:rageephs shall be owniad 'by the First Party, and the Second Party ah*ll haeo 06 right* title:or interest therein. IF. It.is 'agrrad end understood that the First Party sb&12 have the right tm approve all epecifieatione of the mater and_ Aw"r lisee within the development which are to be constructed by tte Second Party. V. After the construction of said rater and sewer trunk lines by Uw First Party and the construction and installation of the saver ., and water lines within the development by the Second Party or its " "runs, it is agreed and understood that the First Party'shall 01Nots4 &W saintain.the entire water and serer system qubaeet t® th@ terns and conditions of this sEreement, the Ashland City Chaster, osd further subject to the provisions of 22j.020 et seq. Oregon . Revised. Statutes and 224.01n at seq. Oregon Revised Statutes. The City of. Ashland shall operate and saintain said water and sower ayvtecis the saw as if such property were within the City of ,Ashland, eseeFt that the First Party shall have the right to make a reasonable s4Ce W4 cbArge. to users* over and above the charge made to use with- %A the City Of Ashland. YI. It is agreed that the monthly sewer service cher!!e shall be Two and 50/100 (92.5)1 Unllr.rs per tc-,ntf, for users an such. charge snat ! Cdntinil9 L'7 '1 : L'n' r.r:$•i(•�•,' ry v , n.i'i. . rte "., �f ! he F"."st YII. rho First ft-. ty. shall hate the aR9k® rishte to enforem !@m" pmymmt of ehergca l:y users of the sewer and rater facilities ss the lirst Party has or shell have against the csers within the City i v1" Ashland, end any city ordinanoe appertaining thereto &ball be " Appliesblm- ta outra ortslde of the city limits as wmll as wj.thia Tbe .Firot. Party agrees. to provide adequate water serviee" few the oeern In the. propos-4 d.eralopsent subject. to limitations of water,vapply end subject to the condition that said water maters ante ` rteq ired to use .water for domestic purposes" only esoept when saffi- eient supply is available to pdrmit lawn and household garden irrigation, and the First Party Is to be the sole judge of saota available. supply, and further subject to the provisions of 224.010. 1 set seq. -Oregon Revised Statutes . rx M� It Is. furtner agreed and understood that the first Party at any time shall have the right to demand that the Second Party cv.' + to assigns organise water or sewer districts or private "earpora tioaa for the purpose of operating and maintaining said water and. }ovaor systems. In such event the First Party shall have the option 1 -t- to be under no further obligation to operate cm maintain said water - � -'4r "eoaer systaes, and further EhRll have the option to furnish } mater at "a" teason¢blo charge in truik at the properly line of Seaoer! Party's property. It is agreed that the First. Party will ogerclse .reasonable efforts to oh L&In e.,we"tit-,.t .: f r .m:, ',"r :,n., sewer lies . Tree First party snh `. -its , but a a. '2. .i• )nJ Partyo ecodoo- .1 _ �a ��tiaps '�t-*yec�li-�rz , ' •' �1 •.•1^ •'•. t.s n tray elect to dRalarr+ ,r-'si11�a aunt null an41 vkIle ks a ''urther consideration of this YOS�ent9. the Second: Party wi!.l . pay the coot of obtaining WW is obtained by the City of Ashland. for sever or water Aail*_i,. ... . t4 boe!evar o that the Second,Party shall have the rLCM t44� 4. .,alatah most. XtVis agrosd and underst3od that in the event the property M ' kb• propoard development is annexed by the C_ty of lsblplg, , t a- slalsss6aat will he made for trues sower mains or trunk;Btelit mains &atharirsd by Ordinance Ho. 1201 and, Ordinaneo Pe. i ty =Cy'ty of.Aehlnnd because of the contributions to be stse4e 8y r Party* as heretofore stated. i4 ' eaeatit of .ana xation of the property in the prnFaK4 A big?®tv no assessment, shall be made to any property .oasar for. GAMr.amUs in the event such mains have been installer property; proeidnd, hoai,ver, that `thm. First- per. 8 al r ~°Yt to ebarge the regular connect charge for ndy estteae- 'property owners after annexation. If after am 'tl�f `Party ecnstroote setser or water mainsi the adloinietg ehttll pay such charges and assessments as are. tWM xor.by ordinances of .€he City of Ashland. Ids anae snit or action 1a brronsht to enforce any rights -w 0" of this agreement, it is mutually agreed that the Prevail- gtg Vatrty in such snit or action shall be entitled to a 'reasonable at`-crneg'a fee a, as dot-trained by the Court so against the losing party therein. r E •,? xr�"`..b'°.yCi.�J •B. . -coal .:x @. t t e :[ enl Party, . y l 7 eloct to dacleta ;tea agre*w.nt .null and void- t,s a further consideration el thi3 Y RtQ t _hQ SecOn.i Peertq eel' : pig. tho, cost of obtaldtag s&b 'Y Y, to obt ina-d by the City If kchland ror sower or W&UM RaLSM 9 ` T _ YFPL"� � y � �e: that the Second shall ttsc the sight t6 z fCI+ <�5•! � &SY'a"' t "48�,t8`A �wt0 x_ It $w Wood and understood that in tho. event UA Vs-dw4rty . P 1; � yracepo&ed development is annexed by the Cety of �OhU' y =� Y � aPcat will ba made for. trut�k sewer seine or trtS ,.�tc .i�aj" 6ibtharited , by Ordinance ho. 12�'_` and. Ordiru2� �. `Z City 42 Achland beceuse of the contributions to be =60 33q : tl .�.� •„ .c,�;w �� °p: as heretofore stated. ` s r XII: t 2 :.X3 tha. stt of inn®zation of the property in' £k�, ffrQF� �y a:'assessmmant, shall be made to any property OMOW 1'c2t .' fir amino in the event such wins have baon inatsl2 r "ffrtrb praaidR hoarvvosy that ttm First 3}P -ty a `t. to ,®targv ttrs regular connect charge for 2ay _ s 3 94S..&y :ysroperty airs after amexaticn. If rUr. aMigga::it V { 'Party constr=te e"er or tamter mains, the ara4o1nimg s' -Mpg etall pay ouch chArgea and assesssents ae.sre tk*n F: a` $ .YOT b7 ardi>eeFa zee or the city or kobland. a Y Kill. t; emit ar action is 'brought to enforcer any rights or $.1mr thin agr"abnt} it iu tavtttallq a�raad that thi.4 pgeareil- :' ^ZZ T'.vy In rw iY euit or e.ctton shalt be entitle, to .. dasa.?r._.jai) §f® fees as det^traalned by the Court ax atalAst the loving x•. rt7 the"in. j rrnn t i.• 4'. ftl& &jr"lO*rM 160 .8b$ ahs21 W# k4rWLed WPQn 40dd. ift*o W . e .Rraarafgt 'cc the pertle€s Qmre o, their eecoessare sad ammigas. F� a WISUOPO the partsea hxreto have harewmata get NWEr �aaEa Se gwada"lieate as thin date in this m t'Lea�a dsit®oe. cm w "WAW FIRS . 1ry ft 4e O- February, L963, h moo ffiae . ' ' £te 4" fW 046 COMARtY aM 6tatec 80a tffi� hiahme� L. illc lkrw of the CitF .ef kluums sib . . 2te Cltr goeardw at. the Gitg of `ahiaedo sine ape M go tea to t1w 16wetieal iaasividma29 deaeritod in a" tue'sweewuA taRt� L=ftV=Qtc Old aGbWwledg*d to ace that they a the t S aa3 "lutart2F. �® S havc VArOmte set q' fbabd. astd Boa$ t31d a� Fe 3.sat apse with. 4 -Y CITY OF ASHLAND Memo TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Dave Kanner DATE: August 21, 2012 RE: Renewal of motion Following the August 7 Council meeting, I was asked by two Councilors about reconsideration of the code amendment for drive-up windows. According to City Attorney Dave Lohman, a motion for reconsideration can only be made for an item that was voted down, which this was not. However, under Roberts Rules of Order, a motion that dies for lack of a second can be renewed by any Councilor at any subsequent meeting at the appropriate time in the agenda. Councilor Chapman indicated to me that he wants to renew the motion, and it has been placed on the agenda under ordinances and resolutions. The agenda packet materials from the August 7 meeting are provided for you in this agenda packet. 20 ADMINISTRATION East TR Scree Tex:541-088-5311 20 East Main Street Fax:541-088-5311 Ashland,Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 w .ashland.or.us CITY OF -ASH LAN D Council Communication August 7, 2012 Business Meeting First reading of an ordinance amending Section 18.32.025 of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance to provide for the relocation or redevelopment of four financial institutions' existing, non-conforming drive-up uses in Ashland's Historic Interest Area. FROM: Derek Severson, Associate Planner, derek.severson @ashland.or.us SUMMARY Ashland's land-use code limits the number of drive-up windows allowed in the city and establishes the four existing drive-up uses in the City's Historic Interest Area as legal, non-conforming uses. This land use ordinance amendment, proposed by the Ashland Food Co-op, would allow existing drive-up uses in the Historic Interest Area to relocate to a new site elsewhere in the C-1 or C-1-D zoned portions of the Historic Interest Area provided they were located predominantly underground or otherwise screened from the view from the public right of way. The Planning Commission approved this proposed change, but with a number of modifications to minimize adverse impacts of drive-up uses. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: The original Transportation Element of Ashland's Comprehensive Plan, adopted in 1982, included a policy discouraging drive-up windows to limit fuel consumption and air pollution associated with vehicle idling at drive-ups. In keeping with this policy, in 1984 the city adopted Ordinance #2313 which defined a drive-up use as "any establishment which by design, physical facilities, service or by packaging procedures encourages or permits customers to receive services, obtain goods, or be entertained while remaining in their motor vehicles," set standards for the development of drive-up uses, required Conditional Use Permits for the approval of drive-up uses, and limited the total number of drive-up uses in the city to the 12 in place on July 1, 1984 plus one additional drive-up use for each additional 1,250 persons added to the state-certified population census for the city. As part of that ordinance, drive-up uses were prohibited in Ashland's Historic Interest Area, which is defined in the Comprehensive Plan as the four National Register of Historic Places-listed historic districts. This rendered the existing drive-up uses within the Historic Interest Area as legal non-conforming uses. In 1992, Ordinance 42688 further amended the regulations, making drive-up uses a Special Permitted Use rather than a Conditional Use, and limiting the number of drive-up uses allowed in the city to the 12 that were in place on July 1, 1984 with no allowance to increase this number with increased population. The ordinance also provided for the transfer of those 12 drive-up uses between users and locations, subject to the requirements of the Ordinance. The 12 current approved drive-up permit holders are: 1. 250-300 N. Pioneer St./Umpqua Bank (Historic Interest ArealZoned E-1) Page 1 of 5 11FAW"A CITY OF -ASH LAN D 2. 67 E. Main St./Wells Fargo Bank (Historic Interest Area) 3. 30 N. Second St./U.S. Bank (Historic Interest Area) 4. 243 E. Main St./Chase Bank (Historic Interest Area) 5. 2290 Ashland St./Taco Bell 6. 2235 Ashland St./Premier West Bank 7. 2280 Ashland St./Bi-Mart Pharmacy 8. 1652 Ashland St./Dutch Bros. 9. 1500 Siskiyou Blvd./People's Bank 10. 1624 Ashland St./Wendy's 11. 512 Walker Ave./Sterling Savings Bank 12. Inactive(Was McDonalds' now reportedly Rogue Federal Credit Union) Of the 12 existing drive-up permits, all four of those in the Historic Interest Area are financial institutions. In reviewing the historic district survey descriptions of these properties, staff noted that none of the buildings were contributing resources in their districts, and several of the descriptions cite the buildings' relationships to the sidewalk or streetscape, or site planning to accommodate drive-up use, as key factors in their lacking compatibility with the historic character of the district. The revised Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan adopted in 1996 no longer contains an explicit policy discouraging drive-up uses, since it was unnecessary due to the ordinance already in place to limit these uses. The Comprehensive Plan and implementing ordinances encourage the community to develop at a human scale with a balanced approach to transportation rather than taking a more auto-centric approach, and adopted design standards seek to create a richer pedestrian environment by minimizing, carefully placing and screening parking areas and driveways while emphasizing a high standard of urban design and a strong relationship between buildings and the pedestrian streetscape. City standards and requirements place special emphasis on the Historic Interest Areas, and particularly the downtown with the removal of off-street parking requirements, additional design standards for historic districts in general and the downtown in particular, and the prohibition on drive-up's in the Historic Interest Area all working to give priority to the creation of a pedestrian friendly environment with a continuous storefront streetscape at the sidewalk. Section VI.J.6 of the Downtown Design Standards emphasizes that, "Uses which are exclusively automotive such as service stations, drive-up windows, auto sales, and tire stores are discouraged in the downtown. The City shall use its discretionary powers, such as Conditional Use Permits, to deny new uses, although improvements to existing_facilities may be permitted" The Legislative Amendment, proposed by the Ashland Food Co-Op as applicant, would change the existing land use regulations prohibiting drive-up uses in the Historic Interest Area, which consists of the four National Register of Historic Places-listed historic districts. As initially proposed, the amendment would have simply added exception language to allow existing drive-up uses within the Historic Interest Area to relocate to a new site elsewhere within the C-1 or C-1-D zoned portions of the Historic Interest Area provided that they were located "predominantly underground or otherwise screened from view from the public right-of-way." The application explains that the amendment proposal is being made by Ashland Food Co-op as applicant, noting that both the Co-op and its neighbor Umpqua Bank are keenly aware of parking challenges at their sites. The Co-op would like to pursue the purchase of the adjacent bank property to Page 2 of 5 11FAI, CITY OF -ASHLAND expand their building and add parking, however the bank wishes to remain in the Historic Interest Area near the downtown and to keep a drive-up window for its customers. As currently regulated, the bank could not relocate elsehwhere in the Historic Interest Area without a Variance, and any modification to the existing drive-up use on the current site would be subject to a Conditional Use Permit for modification of the existing non-conforming drive-up use. The applicants assert that the current prohibition on new drive-up uses in the Historic Interest Area combined with the non-conforming status of the four existing drive-up uses in the area, and the resultant requirement that these uses obtain discretionary approvals (i.e. Conditional Use Permits or Variances) for any modification of their non-conforming uses serve to prevent upgrades to or redevelopment of these sites, as the financial institutions holding the existing drive-up permits are inherently risk-averse and unwilling to move forward with costly projects when their outcomes are uncertain and subject to signficant levels of discretion. The application suggests that the proposed code amendment would facilitate more serious discussions between the Ashland Food Co-op and Umpqua Bank by removing one of the perceived barriers to the Co-op acquiring the bank's property to better address parking in their vicinity. More broadly, the application suggests that in removing the perceived barrier posed by having to obtain Conditional Use Permit approval to redevelop, the requested ordinance changes could facilitate the redevelopment of the sites of current drive-up uses in a manner more in keeping with current design standards while at the same time minimizing the impacts of the relocated drive-up uses to the Historic Interest Area. During testimony at the Planning Commission hearings in May and June, opponents to the requested amendment argued that the barrier posed by requiring Conditional Use Permit approval was by design, and was intended to encourage these drive-up uses to relocate outside of the Historic Interest Area over time. In considering the requested amendment, the Planning Commission recognized the potential benefit that could arise from the proposal in allowing the four existing drive-up uses in the Historic Interest Area to relocate and thereby opening the possibility for redevelopment of their current sites according to current standards, however the Commission felt strongly that any lessening of the current prohibition needed to carefully consider potential adverse impacts to the built environment and pedestrian-friendly, human-scale character of the National Register of Historic Places-listed Historic Interest Area. The Commission ultimately recommended that if the four drive-up uses are to be allowed to relocate without the discretionary consideration of a Conditional Use Permit as proposed, the proposed ordinance amendment should be modified beyond the initial proposal of the applicant in order to minimize the adverse impacts that the current prohibition on drive-up uses in the Historic Interest Area was enacted to avoid with the addition of the following performance standards and design requirements: • That relocation of the four existing drive-up uses or redevelopment of their existing sites in the Historic Interest Area (HIA) be allowed as a"Special Permitted Use" within the C-1 and C-1-D zoned portions of the HIA subject to "Type II" Site Review. • That regardless of the number of drive-up windows/lanes in use in the current drive-up location, with relocation or redevelopment under this amendment the number of windows/lanes be reduced to one. • That existing approved drive-up uses not currently in use in the HIA would continue to be unable to be transferred into the HIA. Relocation of the existing uses or redevelopment of existing sites in the HIA would be limited to the four existing financial institutions; all other uses would remain subject to existing regulations within Page 3 of 5 Fr, CITY OF ASHLAND the HIA. • That with relocation or redevelopment, drive-up uses may only be placed on a non- street (other than an alley) facing secondary building elevation, and only accessed from an alley or driveway. • That drive-up uses be clearly defined, and that this definition include all drive-up components (i.e. the kiosk, canopy or other structures, window, driveway and queuing lane). All components of a drive-up use shall be removed from the building/site within 60 days of discontinuation of the use through transfer, relocation or redevelopment. • That driveways serving relocated drive-up uses may not enter from or exit to a higher order street frontage or through a primary elevation of the building, and that there is to be no placement of driveways or queuing lanes between a building and the right-of-way other than an alley. • That no demolition of or exterior change to buildings considered to be historic resources be allowed to in order to accommodate the relocation of a drive-up use or redevelopment of its site through this amendment. • That a ministerial permit be required for the transfer of any drive-up use when such transfer is not associated with a Site Review application. Uses which are discontinued without a properly permitted transfer shall be deemed to have expired after being unused for six (6) months. The Planning Commission found that with the addition of these standards and requirements, the proposed amendment may serve to encourage redevelopment of one or more of these bank sites to bring them more into compliance with current standards, thereby working to improve the streetscape character within the Historic Interest Area while minimizing adverse impacts posed by the existing drive-up uses by more carefully regulating their placement and access. With this in mind, the Planning Commission recommended that Council approve the amendment with the additional standards and requirements listed above. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: N/A. STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Should the Council concur with the Planning Commission and support allowing redevelopment or relocation of drive-up uses within Ashland's Historic Interest Area (HIA) without requiring Conditional Use Permit approval to encourage redevelopment according to current standards, staff would recommend that Council approve first reading by title only of the ordinance with the additional requirements recommended by the Planning Commission, and move it to second reading. Should the Council believe that transferring and establishing a drive-up window use at a"new" site within the Historic Interest Area runs contrary to past and present policy of"discouraging" and prohibiting these types of uses with the HIA, then Council should direct staff to modify the proposed ordinance in order to reflect this position. SUGGESTED MOTION: Move to approve first reading by title only of the ordinance titled, "An ordinance amending Section 18.32.025 of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance to provide for the relocation or redevelopment of four Page 4 of 5 I r, CITY OF -ASH LAN D financial institutions' existing, non-conforming drive-up uses in Ashland's Historic Interest Area" and move it on to second reading. ATTACHMENTS: Proposed Ordinance Explanatory Matrix of Current and Proposed Regulations Record of the Planning Action Page 5 of 5 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 18.32.025 OF THE ASHLAND LAND USE ORDINANCE TO PROVIDE FOR THE RELOCATION OR REDEVELOPMENT OF FOUR FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS' EXISTING, NON-CONFORMING DRIVE-UP USES IN ASHLAND'S HISTORIC INTEREST AREA. Annotated to show deletions choirs and additions to the code sections being modified. Deletions are bold 1iaed4hfy&gh and additions are in bold underline. i WHEREAS, Article 2. Section 1 of the Ashland City Charter provides: Powers of the City The City shall have all powers which the constitutions, statutes, and common law of the United States and of this State expressly or impliedly grant or allow municipalities, as fully as though this Charter specifically enumerated each of those powers, as well as all powers not inconsistent with the foregoing; and, in addition thereto, shall possess all powers hereinafter specifically granted. All the authority thereof shall have perpetual succession. WHEREAS, the original Transportation Element of the City of Ashland's Comprehensive Plan, adopted in 1982, included a policy explicitly discouraging drive-up uses in order to limit fuel consumption and air pollution associated with vehicle idling. WHEREAS, the City of Ashland adopted Ordinance # 2313 in 1984 to define drive-up uses, set specific standards for their development, place a limit on the total number of drive-up uses allowed in the city, prohibit drive-up uses in Ashland's Historic Interest Area as defined in the Comprehensive Plan, and render existing drive-up uses within that Historic Interest Area non- conforming uses. WHEREAS, with the adoption of Ordinance #2313 in 1984 and subsequent amendments with the adoption of Ordinance #2688 in 1992, it was no longer seen as necessary that the Transportation Element of the City of Ashland's Comprehensive Plan, as revised and adopted in 1996, contain an explicit policy discouraging drive-up uses, the Element continues to include policies which promote decreased auto use and increased walking and bicycling, public transportation, ride sharing and other transportation demand management techniques (X.II-1) and to encourage businesses to inform customers of available non-automotive access to the business locations and to support customer use of non-automotive access (X.II-6). WHEREAS, the City of Ashland's Comprehensive Plan and implementing ordinances encourage development at a human scale with a balanced approach to transportation rather than encouraging a primarily auto-centric approach to development, and the Downtown Design Standards explicitly discourage auto-centric uses in the downtown (VI.J-6) in seeking to create a pedestrian friendly environment with a continuous storefront streetscape at the sidewalk. Page 1 of 5 WHEREAS, the Ashland Food Co-op as applicant has proposed a Legislative Amendment to the existing drive-up use regulations to allow the existing non-conforming drive-up uses within the Historic,Interest Area to redevelop on site or relocate elsewhere in the C-1 or C-1-D zoned portions of the Historic Interest Area without being subject to the discretionary review of a Conditional Use Permit in order to facilitate further negotiations with the adjacent property owner, Umpqua Bank, in hopes that the Co-op will ultimately be able to acquire the bank property if the bank is able to relocate elsewhere in the Historic Interest Area while retaining its existing drive-up use, and to encourage the redevelopment of the other existing non-conforming drive-up sites in a manner more consistent with current city standards. WHEREAS, the City of Ashland Transportation Commission considered appropriate amendments to the Ashland Municipal Code's Land Use Ordinances at a duly advertised public hearing on May 24, 2012, and following deliberations identified no specific adverse impacts to the transportation system which would result from the proposed amendments; WHEREAS, the City of Ashland Planning Commission considered appropriate amendments to the Ashland Municipal Code's Land Use Ordinances at duly advertised public hearings on May 8, 2012 and June 12, 2012, and following deliberations recommended approval of the amendments; WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Ashland conducted a duly advertised public hearing on the amendments to the Ashland Municipal Code's Land Use Ordinances on July 17, 2012; WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Ashland, following the close of the public hearing and record, deliberated and conducted first and second readings approving adoption of the Ordinance in accordance with Article 10 of the Ashland City Charter; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Ashland has determined that in order to protect and benefit the health, safety and welfare of existing and future residents of the City, it is necessary to amend the Ashland Municipal Code and Land Use Ordinance in manner proposed, that an adequate factual base exists for the amendments, the amendments are consistent with the comprehensive plan and that such amendments are fully supported by the record of this proceeding. THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The above recitations are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 2. The following amendments are hereby added to AMC Section 18.32.025 E. Drive-up uses as defined and regulated as follows: Page 2 of 5 1. Drive-up uses are defined as any establishment which by design, physical facilities, service or by packaaina procedures encourages or permits customers to receive services, obtain goods other than automobile fuel, or be entertained while remaining in their motor vehicles. The components of a drive-up use include kiosks, canopies or other structures; windows: stalls; queuing lanes and associated driveways. Drive-up uses may be approved in the C-1 District only, and only in the area east of a line drawn perpendicular to Ashland Street at the intersection of Ashland Street and Siskiyou Boulevard. 2. Drive-up uses are prohibited in Ashland's Historic Interest Area as defined in the Comprehensive Plan. The four existing non-conforming financial institution drive-up uses in operation in the Historic Interest Area as of August 7, 2012 may redevelop or relocate within the C-1 and C-1-D zoned portions of Ashland Historic Interest Area subject to the following requirements: a. Relocation or redevelopment of a drive-up use within the C-1 or C-1-D zoned portions of the Historic Interest Area shall be subiect to a Type II Site Review procedure as a Special Permitted Use. b. Relocated or redeveloped drive-up uses may only be placed on a non-street facing (other than an alley) secondary building elevation, and only accessed from an alley or driveway. c. Driveways serving relocated or redeveloped drive-up uses shall not enter from or exit to a higher order street frontage or through a primary elevation of the building, and driveways or queuing lanes shall not be placed between a building and the right-of-way other than an alley. d. No demolition of or exterior change to a building considered to be a historic resource shall be permitted to accommodate the relocation or redevelopment of a drive-up use. e. Regardless of the number of drive-up windows/lanes in use in the current location, with a relocation or remodel the number of windows/lanes shall be reduced to one (1). 3. Drive-up uses are subject to the following criteria: a. The average waiting time in line for each vehicle shall not exceed five minutes. Failure to maintain this average waiting time may be grounds for revocation of the approval. b. All facilities providing drive-up service shall provide at least two designated parking spaces immediately beyond the service window or provide other satisfactory methods to allow customers requiring excessive waiting time to receive service while parked. C. A means of egress for vehicular customers who wish to leave the waiting line shall be provided. d. The grade of the stacking area to the drive-up shall either be flat or downhill to eliminate excessive fuel consumption and exhaust during the wait in line. e. The drive-up shall be designed to provide as much natural ventilation as possible to eliminate the buildup of exhaust gases. Page 3 of 5 f. Sufficient stacking area shall be provided to ensure that public rights-of- way are not obstructed. g. The sound level of communications systems shall not exceed 55 decibels at the property line and shall otherwise comply with the Ashland Municipal Code regarding sound levels. h. The number of drive-up uses shall not exceed the 12 in existence on July 1, 1984. Drive-up uses may be transferred to another location in accord with all requirements of this section. The number of drive-up window stalls shall not exceed one 11 per location, even if the transferred use had greater than one stall. L A separate ministerial "Drive-Up Transfer" permit shall be obtained for the transfer of any drive-up use when such transfer is not associated with a Site Review or Conditional Use permit application in order to formally document transfer of the use. j. Drive-up uses which are discontinued without a properly permitted transfer shall be deemed to have expired after being unused for six (6) months. Discontinuation of a drive-up use is considered to have occurred when the drive-up use is documented as having ceased on site through a ministerial. Site Review or Conditional Use permit review, or upon on-site verification by the Staff Advisor. k. All components of a drive-up use shall be removed within sixty (60) days of discontinuation of the use through abandonment, transfer, relocation or redevelopment. SECTION 3. Severability. The sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses of this ordinance are severable. The invalidity of one section, subsection, paragraph, or clause shall not affect the validity of the remaining sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses. SECTION 4. Codification. Provisions of this Ordinance shall be incorporated in the City Code and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "code", "article", "section", or another word, and the sections of this Ordinance may be renumbered, or re-lettered, provided however that any Whereas clauses and boilerplate provisions, and text descriptions of amendments (i.e. Sections 1, 3-4) need not be codified and the City Recorder is authorized to correct any cross-references and any typographical errors. The foregoing ordinance was first read by title only in accordance with Article X, Section 2(C) of the City Charter on the 7`h day of August 2012, and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this 21s` day of August , 2012. Barbara M. Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this 215` day of August , 2012. Page 4 of 5 John Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: David Lohman, City Attorney Page 5 of 5 n c v vi � O p N N N 10 I v a c o E O E N O H O m a ° o •� o y c c n � u o 3 ¢ h ° v Lo n u o t ° � Q C h C N a p W E a C O ` C O C C N 1 L 3 z o z a E o c E o o t o °c r a °c to •3 v � _ r v Z' — w 2'• v v o ots a c c o c c c o F o a g o F o y g o t ti u a •E c 3 rl n' a .N. � ° E �' oa a y E z c O y o c a v o E c \ a a o y E v of 3 a N y N C y o NMI o 2 ti 7s O N t E 8 CITY OF ASHLAND RECORD FOR PLANNING ACTION #2012-00265 PLANNING ACTION: #2012-00265 SUBJECT PROPERTY: C-1 &C-1-D zoned portions of the Historic Interest Area APPLICANT: Ashland Food Co-Op DESCRIPTION:A request for a legislative amendment to amend the Ashland Municipal Code as it relates to drive-up uses in Commercial districts. Drive-up uses are currently allowed only as"special permitted uses" in the portions of the C-1 zoning district east of a line drawn perpendicular to Ashland Street at its intersection with Siskiyou Boulevard. Drive-up uses are explicitly prohibited in the Historic Interest Area as defined in the Comprehensive Plan. The proposal would provide exception language allowing existing drive-up uses in the Historic Interest Area to redevelop on-site or relocate to new sites elsewhere in the Historic Interest Area provided that the relocated or redeveloped drive-up use would be located predominantly underground or otherwise screened from view from the right-of-way. DATE ITEM 7/24/12 Planning Commission Recommendation 1-8 6/12112 Planning Commission Minutes 9-11 6112/12 Speaker Request Forms 12-14 6112112 Planning Commission Packet Agenda 15-16 Public Hearing Notice, Related Criteria,Affidavit of Mailing, Mailing List 17-20 Staff Report Addendum 21-24 Staff Exhibit 25 Letter from Oregon Dept.of Transportation 26 Daily Tidings Article 27-29 Transportation Commission Minutes 30-32 Tree Commission Recommendation 33 Letter from Julia Sommer 34 Email from Colin Swales 35-39 5/08/12 Planning Commission Minutes 40-43 5108/12 Exhibits#1 -#2 submitted at May 8 Public Hearing 44-51 5/08/12 Speaker Request Forms 52 5/08/12 Planning Commission Packet Agenda 53 Public Hearing Notice 54 Staff Report 55-63 Staff Exhibits 64-67 Applicant's Submittals 68-86 BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION City of Ashland,Jackson County,Oregon July 24,2012 IN THE MATTER OF PLANNING ACTION#2012-00265,A REQUEST FOR A ) LEGISLATIVE AMENDMENT TO AMEND THE ASHLAND MUNICIPAL ) CODE AS IT RELATES TO DRIVE-UP USES IN COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS. ) DRIVE-UP USES ARE CURRENTLY ALLOWED ONLY AS SPECIAL ) PERMITTED USES IN THE PORTIONS OF THE C-1 ZONING DISTRICT ) EAST OF A LINE DRAWN PERPENDICULAR TO ASHLAND STREET AT ) IT'S INTERSECTION WITH SISKIYOU BOULEVARD. DRIVE-UP USES ARE ) EXPLICITLY PROHIBITED IN THE HISTORIC INTEREST AREA AS DE- ) RECOMMENDATION FINED IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THE PROPOSAL WOULD PRO- ) VIDE EXCEPTION LANGUAGE ALLOWING EXISTING DRIVE-UP USES ) IN THE HISTORIC INTEREST AREA TO REDEVELOP ON-.SITE OR RE- ) LOCATE TO NEW SITES ELSEWHERE IN THE HISTORIC INTEREST ) AREA PROVIDED THAT THE RELOCATED OR REDEVELOPED DRIVE-UP ) USE WOULD BE LOCATED PREDOMINANTLY UNDERGROUND OR ) OTHERWISE SCREENED FROM VIEW FROM THE RIGHT-OF-WAY. ) APPLICANT: Ashland Food Co-Op ) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- RECITALS: 1) The application is a request for a Legislative Amendment to amend the Ashland Municipal Code as it relates to drive-up uses in Commercial districts. Drive-up uses are currently allowed only as "special permitted uses"in C-1 zoning districts, but only in the area east of a line drawn perpendicular to Ashland Street at its intersection with Siskiyou Boulevard. Drive-up uses are explicitly prohibited in the Historic Interest Area defined in the Comprehensive Plan. The application proposes to provide for exception language allowing existing drive-up uses in the Historic Interest Area to redevelop on their existing sites or relocate to new sites elsewhere within the Historic Interest Area, provided that the relocated drive-up use would be located predominantly underground or otherwise screened from view from the public right-of-way. 2) A Legislative Amendment is defined in AMC 18.08.345 and is subject to the requirements for a Legislative Amendment described in AMC 18.108.170 as follows: SECTION 18.08.345 Legislative amendment. An amendment to the text of the land use ordinance or the comprehensive plan or an amendment of the zoning map, comprehensive plan maps or other official maps including the street dedication map described in section 18.82.050, for land involving numerous parcels under diverse ownerships. PA#2012-00265—Drive-Up Amendment July 24,2012 Page 1 1 SECTION 18.108.170 Legislative Amendments. A. It may be necessary from time to time to amend the text of the Land Use Ordinance or make other legislative amendments in order to conform with the comprehensive plan or to meet other changes in circumstances and conditions. A legislative amendment is a legislative act solely within the authority of the Council. B. A legislative amendment may be initiated by the Council, by the Commission, or by application of a property owner or resident of the City. The Commission shall conduct a public hearing on the proposed amendment at its earliest practicable meeting after it is submitted, and within thirty days after the hearing, recommend to the Council, approval, disapproval,or modification of the proposed amendment. C. An application for amendment by a property owner or resident shall be filed with the Planning Department thirty days prior to the Commission meeting at which the proposal is to be first considered. The application shall be accompanied by the required fee. D. Before taking final action on a proposed amendment, the Commission shall hold a public hearing. After receipt of the report on the amendment from the Commission, the Council shall hold a public hearing on the amendment. Notice of time and place of the public hearings and a brief description of the proposed amendment shall be given notice in a newspaper of general circulation in the City not less than ten days prior to the date of hearing. E. No application of a property owner or resident for a legislative amendment shall be considered by the Commission within the twelve month period immediately following a previous denial of such request, except the Commission may permit a new application if, in the opinion of the Commission, new evidence or a change of circumstances warrant it. 3) The Planning Commission, following proper public notice as required in AMC 18.108.170.D., scheduled a public hearing on May 8, 2012 at which time testimony was received and exhibits were presented. Following public testimony, the Commission continued the hearing to the regular meeting of June 12, 2012 in order to allow time for the Transportation Commission to review and comment on the proposal at it's May 24, 2012 meeting. At the continued public heating on June 12, 2012 testimony was received and exhibits were presented. Following the closing of the public hearing, the Planning Commission deliberated and recommended that the City Council approve the proposed Legislative Amendment subject to additional performance standards and design requirements to minimize potential impacts to the Historic Interest Area. Now,therefore,the Planning Commission of the City of Ashland recommends as follows: SECTION 1. EXHIBITS For the purposes of reference to these Findings, the attached index of exhibits, data, and testimony will be used. Staff Exhibits lettered with an "S" Proponent's Exhibits, lettered with a Opponent's Exhibits, lettered with an "0" PA#2012-00265 Drive-Up Amendment July 24,2012 Page 2 2 Hearing Minutes,Notices,and Miscellaneous Exhibits lettered with an"M" SECTION 2. CONCLUSORY FINDINGS 2.1 The Planning Commission finds that it has received all information necessary to make a recommendation based on the Staff Report,public hearing testimony and the exhibits received. 2.2 The Planning Commission finds that the proposal for a Legislative Amendment to amend the Ashland Municipal Code as it relates to drive-up uses in Commercial districts meets all applicable criteria for the approval of Legislative Amendment as described in Chapter 18.108.170. The Planning Commission accordingly recommends approval of the Legislative Amendment with the addition of specific performance standards and design requirements which are delineated in 2.6 below. 2.3 The Planning Commission finds that the original Transportation Element of Ashland's Comprehensive Plan, adopted in 1982, included a policy explicitly discouraging the use of drive- up windows with the stated intent of limiting both fuel consumption and air pollution associated with vehicle idling while waiting at drive-ups. In keeping with this policy, in 1984 the city adopted Ordinance 42313 which defined a drive-up use as "any establishment which by design, physical facilities, service or by packaging procedures encourages or permits customers to receive services, obtain goods, or be entertained while remaining in their motor vehicles," set standards for the development of drive-up uses, required Conditional Use Permits for the approval of drive-up uses, and limited the total number of drive-up uses in the city to the 12 in place on July 1, 1984 plus one additional drive-up use for each additional 1,250 persons added to the state-certified population census for the city. As part of that ordinance, drive-up uses were prohibited in Ashland's Historic Interest Area as defined in the Comprehensive Plan (see attached Staff Exhibit S-1), and existing drive-up uses within the Historic Interest Area were rendered non-conforming. In 1992, the ordinance was amended to make drive-up's a Special Permitted Use rather than a Conditional Use, and to limit the number of drive-up uses allowed in the city to the 12 that were in place on July 1, 1984 with no allowance to increase this number with increased population. By ordinance, drive-up uses are allowed to be transferred between users and locations, subject to the requirements of the Ordinance, but the total number of approved drive-up uses allowed in the city remains at the 12 which were in place on July 1, 1984. These include: 1. 250.300 N. Pioneer St./Umpqua Bank Historic Interest Area&Zoned E-1 2. 67 E. Main St.IWells Faro Bank Historic Interest Area 3. 30 N.Second St./U.S.Bank Historic Interest Area 4. 243 E. Main St./Chase Bank Historic Interest Area 5. 2290 Ashland St./Taco Bell 6. 2235 Ashland St./Premier West Bank 7. 2280 Ashland St./Bi-Mart Pharmacy PA P2012-00265—Drive-Up Amendment July 24,2012 Page 3 3 8. 1652 Ashland St./Dutch Bros. 9. 1500 Siski ou Blvd./People's Bank 10. 1624 Ashland St./Wend 's 11. 512 Walker Ave./Sterling Savings Bank 12. Inactive(was previously McDonalds', now reportedly held-but not currently in use- — by Rogue Federal Credit Union The Commission finds that of the 12 existing drive-up permits, all four of those currently established in the Historic Interest Area are financial institutions. The Commission further finds that in reviewing the historic district survey descriptions of these properties, none of these buildings is considered to be a contributing resource to the districts, and with the exception of US Bank, the narrative descriptions within the inventory cite the buildings' relationships to the sidewalk or streetscape, or site lay-out to accommodate drive-up uses, as key factors in their lack of compatibility with the historic character of the district. The Planning Commission further finds that the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan as revised in 1996 no longer contains an explicit policy discouraging drive-up uses, since it was unnecessary due to the ordinance already in place limiting these uses. However, the current Transportation Element retains policies which continue to support discouragement of drive-up uses, including: X.II-1 "Promote decreased auto use and increased walking and bicycling, public transportation, ride sharing and other transportation demand management techniques. " X.1I-6 "Encourage businesses to inform customers of available non-auto access to the business locations and to support customer trse of non-auto access." The Commission further finds that the Comprehensive Plan and its implementing ordinances encourage human scale development with a balanced approach to transportation rather than taking a primarily auto-centric approach to development. The city's design standards encourage designs which limit the adverse impacts of the automobile on the built environment in large part by minimizing, carefully placing and screening parking areas and driveways while emphasizing a high standard of urban design and a strong relationship between buildings and the pedestrian streetscape. City standards and requirements place special emphasis on the Historic Interest Areas, and particularly the downtown. Ashland's Downtown Design Standards explicitly discourage auto-centric uses in the downtown (VI.J-6), and the removal of off-street parking requirements in the downtown, downtown design standards, and prohibition on drive-up's in the Historic Interest Area all work to create a pedestrian friendly environment with a continuous storefront streetscape at the sidewalk. The Planning Commission finds that the application proposes an amendment to the Land Use Ordinance which currently explicitly prohibits drive-up uses in the Historic Interest Area. Ashland's Historic Interest Area consists of the four National Register of Ilistoric Places-listed PA#2012-00265 Drive-Up Amendment July 24,2012 Page 4 4 Ashland's Historic Interest Area consists of the four National Register of Historic Places-listed historic districts. As initially proposed by the applicants, the amendment would add exception language to the ordinance to allow existing drive-up uses within the Historic Interest Area to relocate to a new site elsewhere within the C-1 or C-1-D zoned portions of the Historic Interest Area provided that they are located "predominantly underground or otherwise screened from view from the public right-of-way." The Commission further finds that the application explains that the amendment proposal is being made by Ashland Food Co-op as applicant, noting that both the Co-op and its neighbor Umpqua Bank are keenly aware of parking challenges at their sites. The Co-op would like to pursue the purchase of the adjacent bank property to expand their building and add parking, however the bank wishes to remain in the Historic Interest Area near the downtown and to keep a drive-up window for its customers. As currently regulated, the bank could not relocate elsehwhere in the Historic Interest Area without a Variance, and any modification to the existing drive-up use on the current site would be subject to a Conditional Use Permit for modification of an the existing non-conforming use due both to its location within the Historic Interest Area and outside of the C-1 zoning district where drive-up uses are allowed. The applicants assert that the current prohibition on new drive-up uses in the Historic Interest Area combined with the non-conforming status of existing drive-up uses in that area, and the resultant requirement that these uses obtain discretionary approvals (i.e. Conditional Use Permits or Variances) for any modification of their non-conforming uses serve to prevent upgrades to or redevelopment of these sites, as the financial institutions holding the existing drive-up uses are inherently risk-averse and unwilling to move forward with costly projects when their outcomes are uncertain and subject to obtaining discretionary approvals. As such, the proposed amendment would provide for these relocations through the Site Review process as a "Special Pennitted Use", which has considerably less discretion. The Planning Commission finds that the application suggests that the changes proposed would facilitate more serious discussions between the Ashland Food Co-op and Umpqua Bank by removing one of the perceived barriers to the Co-op acquiring the bank's property to better address parking in their vicinity, and more broadly suggests that in removing the perceived barrier posed by discretionary approval requirements, the requested ordinance changes could facilitate the redevelopment of the sites of current drive-up uses in a manner more in keeping with city design standards while minimizing the impacts of the relocated drive-up uses to the Historic Interest Area, 2.4 The Planning Commission finds that while the original regulation of drive-up uses was tied to issues of fuel consumption and air quality, their prohibition in the Historic Interest Area goes beyond these concerns to the more general discouragement of auto-centric uses in order to maintain the downtown's historic, pedestrian friendly character. Ashland's various standards seek to limit the adverse impacts of auto-centric design on the built environment in large part by minimizing, carefully placing and screening parking and circulation areas while emphasizing a high standard of urban design and a strong relationship between buildings and the pedestrian PA#2012-00265—Drive-Up Amendment July 24,2012 Page 5 5 centric uses in the Downtown Design Standards (VI.J-6) and directing that the city shall use its discretionary authority to deny new auto-centric uses while still providing for the improvement of existing facilities; largely eliminating requirements to provide required parking on site; and prohibiting drive-up uses to provide for a continuous storefront presence at the sidewalk that engages pedestrians and remains compatible with historic development patterns. The Commission finds that drive-up uses by their very nature are designed to accommodate automobiles, and the concern with their placement in the Historic Interest Area is that auto- centric design can often occur to the detriment of a human scale pedestrian environment. The Commission further finds that specific concerns center on impacts to the built environment in terms of altering building relationships to the street, scale, proportion, rhythm of openings and horizontal rhythms, breaking up the continuous storefront presence to accommodate drive-up windows and associated vehicular circulation. In addition, placement of driveways with cars crossing the sidewalk, or queuing into the sidewalk, from an underground drive-up could substantially alter the pedestrian streetscape and impact safety and visibility. 2.5 The Plamiing Commission finds that the issue of discretion is a key consideration of the request. The relocation of the four existing drive-up uses within the Historic Interest Area could be handled with discretionary review through the Conditional Use Permit process to assure all potential impacts, including architectural compatibility, of each use are considered in a manner appropriate to the individual circumstances of each site and proposal. However, the Commission recognizes the applicants' concerns with discretionary Conditional Use Permit approval standards as at least a perceived barrier to the redevelopment of the four existing drive-up sites in the Historic Interest Area (Umpqua Bank, Wells Fargo Bank, Chase Bank and US Bank) and further recognizes that with the removal of this perceived barrier most of these sites have the potential for substantial redevelopment that under current standards could benefit the character of the downtown streetscape. The Commission finds that in order to protect the historic built environment and pedestrian friendly character of the Historic Interest Area, it is important that any modification of the ordinance ensure that with redevelopment or relocation of drive-up uses, they be limited to secondary building elevations; that queuing lanes not be placed between building and the right- of-way other than an alley; that no more than one window or queuing lanes be allowed regardless of the number currently in use; that if the subject property abuts an alley, access to and from the drive-up be from the alley; that there be no access from a higher order street or through a primary building elevation; and that no demolition of buildings considered to be historic resources be permitted to facilitate the relocation or redevelopment of drive-up uses. The Commission further finds that while placement of drive-up uses underground or in some other manner which screens them entirely from view from the right-of-way may be appropriate for some sites it could lead to greater impacts to the rhythm of openings, and the need to provide barriers when drive-up uses are close; the larger concern for the Commission is in minimizing the impacts of drive-up uses to the streetscape by carefully regulating their placement and access as detailed above. PA#2012-00265 Drive-Up Amendment July 24,2012 Page 6 6 The Commission finds that the proposed modification is being considered as a means to encourage redevelopment of the sites of the four existing drive-up use permit holders already operating within the Historic Interest Area, all of which are financial institutions, and that the proposed modifications should be similarly limited to apply only to financial institutions, rather than encouraging uses of a more auto-centric nature or of a drastically different character within the Historic Interest Area. The Commission further finds that the transfer of any drive-up use between users or sites, when such transfer is not associated with a Site Review application, should be subject to a ministerial permit. AMC 18.32.025.E.3.h limits the number of drive-up uses to the 12 which were in place on July 1, 1984 and provides for their transfer provided they meet all applicable requirements. The Commission finds that for purposes of maintaining an accurate record of the approved uses and verifying their compliance with applicable requirements, that those transfers not requiring Site Review approval should be required to obtain a ministerial permit. 2.6 The Planning Commission recognizes the potential benefit that could arise from the proposal in allowing the four existing drive-up uses in the Historic Interest Area to relocate and thereby opening the possibility for redevelopment of their current sites according to current standards, however the Commission finds that any lessening of the current prohibition needs to be carefully considered for the potential adverse impacts to the built environment and pedestrian- friendly, human-scale character of the National Register-listed Historic Interest Area. If the four drive-up uses are to be allowed to relocate without the discretionary consideration of a Conditional Use Permit as proposed, the Commission finds that the proposed ordinance amendment should be modified in order to minimize the adverse impacts that the current prohibition on drive-up uses in the Historic Interest Area was enacted to avoid with the addition of the following performance standards and design requirements: • That relocation of the four existing drive-up uses or redevelopment of their existing sites in the Historic Interest Area (HIA) be allowed as a "Special Permitted Use" within the C-1 and C-1-D zoned portions of the HIA subject to "Type I1" Site Review approval. a That regardless of the number of drive-up windows/lanes in use in the current drive-up location, with relocation or redevelopment under this amendment the number of windows/lanes be reduced to one. s That existing approved drive-up uses not currently in use in the HIA would continue to be unable to be transferred into the HIA. Relocation of the existing uses or redevelopment of existing sites in the HIA would be limited to the four existing financial institutions; all other uses would remain subject to existing regulations within the HIA. e That with relocation or redevelopment, drive-up uses may only be placed on a non-street (other than an alley) facing secondary building elevation, and only accessed from an alley or driveway. PA#2012-00265—Drive-Up Amendment July 24,2012 Page 7 7 • That drive-up uses be clearly defined, and that this definition include all drive-up components (i.e. the kiosk, canopy or other structures, window, driveway and queuing lane). All components of a drive-up use shall be removed from the building/site within 60 days of discontinuation of the use through transfer, relocation or redevelopment. • That driveways serving relocated drive-up uses may not enter from or exit to a higher order street frontage or through a primary elevation of the building, and that there is to be no placement of driveways or queuing lanes between a building and the right-of-way other than an alley. • That no demolition of or exterior change to buildings considered to be historic resources be allowed to in order to accommodate the relocation of a drive-up use or redevelopment of its site through this amendment. • That a ministerial permit be required for the transfer of any drive-up use when such transfer is not associated with a Site Review application. Uses which are discontinued without a properly permitted transfer shall be deemed to have expired after being unused for six (6)months. 2.7 The Planning Commission finds that with the standards and requirements recommended in 2.6 above, the proposed amendment may serve to encourage redevelopment of one or more of these bank sites to bring them more into compliance with current standards, thereby working to improve the streetscape character within the Historic Interest Area while minimizing adverse impacts posed by the existing drive-up uses by more carefully regulating their placement and access. SECTION 3.DECISION 3.1 Based on the record of the Public Hearing on this matter, the Planning Commission recommends that the Council approve Planning Action#2012-00265 and adopt the associated ordinance amendments. July 24, 2012 Planning Commission Approval Date PA#2012-00265_Drive-Up Amendment July 24,2012 Page 8 8 Commissioners KaplanlHeesacker m/s to nominate Michael Dawkins as vice chair of the Planning Commission.Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed 6.0. It was agreed Commissioner Marsh would lead this meeting since Mindlin is not present. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. PLANNING ACTION: #2012.00265 APPLICANT: Ashland Food Cooperative LOCATION(S): C-1-&C-1-D-zoned portions of Ashland's"Historic Interest Area" REQUEST: A proposal to amend the Ashland Municipal Code(AMC 18,32,035.E)as It relates to drive-up uses in Commercial districts. Drive-up uses are currently a special permitted use in the C-1 zoning district, but only in the area east of a line drawn perpendicular to Ashland Street at the intersection of Ashland Street and Siskiyou Boulevard. Drive-up uses are currently explicitly prohibited in the Historic Interest Area as defined In the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed legislative amendment is to provide exception language which would apply only to existing drive-up uses within the Historic Interest Area and would allow them to relocate to a new site elsewhere within the Historic Interest Area provided that they are located predominantly underground or otherwise screened from view from the public right-of-way.[Continued from May 8, 2012 meeting] Staff Report Associate Planner Derek Severson explained the proposal before the Commission would modify the regulations in the C-1 and C-1-D districts relative to drive-up uses in the Historic Interest Area. Under the current regulations,new drive-up uses are prohibited and any modification to the existing uses(Umpqua Bank,Wells Fargo,US Bank,Chase Bank)requires a conditional use permit.Mr. Severson stated this proposal would modify the requirements to allow redevelopment/relocation of drive-ups elsewhere in the Historic Interest Area subject to site review approval as a special permitted use. Mr. Severson stated the initial public hearing was continued to allow review by the Transportation Commission, and the draft minutes from that meeting have been provided. He explained at the end of the Transportation Commission's discussion the members were polled and two members were negative,one was neutral,one was slightly positive, and one abstained.There were no specific concems or recommendations issued by the Transportation Commission.Mr. Severson noted the matrix included in the packet materials and stated the areas in blue identify the areas affected by this proposal. He clarified Umpqua Bank is addressed separately in the matrix because they are in a split-zoned property and neither zone allows drive-up uses. Mr. Severson briefly reviewed the staff recommendations and asked for the Commission's feedback on the issue of visibility and screening. Commission Comments Comment was made questioning how you would eliminate visibility and that this provision seems impractical for buildings that are surrounded by streets.Additional comment was made that there is some benefit to seeing how many cars are in the cue; and as long as it is not intrusive on the neighborhood,visibility is not a major concern. Applicant's Presentation Mark Knox/Mr. Knox voiced their support for excluding food and beverage uses and requiring ministerial permits for tracking. He stated they do not see any negative associations with this proposal and believe it will provide the ability for economic development, historic preservation,and the redevelopment of surface parking lots into main street facades. He stated without this proposal these sites will continue to exist in their current state and will not be redeveloped to Ashland's standards. Mr. Knox stated he understands some people believe downtown should be pedestrian only, but this is not realistic. He stated drive-ups (excluding fast food) provide a central service to the elderly population for banking and pharmacy needs.He added inclement weather and night time/security concerns are other reasons people choose to use drive-ups. He stated this proposal will provide an opportunity for this service to work, and will provide better screening and fewer lanes than exist now. Richard KatzlStated this is a strange situation for the Food Co-op and they are here to improve their facility for the good of their patrons and owners. He stated this is the only option they have available. Mr.Katz stated a lot of Ashland's population visits the Co-op on a regular basis,with over 3,000 transactions per day,and they are following the lead of their owners who say time Ashland Planning Commission June 12, 2012 Page 2 of 7 9 after time that parking is a major issue for them. He added this proposal is not just for the Co-op to have more parking,but addresses their desire to make their site safer,easier to get around,and less congested. Comment was made that the Commission's decision is not predicated on the needs of the Co-op,and rather on the policy change they have brought forward. Mr. Katz stated aside from the needs of the Co-op,they believe this amendment has merit. Public Testimony Catherine Shaw/886 Oak StreetlStated the drive-up ordinance was a component of the overall redevelopment of downtown and at that time they did a number of things to encourage people to walk.She stated the idea of making downtown completely car free was abandoned,but what they had hoped back then was that drive-up windows would eventually be eliminated.She stated these were hard fought battles that should remain. Ms.Shaw stated it's the bustle of the downtown that creates a vibrant community and voiced her opposition to drive-up windows. She stated significant effort has been made to create a more walkable downtown,which is better for Ashland's businesses and economy,and Ashland needs to walk the talk. Colin Swales/143 Eighth Street/Stated he is a member of the Transportation Commission and is also their liaison to the Planning Commission.Mr.Swales recommended the three service stations in this area be looked at as part of this amendment. He stated just as some would like to see the drive-ups disappear from downtown,he would also like to see the gas stations disappear. Mr.Swales cited two minor corrections in the draft minutes from the Transportation Commission. He also commented on a sex shop drive thru in Alabama and cautioned the Commission about this possibility. He added he is one of the Transportation Commissioners who voted against this proposal. Cate Hartzell/892 Garden Way/Stated she is an owner of the Co-op and opposes this change. She thanked Ms. Shaw for speaking on the intent