Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-0315 Council Mtg PACKET CITY OF ASHLAND Important: Any citizen may orally address the Council on non-agenda items during the Public Form. 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 lime 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 March 15, 2011 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.] 6:30 p.m. Executive Session for discussion of labor negotiations pursuant to ORS 192.660(2)(n) 7:00 p.m. Regular Meeting 1. CALL TO ORDER IL PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 111. ROLL CALL IV. MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS V. SHOULD THE COUNCIL APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THESE MEETINGS? [5 minutes] 1. Study Session of February 28, 2011 2. Regular Meeting of March 1, 2011 3. Executive Session of March 4 and 5, 2011 VI. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS 1. Does Council have any questions regarding the annual RVCOG presentation by Michael Cavallaro? VII. CONSENT AGENDA [5 minutes] 1. Does Council wish to approve the minutes of the Boards, Commissions, and Committees? 2. Does Council wish to approve a Liquor License Application from Jesus Nunez dba El Paradiso Mexican Cuisine at 545 Clover Lane? 3. Does Council wish to approve a Liquor License Application from Ken Khosroabadi dba Siskiyou Shell at 1515 Siskiyou Blvd.? 4. Does Council wish to approve a Liquor License Application from Carolyn Kennedy dba Mongo Grill at 1662 Siskiyou Blvd.? 5. Does Council wish to authorize the Mayor to sign a letter of support for a regional Fire Prevention & Safety grant to install fire sprinklers in foster homes in Jackson, Josephine, and Douglas Counties? 6. Does Council wish to accept a grant in the amount of $34,079 from the Department of Homeland Security/ Oregon Emergency Management for the purchase of radio equipment? r Ct)1"\•CII U61' 11V'(;S ARE 131ZOADC IS I I IVF ON C1IA'NNFI9 VISI I "I 'I IF C:11'l' 01- ASI ILAND'S WF13 SI7 F ATWWW'.ASI I1 ;1ND.C>RAl S 7. Does Council wish to approve the application and matching funds for a Fire Prevention & Safety Grant for the Fire Inspection Program for $85,700 of which $8.750 is required as matching funds from the City? 8. Does Council have questions or input regarding the direction and progress of the Water Conservation and Reuse Study and Comprehensive Water Master Plan? 9. Should Council authorize staff to sign an Intergovernmental Agreement between the Oregon Department of Energy for continued participation in the Energy Star program? 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. Will Council approve and authorize the Mayor to sign a quitclaim deed to relinquish all City interest in an 8.5 food wide parcel of land referred to as tax lot 391 E4CA-3300? [20 Minutes] 2. Does Council approve a request to annex a 3.72 acre parcel consisting of three lots located at 590 Clover Lane and change the Zoning Map designation from Jackson County RR-5 (Rural Residential) to City of Ashland E-1 (Employment)? [60 Minutes] 3. Will Council increase Water Utility Rates 10% including the potable water irrigation surcharge during summer months and increase Wastewater Rates 6% with a combined, average monthly impact (excluding irrigation) on a single-family residence of $4.29 per month? 130 Minutes] 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] Please note: Comments or questions from the public that are of a defamatory nature, such as statements directed at individual Councilors' character, intentions, etc., are out of order because they interfere with the work of the Council. The Council will not answer questions posed during public forum but may direct staff to answer such questions later. X. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Does Council wish to approve an order authorizing a lease of real property to the Ashland Gun Club? [30 Minutes] XI. NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS XII. ORDINANCES. RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS 1. Should Council approve Second Reading of an ordinance titled, "An Ordinance amending the City of Ashland Physical and Environmental Constraints (Chapter 18.62), and incorporating necessary changes based on the adoption of the Flood Insurance Study for Jackson County Oregon and incorporated areas, and accompaning Flood Insurance Rate Maps" and approve Second Reading of an ordinance titled, "An Ordinance amending the City of Ashland Flood Damage Prevention Regulations (Chapter 15.10), adopting by reference the revised Flood Insurance Study for Jackson County Oregon and incorporated areas, and accompaning Flood Insurance Rate Maps"? [10 Minutes] XIII. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS/REPORTS FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS 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 I). COUNCll A11:1`I1N(`,S ARI.. BROADCAST LIVE ON Cl IANNF1_ 9 VIS1I I I IF CITY OI' ASI1i.AND'S \\11'11 Sll I: A'I WWW.ASI II AND.OR.US CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION February 28, 2011 Page I of 3 MINUTES FOR THE STUDY SESSION ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL Monday, February 28, 2011 Siskiyou Room, 51 Winburn Way Mayor Stromberg called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. in the Siskiyou Room. Councilor Chapman, Silbiger, Lemhouse, Moms, Voisin, and Slattery were present. 1. Does Council have direction about a response to Mount Ashland Association's (MAA's) request that the City request that the Special Use Permit (SUP) for the ski area be transferred from the City to MAA? Members of the Mt. Ashland Association (MAA) Board of Directors present were General Manager Kim Clark; Treasurer Lisa Beam, Guest Services Manager Ada Rivera, President Tom Mayer, Vice President Frank Rote, Marketing Manager Rick Saul, and Secretary Darrel Jarvis. Mr. Mayer noted transferring the Special Use Permit (SUP) was economically, socially, and environmentally important and would make it easier for people to invest in the expansion by eliminating third party involvement. City Administrator Martha Bennett added in transferring the SUP the City would relinquish ownership of all assets of the ski area and MAA would take over completely. A replacement contract would determine the terms of the dissolution and the transfer of assets. Monitoring Ms. Bennett explained the City's concern regarding the expansion was erosion and sedimentation in the watershed and a potential negative impact on one of the City's major drinking water supply. At an earlier meeting with Mr. Clark both discussed the possibility of a multi-party monitoring team similar to the Ashland Forest Resiliency (AFR) Master Stewardship Agreement (MSA). The monitoring team could include onsite review of activities and plan review prior to construction. The group would be comprised of a member appointed by MAA, one by the City, one by the Forest Service and possibly a fourth with monitoring experience. The MAA Board and Council agreed it was a model that worked well. Council suggested adding someone from the Public Works Department and possibly a fifth member from the community. Both the MAA Board and Council supported setting up criterion for monitoring and guidelines. The AFR monitoring team did not vote but had specific roles through the Master Stewardship Agreement. Ms. Bennett clarified if the SUP was transferred the new contract would address the City's concerns and other than the monitoring group, the City would no longer have a relationship to the Forest Service and a direct relationship with MAA only on issues of concern. Mr. Clark added that it made sense to establish a cooperative and a member of Public Works would be a logical participant. He preferred having a Memo of Understanding versus a contract. Council and MAA Board consensus supported establishing a monitoring team. Reserves/Unencumbered Assets for Future Restoration The City was concerned there were enough assets to pay the cost of the required restoration in the event MAA ceased to operate the ski area. The SUP required $200,000 for restoration. The lease between the City and the MAA had the same amount but increased it yearly by the Consumer Price Index (CPI) requiring the MAA to maintain more in terms of cash assets than the SUP. The MAA agreed to maintain those reserves. When MAA expands the ski area, the U.S. Forest Service will adjust the required dollar amount. In the event MAA failed, the U.S. Forest Service would ask the City to operate the ski area, if the City declined, they would CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION February 28, 2011 Page 2 of 3 look for another operator. If no one took over operations, they would start requesting the restoration requirements in the SUP. There was the possibility the U.S. Forest Service might require a certain level of restoration that does not meet the City's expectations. Mr. Clark clarified the U.S. Forest Service had definite standards, was the property owner and had the final decision. If the expansion happened and the restoration amount was readjusted, the MAA Board was fine taking that amount and starting over with a new CPI. Current restoration included slreambed stabilization and four of the 27 identified sites complete with work started on sites 6 & 7. However, no work has happened for three years due to the court case. Ms. Bennett explained the City did not have the in-house expertise to conduct a separate study to compare it to what was in the SUP. The U.S. Forest Service had jurisdiction over the property and set the correct standard. Council noted the issue of restoration and failure would increase dramatically with the expansion especially in the early years. If the expansion went forward and MAA failed, the impact would extend far beyond the U.S. Forest Service restoration requirement. Alternately, the U.S. Forest Service requirements may be sufficient to protect the watershed and the expansion might not be harmful to the water supply. Council wanted to know the cost to restore the area in the event MAA failed. Other comments from Council supported the amount the U.S. Forest Service suggested in the SUP. Staff clarified that the U.S. Forest Service may not allow the City to do the restoration they thought necessary to protect the watershed. Mr. Rote's understanding was that once the expansion concluded, there would be less sediment than there was now, the expansion would actually decrease the problem. Both the MAA Board and the City purchased testing equipment and have tested and monitored specific sites downstream from the ski area for 10 years. Public Works Director Mike Faught explained new requirements for the total daily maximum load prohibited more than 3.62 cubic yards of sediment going into the reservoir daily. Council commented the issue was water quality and the City should focus on that and form an agreement that highlighted the weaknesses and the City's position in relation to those weaknesses. Staff responded the existing agreements between the U.S. Forest Service and the City captured the issues and the results from monitoring the water quality could be included in a replacement agreement. In the worst-case scenario of not enough reserves, the City could negotiate with the U.S. Forest Service to restore the area to City standards whether they held the SUP or not. The MAA Board thought the existing restoration sum including the expansion restoration sum and inflation was acceptable although some of Council thought the amount was too low. Staff would bring back an agreement between the MAA and the City regarding background data, monitoring and remedies available to the City if sedimentation exceeded an expected level during the construction. Non-voting Seat on the Board The Board supported having a Councilor serve as a non-voting member of the MAA Board and referred to the model the City used with the Ashland Community Hospital. That member was non-voting, and the Board wanted to reserve the right to reject whom the City suggested. The member would sit in on all Board actions with the exception of personnel and executive meetings. Mayor Stromberg suggested making the member ex officio so they could participate in discussions and the MAA Board agreed. Cash Payment Ms. Bennett explained a Council member asked to receive cash for the transfer of the assets. The City owns the lodge, ski lifts; and some of the equipment for an appraised value of approximately $700,000. The lease required a minimum liquidation value and allowed the City to appraise the assets at any time. If the MAA was below the amount required, they set aside cash and paid for the appraisal. If MAA had sufficient funds, the City CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION February 18, 2011 Page 3 of 3 would pay the $22,000 for the appraisal. Mr. Rote added in operating permit transfers charging for the permit was not allowed. Comments from Council opposing the request for a cash transfer of assets stated it was an overreach and inappropriate. Supporting comments suggested more funds going towards restoration, would position the City better in the event of failure. A Council member suggested the MAA pledge the cash value of assets towards restoration'costs. Ms. Beam thought the U.S. Forest Service would be in first position for restoration, even if they set aside more assets. Asking to pledge all assets would hinder their ability to make improvements, and apply for loans in the future, they could not use the assets as collateral, and the bank would sit second to the City. Staff clarified the SUP holder would be in first position if there were a failure. Mr. Clark confirmed funding for the expansion would be donations only and the MAA would not borrow against assets unless the Board changed their minds. Ms. Beam added there were people who would make donations only if the City was not involved. Councilor Chapman clarified the assets would not be pledged to the City and would only happen if the U.S. Forest Service was unable to locate another operator. In the event of a failure and no one took over, his suggestion would require the MAA to pledge a portion of the cash liquidation of assets for restoration projects and have that requirement as part of the SUP. Ms. Bennett added this was the reason to hold the SUP, if MAA fails, the City could choose the next operator and have the first right of refusal. Ultimately, the U.S. Forest Service would have to approve any agreement. Mr. Clark commented on the potential liability of the City retaining the SUP. If the MAA failed, the entire liability would rest with the City finding a new operator or restoring it as the SUP holder. Additionally the City could incur litigation if there were a major accident at the ski area. Council consensus was to continue the process of possibly transferring the SUP. 2. Does Council wish to revise direction related to an ad hoc committee to address homelessness? Councilor Slattery suggested having one central ad hoc committee with several groups from the community forming "stakeholder" committees and presenting the central ad hoc with each of their top three issues and solutions regarding homelessness. Examples of stakeholder groups included the Chamber of Commerce, League of Women, Southern Oregon University (SOU), City of Ashland, Homeless Representatives, and the Faith Community. The central ad hoc committee could consist of two Councilors, 3-5 experts on homelessness and 1 staff person. This group would review each committee's three issues and forward to Council for deliberation. He also recommended taking the ideas on the short-term list and implementing ones that were feasible and have the stakeholder groups address the more controversial items or all of them. Council supported the suggestion of multiple ad hoc committees. Councilor Slattery will provide a formal plan and a revised Council Goal on Homelessness at the April 5, 2011 meeting. 3. Look Ahead Review. City Administrator Martha Bennett reviewed items on the Look Ahead. Meeting adjourned at 7:20 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Dana Smith Assistant to the City Recorder AVILANU (.Y7 T I.UUMAL MLh71N(i March 1, 2011 Page I of 9 MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL March 1, 2011 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 Mayor Stromberg announced the annual process for various positions on the City's Commissions and Committees was open. The deadline for submitting applications is March 18, 2011. SHOULD THE COUNCIL APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THESE MEETINGS? The minutes of the Study Session of February 14, 2011, Executive Session of February 15, 2011 and Regular Meeting of February 15, 2011 were approved as presented. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS The Mayor's Proclamation of International Women's Day was read aloud. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Does Council wish to approve the minutes of the Boards, Commissions, and Committees? 2. Does Council have any questions regarding the Ashland Response Team update? 3. Does Council have any questions regarding the Ashland Fire and Rescue Annual Report? 4. Does Council wish to confirm the Mayor's appointment of Margaret Garrington to the Public Arts Commission with a term to expire April 30, 2012? 5. Will Council direct staff to submit a grant application to fund the preparation of an area plan for the North Normal Avenue Neighborhood? Councilor Chapman requested that Consent Agenda item #5 be pulled for discussion. Councilor Slattery/Morris m/s to approve Consent Agenda items #1 through #4. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. Councilor Chapman thought the North Normal Neighborhood Plan would interfere with outstanding projects in the Planning Department and would not support the project. Community Development Director Bill Molnar explained the plan density for the area in total was roughly six units per acre, below the threshold identified in Regional Problem Solving (RPS). There was no local street system laid out for it and a comprehensive planning project would allow the City to look at the entire 90 acres. The grant would establish a pre-plan so when annexations occurred innovative ways to minimize impacts on natural resources through density transfer would be in place. Planning discussions with property owners would address connectivity challenges. Mayor Stromberg added Jackson County could break the property into low-density parcels that would remove the City's ability to use it under the buildable lands inventory for compact development. Councilor Chapman/Silbiger m/s to not apply for the grant. DISCUSSION: Councilor Silbiger thought the grant would take time away from projects that have been waiting for years. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Chapman and Silbiger, YES; Councilor Voisin, Lemhouse, Slattery and Morris, NO. Motion denied 24. Councilor Voisin/Slattery m/s to approve Consent agenda item #5. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Voisin, Lemhouse, Slattery and Morris, YES; Councilor Chapman and Silbiger, NO. Motion passed 4-2. ASHLAAL) (.77'Y (.UUN(.7L MLL711V(7 March 1, 2011 Page 2 of 9 PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Should Council approve First Reading of an ordinance amending the Ashland Land Use Ordinance Chapter 18.62 (Physical and Environmental Constraints), an ordinance amending the Ashland Municipal Code Chapter 15.10 (Flood Damage Prevention Regulations), and revisions to the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps and move both ordinances on to second reading? Senior Planner Brandon Goldman provided a presentation on the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate map Modernization Project Components that included: • New FEMA Flood Hazard Mapping • The Flood Insurance Study and revised FEMA Special flood Hazard Maps (FIRMS) are effective May 3, 2011 • FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map changes - FEMA's Map Service Center: www.msc.fema.gov FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map Modernization Project • Modifies 100 year and 500 year flood zones • Study of Flood zones completed • Delineates inundation areas • Pre-existing letters of Map Amendments (LOMAs) to be revalidated: FEMA agrees to make flood insurance available within a community. The community agrees to adopt the Flood Insurance Study, Flood Insurance Rate Maps, and floodplain management ordinance and enforce the regulations in that ordinance • Ashland is a participating jurisdiction in the National Flood Insurance Program and Community Rating System Local Ordinance Amendments • Land Use Code - Physical and Environmental Constraints (18.62) • Building Code -Flood Damage Prevention Regulation (15.10) Insurance Issues • Property owners are strongly advised to consult their Insurance Agent immediately to evaluate their changing flood insurance needs • Purchase flood insurance BEFORE the map revisions go into effect May 3, 2011 • Maintain continuous coverage Upcoming Insurance Fair • Regionally Coordinated Training for local Insurance Agents March 21 ' • Public Insurance Fair tentatively scheduled for March 29ih • Detail will be available at: http://www.ashland.or.us/femaupdates Resources • Amy Gunter, Assistant Planner 541-552-2044, guntera(@,ashland.or.us • Christine Shirley, NFIP Coordinator, Dept. of Land Conservation & Development, 503-373-0050 x250, FAX 503-375-5581, Christine.shirley@state.or.us • Flood policy coverage and rates: 1-800427-4661 • FEMA Map Assistance Center: 1-877-FEMA MAP (1-877-336-2627) Staff summarized the key issues were changes to flood map lines that would go into effect May 3, 2011. Property owners needed to check with their insurance to determine how it will affect their property. They could also use a Letter of Map Amendment (LOMA) to have their property delineated as outside the flood plain and there were mitigation steps if they were in the flood plain. Council needed to pass the ordinances in order to remain a participating community with 15% premium reductions and enable people to get national flood insurance or federal funding for repairs within the flood plain in the event of a flood. Additionally, the City needed to adopt the Flood Insurance Study and FIRM maps in total. Assistant Planner Amy Gunter explained why the City of Central Point and portions of Jackson County appealed the original map information. This was the first time FEMA mapped Central Point and it revealed 3,500 households in floods zones because it is one of the lowest areas in the valley. The removal of Gold Ray Dam ASHLAND (,17Y (A)UNCIL MCC77N(i March I, 2011 Page 3 of 9 affected the other areas in Jackson County. FEMA remedied the appeals and issued letters of final determination for the entire town. Mr. Goldman added the appeal period had passed and the maps were complete by FEMA standards and not subject to change except for the letter of map amendment. Public Hearing Open: 7:38 p.m. Zach Brombacher/1370 Tolman Creek Road/Explained Hamilton Creek ran throughout his property and his April 23, 2003 LOMA was not represented on the FEMA maps. He noted other issues with changing the flood plain on his property, conservation easements, and a current issue of the City dumping storm water onto his land. Public Hearing Closed: 7:41 p.m. Councilor Voisin/ Silbiger m/s to approve the first reading and amendments to the Chapter 18.62 Physical and Environmental Constraints of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance (ALUO) and schedule second reading for March 15, 2011. DISCUSSION: Councilor Lemhouse felt pressured into making a decision he did not want to make. Councilor Chapman did not understand why Ashland did not appeal. Councilor Moms supported the creeks already mapped but had issues with the unmapped areas and inaccuracies and thought they should be corrected prior to adoption. Councilor Slattery agreed with Councilor Lemhouse that Council was in the position where they had to vote this through for the overall good. Councilor Voisin would support the motion. It was Council's role to protect the larger portion of the community, FEMA's information did have inaccuracies, but the disaster would be having a flood where the City could not apply for FEMA funds. