Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-0918 Council Mtg PACKET CITY OF ASHLAND Important: Any citizen may orally address the Council on non-agenda items during the Public Forum. 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 new 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 September 18, 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. Executive Session of September 4, 2012 2. Business Meeting of September 4, 2012 VI. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS 1. Mayor's Proclamation declaring October 7— 13, 2012, as Fire Prevention Week 2. Introduction of Terri Eubanks as CERT Coordinator 3. Presentation on water-wise landscaping website for the City of Ashland 4. Mayor's endorsement of marriage equality VII. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approval of Commission, Committee, and Board Minutes 2. Approval of a liquor license application for Todd Tennyson dba Anya's Thai Bistro 3. Approval of a liquor license application for Karen Stacy dba Alchemical Solutions, LLC 4. Appointment of Matt Warshawsky to the Firewise Commission 5. Approval of a property easement request for a driveway in the Westwood area 6. Award of a contract to the apparent low bidder for the Ashland Creek trunkline reconstruction 7. Approval of an Intergovernmental Agreement between the Oregon Department of Transportation and the City of Ashland for Code Assistance for the Unified Development Code, Phase Two 8. Special Procurement of a service agreement for use of NEOGOV on-line recruitment and application tracking services COUNCIL MEETINGS ARE BROADCAST LIVE ON CHANNEL 9 VISIT THE CITY OF ASHLAND'S WEB SITE AT WWW.ASHLAND.OR.US 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 from the 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] X. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None. XI. NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS 1. Designation of LOC voting delegate XII. ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS 1 First reading of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance amending Ashland Municipal Code (AMC) 10.64.010 obstructing passageways" XIII. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS/REPORTS FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS e 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 ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING September 4, 1012 Page 1 of 5 MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL September 4,2012 Council Chambers 1175 E.Main Street CALL TO ORDER Mayor Stromberg called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers. ROLL CALL Councilor Voisin, Morris, Lemhouse, Slattery, Silbiger,and Chapman were present. MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS City Recorder Barbara Christensen announced vacancies on the Firewise Commission, Public Arts Commission, Housing Commission, and Tree Commission. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the Study Session of August 20, 2012, Executive Session of August 20, 2012 and Business Meeting of August 21, 2012 were approved as presented. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS Mayor Stromberg introduced Mark Holden as the new Director of Electric and Information Technology. The Mayor's Proclamation declaring September 7-14,2012, as Eat Local Week was read aloud. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approval of Commission,Committee,and Board Minutes 2. Authorization for telecommunications franchise with AT&T 3. Adoption of findings for Regional Plan element as approved on August 7,2012 4. City waiver of Right to Terminate Lease Agreement with Ashland Community Hospital for failure to maintain working capital and debt service coverage ratios 5. Approval of Utility Box Design Recommendation of the Public Art Commission 6. Approval of recommendation of the Public Art Commission for a sculpture selected for installation at Fire Station No.2 7. Appointment of Michael Gutman to the Housing Commission Councilor Chapman pulled Consent Agenda item #3, and Councilor Voisin pulled Consent Agenda items#4 and #5 for discussion. Councilor Lemhouse/Slattery m/s to approve Consent Agenda items #1, #2, #6 and #7. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. Councilor Chapman did not support the Regional Problem Solving plan in general and would vote against adopting the Findings. Councilor Morris/Voisin m/s to approve Consent Agenda item #3. Voice Vote: Voisin,Morris, Lemhouse, Slattery,and Silbiger,YES; Councilor Chapman,NO. Motion passed 5-1. Administrative Services Director Lee Tuneberg explained Ashland Community Hospital was in default and did not have enough cash to meet their 1.25 debt service coverage and working capital ratios. Councilor Voisin thanked the Public Arts Commission for their efforts beautifying utility boxes. ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING September 4, 2012 Page 2 of 5 Councilor Voisin/Slattery m/s to approve Consent Agenda items #4 and #5. Voice Vote: All AYES. Motion passed. PUBLIC HEARINGS (None) PUBLIC FORUM Brandon Schilling/565 Scenic Drive/Spoke regarding the Standing Stone Farm that was located on the Imperatrice property leased from the City. The farm produced a consistent source of beef and eggs, reduced waste 95%, and served as a platform for community education. The farm successfully managed a multi-species rotational grazing system. Additionally, they established beehives that provided honey and pollinated grasses, berries, and fruits. Renewing the lease would allow the farm to continue its success and represent a thriving example of product management and sustainable agriculture. He invited Council to tour the farm September 14, 2012, 6:00 p.m. or at their convenience. Ken Khosroabadi/2371 Ashland Street/Owned two service stations, one at Exit 14 off Interstate 5. He had previously attended a Council meeting regarding a high utility bill and sign violation issues and expressed his frustration getting information and assistance from the City regarding his signs being out of compliance. He shared his experience trying to contact City staff and questioned why he received two tickets for signage when other establishments were in violation and had not receive any form of citation. He was also disappointed in the extended deadlines to complete the bridge construction at Exit 14 and wanted the City to contact the Oregon Department of Transportation to find out why the extensions were occurring and get an explanation for the long periods of inactivity. UNFINISHED BUSINESS(None) NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS 1. FY 2011-12 Quarterly Financial Report for April—June,2012 Administrative Services Director Lee Tuneberg explained the quarterly report indicated most funds were ahead of projections due to several projects re-budgeted to the following year, open positions throughout the City, and an increase in utilities usage. City Administrator Dave Kanner addressed a Council concern on potentially lagging projects and explained several projects were included in the Capital Improvement Project list that lacked funding and questioned whether the City should continue that practice. Staff anticipated 100% completion by fiscal year end of funded projects. In addition, large expenditures were budgeted in Fiscal Year 2012 with the funds actually being spent Fiscal Year 2013. Mr. Tuneberg added there was a need to look at a longer tern for capital improvements. Councilor Voisin/Slattery m/s to accept the preliminary Fourth Quarter Financial Report for Fiscal Year 2012-12. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. 2. Approval of a letter to the Jackson County Board of Commissioners expressing the Ashland City Council's support for a ban on the use of GMO seeds in Jackson County City Administrator Dave Kanner explained Jackson County was exploring a ban on genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and waiting for a recommendation from their Natural Resources Advisory Committee (NRAC)January 2013 prior to taking any action. Kay Harrison/2359 Evan Way, Central Point/Supported banning GMOs in the valley and expressed concern of possible state legislation similar to other states blocking GMO bans. Cross-pollination with GMO farms could make organic farmers lose their organic status. It was important to have local governments support local industries. ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING September 4, 2012 Page 3 of 5 Brian Comnes/444 Park Ridge Place/Cited the recent Willamette Valley case where the Court ruled in favor of a temporary stay against GMO canola farming. The Court determined organic farm petitioners' had demonstrated the requisite prospect of irreparable harm with the presence of GMO corps and the sufficient likelihood of severe and irremediable harm. He supported Council's letter to the Jackson County Commissioners. Anna Cassilly/1012 Bellview Avenue/Grew most of her vegetables in her garden and expressed concern she could no longer cultivate seed without wondering whether it was contaminated by the GMO sugar beets growing the next street over. The GMO crop was less than the four-mile distance recommendation by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). She believed people had the fundamental right to grow safe, healthy food without concern of contamination by genetically engineered crops. Currently people had applied to the USDA for 48 other GMO crops. She encouraged Council to send the letter supporting initiatives to ban the cultivation of GMO crops in Jackson County. Each season that passed allowed more contamination. Sylvain Brown/1067 Ashland Street/Supported sending a letter encouraging a GMO ban in Jackson County. Several countries had already banned GMOs. In the past, biotechnology companies convinced the public that Agent Orange, PCBs (Polychlorinated Biphenyls), and DDT (dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane) were safe and now companies were using the same type of research to convince the public that GMOs were safe. While short- term nutritional differences required further research, genetically altered produce had a long-term impact on the human body and future generations. Cross contamination between GMO, conventional, and organic crops was a reality. Through the environment itself, the choice to grow GMO crops encroached on other farmers and that alone was reason enough to disallow GMO crops in Jackson County. Annie Hoy/1085 Pleasant Way/Explained she was the Outreach manager at Ashland Food Coop. Prior to establishing the organic standard, organic food traders were concerned with GMO contamination. One of the largest consumer actions in approving the Organic Standard was not allowing organic certification for GMO farming. The USDA was now discussing coexistence due to the amount of GMO pollen already in the environment and coexistence was not a possibility. Genetic contamination from the pollen would eventually end the organic movement. She supported Council sending the letter. Karen Horn/140 Clay Street/Asked Council to send a letter to Jackson County Commissioners supporting a GMO ban in Jackson County. She recommended reading a report titled GMO Myths and Truths: an evidence based examination of the claims made for the safety and efficacy of genetically modified crops by Michael Antoniou, Claire Robinson, and John Fagan at earthopensource.org. Highlights from the Executive Summary stated GMO crops were potentially toxic, less nutritious, not adequately regulated, and increased pesticide use. She urged Council to request a spring special election. Nancy Nelson/149 Clear Creek Drive/Supported Council sending a letter to Jackson County regarding a GMO ban. She quoted a statement from Albert Einstein that people could only live three days without the bees. She submitted documents into the record regarding the affect of insecticides genetically engineered plants produced and the Colony Collapse Disorder that subsequently harmed the bees. Many countries in Europe banned GMO crops and she wanted Ashland and Jackson County to become a GMO free zone to protect organic and conventional growers as part of sustainability. She went on to share some of the disastrous outcomes India experienced with GMO crop failures. Chuck Burr/1133 Old Hwy 99 South/Owned Restoration Farm and grew seeds for packaging. Syngenta contacted and informed him they had grown genetically modified chard less than 2.7 miles of his property. That action resulted in the destruction of$4,400 of chard seeds for his farm. It was in the best interest of the seed companies and a strategic food standpoint to have large GMO free zones where wild breeding can occur. Shady Siroltein/164 Eastbrook Way/Worked with GMO Free Jackson County and attended the last NRAC meeting and was disappointed to discover the NRAC sub-committee had not met or discussed the issue. Natural ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING September 4, 2012 Page 4 of 5 and organic food was a huge growing industry and many people wanted the benefit. Marin County in California had banned the cultivation of GMO plants through a local ballot initiative with a 61% vote. The GMO ban applied only to what was cultivated on the land within County geography, excluded medical research, and would not affect what was imported. Tenasi Rama/815 Oak Street/This was an opportunity to decide on the type of quality of life Jackson County wanted to foster. Community could choose to focus on smaller sustainable farms or support larger agriculture that would not bring profit or lifestyle enhancements to the valley. Many countries tried the GMO paradigm and failed. Jackson County had the chance to precede and prevent the same from happening here. Chris Hardy/774 B Street/Explained he was part of GMO Free Jackson County and Village Farm. Syngenta had not adhered to the required 4-mile isolation distance nor contacted farms to notify them of their activities. GMOs could withstand high doses of toxic chemicals that in turn created super weeds resulting in even higher doses of chemicals that polluted the environment. The pesticide industry had owned the seed company since the late 1980s. He asked Council to protect the rights of farmers who grew and maintained pure and natural seeds, produced livestock, feed, and vegetables for the community uncontaminated by neighboring GMO farms and send a letter to Jackson County supporting a ban. Charlotte Nuessle/1516 Oregon Street/Commented there was inadequate testing on GMOs and from a personal health level, there was a moral responsibility to retaining the safety of food and the need to take this issue seriously. Paige Frazer/10631 Yank Gulch Road, Talent/Read a statement from Dr. Deborah Gordon that GMO technology was not adequately tested. There were cross-pollination contamination of GMO seeds and environmental concerns. Until studies demonstrated absolute safety of GMO technology and food production, she urged Council to support a GMO free local environment. Ms. Frazer added her own concern for the health of her child and others. Councilor Voisin/Slattery m/s to approve Mayor's signature to a letter to the Jackson County Board of Commissioners expressing the Ashland City Council's support for a ban on the use of GMO seeds in Jackson County. DISCUSSION: Councilor Voisin explained local farmers needed Council support in banning GMOs from Jackson County. It was a health, economic, and quality of life issue. Councilor Slattery agreed Council should support the motion. Councilor Chapman added it was clear Council wanted to protect organic farming and Jackson County was looking at both sides of the issue prior to making a decision. He was not sure how effective the letter was but thought Council should send it and expressed concern the State could write legislature that usurped a local government's ability to regulate. Councilor Lemhouse supported the intent of the letter. People had the right to have their livelihood unaffected by their neighbors. He thought the last paragraph of the letter needed revision. Councilor Morris also questioned the effectiveness of the letter, thought the process should occur at the state level but would support the motion. Councilor Slattery/Chapman m/s to amend motion by changing last paragraph to read "The Ashland City Council respectfully requests that the Jackson County Commissioners take what action they deem necessary to protect organic farming in Jackson County." DISCUSSION: Councilor Voisin thought the original language was respectful, specific, and requested action. Councilor Slattery added the letter put Ashland on record as supporting a GMO free Jackson County and encouraged Jackson County to protect organic farming but thought the last paragraph was limiting. Councilor Voisin suggested Council contact Representative Buckley and Senator Bates. Councilor Lemhouse added changing the last paragraph made the letter stronger. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Slattery, Lemhouse, Chapman, Silbiger, and Morris, YES; Councilor Voisin, NO. Motion passed 5-1. Councilor Chapman motioned to strike the third paragraph in the letter. Motion died for lack of a second. ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING September 4, 2012 Page 5 of 5 Roll Call Vote on amended motion: Councilor Voisin, Morris, Slattery, Lemhouse, Chapman, and Silbiger,YES. Motion passed. 3. Approval of streaming of City Council Study Sessions Management Analyst Ann Seltzer explained initial installation and equipment costs totaled $4,930 with an annual of$1,000 for the Ustream account. Amounts did not include staff time to operate the equipment. Councilor Lemhouse/Silbiger m/s to approve directing staff to move forward and stream Council Study Sessions. DISCUSSION: Councilor Lemhouse supported streaming Study Sessions because it would add transparency to the process, but wanted the least expensive way to record them. Councilor Silbiger thought the costs could be lower, questioned why staff did not consider AFN, and thought they could stream meetings in Council Chambers. Councilor Lemhouse also questioned why Council Chambers was not an option. Ms. Seltzer explained the feed in Council Chambers would have to go through RVTV and stream from that location. Councilor Slattery supported government transparency, thought the new IT Director might have different suggestions, and would support the motion if the intention was to continue looking at ways to record Study Session, not an approval to purchase equipment. Councilor Lemhouse thought the motion was whether Council should stream Study Sessions or not and staff needed to further investigate the most efficient way to do that. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Silbiger, Voisin, Lemhouse, and Slattery, YES; Councilor Chapman and Morris,NO. Motion passed 4-2. ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS 1 First reading of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance amending Ashland Municipal Code (AMC) 10.64.010 obstructing passageways" Councilor Slattery declared a potential conflict of interest and disclosed his wife was the executive director of the Chamber of Commerce. Councilor Slattery/Lemhouse m/s to postpone the matter until the Regular Council Meeting of September 18, 2012 with all due notices. DISCUSSION: Staff explained Council had not received proper notification of the ordinance in time to follow the normal procedures regarding ordinances. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Voisin, Morris, Lemhouse, Slattery, Silbiger, and Chapman, YES. Motion passed. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS/REPORTS FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS (None) ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 8:37 p.m. Barbara Christensen,City Recorder John Stromberg, Mayor rye �. , � �, ��:� �� , ��e •, rya ��-r e�7r a�'� • �f�l, Proclamation kA VI The City of Ashland is committed to ensuring the safety and security of all those living in and visiting our City. gt �« s r l�l D' ij�i S a n . public safety conce both nationally, • homes 1 R, the locations where people are at greatest risk from fire. are ' �q�s • _ 3,000 people die as a result of . and bums, • - Wall 200,000 individuals are seen in the nation's g- •• for bum injuries. Home fires killed more than 2,600 people in the United States in 2010, % according • the latest research from • • • •nal Fire Protection 1 (! ondedto Association fire departments in the United • t ,1� more . ' 111 home fires. lt Residents 1 have planned . practiced 1 •- plan are more prepared and will therefore be more likely to survive a fire. .3( 0 The 2012 Fire Prevention Week theme, "Have Two Ways Out!" effectively serves W remind the citizens of Ashland to develop and practice home fire escape plans during Fire Prevention and • . "try_. t -vl� THEREFORE, • • • - • • • . hereby proclaim October 7-13,2012 as: Prevention in the City of . and I urge people to protect their homes and families by '•• _ ublic 1:. important ;i safety activities and efforts of City of Dated this 18th day of q John Stromberg,Mayor Barbara Christiansen, City Recorder iJ. n i Ar-'O ri1Q i':. A M.���•�� j +aw �•i NI \� "agAg S, Will CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication September 18, 2012, Business Meeting Presentation on Water-Wise Landscaping Website for the City of Ashland FROM: Julie Smitherman, Water Conservation Specialist, Public Works,julie.smitherman @ashland.or.us SUMMARY Staff would like to unveil to the Council and the citizens of Ashland a new water-wise landscaping website feature that serves as a virtual demonstration gardening tool. This site provides information and resources on water efficient gardening concepts and showcases examples from local residents. Staff would like this water-wise website to be accessible to the public from a link on the City of Ashland's website. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: Staff has been working with a website designer and landscape professional team from California called GardenSoft. They have developed similar sites for other entities throughout California, and Arizona and now two in Oregon. With their help, we were able to build a website on water-wise landscaping that is unique to the Ashland area. The site has been up and running since July 1, 2012. A summary on how many people have visited the website is sent to us each month by the website developer. This site includes virtual garden tours featuring the landscapes of local residents. Each tour includes several pictures of the property showing examples of attractive and functional landscapes that use less water. Pictures taken of local properties have also been divided up into garden gallery categories to provide users with ideas on how to landscape a specific area of their property. Categories include front yards, backyards, hillsides, walkways, arbors, fences, decks, dry creek beds and much more. Within each picture, some of the plants are highlighted with a hotlink. The user can hover over it with the mouse or click on it for more detailed information. If the user decides they like the plant, then they can add it to their saved plant list. Once they have their list complete, they can print it out to give it to their landscaper or take it to a local nursery. There are several plant categories such as fire-wise and deer resistant plants, as well as an extensive plant database listed alphabetically. This section of the site will enable users to search for plants based on plant type, size, color, sun needs, soil type, and blooming season. In addition to plant information, there are numerous resources on irrigation design and maintenance. Some of the topics include principles of design, plant water needs, smart controllers, irrigation challenges and so forth. There is also a guide on how and when to water, listing a variety of factors that have an impact on a watering schedule. Page 1 of 2 �r, CITY OF ASHLAND FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: The fiscal impact was a development cost of$500 to FY2012. A two year license agreement was also made with a fee of$1,500 per year beginning with FY2013. ATTACHMENTS: Website visitor summary for August 2012 S Page 2 of 2 I`, E R 0 \ c 2 7 \ c / / n ■ $ § q » / 7 7 0 % ° j � f . 0 § / G \ / % 7 ° 2 > / 7 n R > ■ > ( 2 Q = '\ o § \ 0 f '$ cn _ � k CA m = o a) E © [ o k t CO'E a a) / ° § . (n k E §$ % ® k £ a) _ ® ® m 3 E ƒ 0 f f a )Sf & £ \ a a § 2 / ° J % . m 2 / / R A E cn Q a) / \ % / -0 / (n / 0 £ k j § E k .Er \ § \ 2 m \ 2 § £ 2 E a a = z m §00 § . �ch fJƒ ( . gM22 k ; l . 0 ; § ; �� U § § § ® 2 � J§ 3jg _ cool \ §ƒ JR 0 a 0 a Sa % 000j § z $ ) # �;) } � E . A } ! ! ƒ§ |) 0 0 , nn § R ~ 0 0 0I ■ < . 0 1 - . ; ) N \ / \ \ } k / / n � Ir in . ! ƒ 3 § ) ?\ \ } z �� 2 - ƒ� 7 \ \ £ £ E f £ £ £ £ E E E ££ AIR Ui n M - y M 4 4 � nA N 0Y. \ �1 0 •U Q � f�' O b n n P ] �onRU: rvnr. Q Y 6 9 m O 0,1C n m EEEE E'FF h n S nq n O Ll N n C ^ .0 M P N r ? Y C n M M M P N N N n M Q 0 Oft ;.a MR r V N V V V r �e O � y r .Ni Ui .ni � .TiNNNn C m n CO O O C a m m m C v C n M N O P ^! W N N n h L 0 •L Y a 0 w G F OA C M CN C N H P - H Cl M n n IA P e D N '1 Y e _ i j C Y M a O C O n O O a O C ] 0 0 .1 F, l : u a a fie$ M P N ip �' NJ ^ � N$ T N !V .i � M ci � N M'O T IV h M � Ol .Ny IV ti d N IV IM N N$p g N .O 4 I IL.p. �p H h .H N M H O M N Hof .f M [V (QV N H M ITiI N fY fN.l M H N M ti ti '1 H H N q til$ Lill I O N N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O fl N N 1 N N N N 1 1 N N N N N 1 N N N N N . . N N N 1 N a s y a a a a ¢ a ¢ aia a a s a s a s O Q wog d �I Via$ � o� CITY OF ASHLAND ASHLAND HISTORIC COMMISSION Meeting Minutes July 3,2012 Community DevelopmentlEngineering Services Building-51 Winburn Way-Siskiyou Room CALL TO ORDER—REGULAR MEETING. 6:07 am Historic Commissioners Present: Dale Shostrom, Keith Swink,Tom Giordano,Ally Phelps, Sam Whitford,Allison Renwick,Terry Skibby,Victoria Law, Commission Members Absent: Kerry Kencairn Council Liaison: Greg Lemhouse, absent High School Liaison: None Appointed SOU Liaison: None Appointed Staff Present: Planner:Amy Gunter;Clerk: Billie Boswell APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The minutes of the May 2, 2012 Historic Commission meeting were reviewed. Mr. Whitford made a motion to approve them. Mr. Swink seconded the motion and the motion was approved unanimously. PUBLIC FORUM: No one in the audience wished to speak.(Melanie Smith came into the meeting later and Public Forum was reopened after the public hearing concluded). COUNCIL LIAISON REPORT: None PUBLIC HEARING: 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 fagade, 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-D;ASSESSOR'S MAP#:39 1 E 09 BA;TAX LOT#: 10800 Ms. Gunter reviewed the proposal and the Commission's concerns from the PreApp meeting including defining the pedestrian area. It would be a mixed use building with the same footprint as originally submitted. Mark Knox, planner, and architect, Ray Kistler explained how the pedestrian area would be incorporated. They also went over the fagade materials and pointed out that the parapet would be 6'above the max building height.They said the owner preferred brick for the column bases and planned on using wood-clad windows. Kitchens are planned for the residential units but the details weren't yet done. There being no further questions and no one in the audience to speak,the public hearing was closed. The Commissioners liked the design and felt it would finish off the block nicely. Ashland Histonc Commission Minutes 9/112012 CITY OF ASHLAND Mr. Whitford made a motion to recommend approval of the project as presented. Mr. Swink seconded the motion. Chairman Shostrom called for discussion on whether or not to add a condition that the applicant be required to return to the full Commission to present a materials board and more specifically call out the details of the brick, fenestrations, colors, mullions, and other specifics of the cornices, bases, etc. to meet the requirements of the Site Design and Use Standards prior to submitting for the building permit.There was discussion about what level of detail should be required and when it should be submitted. There was consensus that the Staff advisor would make sure the building plans met compliance and they would be reviewed by the Historic Review Board prior to issuance. The motion was restated to recommend approval of the proposed plans with the following recommendations: 1) That the building permit submittals shall demonstrate material and relief compliance with section 11-C-2d of the Site Design and Use Standards for the brick, fenestrations and mullion details including the width, depth and size of materials for the cornices, columns, bases, arches etc. for review and approval of the Staff Advisor and the Historic Commission Review Board. 2) That brick shall be used for the column base and not stone or stucco. 3) Exterior lighting details demonstrating compliance with the Site Design and Use Standards and shall be designed in a manner which does not produce direct illumination onto the street. 