of the original ordinance and stated there should be a compelling reason for considering this change. Ms. Hartzell questioned if this proposal would protect the integrity of the original ordinance or move the City further along in achieving its Comprehensive Plan goals.She noted the City goals to reduce vehicle trips and reduce pollution and encouraged the Commission to consider the risks of vehicles intersecting with pedestrians in areas where they are trying to intensify pedestrians.She noted the City of Corvallis has two Co-ops and it has worked well.She added there is a lot of commercial space available in Ashland right now and perhaps the Co-op could find other alternatives. Applicant's Rebuttal Mark KnoxlNoted his respect for Ms. Shaw and stated during her tenure as mayor a lot of efforts were made that have shaped Ashland in a positive way. However he believes their proposal is misunderstood. He clarified they are not proposing to increase the number of drive-up uses permitted,but rather to allow them to redevelop to meet the current standards. He stated this proposal addresses eighteen different policies that are to the benefit of the Comprehensive Plan.He stated this is a minor tweak that will have a very positive impact. He added if the Commission is concerned about the potential for drive up sex stores,they should limit this change to financial institutions,which is what the applicant originally proposed. Commissioner Marsh closed the record and the public hearing at 7:50 p.m. Deliberations&Decision Commissioner Dawkins motioned to deny Planning Action#2012.00265. Motion failed due to lack of a second. Mr. Molnar reminded the Commission this is a recommendation to the City Council and requested they provide guidance in addition to direction. Commissioners Brown/Kaplan mis to recommend Council's approval of Planning Action#2012.00265. DISCUSSION: Brown stated the existing drive-ups are a hazard and there is no way for these to change under the current ordinance.He stated this is an opportunity to change drive-thrus to alleys and side streets and get that traffic off the main street. He stated he would like to provide banks the opportunity to change their configuration or relocate in the downtown,and believes this modification should be limited to financial institutions. He added he believes this will result in a better downtown. Marsh asked if the motion includes staffs recommendations.Brown clarified his motion is to exclude food and beverage related uses and limit it to Ashland Planning Commission June 12, 2012 Page 3 of 7 10 financial institutions;and also for uses which are discontinued without a properly permitted transfer to be deemed expired after unused for 6 months,instead of 12. Kaplan stated he is divorcing this proposal from the Co-op's needs and sees this as an opportunity to give financial institutions the opportunity to do something that would be better for the City. Staff clarified this proposal would provide more flexibility for the four bank locations to redevelopment and add the ability for them to relocate. Dawkins spoke against the motion and voiced support for Ms. Shaw's comments. He stated things worked just fine before there were drive-ups in town and it is a convenience of our auto-centric society that we support things like this. He stated the City should be trying to eliminate all drive-thrus and have people get out of their cars. Marsh stated she resonates with Ms. Shaw's description for how the downtown was developed, however downtown should have been made retail only and there is no likelihood of these banks leaving anytime soon.She voiced her support for the motion and stated it could motivate these businesses to redevelop and would also reduce crossings, reduce the number of drive-up lanes,and improve the environment. Commissioner Marsh noted her desire to address the screening and visibility issue,and motioned to amend the recommendation at the top of page 4 of the staff report to read: "That with relocation or redevelopment,drive-up uses only be placed in a basement or on a non-street facing(other than an alley)secondary building elevation, only accessed from an alley or driveway diiveway oemponeny maybe t"le from adjacent Streets otheF than an aiiey,"Brown seconded this and accepted it as a friendly amendment. Commissioner Kaplan recommended they remove the word"basement"from the above recommendation. Brown seconded this as a friendly amendment. Roll Call Vote on Motion as Amended:Commissioners Kaplan,Brown, Heesacker,Miller and Marsh,YES, Commissioner Dawkins, NO. Motion passed 5.1. Commissioner Miller asked if they could submit concerns to Council along with the recommendation. Staff noted the Findings and Minutes will be provided.Commissioner Marsh stated it is inappropriate for commissioners to submit personal comments and instead the Council should be encouraged to watch the taped recordings. B. PLANNING ACTION:#2012.00575 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 1155 East Main Street APPLICANT: City of Ashland/Ashland Police Department DESCRIPTION:A request for Site Review approval to construct a 3,016 square foot addition and associated site Improvements for the Ashland Police Department located at 1155 East Main Street. This addition is the first phase of a multi-phase project over the next five years;subsequent phases will include a 1,975 square foot addition, additional parking,and site improvements to bring the site more in line with current standards.COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Employment;ZONING: E-1;ASSESSOR'S MAP#: 391E 10; TAX LOT#:900. The Commission took a short recess and performed a site visit.The meeting reconvened at 8:30 p.m. Marsh read aloud the public hearing procedures for land use hearings. Ex Pare Contact All commissioners attended the site visit; no ex parte contact was reported. Staff Report Associate Planner Derek Severson presented the staff report and noted the subject property is located behind the Police Department and Council Chambers. He explained this application is for site review approval to construct a 3,016 sq.ft.addition to the police station,and this would be the first phase of a multi-phased construction project.Mr. Severson provided an overview of the site plan,building elevations, project phasing,tree protection plan,and landscape plan;and noted staffs recommendation for the sense of entry to be improved to make it a more people friendly space through the use of landscaping and hardscaping. Mr.Severson listed the recommendations from the Tree Commission to supplement the existing hedge buffer with two additional trees and for tree#50 to be retained and protected. He noted the nearby neighbors spoke at the Tree Commission meeting and requested measures be taken to soften the exposure to the existing ratio antenna, parking,and building roof to the extent possible. He stated the other concerns that have been raised by the neighbors include: 1)the placement of the addition, Ashland Planning Commission June 12, 2012 Page 4 of 7 11 Planning Commission Speaker Request Form 1)Complete this form and return it to the Secretary prior to the discussion of the item you wish to speak about. 2) Speak to the Planning Commission from the table podium microphone. 3) State your name and address for the record. 4)Limit your comments to the amount of time given to you by the Chair, usually 5 minutes. 5)If you present written materials, please give a copy to the Secretary for the record. 6)You may give written comments to the Secretary for the record if you do not wish to speak. 7)Speakers are solely responsible for the content of their public statement. Name (please print) Address(no P.O.Box) Q.,4'�P ;.'(//� : c Phone4�L Tonight's Meeting Date Regular Meeting Agenda item number—a7l OR Topic for public forum (non agenda item) Land Use Public Hearing For: Against: 'Challenge for Conflict of Interest or Bias If you are challenging a member(planning commissioner)with a conflict of interest or bias, please write your allegation complete with supporting facts on this form and deliver it to the clerk immediately. The Chair will address the written challenge with the member. Please be respectful of the proceeding and do not interrupt. You may also provide testimony about the challenge when you testify during the normal order of proceedings. Written Comments/Challenge: The Public Meeting Law rewires that all city meetings are open to the public. Oregon law does not always require that the public be permitted to speak. The Ashland Planning Conunissio»generally invites the public to speak on agenda items and during public formn on non-agenda items unless time constraints limit public leslimorvy. No person has an absolute right to speak or participate in every phase of a proceeding. Please respect the order of proceedings for public hearings and strictly follow the directions of the presiding officer. Behavior or actions which are unreasonably loud or disruptive are disrespectfnd, and may constitute disorderly conduct. Offenders will be requested to leave the room. Continents and statements by speakers do not represent the opinion of the City Council, City Officers or employees or the City of Ashland. 12 Planning Commission Speaker Request Form 1)Complete this form and return it to the Secretary prior to the discussion of the item you wish to speak about. 2)Speak to the Planning Commission from the table podium microphone. 3) State your name and address for the record. 4)Limit your continents to the amount of time given to you by the Chair, usually 5 minutes. 5)If you present written materials, please give a copy to the Secretary for the record. 6)You may give written comments to the Secretary for the record if you do not wish to speak. 7)Speakers are solely responsible for the content of their public statement. (please print) rte: t; ; Address(no P.O.'Biz) Y Phone 6 1 f Emad C� I Vj�j'(i3(3�1� �� n F I � VY, eW' g s unlL Toni htl Meetin Dale Regular Meeting Agenda item number�[M OR Topic for public forum(non agenda item) "'DAVE --UP- Land Use Public Bearing For: Against: Challenge for Conflict of Interest or Bias If you are challenging a member(planning commissioner)with a conflict of interest or bias, please write your allegation complete with supporting facts on this form and deliver it to the clerk immediately. The Chair will address the written challenge with the member. Please be respectful of the proceeding and do not interrupt. You may also provide testimony about the challenge when you testify during the normal order of proceedings. Written Comments/Challenge: The Public Meeting Law requites that all city meetings are open to the public. Oregoe lain does not always require that the public be permitted to speak. The Ashland Plantir:g Conntission generally hrniles•the public to speak on agenda ilents and dm•ing public forum on non-agenda iteuts unless time consh-aitds limit public iestiutory. No person has at absolute right to speak o•participate in every phase of a proceeding. Please respect the order of proceedings fa•public hearings and strictly follow the directions of the presiding officer. Behavior or actions which are unreasonably loud or disruptive are disrespectful, and nary constitute disorderly conduct. Offenders will be requested to leave the room. Comments and statements by speakers do not represent the opinion of the City Council, City Officers or employees or the City of Ashland. 13 Planning Commission Speaker Request Form 1)Complete this form and return it to the Secretary prior to the discussion of the item you wish to speak about. 2)Speak to the Planning Commission from the table podium microphone. 3)State your name and address for the record. 4)Limit your comments to the amount of time given to you by the Chair, usually 5 minutes. 5) If you present written materials,please give a copy to the Secretary for the record. 6)You may give written comments to the Secretary for the record if you do not wish to speak. 7)Speakers are solely responsible for the content of their public statement. y ; Name (please pant Address(nu_P O:Box) rV ( 3 PhoneC) �l11��l .,� Email Tonight's Meeting Date Regular Meeting Agenda item number OR Topic for public forum (non agenda item) Land Use Public Hearing For: Against: Challenge for Conflict of Interest or Bias If you are challenging a member(planning commissioner)with a conflict of interest or bias,please write your allegation complete with supporting facts on this form and deliver it to the clerk immediately. The Chair will address the written challenge with the member. Please be respectful of the proceeding and do not interrupt. You may also provide testimony about the challenge when you testify during the normal Oder of proceedings. '— WrittenComments/Challenge: LKIIQqt; (s pel'Qow C" Woxk� 1� I�1� u I The Public Meeting Lou,requires that all city meetings are open to the public. Oregon law does not always require that the public be permilled to speak. The Ashland Planning Commission generally invites the public to speak on agenda items and during public forznn on non-agenda items unless time constrahnls linnit public testinnaty. No person has an absolute right to speak or participate in every phase of a proceeding. Please respect the order ofproceedings for public hearings and strictly follow the directions of the presiding officer. Behavior or aclions which are unreasonably lout!or disruptive a-e disrespectful, and may constitute disorderly conduct. Offenders will be requested to leave the roonn. Cotmnents and statements by speakers do not represent the opinion of the City Council, City Officers or employees or the City of Ashland. 14 Note: Anyone wishing to speak at any Planning Commission meeting is encouraged to do so. If you wish to speak, please rise and,after you have been recognized by the Chair,give your name and complete address for the record. You will then be allowed to speak. Please note that the public testimony may be limited by the Chair and normally is not allowed after the Public Hearing Is closed. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING JUNE 12, 2012 AGENDA I. CALL TO ORDER Il. ANNOUNCEMENTS III. CONSENT AGENDA A. Approval of Minutes 1. April 24, 2012 Study Session 2. May 8, 2012 Regular Meeting 3, May 22, 2012 Study Session IV. PUBLIC FORUM V. UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. . Approval of Findings for PA-2012-00018, 2220 Ashland Street. VI. NEW BUSINESS A. Election of Officers. VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. PLANNING ACTION: #2012-00265 APPLICANT: Ashland Food Cooperative LOCATION(S): C-1-&C-1-D-zoned portions of Ashland's"Historic Interest Area" REQUEST: A.proposal to amend the Ashland Municipal Code (AMC 18.32.035.E) as it relates to drive-up uses in Commercial districts. Drive-up uses are currently a special permitted use in the C-1 zoning district, but only in the area east of a line drawn perpendicular to Ashland Street at the Intersection of Ashland Street and Siskiyou Boulevard. Drive-up uses are currently explicitly prohibited in the Historic Interest Area ' as defined in the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed legislative amendment is to provide exception language which would apply only to existing drive-up uses within the Historic Interest Area and would allow them to relocate to a new site elsewhere within the Historic Interest Area provided that they are located predominantly underground or otherwise screened from view from the public right-of-way. [Continued from.May 8, 2012 meeting] CITY OF AS H LAN In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting,please contact the Community Development office at 541-488-5305(TTY phone is 1-800-735-2900). Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting(28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title 1). 15 Note: Anyone wishing to speak at any Planning Commission meeting is encouraged to do so. If you wish to speak, please rise and,after you have been recognized by the Chair,give your name and complete address for the record. You will then be allowed to speak. Please note that the public testimony may be limited by the Chair and normally is not allowed after the Public Hearing is closed. B. PLANNING ACTION: #2012-00575 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 1155 East Main Street APPLICANT: City of Ashland/Ashland Police Department DESCRIPTION: A request for Site Review approval to construct a 3,016 square foot addition and associated site Improvements for the Ashland Police Department located at 1155 East Main Street. This addition is the first phase of a multi-phase project over the next five years; subsequent phases will Include a 1,975 square foot addition, additional parking, and site improvements to bring the site more in line with current standards. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Employment; ZONING: E-1; ASSESSOR'S MAP#: 39 1 E 10; TAX LOT#: 900. C. PLANNING ACTION: #2012-00573 APPLICANT: City of Ashland LOCATION: Not property-specific ORDINANCE REFERENCE: 18.108.170 Legislative Amendments REQUEST: A Legislative Amendment is proposed to adopt a new "Chapter XV - Regional Plan" element to the City of Ashland Comprehensive Plan to incorporate applicable portions of the Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Problem Solving Plan ("the RPS Plan") and to acknowledge revised population allocations for the City of Ashland. Jackson County recently adopted the RPS Plan which identifies urban reserve areas to accommodate a doubling of the region's population, but before the RPS Plan can take effect, each of the six participating cities in the region (Ashland, Talent, Phoenix, Medford, Central Point and Eagle Point) must adopt the applicable portions of the plan into their comprehensive plans and implementing ordinances. (Ashland is the only participating city which has not identified urban reserves as the city's existing urban growth boundary was determined to be sufficient to accommodate anticipated growth. Adoption of the new element incorporates those portions of the Regional Plan applicable to Ashland as a signatory participant with no identified urban reserves.) VIII. ADJOURNMENT CITY OF -ASH LAN ® !si, In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting,please contact the Community Development office at 541-488-5305(TTY phone is 1-800-735-2900). Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting(28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title 1). 16 � , Planning Department,51 Winbu(. ,ay,Ashland,Oregon 97520 CITY O F ,_ 541-488-5305 Fax:541-552.2050 www.ashland.or.us TTY: 1-800-735-2900 ASHLAND PLANNING ACTION: PL-2012-00265 SUBJECT PROPERTY: C-1 &C-1-D Portions of the Historic Interest Area(See map below) OWNERIAPPLICANT: - Ashland Food Co-op DESCRIPTION: The Planning Commission will conduct a public hearing to consider a proposed Legislative Amendment to amend the Ashland Municipal Code(AMC 18.32.035.E)as it relates to drive-tip uses in Commercial districts; this is a continuance of the public hearing which began on May 8`n. Drive-up uses are currently allowed only as "special permitted uses" in the C-1 zoning district, but only in the area east of a line drawn perpendicular to Ashland Street at the intersection of Ashland Street and Siskiyou Boulevard. Drive-up uses are currently explicitly prohibited in the Historic Interest Area as defined in the Comprehensive Plan, and the four existing drive-up uses in place in the Historic Interest Area are considered to be legal non-conforming uses. The proposal is to provide exception language which would apply only to the four existing drive-up uses within the Historic Interest Area and allow them to relocate to new sites elsewhere within the Historic Interest Area provided that their drive-up windows be located predominantly underground (in a basement) or otherwise screened from view from the public right-of-way. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: June 121h, 2012 at 7:00 PM,Ashland Civic Center(1175 E. Main St.) PROPOSAL WOULD ALLOW y J EXISTING DRIVE-UP'S IN HISTORIC INTEREST AREA C TO RELOCATE WITHI N HISTORIC INTEREST AREA WHERE CURRENTLY PROHIBITED, l p tic C .tl E-_.x PROVIDED THEY WERE UNDER- �- - t 1 ctGROUND OR SCREENED CURRENT DRIVE-UP ALLOWANCE f Tt u s IS LIMITED TO C-0 ZONING 1Xay \l L r EAST OF THIS LINE (INTERSECTION OF ASHLANDISISKIYOU ilk U � r 1 T Notice is hereby given that a PUBLIC HEARING on the following request with respect to the ASHLAND LAND USE ORDINANCE will be held before the ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION on meeting date shown above. The meeting will be at the ASHLAND CIVIC CENTER, 1175 East Main Street, Ashland,Oregon. The ordinance criteria applicable to this application are attached to this notice. Oregon law states that failure to raise an objection concerning this application, either in person or by letter, or failure to provide sufficient specificity to afford the decision maker an opportunity to respond to the issue, precludes your right of appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeals(LUBA)on that issue. Failure to specify which ordinance criterion the objection is based on also precludes your right of appeal to LUBA on that criterion. Failure of the applicant to raise constitutional or other issues relating to proposed conditions of approval with sufficient specificity to allow this Commission to respond to the issue precludes an action for damages in circuit court. A copy of the application,all documents and evidence relied upon by the applicant and applicable criteria are available for inspection at no cost and will be provided at reasonable cost,if requested. A copy of the Staff Report will be available for inspection seven days prior to the hearing and will be provided at reasonable cost, if requested. All materials are available at the Ashland Planning Department,Community Development and Engineering Services,51 Winburn Way,Ashland,Oregon 97520. During the Public Hearing,the Chair shall allow testimony from the applicant and those in attendance concerning this request. The Chair shall have the fight to limit the length of testimony and require that comments be restricted to the applicable criteria. Unless there is a continuance, if a participant so requests before the conclusion of the hearing,the record shall remain open for at least seven days after the hearing. In compliance with the American with Disabilities Act,if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting,please contact the City Administrator's office at 541-488-6002(TTY phone number 1-800-735-2900). Notification 72 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting.(28 CFR 35.102.-35.104 ADA Title 1). If you have questions or comments concerning this request,please feel freelt9 contact the Ashland Planning Division,541-488-5305. AMC 18.108.170 Procedure for Legislat(I" Amendments I 1 A. It may be necessary from time to time to amend the text of the Land Use Ordinance or make other legislative amendments in order to conform with the comprehensive plan or to meet other changes in circumstances and conditions. A legislative amendment is a legislative act solely within the authority of the Council. B. A legislative amendment may be initiated by the Council, by the Commission, or by application of a property owner or resident of the City. The Commission shall conduct a public hearing on the proposed amendment at its earliest practicable meeting after it is submitted, and within thirty days after the hearing,recommend to the Council,approval,disapproval,or modification of the proposed amendment. C. An application for amendment by a property owner or resident shall be filed with the Planning Department thirty days prior to the Commission meeting at which the proposal is to be first considered. The application shall be accompanied by the required fee. D. Before taking final action on a proposed amendment, the Commission shall hold a public hearing.After receipt of the report on the amendment from the Commission, the Council shall hold a public hearing on the amendment. Notice of time and place of the public hearings and a brief description of the proposed amendment shall be given notice In a newspaper of general circulation In the City not less than ten days prior to the date of hearing. E. No application of a property owner or resident for a legislative amendment shall be considered by the Commission within the twelve month period immediately following a previous denial of such request, except the Commission may permit a new application if, in the opinion of the Commission,new evidence or a change of circumstances warrant it. CURRENT DRIVE-UP REGULATIONS AMC 18.32.035.E Drive-up uses as defined and regulated as follows 1. Drive-up uses may be approved in the C-1 District only, and only in the area east of a line drawn perpendicular to Ashland Street at the Intersection of Ashland Street and Siskiyou Boulevard. 2. Drive-up uses are prohibited in Ashland's Historic Interest Area as defined in the Comprehensive Plan. 3. Drive-up uses are subject to the following criteria: a. The average waiting time in line for each vehicle shall not exceed five minutes. Failure to maintain this average waiting time may be grounds for revocation of the approval. b. All facilities providing drive-up service shall provide at least two designated parking spaces immediately beyond the service window or provide other satisfactory methods to allow customers requiring excessive waiting time to receive service while parked. c. A means of egress for vehicular customers who wish to leave the waiting line shall be provided. d. The grade of the stacking area to the drive-up shall either be flat or downhill to eliminate excessive fuel consumption and exhaust during the wait In line. e. The drive-up shall be designed to provide as much natural ventilation as possible to eliminate the buildup of exhaust gases. f. Sufficient stacking area shall be provided to ensure that public rights-of-way are not obstructed. g. The sound level of communications systems shall not exceed 55 decibels at the property line and shall otherwise comply with the Ashland Municipal Code regarding sound levels. h. The number of drive-up uses shall not exceed the 12 in existence on July 1, 1984. Drive-up uses may be transferred to another location In accord with all requirements of this section. The number of drive-up window stalls shall not exceed 1 per location, even If the transferred use had greater than one stall. 18 GAcomm-dev\phnning @Ienning AetionaVoticing ForderWailed Notices&Signs=1=012 W265.d= i AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF OREGON ) County of Jackson ) The undersigned being first duly sworn states that: 1. 1 am employed by the City of Ashland, 20 East Main Street, Ashland, Oregon 97520, in the Community Development Department. 2. On May 24, 2012 1 caused to be mailed, by regular mail, in a sealed envelope with postage fully prepaid, a copy of the attached planning action notice to each person listed on the attached mailing list at such addresses as set forth on this list under each person's name for Planning Action #2944--03, Historic Design L' Standards. Signaf re of Employee G:Ioommde4lanningTomu&HandouWAffdavit of Mailing—Planning Action Notice.doc 19 PA-2012-00265 DRIVE UP CODE NA-2012-00265 DRIVE UP CODE ,-A-2012-00265 DRIVE UP CODE WELLS FARGO BANK CHASE BANK U.S. NATIONAL BANK ATTN. BRANCH MANAGER ATTN. BRANCH MANAGER ATTN. BRANCH MANAGER 67 MAIN ST E. 243 MAIN ST E. 30 SECOND ST N. ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 ASHLAND, OR 97520 PA-2012-00265 DRIVE UP CODE PA-2012-00265 DRIVE UP CODE PA-2012-00265 DRIVE UP CODE UMPQUA BANK CRATER NATL BANK (MFR) MITTLEMAN PROPERTIES ATTN. BRANCH MANAGER INDUSTRY CONSULTING GROUP FLEAHMAN LEIGH 250 PIONEER ST. N PO BOX 810490 2800 EAST LAKE STREET ASHLAND, OR 97520 DALLAS TX, 753810490 MINNEAPOLIS MN, 55406 PA-2012-00265 DRIVE UP CODE PA-2012-00265 DRIVE UP CODE PA-2012-00265 DRIVE UP CODE ASHLAND FOOD CO-OP FIRST INTERSTATE BANK/OR NA VALLEY OF THE ROGUE BANK ATTN. MGR RICHARD KATZ % THOMSON PROP TAX SVCS 1 COLUMBIA ST STE#1400 237 FIRST ST N. P O BOX 2609 PORTLAND OR, 97258 ASHLAND, OR 97520 CARLSBAD CA, 92018 PA-2012-00265 DRIVE UP CODE PA-2012-00265 DRIVE UP CODE PA-2012-00265 DRIVE UP CODE URBAN DEVELOPMENT SVCS. COLIN SWALES ASHLAND DAILY TIDINGS ATTN. MARK KNOX 143 EIGHTH ST ATTN. VICKI ALDOUS 485 NEVADA ST W. ASHLAND, OR 9752.0 P O BOX 1108 ASHLAND, OR 97520 MEDFORD, OR 97501 A -60 SSNT TO ODC- ��iT k P f�CVG� Lti¢,tPS� 12-4q 5--2012 Downtown Drive Up Codes 20 t ASHLAND PLANNING DIVISION STAFF REPORT ADDENDUM #1 June 12`h, 2012 PLANNING ACTION: PL#2012-0265 APPLICANT: Ashland Food Cooperative LOCATION: C-1- &C-1-D-zoned portions of the Historic Interest Area (See Attached Exhibit S-1) ORDINANCE REFERENCE: 18.08 Definitions 18.32 Commercial(C-1) 18.72 Site Design Review 18.104 Conditional Uses 18.108.170 Legislative Amendments REQUEST: A proposal to amend the Ashland Municipal Code as it relates to drive-up uses in Commercial districts. Drive-up uses are currently allowed only as"special permitted uses"in C-1 zoning districts, but only in the area east of a line drawn perpendicular to Ashland Street at the intersection of Ashland Street and Siskiyou Boulevard. Drive-up uses are explicitly prohibited in the Historic Interest Area defined in the Comprehensive Plan. The proposal would provide exception language allowing existing drive-up uses in the Historic Interest Area to redevelop on their existing sites or relocate to new sites elsewhere within the Historic Interest Area,provided that the relocated drive-up use would be located predominantly underground or otherwise screened from view from the public right-of-way. I. Relevant Facts A. Background • History of the Application At the Planning Commission's May 8`11, 2012 regular meeting, the public hearing on this matter was opened. The proposed legislative amendment would change the existing regulations for drive-up uses to allow existing uses in the commercially-zoned portions of the city's"Historic Interest Area"to relocate,or remodel on their current sites,without requiring Conditional Use Permits. Currently, drive-up uses are prohibited in the Historic Interest Area and the four existing drive-up uses are considered to be non-conforming, so any substantive modification requires a Conditional Use Permit which provides for a degree of discretionary review while requiring the Planning Commission to evaluate impacts in comparison to the target use of the zoning district. As proposed in the amendment, these uses would be able to relocate or remodel on site with only a Site Review permit provided that the components of the drive-up use were predominantly underground or otherwise screened from view. Planning Action PL#2012-00265 Ashland Planning Division—Staff Report Addendum#1 Applicant: Ashland Food Co-Op Drive-UIo's in Historic Interest Area Page 1 of 4 21 I The proposed amendment is being initiated by the Ashland Food Co-op,which has expressed an interest in acquiring the adjacent property at 250 North Street currently owned and occupied by Umpqua Bank. Their hope is that acquisition of the property and relocation of the existing bank use would allow them to pursue options for expansion while better addressing parking issues in the area. However,under the current regulations Umpqua Bank could not readily relocate in the downtown area if they wanted to retain their existing drive- up window. With this in mind,the Co-op has initiated the proposed legislative amendment, suggesting that the proposed amendment would let them begin discussions with Umpqua Bank, and that on a broader level it might encourage some of the three other banks with drive-up windows in the "Historic Interest Area" (Wells Fargo, Chase & U.S. Bank) to consider redeveloping their sites. It should be noted that the current request is limited to the legislative amendment which the Co-op hopes would enable further discussion with their neighbors;there is no proposal for modifications to the existing sites or uses of the Co-op or Umpqua Bank at this time and any such request would require a separate land use action. At the hearing,planning staff recommended that if the Commission were supportive of the amendment, that they include additional design standards and requirements to minimize potential impacts to the Historic Interest Area. Following