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Voisin, Slattery, Silbiger and Lemhouse, YES; Councilor Morris and Chapman, NO. Motion passed 4-2. Councilor Voisin/Slattery m/s to approve first reading ordinance amendments to Chapter 15.10 of the Ashland Municipal Code and revisions to the Flood Insurance Study and FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps and schedule second reading for March 15, 2011. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Voisin, Slattery, Silbiger and Lemhouse, YES; Councilor Morris and Chapman, NO. Motion passed 4-2. 2. Will Council direct Staff to develop a purchase and sale agreement to transfer City property on Chitwood Lane to GroundWorks for the purpose of developing five affordable housing units? Senior Planner Brandon Goldman explained the Parks and Recreation Department initially purchased the property for a park. The City purchased a third acre for $125,000 for affordable housing using funds from properties sold on Strawberry Lane. In 2008, the City selected Rogue Valley Community Development Corporation (RVCDC) currently known as GroundWorks to build five low-income moderate home ownership units. The preliminary project design and project pro-forma were complete and GroundWorks was ready to submit a formal planning action application and obtain signatures from the City. Public Hearing Open: 7:54 p.m. John Wheeler, Executive Director for GroundWorks/RVCDC/Explained GroundWorks was also developing 15 homes in Rice Park that would be complete late summer 2011. They were able to finance development by expanding the Rice Park project to include the five houses at Chitwood. These homes were mutual self-help sweat-equity homes where the future owners work together 32 hours a week until all the homes are finished. The Chitwood homes would sell at $158,000 for a two-bedroom and $163,000 for a three bedroom if the land sold at $75,000. Selling the property for $75,000 enabled GroundWorks to obtain a grant for $15,000 per house that could go towards the acquisition. Currently GroundWorks was working with the City to complete National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) to access those funds. GroundWorks will maintain ownership of the land and in mutual self-help would recapture a subsidy if someone sold his or her house. Homeowners can only sell to low-income families. AJWLANU Ul'Y l.'UUNCIL MLLIINU March 1, 2011 Page 4 of 9 Regina Ayars/199 Hillcrest/Spoke as a citizen not as Housing Commissioner and noted the Chitwood project would offer five families the opportunity to build and own their homes. The Request for Qualifications (RFQ) stated the City might entertain reductions in sale price as a necessary subsidy to facilitate the properties development. GroundWorks indicated they would ask for a reduction in the price at that time. The $50,000 difference would offset the energy efficiency and earth advantage designation. Proceeds from the sale of the property were originally designated for the Housing Trust Fund. She strongly encouraged Council to sell the parcel to GroundWorks for $75,000 and move proceeds from the sale to the Housing Trust Fund. Mayor Stromberg referred to the letter submitted by the Deerfield Homeowners Association. Mr. Goldman explained staff met with the Homeowners Association along with Parks and Recreation Director Don Robertson and John Wheeler from GroundWorks. They addressed contact information, the master plan the Parks Commission was contracting GroundWorks to conduct that would include onsite detention of storm water, and how the Parks and Recreation Department maintained the grass. Additionally, the presence of GroundWorks developing the property then the subsequent homeowners would help dispel current behavior neighbors were observing. Public Hearing Closed: 8:07 p.m. Councilor Slattery/Morris m/s to direct staff to develop a Purchase and Sale Agreement for transfer of the 14,000 property to RVCDC/GroundWorks for $75,000 for the development of five affordable housing units, and authorize GroundWorks to submit a planning action application for the proposed subdivision and development. DISCUSSION: Councilor Slattery thought it was a great project. Councilor Chapman did not think the City should be involved in the development portion of affordable housing and instead have a third party hold the land and let GroundWorks go through the Planning process. City Administrator Martha Bennett explained the City would sell the property to GroundWorks and the motion allowed them to apply to the Planning Department while the purchase and sale agreement was finalized. The City would co-enter the Planning application and GroundWorks could not submit an application to the Planning Department without the landowners' approval. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Slattery, Lemhouse, Silbiger, Voisin and Morris, YES; Councilor Chapman, NO. Motion passed 5-1. Councilor Voisin/Slattery m/s to allocate proceeds from the sale of this land to the Ashland Housing Trust Fund. DISCUSSION: Ms. Bennett clarified Council had purposely left this as a separate account in the General Fund until it reached a specific dollar amount to offset the accounting cost of creating a separate fund. .Monies were earmarked for affordable housing. Administrative Director Lee Tuneberg added currently in the General Fund there was approximately $23,000 restricted for Housing and $120,000 from the Strawberry Lane sale. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Slattery, Lemhouse, Silbiger, Voisin and Morris, YES; Councilor Chapman, NO. Motion passed 5-1. PUBLIC FORUM Emery Way/724 '/z Siskiyou Boulevard/Southern Oregon University (SOU) Representative/Explained a recent Homelessness Town Hall meeting resulted in a group of students, homeless people, community at large and businesses forming a group interested in finding solutions to the homelessness issue. The group wanted to create a community opinion in response to the ordinances on homelessness coming before Council April 5, 2011. They asked that ordinance language be made public at least one week prior to the meeting, if possible, in order for their opinion to be pertinent. He invited anyone interested to attend their weekly meetings on Thursday in the Stevenson Union at SOU, room 319 from 6:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. Brian Comnes/444 Park Ridge Place/Recently moved to Ashland because it was considered a progressive, aware, and caring community. He wanted the homeless issue addressed in the same progressive, caring, and aware fashion. He did not find homeless people in Ashland threatening, and noted other cities that had aggressive panhandling issues. He hoped the City would not use exclusionary zones, other cities that had incurred more problems and legal responses and he thought those efforts created a mean-spirited environment. He encouraged the City to explore positive approaches to homeless issues. AJHLANU t,Y/'Y CUUNC.7L Mt.b77NU March 20// Page 5 of 9 UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Will Council adopt a resolution allocating Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) revenue for tourism and non-tourism purposes for FY2011-2012 and establishing criteria for the grant program? City Administrator Martha Bennett declared a conflict of interest and recused herself. Councilor Slattery also declared a conflict of interest and asked Council to recuse him from the discussion. He was related to the Executive Director of the Ashland Chamber of Commerce who benefitted from the grants. Councilor Chapman/Lemhouse m/s to recuse Councilor Slattery. All AYES. Motion passed. Councilor Slattery and City Administrator Martha Bennett left the meeting at 8:20 p.m. Councilor Silbiger/Lemhouse m/s to adopt a Resolution using the allocation for option #2. Councilor Silbiger/Lemhouse m/s to amend the motion, the $150,000 that is listed in the Council Communication as Strategic Planning and listed in the previous Resolution as Economic Development, that $150,000 be reserved for Economic Development Programs to be allocated by resolution of the City Council. DISCUSSION: Councilor Silbiger wanted to reserve the funds for economic development and have Council decide how it was spent. Administrative Services Director Lee Tuneberg explained the money could go as restricted funds into the Ending Fund Balance of the General Fund for a subsequent budget year or appropriated but not spent under economic development until Council identified the program or expenditure. Councilor Silbiger clarified he wanted it appropriated for the next budget year. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Voisin, Morris, Chapman, Silbiger ind Lemhouse, YES. Motion passed. DISCUSSION on amended motion: Councilor Silbiger thought the allocations in Option 2 gave a substantial increase to small grants as well filled out the balance for the General Fund and the Chamber of Commerce for the tourism portion of the grant. Councilor Lemhouse still preferred raising the. rate for the Visitors Convention Bureau (VCB) and putting the remainder into the General Fund but Option 2 was better than other options. Councilor Voisin reluctantly supported the motion and voiced concern the small grants should receive the full amount indicated in Option•#1. The organizations that applied had no other source but these grants where the General Fund and the Chamber of Commerce had many. Councilor Chapman opposed the motion and thought small grants should be allocated under Economic and Cultural Grants and not have to determine what percent they would do in tourism. Roll Call Vote on amended motion: Councilor Voisin, Morris, Silbiger and Lemhouse, YES; Councilor Chapman, NO. Motion passed 4-1. Councilor Slattery and City Administrator Martha Bennett returned to meeting at 8:37 p.m. 2. Does the City Council wish to affirm, reverse, modify or remand back to the Planning Commission the decision to approve Planning Action #2010-01239 - a Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Amendment, Site Review, Tree Removal Permit, and Physical & Environmental Constraints Review Permit to construct a 10,632 square foot building at 85 Winburn Way? and Does the City Council wish to approve the Development Agreement proposed by the applicants, make changes to the Development Agreement prior to approval, or reject the Development Agreement? Mayor Stromberg noted the Public Hearing on this item was closed and there would be no further public testimony. He went on to read a statement that the applicants might have improperly influenced Community Director Bill Molnar with a previous contact that involved a plane ride on the applicant's plane six weeks prior to the applicant submitting a pre-application request for the restaurant at 85 Winburn Way on August 17, 2009. When staff was informed by a citizen, Mr. Molnar was removed from working on the 85 Winbum Way application and concurred with that decision. Mr. Molnar had also asked the Oregon State Ethics Commission to determine whether the flight was a gift under state law. Ashland Municipal Code Ethics violations were considered a personnel matter handled by the City Administrator and not a matter for the Council to debate as part of the planning action. ASHLAND U] Y CUUNCIL Mtt111VO March 1, 2011 Page 6 of 9 The Interim City Attorney advised the Mayor and Council that because the City Council was the final decision maker, they could correct any bias held by the staff as long as the Council conducted an open hearing and considered the application on its merits. Additionally, the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) previously found that the bias of a staff person was moot because it was the decision maker's responsibility to remain free of bias. During the hearing on February 15, 2011, all Councilors formally stated they could be objective regarding the application. The State Ethics Commission will determine whether this event violated state ethics law and the City Administrator will determine if City Ethics Law was violated. Any staff bias that might have occurred will be cured by the Council's own process of objective decision-making. ABSTENTIONS, CONFLICTS, EX PARTE CONTACTS Councilor Slattery disclosed he had stopped several conversations regarding the project and had nothing else to declare. Councilor Morris disclosed he had passed the location several times and many people asked him for a status and he said it was undecided. Councilor Lemhouse frequented the general area, had received numerous entails regarding the project that he did not read. Councilor Voisin declared no conflict of interest or ex parte. Councilor Silbiger avoided the entails regarding the project and had nothing else to disclose. Councilor Chapman declared no ex parte. Associate Planner Derek Severson clarified information based on the March 15, 2011 testimony. The applicant was not willing to pay in-lieu-of-parking fees to offset the demand on parking. However, they would participate in a downtown local improvement district (LID) regarding parking with other businesses. Regarding allowed uses within the development agreement (DA), medical uses in C-I-D zone were an outright permitted use. The Planning Commission recommended it change to a conditional use for this project. Staff could add a condition to the DA stating medical offices were a conditional use during the parking LID and upon completion of that LID, be restored to outright permitted. Systems Development Charges (SDCs) would not include transportation or Parks. The City would not require the applicants to pay SDCs for water, sewer, and storm sewer for the Zamboni structure. The applicant's testimony stated that amount would be a couple hundred dollars. Based on the SDCs, it would range from $7,000410,000. Additionally testimony from the applicant regarding building valuation indicated the site improvements and the Zamboni and Ice Rink support building totaled approximately $600,000. Commercial valuation is close to $125 per square foot. The Zamboni and Ice Rink support building would be a 600-700 square foot project and significantly lower than the amount suggested by the applicant. In terms of traffic impact, the Public Works Department determined a Traffic Impact Analysis was not needed. For applicability of a zone change and development agreement to City Properties, the Planning Commission recommended the zone change apply to the Ice Rink lot only and not the other city properties. For option on the property, staff provided sample language for the DA in case Council wanted "first right of refusal" or "first offer." Staff also provided language for the Non-Competition Clause and noted that the clause did not extend to the Community Center or Pioneer Hall just the Ice Rink support building. Alternately, the non-competition clause would not apply during the Fourth of July celebration. To address the perpetual easement to the Ice Rink lot, staff could incorporate language that would allow the applicant use of a portion of the property for security and maintenance. Mr. Severson clarified in a C-1-D zone there were no site setbacks required. There were minimum sidewalk requirements in street standards but not specifically for site circulation. Council agreed the area should not be zoned residential but was concerned on the variety of uses a C-1-D zone AJHLANU t:1'/ 'r t.UUNt,7L MLL77NU March 1, 2011 Page 7 of 9 entailed. Other areas of concern were "spot zoning" three properties when the zone change should apply to the entire block. If the properties were zoned for commercial, it should include a Parks overlay. Originally, the Planning Commission and Planning Department should have initially addressed zoning for the area, and then discussed conditions and trade-offs. Other concerns were the size of the restaurant and its impact on smaller restaurants in the area. Interim City Attorney Megan Thornton noted for the C-1 -D zone change, Council needed to decide what kind of uses they wanted on the property and if anything needed modification. That decision would determine parking impacts. Another decision was whether the waiver of remonstrance was sufficient. Issues with the C-1-D could be incorporated into the DA. Council discussed Exhibit D. Special Conditions B. Additional conditions Approved by Council and SITP as part of Development Agreement for Winburn Way, (12) Permitted Uses (Revised from AMC 18.32.020). Staff clarified the approval for a 90-seat restaurant was already in the system as well as the impact on transportation. Staff went on to explain conditional uses would require future ventures to go through the Planning process to get a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). The criteria for conditional use permits was difficult to prove and apply. If Council decided to rule specific uses out entirely, it would require an amendment to the development agreement if an applicant wanted to put one of those uses at that site. This was a site-specific overlay. Professional, financial, and business and medical offices and personal service establishments such as beauty and barbershops. Council consensus to keep as strict permitted use with the exception of medical offices. A. Stores, shops and offices (supplying commodities) or performing services, such as antique shops, artists supply stores, or non-chain department stores. Council majority excluded stores, shops, and offices supplying commodities and retained the rest as strict permitted use. B. Restaurants Council consensus retained restaurants as strict permitted use. C. Theaters, but not including a drive-in Council majority supported theaters as a strict permitted use. D. Manufacture or assembly of items sold in a permitted use, provided such manufacturing assembly occupies six hundred (600) square feet or less, and is contiguous to the permitted retail outlet. Council consensus was to move manufacturing as a conditional use. E. Printing, publishing, lithography, xerography, copy centers Council consensus was to move all items as conditional uses. F. Temporary tree-sales, from November 1 to January I Council consensus was to move as a conditional use. G. Public and quasi-public utility and service buildings, public parking lots, but excluding electrical substations Council consensus was to retain as a strict permitted use. Council went on to discuss Exhibit D. Special Conditions B. Additional conditions Approved by Council and SITP as part of Development Agreement for Winburn Way, (13) Special Permitted Uses (revised AShILANU U11 -Y C:UUNC.7L MEtIMi March 1, 2011 Page 8 of 9 from AMC 18.32.025). A. Bowling alleys, auditoriums, skating rinks, and miniature golf courses Council majority removed bowling alleys, and miniature golf courses and retained auditoriums and skating rinks as special permitted uses. B. Residential uses 1. At least 65% of the total gross floor area of the ground floor, or at least 50% of the total lot area if there are multiple buildings shall be designated for permitted or special permitted uses, excluding residential. Council consensus removed language: "At least 65% of the total gross floor area of the ground floor" as residential uses and retained the remainder as special permitted uses. 2. Residential densities shall not exceed 30 dwelling units per acre in the C-1 District, and 60 dwelling units per acre in the C-1-1) District. For the purpose of density calculations, units of less than 500 square feet of gross habitable floor area shall count as 0.75 of a unit. Staff clarified the DA limited the building height to 40 feet. Council consensus retained item. 3. Residential uses shall be subject to the same setback,'landscaping, and design standards as for permitted uses in the underlying C-1 or C-1-D District. Council consensus was to retain. 