4) That a material board shall be provided for review and approval by the Staff Advisor and the Historic Commission Review Board. The motion passed unanimously. PUBLIC FORUM: Melanie Smith of Star Sushi explained to the Commissioners that they are in the process of adding a Type 1 kitchen hood in the back of the building at 293 East Main. She reviewed with them the various options they had for venting and felt coming out the back wall under the upper deck was their best option. Mr. Skibby was concerned about smoke and fumes blowing back into the windows. Ms. Smith commented that access for cleaning the vent was also necessary. The majority of the Commissioners agreed to the plan. OLD BUSINESS: A. Review Board Schedule July 5"h Terry, Keith, Kerry July 12t^ Terry,Allison,Victoria July 19t^ Terry, Dale,All July 26t' Terry,Tom, Sam August 2nd Terry,Kerry August 9t^ Terry,Keith, Sam Ashland Historic Commission Minutes 9/112012 CITY OF ASHLAND B. Proiect Assi nments for Planning Actions BD-2011-00436 426 A St(Sidney Brown)Mixed Use Bldg (permit issued 5-18-11)) Giordano BD-2011-01029 400 Allison Robin Biermann New SFR (Ready to issue) Whitford/Renwick BD-2011-01079 134 Terrace Allman New SFR issued 2-17-12 Whitford BD-2011-00621 89 Oak St Amorotico New fa ade on building under construction Shostrom PL-2012-00434 843 B St Holzshu ARU Renwick PL-2012-00440 27 N Main McKechnie Comm Site Review Shostrom DISCUSSION: Ashland Historic Plaza—Ms.Gunter gave a summary of the public meetings where the 3 design options were presented. There was consensus to enlarge the hardscape with a radial design paving(colored)and create a stage area with curved, low wall seating. The Commissioners liked the designs and supported the changes as long as the Plaza Fountain,"Iron Mike", Lithia Water fountain and other historic features were retained. Mr. Skibby spoke of multiple redesigns of the plaza over the past 100 years as the uses changed and the facilities were improved to meet the needs of the public. Ms. Law suggested a series of plaques placed along the low wall outlining the history of Ashland. The Commissioners were very supportive of that idea. ADJOURNMENT: It was the unanimous decision of the Commission to adjourn the meeting at 8:00 p.m. Ashland Historic Commission Minutes 9/112012 CITY OF ASHLAND ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES August 14,2012 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 Harris, Planning Manager Eric Heesacker April Lucas,Administrative Supervisor Richard Kaplan Pam Marsh Debbie Miller Melanie Mindlin Absent Members: Council Liaison: None Dennis Slattery, absent ANNOUCEMENTS Commissioner Heesacker announced he will not be present for the September 11 Planning Commission meeting. Commissioner Dawkins noted he attended the last City Council meeting and stated the motion to approve the drive-ups amendment failed for lack of a second. He stated following the meeting he spoke individually with four of the city councilors and each member indicated the applicant failed to make a strong enough argument for the change.Commissioner Marsh slated as a planning commissioner she does not feel in tune with the City Council and does not feel like they are working on the same team. She noted the lack of feedback they receive from the City Council and recommended more contact or joint meetings so that they are not acting in isolation from one another. Commissioner Miller agreed and stated it would be nice if the Council could provide an explanation of their decision. Community Development Director Bill Molnar noted there is a process that allows for the motion to be put back on the Floor at the next meeting, and believes this will occur. He added the Commission could gel the additional feedback they desire at the next Council meeting. Commissioner Dawkins requested Mr. Molnar speak with the Planning Commission's council liaison and encourage him to come to regular meetings in addition to the study sessions. Mr. Molnar announced the City Council passed second reading of the RPS ordinance and changes to the keeping of chickens ordinance,and also discussed the potential legalization of short term vacation rentals. He stated the Council directed the vacation rental item to be looked at further,and this will come back to the Planning Commission in the next few months. Lastly, the City Council will be discussing the completion of the railroad property clean-up at an upcoming meeting. CONSENTAGENDA A. Approval of Minutes 1. July 10,2012 Regular Meeting 2. July 24,2012 Special Meeting Commissioners Miller/Kaplan m/s to approve the Consent Agenda.Voice Vote:all AYES. Motion passed 7.0. PUBLIC FORUM No one came forward to speak. Ashland Planning Commission August 14, 2012 Page 1 of4 UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Approval of Findings for PA-2012-00740, 160 Lithia Way. Ex Parte Contact No ex parte contact was reported. Commissioners Marsh/Heesacker m/s to approve the Findings for PA-2012-00740. Roll Call Vote: Commissioners Brown, Dawkins, Heesacker, Kaplan, Marsh,Miller and Mindlin,YES.Motion passed 7-0. TYPE II PUBLIC HEARING A. PLANNING ACTION: PA-2012-00981 SUBJECT PROPERTIES: 541 Strawberry Lane&48 Westwood Street APPLICANTS: Paul Conflitti and Doug Irvine, property owners; Mark Knox of Urban Development Services as agent DESCRIPTION: The application involves a request for a Variance to the lot coverage limitations of the Rural Residential zoning district for the property located at 541 Strawberry Lane. The maximum lot coverage allowed for the RR-.5 district is 20 percent,and a 24.7 percent coverage is requested. As part of the request,the owner of a contiguous property located at 48 Westwood Street has agreed to deed restrict their property's allowed lot coverage with a commensurate reduction to offset the additional coverage requested for 541 Strawberry Lane.COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Rural Residential; ZONING: RR-.5-P;ASSESSOR'S MAP#: 391E 08BD;TAX LOT#: 541 Strawberry Lane is Tax Lot#104;48 Westwood Street is Tax Lot#102. Commissioner Mindlin read aloud the public hearing procedures for land use hearings. Ex Parte Contact Commissioners Heesacker, Miller,and Kaplan reported site visits. No ex parte contact was reported. Staff Report Planning Manager Maria Harris stated the application before them is a variance request to increase the lot coverage from 20% to 24.7%,and to offset the increase 48 Westwood has agreed to reduce its lot coverage by 4.7%. Ms. Harris displayed photos of the site and explained the proposal is to develop a single family home;the house,garage, and pool would be impervious, and permeable pavers would be used for the driveway, parking area,and the area around the swimming pool. Ms. Harris reviewed the variance criteria and the information put forward by the applicants. Criterion 91: There are unique or unusual circumstances which apply to this site which do not typically apply elsewhere. Ms. Harris stated the applicants assert the unique or unusual circumstance is a hazard that is created by the street and lot configuration and the lack of traffic control or caution signs. She stated the application states the 900 bend where Westwood turns into Strawberry,the intersection of Strawberry and Birdsong across from the property, and the location of the lot on the curved portion of Strawberry all contribute to this hazard. For these reasons,the applicants have proposed a driveway with a turnaround area so that drivers can pull out of the driveway in a forward manner so as to be able to see oncoming traffic. Ms. Harris stated staff is cautious about using street and lot configuration as a reason for a variance, as there are some unusual street and lot configurations in Ashland, but there are not very many streets that have a 900 bend, plus a curvature in the road, plus an adjacent intersection. She stated for these reasons, staff believes the Planning Commission could make a finding that this is a unique situation. Criterion#1: The proposals benerits will be greater than any negative impacts on the development of the adjacent uses,and will further the purpose and intent of this ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan of the City. Ms. Harris stated staff believes the use of permeable pavers and the decrease in lot coverage for 48 Westwood will negate any negative impacts to the surrounding area. In addition, staff looked at the issue of character and believes the proposed home will fit it with the surrounding area. Ashland Planning Commission August 14, 2012 Page 2 of 4 Criterion#3: The circumstances or conditions have not been willfully or purposely self-imposed. Ms. Harris stated the unusual circumstance stated in the application is the street configuration and the location of the lot, and these items are not self-imposed. Ms. Harris concluded her presentation and noted the minor corrections to the proposed conditions of approval that were distributed at the beginning of the meeting. Questions of Staff Staff was asked to clarify why some of the lots on Birdsong have more than 20%coverage. Ms. Harris explained in performance standards subdivisions the total site is looked at rather than calculating lot coverage per lot, and open space above the minimum required can be allocated back to the lots. Comment was made questioning whether the pavers would stay in place on a slope. Ms. Harris noted the conditions of approval require a licensed engineer to confirm the system will work in the subject location and for certification to be provided that they have been installed properly. It was questioned if the pavers will be 100%permeable as claimed. Ms. Harris stated this would be a good question for the applicant. Staff was asked to comment on the Hitt Road action that came before the Commission a couple years ago. Ms. Harris explained the application for Hitt Road that came before the Commission in 2010 was approved with 47,47%lot coverage.This figure included a shared driveway that ran through the property and with it removed the coverage was approximately 36%. Applicant's Presentation Paul ConflittilApplicant and Mark Knox/Applicant's Representative addressed the Commission. Mr. Knox explained their variance request is based on the following reasons: 1)the sharp intersection of Westwood and Strawberry, 2)the intersection of Birdsong and Strawberry, 3)the curvature of Strawberry, and 4)the slope of the property. He explained the house is intended to sit back from the street and because of the slope it will be below street grade. He stated it will not be easy to back out of the driveway and see oncoming traffic and because of these factors the owners would like to be able to enter the roadway in a forward manner. Mr. Knox explained the property to the north will be deed restricted to limit its lot coverage and this was done to mitigate the proposed coverage increase for 541 Strawberry. Regarding the 100%permeable claim, Mr. Knox requested some flexibility with this item. He also noted the neighborhood meeting that was held and stated those in attendance were positive about this proposal and the design of the home. Comment was made that the outdoor spaces seem small compared to the house. Mr. Knox stated when they first drew up the plans there was more patio space and the coverage amount was 28%, but as they went through this process they tried to mitigate and request as minimal a variance as possible. Public Testimony Catherine Dimino/423 Strawberry/Read aloud a prepared statement and submitted it into the record. (See attached Exhibit #2012-01) Applicant's Rebuttal Mark Knox/Stated this is a unique circumstance,there is justification for this request,and cited the four issues mentioned in his presentation. He stated lot coverage is arbitrary and you do not always achieve the best results by having a fixed number. He also explained that 48 Westwood would likely develop as a two-story house with a shared driveway. He stated they believe they have justified the variance straight up, but have included the reduction of lot coverage for 48 Westwood in order to better their chances of approval. Commissioner Mindlin closed the public hearing and record at 8:10p.m. Deliberations/Decision It was questioned if the transfer from 48 Westwood would make that lot smaller than the minimum lot size. Staff clarified they are only transferring coverage, and therefore the lot will still comply with the requirements. Ashland Planning Commission August 14, 2012 Page 3 of 4 Commissioners Heesacker/Marsh m/s to approve the variance for lot coverage and to deed restrict 48 Westwood. DISCUSSION: Commissioner Heesacker stated the variance request is weak, but he supports the two neighbors working together. Commissioner Marsh stated she would be willing to exclude 48 Westwood from this approval, but believes the transfer of densities is a reasonable way to proceed. She also commented on lot coverage and stated in other communities this only applies to the building. Commissioner Dawkins stated he supports the application and the home will fit in with that neighborhood, but does not find the variance argument put forward by the applicant very compelling. Commissioner Brown noted two typographical errors in the revised conditions of approval(2.d 'That a deed restriction shall be prepared..."and 2.f.iii '.Aorinstallation of the driveway apron by the Public Works Department)and Heesacker and Marsh approved this as a friendly amendment.Commissioner Miller voiced her agreement with Heesacker and said she is not convinced by the applicant's argument for the variance, but likes Westwood having a smaller footprint and likes that the owners are working together. Commissioner Mindlin stated it is not appropriate for them to apply pervious pavers as a mitigation factor when this measure was specifically rejected by the City Council a few years ago. She stated the applicants should be looking at other ways to mitigate on site and she is unconvinced by their unusual factors argument. Mindlin stated it appears the commissioners are not convinced the applicants have met the criteria, but support the trade-off between the lots,and asked if there was a way for the findings to capture this.Commissioner Marsh stated she is uncomfortable with this discussion and in order to approve this request they must find the applicant has met the criteria. She stated it is not the strongest argument she has seen, but believes the street layout is unusual,the benefits will be greater than the impacts, and the conditions have not been self imposed. Roll Call Vote: Commissioners Kaplan,Marsh, Brown, Miller,and Heesacker,YES.Commissioners Dawkins and Mindlin,NO.Motion passed 5.2. Request was made for staff to put lot coverage and permeability back on the agenda for further discussion.Ms. Harris clarified this is on the list of discussion items for the Unified Code Project. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, April Lucas,Administrative Supervisor Ashland Planning Commission August 14, 2012 Page 4 of 4 City of Ashland August 14; 2012 planning Exhibit Etnisrt?-=-0I I Catherine Dimino PAB . 423 Strawberry Lane OAtt U «STAFF ALA I Re: PA 2012-00981 Four (4) lots were created as part of a rolling partition that came before the Planning Commission in 2004 and 2007. There were neighbors who expressed a number of concerns at the initial meeting (please see May 11, 2004 Planning Commission Regular Meeting minutes). The city partitioned the lot so they could sell 4 legal lots. When addressing partitioning in 2004, Director McLaughlin mentioned that the property is relatively flat, and there are no significant natural features. The 2004 staff report stated that "Each lot complies with the minimum lot size." Regarding this application, the proper thing to do is to apply for a lot line adjustment. However, I assume that's not possible since 48 Westwood would fail to meet the city's code for the minimum lot size (18.16.040 A). Where does the code allow the city to transfer lot coverage to other lots that have been partitioned? I understand transferring coverage to lots in the same subdivision is allowed when there is/are common open space area(s). By transferring lot coverage via a deed restriction, this is .effectively changing the minimum lot size. If the variance for 541 Strawberry Lane has merit, there is no need to encumber 48 Westwood Street. The variance code (18.100.020 C) requires that the circumstances or conditions have not been willfully or purposely self-imposed. Regarding whether this is self-imposed, there are other designs that allow the applicant to exit the lot without backing out. The question is a tradeoff between what is important to homeowners of a lot. Do they want a larger driveway, a different driveway design, a large home, swimming pool, etc.? The variance code also states (18.100.020 B) that the proposal's benefits will be greater than any negative impacts on the development of the adjacent uses; and will further the purpose and intent of this ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan of the City. Encumbering 48 Westwood Street is j a greater negative impact on the development of the adjacent lot than it is a benefit to 541 Strawberry since 541 Strawberry could produce a different design without backing out onto Strawberry Lane. The city recently changed the code and didn't see fit to change how they measure impervious surface for lot coverage (18.08.160). They could have uniformly said all lots that have porous driveways are not considered part of lot coverage. Some possible alternatives for the applicant are: • Add signage that the applicants say are lacking. • Maybe a curb cut change, or adding a mirror. • Extend the driveway with a small turnaround so vehicles don't have to back out onto Strawberry. • Consider other designs for the driveway, garage, home, swimming pool. My husband and I managed to reduce the size of our driveway significantly by redesigning the 3 car garage to share a smaller driveway. In closing, I'd like to add: There are a number of requests for larger lot coverage in this area. Should the commission reconsider the 20% lot coverage for .5 acre zoning and/or the definition of impervious surface (i.e., lot coverage)? As people age,.it is very desirable,to have 1 story homes. I don't object to 25% lot coverage if everyone in .5 acre zoning were allowed to cover 25% of their lot. It would be aesthetically pleasing if Ashland had ordinances that encourage applicants to make garages a less prominent feature of a home. For example, additional driveway coverage for hidden garages. Thank you. JOINT ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION and ASHLAND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES August 16,2012 CALL TO ORDER Chair David Young called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street. Transportation Commissioners Present: Tom Burnham, Mike Gardiner, Pam Hammond, Shawn Kampmann, Colin Swales, Corinne Vieville,and David Young Planning Commissioners Present: Troy J. Brown,Jr., Eric Heesacker, Richard Kaplan, Pam Marsh, Debbie Miller and Melanie Mindlin(arrived at 6:07 p.m.) Staff Present: Mike Faught and Jodi Vizzini Council Liaison Present: David Chapman Transportation Commissioners Absent:All present Planning Commissioners Absent: Michael Dawkins INTRODUCTORY REMARKS AND ADOPTION OF PREVIOUS MEETING MINUTES Commissioners Swales/Burnham mis to approve the July 12,2012 minutes. Voice vote: all AYES. Motion passed 11 —0. [Commissioner Kaplan abstained,Commission Mindlin not yet present.] PUBLIC FORUM No one came forward to speak. ACTION ITEMS (TR1)Planned Bike Path/Greenway Staff Report Mike Faught stated the bikeway network map was previously approved by the Commissions, but an additional path (TR1)was added to the approved map. He explained the location of the multi-use path(TR1)and added staff was recommending approval of the additional path. Commissioners Questions/Comments • An explanation for adding the path was requested as it seemed redundant. Response:Having access on both sides of the railroad tracks will reduce the access challenge and the need to cross the tracks. • How much right-of-way is currently in place? Answer:A right-of-way does not currently exist. • Will the current bike path remain in place? Answer: Yes. • Does adding this route to the Transportation System Plan (TSP) mean it is predestined or simply tagging it for the possibility? Answer: It may not be built for some time, but the multi-use path will be identified as an important link in the TSP. • If the freight rail returns, will it impede the bike path? Answer: There is an established safe distance for trails along rails that will be followed. • Is this an area where contaminated soil will need to be removed? Answer.: Staff is not aware of the issue in this location. • What is happening behind Ashland Co-op? Answer: The City will allempt to acquire the right-of-way on both sides of the track. Commissioners HeesackerlSwales m/s to include(TR1)in the bikeway network of the financially constrained Joint TC/PC August 12,2012 Page I of 4 plan of the TSP. DISCUSSION: Commissioner Burnham stated he is in favor of bikeways but this one seems redundant. Commissioner Kampmann questioned if there had been any consideration in completing the existing path on the south side of the railroad tracks before adding a path on the north side. Commissioner Brown expressed the importance of connectivity without the need to cross the tracks several times to get to a destination. Commissioner Young concluded the discussion by adding the path would make it easier for other modes of transportation to be chosen and will be a positive visionary piece to have in the TSP. Commissioner Young asked for a show of hands in favor of the motion. The motion passed unanimously. (R25) Washington St/Tolman Creek Rd. Street Connection Project Staff Report Mr. Faught gave an overview of the importance of the Washington St./Tolman Crk. Rd.connection in the TSP. He presented a master site plan provided by the property owner, Zach Brombacher,for review and clarified important details of the plan and the updated letter of intent. Zach Brombacher/1370 Tolman Creek Rd./Recognized the diligent work Mr. Faught has put into working with him and acknowledged the Commissions for listening to his requests. He stated he has owned the property for 45 years and outlined his long-term vision for the property site. He noted he is not in favor of having the roadway run through his property, but has made efforts in good faith to work with the City. He added the process has been unique and refreshing for his family to see. Several Commissioners thanked Mr. Brombacher for his effort in working with the City, acknowledging the road is not what he would ideally choose for his property, recognized his spirit of compromise and cooperation, and hoped he felt the plan will benefit him in some ways. Mr. Faught clarified the action staff was recommending was to add project(R25)to the TSP with the contingency the City will buy the right-of-way,construct the road, and work on the items listed in the letter of intent. Commissioners Questions/Comments • A request was made to clarify the language in Item#8 of the letter of intent where it states the planning costs will be paid by the City; it suggests the City becomes a collaborator for the master plan. Response: The letter of intent refers to City staff time;not planning costs. The intention is to assist Mr. Brombacher from point A to point 8 of the master plan. (it was determined the last sentence of#8 will be deleted.) • Several Commissioners commented the City typically assists the applicant during the planning process and did not see this as anything different than the normal procedure. • Comment was made expressing concern as to whether this would set a precedent for future applicants asking the City to pay for the right-of-way and construction of a new road through property. Response: There are circumstances where the connection is important causing the City to pursue this process. Staff will look for economic development funds to pay for the project. Commissioner Brown expressed during the normal planning process the City works with the applicant and therefore felt Item#8 was not germane to this particular application. He suggested a motion removing Item#8 from the letter of intent. Mr. Faught voiced concern if the language is dropped, it will appear to Mr. Brombacher that staff is abandoning him at the application process. He stressed the importance of leaving the verbiage in the letter. Commissioner Gardiner agreed the letter of intent could be in the motion, but needed rewording. The Commissions discussed the process further and asked Mr. Brombacher to clarify his vision of the process. Commissioners HeesackerNieville m/s to include project(1125) in the TSP,with the contingency the City will buy the right-of-way,construct the road,and move forward with the items listed on the letter of intent which will be reworded to meet Council's satisfaction.Commissioner Young asked for a show of hands in favor of the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Joint TGPC August 12,2012 Page 2 of 4 (B1)Downtown Sharrows Staff Report Mr. Faught reaffirmed the concept of three lanes to two lanes on N. Main St. had been moved into the downtown transportation plan study, leaving a void for bikes. He noted that Kittelson&Associates suggested adding sharrows for the short term and provided an illustration of a conceptual map for the Commissions to review. Commissioners Questions/Comments • Will signage be included? Answer: Yes. • Will sharrows be added to the road until better bike protection is provided? Answer:Currently the bike lane stops at N. Main St. and bikes do not have a designated space to ride. Adding sharrows on N. Main St. will designate a bike route through downtown, connecting to the bike lane on Siskiyou Blvd. • Where will the sharrows start and stop? Answer: The sharrows will begin just past Heiman St and end on Siskiyou Blvd. where the bike path picks up again. • Comment was made stating sharrows should be included on Lithia Way from Oak St.to Heiman St. The Commissions discussed the effectiveness of adding sharrows to roads. Concern was voiced as to whether sharrows create an illusion of safety for bicycles without the added protection of a bike lane. Several Commissioners commented sharrows serve the purpose of alerting motorists of potential cyclists on the road. Commissioners Heesacker/Swales mils to approve the exhibit illustrating sharrows on N. Main St.with the addition of sharrows on north bound Lithia Way between Oak St. and Heiman St. Commissioners Brown, Burnham,Gardiner, Hammond, Heesacker, Kaplan, Marsh, Miller, Mindlin,Swales,Vieville,and Young,YES. Motion passed 12—0. [Commissioner Kampmann abstained.] (R10) Oak SUVan Ness Ave.Intersection Project Staff Report Mr. Faught provided information on the(R10) intersection project and voiced his opposition to the project as the proposed road would go through two homes in the historic district. He recommended removing this project from the TSP. Commissioners Kampmann ISwaies mis to remove(R10)Oak St./Van Ness Ave. Intersection Project from the TSP. Commissioner Young asked for a show of hands in favor of the motion. The motion passed unanimously. (B35)Shared Roads—Pinecrest Terrace Staff Report Mr. Faught reminded the Commissions they voted in approval of adding the section of Pinecrest Terrace from Walker Ave.to Starlight PI.to the shared roads list at the previous meeting. He added that following the meeting he drove the road and asked the traffic engineers to evaluate it. Based on both actions, he determined this section as an unsafe location for a shared road. He recommended the Commissions remove this section of Pinecrest Terrace from the shared roads list. Commissioners Burnham/Marsh m/s to remove the section of Pinecrest Terrace from Walker Ave.to Starlight PI.from the shared roads list of the TSP. Commissioner Young asked for a show of hands in favor of the motion. Commissioners Brown, Burnham, Gardiner, Hammond, Heesacker, Kaplan, Marsh, Miller, Mindlin,Vieville,and Young,YES. Commissioners Kampmann and Swales, NO. Motion passed 11 —2. Eagle Mill Rd./oak SUE. Nevada SUN. Mountain Ave.Alternate Route Staff Report Mr. Faught provided information on a potential designated alternate bypass of the downtown area using Eagle Mill Joint TUPC August 12,2012 Page 3 of 4 Rd./Oak St./E. Nevada St./N. Mountain Ave. He noted the Nevada St. connection is not in place,but was approved in the TSP and will provide the link to the alternate route. He shared information received from Jackson County regarding future plans for Eagle Mill Rd, which is maintained by the County. Currently the road is in the unfunded part of the County's TSP, but could be moved to the funded area if it is identified as a bypass.The improvements would include widening the multi-use path on Eagle Mill Rd. He added this area is outside of the Urban Growth Boundary. Commissioners Questions/Comments • Comment was made expressing concern regarding the alternative route ending at a pedestrian plaza. • Will this proposal include making changes with the roadway width? Answer: No. • Commissioners voiced concern regarding the increased traffic including delivery trucks this route will pose to N. Mountain Ave. It was noted that traffic impact to neighborhoods should be studied. • Comment was made that other roads already provide alternate routes to downtown; designating this route does not make sense. • It was noted that delivery trucks already use Eagle Mill Rd.;the point is to put this road on the County radar. • Will there be signage indicating a truck route or alternate route directing to Eagle Mill Rd.? Answer: Not necessarily;it will not be a designated truck route. Councilor David Chapman stressed the importance of Eagle Mill Rd. appearing on the Ashland TSP as it is a clear alternative for Hwy.99. He added when looking at the overall TSP, Eagle Mill Rd. is used frequently yet it does not appear on the plan;if it does not appear on the plan,the County will not do anything about it. He noted the Nevada St. Bridge does not currently exist and is an unfunded project but when it is constructed motorists will use Eagle Mill Rd.to get to destinations such as Southern Oregon University rather than driving through downtown. Commissioners Heesacker/Kampmann m/s to designate Eagle Mill Rd. and Oak St.,where Oak St. hits the Urban Growth Boundary,as an alternate route. Commissioners Brown, Burnham, Hammond, Heesacker, Kampmann, Kaplan, Marsh, Miller, Mindlin,Swales,Vieville,and Young,YES. Commissioner Gardiner, NO. Motion passed 12-1. NON-ACTION ITEMS Final TSP Timeline Mr. Faught clarified the final TSP timeline. He stressed the need for Commissioners to be present at the town hall presentation on October 24, 2012. Volunteers Needed to Conduct Bike/Pedestrian Counts for Road Diet Mr. Faught requested volunteers to conduct bike/pedestrian counts once the road diet is in place. Commissioners Swales,Young and Burnham volunteered. Mr. Faught noted the training will take place on September 6, 2012. Council TSP Update Mr. Faught requested the chairs of each Commission be present at the City Council meeting September 18, 2012. He added Kittelson &Associates will prepare a PowerPoint presentation. NEXT MEETING DATE The next meeting date of September 6,2012 from 6:00—9:00 p.m. was confirmed. ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjourned at 7:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Jodi Vizzini, Public Works Assistant Joint TC/PC August 12,2012 Page 4 of 4 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication September 18, 2012 — Business Meeting Liquor License Application FROM: Barbara Christensen, City Recorder, christeb @ashland.or.us SUMMARY Council approval of a Liquor License Application from Todd Tennyson dba Anya's Thai Bistro at 33 N 3`d Street. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: Application is for a new ownership. The City has determined that the license application review by the city is set forth in AMC Chapter 6.32 which requires that a determination be made to determine if the applicant complies with the city's land use, business license and restaurant registration requirements (AMC Chapter 6.32). In May 1999, the council decided it would make the above recommendations on all liquor license applications. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: N/A STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Endorse the application with the following: The city has determined that the location of this business complies with the city's land use requirements and that the applicant has a business license and has registered as a restaurant, if applicable. The city council recommends that the OLCC proceed with the processing of this application. SUGGESTED MOTION: Motion to approve liquor license for Todd Tennyson dba Anya's Thai Bistro at 33 N 3`d Street. ATTACHMENTS: None Page 1 of 1 PFFISA CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication September 18, 2012 — Business Meeting Liquor License Application FROM: Barbara Christensen, City Recorder, christeb @ashland.or.us SUMMARY Council approval of a Liquor License Application from Karen Stacy dba Alchemical Solutions, LLC at 700 Mistletoe Road, Suite 101. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: Application is for a new outlet because of the change of location. The City has determined that the license application review by the city is set forth in AMC Chapter 6.32 which requires that a determination be made to determine if the applicant complies with the city's land use, business license and restaurant registration requirements (AMC Chapter 6.32). In May 1999, the council decided it would make the above recommendations on all liquor license applications. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: N/A STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Endorse the application with the following: The city has determined that the location of this business complies with the city's land use requirements and that the applicant has a business license and has registered as a restaurant, if applicable. The city council recommends that the OLCC proceed with the processing of this application. SUGGESTED MOTION: Motion to approve liquor license for Karen Stacy dba Alchemical Solutions, LLC at 700 Mistletoe Road, Suite 101. ATTACHMENTS: None Page 1 of I CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication September 18, 2012 — Business Meeting Appointment to Firewise Commission FROM: Barbara Christensen, City Recorder, christeb @ashland.or.us SUMMARY Confirm Mayor's appointment of Matt Warshawsky to the Firewise Commission with a term to expire April 30, 2014. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: This is confirmation by the City Council on the Mayor's appointment to the Firewise Commission on application received. Ashland Municipal Code (AMC) Chapter 2.17.020 FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: N/A STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: None SUGGESTED MOTION: Motion to approve appointment of Matt Warshawsky to the Firewise Commission with a term to expire April 30, 2014. ATTACHMENTS: Application received Page I of I �r, CITY OF ASHLAND 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 christebnashland.or.us. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact the City Recorder at 488-5307. Attach additional sheets if necessary. Name—Matt Warshawsky Requesting to serve on:_Firewise Commission_(Commission/Committee) Address 821 Indiana St,Ashland Occupation_Software Publisher_ Phone: Home_541-488-0917_ Work Email—ashland@azeotech.com Fax 1. Education Background What schools have you attended? Cornell, University of Colorado What degrees do you hold? Bachelors Arts in Chemistry,Master in Atmospheric Chemistry What additional training or education have you had that would apply to this position? None I suppose,other than working on making our own house Firewise. I also served on the Transportation /Traffic Safety commission for 5 years, so am experienced working with the city government_ 2. Related Experience What prior work experience have you had that would help you if you were appointed to this position? Media experience for publicity. Construction experience for understanding how things are built and coming up with creative solutions that can actually be implemented Do you feel it would be advantageous for you to have further training in this field, such as attending conferences or seminars? Why?_Certainly. There is always something to learn. M`, 3. Interests Why are you applying for this position? It is an area of concern for me for the city,I've been wanting to get involved with the city again,and the timing of the meetings works with my schedule. I unfortunately had to step down from the Transportation commission because the evening meetings were difficult with my wife's work schedule at OSF(often evenings)and watching my 4 year old daughter. Meeting during the day is easy as my daughter is in school and I work for myself so can get away. 4. Availability Are you available to attend special meetings, in addition to the regularly scheduled meetings? Do you prefer day or evening meetings? _Yes, preferably day, but an occasional evening can certainly be achieved. 5. Additional Information How long have you lived in this community? _10 years Please use the space below to summarize any additional qualifications you have for this position 9/4/12 _Matt Warshawsky_ Date Signature O`, CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication September 18, 2012, Study Session Property Easement Request for Westwood Area FROM: Don Robertson, Parks Director, robertsd @ashland.or.us SUMMARY The Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission recommends providing an easement over City-owned land for an existing private residential driveway in the Westwood area that has historically served multiple households. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: A resident adjacent to the south border of the Westwood property is making improvements to his and his neighbors' access drive. During the survey he determined that a small portion of their drive overlaps onto Parks-managed property. The drive has been in place for many years and predates City ownership of the Westwood property. In order for the drive to be relocated fully onto his property, it would require removal of many of the oak trees that currently line the drive. City staff, including engineering, parks and recreation, and legal met with the property owners and recommends: granting an easement as described in Exhibit A to ensure continued historic access to all the residential properties and allow for improvements without removing the trees. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: N/A STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REOUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends approval of the easement as identified in the attached "Exhibit A" legal description and "Exhibit B" site map. SUGGESTED MOTION: Move to approve an easement as described in Exhibit A and shown on Exhibit B for the residential driveways. ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A: Legal Description by land surveyor Exhibit B: Site map by land surveyor Easement Agreement Page I of 1 �r, After Recording Return To: Joseph E.Kellerman Homecker,Cowling,Hassen&Heysell,LLP 717 Murphy Road Medford,OR 97504 Send Tax Statements To: Jeff Roberts 402 North Laurel Street Ashland,OR 97520 EASEMENT AGREEMENT This Agreement is made and entered into this day of 2012, by and between Jeffrey K. Roberts (hereinafter"Roberts") and City of Ashland, a municipal subdivision of the State of Oregon (hereinafter"City"); WITNESSETH RECITALS: A. City has record title to real property legally described in Exhibit A hereto. Roberts owns property legally described in Exhibit B hereto. B. There is a portion of real property within the metes and bounds descriptions of City's title that Roberts claims has been adversely possessed by his predecessors in interest long before City acquired any interest in the same. C. This claim is based upon long existing fence that was situated, and according to Roberts, was utilized by himself and predecessors in interest as if it demarked the boundary line between the parties' respective parcels. D. There is a roadway that serves as access to Roberts' Exhibit B property. On the northerly border thereof is the area in question that Roberts claims to have acquired by adverse possession. Said area in dispute is attached hereto as Exhibit C and is depicted on the map attached hereto as Exhibit D. E. City has requested that Roberts allow City access over and across a portion of Roberts' property as and for access to the City's property. Roberts is willing to do so on the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth. In addition, City is willing to grant Roberts an easement to the Exhibit C property on the terms set forth herein. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants contained herein, the parties hereby agree as follows: EASEMENT AGREEMENT—Page 1 i I. City hereby grants to 1) Roberts and 2) all other property owners who currently have lawful access across portion of roadway on Robert's Exhibit B property a perpetual easement for access, utilities and any other purposes over and across that portion of City's property which is hereby legally described in Exhibit C hereto and depicted on the map attached hereto as Exhibit D. This easement is exclusive in favor of Roberts and the other property owners who currently have lawful access across portion of roadway on Robert's Exhibit property, except that City may utilize easement area solely for access and fire protection purposes to City's remainder adjacent property to the north thereof. City may use the easement area only in emergency circumstances and only when City has no other reasonably convenient and viable access to City's remainder adjacent property. 2. Roberts hereby grants to City a non-exclusive easement over and across that portion of the roadway depicted on Exhibit D hereto that is due south of the Exhibit C easement that runs in a generally east/west direction. City's rights under this easement is solely for the purpose of allowing City access to its adjacent property located to the north and only for emergency purposes when there is no other reasonable access available to the City's adjacent property. 3. Roberts may install gates on the roadway that serves his property in such manner as he deems prudent and necessary. If such gates are locked, Roberts shall provide City with the means to gain access through the same for the purposes set forth in paragraph 2 above. 4. Should City, while exercising its rights herein, cause damage to Roberts' property, City shall restore the property to its pre-damaged condition all at City's sole expense. Otherwise, City shall have no obligation to maintain all or any portion of the area within easement granted to Roberts or the limited access rights granted to City herein. 5. The easement in favor of Roberts and the other property owners who currently have lawful access across portion of roadway on Robert's Exhibit B property herein is binding and shall inure to the benefit of the heirs, successors and assigns of the parties hereto. The easement inuring to the benefit of City is personal to the City and shall automatically terminate should City convey the adjacent real property to the north to any third party, person, or entity. 6. This Agreement shall be construed as if it was jointly drafted by the parties hereto. 7. Each of the parties hereby agrees to save,protect, indemnify and hold the other party harmless of and from any and all actions, claims, suits, demands or liabilities arising from or attributable to the other party's, or the other parties' guests, licensees, invitees, employees and/or agent's, exercise of any rights under this Agreement. 8. In the event suit, action or other proceeding is instituted to enforce or interpret any term, covenant or condition contained herein, the prevailing party in such suit or action EASEMENT AGREEMENT—Page 2 shall be entitled to recover from the non-prevailing party such costs as may be allowed by law and such prevailing party's reasonable attorneys' fees incurred through trial and upon any appeal therefrom. 9. The parties agree that the consideration for the easement is the resolution of the issues recited above. The parties agree that the mutual promises and covenants contained herein is adequate and valuable consideration. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunto set their hands and seals as of the date and year first above written. ROBERTS Jeffrey K. Roberts CITY By: Its Authorized Representative MUSERTILES\29478-001\e ement agme mdoc EASEMENT AGREEMENT—Page 3 Commencing at a 2" iron pipe situated at the quarter corner common to Sections 5 and 8, Township 39 South, Range 1 East of the Willamette Meridian in Jackson County, Oregon, thence South 00 013' 53". East, 1333.07 feet to a 5/8" iron rod for the true point of beginning; thence South 00 013'53" East along that boundary line by Agreement recorded as Instrument No. 78-09396, Official Records of Jackson County, Oregon, 532.67 feet to a 5/8" iron rod; thence South 39 016134" West, 158.61 feet to a 5/8" iron rod situated in the southerly boundary line of the north half of the Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of said Section 8; thence leaving said Boundary Line, South 89 058110" West, along the last hereinabove referred to Southerly boundary line, 67.93 feet to a 5/8" iron rod situated at the Southwest corner of the north half of the South- west Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of said Section 8; thence ' South 89 055141" West along the Southerly boundary line of the north half of the south half of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 8, a distance of 831.15 feet to a 5/8" iron rod situated at the southerly end of that boundary line by Agreement re- corded as Instrument No. 78-09397, said Official Records; thence leaving the southerly boundary line as last hereinabove referred to, North 00 013'53' West along that boundary line by Agreement, as last hereinabove referred to, 658.94 feet to a 5/8" iron rod; thence leaving said Boundary Line, South 89 051'44" East, 1000.00 feet to the true point. of beginning. Ci(41� 1 Commencing at the Northwest corner of the Northeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section B in Township 39 South, Range 1 East of the Willamette Meridian in Jackson County, Oregon; thence West, along the North line of said Southwest Quarter, 132.00 feet; thence North, parallel with the West line of said Section 8, a distance of 660.00 feet to the North line of tract described in Volume 574, Page 334, of the Deed Records of Jackson County, Oregon; thence East, along the North line of said tract and the Easterly projection thereof, 792.00 feet to the true point of beginning; thence South, parallel with the West line of said Section 8, a distance of 660.00 feet to the.North line of said Southwest Quarter; thence East, along said North line 660.00 feet to the Northeast corner of said Southwest Quarter; thence North, along the East line of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 8, a distance of 660.00 feet to intersect the North line of tract described in Volume 42, Page 570, of the Deed Records of Jackson County, Oregon; thence West, along the North line of said tract 660.00 feet to the true point of beginning. For Informational purposes only, the following is included; (Map No. 391EOBSD, Tax Lot 200, Account No. 1-010125-2, Code 5-11) I. A strip of land, over and across a portion of that certain property described in Document No. 86-26704, Official Records, Jackson County, Oregon, and located in the Northwest Quarter of Section 8 in Township 39 South,Range 1 East, Willamette Meridian, City of Ashland, Jackson County, Oregon and being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the Center Quarter Corner of Section 8 in Township 39 South, Range 1 East, Willamette Meridian, thence North 04e 3723"East, 664.96 feet to a 519" iron pin marking the Northeast Corner of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 8; thence along the north line of said Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter, South 89e 55' 57" West, 197.18 feet to the point of intersection with the west line of Westwood Street in the City of Ashland, Jackson County, Oregon, said point being also the Point of Beginning; thence continuing along said north line, South 89° 55' 57" West, 291.11 feet; thence leaving said north line, North 00 04' 03" West, 4.00 feet; thence parallel with and distant 4.00 feet from said north line,North 89e 55' 57"East, 280.70 feet; thence North 440 55' 57 East, 14.68 feet to said west line of Westwood Street; thence along said west line, South, 0° 13' 07" East, 14.39 feet to the Point of Beginning. REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL LA SUR EYOR OREGON -ULY i e.19D4 RICHARD F.ALSPACH No.2663 Expires •7o C EXHIBIT 'B' 39 IE 0860 TL 100 ti CITY OF ASHLAND W OR 86-25704 N 0 0 0 DATE: AUGUST 7, 2012 3 SCALE., I"= 100' j PROPOSED EASEMENT - - N89-55'57"E h ;�L3 STRAWBERRY LANE _ o ___� 280.70' — 5895557"W S895557"W 197.18' 291.]1 EXISTING GRAVEL DRIVE 518" IRON PIN W/ ALUMINUM CAP MARKED 'CSN 1/64' I LINE TABLE LINE LENGTH BEARING L 1 4.00 N00'04'03"W L2 14.68 N44-5557"E L3 14.39 SOO'13'07"E 39 1E OBBD TL 200 LEGEND ROBERTS I --_---- OR 2011-13153 PROPERTY LINE W i ' -------- EASEMENT LINE OR 03-12473 OFFICIAL RECORDS, JACKSON COUNTY, OREGON o v: 2 THIS EXHIBIT IS FOR GRAPHIC PURPOSES I ONLY. ANY ERRORS OR OMISSIONS ON THIS EXHIBIT SHALL NOT AFFECT THE DEED DESCRIPTION. lREGISTERED PROFESSIONAL l-AItW SURVEYOR TERRASURVEY, INC_ - _ PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYORS dREGr N OR is.ffN RICHARD F. ALSPACH ' 274 FOURTII STREET L No. 2653 ASHLAND,,OREGON' 97520 Expires 12-31-2013 (541)482-6474 terrainebisp.net 1 CENTER 1/4 CORNER, SECTION 8 (POINT OF I COMMENCEMENT) EXHIBIT `A' A strip of land, over and across a portion of that certain property described in Document No. 86-26704, Official Records, Jackson County, Oregon, and located in the Northwest Quarter of Section 8 in Township 39 South, Range 1 East, Willamette Meridian, City of Ashland, Jackson County, Oregon and being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the Center Quarter Corner of Section 8 in Township 39 South, Range 1 East, Willamette Meridian, thence North 04° 37' 23" East, 664.96 feet to a 5/8" iron pin marking the Northeast Corner of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 8; thence along the north line of said Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter, South 89° 55' 57" West, 197.18 feet to the point of intersection with the west line of Westwood Street in the City of Ashland, Jackson County, Oregon, said point being also the Point of Beginning; thence continuing along said north line, South 89° 55' 57" West, 291.11 feet; thence leaving said north line, North 0° 04' 03" West, 4.00 feet; thence parallel with and distant 4.00 feet from said north line,North 89° 55' 57" East, 280.70 feet; thence North 44° 55' 57" East, 14.68 feet to said west line of Westwood Street; thence along said west line, South, 0* 13' 07" East, 14.39 feet to the Point of Beginning. REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL LA SUR EYOR OREGON JULY 19'1994 RICHARD F.ALSPACH No. 2863 Expires CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication September 18, 2012, Business Meeting Award of a Contract to the Apparent Low Bidder for the Ashland Creek Trunkline Reconstruction FROM: Scott A. Fleury, Engineering Services Manager, Public Works Department, fleurys @ashland.or.us SUMMARY On September 11, 2012 at 2:00 p.m. bids submitted for the Ashland Creek Trunkline Reconstruction phase lwere opened and publicly read. Bids were received from five local excavation contractors with KOGAP Excavation providing the low bid. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: Bidding Procedure: The Ashland Creek Trunkline Reconstruction phase 1 was publicly bid on August 28, 2012. Project plans and specifications were sent to several plan review centers and were included on the City's website. A non-mandatory pre-bid meeting was held on September 5, 2012 to answer contractor's specific questions. Seven contractors were present for the meeting. Bids were opened on September 11, 2012, at 2 p.m. with five contractors responding with bids. All five bids were valid and contained the required bonds, documentation, and acknowledgements. Bidding information is shown on the attached proposed summary. Proiect Description: Phase one of the project entails construction of a new 8" and 12" sanitary sewer main through Ashland Creek Park and across Ashland Creek along with 3 new sewer manholes. The creek crossing requires special structural footings for holding and securing the creek crossing pipe in order to handle storm and high water events. The construction also requires the installation of numerous tree protection and erosion control measures when working within the riparian corridor of Ashland Creek. The contractor will also be required to clean up any significant rutting from equipment in Ashland Creek Park. Phase two of the project will be bid in spring of 2013 and entail the construction of 1800 feet of cured in place pipe for the existing 24" clay sewer trunkline running along Ashland Creek. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: The Ashland Creek Trunkline Reconstruction phase 1 is funded directly by the City as a capital improvement project. The project budget in the CIP for phase 1 and 2 is $458,750. Staff believes this amount will be adequate to cover the cost of both phase 1 and 2 of the project. Page I of 2 OW I`, CITY OF ASHLAND STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends that the Council accept the bid and authorize the award of contract to KOGAP Excavation in the amount of$217,125 for the Ashland Creek Trunkline Reconstruction phase 1. Reasons for acceptance include: 1. The bid is the lowest of five received 2. The bid is a valid legal bid containing all necessary information and bond 3. A re-bid of the project would result in additional costs encumbered by the City and possibly higher bid results SUGGESTED MOTION: Move to approve the bid and award of contract to KOGAP Excavation in the amount of$217,125 for Ashland Creek Trunkline Reconstruction phase 1. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Summary of bids 2. Bid schedule from KOGAP Excavation Page 2 of 2 �r, ® w v U O 4 N .D C U U c w c = x °• o o rn E O E O o a � W a Py @ O a C I� w M Q vi co T U 0 c X O o O CD a Cj d c. W U u o ti 9a � S Lr•-1 E•"' F N U r-1 V o y ~; V C CL N Ln .~.. .Rt. N X 1 ra dud E SD.-O v -o CIO v O C] N _o Za"av caw ° c 3 1 'Li aa` C? 2 z v'� Zm° w° QQ �o g o°c 0000pO o c c oo p S O O O S o 0 0 o O O S S S S 8$S O o p 8888oaWV< o � poo888$ 8 FOqOoW mbS ° e ' _.}OOOOOON SAD {DSOOONO O� N O N �ffAA NN N rya °° ° S ° SSSS $ 8SS000B$ 8 � 588$ 88 $ � O O p O O ONO 0 0 O O W H O C O W ~ p O o n U'CJr to L6e6 W L+IN N N lh U r CJ w H A z ZZ 0 ¢ U Z O = a: D ? U 4 Z O k z U y O O Z V N N Hf S Q W N W U O W O U U 'J 2 �rrr K F- Z U a 4mJ n W Wm rW U U w N 0 z O Q O C U m p Q ul ri m a Q Z 1• z_ W O Zo O cwmoi� ¢ ¢ = J h s m A O Y Z ti K j a LU nW W U W Q Z w O R OOM Vl Z. O F- NxOOO wU � J Y U m � UxZ=yw � � v w K w °o W Z Z§ a o = Y U fV» ¢ a na. LL w2ww zz W C UZ O Z w w Kw0 W Gl W m o Fw- H zX ?i Q r✓ Z 7U' J W W 0500 W U W W J 4' O U ? Ww WC>e'e W F�- � WZof D % h'. KIt f dr CC w ¢ ¢F la--h¢-- X V z W J N¢ W W 0 N Q 4t O = F- O- UZZZZZ W Z w J W Z Z 'Z � ZW �U' W aQF¢- z6Q¢ W K W W V ¢ Iw- mOa O OYO W YU' ZF - W mfD fn F- r�2z O-6 m W aa ZZ ddZZ w W w W ¢ W W U LL U' U Z 0 2 U (D oOdQ W QJQU w W 7 it mN ?< OO � Z = � ==UUUUU ¢ w�UK ¢U' co O f K m z Z Z Z z x Z?? H 6 C - O a z g � owrcwJaQ: mzz— OOOwwwp �w -, wog000 . N W KU W my W �U V UU W' C70.'rlm W\2N Vi I-U � n � m r IL o �s CITY OF -ASHLAND Council Communication September 18, 2012 Business Meeting Approval of an Intergovernmental Agreement between the Oregon Department of Transportation and the City of Ashland for Code Assistance for the Unified Development Code Phase Two FROM: Maria Harris, Planning Manager, harrism @ashland.or.us SUMMARY The City Council's authorization is requested to enter into an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) with the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) for Code Assistance from the Transportation and Growth Management (TGM) program for the second phase of the Unified Development Code project. The purpose of the project is to combine the land use ordinance and related standards into one document with improved organization, wording, formatting and graphics. The project also includes an evaluation of the planning application process and green development incentives, and preparation of code amendment options addressing these areas for consideration. The code is expected to be completed by June 2013, with the formal adoption process taking place directly thereafter. The statement of work is an exhibit to the IGA, and describes the responsibilities of all entities involved in the second phase of the project. The TGM award is$46,500, and requires the execution of the IGA. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: On September 6, 2011 the City Council voted to direct staff to submit a grant application to obtain funding for the Unified Development Code project to address the Council's adopted goals concerning making the planning process more clear, timely and predictable, and creating incentives for energy, water, land efficient and multi-modal development. The City received notice from the TGM program in May 8, 2012 that the grant was awarded, and proceeded to develop the IGA. There were some delays in development of the IGA due to state funding freezes, and as a result, the IGA was transmitted to the City on August 28, 2012. The Code Assistance program enables the assistance of a consultant with land use code expertise to assist with the revisions of the code, a graphics package, a procedures and green code evaluation, and development of the final draft. The City is responsible for project management, review of project deliverables, meeting preparation, conducting focus group meetings, project web page management, and the study session and adoption process preparation and presentations. The project has been underway since April 2012. The first phase of work is nearing completion, and included preparation of background materials, the project introduction and review at the Planning Commission and advisory commissions, and development of the first draft of the reorganized and reformatted code. The Planning Commission has held several study sessions, and discussed the public outreach approach, the code outline, use and dimension tables, review of the policy issues from the Page 1 of 2 �r, CITY OF -ASHLAND 2006 Land Use Ordinance Review, and updating the manufactured home standards. The Planning Commission is scheduled to begin review of the first draft at the September study session. TGM is a joint program of ODOT and the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development. TGM includes a program of grants for local governments for planning projects. The program objective is to better integrate transportation and land use planning, and develop new ways to manage growth in order to achieve compact pedestrian, bicycle and transit friendly development. The City of Ashland has been awarded a $46,500.Code Assistance grant from TGM for the second phase of the Unified Development Code project. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: The Code Assistance program funds the consultant time, and the full amount of the grant is used for this purpose. The City is not required to provide a direct cash matching amount, but is required to provide staff time for the completing the tasks identified in the statement of work. STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends that Council approve the IGA with ODOT for Code Assistance from the TGM program for the second phase of the Unified Development Code project. SUGGESTED MOTION: Move approval of entering into an Intergovernmental Agreement between the City of Ashland and Oregon Department of Transportation for Code Assistance for the City of Ashland Unified Development Code Phase Two. ATTACHMENTS: Intergovernmental Agreement Page 2 of 2 TGM Grant Agreement No.28905 TGM File Code CIBI-12 EA#TG 12GF32 INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT Code Assistance for the City of Ashland Unified Development Code Phase 2 THIS INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is made and entered into by and between the STATE OF OREGON, acting by and through its Department of Transportation ("ODOT" or"Agency"), and City of Ashland ("City"). RECITALS 1. The Transportation and Growth Management ("TGM") Program is a joint program of ODOT and the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development. 2. The TGM Program includes a program of community assistance for local governments to assist with better integration of transportation and land use planning and development of new ways to manage growth in order to achieve compact pedestrian, bicycle, and transit friendly urban development. 3. This TGM Project (as defined below) is financed with federal Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users ("SAFETEA-LU") funds. State funds that are paid under this Agreement to the Consultant (as defined below) are used as match for SAFETEA-LU funds. 4. By authority granted in ORS 190.110, state agencies may enter into agreements with units of local government or other state agencies to perform any functions and activities that the parties to the agreement or their officers or agents have the duty or authority to perform. 5. ODOT intends to enter into a PSK (as defined below) with a Consultant(as defined below) for the Project that benefits the City, and as a condition to entering into this PSK and making the Consultant's Amount available, ODOT requires the City to execute and agree to the terms of this Agreement 6. The parties desire to enter into this Agreement for their mutual benefit. NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: SECTION 1. DEFINITIONS Unless the context requires otherwise, the following terms, when used in this Agreement, shall have the meanings assigned to them below: - 1 - TGM Grant Agreement No.28905 TGM File Code CIBI-12 EA#TG12GF32 A. "City's Project Manager" means the individual designated by City as its project manager for the Project. B. "Consultant" means the personal services contractor(s)hired by ODOT to do the tasks indicated in Exhibit A as being the responsibility of such contractor(s). C. "Consultant's Amount" means the Amount payable by ODOT to the Consultant for the deliverables described in Exhibit A for which the Consultant is responsible. D. "Direct Project Costs" means those costs which are directly associated with the Project. These may include the salaries and benefits of personnel assigned to the Project and the cost of supplies, postage, travel, and printing. General administrative costs, capital costs, and overhead are not Direct Project Costs. Any jurisdiction or metropolitan planning organization that has federally approved indirect cost plans may treat such indirect costs as Direct Project Costs. E. "Federally Eligible Costs" means those costs which are Direct Project Costs of the type listed in Exhibit D incurred by Consultant during the term of this Agreement. F. "ODOT's Contract Administrator" means the individual designated by ODOT to be its contract administrator for this Agreement. G. "PSK" means the personal services contract(s) executed between ODOT and the Consultant related to the portion of the Project that is the responsibility of the Consultant. H. "Project" means the project described in Exhibit A. I. "Termination Date" has the meaning set forth in Section 2.A below. J. "Work Product" has the meaning set forth in Section 4.I below. SECTION 2. TERMS OF AGREEMENT A. Term. This Agreement becomes effective on the date on which all parties have signed this Agreement and all approvals (if any) required to be obtained by ODOT have been received. This Agreement terminates on June 30, 2013 ("Termination Date"). B. Consultant's Amount. The Consultant's Amount shall not exceed $46,500 and is disbursed as provided under the PSK. - 2 - TGM Grant Agreement No.28905 TGM File Code C1B1-12 EA It TG 12GF32 SECTION 3. CITY'S REPRESENTATIONS, WARRANTIES, AND CERTIFICATION A. City represents and warrants to ODOT as follows: I. It is a municipality duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of Oregon. 