public testimony,Commissioners discussed whether relocation or redevelopment should be limited to the four existing financial institutions,if more leeway should be allowed to permit pharmacy drive-up windows, or if there should simply be a restriction that the amendment would not apply for food-related uses. The Commission also discussed whether these applications should automatically trigger a public hearing. The Planning Commission ultimately continued the matter to their June 12' meeting in order to allow for review and comment on the proposal by the Transportation Commission at its May 24th meeting. II. Project Impact A. Transportation Commission Review The Transportation Commission considered the request at its May 201 meeting. Following testimony and Commissioner discussion,the Commission polled its members as to whether they were positive, negative or neutral with regard to the proposed legislative amendment. Two of those present were "neutral to negative", two were "neutral to positive", and one abstained from the vote. There were no specific concerns expressed through a motion and no specific recommendations with regard to potential impacts to the transportation system. Draft minutes of this meeting will be provided at the Planning Commission meeting. B. Matrix Staff has prepared a matrix to make clear the current and proposed regulations, and has attached it as Staff Exhibit S-5. Planning Action PL#2012-00265 Ashland Planning Division-Staff Report Addendum 41 Applicant: Ashland Food Co-Op Drive-Ups In Historic Interest Area Page 2 of 4 22 i r III. Procedural - Required Burden of Proof 18.108,170 Legislative Amendments A. It may be necessary from time to time to amend the text of the Land Use Ordinance or make other legislative amendments in order to conform with the comprehensive plan or to meet other changes in circumstances and conditions.A legislative amendment is a legislative act solely within the authority of the Council. B. A legislative amendment may be initiated by the Council, by the Commission, or by application of a property owner or resident of the City. The Commission shall conduct a public hearing on the proposed amendment at its earliest practicable meeting after it is submitted, and within thirty days afterthe hearing, recommend to the Council,approval, disapproval,or modification of the proposed amendment. C. An application for amendment by a property owner or resident shall be filed with the Planning Department thirty days prior to the Commission meeting at which the proposal is to be first considered. The application shall be accompanied by the required fee. D. Before taking final action on a proposed amendment, the Commission shall hold a public hearing.Afterreceipt of the report on the amendment from the Commission,the Council shall hold a public hearing on the amendment.Notice of time and place of the public hearings and a brief description of the proposed amendment shall be given notice in a newspaper of general circulation in the City not less than ten days prior to the date of hearing. E. No application of a property owner or resident for a legislative amendment shall be considered by the Commission within the twelve month period immediately following a previous denial of such request, except the Commission may permit a new application if in the opinion of the Commission, new evidence or a change of circumstances warrant it. IV. Conclusions and Recommendations Based on last month's Commission discussion, staff has slightly revised the previous recommendations to incorporate the issues raised in terms of requiring a public hearing for each of these applications and considering limitations on food-related uses. Should the Commission ultimately wish to forward a favorable recommendation to the Council for the proposed amendment, Staff would recommend that the following items be incorporated into any ordinance amendment: • That relocation of the four existing uses or redevelopment of their existing sites in the Historic Interest Area (HIA) be allowed as a Special Permitted Use within the C-1 and C-1-D zoned portions of the HIA subject to "Type 11" Site Review approval. • That regardless of the number of drive-up windows/lanes in use in the current location, with a relocation or remodel under this amendment the number of windows/lanes would be required to be reduced to one. • That existing approved drive-up uses not currently in use in the HIA would be unable to be transferred into the HIA. Relocation of existing uses or redevelopment of existing sites in the HIA would not be permitted for food-or beverage-related uses, which would remain subject to existing regulations within the HIA. (May also simply wish to consider simply limiting to financial institutions). Planning Action PL#2012-00265 Ashland Planning Division-Staff Report Addendum 41 Applicant: Ashland Food Co-Dp Drive-Up's in Historic Interest Area Page 3 of 4 23 • That with relocation or redevelopment, drive-up uses only be placed in a basement or on a non-street facing(other than an alley)secondary building elevation, only accessed from an alley or driveway, and no components of the relocated/redeveloped drive-up (i.e. structure, kiosk, window or queuing lane- but not the driveway component) may be visible from adjacent streets other than an alley. • That driveways serving relocated drive-up uses may not enterfrom orexitto a higher order street frontage or through a primary elevation of the building, and that there is to be no placement of driveways or queuing lanes between a building and the right- of-way other than an alley. • That no demolition of or exterior change to buildings considered to be historic resources .be allowed to accommodate the relocation of a drive-up use. or redevelopment of its site through this amendment. • That all components of a drive-up use shall be removed within 60 days of discontinuation of the use through transfer, relocation or redevelopment. • That a ministerial permit be required for the transfer of any drive-up use when such transfer is not associated with a Site Review application. Uses which are discontinued without a properly permitted transfer shall be deemed to have expired after being unused for 12 months. Planning Action PL#2012-00265 Ashland Planning Division—Staff Report Addendum#1 Applicant: Ashland Food Co-Op Drive-Up's In Historic Interest Area Page 4 of 4 24 u `o c C 0 N N V y d C u n L ¢ L 2 u :y n L ¢ L a ° N E o ' O : >i > > C G 'h U �• ix ' a u C 0>! 0 d V V C O C C O s•3 � � C � m � C 3 � d 3 C t N W� n ` d � 6 r d 0 O � O 4 0 •C � .� d a 7 •� d >�. N " N d � y ;.O O � ❑ d ti '> u E 3 2 ^ u E a`c 6 `w g cc 3 w e d o 'c. a ti ,x• r ;c "� 'u a o 'a c E , o E o � o •E � w v a S v c a s h ° a « h `0 3 c 72 E .-pja,•rE Z .°. .�.' .. 2 C ° IV'= m a t X LL W}Z Va-p O` C E O. p N a y E 0 Z H d N v O Y N T re g o n Department of Transportation Region 3 John A.K11zhaber M.D.,Governor 3500 NW Stewart Parkway Roseburg,OR 97470 Phone:(541)957-3692/Fax:(541)957-3547 June 1, 2012 Thomas.Guevara@odot.state.or.us Derek Severson, Associate Planner City of Ashland Planning 51 Winburn Way Ashland, OR 97520 Re: Ashland Food Co-Op Legislative Amendment to C-1 & C-1-D Portions of Historic Interest Area Mr. Sevenson: Thank you for sending public notice on the proposed Legislative Amendment to Ashland Municipal Code Section 18.32.035.E as it relates to drive-up uses in Commercial Districts to allow four existing drive-up uses within the Historic Interest Area to relocate to new sites elsewhere within the Historic Interest Area. We reviewed the proposed project and determined it does not significantly affect state transportation facilities under Oregon's Transportation Planning Rule or Access Management Rule. We have no further comments at this time. You may contact me at 541-957-3692 if you have questions or require additional information. 3 Sin erely, "aA A THOMAS GUE ARA 11 Development Review Planner 26 Page 1 of 3 i Environment Co-op seeks loosening of drive-thru rules Store hopes to buy neighboring land, but under 1984 city law, bank's drive-thru access could be lost if it moves elsewhere in the downtown By Vickie Aldous Ashland Daily Tidings June 01, 2012 2:00 AM An Ashland law that limits drive-thru windows in town has a new and unexpected opponent—the Ashland Food Co-op. Adopted in 1984 in an effort to curb vehicle pollution and auto-centric development, the law allows only 12 drive-thru windows in Ashland. Drive-thru windows were banned in Ashland's historic downtown area,except for four that already existed and were grandfathered in. The idea was that those four drive-thru windows might someday disappear as the properties changed uses. The co-op,which is located in the historic downtown area, doesn't want a drive-thru window for itself. But the busy grocery store—which often has a jam-packed parking lot—is interested in purchasing the property next door that houses Umpqua Bank. The co-op could then expand its parking area, according to city planning documents. A deal between the co-op and bank is unlikely unless Umpqua can get city approval for a drive-thru window within the historic downtown area. The co-op has proposed a change in the law to allow relocating the four grandfathered drive-tluu windows in the historic downtown. To minimize visual impacts, the drive-thru facility would have to be located mainly underground or be screened from view from public streets. Under the proposal, the four downtown sites that have drive-thru windows could also be remodeled without.going through an onerous and risky planning process, as would be required now. The other eight drive-thru windows in Ashland already can be transferred between users and locations, as long as they remain southeast of the intersection of Siskiyou Boulevard and Ashland Street, clustered mainly in the business area around Exit 14. Co-op General Manager Richard Katz emphasized that the store has no deal in place with Umpqua Bank, but an easing of the city's restrictions on downtown drive-thru windows could open the door for productive negotiations. The co-op moved to its current site at 237 N. First St. in 1993, before the area saw a flurry of 27 http://www.dailytidings.com/apps/pbes.dll/article?AID=%2F20120601°/`2FNEWS02%2F2... 6/1/2012 Page 2 of 3 development, Katz said. "We felt we had found a neighborhood that would accommodate us," he said. As time went on, the neighborhood got more crowded as businesses sprouted along nearby A Street and downtown workers in Main Street and Lithia Way businesses began using the neighborhood for parking,Katz said. The co-op's business also boomed, to the point where it now serves more than 3,000 customers per day,he said. "We didn't know how successful we would be. The response to our store has been fantastic," Katz said. "We probably have one of the most popular and well-used parking lots in town." In customer surveys,parking is listed as their biggest concern, he said. The co-op has looked at relocating or using valet or remote parking, but those ideas aren't very feasible, he said. The co-op began discussions with Umpqua Bank six years ago,but bank officials have been concerned about losing their drive-thru window if they moved the branch to a different downtown location,Katz said. Katz said allowing the relocation of downtown drive-thru windows and easing the remodeling process for the four bank properties with windows could ultimately improve Ashland's appearance. U.S. Bank is an example of modern International Style and contributes to Ashland's historical heritage, but Wells Fargo,Umpqua and Chase are not historically compatible with the downtown, according to planning documents. In fact, the historic Ashland Hotel, a grand turreted structure that dominated a full block downtown, was razed in 1961 to make way for the plain, flat-roofed Wells Fargo building,according to planning documents. Katz said the bank buildings are prime candidates for renovations that could make them more attractive and historically compatible with the downtown area. The proposal to loosen city rules on the downtown drive-thru windows has recently gone before the Planning Commission and Transportation Commission, and is due back before the Planning Commission in June. Some commissioners have voiced support for elements of the proposal, such as easing the banks' ability to remodel their properties, but have raised concerns about other aspects, including the increased chance that the drive-thru windows would stay in operation indefinitely in the downtown area, rather than fading away over time. Planning staff members have recommended rules to minimize impact. The rules would include that the facilities be located primarily underground, be accessible only from a driveway or alley and not be visible fiom any adjacent streets. 28 http://www.dailytidings.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=O/`2F20120601%2FNEWSO2%2F2... 6/1/2012 Page 3 of 3 I The Planning Commission will take up the issue again at 7 p.m. June 12 in the Ashland Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 E. Main St. The issue could go before the Ashland City Council for a final decision in mid-July, according to city staff. Staff reporter Vickie Aldous can be reached at 541-479-8199 or vlaldous @yahoo.com. 29 http://www.dailytidings.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=%2F20120601%2FNEWS02%2F2... 6/1/2012 I i I ASHLAND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DRAFT MINUTES OF AGENDA ITEM; DRIVE-UP USES MAY 24,2012 Drive-up Uses: Type III PLANNING ACTION:#2012.00265 APPLICANT: Ashland Food Cooperative LOCATION(S): C-1-&C-1-D-zoned portions of Ashland's"Historic Interest Area" REQUEST: A proposal to amend the Ashland Municipal Code(AMC 18.32,035.E)as it relates to drive-up uses in Commercial districts. Drive-up uses are currently a special permitted use In the C-1 zoning district, but only In the area east of a line drawn perpendicular to Ashland Street at the intersection of Ashland Street and Siskiyou Boulevard, Drive-up uses are currently explicitly prohibited in the Historic Interest Area as defined in the Comprehensive Plan.The proposed legislative amendment is to provide exception language which would apply only to existing drive-up uses within the Historic Interest Area and would allow them to relocate to a new site elsewhere within the Historic Interest Area provided that they are located predominantly underground or otherwise screened from view from the public right-of-way. Staff Report Senior Planner Brandon Goldman introduced the planning action as a land use application which is a legislative amendment to the code previously referenced and would set forth standards that would be applied to drive-up uses within the historic district. He explained the current code limits 12 drive-up uses within the city of which four are financial institutions located within the historic district. The businesses that would be impacted by the proposal of the applicant and subsequently subject to new requirements if approved by Council are: Wells Fargo Bank(67 E Main), U.S. Bank(30 N Second),Chase Bank(243 E Main)and Umpqua Bank(250 N Pioneer). Mr.Goldman explained the applicants presented the concept to the Transportation Commission at the pre-application stage prior to drafting the code.The Planning Commission opened the public hearing on the proposed ordinance amendment at their May 8,2012 meeting and felt it would be beneficial to hear input from the Transportation Commission before making a formal recommendation to Council on June 12,2012. Mr.Goldman stated issues that came up during the staff evaluation were addressed on page 9 of 9 in the staff report section of the application. He noted in particular staff recommended criteria of approval specifically related to transportation read: That driveways serving relocated drive-up uses may not enter from or exit to a higher order street frontage or through a primary elevation of the building,and that there is to be no placement of driveways or queuing lanes between a building and the Hght-of-way other than an alley. He added the proposal intends to change the code so if one of the four institutions were to relocate elsewhere within the historic district they would be able to do so. Currently there is a prohibition on new drive-ups within the historic district.The code amendment would allow drive-ups when relocating; but would not increase the number allowed. Questions of Staff The following questions and comments were issued to staff: • The existing policy would hopefully phase out drive-up uses in the downtown area and yet the staff report states more general discouragement of auto-centric uses in order to maintain the downtown historic districts character. Is the policy/staff discouraging auto drive-up uses? Staff stated all buildings would be subject to the historic design standards and staff will look at relocating, not increasing the number of drive-up uses. • Commissioner questioned existing and new gas stations under the purview of this proposal, Staff stated drive-up uses are separate and distinct from automobile fuel sales. • What if a fast food restaurant bought one of the downtown area buildings with an existing drive-up? 30 i t Staff stated they could do so under the existing code,but would have to go through a conditional use permit and site review. • Comment was made concerning the language stating the Transportation Commission had previously heard and commented on the application. This is a misstatement as they have heard,but have not deliberated on it. Suggestion was made to provide information to the Conservation Commission as it pertains to emissions and could affect their mission policy. Staff responded it is not an application for the Ashland Cooperative(Co-op)to expand parking;it is an application for an ordinance change. • Commissioners commented the ordinance change is driven with future parking in mind. Staff added it is a separate issue;if this application is approved it does not automatically approve the location of additional parking. Mr. Goldman explained it is a legislative amendment proposed by an applicant and described the process for application approval. • Will there always be four downtown drive-up uses? Staff stated four or less. Staff added at six months of non-use, the drive-up use can expire. • Questioned zoning of the Co-op and Umpqua Bank. Staff deferred question to the applicant. • What is the city policy on encouraging large scale surface parking in this type of zone? Staff explained parking requirements are based on the use, and to discourage large expansive lots the city has a cap of 10%of the square footage of a building which cannot be exceeded. Commissioner Hammond left the meeting at 6:54 p.m. Applicant's Presentation Mark Knox,Urban Development Services,Applicant's Representative addressed the commission. He stated in general the goal is not to increase the number of drive-ups uses,but to look at a variety of comprehensive plan policies. The goal would be to identify a system and Include language that would allow and encourage redeveloping of the existing drive-up properties. He encouraged questions and feedback from the Transportation Commission. Richard Katz,General Manager of Ashland Food Cooperative addressed the Commission. Mr. Katz stated the Co-op moved to the location 20 years ago and described it as a mostly residential area at that time.The business has tripled in the last 10 years causing the need to expand and accommodate parking issues to meet the needs of the Co-op's patrons. He added half of the citizens of Ashland are not only shoppers,but are owners of the Co-op. He acknowledged the concern of emissions that are caused by patrons idling and driving around looking for a place to park. He shared his vision of how the Co-op would utilize the Umpqua Bank property if they were able to occupy the space. Questions of Applicant • Is the goal for redevelopment of the existing drive-up businesses driven by the need, aesthetically,to conform architecturally to the character of downtown, i.e.redeveloping as banks,but with a different look? Applicant stated the goal was to accomplish all the existing codes in place,including discouragement of auto-centric uses. • Would a change to the ordinance affect existing drive-up businesses retroactively or only 9 redeveloped? Applicant and staff stated only if redeveloped. Rebuttal by the Applicant Mark Knox/Clarified and emphasized the conclusions and recommendations of the Planning Commission as illustrated on page 8 and 9 of the packet provided. Deliberations and Declsion Chair Young felt it was onerous for the commission to make thoughtful suggestions or decisions without the benefit of the Planning Commission's ideas prior to the meeting. Commissioner Swales stated the purview of the Transportation Commission was to focus on the transportation system plan and the multi-modal future and 31 encouraged the Co-op and Planning Commission to look at creative options that would support the mission. Chair Young asked the commissioners to express their decision on the ordinance change as being net negative, net neutral or net positive. Commission Swales,negative; Commissioner Ryan,negative;Commissioner Gardiner, neutral; Commissioner Vlavllle,in between neutral and negative; and Chair Young, neutral,slightly positive. SOU Student Liaison, Honors Depew commented on the vague language of the amendments to the ordinance which could potentially provide loopholes and cause potential abuse. Chair Young summarized the majority of the Commission as leaning negative to neutral. He added Mr. Depew's comment was neutral, although he is not a voting member but wanted to acknowledge his comment. Mr. Goldman stated the events of the meeting will be forwarded to the Planning Commission and added if the commissioners had any further comments specifically related to the suggested criteria for approval,they should submit them prior to June 12,2012. Prior to the conclusion of the meeting Commissioner Vievllle withdrew her neutral negative position and changed it to an abstention as she had not read the packet due to technical difficulties with her document reader and the City's pdf format. 32 i l ASHLAND TREE COMMISSION PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW COMMENT SHEET JUNE 7, 2012 PLANNING ACTION: PA-2012-00575 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 1155 East Main Street APPLICANT: City of Ashland/Ashland Police Department DESCRIPTION: A request for Site Review approval to constrict a 3,016 square foot addition and associated site improvements for the Ashland Police Department_ located-at 1155 East Main Street. This addition is the first phase of a multi-phase project over the next five years; subsequent phases will include a 1,975 square foot addition, additional parking, and site improvements to bring the site more in line with current standards. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Employment; ZONING: E-1; ASSESSOR'S MAP #: 39 IE 10; TAX LOT#: 900 Recommendation: . 1) The Commission recommended that tree#50 be preserved 2) The Commission also recommended that a two more trees be planted in the western planting strip abutting the residential zone to the west. I Department of Community Development Tel:541A88-5350 CITY OF 51 nhum Way Fax:541-552-2050 ASHLAND Ashland,Oregon 97520 TTY: 800.735-2900 ' www.ashland.orus 33 RECEIVED June 9, 2012 JUN 11 1011 Dear Ashland Tidings/Mail Tribune: As a loyal Ashland Food Co-op member and shopper, I am very disturbed that the Co-op is spending so much time, effort,and money trying to change the local drive-thru banking law. First, I would have thought that online banking is fast making drive-thru banking obsolete. Second,contrary to the Co-op's constant talk of sustainability, an auto-centric approach to life is clearly NOT sustainable. Instead of supporting more cars, more driving, and more pollution-- especially in the historic downtown area--the Co-op should be encouraging sustainable ways of getting around. I usually bike to the Co-op, but when I drive there, I never have to park more than a block away. For health-conscious Ashland,walking one block should not be a problem,and in fact,might be a very good idea. For those who can't walk, handicapped parking is available right outside the Co-op's door. Third,the cost of building underground anything, let alone bank drive-thins, would seem to be prohibitive, as well as ridiculous for a town the size of Ashland. I would like to see my Co-op drop its fixation on parking and place that energy on the more appropriate areas of good,healthy food; sustainable,healthy agricultural practices; sustainable modes of transportation; and community-building. Julia Sommer Ashland cc: Ashland Food Co-op, Ashland Planning Commission 34 April Lucas From: Colin Swales[colinswales @gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2012 9:48 AM To: April Lucas Subject: Co-Op Ordinance Change. April, I saw in the PC's packet a copy of the recent Tidings article by Vickie Aldous Co-op seeks loosening of drive4hru [sic] rules Store hopes to buy neighboring land, but under 1984 city law, bank's drive- thru access could be lost if it moves elsewhere in the downtown"c Since then there has been even more newspaper coverage (and comments) - including 2 letters just today. Could you please make a hard copy for all commissioners - as not all get email - and also add the following to the "Record" for this planing action? thanks Colin Tidings Editorial Posted: 2:00 AM June 08, 2012 The Ashland Food Co-op's proposal to change the city's no-new-drive-thrus ordinance to free up parking strikes us — and others — as counterintuitive for a business associated with buzzwords such as "green," "sustainable" and "locavore." The city should proceed with extreme caution. The ordinance in question dates back to 1984. It limited the total number of drive-thrus citywide to 12, and banned them from downtown entirely except for four existing drive= thrus that were grandfathered in. City leaders expected and hoped that the downtown drive-thrus eventually would go away, never to return. That hasn't happened. All four are operated by banks — US Bank, Chase, Wells Fargo and Umpqua. . Enter the Co-op, which gets frequent complaints from customers about insufficient parking at busy times of the day. Co-op management would like to cut a deal to buy the Umpqua Bank property next door, allowing the Co-op to expand its parking. 1 35 But the drive-thru ordinance wouldn't allow Umpqua to move to another downtown location and keep its drive-thru. So the Co-op wants the city to amend the ordinance. The proposal would allow the four grandfathered drive-thrus to relocate, as long as they were moved underground or screened from view from nearby streets. The proposal also would let the banks remodel their buildings without going through a complicated planning process Co-op General Manager Richard Katz says that could make the buildings more attractive and historically compatible with the rest of the downtown district. That sounds good. But if the city's intent is still to see the drive-thrus eventually disappear, easing remodeling rules and letting them relocate will only ensure they will never leave. A bank that pays to put its drive-thru underground isn't likely to abandon it anytime soon. The drive-thru issue aside, it is worth asking if the Co-op is adhering to its own principles in addressing the problem of an overcrowded parking lot, or if it is taking the path of least resistance rather than looking for creative solutions. The Co-op website indicates the business has adopted an approach called The Natural Step, featuring "The Four Principles of Sustainability." The first of those is to "eliminate our contribution to the progressive buildup of substances extracted from the Earth's crust (for example, heavy metals and fossil fuels)." If the Co-op's No. 1 sustainability goal is to reduce the use of fossil fuels, expanding the parking lot would seem to be exactly the wrong way to go about it. Comment: Rafferty This is great! This letter brings up some very valid points. Does anyone think the "drive anywhere you go" SUV-toting, retiree transplants care much about environmental stewardship? Many are in denial, but these folks are quickly becoming the majority in this town, so the extended parking lots will be in our future along with other regressive changes. Though they think they're fighting the power just by shopping at the co-op, philosophically they aren't much different from other quasi conservative exiled suburbanites. Does anyone think that law from the 1980s anticipating growing auto-centric development could be passed by the city council today? I seriously doubt it. For those willing to walk a block or two, there's always parking in the neighborhood. juliamsommer I agree whole-heartedly. Well done! Posted: 2:00 AM June 06, 2012 Some perspective on drive-through 3s The genesis of Ashland's drive-through-window ordinance wasn't pollution (as reported), it was about community engagement: The more we get out of our cars, the more we interact, window shop and potentially buy from local businesses. Further, restrictions help keep fast-food chains out of the downtown, so beware of what you wish for. Important to the discussion is that the A Street neighborhood was taking off long before the Co-op moved in. Further, its previous location, near US Bank, enjoyed more revenue per square foot than any co-op in America (according to Co-op Banks of America), so how could they possibly be surprised at current business volume? Besides, parking isn't the problem; layout of the parking lot is (as noted during the planning process). The deal is, the Co-op board eschewed the empty Cantwell's Market location and the bank sweetened the package to win them over. Decisions were made: live with it. Besides, there's plenty of parking nearby in underused lots where the Co-op should purchase use of existing space. Patrons can also help by bundling their errands or walking to do their shopping. And the Co-op could encourage off-hour shopping by offering 10 percent discounts between 5 and 8 p.m. when the bank is closed. Catherine M. Shaw Posted: 2:00 AM June 06, 2012 Money will change drive-through rule I'm confident the Ashland Food Co-op will have no difficulty working with the city of Ashland and Umpqua Bank to develop more parking spaces for the many SUVs currently occupying the Co-op's small, crowded parking lot (Tidings, June 1). Big money talks. The city will approve a drive-thru window in the downtown area for Umpqua Bank — and all will be well here in DeBoerville. I suggest that both parking lots be painted green — in keeping with the local progressive attitude toward sustainability. In this way, Ashland's reusable-cloth-bag liberals can brag about the greenness of their Co-op. It makes perfect sense. Robert Simms Ashland Posted: 2:00 AM June 07, 2012 3 37 Food Co-op should promote ride-share I am responding to "Ashland Co-op proposes change to drive-through law" by Vickie Aldous. As a member/owner of the Ashland Food Co-op, I would like to see the Co-op put as much effort into promoting a ride-share among its members and Rogue Valley Transportation District use as it does toward trying to secure the use of more parking spots. Allowing Umpqua Bank to transfer the location of its drive-through window seems reasonable and . fair, but is only a short-term fix. As the Co-op continues to grow in operation, it will continue to perpetuate an ever-increasing need for more parking space. Just as it responded to the values of its membership when it ceased single-serving water bottle sales, I believe that the Co-op should lead the way toward reduced dependence upon cars. Cynthia Parkhill Middletown, Calif. Posted: 2:00 AM June 12, 2012 Drive-thrus serve important purpose In 1984 when the issue of drive-up windows was debated in Ashland, the average age of Americans was less than today, and most of the decision makers in the drive-up window deliberations still had many more years of vigorous activity. It was a credit to the community that the issue was debated, but with the passing years and the aging of Ashland's population and with the accompanying disabilities associated with age, the reality is that some drive-up windows, particularly for essential services such as banking, have a valid place. Sometimes it is too painful, difficult, risky (such as in