4. Off-street parking shall not be required for residential uses in the C-1-D District. Decision pending by Council on this item. 5. If the number of residential units exceed 10, then at least 10% of the residential units shall be affordable for moderate-income persons in accord with the standards established by resolution of the Ashland City Council through procedures contained in the resolution. The number of units required to be affordable shall be rounded down to the nearest while unit. Council discussed Exhibit D. Special Conditions B. Additional conditions Approved by Council and SITP as part of Development Agreement for Winburn Way, (13) Conditional Uses (revised from AMC 18.32.030) Staff explained parking would be considered as conditional use permit when these uses were reviewed. A. Medical Offices Council could not agree to retain as conditional use. B. Temporary uses ' Council majority to retain as a conditional use. C. Outdoor storage of commodities associated with a permitted, special permitted or conditional use. Council majority to remove this item from conditional uses. D. Churches or similar religious institutions Council decision to be determined. E. Hotels and motels Council consensus to remove this item as a conditional use. Councilor Voisin/Slattery m/s to continue the 85 Winburn Way discussion until April 5, 2011. Voice Vote: Councilor Voisin, Silbiger, Slattery and Morris, YES; Councilor Chapman and Lemhouse, NO. Motion passed 4-2. ASWLANU Ulf Y C:UUNCaL MGLl7NC1 March 1, 2011 Page 9 of 9 3. Does Council wish to approve an order authorizing a lease of real property to the Ashland Gun Club? Item delayed due to time constraints. ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS 1. Should Council approve Second Reading of an ordinance titled, "An Ordinance Relating to Business Licenses?" Councilor Silbiger/Chapman m/s to postpone consideration of the Business License Ordinance pending a further review of a Study Session by City Council. DISCUSSION: Councilor Silbiger explained the proposed ordinance was not fair and used some of the exemptions as examples. This was the opposite direction Council had intended and after several discussions, did not appear fixable. Councilor Lemhouse agreed and added the intention was to make it better for the community and the proposed ordinance did not. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Slattery, Morris, Lemhouse, Voisin, Silbiger and Chapman, YES. Motion passed. NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS 1. Will Council schedule a public hearing for March 15, 2011 to consider an increase in Water rates and Wastewater rates? Administrative Services Director Lee Tuneberg explained the previous year's increase in both funds helped stabilize the Wastewater Fund but the Water Fund was spending down its operational reserves and would deplete those reserves unless action was taken. The Water Fund had significant debt service that paid for improvements over the past 20 years. Debt service would decrease over the next ten years but there was still a significant debt load. Cooler summer temperatures during the past two years also contributed in not meeting water sales and cash generation. In addition to rate increases, staff would also request an inter-fund loan as a temporary fix. Rate increases for both funds were recommended because each had aging infrastructures and unfunded projects that needed attention soon. City Administrator Martha Bennett confirmed the base rate did not cover operational costs, but having a base rate would affect low-income rates. Council was trying to achieve multiple policy objectives through a desired base rate with a consumption rate structure. A rate restructure was forthcoming through the master plans and the Ashland Water Advisory Ad-Hoc Committee (AWAC). Councilor Silbiger/Slattery m/s to accept staffs proposal to set a Public Hearing to discuss rates. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS/REPORTS FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjourned at 10:27 p.m. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder John Stromberg, Mayor CITY OF ASHLAND ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES February 8, 2011 CALL TO ORDER Chair Pam Marsh called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street. Commissioners Present: Staff Present: Larry Blake Bill Molnar, Community Development Director Michael Dawkins Derek Severson, Associate Planner Pam Marsh April Lucas, Administrative Supervisor Debbie Miller Melanie Mindlin John Rinaldi, Jr. Absent Members: Council Liaison: None Russ Silbiger ANNOUNCEMENTS Commissioner Marsh welcomed Russ Silbiger as the Commission's new Council Liaison. Councilor Silbiger thanked the commission and commented briefly on the new City Council goals. Commissioner Marsh reminded the Commission of the Joint Study Session with the Transportation Commission on Thursday, February 10th at 7 p.m. Community Development Director Bill Molnar noted there will be a Study Session on the Urban Renewal Feasibility Study on Monday, February 15th, and on Tuesday, February 16th the Council will hold a hearing on the 85 Winbum Way land use action and associated development agreement. CONSENT AGENDA A. Approval of Minutes 1. January 11, 2011 Planning Commission Minutes. Commissioners Dawkins/Blake m/s to approve the Consent Agenda. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed 6.0. PUBLIC FORUM No one came forward to speak. UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Approval of Findings for PA-2010.01570, 590 Clover Lane. Ex Parte Contact: No ex parte contact was reported by the commissioners. Commission Mindlin asked for clarification regarding the sense of entry for the building, and remembered the Commission being satisfied with what was proposed by the applicant. Associate Planner Derek Severson clarified the motion adopted by the Commission was to recommend that the applicant better respond to the sense of entry, but not require it. Commissioners Miller/Rinaldi m/s to approve the Findings for PA-2010.01570, 590 Clover Lane. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed 6-0. Ashland Planning Commission February 8. 2011 Page 1 of 3 TYPE II PUBLIC HEARINGS A. PLANNING ACTION: #2010-01622 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 163 Hitt Road APPLICANTS: R. Scott Dixon and Joan Cresse DESCRIPTION: A request for a Modification of the Performance Standards Options Subdivision Final Plan Approval (PA #2003.020) for the Strawberry Meadows Subdivision. The proposed modifications include relocation of the driveway entrance, changes to the approved building envelope, and the allocation of a portion of the lot coverage from the subdivision's approved "Open Space 'A... to allow increased lot coverage for Lot #6, located at 163 Hitt Road. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Rural Residential within a Performance Standards Overlay; ZONING: RR-.5- P; ASSESSOR'S MAP 391 E 08AC; TAX LOTS: 506. Applicant Scott Dixon called a point of order and stated the staff report included new information which he should be given the opportunity to rebut. Commissioner Marsh explained the staff report was a reiteration of information already received and recommended they move forward with their deliberations. Ex Parte Contact: Commissioner Miller stated she contacted staff and received some clarification. No ex parte contact was reported by any of the commissioners. Deliberations and Decision: LotAccess: Commissioner Mindlin questioned whether Hitt Rd meets the City's street standards, and whether the Commission should require the applicant to bring the street up to current standards. Mr. Molnar clarified the street complied with the street standards at the time the subdivision was created, but concurred that the standards have since changed. He stated the question is whether the impacts of this proposal merit extending the Hitt Rd improvements up to the proposed new driveway. It was questioned whether staff sees it as a benefit for the applicant to access their property from the upper driveway. Mr. Molnar stated it is not so much of a public benefit, but rather a part of the performance standards subdivision which speaks to minimizing tree removal, cuts and fills, and the impacts of the building on the site. Comment was made questioning whether there could be development past this site in the future. Mr. Severson stated this is a possibility and noted the original subdivision approval identified three lots that would be accessed from the same existing driveway. Commissioner Blake questioned the width of the proposed driveway and stated the applicant's drawings seem to indicate the driveway is wider than Hitt Road. Commissioner Mindlin expressed concern with the lack of clarity on the street issue and would like the Commission to be clear on what standard they are applying. Mr. Molnar provided some background and explained when lots are created a portion of the lot needs to front a street that complies with a minimum standard, and this can be as narrow as 20 ft. in hillside areas. He stated in this case the improved portion of Hitt Rd does meet street standards, however as you move up to the location where the new driveway is proposed it is less than 20 ft. wide. Mr. Molnar stated the Commission could require Hitt Rd to be widened to 20 ft. up to the point where the applicant wants to access their lot, or they could apply a provision that allows for three lots to be served off a private driveway of 15 ft. with 20 feet of clear. Comment was made voicing support for keeping the road at its current width. Commissioner Mindlin stated she also does not have a problem with this, as long as they are clear that they are applying the 3-home flagddve standard. Building Envelope Modification: No concerns were expressed with moving the building envelope. Lot Coverage: Commissioner Marsh explained the applicants have requested a lot coverage allocation of 56.7%, and staff is recommending an allocation of 4,356 sq. ft or 47.75% (which is the standard minimum for a one-half acre parcel size allowed within the district). In addition, it was noted that staff does not support the additional 1,122 sq. ft of permeable surface proposed by the applicant. Ashland Planning Commission February 8. 2011 Page 2 of 3 Commissioner Miller voiced support for staffs recommendation and stated basing the allocation on the standard half-acre lot size makes sense. Mr. Severson clarified the action before them is a lot allocation request specific to a particular lot. It was clarified the owners of the subdivision could come forward and resolve the allocation issues for the subdivision by assigning out coverage for the undeveloped lots, however the Commission cannot fold the applicant's request into that bigger consideration of lot coverage for the subdivision as a whole. Commissioner Mindlin commented that she does not want their decision to be interpreted as being against cluster development, however she supports the 4,356 sq. ft. lot coverage recommended by staff. Commissioner Marsh agreed and believes the calculation based on a half-acre lot and excluding the existing driveway is a reasonable comprise. Mr. Severson commented on the conditions proposed by staff and listed modifications for the Commission to consider. He noted the applicants have raised question about whether their future development would trigger a Physical & Environmental Constraints permit and noted the applicant's surveyor has indicated that portions of the building envelope has a slope less than 25%. Mr. Severson stated as it is currently written, Condition #3 states the P&E permit is required, and they may want to modify this to clarify the permit is only required if it entails development on hillside lands with slopes of 25% of greater. Mr. Severson added if the Commission agrees to the 4,356 sq. ft. lot coverage as recommended by staff, they may want to remove the permeable coverage requirement for the building footprint. Mr. Severson clarified he could address the lot access issue by clarifying in the Findings that they are applying the flaglot standard, and stated if development goes beyond the limitations of a flagdrive, this will trigger further street improvements to Hift Rd. Commissioners MillerlMindlin m/s to approve PA #2010-01622 to allow a 47% lot coverage (4,356 sq. ft), to not count the shared driveway in the lot coverage, to modify Condition #3 to clarify a Physical & Environmental Constraints Review Permit may be required, to remove the permeable surface requirement from Condition #2, and to approve the proposed locations for the driveway and building envelope. Roll Call Vote: Commissioners Dawkins, Blake, Miller, Rinaldi, Mindlin and Marsh, YES. Motion passed 6-0. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Mindlin noted DEQ will be in Ashland at Pioneer Hall on March 3m to take input on changing graywater standards. Meeting adjourned at 8:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, April Lucas, Administrative Supervisor Ashland Planning Commission February 8. 2011 Page 3 of 3 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Liquor License Application Meeting Date: March 15, 2011 Primary Staff Contact: Barbara Christensen Department: City Recorder E-Mail: christeb@ashland.or.us Secondary Dept.: None Secondary Contact: None Approval: Martha Benn201 Estimated Time: Consent Question: Does the Council wish to approve a Liquor License Application from Jesus Nunez dba El Paradise, Mexican Cuisine at 545 Clover Lane? Staff Recommendation: 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. Background: Application is for a new license. 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). Related City Policies: In May 1999, the council decided it would make the above recommendations on all liquor license applications. Council Options: Approve or disapprove Liquor License application. Potential Motions: Approve or disapprove Liquor License application. Attachments: None Page I of I ~r, CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Liquor License Application Meeting Date: March 15, 2011 Primary Staff Contact: Barbara Christensen Department: City Recorder E-Mail: christebgashland.or.us Secondary Dept.: None Secondary Contact: None Approval: Martha Benn Estimated Time: Consent L/ I Question: Does the Council wish to approve a Liquor License Application from Ken Khosroabadi dba Siskiyou Shell at 1515 Siskiyou Blvd? Staff Recommendation: 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. . Background: Application is for a new license. 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). Related City Policies: In May 1999, the council decided it would make the above recommendations on all liquor license applications. Council Options: Approve or disapprove Liquor License application. Potential Motions: Approve or disapprove Liquor License application. Attachments: None Page 1 of 1 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Liquor License Application Meeting Date: March 15, 2011 Primary Staff Contact: Barbara Christensen. Department: City Recorder E-Mail: christeb a,ashland.or.us Secondary Dept.: None Secondary Contact: None Approval: Martha Berm Estimated Time: Consent Question: Does the Council wish to approve a Liquor License Application from Carolyn Kennedy dba Mongo Grill at 1662 Siskiyou Blvd.? Staff Recommendation: 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. Background: Application is for a new license. 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). Related City Policies: In May 1999, the council decided it would make the above recommendations on all liquor license applications. Council Options: Approve or disapprove Liquor License application. Potential Motions: Approve or disapprove Liquor License application. Attachments: None Page I of I CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication 2011 Regional Fire Prevention & Safety Grant Meeting Date: March 15, 2011 Primary Staff Contact: Margueritte Hickman Department: Fire E-Mail: hickmanm@ashland.or.us Secondary Dept.: None Secondary Contact: John Karns Approval: Martha Bennet Estimated Time: Consent Question: Does the Council wish to authorize the Mayor to sign a letter of support for a regional Fire Prevention & Safety Grant to install fire sprinkler system in foster homes in Jackson, Josephine, and Douglas Counties? Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the Mayor to sign a letter of support for this regional grant. Background: A regional grant application has been submitted under the Fire Prevention & Safety Assistance to Firefighter Grants to install fire sprinkler systems in existing adult foster care homes and provide education to the public about the benefits of fire sprinkler systems. The grant was requested on behalf of the Rogue Valley Fire Prevention Coop and the Southern Oregon Fire Code Officials, representing fire departments throughout Jackson, Josephine and Douglas Counties. The total grant amount requested is $500,000. The goal is to retrofit up to 100 adult and developmentally disabled group foster homes with residential fire sprinkler systems and to educate communities about the effectiveness of these systems. This grant would provide fire protection safety for the existing residents and all future residents for the life of the home. All together, this grant would provide fire protection that would continue to protect thousands from the devastating effect of residential structure fires. Adult foster care homes were selected because the aged and developmentally disabled residents are considered a high risk in the event of fire. In Oregon, up to five residents are permitted in an adult foster care home per code with as few as only one care provider to provide rescue in the event of an emergency. In the event of a fire, the care provider will be taxed with reporting the fire, deciding to fight it or not, the order of evacuation of residents and whether or not to re-enter to evacuate more residents. Over the last 25 years, six of the fire deaths in Medford were in adult foster care homes. There six adult foster care homes within the city limits of Ashland, and one located in rural Ashland. In addition there are two developmentally disabled group homes operated by Ashland Supportive Housing (ASH). Recognizing the importance of residential fire sprinkler systems, ASH voluntarily installed residential fire sprinkler systems in each of these homes. Page 1 of 2 Ir, CITY OF ASHLAND Because this is a regional grant, no matching funds required. The letter of endorsement can be provided anytime before the grant is awarded. Grants can be awarded anytime from now until September 30, 2011. Related City Policies: The purpose of residential fire sprinkler systems is to provide residents a longer period to evacuate, thus increasing the survivability of our residents during a fire. Many of the city's policies and goals relate to the safety of our citizens. In addition, residential fire sprinkler systems directly respond to the council goal to support green building development and water efficiency. During a fire, fire sprinkler systems reduce water consumption and reduce damage as a result of the fire. Council Options: • Send a letter of endorsement to FEMA for this regional fire sprinkler grant. • Reject the staff recommendation. Potential Motions: I move to approve the Mayor signing a letter of support for the regional fire sprinkler grant. Attachments: Fire Prevention & Safety Regional Grant Narrative Draft letter of support Page 2 of 2 ~r, Regional Grant Request for Installing Residential Fire Sprinklers in Existing Adult and Developmentally Disabled Group Foster Homes The Rogue Valley Fire Prevention Cooperative (RVFPC), in cooperation with Southern Oregon Fire Code Officials (SOFCO), is applying for a regional grant to install residential fire sprinkler systems in existing licensed adult and developmentally disabled foster care group homes in Jackson, Josephine, and Douglas Counties. The total grant amount requested is $500,000. The goal is to retrofit up to 100 adult and developmentally disabled group foster homes with residential fire sprinkler systems and to educate communities about the effectiveness of these systems. This grant would provide fire protection safety for the existing residents and all future residents for the life of the home. All together, this grant would provide fire protection that would continue to protect thousands from the devastating effect of residential structure fires. As part of this grant, members of the organizations listed above would provide residential fire sprinkler awareness education to both the providers and the overall communities. The education would focus on the risk of residential fires, protecting the most vulnerable populations, fire safety and prevention, and the effectiveness of residential fire sprinklers in mitigating fire casualties and property losses. Jackson, Josephine, and Douglas counties contain 385,517 residents, and have a resident median age 4-9 years higher than the State average. The percentage of residents age 65 years old and over is well above the State average in all three of these counties (Jackson 17.4%; Josephine 21.7%; Douglas 21 Oregon 13.5%). The three counties contain nearly 75,000 residents age 65 years old and over. Together, these counties contain 290 foster homes that provide shelter for the elderly and developmentally disabled. Each of these homes is licensed by the State of Oregon for a specific number of resident beds. These are long term group homes that provide services to nearly 1,200 residents. Between 2000 and 2009, an average of 2,919 civilians lost their lives and another 14,081 were injured annually as the result of residential structure fires in the United States.' In Jackson, Josephine, and Douglas Counties, between 1985 and 2009, there were 11,698 structure fires in one and two family dwellings which killed 73 residents.2 Fire discriminates. Adults age 65 years or older are nearly 3 times more likely to die in a home fire as the general public.3 The fire death rate is higher for older adults than any other segment of the population.4 From 1985 to 2010, Medford, the largest jurisdiction in Southern Oregon, has experienced 29 fire deaths. Six of these fatalities, or over 20% of the fire deaths, occurred as a result of fires in adult foster homes. In the case of one of the devastating adult foster home fires in Medford, four elderly residents died from a fire that broke out just before midnight. Fire Investigators determined there were eight smoke detectors in the residence-all working except one that had missing batteries. One of the victims spent an agonizing week in the hospital. Her daughter watched her slowly die. The elderly mother pleaded the day before she died, "I hurt so bad, please help me." Her daughter stated, "You cannot watch your mother going through the agony she did for a week and not be angry." The victims were simply not able to evacuate before the effects of the fire were life-threatening. They would not have died if the home was protected by a fire sprinkler system. Anything less than an automatic fire sprinkler system was not enough to save them. The older population is especially vulnerable to residential fires, because older adults have reduced sensory abilities and may have physical or cognitive disabilities which lead to reduced reaction and evacuation times.5 Developmentally disabled adults may exhibit the same issues. In the case of senior and developmentally disabled adult foster homes, the residents are especially vulnerable to fire as they are, in many cases, not capable of self- preservation. Also, their physical and mental condition may deteriorate with time, requiring greater assistance. In addition, they most likely will not be able to navigate the secondary exit in the bedrooms, as these are usually windows with evacuation requiring climbing over the raised sills. The United States Fire Administration (USFA) reports People with limited physical and mental abilities, especially older adults, are at a higher risk of death from fire than other groups. Older adults, those ages 65 and older, account for 32 percent of fire deaths and 12 percent of estimated fire injuries. As baby boomers enter retirement age, the demographic profile of the United States is expected to change dramatically. Over the coming decades, the older population will increase and a corresponding increase in fire deaths and injuries among older adults is likely.16 The elderly population is expected to increase from its current 12% of the total population to nearly 20% within a few decades. The assumption is that there will be a corresponding increase in fire deaths and injuries among older adults. 