2. It has full legal right and authority to execute and deliver this Agreement and to observe and perform its duties, obligations, covenants and agreements hereunder and to undertake and complete the Project. 3. All official action required to be taken to authorize this Agreement has been taken, adopted and authorized in accordance with applicable state law and the organizational documents of City. 4. This Agreement has been executed and delivered by an authorized officer(s) of City and constitutes the legal, valid and binding obligation of City enforceable against it in accordance with its terms. 5. The authorization, execution and delivery of this Agreement by City, the observation and performance of its duties, obligations, covenants and agreements hereunder, and the undertaking and completion of the Project do not and will not contravene any existing law, rule or regulation or any existing order, injunction,judgment, or decree of any court or governmental or administrative agency, authority or person having jurisdiction over it or its property or violate or breach any provision of any agreement, instrument or indenture by which City or its property is bound. 6. The statement of work attached to this Agreement as Exhibit A has been reviewed and approved by the necessary official(s) of City. B. As federal funds are involved in this Project, City, by execution of this Agreement, makes the certifications set forth in Exhibits B and C. SECTION 4. GENERAL COVENANTS OF CITY A. City shall complete the Project; provided, however, that City shall not be liable for the quality or completion of that part of the Project which Exhibit A describes as the responsibility of the Consultant. 3 - TGM Grant Agreement No.25905 TGM File Code C1 BI-12 EA#TG 12GF32 B. City shall, in a good and workmanlike manner, perform the work, and provide the deliverables, for which City is identified in Exhibit A as being responsible. C. City shall perform such work identified in Exhibit A as City's responsibility as an independent contractor and shall be exclusively responsible for all costs and expenses related to its employment of individuals to perform such work. City shall also be responsible for providing for employment-related benefits and deductions that are required by law, including, but not limited to, federal and state income tax withholdings, unemployment taxes, workers' compensation coverage, and contributions to any retirement system. D. All employers, including City, that employ subject workers who work under this Agreement in the State of Oregon shall comply with ORS 656.017 and provide the required Workers' Compensation coverage unless such employers are exempt under ORS 656.126. Employers Liability insurance with coverage limits of not less than $500,000 must be included. City shall ensure that each of its contractors complies with these requirements. E. City shall not enter into any subcontracts to accomplish any of the work described in Exhibit A, unless it first obtains written approval from ODOT. F. City agrees to cooperate with ODOT's Contract Administrator. At the request of ODOT's Contract Administrator, City agrees to: (1) Meet with the ODOT's Contract Administrator; and (2) Form a project steering committee (which shall include ODOT's Contract Administrator)to oversee the Project. G. City shall comply with all federal, state and local laws, regulations, executive orders and ordinances applicable to the work under this Agreement, including, without limitation, applicable provisions of the Oregon Public Contracting Code. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, City expressly agrees to comply with: (1) Title VI of Civil Rights Act of 1964; (2) Title V and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973; (3) the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and ORS 659A.142; (4) all regulations and administrative rules established pursuant to the foregoing laws; and (5) all other applicable requirements of federal and state civil rights and rehabilitation statutes, rules and regulations. H. City shall maintain all fiscal records relating to this Agreement in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. In addition, City shall maintain any other records pertinent to this Agreement in such a manner as to clearly - 4 - TGM Grant Agreement No.28905 TGM File Code CIB1-12 EA#TG12GF32 document City's performance. City acknowledges and agrees that ODOT, the Oregon Secretary of State's Office and the federal government and their duly authorized representatives shall have access to such fiscal records and other books, documents, papers, plans, and writings of City that are pertinent to this Agreement to perform examinations and audits and make copies, excerpts and transcripts. City shall retain and keep accessible all such fiscal records, books, documents, papers, plans, and writings for a minimum of six (6) years, or such longer period as may be required by applicable law, following final payment and termination of this Agreement, or until the conclusion of any audit, controversy or litigation arising out of or related to this Agreement, whichever date is later. I. To the extent it has any rights in the Work Product granted to it pursuant to the PSK, ODOT hereby grants to City a royalty free, non-exclusive license to reproduce any Work Product for distribution upon request to members of the public. SECTION 5. CONSULTANT ODOT shall enter into a PSK with the Consultant to accomplish the work described in Exhibit A as being the responsibility of the Consultant. A. Selection of the Consultant will be conducted by ODOT in accordance with ODOT procedures with the participation; B. ODOT will review and approve Consultant's work, billings and progress reports; C. City will appoint a Project Manager to be City's principal contact person for ODOT's Contract Administrator and the Consultant on all matters dealing with the Project. SECTION 6. ODOT'S REPRESENTATIONS AND COVENANTS A. ODOT certifies that, at the time this Agreement is executed, sufficient funds are authorized and available for expenditure to finance ODOT's portion of this Agreement within the appropriation or limitation of its current biennial budget. B. The statement of work attached to this Agreement as Exhibit A has been reviewed and approved by the necessary official(s) of ODOT. - 5 - TGM Grant Agreement No.28905 TGM File Code CIB1-12 EA#TG12GF32 C. ODOT will assign a Contract Administrator for this Agreement who will be ODOT's principal contact person regarding administration of this Agreement, the monitoring of the Consultant's work, and the review and approval of the Consultant's work, billings and progress reports. D. ODOT shall enter into a PSK with the Consultant to perform the work described in Exhibit A designated as being the responsibility of the Consultant, and in such a case ODOT agrees to pay the Consultant in accordance with the terms of the PSK up to the Consultant's Amount. SECTION 7. TERMINATION This Agreement may be terminated by mutual written consent of all parties. ODOT may terminate this Agreement effective upon delivery of written notice to City, or at such later date as may be established by ODOT under, but not limited to, any of the following conditions: A. City fails to complete work specified in Exhibit A within the time specified in Exhibit A, or fails to perform any of the provisions of this Agreement and does not correct any such failure within 10 days of receipt of written notice or the date specified by ODOT in such written notice. B. Consultant fails to complete work specified in Exhibit A within the time specified in this Agreement or the PSK, including any extensions thereof, and does not correct any such failure within 10 days of receipt of written notice or the date specified by ODOT in such written notice. C. If federal or state laws, regulations or guidelines are modified or interpreted in such a way that either the work under this Agreement or the PSK is prohibited or ODOT is prohibited from paying for such work from the planned funding source. D. If ODOT fails to receive funding, appropriations, limitations or other expenditure authority sufficient to allow ODOT, in the exercise of its reasonable administrative discretion, to continue to make payments for performance of this Agreement or the PSK. In the case of termination pursuant to A, B, C or D above, ODOT shall have any remedy at law or in equity. Any termination of this Agreement shall not prejudice any right or obligations accrued to the parties prior to termination. - 6 - TGM Grant Agreement No.28905 TGM File Code C1B1-12 EA#TG12GF32 SECTION 8. GENERAL PROVISIONS A. Time is of the essence of this Agreement. B. Except as otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement, any notices to be given hereunder shall be given in writing by personal delivery, facsimile, or mailing the same, postage prepaid, to ODOT or City at the address or number set forth on the signature page of this Agreement, or to such other addresses or numbers as either party may hereafter indicate pursuant to this Section. Any communication or notice so addressed and mailed is in effect five (5) days after the date postmarked. Any communication or notice delivered by facsimile shall be deemed to be given when receipt of the transmission is generated by the transmitting machine. To be effective against ODOT, such facsimile transmission must be confirmed by telephone notice to ODOT's Contract Administrator. Any communication or notice by personal delivery shall be deemed to.be given when actually delivered. C. MOT and City are the only parties to this Agreement and are the only parties entitled to enforce the terms of this Agreement. Nothing in this Agreement gives, is intended to give, or shall be construed to give or provide any benefit or right not held by or made generally available to the public, whether directly, indirectly or otherwise, to third persons (including but not limited to any Consultant)unless such third persons are individually identified by name herein and expressly described as intended beneficiaries of the terns of this Agreement. D. Sections 4(H), 4(I), and 8 of this Agreement and any other provision which by its terms is intended to survive termination of this Agreement shall survive. E. The parties agree as follows: (a) Contribution. If any third party makes any claim or brings any action, suit or proceeding alleging a tort as now or hereafter defined in ORS 30.260 ("Third Party Claim") against ODOT or Grantee ("Notified Party") with respect to which the other party ("Other Party") may have liability, the Notified Party must promptly notify the Other Party in writing of the Third Party Claim and deliver to the Other Party a copy of the claim, process, and all legal pleadings with respect to the Third Party Claim. Each party is entitled to participate in the defense of a Third Party Claim, and to defend a Third Party Claim with counsel of its own choosing. Receipt by the Other Party of the notice and copies required in this paragraph and meaningful opportunity for the Other Party to participate in the investigation, defense and settlement of the Third Party Claim with counsel of its own choosing are conditions precedent to the Other Party's liability with respect to the Third Party Claim. - 7 - TGM Grant Agreement No.28905 TGM File Code CIBI-12 EA#TG12GF32 With respect to a Third Party Claim for which ODOT is jointly liable with the Grantee (or would be if joined in the Third Party Claim ), ODOT shall contribute to the amount of expenses (including attorneys' fees), judgments, fines and amounts paid in settlement actually and reasonably incurred and paid or payable by the Grantee in such proportion as is appropriate to reflect the relative fault of ODOT on the one hand and of the Grantee on the other hand in connection with the events which resulted in such expenses, judgments, fines or settlement amounts, as well as any other relevant equitable considerations. The relative fault of ODOT on the one hand and of the Grantee on the other hand shall be determined by reference to, among other things, the parties' relative intent, knowledge, access to information and opportunity to correct or prevent the circumstances resulting in such expenses, judgments, fines or settlement amounts. The ODOT's contribution amount in any instance is capped to the same extent it would have been capped under Oregon law, including but not limited to the Oregon Tort Claims Act, ORS 30.260 to 30.300, if ODOT had sole liability in the proceeding. With respect to a Third Party Claim for which the Grantee is jointly liable with ODOT (or would be if joined in the Third Party Claim), the Grantee shall contribute to the amount of expenses (including attorneys' fees), judgments, fines and amounts paid in settlement actually and reasonably incurred and paid or payable by ODOT in such proportion as is appropriate to reflect the relative fault of the Grantee on the one hand and of ODOT on the other hand in connection with the events which resulted in such expenses, judgments, fines or settlement amounts, as well as any other relevant equitable considerations. The relative fault of the Grantee on the one hand and of ODOT on the other hand shall be determined by reference to, among other things, the parties' relative intent, knowledge, access to information and opportunity to correct or prevent the circumstances resulting in such expenses, judgments, fines or settlement amounts. The Grantee's contribution amount in any instance is capped to the same extent it would have been capped under Oregon law, including but not limited to the Oregon Tort Claims Act, ORS 30.260 to 30.300, if it had sole liability in the proceeding. (b) Choice of Law; Designation of Forum; Federal Forum. (1) The laws of the State of Oregon (without giving effect to its conflicts of law principles) govern all matters arising out of or relating to this Agreement, including, without limitation, its validity, interpretation, construction, performance, and enforcement. (2) Any party bringing a legal action or proceeding against any other party arising out of or relating to this Agreement shall bring the legal action or proceeding in the Circuit Court of the State of Oregon for Marion County (unless Oregon law requires that it be brought and conducted in another county). Each party hereby consents to the exclusive jurisdiction of such court, waives any objection to venue, and waives any claim that such forum is an inconvenient forum. (3) c)Notwithstanding Section 8.E (b)(2), if a claim must be brought in a federal forum, then it must be brought and adjudicated solely and exclusively within the United States District Court for the District of Oregon. This Section 8.E(b)(3c) applies to a claim brought against the State of Oregon only to the extent Congress has appropriately abrogated the State of Oregon's sovereign immunity and is not consent by the State of - 8 - TGM Grant Agreement No.28905 TGM File Code CIB1-12 EA#TG12GF32 Oregon to be sued in federal court. This Section 8.E(b)(3c) is also not a waiver by the State of Oregon of any form of defense or immunity, including but not limited to sovereign immunity and immunity based on the Eleventh Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. (c) Alternative Dispute Resolution. The parties shall attempt in good faith to resolve any dispute arising out of this Agreement. This may be done at any management level, including at a level higher than persons directly responsible for administration of the Agreement. In addition, the parties may agree to utilize a jointly selected mediator or arbitrator (for non-binding arbitration) to resolve the dispute short of litigation. F. This Agreement and attached Exhibits (which are by this reference incorporated herein) constitute the entire agreement between the parties on the subject matter hereof. There are no understandings, agreements, or representations, oral or written, not specified herein regarding this Agreement. No modification or change of terms of this Agreement shall bind either party unless in writing and signed by all parties and all necessary approvals have been obtained. Budget modifications and adjustments from the work described in Exhibit A must be processed as an amendment(s) to this Agreement and the PSK. No waiver or consent shall be effective unless in writing and signed by the party against whom such waiver or consent is asserted. Such waiver, consent, modification or change, if made, shall be effective only in the specific instance and for the specific purpose given. The failure of ODOT to enforce any provision of this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver by ODOT of that or any other provision. G. This Agreement may be executed in several counterparts (facsimile or otherwise) all of which when taken together shall constitute one agreement binding on all parties, notwithstanding that all parties are not signatories to the same counterpart. Each copy of this Agreement so executed shall constitute an original. On December 1, 2010 the Director of the Oregon Department of Transportation approved DIR-06, in which authority is delegated from the Director of the Oregon Department of Transportation to the Operations Deputy Director and Transportation Development Division Administrator, to approve agreements with local governments, other state agencies, federal governments, state governments, other countries, and tribes as described in ORS 190 developed in consultation with the Chief Procurement Officer. - 9 - TGM Grant Agreement No.28905 TGM File Code C1B1-12 EA#TG12GF32 City City of Ashland By: (Official's Signature) (Printed Name and Title of Official) Date: ODOT STATE OF OREGON, by and through its Department of Transportation By: Jerri Bohard, Division Administrator Transportation Development Division Date: Contact Names: Maria Harris City of Ashland City Hall,20 East Main Street . Ashland,OR 97520-1849 Phone: 5415522045 Fax: 541-488-5311 E-Mail: harrism @ashland.or.us Bill Holmstrom,Contract Administrator Transportation and Growth Management Program 635 Capitol Street NE,Suite 150 Salem,OR 97301 Phone: 503-373-0050 Ext265 Fax: 503-378-5518 E-Mail: bill.holmstromCstate.or.us 10 - TGM Grant Agreement No.28905 TGM File Code C1B1-12 EA#TG12GF32 STATEMENT OF WORK Oregon Transportation and Growth Management Program(TGM) Smart Development Code Assistance Project for the City of Ashland Ashland Unified Development Code—Phase 2 A. PROJECT MANAGEMENT TEAM ("PMT") Consultant—Siegel Planning Services Scot Siegel scot @siegelplanning.com 16067 SW Boones Ferry Road 503-699-5850 Lake Oswego,OR 97035 City of Ashland Maria Harris, Planning Manager harrism @ashland.or.us Department of Community Development 541-552-2045 20 E Main Street Ashland,OR 97520 Agency—TGM Code Assistance Program Bill Holmstrom, Project Manager bill.holmstrom @state.or.us Oregon Department of Land Conservation& Development 503-373-0050 Ext.265 635 Capitol Street NE, Suite 150 Salem, OR 97301 ODOT Regional Planner John McDonald john.mcdonald @odot.state.or.us Oregon Department of Transportation 541-957-3688 3500 NW Stewart Parkway Roseburg,OR 97470 DLCD Regional Representative Josh LeBombard josh.lebombard @state.or.us Oregon Department of Land Conservation& Development 541-414-7932 673 Market Street Medford, OR 97504 B. PROJECT BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES Background The City of Ashland Land Use Ordinance(ALUO) has been incrementally amended numerous times since it was originally adopted in 1964. Each update was prepared and adopted independently. Many of these updates were part of projects to plan for compact, transportation-efficient development. Some of these projects were funded by TGM. - I1 - TGM Grant Agreement No.28905 TGM File Code CIBI-12 EA#TG12GF32 There are now several documents that comprise the City's land use regulations and standards. As a result,today's collection of development regulations present obstacles to smart development as they are often confusing, difficult to navigate,repetitious,and inconsistent. The City of Ashland is undertaking a project to combine the ALUO and related development standards into a Unified Land Use Code with improved organization,wording, formatting and graphics. The focus of the project is reorganizing the existing development standards into one user-friendly document that will remove existing barriers to transportation-efficient development. The project will also include an evaluation of the planning application process and green development measures, and preparation of code amendment options in these areas consistent with TGM objectives. This project was initiated by the City of Ashland and the first phase of this work (Phase 1)was funded by the City. Phase 1 is currently being completed. The City has requested TGM Code Assistance to complete the second phase of the project. Project Objectives 1. Draft an updated development code that includes all parts of the City's development standards in one consistent document to remove impediments to smart development. 2. Include updated standards to be consistent with the City's goals and TGM objectives in the areas of procedures, economic development, sustainability, and green development. 3. Engage the community in a meaningful public process in order to gain their input and use the results to edit and refine the code update. 4. Guide the resulting updated code through the Adoption process. Purpose of Contract-Transportation Relationships and Benefits The TGM Program is a joint effort of the Oregon Department of Transportation(ODOT)and the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development OLCD). The purposes of TGM are to strengthen the capability of local governments to effectively manage growth and comply with the Transportation Planning Rule, to integrate transportation and land use planning,and to encourage transportation-efficient land uses that support modal choice and the efficient performance of transportation facilities and services. This project will meet TGM objectives by removing barriers in the development code to the implementation of compact, mixed-use,transportation-efficient development patterns.The project will use work completed in previous TGM projects and ensure consistent implementation throughout the City. C. GENERAL PROVISIONS Project Management Project management tasks are integrated into each of the tasks in this Work Order Contract(WOC),but are described here to establish a framework for managing the project.A Project Management Team (PMT), comprised of a City Project Manager,Agency Project Manager,and Consultant shall provide overall guidance for the project. PMT shall meet as specified within individual tasks to coordinate logistics of the project and to give feedback to Consultant. PMT shall meet by telephone conference; the duration of each meeting shall not exceed two hours. City shall lead Planning Commission Work Sessions and Public Hearings as described in this SOW. City shall provide all necessary public notices and notifications. 12 - TGM Grant Agreement No.28905 TGM File Code Cl B1-12 EA#TG 12GF32 Consultant shall provide materials to PMT for review and comment at least 14 working days prior to the scheduled distribution of a deliverable to.City, unless Agency Project Manager agrees to a different length of time. Consultant shall provide meeting materials to City Project Manager for photocopying and distribution,and to Agency Contract Administrator, at least seven calendar days prior to the relevant meeting date unless agreed to differently by PMT. This statement of work describes the responsibilities of all entities involved in this cooperative project. The work order contract (for the purposes of the quoted language below the "WOC") with the work order consultant("Consultant") shall contain the following provisions in substantially the form set forth below: "Project Cooperation This statement of work describes the responsibilities of the entities involved in this cooperative Project. In this WOC,the Consultant shall only be responsible for those deliverables assigned to the Consultant. All work assigned to other entities are not Consultant's obligations under this WOC, but shall be obtained by Agency through separate intergovernmental agreements which contain a statement of work that is the same as or .similar to this statement of work. The obligations of entities in this statement of work other than the Consultant are merely stated for informational purposes and are in no way binding,nor are the named entities parties to this WOC. Any tasks or deliverables assigned to a subcontractor shall be construed as being the responsibility of the Consultant. Any Consultant tasks or deliverables which are contingent upon receiving information,resources, assistance, or cooperation in any way from another entity as described in this statement of work shall be subject to the following guidelines: 1. At the first sign of non-cooperation, the Consultant shall provide written notice(email acceptable)to Oregon Department of Transportation(Agency) Project Manager of any deliverables that may be delayed due to lack of cooperation by other entities referenced in this statement of work. 2. Agency Project Manager shall contact the non-cooperative entity or entities to discuss the matter and attempt to correct the problem and expedite items determined to be delaying the Consultant. If Consultant has followed the notification process described in item 1,and Agency finds that delinquency of any deliverable is a result of the failure of other referenced entities to provide information,resources, assistance, or cooperation,as described in this statement of work,the Consultant will not be found in breach of contract; nor shall Consultant be assessed or liable for any damages arising as a result of such delinquencies. Neither shall ODOT be responsible or liable for any damages to Consultant as the result of such non- cooperation by other entities. Agency Project Manager will negotiate with Consultant in the best interest of the State, and may amend the delivery schedule to allow for delinquencies beyond the control of the Consultant." Consultant shall ensure that any work products produced pursuant to this WOC include the following statement: This project is partially funded by a grant from the Transportation and Growth Management (TGM) Program, a joint program of the Oregon Department of Transportation and the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development. This TGM grant is financed, in part, by federal Safe,Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act.A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-L U), local government, and the State of Oregon funds. - 13 - TGM Grant Agreement No.28905 TGM File Code CIB 1-12 EA#TG12GF32 The contents of this document do not necessarily reflect views or policies of the State of Oregon. Key Personnel Consultant acknowledges and agrees that Agency selected Consultant, and is entering into this WOC, because of the special qualifications of Consultant's key people. In particular,Agency through this WOC is engaging the expertise,experience,judgment, and personal attention of Scot Siegel("Key Personnel"). Consultant's Key Personnel shall not delegate performance of the management powers and responsibilities. Key Personnel is required to provide under this WOC to another(other)Consultant employee(s)without first obtaining the written consent of Agency. Further,Consultant shall not re-assign or transfer the Key Personnel to other duties or positions such that the Key Personnel is no longer available to provide Agency with Key Personnel's expertise, experience,judgment,and personal attentions,without first obtaining Agency's prior written consent to such re-assignment or transfer. In the event Consultant requests that Agency approve a re-assignment or transfer of the Key Personnel, Agency shall have the right to interview, review the qualifications of, and approve or disapprove the proposed replacement(s) for the Key Personnel.Any approved substitute or replacement for Key Personnel shall be deemed Key Personnel under this WOC. Public Involvement Approach Public involvement must allow residents and business owners an opportunity to provide input into the planning process. Consultant and City shall consider environmental justice issues, which is the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race,color,national origin,or income with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations,and policies. Fair treatment means that no group of people, including a racial,ethnic,or a socioeconomic group,should bear a disproportionate share of the negative environmental consequences resulting from industrial, municipal, and commercial operations or the execution of federal,state, local,and tribal programs and policies. Meaningful involvement means that: (1)potentially affected community residents have an appropriate opportunity to participate in decisions about a proposed activity that will affect their environment and/or health; (2)the public's contribution can influence the regulatory agency's decision; (3)the concerns of all participants involved will be considered in the decision making process;and(4)the decision makers seek out and facilitate the involvement of those potentially affected. The public involvement program must include specific steps to provide opportunities for participation by federal Title VI communities. City shall utilize the ODOT Title VI (1964 Civil Rights Act)Plan guidance to identify Title VI populations, formulate public involvement strategies,and report outreach efforts to and participation by Title VI communities. D.WORK TASKS AND DELIVERABLES Task 1: Draft#2 Code Amendments and Graphics The purpose of Task t is to prepare Development Code Draft#2 for Planning Commission review. Phase I funded by the City included the development of an initial Development Code Draft. Draft Amendments in this draft were divided into three modules.Module 1 of Draft#2 was completed in Phase 1. 1.1 Consultant shall convene PMT Meeting#1 via teleconference. PMT will review work previously completed in Phase 1 of the project, including Development Code Module 1 Draft#2. PMT will review upcoming tasks.Consultant shall prepare and distribute Notes summarizing PMT Meeting#1. - 14 - 1 TGM Grant Agreement No.28905 TGM File Code CIB1-12 EA#TG12GF32 1.2 Consultant shall produce Development Code Module 2 Draft#2 using the results of Phase 1. Consultant shall prepare a cover memo summarizing the module,comparing existing code requirements to proposed changes and highlighting key policy issues. Consultant shall meet with City by telephone to prepare for Planning Commission review.City shall present Development Code Module 2 Draft#2 to Planning Commission for review. 