icy conditions), or inconvenient for people to park and walk into a bank or other business. And sometimes, with kids in the car, it is difficult for parents to shepherd active kids or carry a sleeping child into a restaurant to buy food. The issue then becomes how many drive-up windows do we want, and once installed, do businesses get.to move the windows? The ordinance limiting the amount of drive-up windows has served Ashland well. Perhaps there should be a tax on the sale or exchange of them or the issuing of them to pay for non-automobile transportation improvements. And since it seems we should keep some drive-up windows, we probably ought to allow them to be moved. Brent Thompson I $s Ashland *************************** Co-op should drop fixation on parking As a loyal Ashland Food Co-op member and shopper, I am very disturbed that the Co- op is spending so much time, effort and money trying to change the local drive-thru banking law. First, I would have thought that online banking is fast making drive-thru banking obsolete. Second, contrary to the Co-op's constant talk of sustainability, an auto-centric approach to life is clearly not sustainable. Instead of supporting more cars, more driving, and more pollution — especially in the historic downtown area — the Co-op should be encouraging sustainable ways of getting around. I usually bike to the Co-op, but when I drive there, I never have to park more than a block away. For health-conscious Ashland, walking one block should not be a problem, and in fact, might be a very good idea. For those who can't walk, handicapped parking is available right outside the Co=op's door. Third, the cost of building underground anything, let alone bank drive-thrus, would seem to be prohibitive, as well as ridiculous for a town the size of Ashland. I would like to see my Co-op drop its fixation on parking and place that energy on the more appropriate areas of good, healthy food; sustainable, healthy agricultural practices; sustainable modes of transportation; and community-building. Julia Sommer Ashland s 39 Deliberations and Decision Commissioner Mindlin stated she does not want to turn down the application, but is not confident that the applicants have met the exception criteria.Commissioner Dawkins stated this development will be a step in the right direction in the overall development of the shopping center, however he encouraged the property owners to provide a way for nearby residential patrons to cross over to this property. He added the subject lot size is only 3/10 of an acre short of qualifying for the shadow plan option and does not want to halt the redevelopment of this area.Commissioner Mindlin stated she could be supportive of this application if: 1) references to the shadow plan are removed from the findings and instead they acknowledge that they are granting the applicants a lower FAR;and,2)they modify Condition#8 to state:"That future land use applications shall address the Floor Area Ratio standard and circulation plan...".Support was voiced for the modifications proposed by Mindlin. Commissioner Marsh commented that this application illustrates the importance to dealing with this area in a comprehensive manner and noted her desire to work and collaborate with the property owners. She also voiced her opinion that exception criteria'B'applies to this project and stated this is the first step towards a larger redevelopment project that will move this shopping center towards the desired FAR. Staff requested clarification about the circulation plan component. Commissioner Mindlin stated she does not feel compelled to make this more specific and believes the applicants understand what the Planning Commission is looking for. Ms. Gunter indicated Condition#8 would be revised as indicated and would also specify the map and tax lot numbers as previously discussed. Commissioners Dawkins/Mindlin m/s to approve PA-2012.00016 with conditions as stated during discussion. DISCUSSION: Ms.Gunter clarified the condition modifications include the revision to Condition#8 as discussed and the addition of Condition#10 regarding the landscaping and irrigation plan. Roll Call Vote:Commissioners Mindlin,Dawkins, Heesacker, Kaplan,Brown and Marsh,YES.Motion passed 6.0. B. PLANNING ACTION:#2012.00265 APPLICANT: Ashland Food Cooperative LOCATION(S): C-1-&C-1-D-zoned portions of Ashland's"Historic Interest Area" REQUEST: A proposal to amend the Ashland Municipal Code(AMC 18.32.035.E)as it relates to drive-up uses In Commercial districts.Drive-up uses are currently a special permitted use in the C-1 zoning district,but only in the area east of a line drawn perpendicular to Ashland Street at the Intersection of Ashland Street and Siskiyou Boulevard. Drive-up uses are currently explicitly prohibited in the Historic Interest Area as defined in the Comprehensive Plan.The proposed legislative amendment is to provide exception language which would apply only to existing drive-up uses within the Historic Interest Area and would allow them to relocate to a new site elsewhere within the Historic Interest Area provided that they are located predominantly underground or otherwise screened from view from the public right-of-way. Staff Report Associate Planner Derek Severson explained the request before the Commission is a proposal to modify the regulations in the C-1 and C-1-D districts relative to drive-up uses in the Historic Interest Area. Mr. Severson reviewed the existing regulations and stated drive-up uses are currently prohibited in the Historic Interest Area. He explained this proposal would modify Section 18.32.025.E to read: "Drive-up uses are prohibited in Ashland's Historic Interest Area as defined in the Comprehensive Plan;except that drive up uses already existing and located within Ashland's Historic Interest Area may be relocated to another property or site within Ashland's Historic Interest Area subject to the following additional requirement. a. Existing drive-up uses within Ashland's Historic Interest Area seeking to relocated to another site or property within Ashland Historic Interest Area must be either underground drive-up uses or drive-up uses that are Predominately screened,as defined in Section 18.08.805. Mr. Severson stated the applicants are also proposing to define underground drive-up uses as: 'Underground Drive-up Uses are located within the underground portion of a building where a majority of the drive-up facilities,such as the teller window orATM Ashland Planning Commission May 8, 2012 Page 3 of 6 40 kiosk, are either located underground or are predominately screened and have limited visibility from the adjacent public right-of- way. Underground drive-Up Uses within the Ashland Historic Interest Area shall be subject to Type 11 review." Mr.Severson explained the Ashland Historic Interest Area consists of the four historic districts in town(Skidmore Academy, Downtown, Railroad,SiskiyoulHargadine),and the four drive-up uses that would be impacted by this proposal are Umpqua Bank(250 N Pioneer),Wells Fargo Bank(67 E Main), U.S. Bank(30 N Second),and Chase Bank(243 E Main). Mr. Severson reviewed the policies and standards that have been adopted that discourage drive-up use and asked whether the Planning Commission would support a change in policy as a means to encourage relocation and redevelopment of these four uses;and if so,does the Commission support the request as submitted or wish to impose additional performance standards as outlined in the staff report and supported by the Historic Commission. Questions of Staff The following comments and questions were issued to staff: • Comment was made questioning why they would want to force the drive-ups underground,since underground entries can be more disruptive than a driveway leading to a window. • Umpqua Bank currently has three drive-up stalls, if they were to relocate would the city limit the number of stalls?Mr. Severson clarified at the time of transfer the new location would be only be granted one stall. • What is the difference between a conditional use permit and the process for obtaining a special permitted use?Mr. Severson clarified the conditional use process provides more discretion and allows the Commission to compare the propose use with the target use of the zone. • What is the difference between a Type II and Type III Planning Action?Mr.Severson clarified the City Council makes the final decision on Type III actions. • Comment was made expressing concern with limiting the number of drive-up uses in town;with the recent talk of the gentrification of Ashland's residents,there may be a need for drive-up pharmacies in the downtown. Applicant's Presentation Mark Knox,Applicant's Representative and Richard Katz,General Manager of Ashland Food Cooperative addressed the Commission. Mr.Knox stated they have been working on this proposal for over a year and have had lots of dialogue with City staff. He stated this is a straightforward,good idea and the two main objectives are to encourage redevelopment of the existing drive-up sites in the Historic Interest Area and allow some flexibility to relocate a drive-up use. He added they are not suggesting an increase in the number of allowed drive-up uses,but rather the ability to improve the sites that are already there. Mr. Knox stated this amendment would be a tune-up of an ordinance that has been working well, but has created a lockdown on these four sites.He spoke against the conditional use permit process and stated this process is too subjective and as a result the owners of these properties are not willing to attempt it.He commented on the City's desire to be pedestrian friendly and believes this proposal will allow these four sites to be improved. Mr. Katz stated the Ashland Food Cooperative has been in Ashland for 40 years,they employ 160 people,sold$27 million in products this year, and are one of the larger employers in Ashland. He added half of the citizens of Ashland are not only shoppers, but are owners of the Co-op.He explained most everyone agrees there is a parking issue at the store,and overall congestion in the railroad area. He stated there is almost a constant gridlock of cars idling for parking spaces and it is not a good situation. Mr.Katz stated they have looked at many alternatives,and they believe if Umpqua Bank had the ability to relocate in the downtown,this would free up some needed space for the Co-op. He stated the bank has expressed interest in this idea, but they do not want to relocate outside of the downtown area. He stated this is an awkward position for the Co-op, but this is the only step they can take. He added the bank properties downtown are eyesores,and there is currently no initiative for them to do something different. He voiced his support for this proposal and believes this is a win-win situation. Ms.Knox noted the Q&A in the packet materials explain the intent and what they think will happen. He stated they believe they are on the right track with this amendment and would like the approval process to be less subjective and contain more tangible criteria. Public Testimony Colin Swalesl143 Eighth Street/Stated he has never seen a legislative amendment from a private party and it appears a private party is trying to change our planning laws for their benefit. Mr.Swales clarified he is a member of the Transportation Ashland Planning Commission May 8, 2012 Page 4 of 6 41 Commission but is speaking on his own behalf.Mr. Swales stated the Transportation Commission is required to comment on Type III Actions at the pre-application level, and he was looking forward to this application coming forward at a regular meeting. However when it did come before them, it was under Public Forum and not as a discussion item.Mr. Swales requested the Planning Commission postpone this action until the Transportation Commission has had a chance to review this application. He questioned the need for bank drive-up lanes and stated the laws were adopted to cut down on auto-centric uses in the downtown core. He stated even if the Co-op was able to acquire the bank's parking,they are not allowed to exceed the required parking by more than 10%,and he is not sure how this amendment would help their situation. Rebuttal by the Applicant Mark Knox/Clarified citizens are permitted to request legislative changes and he believes this proposal will help solve the non- confirming issues of the downtown drive-up sites. He stated the current regulations have locked these banks in and it is short- sighted to think these sites will improve on their own.Mr. Knox voiced his support for additional public input, however does not want to delay this action from moving forward. He suggested the Planning Commission move forward with their deliberations and for the Transportation Commission to review this action before it is presented to the City Council. Questions of Staff Mr. Molnar confirmed there is a code provision that allows an applicant to exceed the parking requirement by 10%;however,the property could apply for a parking variance. He added most people would agree that parking is in high demand in that area. Commissioner Brown commented that underground and above grade parking has the tendency to create skateboard ramps, and there may be a need for a barrier at the sidewalk level when the bank is closed. He added he would not support underground drive-ups for a community this small and with such an established walking relationship. Mr. Molnar commented there is a clear history of policies that discourage drive-up uses,and it boils down to redevelopment vs. relocation. He stated redevelopment is possible, however the applicants must obtain a conditional use permit. He stated if the Commission believes this process is too onerous,they could choose a process like the applicants have recommended. He stated with the issue of relocation,right now that is prohibited. He added if the Commission believes that should be changed, what would be the appropriate approval process—Conditional Use Permit or Site Review? Commissioner Dawkins stated he is reluctant to send this on to Council and wishes this had been vetted more thoroughly through the Transportation Commission before it came before them. He stated an action of this magnitude warrants more public input and he does not support moving it on to Council as this point. Commissioner Brown questioned why the Transportation Commission would have a major impact on this issue,since the concerns are regarding the site itself and not the traffic. Commissioner Heesacker stated if nothing else,sending this back to the Transportation Commission will allow the public more time to review this and provide comment.Commissioner Marsh stated there appears to be general agreement that they want input from the Transportation Commission,but added they can still hold general discussion on this action and bring it back at their next meeting. Commissioner Mindlin stated the applicants have a goal for their store,and there is nothing wrong with that, and it would benefit the community to keep the Co-op downtown.She stated this proposal raises some important issues regarding the potential to redevelop those sites and create a better environment. Commissioner Kaplan stated anything they could do to foster redevelopment of those businesses would be a positive, and noted they would be keeping the same number of drive-ups. Commissioner Dawkins commented that they are not getting enough public input about what the negatives might be. He agreed that the redevelopment opportunities are good, but would like to hear more from the public. The Commission continued their general discussion of this action.Support was voiced for limiting relocated drive-ups to a single lane,and the question was raised regarding whether this proposal should be limited to financial institutions.Commissioner Heesacker stated his opinion that it should not be limited to banks;and suggestion was made to exclude food uses. The Commission also discussed and agreed these actions should require a public hearing before the Planning Commission, Mr.Molnar clarified staff would take this issue before the Transportation Commission and it would come back for deliberations and decision at the Commission's June meeting. Ashland Planning Commission May 8, 2012 Page 5 of 6 42 Commissioners Brown/Dawkins m/s to continue the public hearing to June 12,2012.Voice Vote:all AYES. Motion passed 6.0. OTHER BUSINESS Commissioner Dawkins recommended they hold all future annual retreats on the first Saturday in May,and stated he would bring this up at the next meeting when they select their officers. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted,April Lucas,Administrative Supervisor Ashland Planning Commission May 8, 2012 Page 6 of 6 43 r City of Ashland Planning Exhibit HISTORIC COMMISSION LDATe amiT:7D -01 Meeting of May 2, 2012 .5 ('-STAFF PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW PLANNING ACTION: 2012-0265 APPLICANT: Ashland Food Cooperative LOCATION: C-1- & C-1-D-zoned portions of the Historic Interest Area REQUEST: A proposal to amend the Ashland Municipal Code as it relates to drive-up uses in Commercial districts. Drive-up uses are currently a special permitted use in the C-1 zoning district, but only in the area east of a line drawn perpendicular to Ashland Street at the intersection of Ashland Street and Siskiyou Boulevard. Drive-up uses are currently explicitly prohibited in the Historic Interest Area as defined in the Comprehensive Plan. The proposal is to provide exception language which would apply only to existing drive-up uses within the Historic Interest Area and would allow them to relocate to a new`site elsewhere within the Historic Interest Area provided that they are located predominantly underground or otherwise screened from view from the public right-of-way. Recommendation to Planning Commission: The Historic Commission recommends supporting the proposed amendment with the addition of more detailed performance standards which would be considered as part of the Site Review process including the proposed language which allowed for relocation and redevelopment when compliant with the new standards. Department of Community Development Tel:5414885305 20 East Ore Fax:541552-2050 1W Ashland,.Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.orms 44 18/12 r7 ty of Ashland,Oregon-Municipal Code I I 2.13 Transportation Commission City of Ashland Planning Exhibit 2.13.010 Purpose and Mission ANT'r,4 PA L A. Role. The Transportation Commission advises the City Council on transportation related issues specifically as they relate to safety, planning, funding and advocacy for bicycles, transit, parking, pedestrian and all other modes of transportation. B. Mission. The need for a Transportation Commission is emphasized in the Transportation Element: "Ashland has a vision—to retain out small-town character even while we grow. To achieve this vision, we nnast proactively plan for a transportation system that is integrated into the community and enhances Ashland' s livability, character and natural environment. ...The focus must be on people being able to move easily through the city in all modes of travel. Modal equity then is more than just a phase. It is a planning concept that does not necessarily imply equal financial commitment or equal percentage use of each mode, but rather ensures that we will have the opportunity to conveniently and safely use the transportation mode of our choice, and allow us to move toward a less auto-dependent community." / (Ord 2975, 2008;Ord 3003;2010) 2.13.020 Established-Membership A. Voting Members. The Transportation Commission is established and shall consist of nine (9) voting members as designated by the Mayor and confirmed by the council. Voting members will all be members of the community at large and will represent a balance of interest in all modes of transportation. B. Non-voting Ex Officio Membership. The Director of Public Works or designee shall serve as the primary staff liaison and as Secretary of the Commission. Including the staff liaison, there will be twelve (12) total non-voting ex officio members who will participate as needed and will include one member of the Council as appointed by the Mayor, Community Development & Planning, Police, Fire, Southern Oregon University, Ashland Schools, Oregon Department of Transportation, Rogue Valley Transportation District, Ashland Parks and Recreation, Jackson County Roads, Airport Commission. (Ord 2975, 2008;Ord 3003;2010) 2.13.030 Powers and Duties - Generally The Transportation Com rnission will review and make recommendations on the following topics as it relates to all modes of Transp4o5rtation: shland.or.us/CodePdnl.asp?Branch=True&CodelD=3767 tl /8112 City of Ashland,Oregon-Municipal Code L Safety:wili,..velop, coordinate and promote transpi,..ation safety programs; 2. Planning: * Will review and serve as the primary body to develop recommendations to the City' s long range transportation plans. Will review and make recommendations in Type III Planning Actions /ruing the pre-application process. 3. Funding: will make recommendations to the City' s transportation section of the Capital Improvements Program; 4. Advocacy: will advocate and promote all modes of transportation to make modal equity a reality. * Facilitate coordination of transportation issues with other governmental entities. * Select one or more member liaisons to attend and participate in meetings with other transportation related committees in the Rogue Valley. * Examine multi-modal transportation issues. (Ord 2975, 2008;Ord 3003, 2010) 2.13.040 Powers and Duties - Specifically The Transportation Commission will review and forward all traffic implementation regulations to the Public Works Director for final approval and implementation of official traffic safety and functional activities. (Ord 2975, 2008; Ord 3003, 2010) 2.13.050 Traffic Sub-Committee A. Purpose. The purpose of the Traffic Sub-Committee is to enable the Transportation Commission to focus on broad transportation concerns by reducing the number of routine and general non-routine traffic items that come before the full Commission and to insure the Transportation Commission will have sufficient time to devote their full attention to the overall transportation matters at issue. B. Membership. The Traffic Sub-Committee is established and consists of three regular members of the Transportation Commission who shall sit 46 shland.or.us/CodePdnt.asp7Branch=True&CodelD=3767 2/ CITY OF -ASHLAND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Thursday, July 21, 2011 Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street Minutes Attendees:Tom Burnbam,Eric Heesacker,Shawn Kampmann,Steve Ryan(Chair),Julia Snootier,Colin Swales, David Young and Corinne Vieville Absent: Brent Thompson Council Liaison:David Chapman Staff Present: Mike Fought,Jim Olson,Betsy Harshman Ex Officio Members: Steve MacLennan I. CALL TO ORDER: Meeting was called to order at 6:03 p.m. by Chairperson Steve Ryan. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Commissioner Kampmann moved to approve the minutes of June 23,2011 as amended,the motion was seconded by Commissioner Young and it passed unanimously. In. ADJUSTMENTS TO THE AGENDA: Car Free Day,non action item A was moved to position E and the N.Main/Hersey/Wimer Intersection realignment item E was moved to the A spot. TV. PUBLIC FORUM: JR� Mark Knox,485 W Nevada Street,introduced an application in which Planning staff and the Historic Commission recommended he bring before the Transportation Commission. Richard Katz,manager of the Ashland Food Coop asked him to start a dialogue with the community about modifying land use planning to allow underground drive ups. Knox explained that current drive ups in the downtown historic district belong to corporations/banks.These drive ups have been grandfathered in as non-conforming use. If the City makes amendments to allow underground drive ups,the above ground spaces could be turned into vibrant streetscapes and hopefully encourage economic stimulation. Knox stated there are traffic and parking issues at the Coon. The Coop would like to purchase the Umpqua Bank site and relocate the bank to the old Copeland Lumber or the Northlight space. The bank would be removed and replaced with a neighborhood park. Customers of the Coop would use the existing Umpqua parking spaces. In the future,Knox will demonstrate to the commission what is underground,as well as addressing ventilation,stacking and other issues. ey a oo mg at how to penetrate underground and reduce the regulations to make the sites more user and pedestrian friendly. Commissioners were receptive to seeing the bigger picture and hearing more about the proposal at a later date. Faught told the commission that this would be considered through a Type III land use process,which staff would have to look at. Then it would have to be processed through the Transportation Commission which would in turn provide recommendations to the Council. V. ACTION ITEMS A. Parkinp_Prohibitions on E.Nevada St Olson explained that this item is part of an ongoing examination of some of the City's narrow streets. The Page 1 OF 47 Fire Department asked that the commission take a look at these narrow streets and would like to have parking prohibitions put in place where they need to be as soon as possible. Nevada Street from Bear Creek to Mountain Ave. is unusual in that it is n collector street although not developed as such. It was made a 24'wide Avenue that is normally required to be at least 32'and contain bike lanes under Ashland's street standards. At 24' it should not contain parking on each side. Staff recommends that parking is prohibited on the north side primarily because that side has only 3 accesses at this point and there is a very steep bank on the north side. Staff notified everyone on Nevada Street that.was abutting and have not received any feedback except one that was in favor. Motion and vote Young moved to approve staffs recommendation,Heesacker seconded and the motion was approved unanimously. B. Request for Stop Sign at Starflower and Larks)uur Joan and Allen Vogel From 462 Thintbleberry Lane requested a stop sign at the intersection of Larkspur. If a stop sign wasn't available,they suggested that a yield sign be considered. Olson stated that there is about 250 vehicles per day on Larkspur and about half of that on Starflower. The intersection is a 4-leg almost perpendicular intersection,but not quite. All of legs are at a different approach grade which promotes a vision problem when looking at approaching traffic. In some of those legs the elevation helps you,but in others, it does not. This intersection does not warrant a stop sign. The Municipal Uniform Traffic Control Device(MUTCD)handbook does not have volume restriction for a yield sign,although there is in the City's code. In special conditions,an engineering review has shown that a yield sign may help to decrease problems. Olson spent some time monitoring traffic at this intersection and did not see a problem;traffic seemed to flow pretty well and most cars were going through the intersection slowly. There was also discussion regarding a roundabout. Staff recommends that yield signs be installed at the intersection on Starflower at both sides of Larkspur. Motion and Vote Young moved that staffs recommendation be approved and Vieville seconded. Following a voice vote,the motion was approved 5 to 2. C. Budget and Expenses for FY12 Sommer asked that this item be placed on the September agenda for discussion and that new ideas be brought forth by commissioners and staff for monies proposed to be spent between September and June 30, 2012. Faught stated that next year staff will be processing a 2-year budget. Swales agreed that this item should be added to the September meeting and in the meantime,forward ideas to staff. Faught clarified that any of these items must be forwarded to staff and not sent between commission members. No motion was made. D. A Street Shared Road Discussion Burnham requested that shanows be installed on A Street from 8's to Oak Street in the same configuration as Oak Street. Per Burnham,this is a heavily used bike route and shanrows would be a great indicator that bikes arc on the street. Faught stated that in a past meeting the group made a motion to wait until the TSP is done,although there is probably enough data that has been collected if the commission wants to go ahead with it. Burnham said that in the September meeting the motion was passed. Burnham asked if he needed to make another motion. Burnam read fi•om a motion that he made back in October. He restated his motion. Burnham motioned to install sparrows and the accompanying signs on A Street from Oak to Eighth Street. Young seconded the motion. Yong was willing to wait,but he rides the route almost daily and said that it is a major connector for bikes. Young feels that the sparrows on Oak have made bicycling safer. His presence on a bicycle there Page 2 of R 48 48/12 ('11v of Ashland,Oregon-Agendas And Minutes search site GO -+ �sr }3 s' "Ag noen e !r G' • • JT a «, email updates for - City of Ashland,Oregon/Commissions a Committees/Transportation Convmission , Transportation Commission- Agenda Thursday,July 21, 2011 TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION Thursday,July 21,2011 Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street n �(/ I. CALL'1'O ORDER:6:00 PM 'TIC H. APPROVAL OF MINUTES:June 23,2011 111. ADJUSTMENTS TO THE AGENDA IV. PUBLIC FORUM . V. ACTION ITEMS ,1 A. Parking Prohibitions on E.Nevada St.(10 min.) B. Request for Slop Sign at Slarllower and Larkspur(15 min.) C. Budget and Expenses for FY12(15 min.) D. A Street Shared Road Discussion(Tom Burnham)(15 min) E. Draft Memorial Marker Policy(10 min.) VI. NON ACTION ITEMS A. Car Free Day Planning(10 min) e. Discussion regarding Kate Jackson's Road Diet comments(10 min) C. TSP Update(10 min) D. Traffic Crash Surmnary E. N.Mairs/Hersey/Wimer Intersection Re-Alignment(10 min.) VII. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS A. Action Stationary a. TC Budget Balance:$5,000.00 C. City Source Article D. Traffic Safety Connection VIE. FUTURE AGENDA TOPICS • Bike Parking and Bike Rack Design Policy • Future Railroad Crossings • A Street Shared Road Designation Discussion IX. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS X. ADJOURN:8:00 PM Next meeting Scheduled for August 18,2011 Q 6:00 pm A compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you aced special assistance to patlicipale In this nceering,please contact the Public Works Ofce at 488-5587(77Yphone nianbei 1800 735 2900). Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting mill paable the City to make reasonable orrangements to ensure accessibility to the shland.or.us/Agendas.asp7AMID=4575 4y 1/ i The comments of this pre-app are preliminary in nature and subject to change based upon the submittal of additional or different information. The Planning Commission or City Council are the final decision ma/ring authority of the City, and are not bound by the com meats made by the Staff as part of this pre-application. ASHLAND PLANNING DEPARTMENT SITE: C-I &C-1-D Districts PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE APPLICANT: U.D.S. REQUEST: Legislative Amendment July 61h,2011 Drive-Up Ordinance PLANNING STAFF COMMENTS This pre-application conference is intended to highlight significant issues of concern to staff and bring them to the applicant's attention prior to their preparing a formal application submittal. Generally: Staff believes that the existing drive-up regulations are seen as working well and helping to contribute to the unique nature of Ashland. Staff is uncertain that either the Planning Commission or Council would be willing to make this type of"big picture" adjustment which would likely open up broader discussions of the ordinance, and they may prefer to deal with proposals on a site by site basis through the Variance process. Staff believes that if the ordinance were to be amended, a member of issues would need to be considered: Streetscape Impacts: Is it appropriate that driveways exit from underground drive-up's onto arterial or collector streets? Across downtown sidewalks? How can impacts to the streetscape be adequately considered in terms of minimizing impacts to all users and modes (i.e. limit to sidestreet and alley access?) Drive-up uses are typically a significant generator of vehicle trips, and potential traffic impacts will need to be considered. Design Impacts/Ripple Effects on the Built Environment: Will underground drive- %C up uses alter the ground floor floor-levels of the buildings they house? How will this effect these buildings as they relate to each other and the pedestrian streetscape? How much additional site area would need to be dedicated to queuing, circulation, etc.? Ashland's Downtown Design Standards explicitly discourage auto-centric uses within • {( the downtown (VI-J.6), and generally speaking, the restriction on private parking in the l\ downtown, design standards, and prohibition on drive-up's in the historic interest area all work to give primacy to pedestrian friendly/human scale design over auto-centric use. In staff's view, changes to any of these standards would need to demonstrate that they could be carried out in such a way that the pedestrian friendly, human scale character of the historic interest area would not be compromised. Legislative Amendment-Drive-Up's July 61h,2011 Page 1 50 Basis for Limitation to Existing Financial Institutions: Is there a defensible basis for limiting these underground drive-up's solely.to existing financial institutions? What about restaurants,coffee shops, etc.? Logistics: How would ventilation and air quality be addressed? Would the sites likely to be utilized be adequately sized to accommodate the necessary driveway.grades, queuing, ventilation, etc. without impacting the building designs? Would these erequirements likely eliminate the opportunity to accommodate underground parking.on these sites — i.e. would underground drive-up uses support the installation of underground parking, or create a barrier to it for the properties likely to be involved? Are there examples of underground drive-up uses the applicants can cite which work well? Limited Visibility from the Right-of-Way: How is "limited visibility from the right of way" to be defined? As defined in the proposal, it would seem that an "underground drive-up use" could be installed in a daylight basement arrangement and not actually be, below grade at all, which would likely be a concern for Planning Commission and Council. Site Specific Alternative: As previously discussed, staff believe there may be viable options to re-develop the sites noted through the Variance and/or Conditional Use Permit processes based on site-specific considerations. OTHER DEPARTMENTS' COMMENTS BUILDING DEPT: Please contact the Building Division at 541-488-5305 for any questions relating to applicable building codes. ENGINEERING/STREETS/STORMWATER: Please contact Karl Johnson in the Engineering Division for any information relating to Public Works, Engineering or Utility requirements at 541-488-5347. ENERGY CONSERVATION: No comments. For any Conservation-related information, please e-mail Dan Cunningham in Conservation at: cunningd@tishland.or.us or call 541-552- 2063. FIRE DEPARTMENT: Please contact Division Chief and Fire Marshal Marguerilte Hickman of Ashland Fire at Rescue for any Fire Department-related information at 541-552-2229. WATER AND SEWER SERVICE: Please contact Terry Oldfield of the Water Quality Legislative Amendment—Drive-Up's July 6'°,2011 Page 2 51 Planning Commission Speaker Request Form I)Complete this form and return it to the Secretary prior to the discussion of the item you wish to speak about. 2) Speak to the Planning Commission from the table podium microphone. 3) State your name and address for the record. 4)Limit your comments to the amount of time given to you by the Chair,usually 5 minutes. 5)If you present written materials,please give a copy to the Secretary for the record. 6)You may give written comments to the Secretary for the record if you do not wish to speak. 7) Speakers are solely responsible for the content of their public statement. Name -(Please print) Address(no P.O.Box) r Rho e-1. 0 Tonight s Meeting Date i 2 Regular Meeting Agenda item number Vi OR Topic for public forum (non agenda item) Land Use Public Hearing For: Against: Challenge for Conflict of Interest or Bias If you are challenging a member(planning commissioner)with a conflict of interest or bias, please write your allegation complete with supporting facts on this form and deliver it to the clerk immediately. The Chair will address the written challenge with the member. Please be respectful of the proceeding and do not interrupt. You may also provide testimony about the challenge when you testify during the normal order of proceedings. Written Comments/Challenge: The Public Meeting Law requires that all city meetings are open to the public. Oregon !ma does not always require that the public be permitted to speak. 77re Ashland Planning Commission generally invites the public to speak ar agenda items and during public forum on non-agenda items unless lime constraints limit public testimony. No person has an absolute right to speak or participate in every phase of a proceeding. Please respect the order ofproceeclings for public hearings and sirictlyfollow the directions of the presiding officer. Behavior or actions which are unreasonably loud or disruptive are disrespectful, and may constitute disorderly conduct. Offenders will be requested to leave the room. Comments and statements by speakers do not represent the opinion of the City Council, City Officers or employees or the City of Ashland. 52 Note: Anyone wishing to speak at any Planning Commission meeting is encouraged to do so. If you wish to speak, please rise and,after you have been recognized by the Chair,give your name and complete address for the record. You will then be allowed to speak. Please note that the public testimony may be limited by the Chair and normally is not allowed after the Public Hearing is closed. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MAY 8, 2012 AGENDA I. CALL TO ORDER II. ANNOUNCEMENTS III. CONSENT AGENDA A. Approval of Minutes 1. April 10, 2012 Regular Meeting. IV. PUBLIC FORUM V. TYPE II PUBLIC HEARING A. PLANNING ACTION: #2012-00018 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 2220 Ashland Street APPLICANT: Summit Investments DESCRIPTION: A request for Site Review approval to construct a new 4,125 square foot, single story, retail building and associated site improvements for the property located at 2220 Ashland Street. The former Pizza Hut building is currently located on the site.•COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Commercial; ZONING: C-1; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 39 1 E 14BA; TAX LOT: 1700. [Continued from April 10, 2012 meeting. Public Hearing is closed.] VI. LEGISLATIVE AMENDMENT PUBLIC HEARING A. PLANNING ACTION: #2012-00265 APPLICANT: Ashland Food Cooperative LOCATION(S): C-1-&C-1-D-zoned portions of Ashland's"Historic Interest Area" REQUEST: A proposal to amend the Ashland Municipal Code (AMC 18.32.035.E) as it relates to drive-up uses in Commercial districts. Drive-up uses are currently a special permitted use in the C-1 zoning district, but only in the area east of a line drawn perpendicular to Ashland Street at the intersection of Ashland Street and Siskiyou Boulevard. Drive-up uses are currently explicitly prohibited in the Historic Interest Area as defined in the Comprehensive Plan, The proposed legislative amendment is to provide exception language which would apply only to existing drive-up uses within the Historic Interest Area and would allow them to relocate to a new site elsewhere within the Historic Interest Area provided that they are located predominantly underground or otherwise screened from view from the public right-of-way. VII. ADJOURNMENT CITY O F ASHLAND In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act,if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting,please contact the Community Development office at 541-488-5305(TTY phone is 1-800-735-2900). Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting(28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title 1). 53 Planning Department,51 Winbt ay,Ashland,Oregon 97520 1 CITY O F ,= 541-088-5305 Faz:541-552-2050 www.ashland.or.us TTY:1-800.735.2900 ASHLAND PLANNING ACTION: PL-2012-00265 SUBJECT PROPERTY: C-1 &C-1-D Portions of the Historic Interest Area (See map below) OWNERIAPPLICANT: Ashland Food Co-op DESCRIPTION: A proposed Legislative Amendment to amend the Ashland Municipal Code as it relates to drive-up uses in Commercial districts. Drive-up uses are currently allowed only as"special permitted uses" in the C-1 zoning districts, but only in the area east of a line drawn perpendicular to Ashland Street at the intersection of Ashland Street and Siskiyou Boulevard. Drive-up uses are currently explicitly prohibited in the Historic Interest Area as defined in the Comprehensive Plan. The proposal is to provide exception language which would apply only to existing drive-up uses within the Historic Interest Area and allow them to relocate to new sites elsewhere within the Historic Interest Area provided that they are located predominantly underground or otherwise screened from view from the public right-of-way. • The Ashland Planning Commission will review this Planning Action on May 8,2012 at 7:00 P.M. in the City Council Chambers at 1175 East Main Street. • The Ashland Historic Commission will also review this Planning Action on May 2,2012 at 6:00 P.M.in the Community Development and Engineering Services building's Siskiyou Room at 51 Winburn Way. ' 1 '-` PROPOSAL WOULD ALLOW c EXISTING DRIVE-UPS IN HISTORIC INTEREST AREA TO RELOCATE WITHIN HISTORIC INTEREST AREA .� WHERE CURRENTLY PROHIBITED, ( �' PROVIDED THEY WERE UNDER- �- �� , GROUND OR SCREENED -� v5. w CURRENT DRIVE-UPALLOWANCE �k = E LIMITED ZONING � EAST OF THIS IS LINE LINE tiT/ R (INTERSECTION OF ASHLANDISISIUYOU z�v 1 18.108.170 Leglslative Amendments Procedure A. It may be necessary from time to time to amend the text of the Land Use Ordinance or make other legislative amendments in order to conform with the comprehensive plan or to meet other changes in circumstances and conditions.A legislative amendment is a legislative act solely within the authority of the Council. B. A legislative amendment may be initiated by the Council, by the Commission, or by application of a property owner or resident of the City. The Commission shall conduct a public hearing on the proposed amendment at its earliest practicable meeting after it is submitted, end within thirty days after the hearing, recommend to the Council, approval, disapproval, or modification of the proposed amendment. C. An application for amendment by a property owner or resident shall be filed with the Planning Department thirty days prior to the Commission meeting at which the proposal is to be first considered. The application shall be accompanied by the required fee, D. Before taking final action on a proposed amendment,the Commission shall hold a public hearing.After receipt of the report on the amendment from the Commission, the Council shall hold a public hearing on the amendment. Notice of time and place of the public hearings and a brief description of the proposed amendment shall be given notice in a newspaper of general circulation in the City not less than ten days prior to the date of hearing. E. No application of a property owner or resident for a legislative amendment shall be considered by the Commission within the twelve month period immediately following a previous denial of such request, except the Commission may permit a new application if,in the opinion of the Commission,new evidence or a change of circumstances warrant it. 'G,omm-deOplaMing%cngRangelOrdinanuMom tm Ddw Up AmendmenACOVF.RSHEET FOR PACKET.dou ASHLAND PLANNING DIVISION STAFF REPORT May 8th, 2012 PLANNING ACTION: PL#2012-0265 APPLICANT: Ashland Food Cooperative LOCATION: C-1- & C-1-D-zoned portions of the Historic Interest Area (See Attached Exhibit S-1) ORDINANCE REFERENCE: 18.08 Definitions 18.32 Commercial (C-1) 18.72 Site Design Review 18.104 Conditional Uses REQUEST: A proposal to amend the Ashland Municipal Code as it relates to drive-up uses in Commercial districts. Drive-up uses are currently allowed only as"special permitted uses"in the C- 1 zoning district, but only in the area east of a line drawn perpendicular to Ashland Street at the intersection of Ashland Street and Siskiyou Boulevard. Drive-up uses are currently explicitly prohibited in the Historic Interest Area as defined in the Comprehensive Plan. The proposal is to provide exception language which would apply only to existing drive-up uses within the Historic Interest Area and allow them to relocate to new sites elsewhere within the Historic Interest Area provided that they are located predominantly underground or otherwise screened from view from the public right-of-way. I. Relevant Facts A. Background-History of the Prohibition on Drive-Up's in the Historic Interest Area The original Transportation Element of Ashland's Comprehensive Plan, adopted in 1982, included a policy discouraging the use of drive-up windows in order to limit both fuel consumption and air pollution associated with vehicle idling while waiting at drive-ups. In keeping with this policy,in 1984 the city adopted Ordinance 42313 which defined a drive-up use as "any establishment which by design, physical facilities, service or by packaging procedures encourages or permits customers to receive services, obtain goods, or be entertained while remaining in their motor vehicles,"set standards for the development of drive-up uses, required Conditional Use Permits for the approval of drive-up uses, and limited the total number of drive-up uses in the city to the 12 in place on July 1, 1984 plus one additional drive-up use for each additional 1,250 persons added to the state-certified population census for the city. As part of that ordinance, drive-up uses were prohibited in Ashland's Historic Interest Area as defined in the Comprehensive Plan(see attached Staff Exhibit S-1),which rendered those existing drive-up uses within the Historic Interest Area non-conforming. Planning Action PL#2012-00265 Ashland Planning Division—Staff Report Applicant: Ashland Food Co-Op Drive-Up's In Historic Interest Area Page 1 of 9 55 I I In 1992,the ordinance was amended to make drive-up's a Special Permitted Use rather than a Conditional Use,and to limit the number of drive-up uses allowed in the city to the 12 that were in place on July 1, 1984 with no allowance to increase this number with increased population. By ordinance, drive-up uses are allowed to be transferred between users and locations, subject to the requirements of the Ordinance, but the total number of approved drive-up uses allowed in the city remains at the 12 which were in place on July 1, 1984. The revised Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan adopted in 1996 no longer contains an explicit policy discouraging drive-up uses, since it was unnecessary due to the ordinance already in place limiting these uses. However,the current Transportation Element does contain the following policies which were noted in a 2001 ordinance interpretation as supporting the continued discouragement of drive-up uses: • X.II-1 "Promote decreased auto use and increased walking and bicycling,public transportation, ride sharing and other transportation demand management techniques." • X.II-6 "Encourage businesses to inform customers of available non-auto access to the business locations and to support customer use of non-auto access. " Overall, the city's Comprehensive Plan and implementing ordinances encourage the community to develop at a human scale with a balanced approach to transportation rather than taking a primarily auto-centric approach to development. The city's design standards encourage designs which limit the adverse impacts of the automobile on the built environment in large part by minimizing,carefully placing and screening parking areas and driveways while emphasizing a high standard of urban design and a strong relationship between buildings and the pedestrian streetscape. City standards and requirements place special emphasis on the Historic Interest Areas,and particularly the downtown. Ashland's Downtown Design Standards explicitly discourage auto-centric uses in the downtown(VI.J- 6), and the removal of off-street parking requirements in the downtown, design standards, and prohibition on drive-up's in the Historic Interest Area all work to create a pedestrian friendly environment with a continuous storefront streetscape at the sidewalk. B. Background—Existing Drive-Up Uses The 12 existing drive-up permit holders are as follows: 1. 250.300 N. Pioneer St./Umpqua Bank Historic Interest ArealZoned E-1 2. 67 E. Main St. Wells Faro Bank Historic Interest Area 3. 30 N. Second St./U.S. Bank Historic Interest Area 4. 243 E. Main St./Chase Bank Historic Interest Area 5. 2290 Ashland St./Taco Bell 6. 2235 Ashland St./Premier West Bank 7. 2280 Ashland St./Bi-Mart Pharmacy 8. 1652 Ashland St./Dutch Bros. 9. 1500 Siski ou Blvd./People's Bank 10. 1624 Ashland St./Wentl 's Planning Action PL#2012-00265 Ashland Planning Division—Staff Report Applicant: Ashland Food Co-Op Drive-Up's In Historic Interest Area Page 2 of 9 56 I , 11. 512 Walker Ave./Sterling Savings Bank 12, 1 Inactive (Was McDonalds', now reportedly Rogue Federal Credit Union) Of the 12 existing drive-up permits, all four of those in the Historic Interest Area are financial institutions. In reviewing the historic district survey descriptions of these properties, staff noted that several of the descriptions cite the buildings' relationships to the sidewalk or streetscape as a key factor in their compatibility with the historic character of the district. • Umpqua Bank at 250 North Pioneer Street is noted as originally being built in 1979 as Heritage Bank and later converted to Valley of the Rogue Bank. The site is simply described as being part of the property formerly associated with Twin Plunges,an early community recreational use. The building is noted as being non-historic/non- contributing. Staff would add here that the existing drive-up use in this location is non- conforming not only for its location in the Historic Interest Area but for the fact that its zoning is split between E-1 and R-2 zoning districts,neither of which permit drive-up uses. • Wells Fargo Bank at 67 East Main Street is described as originally housing the First National Bank. The survey description notes that the building is a flat-roofed structure that was built in 1962 and is considered "Non-Compatible/Non-Historic/Non- Contributing." The survey indicates that the site previously housed the Ashland Hotel,a late-1 91h century three-story brick building built in anticipation of the connection to the railroad. The Ashland Hotel occupied the full block and dominated downtown for more than 75 years, but was razed in 1961. Built with a flat roof,setback from the sidewalk, and designed in a modern, non-ornamental style with non-historic materials, the First National Bank of Oregon Building is not considered to be visually compatible with or complimentary to the historic character of Ashland's downtown. • US Bank at 30 North Second Street is designated the US National Bank Building. Built in 1956 and considered to be a fine example of the International Style,the building is described as a well-designed brick and glass structure,set backfrom Second Street by small courtyard, and utilizing typical modernistic materials in narrow brick,aluminum framed glass curtain wall glazing and polished granite to great effect. Essentially unaltered since its construction,the US Bank Building was built just outside the historic period of significance for the district and represents an early example of new stylistic forces that would shape Ashland's downtown during the late 1950s and 1960s. As such, it is considered compatible but is non-historic/non-contributing. • The survey description for Chase Bank at 243 East Main Street describes what was originally the Crater National Bank building as a modem,masonry structure built in 1971 that is considered to be"Non-Compatible/Non-Historic/Non-Contributing." The survey document notes that the site previously housed the Lithia Theater and a gas station,and that the current building is built of non-historic materials and set backon the site to allow for drive-through banking and is thus not consistent with the traditional character o the downtown. Planning Action PL#2012-00265 Ashland Planning Division-Staff Report Applicant: Ashland Food Co-op Drive-Urs In Historic Interest Area Page 3 of 9 57 � I C. Background •Detailed Description of the Proposed Amendment The application proposes an amendment to the existing Land Use Ordinance which prohibits drive-up uses in the Historic Interest Area. Ashland's Historic Interest Area consists of the four National Register of Historic Places-listed historic districts(see attached staff exhibits). With the amendment,exception language would be added to the ordinance to allow existing drive-up uses within the Historic Interest Area to relocate to a new site elsewhere within the C-1 or C-1-D zoned portions of the Historic Interest Area provided that they are located "predominantly underground or otherwise screened from view from the public right-of-way." The application explains that the amendment proposal is being made by Ashland Food Co-op as applicant,noting that both the Co-op and its neighbor Umpqua Bank are keenly aware of parking challenges at their sites.The Co-op would like to pursue the purchase of the adjacent bank property to expand their building and add parking,however the bank wishes to remain in the Historic Interest Area near the downtown and to keep a drive-up window for its customers. As currently regulated, the bank could not relocate elsehwhere in the Historic Interest Area without a Variance, and any modification to the existing drive-up use on the current site would be subject to a Conditional Use Permit for modification of an the existing non-conforming use. The applicants assert that the current prohibition on new drive-up uses in the Historic Interest Area combined with the non-conforming status of existing drive-up uses in that area,and the resultant requirement that these uses obtain discretionary approvals (i.e. Conditional Use Permits or Variances) for any modification of their non-conforming uses serve to prevent upgrades to or redevelopment of these sites,as the financial institutions holding the existing drive-up uses are inherently risk-averse and unwilling to move forward with costly projects when their outcomes are uncertain and subject to signficant levels of discretion. The application suggests that the changes proposed would facilitate more serious discussions between the Ashland Food Co-op and Umpqua Bank by removing one of the perceived barriers to the Co-op acquiring the bank's property to better address parking in their vicinity. More broadly, the application suggests that in removing the perceived barrier posed by discretionary approval requirements, the requested ordinance changes could facilitate the redevelopment of the sites of current drive-up uses in a manner more in keeping with city design standards while minimizing the impacts of the relocated drive-up uses to the Historic Interest Area. II. Project Impact A. Commission Review of Legistlative Amendments Procedurally speaking,AMC 18.108.170 allows for property owners or residents to submit proposed legislative amendments, and calls for the Planning Commission to hold a public hearing and following public testimony to make a report of its recommendations to the City Council. After receipt of the Planning Commission recommendations,the Council holds a Planning Action PL#2012-00265 Ashland Planning Division—Staff Report Applicant: Ashland Food Co-Op Drive-Up's in Historic Interest Area Page 4 of 9 58 i I public hearing in conjunction with the first reading of the ordinance amendment. A Council hearing date is tentatively set for July 17, 2012. As this report is being prepared, the Historic Commission has not formally reviewed and commented on the application but they are scheduled to do so on May 2aa, and any recommendations will be provided at the Planning Commission hearing. In considering the request at the pre-application level the Historic Commission noted concerns with the potential impacts of underground drive-ups and how those impacts would affect the built environment of the Historic Interest Area in terms of building orientation to the street,scale, proportion,openings and overall horizontal rhythms. The Commission discussed the'black- hole'effect of creating an entry into an underground drive-up next to the sidewalk or adjacent to the right-of-way. Additionally, the Commission expressed concern regarding the entrance/exit impacts to the sidewalks through the modification of typical traffic flows, vehicular queuing,and pedestrian safety and visibility. In commenting at the pre-application level,the Historic Commissioners felt each application would have unique issues and that a Conditional Use Permit would be the most appropriate way to review each application and its impacts on architectural compatibility,noise,and odor(i.e. air quality)and traffic. Historic Commissioners also felt that relocated drive-ups should be restricted to taking access from parking lots,alleys or side streets and should not be accessed from main arterial streets. The Historic Commission discussed how "underground" would be defined and whether that would mean fully underground or if the definition of basement would be used to allow a daylight basement drive-up use. Because the application is for a legislative amendment, the Transportation Commission is also empowered to review and comment at the pre-application level. The Transportation Commission considered the matter at their July 21, 2011 meeting. It was noted that Public Works staff would review at the time of application and bring any concerns back to the Commission. The details of the application have been sent to Public Works,and no concerns have been raised at this stage. No further comment from the Transportation Commission is anticipated,however staff would note that Public Works staff will be involved in the review of each application and raise site-specific issues as part of the Site Review process for any proposed relocation of a drive-up use should the amendment ultimately pass. B. Potential Impacts of Drive-Up Uses in the Historic Interest Area While the original regulation of drive-up uses was tied to issues of fuel consumption and air quality,their prohibition in the Historic Interest Area goes beyond these concerns to the more general discouragement of auto-centric uses in order to maintain the downtown's historic, pedestrian friendly character. Ashland's various standards seek to limit the adverse impacts of auto-centric design on the built environment in large part by minimizing,carefully placing and screening parking and circulation areas while emphasizing a high standard of urban design and a strong relationship between buildings and the pedestrian streetscape. These standards go even further in the downtown,explicitly discouraging auto-centric uses in the Downtown Design Standards (VI.J-6) while largely eliminating requirements to provide Planning Action PL#2012-00265 Ashland Planning Division—Staff Report Applicant: Ashland Food Co-Op Drive-Up's In Historic Interest Area Page 5ot9 59 required parking on site and prohibiting drive-up's to provide for a continuous storefront presence at the sidewalk that engages pedestrians and remains compatible with historic development patterns. Drive-up uses by their nature are designed to accommodate automobiles, and the concern with their placement in the Historic Interest Area is that auto-centric design can often occur to the detriment of the pedestrian environment, as noted by the Historic Commission in considering the pre-application. Specific concerns center on impacts to the built environment in terms of altering building relationships to the street,scale,proportion,rhythm of openings and horizontal rhythms, breaking up the continuous storefront presence to accommodate drive-up windows and associated vehicular circulation. In addition,placement of driveways with cars crossing the sidewalk,or queuing into the sidewalk,from an underground drive-up could,substantially alter the pedestrian streetscape and impact safety and visibility. C. Procedural Handling—Treatment of these Uses/Staff Recommendations For staff,the issue of discretion is a key consideration of the request. As recommended by the Historic Commission at the pre-application level,the relocation of the limited number of existing drive-up uses within the Historic Interest Area could be treated as a discretionary approval through the Conditional Use Permit process to assure all potential impacts, including architectural compatibility,of each use are considered in a manner appropriate to the individual circumstances of each application. However, the underlying basis of the requested amendment is in seeking to remove the perceived barrier of discretionary approvals to the relocation of the four drive-up uses now in the Historic Interest Area and thus encourage redevelopment of their existing sites in a manner more in keeping with current standards. In looking into the issue of the impact of drive-up uses on historic downtown areas, staff spoke to the Senior Historic Planner with the City of Salem which recently went through an ordinance amendment addressing drive-up uses in Salem's historic downtown. She noted having done research nationally into how drive-up uses were regulated,and found that while several cities have design standards that address visibility or queuing, or allow them only with Conditional Use Permits,the cities of Ashland and Salem had by far the most restrictive codes for drive-up uses. Prior to the recent amendments, drive-up uses were prohibited entirely in Salem's downtown;as amended they are now allowed provided they meet specific criteria subject to Historic Design, Site Design and Conditional Use Permit reviews. Their criteria include:that drive-up uses are allowed only for new construction of banks or credit unions;that all components of the drive-up(structure,kiosk,and drive aisle,etc.)be located on a secondary fagade and not visible from right-of-way other than an alley; that queuing lanes not be permitted between the building and the right-of-way other than an alley;that no more than two queuing lanes be allowed; and that if the subject property abuts an alley, access to and from the drive-through from the alley be encouraged. Salem's staff advised being careful to clearly define"screened from view"and what constitutes the"components of a drive-up use",as in their first application under the amended code there was considerable debate as to whether a driveway exiting onto public right-of-way was a component of the drive-up use, and this posed a quandary because if it were to be considered a component it Planning Action PL#2012-00265 Ashland Planning Division—Staff Report Applicant: Ashland Food Co-Op Drive-Up's In Historic Interest Area Page 6ot9 60 I I could not feasibly be screened from view from the right-of-way without obstructing access. While staff recognizes the applicants' concerns with discretionary approval standards,staff believes that the Commission and Council may ultimately wish to reserve a degree of discretion as a means to protect the Historic Interest Area from potential impacts associated with allowing drive-up uses to relocate. However, the applicants suggest that the discretionary nature of Conditional Use Permit approvals poses at least a perceived barrier to the redevelopment of the existing drive-up sites in the Historic Interest Area, which are limited to Umpqua Bank,Wells Fargo Bank, Chase Bank and US Bank,and that several of these sites have the potential for substantial redevelopment that under current standards could have substantial benefit to the.downtown streetscape. i � If the Comrnlss on is agreeable m principle with allowing these fourrdnve up uses to relocate,staff belleves Ghat the flrstgd6ition toaanswer is whether,Conditional'Use Permit approtyal�siiould be regwred If the,; Commission Is open tola`lowmg these relocations through Slte Review approval as requested,staff would reeommend that the fbllowmg utems be more clearly atld ressed mahe amended ordinance languageJ6) Wavoid adverse impacts sto the built en vironment and pedestrian sti eetscape -» aa ; .