17 With up to 5 residents allowed per code per foster home and the residents dependent on as little as one caretaker to save them in the event of an emergency, the caretaker has a great responsibility during a fire situation. They are tasked with discovering the fire, calling 911, deciding whether to fight the fire or evacuate, determining the order of the residents to evacuate and who to protect-in-place, and having to make a difficult decision whether to re-enter the smoke filled or burning residence to rescue additional occupants. All this occurs before the fire department is able to arrive. DHS rules require the foster provider to be able to demonstrate the ability to evacuate all occupants in the foster home within three minutes. This provides challenges even under ideal conditions. Under rapidly deteriorating conditions where multiple residents may not be capable of self-preservation, this task could be nearly impossible. Studies have shown that the average safe window of escape time has been reduced from 17 minutes in the 1970's to as little as three minutes currently (flashover).6 Victims in the room of origin are affected about half way to flashover because this is when the temperature, smoke and carbon monoxide make conditions life-threatening.7 This reduction in the safe window of escape time is attributed to increased fuel loading within the home-the widespread use of hydrocarbons in modern furniture, including polyurethane foams and plastics. These newer fuels cause more rapid fire growth and produce lethal smoke and gases. When a residence experiences flashover, it is very unlikely any person still in the structure will survive. Studies have shown that most fire victims (75 percent to-80-percent) die from carbon monoxide poisoning, and that most people in post flashover fires die remote from the room of fire origin.8 Fatal fires involving flashover triples the number of victims.8 Residential fire sprinklers are designed to control a fire before conditions become life-threatening. They are designed to prevent flashover.9 A residential fire sprinkler system is the only technology that gives everyone, regardless of age or ability, the opportunity to survive. Residential fire sprinkler systems neutralize the discrimination. They also reduce the risk to firefighters by preventing a flashover scenario during suppression efforts. Firefighter's clothing and equipment is not designed for the temperatures experienced during a room flashover event. The effectiveness of residential fire sprinklers is without question. Ninety percent (90%) of fires are controlled by a single sprinkler head.t0 The fire sprinkler controls the fire while it is still in it's incipient phase, before the fire produces enough heat and smoke to become lethal. In Prince Georges County, Maryland, since an ordinance was mandated to require residential sprinklers in new homes, 15 years of data shows the difference between sprinklered and unsprinklered homes. Prince George's County, MD (15-year study)" Homes Protected by Fire Sprinklers: Lives Lost: 0 Injuries Reported: 6 Average Fire Loss per Incident: $ 4,883 Over $42 million in property loss prevented Homes Not Protected by Fire Sprinklers: Lives Lost: 101 Injuries Reported: 328 Average Fire Loss per Incident: $ 9,983 Avg. Fatal Fire Loss per Incident: $ 49,503 If awarded the grant, RVFPC and SOFCO would administer the grant. A foster home grant committee would be set up to work with the Oregon Department of Human Services (DHS) to identify the providers. An application process would be set up by this committee and the applications would be screened and reviewed for approval. Up to $5,000 per foster care group home would be awarded to the provider/homeowner to retrofit the home with a NFPA 13D residential fire sprinkler system. Any additional cost would be paid by the provider/homeowner. Applicants for the reimbursement would have the following requirements: • To attend a seminar describing the grant process and be educated about residential fire sprinkler systems • Be committed to a long-term State of Oregon licensed provider for senior or developmentally disabled adult foster homes Education would be a cornerstone of this program. The following educational opportunities would be implemented: • An educational committee would be formed to develop a comprehensive presentation about the program. • Community classes would be held for the foster home providers explaining the grant opportunity, the effectiveness of residential fire sprinklers, and essential fire safety information. A fire sprinkler demonstration would be used at many of these events. • Handouts would be developed for the grant program and maintenance of residential fire sprinkler systems • Ribbon cutting ceremonies would be held for foster homes that install fire sprinklers under this grant • A plaque would be given to the providers to be displayed on the front of the home recognizing the life-saving fire protection features built into the home. Members of RVFPC and SOFCO are already very involved in fire, injury, and property loss prevention. The educational portion of this program would be an extension of what these members are already doing. The effectiveness of this program would be measured by using incident data. Statistics would be kept regarding fires in sprinklered foster care homes versus fires in non-sprinklered homes. The data analyzed would include casualty, property loss, and sprinkler activation information. This would be used in a long- term analysis to measure the effectiveness of residential fire sprinkler systems. With the data an estimate of potential lives saved, potential injuries prevented and property saved would be estimated. The grant committee listed above would be diligent to evaluate the effectiveness over time of fire sprinklers in these homes. Data for any fire events in both the retrofitted homes and homes not protected with fire sprinklers would be kept and evaluated. Each year new data would be collected and trends analyzed. This project has a great potential for long term benefits. Each home that is retrofitted with a residential fire sprinkler system will be protected for the life of the home. The fire sprinklers will not just protect the current residents, but all future residents as well. If 100 homes are retrofitted, the individuals protected could number into the thousands over the life of the homes. Residential fire sprinkler systems are a great investment. Not only do they save lives, but the average damage to a home from a structure fire is reduced by 74% when the home is protected by fire sprinklers. 12,13 Amortized over 30 years, the cost of a residential fire sprinkler system is as low as $3-4 per month .14.15 This is a small investment to ensure the residents and the home are safe from the devastating effects of fire. This program will be sustained by fire code officials in Southern Oregon. This group recognizes the value of residential fire sprinklers in reducing fire deaths, injuries, and property damage. These individuals also are tasked with investigating fires for origin and cause, and also have the unpleasant task of investigating fatal fires. Anything this group can do to prevent tragedy is well worth the effort. An education and .maintenance program will be an essential part of this project. The providers for each home that is retrofitted will be contacted on an annual basis to ensure the systems are maintained in working condition and to answer any questions the providers may have. A handout will be developed for the grant program and maintenance of residential fire sprinkler systems. The Fire Code Officials involved have a vested interest in making this program successful beyond the grant performance period, marketing the effectiveness of residential fire sprinkler systems to the general public. Currently, there is no local funding available for such a project. The county agencies cannot afford the cost of such a program because they are dealing with the increasing costs associated with payroll while only seeing a maximum 3% increase to property tax revenue. With so many foreclosed properties, the revenue projections of the counties are not optimistic. Currently, there are no financial incentives (such as tax breaks, insurance savings, etc.) that are big enough for foster home providers to commit retrofit their homes with residential fire sprinkler systems. Please consider funding this effort! Thank you for your consideration for this matter, Greg Kleinberg Fire Marshal Medford Fire-Rescue References: 1. http://www,firesafety.gov/citizens/statistics/index.shtm 2. Oregon State Fire Marshal data 3. hftp://www.sfm.ne.gov/publications/pdf/65-olderStats.pdf 4. http://www.sfpe.org/upload/100208 2010 sfpe poll with tip sheet.pdf 5. http://www.nfpa.org/catalog/services/customer/downloadmemberonlvpdf.asp?pdf name=os%2Edisa bility%2 E pdf&cookie%5 Ftest= l &src=nfpa 6. hftp://www.nfpa.orq/assets/files//PDF/Research/DetectiOnTechnologyTaskFOrce0 208 7. http://www.iafc.org/displayindustryarticle.cfm?articlenbr=33502 8. http://www.usfa.dhs.gov/statistics/national/residential.shtm 9. http://www.usfa.fema,gov/safety/sprinklers/ 10. http://www.nfsa.orq/info/fyi/fvidischarge.htmi 11. http://www.homefiresprinkler.org/images/Prince-Georges-County-Rel)ori.pdi 12. http://firesprinklerinitiative.orq/itemDetaii.asp?categorVID=45&itemlD=1029&URL =Resources %2 0/ %2 O F a ct %2 0 s h e et 13. http://www.usfa.fema.gov/safety/sprinklers/ 14. http://www.iafc.orq/displayindustryarticle.cfm?articlenbr=33502 15. http://www.nfpa.org/assets/files//PDF/Research/FireSprinklerCostAssessment.pd f 16. http://www.usfa.dhs.gov/downloads/pdf/statistics/profile fitus 15th.pdf 17. http://www,usfa.dhs.gov/downloads/pdf/statistics/v7i7.pdf March 2, 2011 Ms. Elizabeth M. Harman, Assistant Administrator DHS/FEMA/Grants Program Preparedness Tech World Building - 9th Floor South Tower 800 K Street, NW Washington, DC 20472-3620 Re: FEMA Foster Home Fire Sprinkler Grant To Whom It May Concern: 1 am writing this letter of support for the Rogue Valley Fire Prevention Cooperative (RVFPC)/Southern Oregon Fire Code Officials (SOFCO) application for a FEMA Fire Prevention and Safety Grant to install residential fire sprinkler systems in senior and developmentally disabled group foster homes. This grant will truly improve the chances of senior and developmentally disabled residents to survive fires that occur in group foster homes. These people represent one of the most vulnerable populations in residential structure fires, and should be afforded protection. In my capacity as Mayor for the citizens of Ashland, Oregon, I confirm that the Rogue Valley Fire Prevention Cooperative & Southern Oregon Fire Code Officials foster home fire sprinkler grant is in accordance with the my city's priorities in supporting activities that reduce adverse impacts and risks posed by fire to senior and developmentally disabled residents. Accordingly, 1 am pleased to endorse the foster home fire sprinkler project proposal with support from the Ashland City Council. If approved, the proposal will be coordinated and implemented by Rogue Valley Fire Prevention Cooperative & Southern Oregon Fire Code Officials. Sincerely, John Stromberg Mayor, City of Ashland OFFICE OF THE MAYOR Tel: 5414888002 20 East Main Street Fax: 541488-5311 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 w .ashland.or.us CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication OEM Radio Grant 2011 Meeting Date: March 15, 2011 Primary Staff Contact: Margueritte Hickman Department: Fire E-Mail: hickmanm@ashland.or.us Secondary Dept.: None Secondary Contact: John Karns Approval: Martha Benne Estimated Time: 5 minutes Question: Does the Council wish to accept a grant in the amount of $34,079 from the Department of Homeland Security / Oregon Emergency Management for the purchase of radio equipment? Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the City Council approve the receipt of this grant in order to meet the interoperability requirements of Project 25. Background: In October 2009, Ashland Fire & Rescue requested for grant funding through the Jackson County Emergency Manager for the purchase of the balance of the radios necessary to meet Project 25 requirements. In March 2011, AF&R received notification of receipt of this grant in the amount of $34,079. This grant requires no matching funds. The budget for Ashland Fire & Rescue will need to be adjusted to reflect this income and to expend $34,079 from the 110.07.12.00.603500 Radios line item. Related City Policies: Employing radios which meet interoperability standards will allow Ashland Fire & Rescue to continue to communicate with cooperators on emergency incidents. Council Options: • Approve the receipt of the grant funding in the amount of $34,079 for radios. • Reject the receipt of the grant Potential Motions: I move to approve the receipt of the Department of Homeland Security / Oregon Emergency Management grant in the amount of $34,079. Attachments: None Page I of I ~r, CITY OF ASHLAND • Council Communication Water Conservation and Reuse Study and Comprehensive Water Master Plan Update Meeting Date: March 15, 2011 Primary Staff Contact: Pieter Smeenk Department: Public Works/Engin ermg E-Mail: Pieter ,ashland.or.us Secondary Dept.: Finance Secondary Contact: Michael R. Faught Approval: Martha Benn Estimated Time: Consent Agenda Question: Does the Council have questions regarding the direction and progress of the Water Conservation and Reuse Study and Comprehensive Water Master Plan? Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that Council review the attached presentation materials from the January 19, 2011 open house and the comparison' matrix of potential supply sources. Background: The last update to the City Council was provided in November of 2010. Since then, the AWAC has held 5 additional public meetings and conducted a second open house. An Ashland Townhall television • program was aired on January 12, 2011 to encourage interest and attendance in the open house. The AWAC is nearing completion of its study of future water supply alternatives and will be presenting its conclusions and recommendations to the City Council soon thereafter. Carollo Engineers have presented a large amount of technical information to the AWAC over the course of the study, and the AWAC has critically analyzed and commented on the information that they received. Seventeen technical memoranda detailing various components of the study have been prepared and posted on the City's website. The committee has questioned key assumptions, delved into the complexities that were not well understood, and debated the implications of the study from different perspectives. Considerable effort has been expended to reach consensus on key decisions such as the selection of level of service goals. The primary goal of the study was to address multiple water sources and options for combining sources while also considering climate change, reliability of supply, and increased environmental stewardship. The engineering consultant refined and more precisely quantified the goals by breaking it into parts called "Level of Service" (LOS) goals. The AWAC reviewed and discussed the proposed LOS goals in two open houses, one in May of 2010 and one in January of 2011. This was needed to provide critical review and input to guide the study in a direction the community can support when the study is complete. The committee also now seeks Council's input prior to making a recommendation. The AWAC has received feedback from as many Ashland citizens as possible. Numerous opportunities • to review progress and solicit input have taken place including: i of2 ii, CITY OF -ASH LAN D • A public access television program on January 12, 2011 to publicize the alternative water sources. • An open house was held on Thursday, January 19, 2011 to present a program update, alternatives for meeting the agreed upon goals, and to serve as an opportunity for public input. • Public meetings were held on February 2 & March 2 to review feedback from the open house. • A public meeting was held on March 9, 2011 to begin deliberation toward a preferred supply strategy. The attached matrix provides a summary of the components considered. Components were discussed individually, and members present were asked to express their opinions on the components. -The committee agreed to meet again in the near future to continue deliberation. Next StWs The following opportunities for public participation remain: • A future council meeting to recommend the selected supply alternative to the City Council. • A public meeting in the middle of the year to preview the master plan and SDC/rate study. • A council meeting later in the year to present the final report to the City Council. Related Policies: On June 16, 2009 and again in January of 2011, the City Council adopted the following goal: Adopt an integrated Water Master Plan that addresses long-term water supply including climate change issues, security and redundancy, watershed health, conservation and reuse, and stream health. Council Options: Council's comments and direction regarding the next steps to be taken are sought. Potential Motions: Not applicable. Attachments: 1. Matrix of Water Supply Alternatives and Level of Service Goals 2. PowerPoint slides presented at the open house on January 19, 2010 • 2of2 Component - Goals Matrix REV LEVEL OF SERVICE GOALS: 1 2 3 4 3 Tools avallable NPV"' Supply ••unltcost" Redundancy Reliability Envlronm ilal to meet gods $MII AGFl) ($K/AC-FT) (days w/o H20for drou Stewardship • 1 A. Re-use W WTP Effluent for Agriculture 15 (Imperatrice and/or Billings) 0.00 to + _$4.69 0 to 424 > $11 a 1 B. Reuse W WTP Effluent Inside City Limits + on Schools and Parks (low estimate) $0.00 to $10.30 0to831 >$12 2A Build TAP pipeline from Ashland Mine Rd to Creel Road w/ emergency + o connections & pumps a $4.30 > $6 3 to 5 days F - - 2B. Build TAP pump station & pipeline from Culver Rd to Ashland w/ Pump Station + (assuming 2A does not happen) $16.00 688 $23 0 to 1 days 3A TID Canal Piped from Starlite to + Ashland Ck o $1.10 135 $8 3B. TID Canal Piped from Ashland Ck to + ' Wrights C k $1.10 135 $8 4A Groundwater - test whether wells could serve as emergency potable supply; if not, propose for irrigation use $0.05 to 3 to 5 days $0.20 0 to 2 2 (only ff potable) 4B. Potable Groundwater-new acquisition $4.30 to Ave. $19.50 0 to 619 =$19 0 to 1 days 5. Increase WTP Capacity from 7.5 MGD + to 10 MGD $5.60 $5 6.Bockup 1.5 MGD WTP (at Crowson II) 3 to 5 days $7.00 $10 7. Harden WTP(not including bank stabilization $1.88 " $0.4 8. Add Potable Water Storage + (Crowson II) $3.90 n/a n/a 9. Purchase or Lease Senior Ashland + + Creek Water Rights 0-$0.30 0 to If < $3 `water could be purchased direolyfrom Talent, but costs would depend on quantity and storage requirements "addresses peak day demand only, assumes 1.5 MGD is equivalent to 688 AC-FT and ignores 0&M costs • on near term projects that did not have cak ulated NPV , I assumed that NPV = 2010 capital cost file:///G:/pub-wrks/eng/08-54 Right Water Right Use/Adorn/City CounciV2011-03-15 AWAC Matrix - DRAFT3.xls 0 _a _ N N - N ~ O N O o C N O ul G _ G d ° a _ v o N N - d J M y r • w a a. ° c M d N ° E 0 _ wcI N 4L _ N a - ~ r a y LL N ~ Q G O Cf) LL LL LL o I LL N Q U Q _ N o O ~ ~ Co. O C• U U fh U O N O U U U U - Ci Ci Ci O O O' O O C Ci O u: O N O N ut O 1I: O lf1 N N +-I !ti r•1 ~ N N ~ 1 gW •sa2e:poyS • DRAFT - August 4, 2010 26 pwllCa'dia9ocu &UiKVMAsNan081 XDA)efve bleswa;srrmO5m5-En9iuap*Baiwimdocx 0 o N C C C C O O O O 'a_+ .R > v C N H u7 C C O « O O O O O Q C C C C O O N O O « C 'v m 'JJ m E ~v a a E a 'O ra ra m O Ln -I Vl Q' m 3 0. ~ I I I 0v wo o N m 5 C CL X. m W d L V A C } a C o m ~ m E o cc N F m m O N a 0 N to r 7 LL O a--i O N 0 00 l0 V' N O N N N (Aep.iad suope2 uoillp) spuewaa Aea )lead FINAL - October 14, 2010 29 pwgCardlaCwa slOieftiMAsMand8CO6AMUefv *sIWCRS/rMDYN5_Fxistig4*Evaiuawndocx(N 1 r 'h 5 4r', ~r~ o r 1j I r n1_1 mss' Qs~i ,r,, ~ ~b✓~,.; ~ ~ . r , c CD 0 l _ c CD co 'Q L : 1. r m v 0 ~ c X" 90 c p c„ N CD w:- ~c~~ fu CO) cn ` r-. r. (0 \ N n < 7 oc 90 1 n , I i MjA~ , J l ~ it ly, 4 111 l U~~~{l')l~l f ~ Si~)]1 ~i~~ ~1 1 1 ~ ~ Q hr cb l l 1 (((rr ~ u 1 r c r o ~'ilr >ip ~ ylct `~••ee o f!J' ('~p 11 1 11 o r e - r , //J 1~ ~ Y a: ' - 1 ,1l ~IQ 1 ~ 1 ti Nm 33 CD m 21 CL g). M a ~ 0 O Mc > Ml n vO (D ~m 3 X Ul 21 fD :r fop m o c C CD T O W n y~ • N31~ fop O 7 n C ~ vw3 O N 7 7a QQ ~C 5 O d Ae Atw=:I • Vii. T N N • O i r n Z s v. n rn Z~ rn ~ i r q J Y'~ 4 T • fi Cl m S O < ~ r* 3 N n r C C Q m O C (D t0 _ =I a o4aa (D < Vf 07 o 3cD < (D (D =3 CL - (D (D Ul a, r. N o rt < 1 ~l O O =3 0) LO cr m CD ~ (D U r T T CD Y CL 'Y (D I J c m T D =3 0 ET I--► I--► (D i r--r - ~ ul C, OJ (D Q r-r ,gyp r~-r --h cp (D < rr (D C 70 r* CL O Q O (~D (D O C. O r•• C. cr Q rt [D r•1• C. C (D O O 0 • - r•r O -h m O 0 0 O (D fli S o N cr C: (D ~ ~ - »3 cr ~ t 3 ~O i c U f~ r f, T m 1 Q' M rD tD n A = O rr f+ • O S Ul tD t 1D A z O i~R u . ~..Y i J - - T cr 11) a m O ~ n A = O rt f D O CD fop O S Ul Ul M ~D A S s - tk ; O T W N ~ FBI d un rF cr m m CD , , , • CD p z (D U) (D A z T r • i,y m I if T -P W N F-` ~ FBI rt 3 D ~ C7 ~ O = r+ 3 a, Cr tD rD (D to O r+ -I to 03 [D rnt (D O O Ml D O ~ Ul (D O CD rrt A S rl U2 I i T I ' A Streamflow, cfs ~ N W A In O V co O O O O O O O O O O O ww'' 0, O O O O O O O O O O W °6 iY >o ~D ~P~6P A (D f+ (D a A' ~ A V P~ IV V1 0 ~P6 d2 (D 3 :r to o~ IV JG'P 3• Ul pit A A YI Yl• c 'a `C O (D ~gCL ~D Vf n' n x n (D O (D A' m n ' m U W n n =r =r • m m o, 7 • (D O1 < (D D ,o m N i T A r ~I n fop (Q O c~D O IC i • roll. 29 o3 tD= CD 0) O O L (D CL CD 0) CD rMIL (D rMIL r (D 5, cr C) to ~ 0 0 = ~D ~ rMIL C _ ~ _ j CD 0) rr m N O C~ A) CL CL c POP C7 _ 'a CD m ~D _ ! 