1.3 Consultant shall produce Development Code Module 3 Draft#2 using the results of Phase 1. Consultant shall prepare a cover memo summarizing the module,comparing existing code requirements to proposed changes and highlighting key policy issues. Consultant shall meet with City by telephone to prepare for Planning Commission review. City shall present Development Code Module 3 Draft#2 to Planning Commission for review. 1.4 Consultant shall review all definitions in the existing development code and Development Code Modules 1,2,and 3 Draft 42 to prepare Development Code Definitions. 1.5 Consultant shall use work developed in Phase I and Development Code Modules 1,2,and 3 Draft#2 to prepare Draft Code Graphics Package. Draft Code Graphics Package must include no fewer than 24 code graphics to be incorporated in an updated development code; code graphics must be a combination of Model Code graphics and up to 12 new graphics developed specifically for the City of Ashland in a consistent format with the Model Code graphics. Draft Code Graphics Package must be prepared to allow easy insertion into an update development code. Consultant shall distribute Draft Code Graphics Package to PMT for review and comment. 1.6 Consultant shall use comments received from PMT to revise Draft Code Graphics Package to prepare Code Graphics Package. Task I Consultant Deliverables: 1.1 PMT Meeting#1 1.2 Development Code Module 2 Draft#2 1.3 Development Code Module 3 Draft#2 1.4 Development Code Definitions 1.5 Draft Code Graphics Package 1.6 Code Graphics Package Task 1 City Deliverables: 1.1 PMT Meeting#1 1.2 Present Development Code Module 2 Draft#2 to Planning Commission 1.3 Present Development Code Module 3 Draft#2 to Planning Commission 1.5 Review Draft Code Graphics Package Task 2: Procedures and Green Building Code Evaluation The purpose of Task 2 is to evaluate existing code provisions for consistency with City Council Goals related to Economic Development and Sustainability(Green Building)best practices,to review code amendment options with local officials, and to prepare a detailed outline and action plan for preparing related,code amendments. 2.1 Consultant shall convene PMT Meeting#2 via teleconference. PMT will review Development Code Draft #2 Modules,I,2, and 3; Development Code Definitions;and Code Graphics Package. PMT will review upcoming tasks. Consultant shall prepare and distribute Notes summarizing PMT Meeting#2. 15 _ TGM Grant Agreement No.28905 TGM File Code CIBI-12 EA#TG 12GF32 2.2 Consultant shall prepare Draft Procedures Evaluation Memo evaluating Ashland's current land use procedures and recommending updates for consistency with Council Goals related to economic development. Consultant shall include sample implementing code text that would be required in an updated development code. Draft Procedures Evaluation Memo must be in summary form and not exceed 8 pages of text,excluding sample code text. Consultant shall distribute Draft Procedures Evaluation Memo to PMT for written comment. 2.3 Consultant shall prepare Draft Green Building Evaluation Memo evaluating Ashland's current Site Design and Use Standards and recommending updates for consistency with sustainability(green building) best practices. Draft Green Building Evaluation Memo must include sample implementing code text that would be required in an updated development code. Draft Green Building Evaluation Memo must be in summary form and not exceed 8 pages of text, excluding sample code text. Consultant shall distribute Draft Green Building Evaluation Memo to PMT for written comment. 2.4 Consultant shall convene PMT Meeting#3 via teleconference. PMT will review Draft Procedures Evaluation Memo and Draft Green Building Evaluation Memo. PMT will review upcoming tasks. Consultant shall prepare and distribute Notes summarizing PMT Meeting#3. 2.5 Consultant shall use feedback received from PMT to revise Draft Procedures Evaluation Memo to produce Evaluation Procedures Memo. Consultant shall meet with City by telephone to prepare for Planning Commission review.City shall present Procedures Evaluation Memo to Planning Commission for review.City shall summarize Planning Commission feedback and distribute to PMT. 2.6 Consultant shall use feedback received from PMT to revise Draft Green Building Evaluation Memo to produce Green Building Evaluation Memo.Consultant shall meet with City by telephone to prepare for Planning Commission review. City shall present Green Building Evaluation Memo to Planning Commission for review. City shall summarize Planning Commission feedback and distribute to PMT. 2.7 Consultant shall use Procedures Evaluation Memo,Green Building Evaluation Memo,and input received from Planning Commission to prepare Evaluation Action Plan including revised evaluation memos and an outline and action plan for related code amendments. Consultant shall include sample implementing code text that would be required in an updated development code. Consultant shall distribute Evaluation Action Plan to PMT for review. Task 2 Consultant Deliverables: 2.1 PMT Meeting#2 2.2 Draft Procedures Evaluation Memo 2.3 Draft Green Building Evaluation Memo 2.4 PMT Meeting#3 2.5 Evaluation Procedures Memo 2.6 Green Building Evaluation Memo 2.7 Evaluation Action Plan Task 2 City Deliverables: 2.1 PMT Meeting#2 2.2 Comment on Draft Procedures Evaluation Memo 2.3 Comment on Draft Green Building Evaluation Memo 2.4 PMT Meeting#3 2.5 Present Evaluation Procedures Memo to Planning Commission 2.6 Present Green Building Evaluation Memo to Planning Commission 2.7 Review Evaluation Action Plan 16 - TGM Grant Agreement No.28905 TGM File Code C I B l-12 EA#TG 12GF32 Task 3: Development Code Draft 93 and Adoption The purpose of Task 3 is to prepare a final draft of the Development Code consolidating all of the previous work including Development Code Modules 1,2,and 3 Draft#2, Development Code Definitions,Code Graphics Package, and Evaluation Action Plan. Draft#3 must incorporate City comments from previous tasks,and must be suitable for public hearings(adoption-ready). 3.1 City shall use Development Code Modules 1, 2, and 3 Draft 42, Development Code Definitions,Code Graphics Package,and Evaluation Action Plan to prepare City Comments containing one set of consolidated and reconciled comments and direction to Consultant to use in the development of Development Code Draft#3. City shall distribute City Comments to PMT. 3.2 Consultant shall convene PMT Meeting#4 via teleconference. PMT will review work previously completed in Task 2, City Comments,and review upcoming tasks. Consultant shall prepare and distribute Notes summarizing PMT Meeting#4. 3.3 Consultant shall use City Comments and direction from PMT Meeting 44 to prepare Development Code Draft#3. Development Code Draft#3 must incorporate Development Code Modules 1,2, and 3 Draft#2, Development Code Definitions,Code Graphics Package,and Evaluation Action Plan. 3.4 City shall prepare for Adoption, including finalizing code amendments, legislative findings, legal review, final formatting,publication, preparation of ordinance for adoption,and public notices and hearings. Consultant shall meet with City by telephone to prepare for the first Planning Commission hearing on the Development Code. Consultant shall assist City by preparing sample findings,with a cover memorandum not to exceed 2 pages. Task 3 Consultant Deliverables: 3.2 PMT Meeting 94 3.3 Development Code Draft#3 3.4 Adoption Findings and Assistance Task 3 City Deliverables: 3.1 City Comments 3.2 PMT Meeting#4 3.4 Adoption I7 _ TGM Grant Agreement No.28905 TGM File Code CIBI-12 EA#TG 12GF32 E. LUMP SUM PER DELIVERABLE AND PROJECT SCHEDULE LUMP SUM PER TASK CONSULTANT DELIVERABLES DELIVERABLE COMPLETION AMOUNT Task 1: Draft#2 Code Amendments and Graphics 1.1 PMT Meeting#1 $500 September 2012 1.2 Development Code Module 2 Draft#2 $6,500 October 1.3 Development Code Module 3 Draft#2 $6,500 November 1.4 Development Code Definitions $5,300 November 1.5 Draft Code Graphics Package $6,200 November 1.6 Code Graphics Package $2,000 December Task 2: Procedures and Green Building Code Evaluation 2.1 PMT Meeting#2 $500 December 2.2 Draft Procedures Evaluation Memo $2,500 December 2.3 Draft Green Building Evaluation Memo $2,700 December 2.4 PMT Meeting#3 $500 January 2013 2.5 Procedures Evaluation Memo $900 February 2.6 Green Building Evaluation Memo $900 March 2.7 Evaluation Action Plan $1,600 April Task 3: Development Code Draft#3 and Adoption 3.2 PMT Meeting#4 $500 April 3.3 Development Code Draft 43 $8,500 May 3.4 Adoption Findings& Assistance $900 June PROJECT TOTAL $46,500 - 18 - TGM Grant Agreement No.28905 TGM File Code Cl B1-12 EA#TG 12GF32 EXHIBIT B(Local Agency or State Agency) CONTRACTOR CERTIFICATION Contractor certifies by signing this contract that Contractor has not (a) Employed or retained for a commission,percentage,brokerage,contingency fee or other consideration,any firm or person(other than a bona fide employee working solely for me or the above consultant)to solicit or secure this contract, (b) agreed,as an express or implied condition for obtaining this contract,to employ or retain the services of any firm or person in connection with carrying out the contract,or (c) paid or agreed to pay,to any firm,organization or person(other than a bona fide employee working solely for me or the above consultant),any fee,contribution,donation or consideration of any kind for or in connection with, procuring or carrying out the contract,except as here expressly stated(if any): Contractor further acknowledges that this certificate is to be furnished to the Federal Highway Administration,and is subject to applicable State and Federal laws,both criminal and civil. AGENCY OFFICIAL CERTIFICATION(ODOT) Department official likewise certifies by signing this contract that Contractor or his/her representative has not been required directly or indirectly as an expression of implied condition in connection with obtaining or carrying out this contract to: (a) Employ,retain or agree to employ or retain,any firm or person or (b) pay or agree to pay,to any firm,person or organization,any fee,contribution,donation or consideration of any kind except as here expressly stated(if any): Department official further acknowledges this certificate is to be furnished to the Federal Highway Administration,and is subject to applicable State and Federal laws,both criminal and civil. EXHIBIT C Federal Provisions Oregon Department of Transportation 1. CERTIFICATION OF NONINVOLVEMENT IN ANY DEBARMENT AND SUSPENSION Contractor certifies by signing this contract that to the best of its knowledge and belief,it and its principals: I. Are not presently debarred,suspended,proposed contract under a public transaction;violation of for debarment,declared ineligible or voluntarily federal or state antitrust statutes or commission of excluded from covered transactions by any embezzlement,theft,forgery,bribery falsification Federal department or agency; or destruction of records,making false statements or receiving stolen property; 2. Have not within a three-year period preceding this proposal been convicted of or had a civil 3. Are not presently indicted for or otherwise judgment rendered against them for commission criminally or civilly charged by a governmental of fraud or a criminal offense in connection with entity(federal,state or local)with commission of obtaining,attempting to obtain or performing a any of the offenses enumerated in paragraph public(federal,state or local)transaction or (1)(b)of this certification;and - 19 - TGM Grant Agreement No.28905 TGM File CodeCIB1-12 EA#TG12GF32 4.-Have not within a three-year period preceding this 4. The Contractor shall provide immediate written application/proposal had one or more public notice to the Department to whom this proposal transactions(federal,state or local)terminated for is submitted if at any time the Contractor leams cause or default. that its certification was erroneous when submitted or has become erroneous by reason of Where the Contractor is unable to certify to any of the changed circumstances. statements in this certification;such prospective participant shall attach an explanation to this proposal. 5. The terms"covered transaction","debarred", 'suspended", "ineligible","lower tier covered List exceptions. For each exception noted,indicate to transaction","participant","person", "primary whom the exception applies, initiating agency,and dates covered transaction", "principal",and of action. If additional space is required,attach another "voluntarily excluded",as used in this clause, page with the following heading: Certification have the meanings set out in the Definitions and Exceptions continued,Contract Insert. Coverage sections of the rules implementing Executive Order 12549. You may contact the EXCEPTIONS: Department's Program Section(Tel.(503)986- 3400)to which this proposal is being submitted Exceptions will not necessarily result in denial of award, for assistance in obtaining a copy of those but will be considered in determining Contractor regulations. responsibility. Providing false information may result in criminal prosecution or administrative sanctions. 6. The Contractor agrees by submitting this proposal that,should the proposed covered The Contractor is advised that by signing this contract,the transaction be entered into,it shall not Contractor is deemed to have signed this certification. knowingly enter into any lower tier covered transactions with a person who is debarred, 11. INSTRUCTIONS FOR CERTIFICATION suspended,declared ineligible or voluntarily REGARDING DEBARMENT,SUSPENSION,AND excluded from participation in this covered OTHER RESPONSIBILITY MATTERS—PRIMARY transaction,unless authorized by the Department COVERED TRANSACTIONS or agency entering into this transaction. 1. By signing this contract,the Contractor is 7. The Contractor further agrees by submitting this providing the certification set out below. proposal that it will include the Addendum to Form FH WA-1273 titled,"Appendix 2. The inability to provide the certification required B--Certification Regarding Debarment, below will not necessarily result in denial of Suspension,Ineligibility and Voluntary participation in this covered transaction. The Exclusion--Lower Tier Covered Transactions", Contractor shall explain why he or she cannot provided by the Department entering into this provide the certification set out below. This covered transaction without modification, in all explanation will be considered in connection lower tier covered transactions and in all with the Oregon Department of Transportation solicitations for lower tier covered transactions. determination to enter into this transaction. Failure to furnish an explanation shall disqualify 8. A participant in a covered transaction may rely such person from participation in this upon a certification of a prospective participant transaction. in a lower tier covered transaction that it is not debarred,suspended,ineligible or voluntarily 3. The certification in this clause is a material excluded from the covered transaction,unless it representation of fact upon which reliance was knows that the certification is erroneous. A placed when the Department determined to enter participant may decide the method and frequency into this transaction. If it is later determined that by which it determines the eligibility of its the Contractor knowingly rendered an erroneous principals. Each participant may,but is not certification,in addition to other remedies required to,check the Nonprocurement List available to the Federal Government or the published by the U.S.General Services Department may terminate this transaction for Administration. cause of default. 9. Nothing contained in the foregoing shall be construed to require establishment of a system of -20 - TOM Grant Agreement No.28905 TOM File Code CIBI-12 EA#TG12GF32 records to render in good faith the certification transact ion","participant","person","primary required by this clause.The knowledge and covered transaction","principal","proposal",and information of a participant is not required to "voluntarily excluded",as used in this clause, exceed that which is normally possessed by a have the meanings set out in the Definitions and prudent person in the ordinary course of business Coverage sections of rules implementing dealings. Executive Order 12549. You may contact the person to which this proposal is submitted for 10. Except for transactions authorized under assistance in obtaining a copy of those paragraph6 of these instructions,if a participant regulations. in a covered transaction knowingly enters into a lower tier covered transaction with a person who 5. The prospective lower tier participant agrees by is suspended,debarred,ineligible or voluntarily submitting this contract that,should the proposed excluded from participation in this transaction, in covered transaction be entered into, it shall not addition to other remedies available to the knowingly enter into any lower tier covered Federal Government or the Department,the transaction with a person who is debarred, Department may terminate this transaction for suspended,declared ineligible or voluntarily cause or default. excluded from participation in this covered transaction,unless authorized by the department 111. ADDENDUM TO FORM FHWA-1273,: or agency with which this transaction originated. REQUIRED CONTRACT PROVISIONS 6. The prospective lower tier participant further This certification applies to subcontractors,material agrees by submitting this contract that it will suppliers,vendors,and other lower tier participants. include this clause titled, "Certification Regarding Debarment,Suspension, Ineligibility • Appendix B of 49 CFR Part 29- and Voluntary Exclusion--Lower Tier Covered Transaction",without modification,in all lower Appendix B--Certification Regarding Debarment, tier covered transactions and in all solicitations Suspension,Ineligibility,and Voluntary for lower tier covered transactions. Exclusion--Lower Tier Covered Transactions 7. A participant in a covered transaction may rely Instructions for Certification upon a certification of a prospective participant in a lower tier covered transaction that it is not I. By signing and submitting this contract,the debarred,suspended,ineligible or voluntarily prospective lower tier participant is providing the excluded from the covered transaction,unless certification set out below. it knows that the certification is erroneous. A participant may decide the method and frequency 2. The certification in this clause is a material by which it determines the eligibility of its representation of fact upon which reliance was principals. Each participant may,but is not placed when this transaction was entered into. If required to,check the nonprocurement list. it is later determined that the prospective lower tier participant knowingly rendered an erroneous 8. Nothing contained in the foregoing shall be certification,in addition to other remedies construed to require establishment of a system of available to the Federal Government,the records to render in good faith the certification department or agency with which this transaction required by this clause.The knowledge and originated may pursue available remedies, information of a participant is not required to including suspension and/or debarment. exceed that which is normally possessed by a prudent person in the ordinary course of business 3. The prospective lower tier participant shall dealings. provide immediate written notice to the person to which this contract is submitted if at any time the 9. Except for transactions authorized under prospective lower tier participant learns that its paragraph 5 of these instructions,if a participant certification was erroneous when submitted or in a covered transaction knowingly enters into a has become erroneous by reason of changed lower tier covered transaction with a person who circumstances. is suspended,debarred,ineligible or voluntarily 4. The terms"covered transaction", "debarred", excluded from participation in this transaction, "suspended","ineligible","lower tier covered in addition to other remedies available to the 21 TGM Grant Agreement No.28905 TGM File Code CIBI-12 EA#TG 12GF32 Federal Government,the department or agency performance of such consulting services on work with which this transaction originated may similar to that hereunder. Department shall be pursue available remedies, including suspension entitled to rely on the accuracy,competence,and and/or debarment. completeness of Contractor's services. Certification Regarding Debarment,Suspension, V. NONDISCRIMINATION Ineligibility,and Voluntary Exclusion--Lower Tier Covered Transactions During the performance of this contract,Contractor, for himself,his assignees and successors in interest, a. The prospective lower tier participant hereinafter referred to as Contractor,agrees as certifies,by submission of this proposal,that follows: neither it nor its principals is presently debarred,suspended,proposed for - I. Compliance with Regulations. Contractor agrees debarment,declared ineligible or voluntarily to comply with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act excluded from participation in this of 1964,and Section 162(a)of the Federal-Aid transaction by any Federal department or Highway Act of 1973 and the Civil Rights agency. Restoration Act of 1987.Contractor shall comply with the regulations of the Department b. Where the prospective lower tier participant of Transportation relative to nondiscrimination is unable to certify to any of the statements -in Federally assisted programs of the Department in this certification,such prospective of Transportation,Title 49,Code of Federal participant shall attach an explanation to this Regulations,Part 21,as they may be amended proposal. from time to time(hereinafter referred to as the Regulations),which are incorporated by IV. EMPLOYMENT reference and made a part of this contract. Contractor,with regard to the work performed I. Contractor warrants that he has not employed or after award and prior to completion of the retained any company or person,other than a contract work,shall not discriminate on grounds bona fide employee working solely for of race,creed,color,sex or national origin in the Contractor,to solicit or secure this contract and selection and retention of subcontractors, that he has not paid or agreed to pay any including procurement of materials and leases of company or person,other than a bona fide equipment. Contractor shall not participate employee working solely for Contractors,any either directly or indirectly in the discrimination fee,commission,percentage,brokerage fee,gifts prohibited by Section 21.5 of the Regulations, or any other consideration contingent upon or including employment practices,when the resulting from the award or making of this contract covers a program set forth in contract. For breach or violation of this Appendix B of the Regulations. warranting,Department shall have the right to annul this contract without liability or in its 2. Solicitation for Subcontractors, including discretion to deduct from the contract price or Procurement of Materials and Equipment.In all consideration or otherwise recover,the full solicitations,either by competitive bidding or amount of such fee,commission,percentage, negotiations made by Contractor for work to be brokerage fee,gift or contingent fee. performed under a subcontract, including procurement of materials and equipment,each 2. Contractor shall not engage,on a full or part-time potential subcontractor or supplier shall be basis or other basis,during the period of the notified by Contractor of Contractor's obligations contract,any professional or technical personnel under this contract and regulations relative to who are or have been at any time during the nondiscrimination on the grounds of race,creed, period of this contract, in the employ of color,sex or national origin. Department,except regularly retired employees, without written consent of the public employer 3. Nondiscrimination in Employment(Title VII of of such person. the 1964 Civil Rights Act). During the performance of this contract,Contractor agrees 3. Contractor agrees to perform consulting services as follows: with that standard of care,skill and diligence normally provided by a professional in the _ 22 _ TGM Grant Agreement No.28905 TGM File Code C 1 B 1-12 EA#TG 12GF32 a. Contractor will not discriminate against any equipment,unless exempt from Regulations, employee or applicant for employment orders or instructions issued pursuant thereto. because of race,creed,color,sex or national Contractor shall take such action with respect to origin.Contractor will take affirmative any subcontractor or procurement as Department action to ensure that applicants are or FHWA may direct as a means of enforcing employed,and that employees are treated such provisions,including sanctions for during employment,without regard to their noncompliance;provided,however,that in the race,creed,color,sex or national origin. event Contractor becomes involved in or is Such action shall include,but not be limited threatened with litigation with a subcontractor or to the following:employment,upgrading, supplier as a result of such direction,Department demotion or transfer;recruitment or may,at its option,enter into such litigation to recruitment advertising; layoff or protect the interests of Department,and,in termination;rates of pay or other forms of addition,Contractor may request Department to compensation;and selection for training, enter into such litigation to protect the interests including apprenticeship. Contractor agrees of the State of Oregon. to post in conspicuous places,available to employees and applicants for employment, V1. DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS ENTERPRISE notice setting forth the provisions of this (DBE)POLICY nondiscrimination clause. In accordance with Title 49,Code of Federal b. Contractor will,in all solicitations or Regulations,Part 26,Contractor shall agree to abide advertisements for employees placed by or by and take all necessary and reasonable steps to on behalf of Contractor,state that all comply with the following statement: qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment without DBE POLICY STATEMENT regard to race,creed,color,sex or national origin. DBE Policy. It is the policy of the United States Department of Transportation(USDOT) to practice 4. Information and Reports. Contractor will nondiscrimination on the basis of race,color,sex provide all information and reports required by and/or national origin in the award and the Regulations or orders and instructions issued administration of USDOT assist contracts. pursuant thereto,and will permit access to his Consequently,the DBE requirements of 49 CFR 26 books,records,accounts,other sources of apply to this contract. information,and his facilities as may be determined by Department or FHWA as Required Statement For USDOT Financial appropriate,and shall set forth what efforts he Assistance Agreement. If as a condition of has made to obtain the information. assistance the Agency has submitted and the US Department of Transportation has approved a 5. Sanctions for Noncompliance. In the event of Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Affirmative Contractor's noncompliance with the Action Program which the Agency agrees to carry nondiscrimination provisions of the contract, out,this affirmative action program is incorporated Department shall impose such agreement into the financial assistance agreement by reference. sanctions as it or the FHWA may determine to be appropriate,including,but not limited to: DBE Obligations. The Oregon Department of Transportation(ODOT)and its contractor agree to a. Withholding of payments to Contractor under ensure that Disadvantaged Business Enterprises as the agreement until Contractor complies; defined in 49 CFR 26 have the opportunity to and/or participate in the performance of contracts and subcontracts financed in whole or in part with b. Cancellation,termination or suspension of the Federal funds. In this regard,Contractor shall take agreement in whole or in part. all necessary and reasonable steps in accordance with 49 CFR 26 to ensure that Disadvantaged 6. Incorporation of Provisions. Contractor will Business Enterprises have the opportunity to include the provisions of paragraphs 1 through 6 compete for and perform contracts. Neither ODOT of this section in every subcontract,including nor its contractors shall discriminate on the basis of procurement of materials and leases of race,color,national origin or sex in the award and - 23 - TGM Grant Agreement No.28905 TGM File Code C I BI-]2 EA#TG 12GF32 performance of federally-assisted contracts. The VII. LOBBYING contractor shall carry out applicable requirements of 49 CFR Part 26 in the award and administration of The Contractor certifies,by signing this agreement such contracts. Failure by the contractor to carry out to the best of his or her knowledge and belief,that: these requirements is a material breach of this contract,which may result in the termination of this I. No Federal appropriated funds have been paid or contract or such other remedy as ODOT deems will be paid,by or on behalf of the undersigned, appropriate. to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any Federal The DBE Policy Statement and Obligations shall be agency,a Member of Congress,an officer or included in all subcontracts entered into under this employee of Congress or an employee of a contract. Member of Congress in connection with the awarding of any Federal contract,the making of Records and Reports. Contractor shall provide any Federal grant,the making of any Federal monthly documentation to Department that it is loan,the entering into of any cooperative subcontracting with or purchasing materials from agreement,and the extension,continuation, the DBEs identified to meet contract goals. renewal,amendment or modification of any Contractor shall notify Department and obtain its Federal contract,grant,loan or cooperative written approval before replacing a DBE or making agreement. any change in the DBE participation listed. If a DBE is unable to fulfill the original obligation to the 2. If any funds other than Federal appropriated contract,Contractor must demonstrate to funds have been paid or will be paid to any Department the Affirmative Action steps taken to person for influencing or attempting to influence replace the DBE with another DBE.Failure to do so an officer or employee of any Federal agency,a will result in withholding payment on those items. Member of Congress,an officer or employee of The monthly documentation will not be required Congress or an employee of a Member of after the DBE goal commitment is satisfactory to Congress in connection with this agreement,the Department. undersigned shall complete and submit Standard Form-LLL,"Disclosure Form to Report Any DBE participation attained after the DBE goal Lobbying",in accordance with its instructions. has been satisfied should be reported to the Departments. This certification is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed when this DBE Definition. Only firms DBE certified transaction was made or entered into. Submission of by the State of Oregon,Department of Consumer this certification is a prerequisite for making or •Business Services,Office of Minority,Women entering into this transaction imposed by Section •Emerging Small Business,may be utilized to 1352,Title 31,U.S.Code. Any person who fails to satisfy this obligation. file the required certification shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than$10,000 and not more CONTRACTOR'S DBE CONTRACT GOAL than$100,000 for each such failure. DBE GOAL 0 % The Contractor also agrees by signing this agreement that he or she shall require that the language of this By signing this contract,Contractor assures that certification be included in all lower tier good faith efforts have been made to meet the goal subagreements,which exceed$100,000 and that all for the DBE participation specified in the Request such subrecipients shall certify and disclose for Proposal/Qualification for this project as accordingly. required by ORS 200.045,and 49 CFR 26.53 and 49 CFR,Part 26,Appendix A. FOR INQUIRY CONCERNING ODOT'S DBE PROGRAM REQUIREMENT CONTACT OFFICE OF CIVIL RIGHTS AT(503)986-4354. - 24 - CITY OF -ASHLAND Council Communication September 18, 2012, Business Meeting Special Procurement— Service agreement for use of NEOGOV on-line recruitment and applicant tracking services. FROM Tina Gray, Human Resource Manager, grayt @ashland.or.us SUMMARY Staff is seeking approval of a special procurement, exemption from competitive bidding, to directly award a public contract to GovernmentJobs.com, Inc., for the use of NEOGOV recruitment and applicant software. The amount budgeted for this procurement in FY 12-13 is $10,000. NEOGOV currently partners with over 750 cities, counties and states, educational and other institutions, so they understand the unique needs of public sector human resources. They currently provide the same services to our regional counterparts and the State of Oregon, so we've been able to check references with our colleagues to ensure it meets their needs. The package is competitively priced for initial set-up and annual renewals. NEOGOV provides all hosting and operational support for the agreed upon fee. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: Currently the city utilizes an antiquated process for posting and collecting employment applications for city employment opportunities. We collect applications electronically through a website add-on tool that doesn't meet our needs, and we accept attachments and hardcopy paper applications via mail, fax or email. Given the volume of applications we receive for open positions, and the number of documents per applicant submitted, the process is inefficient in terms of labor intensity and resource conservation. By using NEOGOV software, city human resource staff can collect employment applications on-line, share them electronically with hiring managers, and retain a permanent record of applications received securely on-line. The City can communicate directly with applicants and select screening parameters to screen out applications that don't meet the minimum job requirements. The city saves money in several ways: increased productivity of a small human resource staff, reduction of printing and photocopying costs, shorter turnaround on recruitments, reduction in costs for postage and paper communications with candidates not selected, reduction in storage requirements for paper applications to comply with Oregon record retention requirements, and the creation of an auditable and legally defensible hiring process. AMC 2.50.090 Exemptions from Formal Competitive Selection Procedures Page I of 2 P1, CITY OF ASHLAND All Public Contracts shall be based upon Competitive Sealed Bidding (Invitation to Bid) or Competitive Sealed Proposals (Request for Proposal) pursuant to ORS 279A — 279C and the Model Rules except for the following: G. Special Procurements — a public contract for a class special procurement, a contract specific procurement or both, based upon a contracting procedure that differs from procedures described in ORS 279B.055, 279B.060, 27913.065, 27913.070. The contracting approach may be custom designed to meet the procurement needs. 1. Special procurements shall be awarded in accordance with ORS 279B.085 and all other applicable provisions of law. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: This contract is in the amount of$9,990 per year. Funds were budgeted in the amount of$10,000 this fiscal year for this purpose. STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends that the "Class Special Procurement" be approved. SUGGESTED MOTION: The Council, acting as the Local Contract Review Board, moves to approve (or decline)the "Class Special Procurement" for NEOGOV software. ATTACHMENTS: Form #9, Special Procurement, Request for Approval Contract Page 2 of 2 �r, CITY OF FORM #9 ASHLAND SPECIAL PROCUREMENT REQUEST FOR APPROVAL To: City Council, Local Contract Review Board From: Tina Grey, Human Resources Date: 9112112 Subject: REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A SPECIAL PROCUREMENT In accordance with ORS27913.085, this request for approval of a Special Procurement is being presented to the City Council for approval. This written request for approval describes the proposed contracting procedure and the goods or services or the class of goods or services to be acquired through the special procurement and the circumstances that justify the use of a special procurement under the standards set forth ORS 279B.085(4). 1. Requesting Department Name:Administration-Human Resources 2. Department Contact Name:Tina Grav 3. Type of Request: Class Special Procurement X Contract-specific Special Procurement 4. Time Period Requested: From: September 19,2012 To: September 19,2013 5. Total Estimated Cost: $9,990.00 FY 2012-13 6. Short title of the Procurement: Purchase agreement for use ofNEOGOV on-line recruitment and applicant tracking services. Supplies and/or Services or class of Supplies and/or Services to be acquired: NEOGOV recruiting and applicant tracking on-line software tools. 7. Background and Proposed Contracting Procedure: Provide a description of what has been done in the past and the proposed procedure. The Agency may, but is not required to,also include the following types of documents: Notice/Advertising, Solicitation(s),Bid/Proposal Forms(s),Contract Form(s),and any other documents or forms to be used in the proposed contracting procedure. Attach additional sheets as needed. Background: Current] try utilizes an antiquated process for posting and collecting employment applications for job opportunities at the city. We collect applications electronically through a website add-on tool which doesn't meet our needs,and we still allow hardcopy paper applications to be submitted via mail, fax or email. Given the volume of applications we receive for open positions, and the number of documents per applicant submitted,the application process has become inefficient in terms of labor intensity and resource conservation. Form#9-Special Procurement-Request for Approval,Page 1 of 3,9/1212012 HR staff researched software options and alternatives, and one clear industry leader in the public sector emerged. NEOGOV is currently used by Jackson County,the City of Medford,the State of Oregon and countless other local government entities in Oregon and throughout the US. Rather than increasing staff to handle the flow of paperwork associated with the application and selection process we recommend harnessing technology to make the process more efficient and reduce paper resources and storage requirements. Proposed procedure: Staff is requesting approval for a Special Procurement to engage with NEOGOV for on-line recruiting and applicant tracking service. 8. Justification for use of Special Procurement: Describe the circumstances that justify the use of a Special Procurement. Attach relevant documentation. NEOGOV currently partners with over 750 cities, counties and states, educational and other institutions, so they understand the unique needs of public sector human resources. They currently provide the same services to our regional counterparts and the State of Oregon, so we've been able to check references with our colleagues to ensure it meets their needs. The package is competitively priced for initial set-up and annual renewals. 9. Findings to Satisfy the Required Standards: This proposed special procurement: X_(a)will be unlikely to encourage favoritism in the awarding of public contracts or to substantially diminish competition for public contracts because: NEOGOV is the industry leader for public sector on-line recruitment and applicant tracking software. (Please provide specific information that demonstrates how the proposed Special Procurement meets this requirement.);and X(b)(i)will result in substantial cost savings to the contracting agency or to the public because: Applications for open positions at the City can be collected on-line, shared with hiring managers electronically permanently, stored on-line The overall cost savings occur in multiple areas: increased productivity of HR staff reducing paper applications and photocopying shorter turnaround on recruitments, reduction in storage requirements for paper applications to comply with Oregon records retention requirements,and eliminates mailings to candidates who won't be continuing on in the selection process;and creates and auditable and legally defensible hiring process. (Please provide the total estimate cost savings to be gained and the rationale for determining the cost savings);or (b)(ii)will otherwise substantially promote the public interest in a manner that could not practicably be realized by complying with the requirements of ORS 27913.055,279B.060,279B.065, or 279B.070,or any rules adopted thereunder because: Hiring an additional staff member even at entry-level wages and benefits would cost twice what NEOGOV will cost the first year($9,990.00), and thereafter it will pay for itself in savings of paper and resources. (Please provide specific information that demonstrates how the proposed Special Procurement meets this requirement.) Form#9-Special Procurement—Request for Approval,Page 2 of 3,911212012 Public Notice: Pursuant to ORS 279B.085(5)and OAR 137-047-0285(2),a Contracting Agency shall give public notice of the Contract Review Authority's approval of a Special Procurement in the same manner as a public notice of competitive sealed Bids under ORS 279B.055(4)and OAR 137-047-0300.The public notice shall describe the Goods or Services or class of Goods or Services to be acquired through the Special Procurement and shall give such public notice of the approval of a Special Procurement at least seven(7) Days before Award of the Contract. After the Special Procurement has been approved by the City Council,the following public notice will be posted on the City's website to allow for the seven(7)day protest period. Date Public Notice first appeared on www.ashland.or.us- PUBLIC NOTICE Approval of a Special Procurement First date of publication: [Enter date] A request for approval of a Special Procurement was presented to and approved by the City Council,acting as the Local Contract Review Board,on[Enter date]. [Describe the goods and services-or-class ofgoods and services-include whether or not it's "Contract-specific special procurement"or a "class special procurement", cost, terms, etc. -briefexplanation ofprocurement] [Describe the alternative contracting procedure-include the time period requested] It has been determined based on written findings that the Special Procurement will be unlikely to encourage favoritism in the awarding of public contracts or to substantially diminish competition for public contracts, and result in substantial cost savings or substantially promote the public interest in a manner that could not be realized by complying with the requirements that are applicable in ORS 279B.055,279B.060, 279B.065,or 279B.070. An affected person may protest the request for approval of a Special Procurement in accordance with ORS 279B.400 and OAR 137-047-0300. A written protest shall be delivered to the following address: City of Ashland,[Enter department name, Contact name, and complete address]. The seven(7)protest period will expire at 5:00pm on [Enter date-seven calendar days from first date ofpublication] This public notice is being published on the City's Internet World Wide Web site at least seven days prior to the award of a public contract resulting from this request for approval of a Special Procurement. Form#9-Special Procurement-Request for Approval,Page 3 of 3,9/1212012 Service Agreement THIS ON-LINE SERVICES AGREEMENT(this"Agreement")is made and entered into this day of 1 ,2012,by and between GovernmentJobs.com,Inc.,a California corporation (d/b/a"NEOGOV"),and the City of Ashland,OR,a public entity acting by and through its duly appointed representative("Customer"). 1. Provision of On-line Services. (a) Customer hereby engages NEOGOV,and NEOGOV hereby agrees(subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein),to provide the services(the"Services")more fully described in this Agreement and in Exhibit A (Order Form). Customer hereby acknowledges and agrees that NEOGOV's provision and performance of the Services is dependent and conditioned upon Customer's full performance of its duties, obligations and responsibilities hereunder. 2. Additional NEOGOV Responsibilities. In connection with the performance of this Agreement, NEOGOV shall be responsible for the following: (a) NEOGOV shall provide all required hosting and operations support for the applications provided through this agreement. (b) NEOGOV shall follow those support,maintenance and other procedures and shall provide those support, maintenance and other services to Customer more fully described in this Agreement. 3. Customer Responsibilities. In connection with the performance of this Agreement and the provision of the Services,Customer shall be responsible for the following: (a) NEOGOV's logos, including the"powered by" logo, may appear on the"employment opportunities", "job description"and other pages of Customer's web site. (b) Customer shall be responsible for ensuring that Customer's use of the Services and the performance of Customer's other obligations hereunder comply with all laws applicable to Customer. (c) Customer shall be responsible,as between NEOGOV and Customer,for the accuracy and completeness of all records and databases provided by Customer in connection with this Agreement for use on NEOGOV's system. 4. Ownership,Protection and Security. (a) The parties agree that the NEOGOV marks and the Customer marks shall both be displayed on and through NEOGOV's system(s). (b) Ownership of any graphics, text, data or other information or content materials and all records and databases supplied or furnished by Customer hereunder for incorporation into or delivery through the application(s)described in this agreement shall remain with Customer,and NEOGOV shall cease use of all such material upon termination of this Agreement. NEOGOV, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential Page 1 of 9 (c) Customer acknowledges and agrees that nothing in this Agreement or any other agreement grants Customer any licenses or other rights with respect to NEOGOV's software system(source code or object code) other than the right to receive Services as expressly provided herein. NEOGOV shall retain all ownership in the intellectual property and all other proprietary rights and interests associated with NEOGOV's software system and Services and all components thereof and associated documentation,except as expressly provided herein. (d) NEOGOV grants to Customer a limited license during the term of this Agreement to use and reproduce NEOGOV's trademarks and logos for purposes of including such trademarks and logos in advertising and publicity materials and links solely as permitted hereunder. All uses of such trademarks and logos shall conform to Customer's standard guidelines and requirements for use of such trademarks and logos. 5. NEOGOV Representations and Warranties. (a) Service Performance Warranty. NEOGOV warrants that it will perform the Services in a manner consistent with industry standards reasonably applicable to the performance thereof. (b) No Other Warranty. EXCEPT FOR THE EXPRESS WARRANTIES SET FORTH IN THIS SECTION 5, THE SERVICES ARE PROVIDED ON AN "AS IS" BASIS, AND CUSTOMER'S USE OF THE SERVICES IS AT ITS OWN RISK. NEOGOV DOES NOT MAKE,AND HEREBY DISCLAIMS,ANY AND ALL OTHER EXPRESS AND/OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, NONINFRINGEMENT AND TITLE, AND ANY WARRANTIES ARISING FROM A COURSE OF DEALING, USAGE, OR TRADE PRACTICE. NEOGOV DOES NOT WARRANT THAT THE SERVICES WILL BE UNINTERRUPTED, ERROR-FREE,OR COMPLETELY SECURE. (c) Disclaimer of Actions Caused by and/or Under the Control of Third Parties. NEOGOV DOES NOT AND CANNOT CONTROL THE FLOW OF DATA TO OR FROM THE NEOGOV SYSTEM AND OTHER PORTIONS OF THE INTERNET. SUCH FLOW DEPENDS IN LARGE PART ON THE PERFORMANCE OF INTERNET SERVICES PROVIDED OR CONTROLLED BY THIRD PARTIES. AT TIMES, ACTIONS OR INACTIONS OF SUCH THIRD PARTIES CAN IMPAIR OR DISRUPT CUSTOMER'S CONNECTIONS TO THE INTERNET (OR PORTIONS THEREOF). ALTHOUGH NEOGOV WILL USE COMMERCIALLY REASONABLE EFFORTS TO TAKE ALL ACTIONS IT DEEMS APPROPRIATE TO REMEDY AND AVOID SUCH EVENTS, NEOGOV CANNOT GUARANTEE THAT SUCH EVENTS WILL NOT OCCUR. ACCORDINGLY,NEOGOV DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL LIABILITY RESULTING FROM OR RELATED TO SUCH EVENTS. 6. Publicity. Following execution of this Agreement,the parties hereto may issue a press release,the form and substance of which shall be mutually agreeable to the parties,announcing the relationship created by this Agreement. Except as expressly contemplated herein, neither party shall issue any additional press release which mentions the other party or the transactions contemplated by this Agreement without the prior consent of the other party,which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. 7. Nondisclosure. Through exercise of each party's rights under this Agreement,each party maybe exposed to the other party's technical, financial, business, marketing, planning, and other information and data, in written, oral,electronic, magnetic, photographic and/or other forms, including but not limited to(i)oral and written communications of one party with the officers and staff of the other party which are marked or identified as confidential or secret or similarly marked or identified and (ii) other communications which a NEOGOV, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential Page 2 of 9 reasonable person would recognize from the surrounding facts and circumstances to be confidential or secret ("Confidential Information")and trade secrets.In recognition of the other party's need to protect its legitimate business interests,each party hereby covenants and agrees that it shall regard and treat each item of information or data constituting a trade secret or Confidential Information of the other party as strictly confidential and wholly owned by such other party and that it will not, without the express prior written consent of the other party or except as required by law including the Public Records Act of the State of Oregon, redistribute, market, publish,disclose or divulge to any other person, firm or entity,or use or modify for use,directly or indirectly in any way for any person or entity:(i)any of the other party's Confidential Information during the term of this Agreement and for a period of three(3)years after the termination of this Agreement or, if later, from the last date Services(including any warranty work)are performed by the disclosing party hereunder;and (ii) any of the other party's trade secrets at any time during which such information shall constitute a trade secret under applicable law. 8. Liability Limitations. (a) If promptly notified in writing of any action brought against Customer based on a claim that NEOGOV's Services infringe a United States patent,copyright or trademark right of a third party(except to the extent such claim or infringement relates to any third party software incorporated into NEOGOV's applications), NEOGOV will defend such action at its expense and will pay any and all fees,costs or damages that may be finally awarded in such action or any settlement resulting from such action (provided that Customer shall permit NEOGOV to control the defense of such action and shall not make any compromise, admission of liability or settlement or take any other action impairing the defense of such claim without NEOGOV's prior written approval). (b) Customer acknowledges and agrees:(i)that NEOGOV has no proprietary,financial,or other interest in the goods or services that may be described in or offered through Customer's web site; and(ii)that except with respect to any material supplied by NEOGOV, Customer is solely responsible (as between NEOGOV and Customer) for the content, quality, performance, and all other aspects of the goods or services and the information or other content contained in or provided through Customer's web site. (c) OTHER THAN THOSE WARRANTIES EXPRESSLY SET FORTH IN THIS AGREEMENT, NEOGOV DOES NOT MAKE ANY WARRANTIES TO CUSTOMER OR ANY OTHER PERSON OR ENTITY, EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED (INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FORA PARTICULAR PURPOSE)WITH RESPECT TO THE SERVICES PROVIDED HEREUNDER. NEOGOV SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO CUSTOMER OR TO ANY OTHER PERSON OR ENTITY,UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCE OR DUE TO ANY EVENT WHATSOEVER, FOR CONSEQUENTIAL OR INDIRECT DAMAGES, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, LOSS OF PROFIT, LOSS OF USE OR BUSINESS STOPPAGE. (d) Under no circumstances shall NEOGOV's total liability to Customer or any other person,regardless of the nature of the claim or form of action(whether arising in contract,tort,strict liability or otherwise),exceed the aggregate amount of fees and revenue received by NEOGOV hereunder for the prior twelve(12)month period; provided,however that the foregoing limitations set forth in this Section 8(d)shall not apply to actions brought under 8(a) above or to any injury to persons or damages to property arising out of NEOGOV's gross negligence or willful,gross misconduct. NEOGOV, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential Page 3 of 9 9. Term and Termination. (a) This Agreement shall commence as of the date hereof and remain in effect for twelve(12)months unless terminated by either party as set forth herein("Initial Term"). (b) This Agreement may be renewed for additional terms("Renewal Term")equal in duration to the Initial Term provided Customer notifies NEOGOV at least thirty(30)days prior to the end of the Initial Term or a Renewal Term. (c) NEOGOV reserves the right to terminate this Agreement immediately if the Services provided hereunder become illegal or contrary to any applicable law,rule,regulation or public policy. Each party shall have the right to terminate this Agreement upon sixty(60)days prior written notice to the other party. (d) Within sixty(60)days of notification of termination of this Agreement,NEOGOV shall provide Customer with a dedicated data files suitable for importation into commercially available database software(e.g.,MS- Access or MS-SQL)The dedicated data files will be comprised of Customer's data contained in NEOGOV's system. The structure of the relational database will be specific to the Customer's data and will not be representative of the proprietary NEOGOV database. 10. Payments. (a)Initial Term. See Exhibit A(Order Form). (b) Renewal Term(s). For each Renewal Term, NEOGOV will continue to provide Customer with the Services,and will provide maintenance and support services as described herein,provided Customer issues a purchase order or modification to this Agreement and pays NEOGOV in advance the annual recurring charges then in effect. if there is an increase in annual maintenance and support charges, NEOGOV shall give Customer written notice of such increase at least thirty(30)days prior to the expiration of the applicable term. 11. Force Maieure. NEOGOV shall not be liable for any damages,costs,expenses or other consequences incurred by Customer or by any other person or entity as a result of delay in or inability to deliver any Services due to circumstances or events beyond NEOGOV's reasonable control,including,without limitation: (i)acts of God;(ii)changes in or in the interpretation of any law,rule,regulation or ordinance;(iii)strikes,lockouts or other labor problems; (iv) transportation delays; (v) unavailability of supplies or materials; (vi) fire or explosion; (vii) riot, military action or usurped power; or (viii)actions or failures to act on the part of a governmental authority. 12. Piggyback Clause. It is understood and agreed by Customer and NEOGOV that any governmental entity may purchase the services specified herein in accordance with the prices, terms, and conditions of this agreement. It is also understood and agreed that each local entity will establish its own contract with NEOGOV, be invoiced therefrom and make its own payments to NEOGOV in accordance with the terms of the contract established between the new governmental entity and NEOGOV. It is also hereby mutually understood and agreed that Customer is not a legally bound party to any contractual agreement made between NEOGOV and any entity other than Customer. 13. Miscellaneous.Either party may not assign its rights or obligations under this Agreement without the prior written consent of the other party. This Agreement may not be modified or amended(and no rights hereunder may be waived) except through a written instrument signed by the party to be bound. This Agreement NEOGOV, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential Page 4 of 9 constitutes the entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Oregon, without giving effect to conflict of law rules. Customer acknowledges and agrees that this Agreement is not intended to be and shall not be construed to be a franchise or business opportunity. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed by their respective duly authorized officers as of the date set forth above. Customer Signature: Print Name: Title: GovernmentJobs.com, Inc.,a California corporation Signature: Print Name: Title: Date: NEOGOV, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential Page 5 of 9 Order Form NEOGOW EXHIBIT A—ORDER FORM Customer: Bill To: City of Ashland,OR Attention: Address: Phone2: Email: Ouote Date: 7/27/12 Valid To: Today plus 90 days Requested Service Date: TBD Initial Term: 12 Months with annual renewal o lion Order Summary: I A nnual Non- Line Descniption� Recurring Recurring Cost Cost 1.0 Insight Enterprise Edition 1.1 Subscription License $5,765.00 1.2 Provisioning $2,500.00 1.3 Training $2,500.00 2.0 Govemmenfobs.com Job Posting Subscription License(Optional) $1,250.00 Sub Total: $7,015.00 $5,000.00 OO rder Uotal: $L2 015.00 'More detailed descriptions of the services are contained in the order detail for each service,which are incorporated herein and made a part hereof by this reference. NEOGOV, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential Page 6 of 9 Order Form NEOGOW Order Detail 1.0 Insight Enterprise Edition 1.1 License Subscription The Customer's subscription to the Insight Hiring Management Software includes the following functionality: Recruitment • Customized online job application • Acceptjob applications online • Online applications integration with current agency website • Onlinejob announcements and descriptions • Automatic online job interest cards • Proactively search your applicant database • Real-time database of all applicant information • Recruitment and examination planning Selection • Create,store, and reuse supplemental questions in the Insight item bank • Screen applicants automatically as they apply • Define unique scoring plans per recruitment,or copy existing scoring plans • Test Item bank(optional in TMS at an extra charge) • Conduct item analysis • Test processing(automatically input Scantron test data sheets)* • Test analysis and pass-point setting • Score,rank,and refer applicants Applicant Tracking • Email and hardcopy notifications • EEO Data collection and reports • Track applicants by step/hurdle • Schedule written, oral,and other exams • Detailed applicant history record • Skills tracking and matching Reporting and Analysis • Collect and report on EEO data • Analyze and report on adverse impact and applicant flow • Track and analyze data such as time-to-hire,recruitment costs, staff workload,applicant quality,etc. • Over 80 standard system reports • Ad Hoc reporting tool HR Automation • Create and routejob requisitions • Refer and certify applicants electronically • Scan paper application materials * Requires a Scantron or similar Optical Mark Reader(OMR)scanner,special forms, form set- up, and scanner software,which are not included in the cost. NEOGOV, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential Page 7 of 9 Order Form NEOGOW Additionally,during the term of the subscription,the Customer will be provided: Unlimited Customer Support(6:00 AM—6:00 PM PT) Customer Support shall be provided to the Customer both on-line and by telephone Monday— Friday,6:00 AM—6:00 PM PT(excluding NEOGOV holidays). Product Upgrades to Licensed Software Customer shall receive all product upgrades to purchased package. Product upgrades are automatic and available upon the next login following a product upgrade rollout. Product upgrade rollouts are generally released every three months. 