�618tdff believes there should be a clear definition fiirwhat constitutes pldcementd`predommantly 4'�undergrroundi'as well as aaclearstandard for acceptable screemng.i A requirement that the drive u'p be-Iocated In a;basement,as defiietl'1n AMC 18 OS 078tcould be included, and would allow for till+i N1- Y l�r£ l - rl i\1i e x�iplacement entirely dhd6rgrounddor within a daylight_basement' Staff belleves that,language to the*ir Yj effeet ttial relocated drlve upt uses may, e-pl ace d within abasement oron a`secondary elevation,that "" ,components)oftn6 use aresfv s ble from adlacen st eet�ghtstof wayeother than}a`Ileys would suffice" igemi, . ai 4p$� i Y Staff believes that the standards should make clearthat:driveways serving dri ve up uses in the; H Historic Interest Area may not enter from or exit to a higher,;ordsr street frontage or,through a=, �1�pirimary elewah in of the building,and that there Into be no placement of driveways or queuing ;lanes between the building and the right of wey;other,tthan an alley I s 1 o Staffbehevesthatnodemolitionsoforexteriorchangestobuildingswhicharecorjsideredto'be'r° t `t , rAtiT' historic resources shoultl be allowedto accommodate relocated drive up,uses ` v o Staff believes that there should be a requirement}t -atanyst uddiFsl oorsite elements associated ti :with the drive up use be removed within 60 daysyof discontin uation°f the drive up use L�� o Staff believes il4fthe amendment shouldjnaketit explicitly cWKthat_the`intenfion is inl,06 jj. ,allow the relocation�of existing drive up uses within the Historic,i'nterest Area, but would ndti4 allow drive up uses riot currently operating within the Historic lnte'rrestArea to be transferred In o, Finally;while there is a c"span the number of approvetl drive up uses and the existing codes�i provide for their transfer,there is no clear mechanism in the;cotles footer the registry ortransfer of a�hese uses Staff bellevesuthat the list of 12 approved uses providetl above should be attached uto the ordinance adopted,and a ministerial permit`requiretl forthe transfer or relocation of these uses when such transfer Is`not associated with Site Rewew applicationF III. Procedural - Required Burden of Proof 18.108.170 Legislative Amendments Planning Action PL#2012-00265 Ashland Planning Division—Staff Report Applicant: Ashland Food Co-Op Drive-Up's In Historic Interest Area Page 7 of 9 61 I j A. It may be necessary from time to time to amend the text of the Land Use Ordinance or make other legislative amendments in order to conform with the comprehensive plan or to meet other changes in circumstances and conditions.A legislative amendment is a legislative act solely within the authority of the Council. B. A legislative amendment may be initiated by the Council, by the Commission, or by application of a property owner or resident of the City. The Commission shall conduct a public hearing on the proposed amendment at its earliest practicable meeting after it is submitted, and within thirty days after the hearing, recommend to the Council,approval, disapproval, or modification of the proposed amendment. C. An application for amendment by a property owner or resident shall be filed with the Planning Department thirty days prior to the Commission meeting at which the proposal is to be first considered. The application shall be accompanied by the required fee, D. Before taking final action on a proposed amendment, the Commission shall hold a public hearing.After receipt of the report on the amendment from the Commission,the Council shall hold a public hearing on the amendment.Notice of time and place of the public hearings and a brief description of the proposed amendment shall be given notice in a newspaper of general circulation in the City not less than ten days prior to the date of hearing. E. No application of a property owner or resident for a legislative amendment shall be considered by the Commission within the twelve month period immediately following a previous denial of such request, except the Commission may permit a new application if, in the opinion of the Commission, new evidence or a change of circumstances warrant it. IV. Conclusions and Recommendations The amendment proposed would allow the relocation of any of the four existing drive-up uses in the C-1 or C-1-D portions of the Historic Interest Area,where new drive-up uses are currently prohibited, provided that the relocated drive-up use would be located predominantly underground or otherwise screened from view from the public right-of-way. The application notes that this change would facilitate discussions between the Ashland Food Co-op and Umpqua Bank about the Co-op purchasing the bank's building to expand the store and provide additional customer parking, while allowing the bank to relocate without the uncertainty of discretionary permit approvals. More broadly however, the application suggests that the current restriction also limits the likelihood of redevelopment of properties that currently have nonconforming drive-up uses in place as the discretionary nature of the required approvals is a strong deterrent to redevelopment for risk-averse financial institutions. As such,the proposed amendment would provide for these relocations through the Site Review process as a"Special Permitted Use",which has considerably less discretion. If the Commission is open to the idea of allowing the relocation of the four drive-up uses currently in the Historic Interest Area, the options include supporting the amendment as requested, supporting the amendment with the addition of a Conditional Use Permit requirement,or supporting the amendment with the addition of more detailed performance standards which would be considered as part of the Site Review process. While staff recognizes the potential benefit that could arise from the proposal in allowing the four existing drive-up uses in the Historic Interest Area to relocate and thereby opening the possibility for redevelopment of their current sites according to current standards,we believe Planning Action PL#2012-00265 Ashland Planning Division—Staff Report Applicant: Ashland Food Co-Op Drive-Up's in Historic Interest Area Page 8 of 9 62 that any lessening of the current prohibition needs to be carefully considered for the potential adverse impacts to the built environment and pedestrian-friendly,human-scale character of the National Register-listed Historic Interest Area. If the four drive-up uses are to be allowed to relocate without the discretionary consideration of a Conditional Use Permit as requested by the applicants, staff would recommend that the Commission make specific recommendations to Council that the ordinance amendment be modified as follows to minimize the adverse impacts that the current prohibition was enacted to avoid: • That the relocation of the four existing drive-up uses within the Historic Interest Area is to be allowed as a Special Permitted Use within the C-1 and C-1-13 zoned portions of the Historic Interest Area subject to Site Review approval. Existing drive-ups not currently in use in the Historic Interest Area would be unable to be transferred into the Historic Interest Area. • That relocated drive-up uses may only be placed in a basement or on a secondary building elevation, only accessed from an alley or driveway, and no components of the relocated drive-up use(i.e.structure,kiosk or queuing lane, but not the driveway)may be visible from adjacent streets other than an alley. • That driveways serving relocated drive-up uses may not enter from or exit to a higher order street frontage or through a primary elevation of the building,and that there is to be no placement of driveways or queuing lanes between a building and the right-of-way other than an alley. • That no demolition of or exterior change to buildings considered to be historic resources shall be allowed to accommodate relocated drive-up uses. • That the components of the relocated drive-up use shall be removed within 60 days of discontinuation of the use. • That a ministerial permit be required for the transfer of any drive-up use when such transfer is not associated with a Site Review application(i.e.the sale of an approved drive up use which is to be discontinued on its current site,but which is not immediately to be relocated to another site). Uses which are discontinued without a properly permitted transfer shall be deemed to have expired after being unused for 12 months. Planning Action PL#2012-00265 Ashland Planning Division—Staff Report Applicant: Ashland Food Co-Op Ddve-Uips in Historic Interest Area Page 9 of 9 63 URN -j z i �` �MI�il�� ,w� l .1.1111,_°,G�"Irn •,; MINI �•u.�,- m^.. � nll•• 1 ■■11,1 Ir.. ...1 • • .- 11.1111 -••••••�■1,■111 �_'.,. nntm au 1 =1' / •!!••n■:'lllllll'.ilnlllllli" ■nnn a■ / min. �uun■oi�11A ■ 1 a��■■11111 Ili � 111 P.11111111...:•. • '�1 .� .°I 'X111111 11 q11�• "annnl�.:•.MINI! , d11��uuii:munnm: nr+mnlore�rtr ■I'R'Y�J nnnm!mu mmmm■ � r —■..' nnliinT;tiiiii�1.�IftJ X11111"11111! IIp1 !•■•• sill �a'��wa'- 16n11111111111.�>'•s�� mumannnn�p� `rWIIF:Cl::. �u... miiiii�'• 11.11 a�.. .��♦ �� I ■ J�Zj�..•!.•■lo•am ■��-. F.. .■ � �♦♦ice. 1 I■�n..uy=a.;.R:-nm-pllll n` -11■IPUn■■11. /■: .L lk E:' �`_unn ,II■I Ir1i�i 1111..1 \I1■L■■■ • 1 PRI .,1.nu•' 1��111• ■:fi■111111;' owl■.'••�'■•�/ I n �Jr:1:r-.- 511 _ ._ ■. M ■ r-�. ■im�"mil aou ig •mil�1�'rr1:r:�F� _11■Ilu1 • .Lr,� ■ uurv. ul!IIIIIIIIlo 'I"n':r .��',' t , ■ ' .,.iP.: �`.�I�-IIn1�l9 ■.1 t■o�.■'111111■ „ 1 ► � RI�111-m _cclr.�llllc�l:mi:u'= _ �■ulu: •' �1°MIN •1 • • m . ,c n - 1 nnn�■■l: Pill N Ipy. i I 1.�- • 111 I n.._n. •!m■■• ■ C . • 1 i pm�l'll�/'nuu�1� �� r�lll.. i��l■r:.q�/.LG.•• _ t • • !'.r ■; _-;a III• .: cl a�..11@, Lam, /_ r�1' =n q..,=amauiinnr _nnnmm�nllmm�■u■lunwu.►�-- 1(a 'I ?bi ._��IIP_:7111_=I i�llmmnn:ItlMlln Clunn11u11■19��i11.■I�■1 / •hc 1//� .,� 7. ...q:�l.,n�;■Illlpp nn, . r o n. � � /►�Gy/ . .•uul:n/_I:i� '■I;n a. �:�ill_' r.� �.:::8 T r// ./1,l�Iln m 1111•• i:...a.� 1' , I■i =ll:,�m\ ��//;a lire � �8�:rii:��{�\711�1�-•i.°:{:�\ 1111'.7� II •I/. l/Itil� \� �� mr III:: 11111�)�=7 �i.� p�.r: Iii ■h. /I/;:- \� �•.]IUn° .in,,.!• "'� p 1 �, 111 __�.1._ •.. /. � .. ��iS ��i�mL',.�i:�-_'�`.�•i:.IIU�-�I� I� �I■'i9�'• \1 ,• '31/ 4l/t�..• S� �� •1 p•n• 1 ..111■v� ► I♦�� , 11`ri: � r3elT?n�- �%II``//y/ '///I�i\�'`��Ii•`J`��1■i::::.°:::♦G,■Ari■�f��I/I�•� 111.Y=1111 1 ( ' i. g 1l/1:. OY.��7 I�j■.dll■11 Illlr�IUq ��1 111111 JOE .$�� Iry /llY r / QQ ..i.J♦� I, ri 1.1•i♦ijj ' ////l li �� ♦ :n•u i�■o��o� ♦!i 1/� / r ..•..��s 1111 HIV �- • :4 In7L!!n 111111111•nu. '• 1i..J�\,i - N �I I/ `♦ 7!�' . ► ,1 i■116..1: unma�;,1-� ��. IIII■■I■► !wI Cdr- � .•E I�1119 r Imi�. �� • .n.Q bT ♦ .. •//\j /111■111 1 IL4•Il q1■■nnn: �� noon.�`•• � ��``\�h��1 < �i, � � •nii. �ii it� •.'iIc �/��D\��° '�:• i► ♦' � i�•�.��f��% Qs�Q.a.�i��ir�III�I//I/ V � r'"• .. amor 'i�:lii�i'�\� Iii•'s�,•i�`•�•I/P•�///1 t��•��11■�!1 ' � Mot •-•�� now ter', ■r ■Illlllill�li ��1 ��.1:■■11"-111:::x , 1■I` �Ib:Q:=•:...= �:�■ unlit 1 ■ o u ■ 1 Iql Mill ■ Cin�■■1■u. • ��'■= - = ,`'= Jr'• �� ` nun unit_ == ■■ 911111t�1111�ELI ■111■Ellin mull nl!IIIIInl1� ��i■-lii'■ � r�:�'au■II■I� ilii 1111• ' 1 � Eli willimmi-- ri��-�� f 111■111 iJl: �� ill m1�- �� ■' •;v!iiii: :_ / i Iin�� In X111 IAN III■ . III '�i�1111 'II- ,! L • 1 • / w ,=■ , 111 IIIII I 11 ■ .` �.� ■ 1•I �� ' inn nn ■111 r�.- �� ■i t` ?■III �•. 1111 1111111 p ,,, �. v we 41:s o as 0 ffi�91aB11 s91©oiVo 000ll� 0000000 n u -- X111■■ • o©© ;o opl/BI o°° �uanee0lo dip Qo 0 0- '*'■ _ ■■ o /� o o-11 p P =�11 ■■■ ■1111111 .��:■rte �� ao y4 oa© 0 4eamlo ooD aoo =+o❑o:u■■ ■11- ■■■■ m o pp� Q eea 0%0 0400 \11111 ' . -n: 4ppo �/l/Q/ ° pD °Oaloaoo oQOOOI�� ■\ ' .IIIII _■■ �� o ohpg Q o/0/p/oo°dllm000 ooug I, ' ■ ■■� 7 wlB/e ® l/o p ° D x101 r°44 .IIIII.i� X11 a ° m • _[ ov nn �. ��■ e0 nB/ ./,B/s o o of = o a f■o■■■I. Il�llpl � 1.=. .,.no . � o////° Q// a � o 0 0 � pQ °�nl� �■1711.11 o■1■Ili i��iil?fir■ o ..fir ��Q/18� � 5//%///° 4>%p°°oe°O oeOa c°l=r :1■11111111 �1 W �■1a11 � � a 4io m ///00°-, © o °°® ° 0 ❑ ri . ■ Il - ° ®//� R.a/�P �/In om°p°dine d Q�1■■ :i il:\�:i1 !i��llt�il/I�i ��'IJ ��!/�;/ /e/ ,®os:� nllo�� aU1001�11V1° ��II■_' .■■■■■1C.■ oo P o ■■ num- I� a o oo�G80❑� o il■ uun■■1 oo ❑ ❑ �LI■ ■■ ■■■ n..�ott►,'��ml� ` •p�p©oo//C7�0�•, a$00�4�ilf�?90 C':o ai!L■11 !1:■ I■,ii�ii ■■ �i.►�� 1�/�•m�Ir��`� �«{0//®0 Oo°�' o `�°/OpOQ�]= .�■�II�,�■■�.1�■' ■ ■■11■III1�/``�. I`. tyl® �/ ��a o a L .a°0��[1° \� I��r ax,j uo■v 1j��'v ma� �dm o�� C* ■mm!lu� ' IIIII.y+li��°=©©oQ�``eol6p� O�Qo�".��a�i�.,■ r I- • ..�• a as pp o �i �`�s, �aQ© 6 O " " �\�o4o°OO�� ©' � e°��® ■■III ,� `� ®�� ajo oo®©© 13 o ■800° IBO�11. oo L �a�o©��opQo�' r'�/1��-i��r K��. :�� {7 4._94 1 440 D RP P 4�ik? r •-�ril�OPE, - 1■■■■. III:all �1 ',.•��1�■�> J•y' 1'.11 I'�J■n/I��■ ii�� \�� , �� = ■■■■�■1111■��ii ��■■�■ ��J!■,�-- 1 - � i♦%� ��Il/III . � �/GIs•' � VIII � :� _� oil � Ir OM STAFF EXHIBIT S4—Current Regulations 18.32.025.E. C-1 District Special Permitted Uses Drive-up uses as defined and regulated as follows: 1. Drive-up uses may be approved in the C-1 District only, and only in the area east of a line drawn perpendicular to Ashland Street at the intersection of Ashland Street and Siskiyou Boulevard. 2. Drive-up uses are prohibited in Ashland's Historic Interest Area as defined in the Comprehensive Plan. 3. Drive-up uses are subject to the following criteria: a. The average waiting time in line for each vehicle shall not exceed five minutes. Failure to maintain this average waiting time may be grounds for revocation of the approval. b. All facilities providing drive-up service shall provide at least two designated parking_ spaces immediately beyond the service window or provide other satisfactory methods to allow customers requiring excessive waiting time to receive service while parked. C. A means of egress for vehicular customers who wish to leave the waiting line shall be provided. d. The grade of the stacking area to the drive-up shall either be flat or downhill to eliminate excessive fuel consumption and exhaust during the wait in line. e. The drive-up shall be designed to provide as much natural ventilation as possible to eliminate the buildup of exhaust gases. f. Sufficient stacking area shall be provided to ensure that public rights-of-way are not obstructed. g. The sound level of communications systems shall not exceed 55 decibels at the property line and shall otherwise comply with the Ashland Municipal Code regarding sound levels. h. The number of drive-up uses shall not exceed the 12 in existence on July 1, 1984. Drive-up uses may be transferred to another location in accord with all requirements of this section. The number of drive-up window stalls shall not exceed 1 per location;even if the transferred use had greater than one stall. 67 i Narrative & Findings of Fact MAR 2 2012 Land Use Application For A Zoning Ordinance Amendment Ashland Municipal Code - Chapter 18.32.025 E. "Drive-Up Uses" Submittal Date: March 2"d,2012 Co-Applicant: Urban Development Services,LLC Contact:Mark Knox 485 W.Nevada Street Ashland, OR 97520 541.821.3752 Co-Applicant: Ashland Food Cooperative Contact: Richard Katz 237N. First Street Ashland, OR 97520 Zoning Districts: C-1 and C-1-1) Related Codes: Ashland Municipal Code (AMC) 18.08, 18.32, 18.68 and 18.108 Description: A proposal to amend the Ashland Municipal Code, Chapter 18.32.025 E., as it relates to Drive-Up Uses in the Commercial District, specifically those areas as designated as Special Permitted Uses within Ashland's "Historic Interest Area" as defined in the Comprehensive Plan as well as the National Register of Historic Places adopted Downtown District. The proposal is to provide exception language for Drive-Up Uses when they . are predominately underground or screened from a public right-of- way. The exception language would only apply to existing drive- up uses within a Historic Interest Area. Attachments: Code Amendment Proposal, Sample Illustrations Zoning Ordinance Amendment Drive-Up Uses-Chapter 18.32.025 E. _,,.r U R BAN DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC 'I UNN YBF PWIMVY AOpfYEtpPMNI SRVMS 'y:,4 68 i History: Financial institutions with drive-up facilities (teller windows, auto lanes, audio speakers, etc.) in the historic core of Ashland were obviously developed during an automobile dominated era beginning in the late 1950's. During this period, a number of historic buildings were recycled into other businesses (First National Bank Building, Comer of East Main & Pioneer Streets - now owned by Oregon Shakespeare Festival and Citizen's Banking& Trust Company, comer of East Main & Second Streets —now various retail businesses) or demolished and new buildings with drive-up facilities constructed (Old Ashland Hotel—now Wells Fargo Bank, Lithia Theater Building— now Chase Bank and multiple historic residences off Pioneer Street —now Umpqua Bank). Note: This trend was not just limited to Ashland, but occurred across the Country where "sites" could easily accommodate drive-up facilities, but not necessarily the building. This time period, so called the "modem" architecture era, represented in most cases, dramatic changes to the character of a community's urban core. With a long-range planning perspective and will by the City Council, Planning Commission, Historic Commission and the City's Planning Department, in 1992, the Ashland City Council adopted a number of code changes in order to address various auto centric developments in an attempt to preserve historic buildings, limit surface parking lots and maintain the Downtown's pedestrian friendly "Main Street" environment, This included the adoption of the original Site Design & Use Standards Ordinance as well as code language prohibiting drive-up uses in the Downtown Historic Interest Area (Ord. 2688). In the process, existing drive-up facilities that remain today are considered "legal uses, but non-conforming" and subject to various land use entitlements if ever proposed to be modified. Proposal: The proposal is for a Type III amendment to the Ashland Municipal Code, Chapter 18.32.025 E., inserting exception language for Drive-Up Uses when they are predominately underground or screened from a public right-of-way and only for"existing" drive-up uses (Wells Fargo, Chase and Umpqua Bank) already within Ashland's "Historic Interest Area"as defined in the Comprehensive Plan. The goal of the amendment would be to "encourage"these more auto- centric sites within the Historic Interest Area to redevelop in compliance with the City's adopted Site Design & Use Standards which provide a more pedestrian and human-scale streetscape experience. Again, as the codes exist currently, drive-up uses within the Historic Interest Area are considered "legal non-conforming" and subject to various provisions and entitlements noted in Sections 18.68.090 A.I. (Nonconforming Uses and Structures) and 18.104 (Conditional Use Permits). Although the applicants wholeheartedly understand the purpose of the existing code language prohibiting drive-up uses in the Historic Interest Area - including code language that manages the redevelopment of those sites, it has become clear that such code language also discourages existing auto-centric sites from redeveloping as "main street" facades as envisioned in the adopted Site Design and Use Standards. In the applicant's opinion, the degree of justification, process and expense of an applicant to submit an application under the Conditional Use Permit criteria is just too subjective and onerous and thus discouraging to owners of those sites (i.e. corporations) to consider redevelopment which, with guidance from the Downtown Design Zoning Ordinance Amendment Drive-Up Uses-Chapter 18.32.025 E. gcw URBAN DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. LLC n/IHn HA I�'{�M( Ll [u IL 69 i Standards,would improve the street's presence, improve pedestrian mobility and experience, and improve the Downtown's overall character and economy. Benefiting Sites: The applicants contend the proposal has far reaching positive attributes for a number of properties within the City's urban core as well as other sensitive sites within the community that would benefit from redevelopment under the City's current Downtown Design Standards. These properties include: 67 Main Street - Wells Fargo Bank 243 Main Street—Chase Bank 175 Lithia Way—old Copeland Lumber/First Place Subdivision site 250 Pioneer Street—Umpqua Bank These properties often cause a pause for many long-time residents and visitors of Ashland who sadly identify with the fact that each property's current building or vacant condition likely superseded a historic building. Although it's clear in the applicants opinion the City has learned from this unforhmate experience and such transformation of historic properties are not likely to easily occur again, the prospect of providing code language to encourage re-development of those same sites guided by current City design standards is intriguing and exciting. Applicant's Purpose: The Ashland Food Cooperative desires to resolve its well known and long- time parking issue with its neighbor, Umpqua Bank(250 Pioneer Street). For many years the two businesses have attempted to work together to minimize the congestion, anxiety and often times frustration that occurs not only between their management, but also employees, customers and neighbors. As with most urban parking issues, it's a.slow methodical build-up with outside influences as well as the new neighboring developments such as the Ashland Hardware Store (previously storage yard), Oak Street Market (previously car wash and Cantwell's store), Oak Street Tank and Steel conversion(now Plexis' Offices) as well as the small,but still measureable impacts of newest businesses such as the new Cafe on Pioneer Street (Ruby's Neighborhood Restaurant) and the recently approved business located at 260 N. First Street (PA-2010-01611).. Regardless of signage, employees and customers of these new businesses, often park on the subject property which decreases available parking and increases the chances of drivers circulating the surrounding neighborhood. Nevertheless, the two parties are in agreement that an amicable solution is needed. Note: At the present time, there are no "agreements, contracts, plans, or otherwise" between the two entities, but both wish for a resolution to its shared parking conflicts that allow both businesses to continue to be a positive presence in the community. A number of meetings and phone conversations have occurred, but until this particular issue is addressed, there will not be any formal arrangements or agreements between the two parties. Instead, the Ashland Food Cooperative is first hoping the City agrees with the logic of the amendment and then hoping that Umpqua Bank would sell their site to the Ashland Food Cooperative and relocate to an area in the Downtown area that is more fitting to their business' long term interest. Zoning Ordinance Amendment Drive-Up Uses-Chapter 18.32.025 E. URBAN oEVEL4ef✓tENT SERVICES, LLC an6Nn�Q�ltvxveec 70 I That said, after a significant amount of thought and a number of meetings with City staff, the applicants have concluded the best solution would be to purchase the Umpqua Bank's property and at the same time identify alternative "areas" more fitting for the bank's needs, including its drive-thru facilities, which are equal or superior to the existing site. In the applicant's opinion, this opportunity best exists on the old Copeland Lumber site between Pioneer and First Streets (now vacant). Umpqua Bank has tentatively agreed with this location, but again a final decision is dependent on the outcome of the proposed ordinance amendment. If approved, Umpqua Bank would then likely identify a site, enter into a purchase agreement, generate concept plans and submit an application to the City for Planning Commission review and approval. Following the purchase of the current Umpqua Bank site and the relocation of the bank, customers of the Ashland Food Cooperative would then begin to use the parking.A small expansion to the store is also possible and discussed in passing, but yet to be finalized. Issues: As noted previously, the existing zoning codes prohibit drive-up uses in the Ashland Historic Interest Area and thus, an amendment to the code is desired. Further, existing drive-up uses in the Ashland Historic Interest Area are considered "non-conforming" and subject to a highly discretionary process called a Conditional Use Permit which, according to City staff, allows complete discretion by the Planning Commission. As such, the applicants desire to submit an application, supported by the City Council, Planning Commission, City staff and the Downtown merchants, that not only provides the opportunity to allow both the Ashland Food Cooperative and Umpqua Bank to "eventually" reach an agreement, but to also provide the mechanism for existing drive-up uses to redevelop under the Downtown's Site Design&Use Standards. Draft Code Amendment: Attached is an initial "draft" of proposed code language intended to provide direction and stimulate discussion with staff. Two sections of the Ashland Municipal Code are proposed to be amended, Section 18.32.025 E., to allow drive-up uses for "existing" drive-up uses in the Historic Interest Area and adding another section, 18.08.805, relating to the definition of"underground drive-up uses". The later includes illustrations (attached) on how the proposal could work,in a variety of scenarios — existing bank sites or vacant properties, in order to give the City staff, the Ashland Historic Commission, Planning Commission and City Council the opportunity to review the proposal in a tangible way. Criteria: In accordance with Chapter 18.108.170 C. (Legislative Amendments),the applicants are proposing an amendment to the Ashland Municipal Code, Chapter 18.32.025 E, as it relates to Drive-up uses in Ashland's Historic Interest Area, based on the policies of the Comprehensive Plan and the circumstances and conditions of the proposal itself and positive redevelopment opportunities in the Historic Interest Areas. The applicants are aware the decision is a legislative act solely within the authority of the Council and that no "specific" criteria exists for text amendments to the land use ordinance. MAR 2 2012 Zoning Ordinance Amendment C . Drive-Up Uses-Chapter 18.32.025 E. �U R BAN DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC pp LWOUSF PVHxwc NOOFVMP4QIn slxvrtu 71 Comprehensive Plan Policies: The applicants have attempted to identify the various Comprehensive Plan Policies that generally relate to the subject matter and overall feel strongly that the proposed amendment is consistent with the policies and will be a substantial benefit for the community. The City's Comprehensive Plan was adopted by the City Council in July of 1981 and although certain elements of the Plan have been updated, the policies noted herein still remain. As such, each pertinent policy is listed below in bold font followed by the applicant's response in regular front: Chanter I Historic sites and Structures I-1 The City recognizes that the preservation of historic sites and buildings provides both tangible evidence of our heritage and economic advantages. The applicants contend the"Main Street"environment in Downtown Ashland is a key factor in maintaining Ashland's heritage and helps stimulate the local economy.The proposal will hopefully encourage redevelopment of non-contributing sites into conforming sites and attractive human-scale buildings that are in context with this heritage and consistent with current Planning codes. I-7 The City shall develop and implement through law design guidelines for new development as well as for alteration of existing structures within the historic interest areas for structures and areas that are historically significant. The proposed application will encourage redevelopment of sites that are inherently auto-centric by design. Such redeveloped properties, incorporating current design standards,will create more contextually compatible main street building facades. I-9 The City shall develop and maintain guidelines for analyzing and resolving conflicting uses of its historic resources,and shall encourage traditional uses of historic resources. The adoption of the proposed Text Amendment to allow drive-up uses in the Downtown, under a narrow list of circumstances, is intended to encourage the redevelopment of conflicting uses (surface parking lots with surface drive-up windows) that will result in building facades and site designs that are consistent with Ashland's Downtown traditional uses and resources. Chanter VI Housing VI-1 Given the scarcity and cost of land as a limited resource, conserve land and reduce the impact of land prices on housing to the maximum extent possible. Various policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan encourage efficient use of lands, a variety of housing types, mixed-use housing, affordable housing, open spaces, quality design standards,historic preservation and an efficient transportation system which the proposed amendment will hopefully lead to and/or participate in. In this vein, redevelopment of under-utilized sites (i.e., auto centric sites) generally encourages land use efficiency which will hopefully lead to added businesses and residential housing. Further, redevelopment also leads to buildings that meet current building codes, handicap access codes, contemporary energy efficiency standards and air quality standards. Zoning Ordinance Amendment Drive-Up Uses-Chapter 18.32.025 E. U R B AN DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC ' . � wioUOrp�xlxoNOatvc�pla9AeuHCCs 72 i Nevertheless, it's clear there is a limited amount of land in Ashland's Downtown and such redevelopment activity will create a more interesting streetscape, exciting urban environment and lead to further compliance with Comprehensive Plan policies and goals. These include Chapter VI, Housing,Policy VI-1 and VI-2. Chanter VII Economic Element To ensure that the local economy increases in its health, and diversities in the number,type and size of businesses consistent with the local social needs, public service capabilities, and the retention of a high quality environment. The proposal is intended to encourage redevelopment of non-contextually compatible buildings that will in turn increase the health of Ashland's economy and diversify the number, type and size of businesses that are consistent with the local needs and will accomplish the task in a quality pattern as regulated by the Downtown Design Standards. In the applicant's opinion, the proposal attempts to address the intentions of the Comprehensive Plan's policies, but also understands that many changes have occurred in recent history with new building codes, advances in technology and consumer behavioral patterns, that the proposed code amendment is attempting to bridge. For example, large banks, such as Ashland's Umpqua Bank or Wells Fargo Bank, would not be built to their current size,but instead would be significantly smaller. In fact, it's well known that banks and grocery stores and similar anchor businesses have been partnering to provide shared services. VII-1 Policy—The City shall zone and designate within the Plan Map sufficient quantity of lands for commercial and industrial uses to provide for the employment needs of its residents and a portion of rural residents consistent with the population projection for the urban area. As previously mentioned, one of the goals of the proposed amendment is to provide the mechanism for efficient land planning on typically in-efficient "auto centric" sites. There is a limited supply of land within the Downtown area and generally the sites with drive-up facilities have the least amount of floor area to land ratio and thus are out of place in their"main street" neighbors. By providing the mechanisms in the municipal code to be efficient,we can continue to be cautious and limit expansion to outlying areas (i.e., sprawl). In reality, the proposed amendment is consistent with recent Council and Planning Commission decisions to participate in the Regional Problem Solving Process (RPS) where the City has committed to not expanding outward, but instead becoming more land efficient and code