0 ~ a (D to CD 10 CL CL N AL = C7 • cr 0 (D -0~ AL EST- mohy CD U, _ rMIL CL CD rMIL CL 0 m =m 0 f+ (D O m O. S CL X ~G O~ y CL m m C. S mh ML 0 Im O CD CD C I (A 't C cr ~ n ;s ~vY~ Q ID 0 -J'7 t 4 ~ x kyu~ r l /yp ~ S FMS R' • _ i ~2's 3m a 0 w r WHOM F, sr.,r Wi H'J minaw'r"3~= mo n~, ~ i 1 ~ cn ~ s OMT ¢2 I + m 31 t 4 I Q S a 5 ~o a' Uma eta 3 m °Q 2u It SA n8fzm8a$ a 3Z~~n m m m p m 6 c ro 8 o g t ° m m' S' 8 8' 3 rg w i 3 IIQ !y1• 1Q n ~ < < a S u0'~a10 'SLarn~f O!C O'NN 3'H I~N~ A~a. '~I t"' G' p `~O ~O m ~d =s.s!Ss~ss3~Ia's moss c m m o o o m m o m e 0 3 0 o~ g, a a 8481 2'fa a ~a•szgaIla aa; K36 , 8'ie8.~E8i~IG.~iw 8 0 a~~a'8~t m,.~~ls~f al~~•.am ~~.8~, m, o. i^~~ Zw f g.~g~ g! ¢$to gig ~ aj spp`. - 3 9'~9'' ~i ~ mm,o B'i ~•.izng ~m'<' ~o'ix~ ~'ml I o $m ~ o. al a• °8~ ~ ~ a'te' ~ ~ n~a3t 8 m8 ;83 k'' mt v 8 FI 8 ro ro a8 8 m IF a 10 0 .xk R ' $ g m 1 9 6j t gg ie c m O 9' 41 ~II a z~0~I °i6gj a aI m, °3'r 8 8 n. Flo ~a! ~I~I~I `~gm~~I.l~ T ' N (D P rt ~ ~ a ~D ~D t0 fit n (D a. ,p o CL o u OD ;zo o r ? c n*. FOP ~D tj, m =I u • p~ ?n g0 a ~V) _ C) A N D w ~ N Waft 4~k CL (D CL Ul fop ---f' T ry J • O M 4 rn t l 7v a, v r O O ~f T O~ C!1 W N rn D m x (D c r*• n mo Q O cn. -p (D - ■ o M D o M Vf cn r M _ U) 70 m C. F 3 o c rt Q C m fD Ul I N U) (D o 'o (ID Sh z, _TEPREll- IF, ty rFT//~gr'S<FR-SEI~~~~ 1~~V•-~ TAYL__ OI{9TjQ { •q~ c~(~ E MprUgi./ ~.L, I ~ r 9i'1,~~OI f1 ~MOPTCW ST3 i +i: wf ~WON ST _ 1'YYY1[jTYYTk7~ ~ r EIS~Rr~i~Tlt'F T fl-•N'n's> L x'`3.F~.gr ~~~;y ~ ~ ~ / { t FC F ~ti .bd i Y EIIV1DEP ST I .Y,J_, r POGT ST MAV LNCOIN ST~ ~tf..4~: y^ MR R OST \ 1 GtEOWRD MEPV 9Tr pyi,,~ / ~.i~ ~F A • ,*T MONK ST ~ W,) nnwus `n'l rY:. ' -avmNTMU. sr ~,'3`xa -T Q ) z2 - j' i i /`D 'Y ST M 9 -1 I IN 74 ul y N00.MgLAV. I 1 A 3+ WER4g S, Lilt m xT~ @ti 1g i s F II rF End i /1tNEWAV~S~Y,}R I~ i h rJ l_ I ul r+ 'z _t a~ (.0.A \ O Y C-)~Ta~(D t_ o `p a y& a J IS C CL n3 T p p n `6 CD m pj s s , O CD CL_ d I ® 1- ' a _ t N T / ~ T L Mh =I O O O O 0 -a -a -a -a C 0 0 0 0' (D =3 =3 =3 w N (D 0 ~ n n M -a n 11+ - o O 0' • 0' • 0 • tD 'Q :3 Uq =3 :3 Ul 11 Ul co to w M F" N C mo ~D (A o Ul ~ a■ 0 0 o OpO n r+ 3 3 3 n 0) (D LO La to M r I 1 t } • f RaF`' , r F~_' 'r t- C.. '~r Ci • L?C 4 wt s+ r f r. 1 t a ~ r ~f' y' (~{Jr F ' • .rt~~Z ~ ~ + e r j ~kKty-.iyiy ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ X S.~ i i ~4~~j. r`i •;:,~(,j~!ti ')M t~ y~1~~y~~ 1 .awe ~ "v'q~-~-v~ rt./tcFi•' + ri T , r ~._?d.. ~~:6~,~ J~j.==ef ti~iy~f'Y`c/PP~ri"n~l'~' ~ 1 ~ o y: • i, iii d/+~~t ~ ~~fP iA6~ !rf1r ll,4 • ' '~q` / -A V i~ b . t R I J"ll : Jr SRO ' • ~I,Nr A i., f ° , 1 . Jam. `r+ ~ 1pl ' 1 I / • rn ~ r 1 v ~ i Y Q M' A S J- u `/'t;~ l;4t ' 4` A'r I`r`•.'S'~ p. y /fit \h ~ A J JCr P v'M ~ 3 'VV ~ ~ Ali ~b ~~1>; t, l . :f1; 3 n. t i.:. (r ' ~R lti: FAZ 1 1I „ [ v~l ' kw- '}'/rl Jam, T 4. r' lY~ . 1 , , .Y. t f r 1 \ G\. b _ s ! JN / P t J ' C /1 \ O 1- - y2 O rf' ~ o • • h V • 1 _ W N a x _ 70 m r) 70 r+ n o N rr p. O 0 m O to < Q V. o o° 0 o (D O A (D o c v o in rt 0- -oh o 3 ~ C-P CD M a O ~ 0 07 C:) • (D 3 (D o E 0 b. CL • < 0 C) (D 2 > 07 h - cn C _ c 00 iiT rt -0 CL V) 0) o ~ 0 3 a CD [D fD a n rt CL EP (n =3 0 - a T (I1 W N F-' C O 13 C - O ~A r(7-r rt CD (n O 13 fop O 0 O S: 3 0 CL 0 =3 Lo rt Q ~ O S 0 C:) ~ 3 F" ~ m o ~ to (D cr o C, r- c I f+ O 70 3 oo + o 00 = n CD D 'Q cl Jr rML 7/ T 1.1J n z mO _ ~I1 r 0 (D (p cfl a' p cn ~ Ln Lo Cl- c, ~-0 C-P C: > ~ r* o cn n o Vf c n O 3 • n t• OJ (D rum_~- ~~o•~ r) U:) a (D CL O rat 0 (D O rt (A :c (J1 O O O O C D Ln r-r Lo (n 0 f-r pr 70 M a) rt -I n 3. ~ (D -h Lr) O O rn-r r-t cli U) r-r 0 (D U) p cn cfl 3 (n =3 0 (D r o - A m 5. CD CT O G) 5i ' z 30 ww v A f+ m co f} (D O cvo i =3 i 0 3 i 7-0 3 n r- O i n n ~ m ro ~ y m w ' A 3 o r- O 3 a CD (D O A W w OD - a) -n o * m CD 0 j c 0 o ' ? W 0 CD (D f+ y 5- C (D C.) W a2 (am 3 O IN► 25' 30' C ca N (D co - a ~2. 0 -100 O 'p _0 0 0 uA rip Ul ~ S'• 0 . 0 m ~m x' \ 0Z Om ~m A l X S CD U) O O rp Y -o i ~ v CD 0 Wo (D afD $ < co -n c 60 0~ (D + C 0 w -n ~ O m . , Cxl o N m_° n y ry r* O n rrt 3 m w ~0~ ~ X, wN I•A N 7 S Q ff. y QO ¥~'Si.15Y O r_ , T D CD O (D --h (D -o a 0 -a 3 CL ~ CD rt ET a .1 rt fD O En rt < -0 O0 > C fD O ? n CU 0) CU J) Di 0-0 :3 PQ =3 ET V) 3 n C Q W r~-r N= w N o F+ 07 M v r* 3 o rt O rn - ~D mo M C: (D r+ (D IW =3 X (D ~l CL to 0. CD N rt O m 3 fD Q -I CD 0 r-r fD N• _0 rt 0 V) r-r < LD N rt fD (D =3 (D (D O Q C7 ~ ~ gy gyp ( ( p O 3 r -r CD • Q mo =3 r-r ~ O n r t 4 .1 CD Q r-r r•r .0 O - m 0 w • ~ =1 ~■h rt -P W N b rt' -0 -0 ~ O n m ~c 3 3 :3 c =3 rt (D ~ o r cl) y O + +cr rr rn -n 70 V p 1 c (D r (D a rt ~D r-r r) rt - Mi (D -0 3 -1 < rt < r+ 0 < N fD L m rt ~p cr 3 w w =3 cr rm+ rt rt 1 l i ~ ;'c~ = ~ ri 4k m ly ~ n I ik jF Im I~ *k ~ ~c9g m ;a O ;a j~ W N im ;a j~ f1 m T r~D m ~D ~Z3 la in I m m 1 y ii s In i 03 t m K D t y 1 y y . H H cn m I 'C y l y y CD 0 0 1 0' It CD 0, 3 3 Q a a n N a, 0) e s C. ; -p ce CD CL ya" ~D j 1 i C. fD ; O I I I `m ~ I i 3 j j c (D i 3 m j CD , ;r• CC, CA c j 'a c + 1 1 j - CD t;' ! + s m CD j 3 ! 0 ' ,A r vI N i I y I 1 i I ~ ! i ; I I I .1 j I 'i I j I 4A 40 4A .69 40 -01 v A 69 N 164j164~!fq ''69~ co l~l~i N p ,im Of O ~ Ol W W'IC41Un W :N W Ijz NI ,Of rC7l'.O c0 o W I A m co N f O OD W 1 co V rn N p a W O: 0 0 0 O O O A 0 1 0 O O V►'Cq O. O O 0 O O: O O O O O O: p, 0 W 00 Co I ()I OO,. p O co O ;0.010:0 O O'O O ',0.0 p O O O O 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O j O 0 1 0 O O : O O 1 O O j 0 O 0, 10 ' 0 1 0; 0 1 0 1 0 O , W I 1 i 1 , I i ~ to 7 M Y h fA (D f,9 GO C4 j ~ N K I o ! 1 ifA ~ cn W~ W !fA co 1 I I N i O1 W v j ;ao O N o Sn fu : 0 90 o O o O O O 0 69 A tnjo pl rflO c~;olo'f'cEjo! 0 3 OjO;OOO101 jOiOjOO1 O OOI O !o',olo O 1 w` Z i !,I ! j N 3 N i i , v N r N . 7 cn co:oA o` itn1AIWIN O cnrn !Cn A o! O in Of ~•i ~jW io IrnIWI44 1 N OD D1.rOI C1 i0)1 W jW N CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Intergovernmental Agreement with Oregon Department of Energy - Northwest Energy Star Homes Verifier Program Meeting Date: March 15, 2011 Primary Staff Contact: Lee Tuneberg Department: Administrative Services E-Mail: tuneberl@ashland.or.us Secondary Dept.: None Secondary Contact: None Approval: Martha Benne Estimated Time: Consent Question: Should the City Council authorize staff to sign an Intergovernmental Agreement with the Oregon Department of Energy for continued participation in the Energy Star program? Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the Intergovernmental Agreement. Background: The City of Ashland has been a recognized verifier of homes for many years. Last year's agreement did not include an ending date and fees were higher. Department of Energy (DOE) has submitted a new agreement. The current agreement will be null and void effective the date your new agreement comes into effect. There are only a couple of changes in this agreement. The biggest change is a reduction of project fees for completed and certified Energy Star multi-family fees. The current charge is $75.00 per dwelling unit and the new fee will be $25.00 per unit. A minor change is adding clarification, or examples of, to the terms of termination. Rather than leave the terms open-ended, DOE included some scenarios that could warrant termination. For example, in order to assure program quality control, if a verifier does not respond to DOE or City it is justification for termination. This new agreement terminates December 31, 2013 and if the program continues, DOE will offer new agreements prior to this termination date. Related City Policies: None Council Potential Motions: Move to authorize staff to enter into the agreement. Attachments: Northwest Energy Star Verifier Agreement No. 10-154 Page 1 of 1 ~r, NORTHWEST ENERGY STAR VERIFIER AGREEMENT NO. 10-154 This agreement is between, City of Ashland hereafter called the Verifier and the Oregon Department of Energy, hereafter called Agency. This agreement shall be in effect from the date that it is signed by all parties and remain in effect until December 3I, 2013 or terminated by either party. 1. Statement of Work The Agency and the Verifier hereby agree to participate in the Northwest Energy Star Homes Program. The objectives of this Agreement are to: (i) ensure that homes labeled under the Northwest Energy Star Homes Program comply with the provisions of the program's technical standards (see http://w w.northwestenergvstar.coinipartner-resources%technicalstandards%index html; (ii) provide quality assurance for consumers and Verifiers of energy-efficient site-built housing in the region; and (iii) help to improve energy and resource efficient products and practices used by the housing industry. By signing this agreement, the Verifier and its agents represent that they understand the program requirements, the Agency's expectations of Verifiers, and the roles of the Verifier and Agency as set forth below and as further explained during Verifier training sessions provided by or authorized by the Agency and attended by Verifier: Agency roles: 1. Use the existing Northwest Builder Option Packages, and as may be modified in the future, as the technical specifications for the Program. Agency and the Verifier agree not to modify or amend the specifications except with the concurrence of the Program's regional technical committee. 2. Certify homes entered into the regional database by the Verifier that meets the Program's technical specifications. 3. Provide problem resolution services on energy-related issues to builders, homebuyers, utilities, and local building departments when asked by the Verifier. 4. Perform quality assurance reviews to ensure Verifier's work with builders consistently results in homes built in compliance with the Program specifications. 5. Notify Verifier, builder and homeowner (if occupying home) within three days of finding substantive problems or defects during the quality assurance reviews. 6. Provide technical assistance with new technologies to builders and the Verifier. 7. Work with builders and the Verifier to develop additional resource efficiency options. Verifier roles: I. Apply for project initiation and home certification using the Program's web-based computer application and home tracking system. 2. Verify homes are built in accordance with NORTHWEST ENERGY STAR Homes Program Builder Option Packages and Technical Specifications. Verifier will retain copies of verification documentation and make such available to Agency upon request. 3. Complete, sign, and attach a NORTHWEST ENERGY STAR Homes label to the home's electrical box and sign the certificate that goes with the house. 4. Notify builder within three days of discovering any energy-related problem or other failure to meet program specifications in any house. 5. Require builder to correct any energy-related problem in all affected homes due to failure to follow the Program's technical specifications, as identified in the verification process or quality assurance inspection, before submitting such homes for Agency certification. 6. Help facilitate the Agency or its contractors to conduct quality assurance reviews. 7. Accept and abide by the criteria and penalties for discovery of non-compliance with Program Technical Specifications during quality assurance reviews, including bearing the costs of additional quality assurance oversight, and, at the Agency's discretion, termination of this agreement and exclusion from future participation in the program for repeated or flagrant non-compliance. 8. Sign the Environmental Protection Agency's Northwest Energy Star Homes Partnership Agreement. Please use the following web site: is://www.ener,vt slar.!ov/index.cfin?fuseaction=opa.sliowPaiinerRoles&p code=HVERORG Under "If your organization is a Rate/Inspector," select your Rater type "Certified BOP Inspector." 11. Consideration A. Verifier agrees to pay certification fees under this Agreement to the Agency for homes submitted for certification and that comply with the Northwest Energy Star Homes specifications. The fee for a single-family residence shall be $75 per home certified. The fee for a multi-family building shall be $25 per dwelling unit. B. Total annual minimum certification fees paid to ODOE shall be no less than $225.00. If the Verifier's total calendar year certification fees paid to ODOE are less than the $225.00, the Verifier will pay the difference between the two by March 31"ofthe next year. If the Verifier meets the annual minimum certification fee, Verifier shall pay $75 for every single family dwelling and $25 per dwelling unit for multi-family buildings certified that exceeds the annual minimum certification fee. The annual minimum certification fee is effective January I, 2010. The Agency reserves the right to increase the annual minimum certification fee identified in II.B. A change in the annual minimum certification fee could be determined by economic factors or changes in the residential code that increase Agency operational costs. The Agency anticipates a change to the current residential code April 1, 2011. If the Agency makes a determination to increase the fee, the Agency shall notify the Verifier either by email or in writing of its intent to increase the fee. Subsequent to the notification, the Agency shall amend this Agreement to reflect change in the fee. If a Verifier enters the program after the calendar has started, their first year minimum fee shall be prorated based on the number of months remaining in that calendar year. The Agency will invoice the Verifier quarterly based upon the Verifier's number of homes certified for the previous quarter. The Agency will invoice the Verifier for the final quarter of the prior calendar year by March 31". Verifier understands these fees will be used by the Agency to fund its home certification and Energy Star labeling efforts, including program quality assurance testing, technical assistance, specification maintenance, and Verifier training. C. This payment shall be the sole monetary obligation of the Verifier and the Verifier's obligation to pay is limited by the provisions of Section V, Termination. D. The Verifier shall pay the Agency based on Agency's quarterly request for payment. The Verifier shall pay the Agency based on the Agency's invoices submitted to the following: City of Ashland Conservation Division 51 Winbum Way Ashland. OR 97520 Ill. Changes No changes to or waivers of provisions of this agreement will be valid until they have been reduced to writing, approved and signed by both parties. IV. Contact Information Verifier ODOE Name: Larry Giardina Alan Seymour Address: 51 Windburn Way 625 Marion St NE Ashland, OR 97520 Salem, OR 97301 Phone: (541)552-2065 (503) 378-5873 e-mail: giardinaashland.or.us alan.seymourdstate.or.us V. Subcontracts The Verifier shall include all Verifier role provisions in all of its subcontracts as set forth in the Northwest Energy Star Homes Verifier Agreement between the Oregon Department of Energy and the Verifier. VI. Termination This agreement may be terminated by mutual consent of both parties or by either party for any reason whatsoever; including but not limited to: failure to respond to inquiries by ODOE or their Quality Assurance program representative regarding verification activities, three instances of errors in reporting verification data, and continuing education and recertification requirements. Requests to terminate this Agreement by either party shall be made in writing either by e-mail or written correspondence. AGREED: City of Ashland Lee Tuneberg, Administrative Services Director Date OREGON DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Bob Repine, Director Date Lorena Wise, DPO Date' Jim Denno, Public Buildings Manager Date CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Fire Prevention & Safety Grant Application 2011 Meeting Date: March 15, 2011 Primary Staff Contact: Margueritte Hickman Department: Fire E-Mail: hickmanm@ashland.or.us Secondary Dept.: None Secondary Contact: John Kams Approval: Martha Bennet / Estimated Time: 10 minutes Question: Does the Council wish to approve the application and matching funds for a Fire Prevention & Safety Grant for the Fire Inspection Program for $85,700 of which $8,750 is required as matching funds from the City? Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the City Council approve the receipt of this grant if it offered in order to improve and broaden the fire inspection program within the City of Ashland. Background: In 2003, Ashland Fire & Rescue was granted a position which provided fire inspections and plan review services, and in 2008 that position was cut. In 2010, Ashland Fire & Rescue implemented a fire inspection program with engine companies, which requires several hours of staff time each week for training, responding to questions, quality assurance and date entry. In addition, this program is limited to specific inspections for which the firefighters have been trained. Fire inspections and code knowledge has become increasingly more complex over the last 15 years requiring advanced training and dedication for many of the higher hazard occupancies. While a full-time fire inspector position is necessary, this grant requests funding for a half-time fire inspector and advanced training; and funding for advanced training for three firefighters, one for each shift, who have an interest in obtaining a greater knowledge of fire inspections. In addition, funding has been requested to upgrade the website with fire inspection information, tools and materials to support the fire inspection program. It is the intent that if a fire inspector is hired, they would manage the weed abatement program, assist with the management of the company officer program and conduct the balance of inspections that require advanced training. By conducting these inspections, the fees will help to offset the cost of the fire inspector; creating a self-sustaining program and a safer community. The $8,750 of matching funds for this grant would come from the Fire Inspection Fees collected and would be placed in the Fire & Life Safety Division Budget. This grant application has already been submitted as it was due on February 4, 2011. Related City Policies: The goal of the fire inspection program is to inspect every business in the community once every two years. A fire inspector is necessary to realize this goal. Page I of 2 MA, CITY OF ASHLAND Council Options: • Approve the application and matching funds for the Fire Inspection Program Grant. • Reject the staff recommendation. Potential Motions: I move to approve the Fire Prevention and Safety Grant to improve the fire inspection program. Attachments: Fire Prevention and Safety Grant Application Page 2 of 2 ~r, Print Application Page 8 of 24 Request Information 1. Select one of the choices listed below. You can, apply for a maximum of 3 projects within an activity. (V you modify your.seleUion, you will lose Bete enlered'under the origlnal activity.) Program Name Fire Prevention and Safety Go Back Request Details The number of projects and cost for the activity Fire Prevention and Safety are listed in the table below. Activity Number of Projects Total Cost Fire Prevention and Safety 1 $ 85,700 Fire Prevention And Safety Projects Code Enforcement/Awareness Project(s) Code Enforcement/Awareness Capabilities In order to help identify what your organization's current Code Enforcement/Awareness capabilities are, please answer the following questions. Please be sure to only address your current capabilities; you will answer questions about the project(s) that your application is requesting after completing this section 1. What nationally recognized building and fire code (s) and editions has your community adopted? Check all that apply. State: 2010 Oregon Fire Code (based on the 2010 IFC with Oregon Amendments) 2. What tools are used to support and enforce Code books inspections? Check all that apply. Educated staff Other New inspections for B & M occupancies 3. Does your jurisdiction enforce adopted building No and/or fire codes on new construction? 4. Does your jurisdiction enforce adopted building Yes and/or fire codes on existing construction? https://eservices.fema.gov/FemaFireGrant/firegrant/j sp/prevention20l 0/application/print-a... 2/15/2011 Print Application Page 9 of 24 I 5. Are those individuals assigned to conduct Yes inspections certified? 5a. If yes, to what level? Company Officer 5b. If no, will you be requesting funds for training in your grant request? 6. Does your jurisdiction measure its code enforcement No efforts? 6a. If yes, then how? Check all that apply: 7. Does your jurisdiction inspect all commercial and high-risk properties? Neither • I View Project Code Enforcement/Awareness Project Information •1. Project Code Enforcement/Awareness If you are submitting more than one Code EnforcementlAwareness project, please provide a project fitle (i.e.: commercial inspections, update code i books, etc) Other Commercial •2. Who is the target audience for the planned project? Business and Building Owners i '3. What is your estimated size of the target audience? 