1.2 Provisioning The following activities are conducted as part of the Insight Enterprise implementation • Conduct a project kick off meeting to review the project timeline,deliverables, and establish project expectations • NEOGOV will establish an Agency-specific training environment that will be used during training and post-training to allow the Agency to learn the system and begin defining new roles, responsibilities,and activities within the HR staff • NEOGOV will conduct eight hours of on line instructor led video tutorial training. NEOGOV will provide all required user exercises and user guides to the Agency. • Once the core user community is comfortable with the system(typically within 10 hours of hands-on use)they will train the remaining HR staff to complete their tasks using Insight. • Between the training and go-live,NEOGOV will complete the following activities: • Creating an agency-specific training environment which is used by your agency during training and afterwards to train in prior to moving into production • Configure printablejob bulletin • Integrate your new production job opportunities,promotional opportunities,and class specifications web pages into your existing agency website • Establish the Agency's Insight Enterprise production environment 1.3 Training NEOGOV will deliver online training videos to Agency recruiters. We will provide all required user exercises and user guides to the Agency. Following the training,your agency will have full access to the training environment.Additionally, your agency has full access to our Customer Support Help Desk during the training to help new users fully utilize Insight.Our existing customers find that this unique implementation approach enables their users to become familiar with Insight in a safe environment, promoting system use and leading to a more successful rollout. NEOGOV, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential Page 8 of 9 Order Form NEOGOW Order Form Terms and Conditions: (1) The Customer hereby orders and GovernmentJobs.com, Inc. (d/b/a NEOGOV, Inc., hereafter "NEOGOV")agrees to provide the services described in this Order Form. THE SERVICES ARE PROVIDED PERSUANT TO THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THIS ORDER FORM AND THE SERVICE AGREEMENT BETWEEN NEOGOV AND THE CUSTOMER. (2) The Customer agrees that the payment schedule is as follows: Provide all required software and Licenses • One hundred percent(100%)of the annual license price is payable within thirty(30)days of execution of this Order Form and Service Agreement.($7,015.00) Software Provisioning • One hundred percent(100%)of the non-recurring costs are to be paid to NEOGOV within thirty (30)days of the execution of this Order Form and Service Agreement. ($2,500.00) Training • One hundred percent(100%)of the non-recurring costs are to be paid to NEOGOV within thirty (30)days of the execution of this Order Form and Service Agreement. ($2,500.00) (3) Neither the Customer nor NEOGOV will be bound by this Order Form until it has been signed by authorized representatives of both parties. (4) Changes or alterations to this Order Form will not be accepted. THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT ADDITIONAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS, WARRANTY DISCLAIMERS AND LIABILITY LIMITATIONS CONTAINED IN THE SERVICE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CUSTOMER AND NEOGOV. DO NOT SIGN THIS ORDER FORM BEFORE YOU HAVE READ THE SERVICE AGREEMENT IN ITS ENTIRETY. YOUR SIGNATURE BELOW INDICATES THAT YOU HAVE READ THE SERVICE AGREEMENT AND AGREE TO BE BOUND BY ITS PROVISIONS. Customer NEOGOV,Inc. Signature: Signature: Print Name: Print Name: Title: Title: Date: Date: NEOGOV, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential Page 9 of 9 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication September 18, 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). In that letter he proposed 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. Just prior to the August 21, 2012, Business Meeting, it was determined the summary appraisal done for the property sale and exchange did not meet the full requirements of ORS 271. To that end, a full appraisal meeting the requirements of ORS 271 was performed. The full appraisal demonstrates that Mr. Millers proposal is directly in line with the appraised value. After reviewing the Appraisal Mr. Miller has increased his offer to $67,500 in order to split the difference between his initial asking amount and the appraisal amount. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: August 21, 2012 City Council Meeting It was determined prior to the Council meeting that the summary appraisal conducted by H&S Appraisers did not meet the full requirements of ORS 271. To that end, the appraisal firm of H&S was contracted to perform a full appraisal of the 12 acre Miller property and the 3.8 acre City property in order to determine the fair market value of each. H&S appraisers determined that the swap of 12 acres of Miller property for 3.8 acres of City property has a net value of$70,500. Mr. Miller has asked for $67,500 for the property sale and exchange which is directly in line with the appraised value. 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. Page I of 3 ��, CITY OF ASHLAND 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 $67,500. 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. In his report, Tom Harris summarizes by stating that the City would be effectively paying $7,927 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 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 $67,500 2. Surveying and plat preparation $ 8,000 3. County fees (estimated) $ 2,500 Estimated Total: $78,000 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: 1. 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. Page 2 of 3 CITY OF ASHLAND 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. ATTACHMENTS: 1. James C. Miller offer of May 16, 2012 2. Appraisal report dated September 5, 2012 Page 3 of 3 �r, 16, May 2012 Joe Kellerman—Attorney Subject:Ashland Gun Club City of Ash land MAY 9, 4. 2012 Attention:Jim Olson Mike Morrison City r"A'A-Mandl 1. 1 would be open to a trade—purchase of the lands that lie south of Emigrant 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 Creel(. 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 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 DEQor any other agencies. Miller would waive 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 Creel(. Purchase price $65,000.00 plus trade. 10. City bears cost of any required survey. 11. Miller will bear cost of land acreage calculations. i 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-1.2 City—Easterly spots—0.3 acres—tax lot 800, 39s-2e-07 f i City—Fasterly spots—0.3 acres—Gov lot 5, 39s-2e-07 Ao nes C. Miller i i i 41d EMIGRANT 9ss �o ?- / o .- / i LL� , U • 1 UK :. O 11aD O U fr- n 0 � co Xlpi \J_ L-4< Oo EL ' 9 _ 1 O. C7 n At . .I U-) nIry V O pe 11 <T 01) CO ci c �d' I Z O N o H & S Appraisal LLC-Ashland Gun Club.Miller SUMMARY REPORT Taking and Damages Section: Pacific Highway to Talent Avenue Project: Ashland Gun Club County: Jackson Eng. Sta: Description Dated N/A Appraiser: T.R. Harris Oregon Certification C-000090 H & S File: 12-021 1. LOCATION OF PROPERTY 555 Emigrant Creek Road North Side of City of Ashland Gun Club Ashland, Oregon 2. OWNERSHIP INFORMATION James C. and Charlene M. Miller Address: 975 Dead Indian Memorial Road Ashland, Oregon 97520 Phone No: 541-482-0950 3. TYPE OF APPRAISAL Appraisal of the Entirety Area of Entire Property 12.00 acres Talent E. Canal Irrigation Rights 4.50 acres SUMMARY OF VALUATION Value of 12 acre Land exchange $99,000 Miller owned exchange acreage Value of 3.8 acre Land exchange $28,500 City owned exchange acreage Net value for 8.2 acres acquired $70,500 Net Miller owned exchange Effective Date of Appraisal: August 30, 2012 Date of the Report: September 5, 2012 1 H & S Appraisal LLC-Ashland Gun Club.Miller SUMMARY REPORT Taking and Damages Section: Pacific Highway to Talent Avenue Project: Ashland Gun Club County: Jackson Eng. Sta: Description Dated NIA Appraiser: T.R. Harris Oregon Certification C-000090 H & S File: 12-021 1. LOCATION OF PROPERTY 555 Emigrant Creek Road North Side of City of Ashland Gun Club Ashland, Oregon 2. OWNERSHIP INFORMATION James C. and Charlene M. Miller Address: 975 Dead Indian Memorial Road Ashland, Oregon 97520 Phone No: 541-482-0950 3. TYPE OF APPRAISAL Appraisal of the Entirety Area of Entire Property 12.00 acres Talent E. Canal Irrigation Rights 4.50 acres SUMMARY OF VALUATION Value of 12 acre Land exchange $99,000 Miller owned exchange acreage Value of 3.8 acre Land exchange $28,500 City owned exchange acreage Net value for 8.2 acres acquired $70,500 Net Miller owned exchange Effective Date of Appraisal: August 30, 2012 Date of the Report: September 5, 2012 1 F: `e.Y y t t' �w 7 r _ 4 , t _ - � f g S k H & S Appraisal LLC-Ashland Gun Club.Miller � 11 LO s `t ————— --- — — -- oeep�°" •/moo v� I O - -- - --------- . � ------ i x a c a --'c----- ---` T-- --- - ---- - " - s� yM L e vlx .g, f. ..e• I �,, 6 it IS l•' S 3 H & S Appraisal LLC-Ashland Gun Club.Miller ACCESS The proposed exchange of property will result in improved access for each party. Emigrant Creek presently creates a barrier which separates the primary ownership areas of each party from the parts to be exchanged. 5. LAND USE REGULATIONS Zoning —EFU Exclusive Farm Use (Miller Property) Comp Plan Designation — Agrees Uses Permitted — Irrigated Farming, Hobby Farming, Recreation Present Use — 4.5 acres of the 12 acre parcel appraised are fenced and irrigated pasture. Lowland areas are wet or potential flood areas. The farmland class/ subclass is 3e which is high value farmland that is primarily limited by potential for erosion. 6. HIGHEST AND BEST USE Plottage value for agricultural use. 7. UTILITIES Electricity is available 9. PURPOSE OF APPRAISAL The purpose of this appraisal is to estimate Fair Market Value for the property described. Fair Market Value is the theoretical highest price a buyer, willing but not compelled to buy, would pay, and the lowest price a seller, willing but not compelled to sell, would accept. The definition of market value provided by USPAP is: The most probable price that a property should bring in a competitive and open market under all conditions requisite to a fair sale, the buyer and seller each acting prudently and knowledgeably, and assuming the price is not affected by undue stimulus. Implicit in this definition is the consummation of a sale as of a specified date and the passing of title from seller to buyer under conditions whereby: 1. buyer and seller are typically motivated; 2. both parties are well informed or well advised, and acting in what they consider their best interests; 3. a reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the open market, 4. payment is made in terms of cash in United States dollars or in terms of financial arrangements comparable thereto; and 5. the price represents the normal consideration for the property sold unaffected by special or creative financing or sales concessions granted by anyone associated with the sale. 4 H & S Appraisal LLC-Ashland Gun Club.Miller 10. EXTRAORDINARY I HYPOTHETICAL ASSUMPTIONS AND CONDITIONS As per the owner's offer to exchange property, the 12 acre area to be acquired may be partially funded with a 3.8 acre exchange of land. The intent is for the City of Ashland to acquire 12 acres located on the south side of Emigrant Creek partially funded with an exchange for 3 separate parcels located on the north side of Emigrant Creek that contain (1) 3.2 acres (391 E12-400); (2) .30 acre (392E07-800 at east end of Govt. Lot 5) and (3) .30 acre (392E07- 800 immediately SE of the SE "point" of tax lot 500). In total the proposal to exchange involves 3.8 acres of currently city owned land for 12 acres of Miller owned land. It is specifically assumed the land appraised is not contaminated in a manner that limits its use, function or value. It is assumed the sizes for areas discussed are accurate. Mr. Miller states his figures were established by survey, but the appraiser has not observed the survey information. Mr. Miller, who owns and has sold other acreage in the vicinity, provided a price and terms of exchange to the city. The terms offered appear to be representative of the property's fair market value for purposes of the proposed exchange. A copy of that document is contained in the addenda. 12. SUBJECT PROPERTY SALES HISTORY The parcel to be acquired is part of a larger parcel that has not sold in the past 10 years. INTENDED USER, INTENDED USE OF THE REPORT The intended user of this appraisal report is the City of Ashland. The purpose of the appraisal is for negotiating purchase of property more fully described in the body of this report. 5 H & S Appraisal LLC-Ashland Gun Club.Miller 12. REGIONAL DESCRIPTION The following table compares Jackson County and selected cities to other Oregon counties and principal cities. Jackson County reflects currently slowed but steady growth following the State's most rampant growth rate prior to 2008. Regional Population Table Source: U.S. Census Bureau / Portland State University (Revised) Compiled by H&S Appraisal 2009- 10 2010- 11 State/County 2000 cns 2004** 2006** 2009•• 2010 cns 2011 (o1 Poo. Cho Poo, Cho, Oregon 3,421,399 3,578,895 3,626,938 3,815,775 3,831,074 3,856,815 +15,299 +25,741 Jackson Co 181,269 189,175 191,719 202,807 203,206 203,955 +399 +749 Deschutes 115,367 128,948 143,316 157,211 157,733 158,880 +522 +1,147 Jefferson 19,009 19,735 20,673 21,646 21,720 21,845 +74 +125 Crook 19,182 17.731 20.350 21,726 20.978 20.855 -148 -123 Tri- County 153,558 166,414 184,339 200,583 200,431 201,580 +744 +1,149 Josephine Co 75,726 78,180 82,509 82,794 82,713 82,730 81 +17 Douglas Co. 100,399 103,461 105,403 107,700 107,667 107,735 -23 +68 Klamath Co 63,775 64,770 65,413 66,289 66,380 66,525 +91 +145 Umatilla Co 70,548 73,757 74,346 75,184 75,889 76,580 +705 +691 Union Co 24,530 24,971 25,282 25,584 25,748 25,980 +164 +232 Wasco Co 23,827 24,340 24,699 25,142 25,213 25,300 +71 +87 Cities %Cha. 2000-2010 Bend 52,080 N/A N/A N/A 76,639 N/A +47% N/A Redmond 13,481 26,215 +95% Madras 5,078 6,046 +19% Prineville 7,358 9,262 +26% Medford 63,687 74,907 +18% Ashland 19,522 20,078 +03% Talent 5,589 6,066 +09% Klamath Falls 19,460 20,840 +07% LaGrande 12,327 13,082 +06% Pendleton 16,354 16,612 +02% Hermiston 13,154 16,812 +28% Milt Freewater 6,470 7,050 +09% Roseburg 20,017 21,181 +06% Myrtle Creek 3,419 3,439 +01% The Dalles 12,156 13,620 +12% Grants Pass 23,003 34,533 +50% Jackson County grew 12.5% between 2000 and 2011 while Talent grew by 9% and Ashland by only 3%. Talent has modestly lower prices and more developable land available than does Ashland which has chosen a slower growth policy to preserve the city's character and limited buildable land areas for orderly growth. 6 H & S Appraisal LLC-Ashland Gun Club.Miller 13. NEIGHBORHOOD The Emigrant Creek neighborhood lies between Emigrant Lake, which is 3 miles east from the subject property, and the Ashland Airport which is less than 1 mile west of the subject. The area is rural in character, and irrigated farmable lands are rapidly being developed for farming with considerable new wine grape plantings, older orchards and high quality larger homes on acreage tracts. Close proximity to Ashland gives the lands good appeal for high quality homes on acreage tracts. Thought the Emigrant Creek valley is narrow and defined by sloping hillsides, the slopes are in many places benched or modestly sloped to allow for grapes, apples and pear orchards. The mix of oak trees in open spaces, open views, proximity to the year round flow of Emigrant Creek and availability of water for irrigation gives the area an attractive character for continued development and specialized farming. 14. COURTHOUSE DATA Legal Description - Assessor's Parcel 392E0700400 Lot: Dimensions See Map Area 32.37 acres Parcel No. Year Acres RMV Land RMV Imp. RMV Total Special Assmt 400 2011 32.37 $112,960 -0- $112,960 $7,605 17. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY TO BE ACQUIRED The Miller Ranch is primarily located on the north side of Emigrant Creek, accessible via Dead Indian Memorial Road. The 12 acre part to be acquired by the City is that part of Tax Lot 392E07-400 located on the south side of Emigrant creek. The proposed agreement provides that neither party will utilize lands within 10 feet of the current Emigrant Creek's upper bank. The 12 acre component is in the creek- bottom where the creek historically changed channels. 4.5 acres of irrigated farmland lies between an old channel located along the south property line and the current channel that forms the north line for the 12 acre parcel. The creek channel is now well established and lined with mature trees. Approximately 1,500 lineal feet of the currently creek channel forms the north boundary for the property. The parcel's spoils types include 4.5 acres capability class III-e and 7.5 acres unclassified farm use Camas-Newberg- Evans complex in low areas. 7 H & S Appraisal LLC-Ashland Gun Club.Miller Highest and Best Use is determined by the following factors: (1) Existing Land Use Regulations (2) Probability for Modifying Land Use Regulations (3) Economic Demand for potential uses (4) Physical Adaptability for potential uses (5) Market Area Trends (6) The Optimum use of the property under the foregoing factors. Land Use Regulations: The 12 acre subject is zoned EFU (Exclusive Farm Use) for which alternative uses include grazing, farming, and recreation. Potential for Modifying Land Use Regulations: The current zone may be changed to the same OSR zone that covers the City's Gun Club lands. The change in zone will not have a significant effect on value. Economic Demand: Demand for land with creek frontage and irrigation rights is currently strong. The creek frontage area improves appeal for recreational uses and irrigation affords opportunity for recreational and/ or hobby farm uses such as pasture or permanent plantings such as orchard or vineyard. Physical Adaptability: 7.5 acres of low area are not generally suitable for farming use though some aquatic plant farming could be possible. The 4.5 acre elevated component is irrigated and has a well established grass hay crop with hand line sprinkler distribution system. The existing distribution system is not included in the appraisal but the sale will include a new point of diversion and easement across seller land from the Talent East Irrigation Canal. The elevated canal affords opportunity to develop pressurized water for irrigation of the subject. Trends: Trends in neighborhood farming uses are rapidly improving. Major new vineyard plantings combined with a new winery has generated considerable interest in irrigated farm lands in this neighborhood. Highest and Best Use: The highest and best use of the land in question is for plottage and agricultural uses in conjunction with other property. 8 H 8 S Appraisal LLC-Ashland Gun Club.Miller APPRAISAL PROBLEM — SCOPE OF APPRAISAL Description of the Appraisal Problem The subject lies adjacent to City of Ashland owned lands that have historically been used as a gun club. A complaint has been filed that suggests birdshot from the gun club may have accumulated on the property appraised with a potential result of creating lead based contamination in the property's soils. The city wishes to acquire title to the property to investigate that possibility and if unsafe levels of contamination are found, to correct that condition. As the current owner of the property wishes to see the gun club use continued he has agreed to cooperate with the city to sell the property that lies within range of the firing range to be affected by such birdshot fallout. Though no actual testing for such lead contamination has been conducted, for the purpose of this appraisal, the land is appraised under assumption it is not significantly contaminated. The assumption is necessary as the current owner is not responsibility for the possibility of contamination caused by the City's Gun Club and the City must have control of the property to pursue investigation and clean- up if necessary. The subject is not a lot of record and has no established right for residential development. It is however, transferrable through lot line adjustment. The appraisal is based on small parcel agricultural land sales of 40 acres or less. While a limited number of such properties have sold recently in the Phoenix- Ashland areas, those that have provide value brackets within which the subject is value via the sales comparison approach. Scope of the Appraisal Process The Regional market is analyzed using demographic information from the State of Oregon and other Oregon counties to compare trends in Jackson County. General conditions within the subject's marketing area are indicated by population, land price trends as addressed in the highest and best use analysis, and observed conditions in the marketplace. The scope of appraisal is set by the land only appraisal problem in which the part taken does not include any improvements. Land valuation is most reliably estimated by use of the sales comparison approach. The owner was called on August 29 2012 to request his presence during an inspection on August 30, 3012. Agreement to meet was established to call prior to the time of inspection. Mr. Miller was present and explained the property's history, its historic use and his motives for accommodating its sale to the City. He pointed out property lines and features of the property. Comparable land sales were researched through the County Assessor's records focusing on 2010 through 2012 recorded sales. The history of nearby and adjoining lands sales was also researched back to 2002. All of the sales data used to compare current value of the subject were inspected, photographed and verified by the appraiser who signed this report. 9 H 8 S Appraisal LLC-Ashland Gun Club.Miller APPRAISAL OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY 18. VALUATION OF THE LAND The following tabulation lists comparable land sales used to explain how the estimate of the subject's land value was derived. Land Sales Tabulation Sale Location Date Price Site Area Price/Acre Comments L-1 537 Voorhies/Medford 7-11 $400,000 33.74 ac 11,855 Subclass 2e irrigated L-2 1975 Houston/Phoenix 2-12 $460,000 16.06 ac 18,436 Home/homesite $210,000 L-3 025 Hughes/ Phoenix 11-10 $175,000 13.40 ac 10,080 1 ac Homesite $50,000 L-4 005 Butler Ck/Ashland 5-10 $550,000 30.00 ac 13,793 1 ac Homesite $150,000 L-5 Dead Indian Memorial 5-05 $549,000 40.91 ac 10,364 Homesite $125,000 L-6 Dead Indian Memorial 7-02 $450,000 56.38 ac 7,609 46 ac irri . +$100,000 H/S 19. EXPLANATION OF ADJUSTMENTS AND COMPARISON OF LAND SALES Time Trend: Farmland price have remained relatively steady though other kinds of real estate have declined significantly since 2008. However, small farmland tracts that also have historic residential rights have increased very substantially since 2002 and where well suited for larger more expensive homes. Though residential land prices have subsided since peaking in 2007 the Ashland area has not declined as much because Ashland did not experience the kind of rapid development many other communities experienced. Demand for irrigated farmland has remained strong, particularly in areas where vineyards are a suitable use of the land. COMPARABLE LAND SALES AND ANALYSIS Sale 1: Reter Fruit LLC to Michael / Dawne DeSimone —This 33.74 acre parcel is located west of Highway 99 between Medford and Phoenix. It has Class 2e irrigated soils which had been a pear orchard before the seller pulled trees and sold the bare land parcel in this transaction. It was subsequently replanted to peach, pear and cherry orchard by the buyer. A cell tower pays ground lease of $8,000/ year, which capitalized at 9% contributed value estimated $89,000. The remaining 33 acres of class 3 and 4 irrigated land contributed the balance of $311,000 or $9,424/ acre. The seller, who priced the land is an experienced orchardist who has sold more than 2,000 acres of agricultural land. He noted that irrigation adds $1,500/ acre over and above the value of non- irrigated land. He confirmed highest and best use of this parcel is for commercial agriculture and not influenced by potential residential uses or motives. Sale 2: John C. Graves to Mark Tuttle — This 16.06 acre farmland capability class 2e parcel has approximately 13.5 acres of mature pears and an approximate 2.5 acre wooded homesite/ woodlot. It is improved with a 1921- built average- good quality 2 story and basement home that has been attractively updated and remodeled. The home contains 2,163 sq. ft. heated living area. The home and lot contributed an estimated $250,000 and 13.6 acre pear orchard contributed the balance of $200,000 or $14,815/ acre. Neither buyer or seller could be contacted to verify allocations but the sale was verified by county records, deed and NRCS soil survey. As verification was not possible and the land is planted with mature pear orchard, no 10 H &S Appraisal LLC-Ashland Gun Club.Miller significant weight is given Sale 2 in the final analysis. As per the seller of Sale 1, the price reflects much greater value than justified by strictly commercial orchard use, which is a reflection of his opinion that residential influence has kept the value of this kind of land well above its economic value for farming use. Sale 3: Garfield A/ Mary Lennick to David/ Shireen Chamberland — This 13.40 acre parcel is 60% irrigated class 4 farmland and 40% unclassified Carney cobbly clay on 20-30% slopes. Its sale was negotiated between neighbors with the seller retaining his home on a .98 acre homesite. (TL 601). The seller set his own price through personal knowledge of the farm- land market. The buyer owns adjoining vineyards immediately south and west of this parcel which are primarily capability class 4 irrigated farmland. The parcel has no residential development rights. 8.0 acres were allocated $15,000/ acre and the residual 5.4 acre non- irrigated component was allocated the $55,000 balance of $10,185/ acre. The seller said the buyer's motive was primarily to provide buffer against animal depredation of his adjoining vineyards. Sale 4: Shady Grove Ranch LLC to Don Kania/ Renee DuBois —This 30 acre parcel is located in a private, gate controlled farming area west of Ashland. It was listed for $650,000 and purchased for $550,000 to develop the buyer's personal residence. The buyer's primary motive was his value of privacy. He noted the entire 30 acre site and private neighborhood was important for that use. The existing pad was developed by the seller prior to sale with intent to build a larger arena for horses. The 12.5 acres of irrigation were very important and "highly valued" since the buyer has horses. Soils consist of 12.5 acres capability class 4 irrigated and 65% unclassified Carne cobbly clay and Heppsie clay. As noted, the parcel includes the large equestrian arena pad as well as electric service. The large arena pad had been previously graded and pea gravel filled by the seller. The buyer did not allocate between various components, but based on motives, the high value 2- acre homesite contributed an estimated $250,000 and 12.5 acre irrigated component contributed and estimated $15,000/ acre ($157,500) while the balance of $142,500 supports the value of 17.5 acres dry land at $8,143/acre. Sale 5: James C./ Charlene Miller to Christian Draoeau/ Natasha Neece — This 40.91 acre parcel is comprised of 4 contiguous tax lots. Approximately 14.91 acres are unclassified Heppsie clay and the remaining 26 acres are capability class 3 and 4 farmland of which approximately 25 acres are irrigated and 1 acre is classified as a homesite. The homesite was estimated $125,000 as of the date of sale. The irrigated acreage was allocated $12,000/ acre ($300,000) and 14.91 acres non- irrigated land was allocated the residual $124,000 or $8,316/ acre. Sale 6: James/ Charlene Miller to Edward/ Karen Kerwin — This dated sale involves a 56.38 acre parcel which is comprised of 46 acres of capability class 4 and class 6 irrigated farm land on slopes ranging 5% to 15% and 10.38 acre unclassified dry hillside on slopes ranging 15% to 40%. The steeply sloped area was subsequently developed with a benched view homesite. The buyer developed a 19,045 sq. ft. high value dwelling and a 2,416 sq. ft. dwelling on the benched area. As of the date of sale the dry land homesite component was allocated $100,000 and the 46 acre irrigated farmland component was allocated the balance of $350,000 or $7,609/ acre. Because Sale 6 occurred prior to the land price bubble that began 2003-04 it requires adjustment for time (based on Sales 4 and 5) at a net +7% annually (compounded annually) or +97%. The irrigated component contributes an equivalent current value of$14,968/acre. 11 H &S Appraisal LLC-Ashland Gun Club.Miller 21. LAND VALUATION SUMMARY Sale 1 was not influenced by potential for residential use, reflecting value for agricultural use (and cell tower) only. The seller is and experienced grower and has reportedly sold more than 2,000 acres of agricultural land ranging in value from $7,000 to $15,000/ acre. He notes that prices for strictly agricultural land are down because the economics of growing crops has deteriorated significantly. He also noted that residential influence has held prices much higher where homes or homesites motivate otherwise agricultural use land. He noted that irrigation adds about $1,500/ acre over and above non- irrigated land and that land that is capable of growing only star thistle is worth not less than $5,000/ acre (due to residential influence). Sale 2 is used only to illustrate the influence of residential use on the value of agricultural land. Sale 3 illustrates the influence of vineyards on the value of land best suited for buffering and potential vineyard use. The seller noted the buyer's primary motive for purchasing non- irrigated unclassified land on 20%- 35% slopes was animal control for the buyer's adjoining vineyards. Sale 4 provides evidence of very strong motive for larger acreage sites and high quality hobby farm use. Its irrigated acreage was rated "very important" to the buyer's requirements as was the privacy of adequate acreage and surrounding land uses. The private setting and close proximity to Ashland was instrumental in the buyer's decision to purchase this parcel. Sale 5 illustrates the influence of residential use on the value of smaller tracts of farm land specifically in the subject's location. Other evidence in the form of more recently developed very high quality homes in the neighborhood, new and recently developed vineyards on both large and smaller homesite/ acreage and current development of a new winery all contribute to the subject neighborhood land values. Sale 6 is historic, but represents a major change in neighborhood land uses from agricultural uses in the past to high value residential and specialty agricultural uses in the future. Assemblage of the subject provides continuous river frontage to the larger parcel of City owned property and results in better control/ privacy as well as adding the superior appeal of irrigated riverfront land. The plottage provided by the 12 acre parcel adds value to the entire larger parcel which comparable irrigated land indicates contributory value between $10,000/ acre and $15,000/ acre. (Sales 1, 3, 4, 5 and 6) Because the subject's potential for an associated residential use is limited, its value is compared in the lower range at $12,000/ acre for 4.5 acres irrigated and modestly less than the value of 7.5 acres non- irrigated unclassified wetland/flood plain at $5,000/acre. Estimated value of the Subject: LAND CLASSIFICATION SITE AREA UNIT PRICE VALUE Irrigated capability class 3 land 4.5 acres $12,000/acre $54,000 Unclassified wetland/flood plain. 