creative (Pedestrian Places Ordinance,Minimum Density Standards, etc.). VII-2 Policy—The City shall design the Land Use Ordinance to provide for: 1) New development or redevelopment in the Historic District will be compatible with the character of the district. The applicants contend the "Main Street"environment in Ashland's Historic Downtown is a key factor in what is Ashland.It's the heart of the community and careful and well-thought decisions are critical. The applicants strongly believe that the proposed amendment is well-thought out and in the long term,will be impacting and meaningful.Incompatible sites will be replaced with compatible Zoning Ordinance Amendment Drive-Up Uses-Chapter 18.32.025 E. Ou R BA N oEVEL'��p/M�r 'r SE2 Vi(J��S�`�/LLc W0U6f1MH 6NLOj,'Mi11FM6FpWES 73 I sites.Non-descript facades will be replaced with architecturally creative facades and most importantly, surface parking lots will be converted to buildings, landscaping and plaza space. .5) Commercial or employment zones where business and residential uses are mixed. This is especially appropriate as buffers between residential and employment or commercial areas, and in the Downtown. There is no doubt that businesses, lending institutions and buyers are accepting mixed-use housing as a viable option and that the `old" is back and desirable. Not only does mixed-use housing provide a variety of positive attributes (energy efficient, land efficient, built-in street surveillance, affordable housing, etc.) it also is very sustainable and environmentally conscious. As such, the proposed amendment simply attempts to "encourage"the right decision and minimize potential barriers. .7) Clear and objective standards for development reviews that provide for a quick and predictable approval process with a reduced amount of uncertainty. After many hours spent on the development of this application with the intent to try and produce code language that is more predictable, the reality is the system and process is still uncertain. In the eyes of the applicants, that's not necessarily a negative as land use planning is very complex and no one property, no single project and no one's personality is the same.Nevertheless, the proposal does remove a large barrier for those few property owners who would be immediately challenged by the "prohibitive" and "grand-fathered" code language and instead. should be encouraged by the "permitted with stipulations" code language. In the applicant's opinion, this is a very important distinction—a distinction that clearly reduces the amount of uncertainty. VII-5 The City shall encourage economic development of the local resources and enhance employment opportunities for existing residents. The City's policy is that economic development shall always have as its primary purpose the enhancement of the community's economic health. The proposal is intended to encourage redevelopment of non-contextually compatible buildings that will in turn increase the health of Ashland's economy and diversify the number, type and size of businesses found in the Downtown that cater to the local needs of the community and its many visitors. The result will not only be an enhancement to the community's economic health, but also its visual appearance which, in turn, is also an economic factor and a sense of pride for Ashlanders. . Chapter VIII Parks,Open Space&Aesthetics VIII-9 Require all new residential,commercial and industrial developments to be designed and landscaped to a high standard to complement the proposed site and the surrounding area. Unlike today's Planning standards, the subject properties with drive-up facilities generally have limited landscaping or architectural presence and were clearly built during the car culture era. Unfortunately, at that time, they did not have compatibility standards and buildings and landscapes were designed and built solely for a single purpose with little thought of one day converting to Zoning Ordinance Amendment Drive-Up Uses-Chapter 18.32.025 E. �AR 2 201 - U R BAN DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC 7fI Y another use - a basic sustainability factor. The proposed amendment, along with existing design standards and time, will likely reverse that pattern and generate buildings and landscapes that complement the surrounding Chanter IX Public Services IX-6 In conjunction with studies of housing, land use, downtown policies, etc., identify and implement innovative service techniques in anticipation of major trends, needs, and economic or environmental changes, rather than waiting to react when all options are closed. Although this policy directly relates to providing public services, it references innovative response to land use planning and describes the applicant's intent in which the proposed amendment is in response to trends, technology, consumer behavior, market conditions - and - simply out of necessity to provide an opportunity for redevelopment of the Co-op site. But, it also considers many other drive-up sites found in the Downtown that are underutilized, incompatible and somewhat neglected. Various community members,including a number of City staff, concur. Chanter X Transportation X-4 Access b) Direct access onto streets designated as arterials should be discouraged whenever an alternative exists or can be made available. Direct access onto streets designated as arterials are now discouraged through a variety of code provisions implemented through the Conditional Use Permit criteria and Site Design Standards as well as policies of the Transportation System Plan and the State of Oregon's (ODOT) Access Management Standards. Regardless, the applicants contend the existing drive-up facilities are currently out of compliance with this policy and the only practical resolution to resolve this issue is through redevelopment which the proposed amendment is designed to encourage. However, if the decision makers believe the ordinance should also specifically regulate access management issues within the code itself,the applicants contend it would be within their power and appropriate. X-6 Pedestrians and Bikeways d) Minimize conflicts between transportation types, especially when those conflicts create a particularly hazardous area. Conflicts between pedestrians and automobiles within the public rights-of-way should be improved dramatically as multiple curb-cuts (conflict points) would likely be eliminated with any redevelopment. Within the City's Municipal Code and Transportation System Plan there are numerous provisions requiring curb-cut consolidation whenever possible which also includes code language restricting access to secondary streets. The proposed amendment will not conflict with these regulations or policies. Zoning Ordinance Amendment Drive-Up ses-Cha ter 18.32.025 E. MAR 2 2012 URBAN DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC p p UNDW nNxIxo NO MOAFUORSOMS 75 I X:10 Parking b) Require new businesses to provide adequate parking spaces for employees and customers, except in the downtown area. Current zoning codes allow businesses (existing or new) to not have any on-site parking which put additional strains on public streets and public parking lots where parking is already a premium. The proposed ordinance simply encourages redevelopment of non-conforming drive-ups to be underground which will hopefully also provide for some underground parking as illustrated in the examples. Finally, it's important to note that this policy has multiple intentions which includes "encouraging development and redevelopment" in the Downtown by not having to provide for parking which limits the ability to fully develop property or create new businesses (parking spaces are generally based on use). In this scenario, the opportunities exist, but not necessarily at the expense of adding additional parking demands on the street or within the public parking lots.And, at no cost to the City. X-9 Fuel Consumption and Air Pollution d).Discourage the use of drive-up windows through the implementing ordinances. The applicants contend this particular policy has generally worked very well in maintaining Ashland's charm and identity. Nevertheless, there are a variety of factors that should be considered as the proposed ordinance amendment does not encourage nor discourage drive-up windows. The amendment only relates to "existing drive-up facilities that are already in existence" and instead of their current auto-centric and unattractive presence,the new code encourages their undergrounding or predominately screening that will occur through redevelopment. The applicants further contend that no one Comprehensive Plan Policy should be regarded so highly where it shadows the numerous policies as noted herein and that when combined and evaluated rationally, the end result will be significantly better than the current status quo. Chanter XI Energy,Air,and Water Conservation XI-4 Commercial and Industrial Sectors f) The City shall ensure that Chapter 53 of the Oregon Building Code,which deals with energy conservation, is adequately enforced for businesses being constructed in Ashland. The City's new Electrical Inspector could be especially helpful in this by evaluating lighting systems for not only code compliance, but also for cost effective investments beyond code requirements. Although the majority of the Comprehensive Plan's Policies relating to conservation in Ashland are very outdated (over 30 years old) and current codes and practices are very much cutting edge, the proposed amendment will encourage redevelopment of sites that are generally lacking any significant conservation measures. As noted previously, one of the benefits of the amendment is a conscientious attempt to specifically target certain sites that are underutilized, out of context to their surroundings and also lack energy efficiencies required and encouraged through today's Building and Zoning codes. Zoning Ordinance Amendment Drive-Up Uses-Chapter 18.32.025 E. MAR 2012 URBAN DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC 4NYIIY PWINIMO NOOfYFIYPNEM SFPNCFB 76 I Chapter XII Urbanization It is the City of Ashland's goal to maintain a compact urban form and to include an adequate supply of vacant land in the city so as not to hinder natural market forces within the City, and to ensure an orderly and sequential development of land in the City limits. The applicants support this policy without question. One of the goals of the proposed amendment is to provide the mechanism for efficient land planning on typically in-efficient "auto centric" sites. There is a limited supply of land within the Downtown area and generally the sites with drive-up facilities have the least amount of floor area to land ratio and thus are "out of place" in their main street context. By providing the mechanisms in the municipal code to be efficient, the City can continue to be cautious and limit expansion to outlying areas (i.e., sprawl). Further, as previously noted the proposed amendment is consistent with recent Council and Planning Commission decisions to participate in the Regional Problem Solving Process (RPS) where the City has committed to not expanding outward, but instead becoming more land efficient and code creative (Pedestrian Places Ordinance,Minimum Density Standards, etc.). Pre-Application Comments: The applicants have discussed the proposal with City Staff with generally positive feedback, but understandably there will be reservations when dealing with a sensitive topic that Ashland has prided itself on for the last 20 years when the City initially took the steps to regulate drive-up uses,their number, location and design. However,in that same vein of creativity and boldness, the applicants desire the current staff and decision makers to evaluate the proposal as a positive and slight adjustment of the ordinance and not as a wholesale modification. Further, staff and the applicants had originally vacillated between the subject application being processed as a Variance vs. a Text Amendment, but in the opinion of the then City Manager and the applicant's legal advisors, the text amendment seemed to be the most comprehensive, benefitting, logical, efficient and transparent route. Typically, Variances relate to a specific site and include specific and detailed building plans as well as Findings of Fact which the applicants contend is not possible as no contracts exist other than a general understanding. On the other hand, the Text Amendment is attempting to be "big picture" in its implementation by first inserting the concept as a permitted use "under certain restrictions" and only then, via a separate application, an applicant would then apply for Site Review Permit and have to address all of the relevant criteria and design standards. Overall, the applicants contend the amendment proposal is relatively straight-forward, but the process, details, various scenarios and explanations are not. As such, the applicants have created a Question & Answer sheet (attached) in an attempt to help answer additional questions or concerns the community, staff and decision makers may have. Conclusion: Finally, it should be understood the proposal is NOT to increase the "total number" of drive-ups within Ashland as regulated by Section 18.32.025 E.31., but instead encourage those existing drive-ups to,redevelop their sites that are fitting to the original character of town. Zoning Ordinance Amendment Drive-Up Uses-Chapter 18.32.025 E. . ( o ,U R BAL DEVUEAL9OU6PFMMENNNYiT E N SOEOryREVIOIP C{¢EIRS6,fgLVLIEC MAR 2 2012 fb 77 i 1 The applicants understand there will likely be many questions and concerns to the proposed code amendments,but hopefully,as we continue to work together to answer the questions and address the concerns, everyone will agree the proposal has merit. MAR 2 2012 Zoning Ordinance Amendment - Drive-Up Uses-Cha ter 18.32.025 E. URBAN DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC 78 f i Proposed Amendment to Ashland Municipal Code,Chapter 18.32.025 E. Drive-up Uses in the Commercial District (C-1 and C-1-D) Existing Code Proposed Code Amendment 18.32.025 Special Permitted Uses The following uses and their accessory uses are permitted outright subject to the requirements of this section and the requirements of Chapter 18.72, Site Design and Use Standards. A. Commercial laundry, cleaning and dyeing establishments. 1. All objectionable odors associated with the use shall be confined to the lot upon which the use is located, to the greatest extent feasible. For the purposes of this provision, the standard for judging "objectionable odors" shall be that of an average, reasonable person with ordinary sensibilities after taking into consideration the character of the neighborhood in which the odor is made and the odor is detected. 2. The use shall comply with all requirements of the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. B. Bowling alleys, auditoriums, skating rinks, and miniature golf courses. If parking areas are located within 200' of a residential district, they shall be shielded from residences by a fence or solid vegetative screen a minimum of 4'in height. C. Automobile fuel sales, and automobile and truck repair facilities. These uses may only be located in the Freeway Overlay District as shown on the official zoning map. D. Residential uses. 1. At least 65% of the total gross floor area of the ground floor, or at least 50% of the total lot area if there are multiple buildings shall be designated for permitted or special permitted uses,excluding residential. 2. Residential densities shall not exceed 30 dwelling units per acre in the C-1 District, and 60 dwelling units per acre in the C-1-1) District. For the purpose of density calculations, units of less than 500 square feet of gross habitable floor area shall count as 0.75 of a unit. MAR 2 2012 79 3. Residential uses shall be subject to the same setback, landscaping, and design standards as for permitted uses in the underlying C-1 or C-1-D District. 4. Off-street parking shall not be required for residential uses in the C-1-1) District. 5. If the number of residential units exceeds 10, then at least 10% of the residential units shall be affordable for moderate income persons in accord with the standards established by resolution of the Ashland City Council through procedures contained in the resolution. The number of units required to be affordable shall be rounded down to the nearest whole unit. E. Drive-up uses as defined and regulated as follows: 1. Except as noted in Section 2. below, drive-up uses may be approved in the C-1 District only, and only in the area east of a line drawn perpendicular to Ashland Street at the intersection of Ashland Street and Siskiyou Boulevard. 2. Drive-up uses are prohibited in Ashland's Historic Interest Area as defined in the Comprehensive Plan; except that that drive-up uses already existing and located within Ashland's Historic Interest Area may be relocated to another property or site within Ashland's Historic Interest Area subject to the following additional requirement: a. Existing drive-up uses within Ashland's Historic Interest Area seeldng to relocate to another site or property within Ashland's Historic Interest Area must be either underground drive-up uses or drive-up uses that are predominately screened, as defined in Section 18.08.805. 3. Drive-up uses are subject to the following criteria: . a. The average waiting time in line for each vehicle shall not exceed five minutes. Failure to maintain this average waiting time may be grounds for revocation of the approval. b. All facilities providing drive-up service shall provide at least two designated parking spaces immediately beyond the service window or provide other satisfactory methods to allow customers requiring excessive waiting time to receive service while parked. c. A means of egress for vehicular customers who wish to leave the waiting line shall be provided. MAR 2 2012 80 I d. The grade of the stacking area to the drive-up shall either be flat or downhill to eliminate excessive fuel consumption and exhaust during the wait in line. e. The drive-up shall be designed to provide as much natural ventilation as possible to eliminate the buildup of exhaust gases. f Sufficient stacking area shall be provided to ensure that public rights-of- way are not obstructed. g. The sound level of communications systems shall not exceed 55 decibels at the property line and shall otherwise comply with the Ashland Municipal Code regarding sound levels. h. The number of drive-up uses shall not exceed the 12 in existence on July 1, 1984. Drive-up uses may be transferred to another location in accord with all requirements of this section. The number of drive-up window stalls shall not exceed 1 per location, even if the transferred use had greater than one stall. F. Kennel and veterinary clinics where animals are housed outside, provided the use is not located within 200' of a residential district. New Definition: 18.08.805 Underground Drive-up Uses. Underground Drive-up Uses are located within the underground portion of a building where a majority of the drive-up facilities, such as the teller window or ATM kiosk, are either located underground, or are predominately screened and have limited visibility from the adjacent public rights-of-way. Underground Drive- up Uses within the Ashland Historic Interest Area shall, be subject to Type III review. MAR 2 2012 81 ' I Questions & Answers Land Use Application For A Zoning Ordinance Amendment Ashland Municipal Code - Chapter 18.32.025 E. "Drive-Up Uses" 1) Why does the existing ordinance limiting drive-ups within the Historic Interest Area need to be amended? Without the proposed amendment, existing drive-up facilities(all of which are now financial institutions—Wells Fargo, Chase,Umpqua, etc.)would likely remain in their current auto-centric state. The proposed amendment would "encourage"these existing sites to redevelop under the adopted Downtown Design Standards and not only create more positive building mass along the street facades similar to the majority of downtown block facades,but also create a more pedestrian friendly environment as envisioned in the Downtown Design Standard's illustrations and Comprehensive Plan policies and Zoning codes. 2) Will the proposed ordinance amendment increase the"number" of drive-ups within the Historic Interest Area? No. The ordinance is specific to "existing"drive-up facilities currently operating in the Historic Interest Area who coincidently are only owned and operated by financial institutions.As such,the number will not be increased. 3) Could an existing drive-up permit holder,outside the Historic Interest Area, relocate into the Historic Interest Area? No. The proposed ordinance specifically applies to existing drive-up facilities currently in operation within the Historic Interest Area. As such,the number of drive-up facilities would remain the same as they exist today(Wells Fargo, Chase and Umpqua Banks). 4) Could another type of drive-up facility(i.e.,fast food)open in the Historic Interest Area? Under the current code, another type of drive-up business(i.e.,fast food) could technically occupy an existing drive-up site and only have to apply for a business license Zoning Ordinance Amendment Drive-Up Uses-Chapter 18.32.025 E. I'p _ URBAN DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. LLC t h1JA 1 2 2012 # U"M cwixwouoannor�¢xrcnrcc� r c. 82 i I and sign permit. The proposed code would not change this possibility. However, it hasn't occurred since the ordinance's original adoption over 20 years ago nor has the applicant heard any rumors of such a possibility so it's highly unlikely. 5) It appears the existing zoning codes currently allow,under the Conditional Use Permit process, "grand-fathered" drive-up facilities to be modified so what is the need for the proposed amendment? In this regard,the proposed amendment has two primary purposes. First,to remove some of the subjectivity inherent with conditional use criteria and instead introduce language that is more clear and objective. In reality,the existing zoning codes are very cumbersome, complex, and subjective and thus have had a chilling effect on redevelopment of these sites. The proposed amendments narrowly define what type of uses ("existing"drive-ups) and how they need to redevelop (underground or predominately screened). The proposed language gives the applicant(s)the confidence that if they submit an application and the submittal documentation meets the applicable standards and criteria and the design fits,the investment can move forward. Some level of predictability is essential. 6) Why would existing drive-up uses propose to redevelop their properties if they are currently successful? The reality is they may not,but at some point they will. It also has to be economical based on sound investment analysis. The proposed amendment simply removes some of the barriers that are real and/or are perceived that has since discouraged redevelopment of these sites. However, like any building, over time they need to be rehabilitated and/or replaced. Coincidently, so do businesses such as financial institutions that have seen dramatic changes over the least twenty years with internet technology and changes to customer banking patterns where retooling there practices allows them to stay competitive in the marketplace. The reality is these businesses no longer need as much space to accommodate their practice and in some cases,no longer need their drive-up facilities. So,why would they not want to redevelop and why occupy more square footage than is needed and instead lease the remaining square footage?The answer is simple... the existing codes are too arbitrary and unpredictable and the cost associated to with Planning Applications can easily exceed$200,000 dollars (before a building permit is even issued). Further,the restrictions on the number of drive-up facilities in the City of Ashland have caused an odd circumstance where they have become a coveted commodity,owned by few that are now worth hundreds of thousands of dollars (the last known transfer was Zoning Ordinance Amendment Drive-Up Uses-Chapter 18.32.025 E. `, URBAN DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC MiAH 2 20 _y UNDUVEFLANENONOOMOP4EN SM ICER � 83 � t purchased for$250,000). That said,why would an existing drive-up facility ever consider a modification without keeping their drive-up? They wouldn't which is why the proposal to allow a major redevelopment with underground drive-ups or with predominant screening with some sense of predictability is a great concept that has many positive attributes. 7) Is it appropriate for driveways serving underground drive-ups to cross public sidewalks? Generally speaking, ingress and egress from private property always cross a public sidewalk. But, on every land use decision(Site Review, Conditional Use Permit, etc.) there is criteria that relate to "adequate transportation facilities"which the decision makers, advised by City staff, would base their decision on. In those cases were a driveway would be deemed"unsafe"by the decision makers,the application would be denied. The proposed ordinance simply allows for the opportunity to underground,but the final design and analysis of a driveway's safety would be determined at the time of the specific planning action. 8) What is "predominately screened" and why not amend the existing ordinance to only apply to underground drive-ups. The reality is the code amendment needs to have some element of flexibility with the final decision being made by Ashland's various decision making entities - Staff,Historic Commission and Planning Commission. Do to the variety of circumstances with each property (grades, lot orientation, and street relationship) as well as the basic necessities of a drive-up window(driver side orientation, stacking needs and venting issues)the applicants, in consultation with a number of architects and designers, felt the outcome could easily meet the ordinance's intent. However,if it's decided by the decision makers that the drive-up facility would not be adequately screened, it would be denied. 9) How could the proposal negatively affect Ashland's Historic Interest Area's built environment? It can't. In the applicant's opinion how could converting auto-centric sites into attractive main street facades be a negative?In combination of the many design and access management standards that"now" exist, any new development or redevelopment would be significantly more preferable than surface parking lots or direct views onto drive-up windows. In particular,would it be preferable to leave the existing Wells Fargo Bank site located between Oak and Pioneer Streets or would Ashland be better off with the redevelopment of that site that includes attractive, active and exciting storefronts with a single 24' (+/-) driveway off Oak Street?It's not too far from reality if one simply looks at photos of the old Ashland Hotel that once existed,on this property. Zoning Ordinance Amendment Drive-Up Uses-Chapter 18.32.025 E. M,AR 2 2012 OuRBAN D EVELOPMENT SEmonwr, LLC Y 4 IA110U5EPWIHINpNOYtV60P46M5EflNCU i 1. .r, .+ M1 84 10)Is private parking restricted in the Historic Interest Areas? No.Although there is definitely numerous City design standards and policies that attempt to screen and limit excessive and unattractive surface parking lots,in no way is private parking prohibited. In fact, as long as surface parking areas are screened and main street facades and pedestrian mobility is protected, as Land Use Planners and rational decision makers,we should encourage "some"private parking (preferably underground), but only where possible and feasible. In doing so,it can have no effect on the historic street facades,would limit taxpayer financing of public parking lots and remain a critical element to a business's success. 11)Are there examples of underground drive-up uses that work well? Yes. In most successful metropolitan cities(where parking is usually cumbersome) such as San Francisco, Tiburon,Portland,Austin, Ottawa, etc. all have successful underground drive-up uses such as banks and libraries. Further,the most common drive-up (although not a drive-up per-se) are large parking structures where there are ingress and egress lines,tellers and payment kiosks and all work very successfully. 12)What are the logistical factors of underground or partially screened drive-up facilities - driveway grades, queuing,ventilation, etc, and do they impact the building's design? Based on the City's Site Design and Use Standards,the end result must be a product that reflects building characteristics predominately found in the Downtown. Driveway grades, queuing,ventilation issues are generally determined by industry standards and national building codes.Design professionals base their decisions on many factors and must merge architectural presence,function and building code regulations in order to design buildings. 13)Why is the Ashland Co-Op proposing the amendment and what is their benefit? The Ashland Food Cooperative desires to resolve its well known and long-time parking issue with its neighbor, Umpqua Bank. For many years the two businesses have attempted to work together to minimize the congestion, anxiety and often times frustration that occurs not only between their management, but also employees, customers and neighbors. As with most urban parking issues, it's a slow methodical build-up with outside influences as well as the new neighboring developments such as the Ashland Hardware Store (previously storage yard), Oak Street Market (previously car wash and Cantwell's store), Oak Street Tank and Steel conversion (now Plexis' Offices) as well as the small, but still measureable impacts of the newest businesses such as the new Cafd on Pioneer Street (Ruby's Neighborhood Restaurant) and the recently approved business located at 260 N. First . Street PA-2010-01611). Regardless of signage, Zoning Ordinance Amendment Drive-Up Uses-Chapter 18.32.025 E. t] ) 7 201 j U R BAN DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC MARL , ,:t� WIUIRf MNgNONDOry60FlIE�f6GVICFf 85 employees and customers of these new businesses, often park on the subject property which decreases available parking and increases the chances of drivers circulating the surrounding neighborhood. Nevertheless, the two parties are in agreement that an amicable solution is needed. Note: At the present time, there are no "agreements, contracts, plans, or otherwise" between the two entities, but both wish for a resolution to its shared parking conflicts that allow both businesses to continue to be a positive presence in the community. A number of meetings and phone conversations have occurred, but until this particular issue is addressed, there will not be any formal arrangements or agreements between the two parties. Instead, the Ashland Food Cooperative is first hoping the City agrees with the logic of the amendment and then hoping that Umpqua Bank would sell their site to the Ashland Food Cooperative and relocate to an area in the Downtown area that is more fitting to their business' long term interest. That said, after a significant amount of thought and a number of meetings with City staff, the applicants have concluded the best solution would be to purchase the Umpqua Bank's property and at the same time identify alternative "areas" more fitting for the bank's needs, including its drive-thru facilities, which are equal or superior to the existing site. In the applicant's opinion, this opportunity best exists on the old Copeland Lumber site between Pioneer and First Streets (now vacant). Umpqua Bank has tentatively agreed with this location,but again a final decision is dependent on the outcome of the proposed ordinance amendment. If approved,Umpqua Bank would then likely identify a site, enter into a purchase agreement, generate concept plans and submit an application to the City for Planning Commission_review and approval. Following the purchase of the current Umpqua Bank site and the relocation of the bank, customers of the Ashland Food . Cooperative would then begin to use the parking. A small expansion to the store is also possible and discussed in passing,but yet to be finalized. MAH G L Zoning Ordinance Amendment Drive Up Uses-Chapter 18.32.025 E. U R BAN DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC IWDMR Hffl HD U&[LMOR SEPVM C5�1 86