1800 Formal Assessment i 4. How was this target audience determined? Briefly describe method used (required if selected "None of the above"above) City Business License Database Only 7 years of data is capable of being queried. During that time,there were 53 fires in commercial and 'S. Briefly describe (or provide) the appropriate statistics multi-family properties. These fires destroyed i that correspond to your project and target audience (i.e. restaurants, evacuated a four-story wing of an assisted injury statistics, # of fires/arsons, firefighter fatalities, living facility, put a laundry facility out of service in a etc). hotel, and threatened collegiate dormitories multiple times. One multi-family residential fire resulted in the death of a child. Hire a part time fire Inspector. Train four personnel to a fire code level that is qualified •6. Describe the steps or methods that will be used to to conduct target hazard inspections. Develop public education program utilizing the web i https://eservices.fema.gov/FemaFireGrant/firegrant/jsp/prevention20l0/application/print_a... 2/15/2011 Print Application Page 10 of 24 achieve the goal and objectives of this project. site, brochures, and a video. Purchase new and upgrade existing technology for data entry. '7. Will your organization periodically evaluate the Yes project's impact on the community? If you answered Yes to question 7 above, please 1 - Customer feedback will be solicited via our website specify: through the use of a short questionnaire. The feedback j will be promoted at the time of the inspection. One question will ask them how prepared they were for their inspection and where they obtained the information. 2 - Fire inspection violations will be entered in FireHouse. Evaluation of the number of violations as related to the education provided will be analyzed. 3 - The long-term evaluation plan will be to compare the first inspection at a business to the second inspection. The subsequent inspection (2 years later) will be compared and will hopefully demonstrate greater compliance, less violations, resulting in improved fire safety and reduced risk for the business. '8. Is it the applicant's intention to continue delivering Yes this program after the grant year? '9. In the space provided below, please provide a brief synopsis of the proposed project: This code enforcement and aware project will prepare business and building owners for fire inspections, prepare qualified personnel to inspect target hazards and create a safer environement for our community, its visitors and firefighters. '10. In the space provided below, please explain the experience you have in managing the type of project you are proposing: I have been managing programs and projects in the fire service for more than 20 years. Currenity I manage the low-hazard Company Officer fire inspection program, provided the necessary training and address concerns and questions as they continue to conduct inspections. `11. The narrative portion of the application should contain supporting information that allows for evaluation of this project. If you are applying for a grant in the Fire Prevention and Safety Activity, your Narrative Statement must address the evaluation elements outlined in the Program Guidance Q. Keep in mind that the evaluation of your application will also be based on a clear understanding of your proposal, your ability to meet the objectives of the program, and your probability of successfully delivering your project to the population targeted. You need to fully explain how the funds will be used to accomplish the goals of your project. To that end be sure to include descriptionsfjustification for all budgeted items - items not justified may be disallowed. i Your narrative may not exceed five pages of text. You may type your project narrative in the space provided below however, due to the built in "lime out" feature, we recommend you create the narrative text in your word processing system and then copy it into the space provided below. Images, attachments, and special characters or formatting (i.e.: quote marks, bold print, bullet points, symbols, etc.) are not allowed. Vulnerability Statement (20%) During the mid-1990"s, Ashland Fire & Rescue stopped conducting fire inspections at the company officer level due to an increase in call volume and limited personnel. The only inspections that occurred from that point until 2010 were mandatory, licensing inspections accounting for about 10 inspections per year, and Halloween night bar checks only for exiting and occupant loads beginning in 2005. After the first year of Halloween inspections, it was deemed an essential inspection night due to the number of overcrowding and blocked exits found. In 2010, Ashland Fire & Rescue firefighters were provided in-house training at the Company Inspector Level. This is the minimum training required by the Oregon State Fire Marshal"s office through Oregon Administrative Rule and qualifies inspectors to only conduct Business and Mercantile (retail) inspections. While these inspections are important, they also represent the lowest occupancy hazards. None of the residential, assembly, manufacturing or storage occupancies are being inspected at this time. The ! i https://cservices.fema.gov/FemaFireGrant/firegrant/jsp/prevention20l0/application/print_a... 2/15/2011 Print Application Page 11 of 24 only person trained and qualified to conduct all inspections is the Division Chief of Fire & Life Safety/Fire Marshal, the only one in the division and the one responsible for all plan reviews, managing the 25 member company inspection program, code complaints, public information, fire investigation, supervision of the CERT Coordinator and administrative duties. The commercial and residential properties in the City of Ashland are at risk of fire, injury or even death without a regular inspection and education program to the building and business owners. Implementation Plan (20%) After more than 10 years of absence, Ashland Fire & Rescue desires to implement a complete fire inspection program with qualified personnel capable of inspecting any occupancy classification. This plan requires personnel, training of personnel and public education. Personnel qualified to inspect all occupancy classifications are required to obtain a minimum competency of Fire and Life Safety Specialist 1 in Oregon. This certification includes the requirement of five classes both online and in class training and ICC Fire Inspector I certification. We have identified two positions that are necessary to Implement this program. One .5FTE to be trained as a fire inspector and.3FTE to conduct data entry. In the event that a qualified person willing to work.5FTE is not found, this money would be used to hire back qualified firefighters. Three firefighters, who are currently trained at the Company Officer Level, would be trained to the Fire & Life Safety Specialist 1 level. This would provide at least one person on each shift with the necessary training to conduct a broader range of Inspections. The new.5FTE fire inspector would also be trained to the Fire Inspector Level 1 in order to fulfill the tasks required of this position. Since inspections have not been conducted for more than 10 years, many of our building and business owners are not aware of or have forgotten their responsibilities as it relates to fire safety. A comprehensive educational campaign will include the augmentation of the department"s website, a video produced just for Ashland business, and brochures to assist them in preparing for an inspection and in training their personnel. Occupancy specific brochures will be created for designated occupancies including information on how to prepare a safety and evacuation plan and forms for tracking employee training. The information developed for the brochures would be mirrored on the website as well. Ashland Fire & Rescue utilizes FireHouse for all NFIRS and EMS reporting. The FireHouse Occupancy and Inspection management modules are also in use, but need to be specialized in order to meet the database management and inspection scheduling needs for the department. FireHouse will be used to delineate routebooks, schedule inspections and record additional inspection requirements such as fire sprinkler, fire alarm and hood suppression system Inspections conducted by private companies. Three tablet PCs will need to be purchased to provide one for the Fire Inspector and one for each station. Personnel - $50,000 $40,000 - Fund .5 FTE and/or hire back trained firefighters on overtime with the intention of increasing this position to full time as soon as revenue would allow It. $10,000 - fund a .3 FTE data entry personnel Training - $7800 4 Fire & Life Safety Specialist 1 Certifications x $1800 = $7800 Upgrade three Company Inspectors to Fire & Life Safety Specialist 1 to provide one on each shift and provide training for the part time fire inspector. Public Education & Awareness of Inspection Program - $8,500 $3,000 - augmentation of the department website for Inspection awareness. $3,000 - creation of a video to be used on public television and to be given to business owners. $2,500 - brochures, forms and materials to support the education and awareness of the business owners. Technology - $10,000 $5,000 - augmentation of the FireHouse occupancy and inspection modules. ' $15,000 - purchase of a tablet and software for data entry of inspection on site ($5,000 each) I Evaluation Plan (20%) Evaluation of the success of this program will occur in three stages. https://eservices.fema.gov/FemaFireGrant/firegrant/j sp/prevention2O l0/application/print-a... 2/15/2011 Print Application Page 12 of 24 i 1 - Customer feedback will be solicited via our website through the use of a short questionnaire. The feedback will be promoted at the time of the inspection. One question will ask them how prepared they were for their inspection and where they obtained the information. 2 - Fire inspection violations will be entered in FireHouse. Evaluation of the number of violations as related to the education provided will be analyzed. 3 - The long-term evaluation plan will be to compare the first inspection at a business to the second inspection. The subsequent inspection (2 years later) will be compared and will hopefully demonstrate greater compliance, less violations, resulting in improved fire safety and reduced risk for the business. Cost-Benefit (15%) Talk about number of commercial fires and the loss Prevention statistics - find study I Sustainability (15%) At the onset of the Company Inspector program in 2010, Ashland Fire & Rescue gained approval from the city council to charge fees for each inspection. The schedule for a fire inspection includes six fee points ranging from $32 - $196 and is based on the number of residential units or the square footage of other businesses. The goal is to inspect each occupancy every two years. Based on the current business inventory, it is estimated that approximately $50,000 of revenue can be attained each year once a fire inspector is on board. The purpose of the fees is to fund a fire inspector position. During the first calendar year of fire inspections, approximately $20,000 will have been billed; however, in order justify the creation of a full time Fire Inspector position, additional funds will need to be obtained. Once a full-time Fire Inspector is hired, he/she will be assigned to conduct inspections as a majority of their tasks and will be able to help provide the revenue necessary to sustain the inspection program. Additional revenue is gained through plan reviews, which will help to fund the balance of the position. Financial Need (10%) Financial need: Ashland Fire & Rescue is requesting an investment from the 2010 Fire Prevention & Safety grant to fund the implementation of an inspection program and public awareness program. The request for the grant is due to the inability for our city to fund these projects. The City of Ashland has an operating budget of 67,075,635. Of that, the fire department's budget is 5,085,705. The department"s revenue is $1,044,203 with the remaining shortfall supported by the City of Ashland"s limited general fund. Our budget is allocated as follows: 72% personnel (wages and benefits), 18.4% direct expenses (dispatch, maintenance, fuel, training, etc.) and 9.6% indirect expenses (insurance, central services, technology debt, etc.). In 1999, the city of Ashland ventured into the telecommunications business as a source of revenue. The idea was to provide Internet and cable TV to the residents and draw Internet based businesses into our community. After seven years the city was in debt over $15 million. The TV service was sold and the city developed a strategy to repay the debt. Starting in 2008, our fire department had to reduce the total operating budget by 6.6% ($339,227). During that budget cycle, we lost funding for our only Fire Inspector, the Division Chief of Ops and a vacant firefighter position. We also reduced our training and equipment replacement funds by more than 50%. i I In Jury 2010, the city council raised the tax rate to prevent the loss of two additional firefighter positions adding a further burden on our citizens. This was due to the Increases in personnel and direct expenses while revenue remained flat. Oregon has 19.6% of the residence living below the poverty level. One in five people in our state rely on government funding for assistance to buy food. Our county is currently almost 2% above the national average unemployment rate while paying one of the nation"s highest income and property taxes. With the increase in health service and retirement costs, our city Is again facing large reductions in both personnel and services provided. We have started charging additional fees for service within the city but do not expect to see revenue increased in the near future. Our fire department is struggling to maintain the ability to I I https.-//eservices.fema.gov/FemaFireGrant/firegrant/jsp/prevention2Ol0/application/print_a... 2/15/2011 Print Application Page 13 of 24 provide basic services. We have been successful in local and state funding opportunities to purchase items such as a Thermal Imager and EMS equipment. We have not pursued other grant opportunities for the items we are requesting in this i application. Our current financial status requires our department to seek every financial opportunity just to maintain our basic services to the citizens we protect. Without funding from this grant, funding for this project will be delayed, allowing extended risk for the businesses, citizens and firefighters in our community. This will have a continued potential impact on the safety and economics of those we serve. Experience & Expertise Ashland Fire & Rescue has graciously accepted previous Homeland Security and grants to improve our preparedness and service to our community. The following is a fist of grant funded equipment for which we have been excellent stewards: 2001 AFG Equipment $ 13,104 Nozzles and Blitz Fires 2002 AFG Vehicle $207,000 Type 3 Engine 2003 Regional Grant $ 40, 815 Fire Safety Trailer 2004 AFG Equipment $ 29,771 RIT 2006 Regional Grant $312,000 Mobile Live Fire Trailer 2007 AFG PPE $ 33,350 Turnouts Performance Funding Priorities This project focuses on the first time implementation of code enforcement throughout all occupancy classifications in more than 10 years and an education program to assist businesses in being prepared for their inspections. Budget Item 'Item Public Education & Awarenees - Website 'Select Object Class Contractual If you selected other above, please specify Number of units 1 (whole number only) T' Cost per unit $ 3000 (Whole dollar amounts only) Description The space to the right should be used to provide further clarification and details on the costs (i.e. personnel costs: number of hours/ratelslaff; meeting Augmentation of the department website for fire code safety and costs: number of meeungs/dayslauendees; travel inspection awareness for the public. costs, etc.) and types of items that you are requesting. Budget justification should be included in the project narrative. Budget Item 'Item Fire Inspector.5 FTE 'Select Object Class Personnel If you selected other above, please specify "'Number of units 1 (Whole number only) https://eservices.felna.gov/FemaFireGrant/firegrant/jsp/prevention2010/applicationlprint_a... 2/15/2011 Print Application Page 14 of 24 Cost per unit $ 40000 (Whole dollar amounts only) Description The space to the right should be used to provide further clarification and details on the costs (i.e. Fund a Fire Inspector at.5 FTE and/or hire back trained firefighters num meet costs nu bcos ertof m etings/days/attendees; t raveling on overtime with the intention of increasing this position to full time costs, etc.) and types of Items that you are as soon as revenue would allow it requesting. Budget justification should be included in the project narrative. Budget Item 'Item Support Staff 'Select Object Class Personnel If you selected other above, please specify ' Number of units 1 (Whole number only) Cost per unit p $ 10000 (Whole dollar amounts only) Description The space to the right should be used to provide further clarification and details on [he costs (i.e. personnel costs: number of hours/rate/staff; meeting Support staff for data entry at .3FTE costs: number of meetings/days/attendees; travel costs, etc.) and types of items that you are requesting. Budget justification should be included in the project narrative. Budget Item `Item Advanced Fire Code Training 'Select Object Class Other If you selected other above, please specify Training ' Number of units 4 (Whole number only) ' Cost per unit $ 1800 (Whole dollar amounts only) ' Description The space to the right should be used to provide further clarification and details on the costs (i.e. Provide advanced fire code training for four people. Upgrade three personnel costs: number of hours/rate/staff; meeting Company Inspectors to Fire & Life Safety Specialist 1 to one on costs: number of meetingsldays/altendees; travel each shift and costs, etc.) and types of items that you are provide training for the part time Fire Inspector. requesting. Budget justification should be included in the project narrative. Budget Item "Item Public Education & Awareness - Brochures 'Select Object Class Supplies If you selected other above, please specify Number of units 1 (Whole number only) Cost per unit $ 2500 (Whole dollar amounts only) Description The space to the right should be used to provide further darification and details on the costs (i.e. personnel costs: number of hourshatelstaff; meeting Brochures, forms and materials to support the education and costs: number of meetings/days/attendees; travel awareness of the business owners. costs, eta) and types of Items that you are requesting. Budget justification should be Included In the project narrative. https://eservices.fema.gov/FemaFireGrant/firegrant/jsp/prevention2Ol 0/application/print-a... 2/15/2011 Print Application Page 15 of 24 Budget Item Stem Technology - Computers & Software 'Select Object Class Supplies If you selected other above, please specify "Number of units 3 (whole number only) `Cost per unit $ 5000 (Whole dollar amounts only) Description The space to the right should be used to provide further darigcation and details on the costs (i.e. Purchase of 3 tablets for data entry of inspection on site - one for the personnel costs: number of hours/ralelslaf; meeting Fire Inspector and one for each station for advance trained costs: number of meelings/dayslatlendees; travel firefighters. costs, etc.) and types of items that you are requesting. Budget justification should be Included in the project narrative. Budget Item 'Item Public Education & Awareness - Video Creation 'Select Object Class Contractual If you selected other above, please specify Number of units 1 (Whole number only) Cost per unit $ 3000 (Whole dollar amounts only) ' Description The space to the right should be used to provide further clarification and details on the costs (i.e. personnel costs: number of hoursl(alelstaa; meeting Creation of a video to be used on public television and to be given to costs: number of meetings/days/attendees; travel business owners. costs, etc.) and types of items that you are requesting. Budget justification should be Included in the project narrative. Budget Item 'Item Technology - Software improvements 'Select Object Class Supplies If you selected other above, please specify Y Number of units 1 (whole number only) --?Cost per unit $ 5000 (Whole dollar amounts only) `Description The space to the right should be used to provide further clarification and details on the costs (i.e. personnel costs: number of hours/ratelstaff; meeting Augmentation of the FireHouse occupancy and inspection modules. costs: number of meetings/days/attendees; travel costs, etc.) and types of items that you are requesting. Budget justification should be included in the project narrative. National/State/Regional Programs and Studies Project(s) Research And Development Projects https://eservices. fema.gov/FemaFireGrant/ff regrant/jsp/prevention2010/application/print_a... 2/15/2011 Print Application Page 16 of 24 Budget Budget Object Class Budget Amount Personnel 50,000 Benefits 0 Travel 0 Equipment 0 Supplies 22,500 Contractual 6,000 Construction 0 Other 7,200 Indirect Charges 0 Indirect Cost Details (complete this section only if you have a Federally approved Indirect Cost Rate agreement). Please note you must add the Indirect Costs as a line item within the Request Details section as they are not automatically calculated. Agency Indirect Cost Agreement with Indirect Cost Rate % Agreement Summary Total Federal and Applicant Share Federal Share $ 77,130 Applicant Share $ 8,570 Federal Rate Sharing 90/10 Non-Federal Resources. fi io nn dtned:Non;Fodoroi_Resou ces n,~sravusi.iiro Appr(canf.Sne a or,-s,_aszo/;. a. Applicant $ 8,570 b. State $ 0 c. Local $ 0 d. Other Sources $ 0 If you entered a value in Other Sources other than zero (0), include your explanation below. You can use this space to provide information on the project, cost share match, or if you have an indirect cost agreement with a federal agency. Total Budget $ 85,700 https://eservices.fema.gov/FemaFireGrant/firegrant/jsp/prevention2O l0/application/print_a... 2/15/20 11 Print Application Page 17 of 24 Narrative Statement The narrative for Fire Prevention and Safety is provided when adding Fire Prevention and Safety Projects under i the Request Details section. i i i I I i 1 https://eservices.fema.gov/FemaFireGrant/firegrantlj sp/prevention2010/application/print_a... 2/15/2011 Print Application Page 18 of 24 Assurances and Certifications FEMA Form 20-16A I You must read and sign these assurances by providing your password and checking the box at the bottom of this page. Note: Fields marked with an ' are required. Assurances Non-Construction Programs Note: Certain of these assurances may not be applicable to your project or program. If you have any questions, please contact the awarding agency. Further, certain Federal awarding agencies may require applicants to 1 certify to additional assurances. If such is the case, you will be notified. As the duty authorized representative of the applicant I certify that the applicant: 1. Has the legal authority to apply for Federal assistance, and the Institutional, managerial and financial capability (including funds sufficient to pay the non-Federal share of project costs) to ensure proper planning, management and completion of the project described in this application. I 2. Will give the awarding agency, the Comptroller General of the United States, and if appropriate, the State, through any authorized representative, access to and the right to examine all records, books, papers, or documents related to the award; and will establish a proper accounting system in accordance with generally accepted accounting standards or agency directives. 