7.5 acres $ 6,000/acre $45,000 Total for 12 acre subject $99,000 12 H & S Appraisal LLC-Ashland Gun Club.Miller Valuation of Land in Exchange The owner's proposal is to sell 12 acres with funding for the exchange to be $65,000 plus 3.8 acres of city owned land lying north of Emigrant Creek which his surveyor reportedly calculated 3 parcels containing 3.8 acres. The city owned soils are unclassified, non- irrigated Camas- Newberg- Evans complex which is the same class as the 7.5 acre component Mr. Miller is exchanging. However, the 3.8 acre area appears to be above the ordinary high water mark and does not appear to be affected by wetlands or hydric type vegetation. It is therefore valued accordingly at more than the same soil class being echanged at 7,500/ acre or $28,500. The net exchange value to the City of Ashland is therefore estimated ($99,000 - $28,500)= $70,500. 13 H & S Appraisal LLC-Ashland Gun Club.Miller ALLOCATION SHEET 57. ESTIMATED VALUE OF THE LAND LAND CLASSIFICATION SITE AREA UNIT PRICE VALUE Irrigated capability class 3 land 4.5 acres $12,000/ acre $54,000 Unclassified wetland/flood plain. 7.5 acres $ 6,000/ acre $45,000 Total for 12 acre subject $99,000 58. CONTRIBUTORY VALUE OF IMPROVEMENTS TAKEN $ -0- 59. FAIR MARKET VALUE FOR LAND TO BE ACQURIED $99,000 60. DAMAGES TO REMAINDER No Damage Results from the exchange $ -0- 61. LAND TO BE EXCHANGED 3.8 acres dry unclassified land x $7,500/ acre ($28,500) 63. NET FAIR MARKET VALUE FOR 8.2 ACRES IN EXCHANGE $70,500 65. HAZARDOUS WASTE INVESTIGATION STATEMENT Appropriate [] Not Appropriate [x ] The appraisal is not subject to hazardous waste investigation. The purpose for the exchange is to allow the city full control for investigation of potential contamination from lead. 14 H & S Appraisal LLC-Ashland Gun Club.Miller APPRAISER'S CERTIFICATION I certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief: The statements of fact contained in this report are true and correct; • 1 have not previously appraised the subject of this appraisal. The reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions are limited only by the reported assumptions and limiting conditions and legal instructions, and are the personal, unbiased professional analyses, opinions, and conclusions of the appraiser, The appraiser has no present or prospective interest in the property appraised and no personal interest or bias with respect to the parties involved; The compensation received by the appraiser for the appraisal is not contingent on the analysis, opinions or conclusions reached or reported, • The appraisal was made and the report prepared in conformity with the Uniform Appraisal Standards for Federal Land Acquisitions, • The appraisal was made and the report prepared in conformity with the Appraisal Foundation's Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice except to the extent that the Uniform Appraisal Standards for Federal Land Acquisitions require invocation of USPAP's Jurisdictional Exception Rule, as described in Section D-1 of the Uniform Standards for Federal Land Acquisitions; The appraiser has made a personal inspection of the property appraised and that the property owner, or his/her designated representative, was given the opportunity to accompany the appraiser on the property inspection. • No one provided significant appraisal assistance to the appraiser. (If professional assistance was provided the appraiser, the name of the individual(s) providing such assistance must be stated and their professional qualifications should be included in the addenda for the appraisal report. This requirement includes both professional appraisal assistance and providers of subsidiary assistance, e.g., planning and permitting consultants, engineers, cost estimators, marketing consultants.) • Estimated Fair Market Value of the Property Appraised, as of August 30, 2012 is $99,000 Ninety Nine Thousand Dollars Dated: September 5, 2012 (Thomas R.ffam , egon C-000090 15 H & S Appraisal LLC-Ashland Gun Club.Miller ADDENDA 16 H & S Appraisal LLC-Ashland Gun Club.Miller ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS 1. The property description used in this report is assumed to be reasonably correct. 2. No survey of the property has been made by the appraiser, and no responsibility is assumed in connection with such matters. Maps in this report are included only to assist the reader in visualizing the property. Property dimensions and size should be considered as approximate. 3. No responsibility is assumed for matters of a legal nature affecting title to the property, nor is an opinion of title rendered. The title is assumed to be good and merchantable. 4. Information furnished by others is assumed to be true, correct, and reliable. A reasonable effort has been made to verify such information; however, no responsibility for its accuracy is assumed by the appraiser. 5. All mortgages, liens, encumbrances, leases, and servitudes have been disregarded unless so specified within the report. the property is appraised as though under responsible ownership and competent management. 6. It is assumed that there are no hidden or unapparent conditions of the property, subsoil, or structures which would render it more or less valuable. No responsibility is assumed for such conditions or for engineering which may be required to discover them. 7. Unless otherwise stated in this report, the existence of hazardous material, which may or may not be present on the property, was not observed by the appraiser. The appraiser has no knowledge of the existence of such materials on or in the property. The appraiser, however, is not qualified to detect such substances. the presence of substances such as asbestos, urea- formaldehyde foam insulation, or other potentially hazardous materials may affect the value of the property. The value estimate is predicated on the assumption that there is no such material on or in the property that would cause a loss in value. No responsibility is assumed for any such conditions, or for any expertise or engineering knowledge required to discover them. The client is urged to retain an expert in this field, if desired. No environmental impact studies were either requested or made in conjunction with this appraisal, and the appraiser hereby reserves the right to alter, amend, revise, or rescind any of the value opinions based upon any subsequent environmental impact studies, research, or investigation. 8. It is assumed that there is full compliance with all applicable federal, state, and local environmental regulations and laws unless noncompliance is stated, defined, and considered in the appraisal report. 9. It is assumed that all applicable zoning and use regulations and restrictions have been complied with, unless a non-conformity has been stated, defined, and considered in the appraisal report. 17 H & S Appraisal LLC-Ashland Gun Club.Miller ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS (Continued) 10. It is assumed that all required licenses, consents, or other legislative or administrative authority from any local, state, or national governmental or private entity or organization have been or can be obtained or renewed for any use on which the value estimate contained in this report is based. 11. The appraiser will not be required to give testimony or appear in court because of having made this appraisal, with reference to the property in question, unless arrangements have been previously made therefor. 12. Possession of this report, or a copy thereof, does not carry with it the right of publication. It may not be used for any purpose by any person other than the party to whom it is addressed without the written consent of the appraiser, and in any event, only with properly written qualification and only in its entirety. 11 Neither all nor any part of the contents of this report, or copy thereof, shall be conveyed to the public through advertising, public relations, news, sales, or any other media without written consent and approval of the appraiser. Nor shall the appraiser, firm, or professional organization of which the appraiser is a member be identified without written consent of the appraiser. 14. The liability of the appraiser, his employees and subcontractors is limited to the initial employer (client) only, and only up to the amount of the fee actually received fro the assignment. Further, there is no accountability, obligation, or liability to any third party. If the appraisal report is placed in the hands of anyone other than the initial employer, the initial employer shall make such party aware of all limiting conditions and assumptions of the assignment and related discussions. The appraiser is in no way responsible for any costs incurred to discover or correct any deficiency (if any) in the property. 15. Acceptance of and/or use of this appraisal report constitutes acceptance of the foregoing assumptions and limiting conditions. Also See Section 10 in the attached Appraisal Report for extraordinary / hypothetical assumptions and limiting conditions (if any). 18 H &S Appraisal LLC-Ashland Gun Club-Miller PHOTOGRAPHS OF SUBJECT PROPERTY COMMENT—(6912-6703)Viewing N across the subject property toward Sale 6 (now developed) C?'3 Comment- (6912-6707) Viewing east on Emigrant Creek from the westerly end of the subject property. 19 H & S Appraisal LLC-Ashland Gun Club.Miller PHOTOGRAPHS OF SUBJECT PROPERTY ti x�;R ti 2 Comment — (6912-6706) Viewing N across Emigrant Creek toward property to be exchanged for the sub ect. i \ Y 1 ? 1 Comment (83012-6884) Viewing E along Emigrant Creek from the west end of the subject Note sprinklers in left photo. 20 H &S Appraisal LLC-Ashland Gun Club.Miller PHOTOGRAPHS OF SUBJECT PROPERTY MOP- I Comment (83012-6897) Viewing N from Emigrant Creek Road overlooking the subject in lower photo and Sale 6 in left upper photo. Comment (83012-6892) a new vineyard is being established east of the subject on Emigrant Creek Road. Vineyard successes give strong influence to neighborhood appeal and land prices. 21 H & S Appraisal LLC-Ashland Gun Club.Miller LAND SALES MAP H & S Appraisal LLC-Ashland Gun Club.Miller AGRICULTURAL LAND SALE Sale No. 1 Address/Location 2537 Voorhies Road City Phoenix County Jackson Township 37S Range 1W Section 08 Tax Lot 100 Neighborhood Description Agricultural community of orchards, vineyards cropland Average 0 Above Average [x] Below Average [ ] Zone EFU Comp. Plan Designation Agriculture Uses Permitted Farming and associated residential uses Present Use New pear orchard Highest and Best Use at Date of Sale Irrigated farmland/ pears Land Area 33.74 acres Dimensions See Map Date of Sale June, 2011 Consideration $ $400,000 Unit Price $ 11,855/ acre Grantor Reter Fruit LLC Grantee Michael/ Dawne Desmone Recording Data 11-17122 Transfer By Warranty Deed Financing Terms Cash Description of the Land and Land Features: Generally level capability class 2e irrigated parcel is planted to young pear trees. Verification: Monte Penwell 541-890-5120 Relationship to Sale Seller Remarks & Motives — The sale was motivated for strictly agricultural use. The buyer subsequently planted an orchard of pears, peaches and cherries. The land was improved with a cell tower which will provide the buyer $8,000/year net income. The seller is an experienced orchardist who confirmed he has sold more than 2,000 acres of agricultural land, and was instrumental in pricing this land. I consider this sale representative of the market. Date Inspected August 30, 2012 Inspected By T. R. Harris (83012-6874) ?; H & S Appraisal LLC-Ashland Gun Club.Miller 24 H & S Appraisal LLC-Ashland Gun Club.Miller 6� - 1 $l 1.',k y� s till: I itws3 ° ' N t "r a a i a I!iit, 11i t� 4 a8 rnU 8� 4 �° az z •�3 __ I� z � lax a 00 VIA 3 8 1 25 H & S Appraisal LLC-Ashland Gun Club.Miller AGRICULTURAL LAND SALE Sale No. 2 Address/Location 1975 Houston Road City Phoenix County Jackson Township 38S Range 1W Section 16B Tax Lot 300 Neighborhood Description Mixed agricultural and rural residential neighborhood Average 0 Above Average [x] Below Average [ ] Zone EFU Comp. Plan Designation Agriculture Uses Permitted Agriculture plus historic residential Present Use Mature pear orchard and residence. Highest and Best Use at Date of Sale Present use Land Area 16.06 acres Dimensions See Map Date of Sale February 2012 Consideration $ $460,000 Unit Price $ 18,436/ acre pears + $210,000 home Grantor John C./ Patricia Graves Grantee Mark Tuttle Recording Data 12-4096 Transfer By Warranty Deed Financing Terms Cash Description of the Land and Land Features: 2.5 acre homesite and 13.56 acre mature pear orchard on capability class 2e irrigated land. Description of Improvements: Two story renovated home originally built 1921 contains 2,163 sq. ft. plus basement Verification: County Records only Relationship to Sale N/A Remarks & Motives — The buyer's new address is the same as this properly but there is no telephone listing either buyer or seller. I consider this sale representative of the market. This is not a remainder property sale from a former eminent domain taking. Date Inspected June 2012 Inspected By T. R. Harris _ (83012-6876-79) 26 + a� yv�"1N.�V4"0 .f' 3� s H & S Appraisal LLC-Ashland Gun Club.Miller _ al � ` g ewn¢am$ �vu ai xavn as sucavm sal e 9 Y Sale 2 I i \\ W i + --- B w a ail Ea \\\ + I i3 w: i i a l 9 . III I I �g 29 H 8 S Appraisal LLC-Ashland Gun Club.Miller AGRICULTURAL LAND SALE Sale No. 3 Address/Location 6025 Hughes Road City Phoenix County Jackson Township 38S Range 1W Section 12 Tax Lot 602 Neighborhood Description Agricultural district of orchards, vineyards and irrigated crops Average [x] Above Average a Below Average [ ] Zone EFU Comp. Plan Designation Agriculture Uses Permitted Agriculture Present Use Partially irrigated farm land Highest and Best Use at Date of Sale Office use Land Area 13.40 acres Dimensions See Map Date of Sale November 2010 Consideration $ $175,000 Unit Price $ 13,059/ acre Grantor Garfield and Mary Lennick Grantee David/Shireen Chamberland Recording Data 10-37037 Transfer By Warranty Deed Financing Terms Cash Description of the Land and Land Features: Irrigated 5% to 20% sloping capability class 4e (approx. 8 acres) and unclassified Carney cobbly clay on 20%to 35% slopes. Verification: Mary Lennick 535-2728 Relationship to Sale Seller Remarks & Motives — Buyer owns adjoining vineyards adjoining the west and south sides of this property. The East Canal borders the north side of property on slopes above the property. I consider this sale representative of the market. Date Inspected August 2012 Inspected By T. R. Harris (83012-5880-83) { V Fence installed by the buyer subsequent to sale. Seller retained ownership of the home and out bldgs 30 H & S A raisal LLC-Ashland Gun Club.Miller Sale 3 westerly portion is the dry strip between fence and canal embankment in upper center photo. tl �. 4-3 • I i P „• Ya I 4-8 - P� PPPP 4P I \ —... ... 6 mV f m. - — 41Q 381W 1: i w n v t PL'\ IN1 iV,Y, i 31 H & S Appraisal LLC-Ashland Gun Club.Miller AGRICULTURAL LAND SALE Sale No. 4 Address/Location 2005 Butler Creek Road City Ashland County Jackson Township 38S Range 1E Section 28 Tax Lot 103 Neighborhood Description Agricultural neighborhood with scattered homes on acreage Average 0 Above Average [x] Below Average [ ] Zone EFU Comp. Plan Designation Farm Use with one homesite Uses Permitted One homesite Present Use Vacant land Highest and Best Use at Date of Sale One homesite and hobby farm Land Area 30 acres Dimensions See Map Date of Sale May 2010 Consideration $ 550,000 Unit Price $ 18,333/acre Grantor Shady Grove Ranch LLC Grantee Don Kania/ Renee DuBois Recording Data 10-14233 Transfer By Warranty Deed Financing Terms Cash Description of the Land and Land Features: 30 acre parcel is approximately 35% irrigated capability class 4 land and 65% unclassified dryland. It has a large level pad for future buildings and approximately 3,000 ft. frontage on Butler Creek, which forms its north line. Verification: Don Kania 503-726-7500 Relationship to Sale Buyer Remarks & Motives — The immediate community has an asphalt paved private road with gated access. Primary value of the property is for homesite and development of equestrian passture on the westerly irrigated component. I consider this sale representative of the market. This is not a remainder property sale from a former eminent domain taking. Date Inspected June 2012 Inspected By T. R. Harris (83012-6899-6901) 32 H & S Appraisal LLC-Ashland Gun Club.Miller This photo views a larger graded/graveled pad for future building development. 33 i}.Apt ���-, �. All R■ ^TP 4 T „""ASAy qq pk�, � ;1 M'yFl�YyA f r 4 f + Y X ing Pad Goo,gle earth lee ' ��� io H& S Appraisal LLC-Ashland Gun Club.Miller sak a 5-4 5-2 in ra 5-4 Y + 38 IH 21 35 H & S Appraisal LLC-Ashland Gun Club.Miller AGRICULTURAL LAND SALE SALE No. 5 Address/Location Dead Indian Memorial Road City Ashland County Jackson Township 39S Range 2E Section 07 Tax Lot 201, 306, 2E06-513, 1E12-112 Neighborhood Description Small to medium acreage farms, hobby farms and homes. Average p Above Average [x] Below Average [ ] Zone EFU Comp. Plan Designation Farm use Uses Permitted Farm use Present Use Vacant land Highest and Best Use at Date of Sale One homesite and irrigated agriculture Land Area 40.91 acres Dimensions See Map Date of Listing May 2005 Asking Price $ $549,000 Unit Price $ 13,420/acre Grantor James/ Charlene Miller Grantee Christian Drapeau Recording Data 05-30756 Transfer By WD Financing Terms Cash Description of the Land and Land Features: Irrigated and dry farmland with one homesite. Verification: James Miller Relationship to Sale Seller Remarks & Motives — The property is located in creek bottom and easterly slopes that run parallel and adjacent to Dead Indian Memorial Road. Land capability class 3 and 4 on approx. 25 acres irrigated bottom land and approximately 15.91 acres are wooded creek bottom or unclassified Carney clay and Heppsie clay dry land. I consider this sale representative of the market. This is not a remainder property sale from a former eminent domain taking. Date Inspected August 2012 Inspected By T. R. Harris (83012-6898) 36 H & S Appraisal LL -Ashland Gun Club.Miller 5-4 1 � I I j ^.•. ------- R All COX OX N yr 5i Y+.r ta e. a+ am 1 I / RR-S" \\ . 5-2 I I r w ash + : I .. ♦. lilt, a a tat +{ / ue e I /)P 9 ► I j •at � { ♦ Y�Y 'II6 aal � I .em IA4 i ea^" r•�• � T 'mn• t Y all \ q, MV•99i , • 6 6 )fuV' AI i W 10] I ) • ' O.a4 m p I bat ac a aM"c x`'OAe nc m cot N Y+ •. a �I 4 yq,S1 . • .,a v rum x MC LOT 91 ti� 1y�� .w FF 9A:P G Y u4 Y 4---eR �--- I .... I 71�H I ------ I ami 11 I Sale 5 ana Ifs I I I �: I I I AIR I 111 I Ia: I L......... I 11I I I I 5-4 I ov all I ut x . i Subject ice.. rx me. Y s aa. I ew me.l a me +I ` ac n acs 'OW a ac ae a jai — _ _--_______—_.�_--____--_—_ •R �\... tat •� 1 t INt + "IAr• e� lol a Im) ,a e O.SR $ t1 op I a ) 37 I H & S Appraisal LLC-Ashland Gun Club.Miller AGRICULTURAL LAND SALE SALE No. 6 Address/Location 955-975 Dead Indian Memorial Road City Ashland County Jackson Township 39S Range 2E Section 07 Tax Lot 1400 Neighborhood Description Small to medium acreage farms, hobby farms and homes. Average a Above Average [x] Below Average [ ] Zone EFU Comp. Plan Designation Farm use Uses Permitted Farm use, two dwellings Present Use Vineyard and two high value dwellings (Vacant Land when sold) Highest and Best Use at Date of Sale Two homesites and irrigated agriculture Land Area 56.38 acres Dimensions See Map Date of Listing July 2002 Asking Price $ $450,000 Unit Price $ 7,981/ acre Grantor James/ Charlene Miller Grantee Edward/ Karen Kerwin Recording Data 02-3991 Transfer By WD Financing Terms Cash Description of the Land and Land Features: Irrigated and dry farmland with rights to develop two homesites. Verification: James Miller Relationship to Sale Seller Remarks & Motives — Buyer subsequently developed an approximate 46 acre vineyard on irrigated capability class 4 land and two very high value homes on the subsequently benched capability class 6 dry hillside above the vineyard. I consider this sale representative of the market. This is not a remainder property sale from a former eminent domain taking. Date Inspected August 2012 Inspected By T. R. Harris (6912-) 38 H& S Appraisal LLC-Ashland Gun Club.Miller r Viewing toward Sale 6 which involves the vineyard and high value homes that overlook the subject of this appraisal a v.. � nr.yy0 vN 1a . Sale 6 AL mz ae. r t IP l 5-4- I I a > �• a '-_.- C. XR 1 39 H &S Appraisal LLC-Ashland Gun Club.Miller 16,May 2012 Joe Kellerman—Attorney REGE'£v ED Subject:Ashland Gun Club f.., �,j City of Ashland MAY Z 1 7017 Attention:Jim Olson Mike Morrison Ci�y i...r Ac,4iland 1. 1 would be open to a trade—purchase of the lands that lie south of Emigrant Creek in my tax t� lot 400,39s-2e-07. 2. In return 1 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 watermark 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 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 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 borne 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. 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 400,395-2e-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 40 H & S Appraisal LLC-Ashland Gun Club.Miller City—Easterly spots—0.3 acres—Gov IM S,39s-2e-07 )01�es C.Miller 41 H & S Appraisal LLC-Ashland Gun Club.Miller THOMAS R. HARRIS PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS BUSINESS ADDRESS H&S APPRAISAL LLC Office: (541)385-6000 20935 ARID AVENUE e-mail:trhards @pacifier.com BEND, OREGON 97701 REAL ESTATE EXPERIENCE 10/06 to Present-H&S Appraisal LLC, Bend,Oregon Appraisal and Consulting Services specializing in eminent domain appraisals. 9/98 to 10106- H & H Appraisal Services Inc. Redmond. Oregon Appraisal and Consulting Services specializing in appraisals for eminent domain purposes. 5/86 to 9/98- 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. 5/83.4186-Community First Federal Savings,Vancouver.Wash. -Vice President- Vancouver,Washington: Manager, Loan Service Operations, including appraisal supervision and management; Manager,commercial loan department; member, loan committee. 7/79-5183-Willamette Savings Association, Portland. Oregon-Vice President, Chief Appraiser; Manager of Project Loan(Special Credits) Department; Manager, RED Department; member, Loan Committee. 7/72-1/79 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. 3/66-7/72 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) 42 H & S Appraisal LLC-Ashland Gun Club.Miller THOMAS R. HARRIS PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS (Continued) CONTINUING EDUCATION 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 RPN 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 1 B-A; Capitalization Theory 1987 - AIREA Examination 1 B-B; Capitalization Theory 1987 - Construction Cost Seminar 1987 - R41(c)Seminar 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 - AREA Course 1 B; Capitalization Theory 1970 - AIREA Course 1A; Principles of Real Estate 43 H & S Appraisal LLC-Ashland Gun Club.Miller Thomas R. Harris 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 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, Inc. 44 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication September 18, 2012, Business Meeting Designation of Voting Delegate to LOC Annual Meeting FROM: Diana Shiplet, Executive Secretary, Administration, diana.shiplet @ashland.or.us SUMMARY Council needs to designate a voting delegate and alternate delegate for the annual League of Oregon Cities membership meeting, occurring on September 29, 2012. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: The annual membership meeting of the League of Oregon Cities will be held on September 29, 2012 at their annual conference. Each member city is entitled to cast one vote at the meeting. Councilors Morris and Chapman, and Mayor Stromberg will be in attendance at the conference on that date. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: N/A STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: N/A SUGGESTED MOTION: I move to approve as the voting delegate and as the alternate voting delegate for the League of Oregon Cities membership meeting taking place on September 29, 2012. ATTACHMENTS: Designation form Page 1 of 1 IL, 87th ANNUAL LOC CONFERENCE LEAGUE 0 Oregon September 27-29, 2012 • Salem Conference Center CITIES Designation of Voting Delegate at Annual Membership Meeting The annual membership meeting will be held Saturday, September 29, at 8:00 a.m. Each city is entitled to cast one vote at the business meeting; however, all city officials are encouraged to attend the meeting. Use this form to indicate those persons who will represent your city as a voting delegate and alternate delegate. The voting delegate or alternate should pick up a voting card at the Conference Registration Desk on Saturday morning prior to entering the business meeting. NOTE: Delegates may not vote without a voting card, and voting cards will be issued only to a person indicated on this form. Voting by proxy will not be permitted. FOR THE CITY OF VOTING DELEGATE: Name Title ALTERNATE: Name Title Submitted by Return this form by Sept. 17 to: (Signature) League of Oregon Cities Attu.Jenni Shepherd Name Fax: (503)3994863 Title shep h e roil o rc i t i es.o rg P.O.sox 928 Phone Salem,OR 97308 Email CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication September 18, 2012, Business Meeting Ordinance Amending Ashland Municipal Code (AMC) 10.64.010 Obstructing Passageways FROM: Ann Seltzer, Management Analyst, seltzera @ashland.or.us SUMMARY Ashland's municipal code prohibits using a public street or sidewalk for selling, storing or displaying merchandise, unless otherwise permitted by ordinance. This means the Farmer's Market on Oak Street, which is approved by conditional use permit, and the vendors at the 4'h of July community celebration on Winburn Way, are actually in violation of City Code. Staff proposes to clean up the code by amending it to clarify that using a street or sidewalk to sell merchandise can be allowed for holders of a conditional use permit or a special event permit. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: July 2011 The Economic Development Strategy was adopted by the Council in 2011 and includes strategy 5 which reads: "Increase tourism in the fall, winter, and spring and diversify the types of events and activities." April 2012 The City Council approved the Special Event Policy and adopted a resolution setting fees for special events. Issue The Ashland Chamber of Commerce Visitor and Convention Bureau(VCB) annually produces the Ashland Culinary Festival (previously Ashland's Food & Wine Classic) held the first weekend in November. After five years,the event is now operating at capacity in the Historical Ashland Armory and the VCB is seeking additional space. They have requested closure of B Street between Oak Street and Pioneer Street to allow for vendors that cannot be accommodated in the Armory. The current language in AMC 10.64.010 prohibits the use of a sidewalks or streets for selling merchandise. A few years ago, AMC chapter 13 was updated to allow sidewalk dining. It now includes 13.03.030 Exempt Activities: City Seasonal Event Usage which permits businesses to sell merchandise on the sidewalk twice a year. It also provides for the Council, by resolution, to establish additional seasonal event days. This"exempt activities" section, however, relates to sidewalk usage not street usage. Staff initially recommended the Chamber apply for a conditional use permit(CUP) for the Culinary Festival and they have begun that process. Our land use law (including its provision for CUPS) is not designed to address once-a-year weekend events. In the case of the street closure for the Oak Street Farmer's Market, a CUP was appropriate since the potential impact to neighboring properties was to occur Page I of 2 CITY OF ASHLAND every weekend for a number of months. AMC 18.08.800 defines Temporary Use as "a short-term, seasonal, or intermittent use. Such use shall be approved by a conditional use permit only, with such conditions..." The street closure request for the Ashland Culinary Festival is for one weekend in November. The special event permit application requires the applicant to notify neighbors, provide a map showing the layout of the event, in this case the booths, and indicate access for emergency vehicles. The permit is not approved until it is reviewed by the various city departments including public works, police, fire and administration. Staff Rationale Staff is recommending this ordinance amendment because the Ashland Culinary Event meets the objectives of the Economic Development Strategy and the Special Event Policy. It occurs in the off season, has grown in attendance and ticket sales over the last several years and is an organized activity that requires the use of the public right of way. In addition to adding an exemption for special event permits, staff has also proposed including an exemption for conditional use permit holders. This would allow the Farmer's Market and any future similar activities that may secure conditional use permits for the use of the public right of way for the purpose of selling merchandise to be in compliance with code: without this change, a conditional use permitee may have City approval and nevertheless be out of compliance with AMC 10.64. More Background In April of 2012,the Parks and Recreation Commission modified its long standing policy"no selling in the park" and now allows up to ten vendor booths in the Band Shell parking lot in association with an approved and permitted special event in Lithia Park. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: N/A STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends approval of the ordinance amendment. SUGGESTED MOTION: I move approval of first reading of an Ordinance titled: "Ordinance Amending Ashland Municipal Code (AMC) 10.64.010 Obstructing Passageways." ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance Page 2 of 2 11FAW, ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ASHLAND MUNICIPAL CODE (AMC) 10.64.010 OBSTRUCTING PASSAGEWAYS Annotated to show deletiens and additions to the code sections being modified. Deletions are bold lined through and additions are bold underlined. 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, permitted special events benefit the City by increasing tourism and economic activity; WHEREAS, the potential impact to neighboring properties of the selling of merchandise in the public right of way has been evaluated and vetted through the conditional use permit process: THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Chapter 10.64.010 is hereby amended to read as follows: 10.64.010 Obstructing passageways a. Except as otherwise permitted by ordinance or by a conditional use permit or by a special event permit, no person shall use a street or public sidewalk for selling, storing or displaying merchandise or equipment." 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 (i.e., Sections [No(s.)] 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, Ordinance No. Page 1 of 2 Section 2(C) of the City Charter on the day of 2012, and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of 2012. 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 2 of 2