3. Will establish safeguards to prohibit employees from using their positions for a purpose that constitutes or presents the appearance of personal gain. 4. Will initiate and complete the work within the applicable time frame after receipt of approval of the awarding agency. 5. Will comply with the Intergovernmental Personnel Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. Section 4728-4763) relating to prescribed standards for merit systems for programs funded under one of the nineteen statutes or regulations specified in Appendix A of OPM's Standards for a Merit System of Personnel Administration) 5 C.F.R. 900, Subpart F). 6. Will comply with all Federal statutes relating to nondiscrimination. These include but are not limited to: (a) Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (P.L. 88-352) which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color or national origin; (b) Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, as amended (20 U.S.C. Sections 1681-1683, and 1685-1686), which prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex; (c) Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. Section 794), which prohibits discrimination on the basis of handicaps; (d) the Age Discrimination Act of 1975, as amended (42 U.S.C. Sections 6101- 6107), which prohibits discrimination on the basis of age; (e) the Drug Abuse Office and Treatment Act of 1972 (P. L. 92-255), as amended, relating to nondiscrimination on the basis of drug abuse; (f) the Comprehensive Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Prevention, Treatment and Rehabilitation Act of 1970 (P.L. 91-616), as amended, relating to nondiscrimination on the basis of alcohol abuse or alcoholism; (g) Sections 523 and 527 of the Public Health Service Act of 1912 (42 U.S.C. 290-dd-3 and 290-ee-3), as amended, relating to confidentiality of alcohol and drug abuse patient records; (h) Title Vill of the Civil Rights Acts of 1968 (42 U.S.C. Section 3601 et seq.), as amended, relating to nondiscrimination in the sale, rental or financing of housing; (1) any other nondiscrimination provisions in the specific statute(s) under which application for Federal assistance is being made; and (j) the requirements of any other nondiscrimination statute(s) which may apply to the application. 7. Will comply, or has already complied, with the requirements of Title li and III of the Uniform j I https://eservices.fema.gov/FemaFireGrant/firegrant/jsp/prevention2010/application/print a... 2/15/2011 Print Application Page 19 of 24 i Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (P.L. 91.646) which provide for fair and equitable treatment of persons displaced or whose property is acquired as a result of Federal or Federally assisted programs. These requirements apply to all interest in real property acquired for project purposes regardless of Federal participation in purchases. 8. Will comply with provisions of the Hatch Act (5 U.S.C. Sections 1501-1508 and 7324-7328), which limit the political activities of employees whose principal employment activities are funded in whole or in part with Federal funds. 9. Will comply, as applicable, with the provisions of the Davis-Bacon Act (40 U.S.C. Sections 276a to 276a- 7), the Copeland Act (40 U.S.C. Section 276c and 18 U.S.C. Sections 874), and the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act (40 U.S.C. Sections 327-333), regarding labor standards for federally assisted construction sub agreements. 10. Will comply, if applicable, with flood insurance purchase requirements of Section 102(a) of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973 (P.L. 93-234) which requires recipients in a special flood hazard area to participate in the program and to purchase flood insurance If the total cost of insurable construction and acquisition is $10,000 or more. 11. Will comply with environmental standards which may be prescribed pursuant to the following: (a) Institution of environmental quality control measures under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (P.L. 91-190) and Executive Order (EO) 11514; (b) notification of violating facilities pursuant to EO 11738; (c) protection of wetlands pursuant to EO 11990; (d) evaluation of flood hazards in floodplains in accordance with EO 11988; (e) assurance of project consistency with the approved State management program developed under the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (16 U.S.C. Section 1451 at seq.); (f) conformity of Federal actions to State (Clean Air) Implementation Plans under Section 176(c) of the Clean Air Act of 1955, as amended (42 U.S.C. Section 7401 at seq.); (g) protection of underground sources of drinking water under the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974, as amended, (P.L. 93- 523); and (h) protection of endangered species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, (P.L. 93-205). 12. Will comply with the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968 (16 U.S.C. Section 1271 et seq.) related to protecting components or potential components of the national wild and scenic rivers system. 13. Will assist the awarding agency in assuring compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 470), EO 11593 (identification and protection of historic properties), and the Archaeological and Historic Preservation Act of 1974 (16 U.S.C. 469a-1 at seq.). 14. Will comply with P.L. 93-348 regarding the protection of human subjects involved in research, development, and related activities supported by this award of assistance. 15. Will comply with the Laboratory Animal Welfare Act of 1966 (P.L. 69-544, as amended, 7 U.S.C. 2131 at seq.) pertaining to the care, handling, and treatment of warm blooded animals held for research, teaching, or other activities supported by this award of assistance. 16. Will comply with the Lead-Based Paint Poisoning Prevention Act (42 U.S.C. Section 4801 at seq.) which prohibits the use of lead based paint in construction or rehabilitation of residence structures. 17. Will cause to be performed the required financial and compliance audits in accordance with the Single Audit Act of 1984. 18. Will comply with all applicable requirements of all other Federal laws, executive orders, regulations and policies governing this program. 19. It will comply with the minimum wage and maximum hours provisions of the Federal Fair Labor Standards Act (29 U.S.C. 201), as they apply to employees of institutions of higher education, hospitals, and other non-profit organizations. I https://eservices.fema.gov/FemaFireGrant/firegrant/jsp/prevention20l O/applieation/print_a... 2/15/2011 Print Application Page 20 of 24 Signed by John Karns on 02/04/2011 I i https://eservices.fema.gov/FemaFireGrant/firegrant/jsp/prevention2010/application/print_a... 2/15/2011 1 i Print Application Page 21 of 24 Form 20-16C You must read and sign these assurances by providing your password and checking the box at the bottom of this page. Note: Fields marked with an ' are required. Certifications Regarding Lobbying; Debarment, Suspension and Other Responsibilities Matters; and Drug-Free Workplace Requirements. Applicants should refer to the regulations cited below to determine the certification to which they are required to attest. Applicants should also review the instructions for certification included in the regulations before completing this form. Signature on this form provides for compliance with certification requirements under 44 CFR Part 18, "New Restrictions on Lobbying; and 44 CFR Part 17, "Government-wide Debarment and suspension (Non-procurement) and Government-wide Requirements for Drug-Free Workplace (Grants)." The certifications shall be treated as a material representation of fact upon which reliance will be placed when the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) determines to award the covered transaction, grant, or cooperative agreement. 1. LOBBYING A. As required by the section 1352, Title 31 of the US Code, and implemented at 44 CFR Part 18 for persons into a grant or cooperative agreement over $100,000, as defined at 44CFR Part 18, the applicant certifies that: (a) No federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid by or on behalf of the undersigned to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with the making of any federal grant, the entering into of any cooperative agreement and extension, continuation, renewal amendment or modification of any Federal Grant or cooperative agreement. (b) If any other funds than Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with this Federal grant or cooperative agreement, the undersigned shall complete and submit Standard Form LLL, "Disclosure of Lobbying Activities", in accordance with its instructions. (c) The undersigned shall require that the language of this certification be included in the award documents for all the sub awards at all tiers (including sub grants, contracts under grants and cooperative agreements and sub contract(s)) and that all sub recipients shall certify and disclose accordingly. 2. Debarment, Suspension and Other Responsibility Matters (Direct Recipient) As required by Executive Order 12549, Debarment and Suspension, and implemented at 44CFR Part 67, for prospective participants in primary covered transactions, as defined at 44 CFR Part 17, Section 17.510-A, the applicant certifies that it and its principals: (a) Are not presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible, sentenced to a denial of Federal benefits by a State or Federal court, or voluntarily excluded from covered transactions by any Federal department or agency. (b) Have not within a three-year period preceding this application been convicted of or had a civilian judgment rendered against them for commission of fraud or a criminal offense in connection with obtaining, attempting to obtain or perform a public (Federal, State, or local) transaction or contract under a public transaction; violation of Federal or State antitrust statutes or commission of embezzlement, theft, forgery, bribery, falsification or destruction of records, making false statements, or receiving stolen property. (c) Are not presently indicted for or otherwise criminally or civilly charged by a government entity (Federal, State, or local) with commission of any of the offenses enumerated in paragraph (1)(b) of this certification: and https://eservices.fema.gov/FemaFireGrant/firegrant/jsp/prevention2010/application/print_a 2/15/2011 Print Application Page 22 of 24 i i (d) have not within a three-year period preceding this application had one or more public transactions (Federal, State, or local) terminated for cause or default; and I B. Where the applicant is unable to certify to any of the statements in this certification, he or she shall attach an explanation to this application. 3. Drug-Free Workplace (Grantees other than individuals) As required by the Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1988, and implemented at 44CFR Part 17, Subpart F, for grantees, as defined at 44 CFR part 17, Sections 17.615 and 17.620: (A) The applicant certifies that it will continue to provide a drug-free workplace by: (a) Publishing a statement notifying employees that the unlawful manufacture, distribution, dispensing, possession, or use of a controlled substance is prohibited in the grantee's workplace and specifying the actions that will be taken against employees for violation of such prohibition; (b) Establishing an on-going drug free awareness program to inform employees about: i (1) The dangers of drug abuse in the workplace; (2) The grantees policy of maintaining a drug-free workplace; (3) Any available drug counseling, rehabilitation and employee assistance programs; and (4) The penalties that may be imposed upon employees for drug abuse violations occurring in the workplace; (c) Making it a requirement that each employee to be engaged in the performance of the grant to be given a copy of the statement required by paragraph (a); (d) Notifying the employee in the statement required by paragraph (a) that, as a condition of employment under the grant, the employee will: i (1) Abide by the terms of the statement and (2) Notify the employee in writing of his or her conviction for a violation of a criminal drug statute occurring in the workplace no later than five calendar days after such conviction. (e) Notifying the agency, in writing within 10 calendar days after receiving notice under subparagraph (d)(2) from an employee or otherwise receiving actual notice of such conviction. Employers of convicted employees must provide notice, including position title, to the applicable FEMA awarding office, i.e. regional office or FEMA office. (0 Taking one of the following actions, against such an employee, within 30 calendar days of receiving notice under subparagraph (d)(2), with respect to any employee who Is so convicted: (1) Taking appropriate personnel action against such an employee, up to and including termination, consistent with the requirements of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended; or (2) Requiring such employee to participate satisfactorily in a drug abuse assistance or rehabilitation program approved for such purposes by a Federal, State, or local health, law enforcement or other appropriate agency. (g) Making a good faith effort to continue to maintain a drug free workplace through i implementation of paragraphs (a), (b), (c); (d), (e), and (f). i https://eservices.fema.gov/FemaFireGrant/firegrant/jsp/Prcvenf on20l0/application/print_a... 2/15/2011 Print Application Page 23 of 24 (B) The grantee may insert in the space provided below the site(s) for the performance of work done in connection with the specific grant: Place of Performance Street City State Zip Action If your place of performance Is different from the address provided b physical y you In the Applicant Information, click on Add Place of Performance button above to ensure that the correct place of performance has been specified. You can add multiple addresses by repeating this process multiple times. Section 17.630 of the regulations provide that a grantee that is a State may elect to make one certification in each Federal fiscal year. A copy of which should be included with each application for FEMA funding. States and State agencies may elect to use a Statewide certification. Signed by John Karns on 02104/2011 https://eservices.fema.gov/FemaFireGrant/firegrant/jsp/prevention2Ol 0/application/print-a... 2/15/2011 Print Application Page 24 of 24 I Standard Form LLL j Only complete if applying for a grant for more than $100,000 and have lobbying activities. See Form 20-16C for lobbying activities definition. This form is not applicable I I 1 i i i i https://eservices.fema.gov/FemaFireGrant/firegrant/jsp/prevention20l0/application/print_a... 2/15/2011 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Public Hearing and Approval of a Quitclaim Deed Meeting Date: March 15, 2011 Primary Staff Contact: James H. Olson Department: Public Works/Engin ering E-Mail: olsonjnaashland.or.us Secondary Dept.: Parks Departme t Secondary Contact: Don Robertson Approval: Martha Benn Estimated Time: 20 Minutes Question: Will the Council approve and authorize the Mayor to sign a quitclaim deed to relinquish all City interest in an 8.5 foot wide parcel of land referred to as tax lot 391 E4CA-3300? Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Council approve and authorize the Mayor to sign a quitclaim deed to relinquish all City interest in an 8.5 foot wide parcel of land referred to as tax lot 391 E4CA-3300. Background: Summary In 1982 the Jackson County Assessor's Office erroneously interpreted filed survey number 9266 as indicating a deed gap between tax lots 3302 and 3400. In reality, the survey merely pointed out that a discrepancy of 8.5 feet existed due to errors in description calls. Thinking that a gap of unknown ownership existed, the County assigned tax lot number 3300 to this parcel and added it to the tax rolls. When no taxes were paid on the parcel, the County ultimately foreclosed on the property for $83.21 in unpaid taxes. Unfortunately lot 3400 had recently been sold and foreclosure notices were not received by that owner, so when the property went unclaimed it was deeded to the City at the City's request. The City was interested in the parcel as a possible access to lot 3303 which was acquired by the City as part of the Ashland Creek Greenway. A recent land partition survey has brought this condition to light and has shown that the north boundary of the 8.5 foot parcel (lot 3300) is the true north boundary of lot 3400. To continue with the land partition process, the ownership of this parcel must be determined through this action or by a subsequent suit to quiet title court action. Staff agrees with the findings of the surveyor and recommends approval of a quitclaim deed as the most expedient method of resolving this boundary problem. Property Acquisition by City The City acquired title to lot 3300 on October 10, 1990 when Jackson County deeded the property to the City by a quitclaim deed which was recorded as instrument no. 90-25848 (copy attached). Quitclaim deeds are used in lieu of a warranty deed where there is some doubt as to the actual title to the property. Under a quitclaim deed the grantor deeds all rights and interests that it may possess in a parcel of land. The grantor offers no warranty of title and will make no claims to defend the title. A quitclaim deed does not profess that the title is valid, and contains no covenants or warranties for title. If the Council elects to deed this parcel to the adjacent property owner, it must also be done by a quitclaim deed as the City cannot warrant its title to this property either by prior deed or by subsequent usage, as the City has not used nor occupied this property since its acquisition in 1990. Pagel of 4 CITY OF -ASH LAN D Surveying History Most of the lots along Ashland Creek were first created by Abel Helman, an early Ashland Pioneer, and many of the property descriptions date back to the late 1800's. Many of these descriptions have never been updated or corrected since that time. Nearly all of the older lots along Helman Street were described from one of three beginning points, either from the centerline intersection of Helman and VanNess Ave. or from the comers of two Donation Land Claim (DLC) corners; DLC no. 40 and 42. Properties north of tax lot 3300 generally used the northeast comer of DLC no. 40 as a point of beginning while the properties to the south commonly used the street intersection as a basis for descriptions. In a few instances the southerly properties used the northwest corner of DLC no. 42 as a point of beginning. The north-south distance between these diverse starting points is over one half mile. Early measurements between these monuments differed by 8.5 feet compared to modem measurements, and this discrepancy has been perpetuated from owner to owner as the same uncorrected deed description was used by each successive owner. The problem becomes apparent when the deed description does not match the lines of occupation, particularly older fence lines. It is the job of a land surveyor to determine property boundaries and to take into consideration all physical and written evidence pertaining to the boundary to make that determination. In this instance the surveyor has carefully analyzed the location of fence lines, building locations, previous surveys and the surrounding property deed descriptions to reach a conclusion that the legal north boundary of lot 3400 should be the north boundary of lot 3300. It is the surveyor's opinion that the 8.5 foot wide strip of land never left the ownership of the lot 3400 lot owner and that the creation of lot 3300 and its ultimate foreclosure and transfer to the City was done in error and does not constitute a legal transfer of ownership. This opinion is also reinforced in an attached letter from Stuart Osmus, a licensed land surveyor who has completed surveys in this area. Stabilization of Area Boundaries As was previously mentioned, this 8.5 foot wide deed discrepancy exists for numerous lots located between lot 3300 to the north and Hersey Street to the south. Several of these lot owners have already taken steps to correct this condition by creating boundary line agreements with the adjoining property owner. In these instances the existing line of occupation or fence line has been agreed upon as the final common boundary. If the Council will grant a quitclaim deed to the owner of lot 3400 then the north boundary of that lot is legally "fixed". It is recommended that the owner of lot 3400 be required to enter into a boundary line agreement with his southerly neighbor to legalize that boundary as well. Boundary discrepancies such as this are common in Ashland where many lots and their supporting surveys date back to the 1880's. A similar situation was remedied by the Council in January 2000 where a 30-foot surveying error dating back to 1887 was corrected. Several homes within the Ashland Homestead Association plat were drastically affected by this error; in fact the described boundary lines actually bisected four Page 2 of 4 ~r, CITY OF ASHLAND buildings. This error was corrected by a boundary line adjustment process which included the Garfield Park property. The Council was asked to approve the new boundary line which was based upon the occupational lines rather than on the flawed deed descriptions. Access to lot 3303 In March of 1982 the City was granted lot 3303 as a "greenway" dedication on a land partition plat filed by James D. Bohaugh. At that time, this 20-foot wide by 137-foot long parcel was land locked with no legal access. It was acquired with the thought that subsequent greenway acquisitions would eventually link this lot to many others to create an Ashland Creek Greenway which could support a pedestrian access way. When the County contacted the City regarding the disposal of the recently foreclosure acquired lot 3300, the City expressed an interest in possessing this property as a possible access to lot 3303. The City took ownership of this parcel in 1990. It was much later that the unsuitability of this lot as an access way became clear. The lot is encumbered by a portion of the house which projects into the 8.5 foot parcel by approximately four feet. The lot is also very steep along the easterly one-half of its length. With the close proximity of the house and attached deck it would be difficult to cut or fill the existing ground to acquire a more usable grade. There are also several large mature trees within the lot which must be removed if it were to be used as an access way. The Ashland Parks and Recreation Department is currently looking at alternative access ways over other properties in the area with the hopes of acquiring a more assessable way to lot 3303. Related City Policies: The disposal of any publicly owned property is governed under ORS section 221.725 which requires the following actions: (1) Except as provided in ORS 221.727, when a city council considers it necessary or convenient to sell real property or any interest therein, the city council shall publish a notice of the proposed sale in a newspaper of general circulation in the city, and shall hold a public hearing concerning the sale prior to the sale. (2) The notice required by subsection (1) of this section shall be published at least once during the week prior to the public hearing required under this section. The notice shall state the time and place of the public hearing, a description of the property or interest to be sold, the proposed uses for the property and the reasons why the city council considers it necessary or convenient to sell the property. Proof of publication of the notice may be made as provided by ORS 193.070. (3) Not earlier than five days after publication of the notice, the public hearing concerning the sale shall be held at the time and place stated in the notice. Nothing in this section prevents a city council from holding the hearing at any regular or special meeting of the city council as part of its regular agenda. (4) The nature of the proposed sale and the general terms thereof, including an appraisal or other evidence of the market value of the property, shall be fully disclosed by the city council at the public hearing. Any resident of the city shall be given an opportunity to present written or oral testimony at the hearing. (5) As used in this section and ORS 221.727,"sale" includes a lease-option agreement under which the lessee has the right to buy the leased real property in accordance with the terms specified in the agreement. Page 3 of 4 ~r, CITY OF ASHLAND Council Options: • Following the public hearing, the Council may approve and authorize the Mayor to sign a quitclaim deed to relinquish all City interest in lot 39 1 E 4CA - 3300. • Following the public hearing, the Council may decline to approve the quitclaim deed. Consequences If the quitclaim deed is not approved, the owner of lot 3400 will likely be compelled to file a suit to quiet title action to re-acquire the 8.5 foot wide parcel of land upon which a portion of his home is situated. Potential Motions: • Move to approve and authorize the Mayor to sign a quitclaim deed to relinquish all City interest in lot 39 1 E 4CA - 3300. • Move to deny approval of a quitclaim deed. Attachments: (1) Quitclaim deed (2) Letters from John Zeller, Will Hershman, Rick Landt and Stuart Osmus (PLS) (3) Vicinity map, site map and partition plat (4) Photos (5) Document no. 90-25848 Page 4 of 4 ~r, After recording return to: William B. Hershman 500 Helman St. Ashland, OR 97520 Until a change is requested, tax statements shall be sent to The following address: SEE ABOVE STATUTORY QUITCLAIM DEED City of Ashland, a Municipal corporation, Grantor, releases and quitclaims to William B Hershman, as tenant by the entirety, Grantee, the following described real property: That certain real property deeded to the City of Ashland by Jackson County Oregon on the 10`h day of October, 1990 and recorded as instrument no. 90-25848 of the official records of Jackson County, Oregon. Tax Account No. 1-004873-3; Map 39 1 E 4CA TL 3300 The true consideration for this conveyance is $0.00. The purpose of this conveyance is to release all of the right, title and interest of the Grantor in that certain 8.5 foot wide parcel described above, to correct a previous transfer of title which was done in error. BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT, THE, PERSON TRANFERRING FEE TITLE SHOULD INQUIRE ABOUT THE PERSON'S RIGHTS, IF ANY, UNDER ORS 195.300, 195.301 AND 195.305 TO 195.336 AND SECTIONS 5 TO 11, CHAPTER 424, OREGON LAWS 2007. THIS INSTRUMENT DOES NOT ALLOW USE OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THIS INSTRUMENT IN VIOLATION OF APPLICABLE LAND USE LAWS AND REGULATIONS. BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT, THE PERSON ACQUIRING FEE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY SHOULD CHECK WITH THE APPROPRIATE CITY OR COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO VERIFY THAT THE UNIT OF LAND BEING TRANSFERRED IS A LAWFULLY ESTABLISHED LOT OR PARCEL, AS DEFINED IN ORS 92.010 OR 215.010, TO VERIFY THE APPROVED USES OF THE LOT OR PARCEL, TO DETERMINE ANY LIMITS ON LAWSUITS AGAINST FARMING OR FOREST PRACTICES AS DEFINED IN ORS 30.930 AND TO INQUIRE ABOUT THE RIGHTS OF NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS, IF ANY, UNDER ORS 195.300, 195.301 AND 195.305 TO 195.336 AND SECTIONS 5 TO 11 CHAPTER 424, OREGON LAWS 2007. Dated _ day of 2011 City of Ashland, a Municipal Corporation G:\pub-wrks\eng\dept-ndmin\SURVEYOR\39 IE 04 CA TL3300.doex By: John Stromberg STATE OF OREGON COUNTY OF JACKSON The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _ day of 2011, by John Stromberg as Mayor of City of Ashland, a municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation. Notary Public for Oregon My commission expires G:\pub-wrks\engldept-admin\SURV EYORl39 I E 04 CA TL33 W.doex Jim Olson From: John Zaller [zaller@ucla.edu] Sent: Monday, February 14, 2011 10:32 PM To: Jim Olson Subject: Tax Lot 3300 Dear Mr. Olson, Please include the letter below in the information packet to the city council on the decision to quit claim Tax Lot 3300. Thank you. John Zaller Members of the City Council: We understand that city staff is recommending that the city quit-claim its title to Tax Lot 3300 on Ashland Creek. We are writing with information that may be relevant to your decision on this matter. We are the owners of two tax lots, 2704 and 2708, across Ashland Creek from TL 3300. Our understanding is that, at some point in the past, the Parks Department considered TL 3300 for a pedestrian path that would run from Heiman Street to Ashland Creek, across the creek to Tax Lot 2704, south along Ashland Creek through Tax Lot 2708, and through Ashland Creek Park to Hersey Street. My wife and I, as owners of the two tax lots, have welcomed this idea. We imagine the path would be a pleasant route for evening strolls and for residents of northwest Ashland to walk into town. We have therefore planned to donate to the city, in our wills, an easement for a path across TL 2704 for the purpose of making this pedestrian path possible in the future. In light of this, we are sorry to learn of the determination by city staff that TL 3300 exists only due to a survey error that was apparently made in the 1800s and affirmed recently in a flawed process. We do not know the technicalities of the issue, nor do we know what political or legal remedies are appropriate for a problem of such ancient origin. We do, however, believe that a public interest may exist in city retention of TL 3300 as the best available corridor for a path from Heiman to the creek. And we want you, the city council, to be aware of.our intent to make a donation to the city that could enhance the value of TL 3300 for use as a path. The city already owns an easement fora path across our TL 2708, and we will go ahead with our plans to donate an easement across TL 2704 regardless of your decision on TL 3300. We enjoy Ashland Creek very much and want to open it up to more Ashlanders - though, selfishly, not until after we are gone. Sincerely, 757 Oak Street Barbara Geddes Ashland, OR John Zaller 310 459 6413 Jim Olson From: Will Hershman [will@barcodeservices.coml Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 20112:08 PM To: olsonj@ashland.or.us Cc: landtifam@opendoor.com; thorntm@ashland.or.us; seversod@ashland.or.us Subject: tax lot 3300 dissolution because of survey error Dear Mr. Olson, 1. Tax Lot 3400 has existed over 60+ years through at least 5 different home owner transactions as tax lot 3400 whose north and south boundary widths have always been 76+ It wide. Throughout the history of tax lot 3400 nothing about it has changed, there are existing monuments that were confirmed in the latest survey done by Polaris Surveying submitted tc'the engineering department on Oct 18,2010. (Please see the narrative 2. 1 strongly support that the City of Ashland quit claim Tax Lot 3300 because it only exists as a survey error and it is comprised of land inside my property, Tax Lot 3400. 1 am aware that the City Engineer, Jim Olson and the legal department of the City of Ashland acknowledge that the quit claim is the proper action for the city council to take as it returns to me what has always been part of my existing property and makes Tax Lot 3400 whole as defined by the recent survey in 2010. 3. 1 don't believe that the City Council of Ashland should perpetuate an error at the expense of a homeowner who, as have his predecessors, dutifully paid their property taxes on a property that has been 76 ft wide. I do not deserve to lose 8.5 ft of my property which includes part of my home and landscape to a survey error. The city has quit claimed other properties in the past for the same reason: survey error. I ask for consistency in this matter as it has been the policy of the city to do so. May it be with your support, the legal department and the City of Ashland's historic policy to connect survey errors in situations identical to the problem that I have with Tax Lot 3300. Sincerely, Will Hershman 500 Helman St. Ashland, OR 97520 541 482-1749 home 541 488-1468 work 541 482-0310fax 541 840-0581 cell will@bareodeservices.com 1 From: Rick Landt Address: 468 Heiman Street (between Hershman property and Hersey Street) To: City Council Date: Feb 24, 2011 Re: Proposed Quit Claim of City's Interest in Tax Lot 3300 (391 E 04CA) The City Council has before it a proposal to quitclaim tax lot 3300 to the adjacent property owner, Will Hershman, owner of tax lot 3400. An objection has been raised by another adjacent property owner because tax lot 3300 has been viewed by the City as a potential pedestrian passage. I support the concept of pedestrian access between Helman Street and Ashland Creek, but this specific location was ill-gained by the City from the County due to a mistake on the part of the County. For the City to continue to claim ownership of this property, after two licensed Ashland surveyors, Shawn Kampmann and Stuart Osmus, have stated that there was no property for the City to claim, would be unfair and unjust. Thus l strongly support the City Staff's position that this property be quitclaimed to Hershman, the rightful owner. The County obtained the property because they miss-determined that no one was paying taxes on the property. It appeared to the County that way due to a survey error. Hershman is and has been paying taxes on a lot 75.90 feet wide. He only has that amount of land within the lines of occupation if the 8.5 feet width of the so-called City's property is included in his property width. Otherwise, he is 8.5 feet short (no coincidence). Also, it should be noted that his 60 year old structure occupies a portion of this 8.5 foot wide strip. Another way of looking at the issue is to add up the street frontage from the deeds show for each property owner on the east side of Heiman Street between the boundary between tax lots 3300 and 3400 to Hersey Street. Then measure the distance on the ground between those two points. What one would find is that there would be 8.5 feet less measured distance than what the deeds state there should be. The only way property owners can have the amount of property that we are paying taxes on is if the 8.5 wide strip currently claimed by the City is deeded to Hershman with a stipulation that he agrees to a boundary agreement with his southern neighbor to change the deed to coincide with the current lines of occupation. There is another issue. As stated above, the survey error translates in a way that the deed lines of the properties between Hershman's property and Hersey Street are 8.5 feet off of the lines of occupation demarcated by fences lines, old survey pipes, and an understanding among property owners of where the boundaries are. Development has proceeded based on lines of occupation, not the deed lines. This development, based on the lines of occupation, has resulted in buildings less than six feet from the deed lines, violation of the solar access code, driveways on adjacent property without easements, and sewer lines on adjacent properties without easements, among other things, if deed lines are used to determine planning requirements. The City has the ability and authority to correct this situation. There is precedent for this action. In 2000, the City gave up a thirty foot strip of property deeded to Garfield Park to correct a similar problem. We hope and trust the City Council will take this opportunity to correct this problem that only exists due to a survey error perpetuated by the County's transfer of the claim of ownership to the City. b TERRASURVEY, INC TPLLPHONn (541) 482-8474 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYORSS rAC51MME (541) 552-0092 274 MURM STREET ELPQPaON1C terrainebisp.not ASHLAND, OREGON 975M i rebrvaly 18, 2011 Rick Landt 468 Heiman Street Ashland, Oregon 97520 RU4 Proposed Quit Claim of City's Interest in Tax I.Ot 3300 (391E 04CA) Dear Rick, I have reviewed the information that you have provided me from the proposed property line adjustment currently being completed by Polaris Land Surveying. I have been aware of the 8.5 foot discrepancy between the deed descriptions and the lines of possession along the east side of Heiman Street, for some time now. In 2003, I prepared a site survey which revealed this issue to your neighbor, the owner of Tax Lot 3701. It appeals that the lot owners along this side of the Street do not have clear title to the land that they possess because of an error that was made in a distance call when the lots were created- Errors such as this are not uncommon occurrences and, when land surveyors mark boundaries, they take into account other elements within the deed such as calls to adjoining tracts or natural boundaries. When elements within a deed cannot resolve a discrepancy, surveyors will search through old titles, look for old monuments, review adjacent deeds and, last but not least,. compare lines of possession. When linos of possession consistently do not match the deed description, it indicates a problem with the deed. An exanrination of the surveys on this side of Heiman Street shows that surveyors have honored the lines of possession and discounted the deed call distances from the intersection of Van Ness and Reiman Streets. As a rule, they have also recommended that their clients execute boundary line agreements with their neighbors to correct their deeds and remove the cloud from their titles. This remedy would have worked for every property owner in the neighborhood until the Jackson County Assessors office seperated the 8.5 foot strip of land from the Hershman tract in 1987. The County Assessor's office, based only on the erroneous deed call and ignoring surveying evidence to the contrary, decided there must be a deed gap between the Hershman tract and what is now Tax Lot 3302. The 8.5 foot wide strip of land was then, apparently without notifying it's true owners, foreclosed on for non-payment of taxes and, later, transferred to City of Ashland ownership. In my opinion, there was no actual gap between the Hershman tract and Tax Lot 3302 so the County erred in foreclosing on the strip of land that is now Tax Lot 3300. Even if a gap had existed, in failing to notify the people in possession of the property at the time of foreclosure, the County cast doubt on the legality of the process. The City of Ashland now has an opportunity to correct what was, at (past, an overzealous act by the County Assessors office. I would hope that the City Council agrees to quit claim any interest that they may have in Tax Lot 3300 to the owners of the Hershman tract This will right an old wrong and allow the Hershmans and their neighbors to execute boundary line agreements or property line adjustments, correct their deed descriptions, and remove doubts as to the true locations of their property lines. FLA x FRIONl~t N0 SURVEYTYR. Sincerely, -ti ` ynHG4N L JULY ii, 1Y STUMT M. U VS u{ Stuart M. Osmus °n1i' It 9 t Oregon Professional Land Surveyor No. 2464 S A y~ w v oM z~ ~M N - 0 a :3~ R p p ~ ' E o Q•-ONM33aJ.NtlW.I+ 1 Oa.N33aJNtlWlO1 Q c i d --Atl.a3NltlM ntl a3Nltlm a 1 W w OJ tl.NItl1Nf1OW.N y~y~ti bO Z b W r H O 3 LQ 0 E ~ N y~ N • Y {Iu ~ a y' O I ® u o 932 - \ r \ I I N F 144 ~S W 1L4,SECA T 39S , R \ JACKSON COUNTY 922 986 \ " V= - 1ool I 1 1 1 I 1 t + 1 SITE MAP 1 t ,t 2901 mm 1 -3100•---- - e1s - 0.22 AC --986- - - 029 An See 29M ,ma 11 6 027AC ` ,mm 2904 . 9 0.17 Aa 855 Ar. =v s M ~(~•y o~ie~ wa m 1 am - , am 2402 Ulm .048M 2805 ,mm e3e e ; s at9An O< 3204 1 , I . f .SAG sets Qm ft g ; rECOn,mJO f , • S 2806 CS 954 0.80Aa Jr) t8J83- _ 169,9 2800 Ely .3209 5258 0.20Aa ' I I 0618214 W °''F h` f mm y 815 $ C 560 8 ~ 2604 I CS 7331 # 4 p0.27 An g,y 1'J • • Jl4m ,mLp r, 320 amp law r 2803 rand, 0.20Ac r i • rm,c mancnY g d wmm•~mmr 001• r ~r~ = 9 805 nt Y I . mraartucJO •Y ; CS 20149 1 ` 3290 Q01 AC trlu. C) _ 11 \ \PCL 1_ 3301 n® \ law ..________=~w_ 4.S1,0.37 AC 2707 tam 058735 mnrcop=w 0.79Ae. 5z4 $ A-163 2706 0.19AG E a~ /;03,AC 773 L 1 a u ad / (J m 1'o S~ vane e 3303 / ~A ~ ;2700 :0.31 A. a 3400 ° 9m~ s4 ps \ ro CS 9281 797 Y a30Ar. y~ r 27(14 yam, MAC 779 t~~ . z ur ^S" 600 UBJECT PROPERTY e 3500 2701 'P 026 A¢ O$ Ot/' c5 6J08 1 Q0.15AC761 ad am ?E')O 494 .F Mtl 0.00 AM J ~cr 2702 "m 1 r) cs 18188 011 m 755 0711 AC, 7\ ♦ tmm 2500 m m 0.31AC. 1 Y1; 4 oa6►n 747 a 2 n MAP 39 1 E 04CA 0151 A yy qq HIM 1I phpj8 q 5 ° q q7 ~ z ^m no pd$ p Spapa ~i 4~2`~~7`~~'C 7O 8~$a~i35~ ,QR im a a m7og m„ a<gyyagp~ B 4sgsaa a~R~7 w"gg"gwZ S k ~ ARA~fi k° ~iip a >jm m 0. ~ 6`a a~~a^ > C yWa S q °$a a a~ aR q~ ®®o ao°° do •III II'~g c@BEE~~~ . q gg=~ I~~~ t _ sr ~\~a mIo a ee q l'.g3 3 b .L S A ~ B V V $ A iT.8 d~6 ~ n b O - ~ ~ 33 I` ~ tl S~ a n g c c s•~ 9 6_ _ 5 a~q~4~ ~E~ I~ ~ aam: g ~ k~, a::_3° o x E a " 2 • 'a - ' A q j~~C 'Noon] ! 3 a a a w a; a a a a a w ~ k~ - aa,.,-]-caaaoN - ~ga3i~ae gg~_5O ~,.8 • I N 2 2 L L 2 Z L 1 i 2 2 L L 2 °22Ip5s i °Z 51 ~ ' - ~ k a <s ° S i ~J{'yp~ i a 9~~ 5 5 a 5 C; q a C k R; B k h a~~~ J =i {,d g $~n R Fnn~xPCk~RXn~NM n~ a 'R , a gt ggyY~ Qg3 ~A, a $ g^ (wi 4 a ]aa a 4 a ,w{1 ag F qF~ ~ Iaa S~ ¢ ^ Qe ;jY^ a d `A 3 k 7 E ~d 3 6 F S'8~ x x Lx L ~gZ Y` - ~ M1s i3al kka x L L 2 2 x L L ]]fH a a bJ u. €g f EY O I °Hy'Sy ,t~•Yi~ / ~ C~`~ \(UfU.r.>aa-3y~ aP/ Al O a .zN a RR1 wry Ya' ~Qfp Q~'i`A y~]LA®° CA 5 _ pq 1yu] K ?I i "Al \\d ~ - ro~~ /z. 0 3$' Iya a , R vso",,, kiN B11^Ya~ ~ 1~ \ \ R~. 2 1 9 a. ~j,A^ N-0Y]YXI; x_ 10.1] fi 3EKtlfil ° ~Lp\ , 4R , 8313 Oro1b x l y ` \ ~ }a ~ ^.P( L , ^A \ MOT Y]* l~k Nal. °n /~.~p v 66333B~x~ ~ ~ 6' V ~ G {{j jet N F+ y~ M t _ f0 fv t Q 06 fYl 1.5 Y .J+~ C1 O t O r 1 ! I ~1 l\! ~ A r 1 SYf O O r Y ~'y" ,,a 1 d~ 5 x ' i. IN'S t ~ t ♦ i ~ i 1 i E 1. i._. s_I I t. ~I4l:h j ~ a ? I ~ r_ `o 3 b C F I W W U O { a e 0 m w 3 f. { .t+....,,\ r' ° e ~ N, j.X`^ r, -swswl, b ~ i I 1 ♦ 16'~ - Y i I ~ I Y s r r ~t t Jl4- } x s in r x 1,0 OO j] 1 I Y . ' LT O u .44 k 2 Y ~ J Pn r t~ R Eli; I ~ -..mot ~ ~ p ~ eP rif I I , . ~ l ' ~ 1 t O w 3 b a' i~ C. 11 u., y 1 t,' i f < h• CL a w 06 i w , fit Y tiSJ qy:~ p~{ c Ei~ f '4. r ~ o •E'- ;%aCz?'~ - t - th' 1 ' h 3 }J~, T. h y a ti. .b .4 h~,, m i rp„ ~1 f ~l it 3 a' p Y~'i xfia' ~ a A~ `i ~y .,,c x. ' m1 wF ~ e.. 06 rY~ r ~I Y 3 4t+ _ a~i - ~ /1 1 ~,..f x I-i Lk ~ ~ St cu O 4 _ H N { / Y ~X ,l } t C Jj v y. 7 nY _ .1 i j ff~ , r R~~ xqe ' a 8l r w. ~ r fit r yxw; { b { ~Sa t m 3 6 a:s( na 90-25848 QUIT CLAIM DEED Jackson County, a political subdivision of the state of Oregon, hereinafter called "Grantor," releases and quitclaims to the city of Ashland all that certain real property situated in Jackson County, State of Oregon, described as follows: 391E4CA - 3300 A tract or parcel of land situated in Donation Land Claim No. 40 in the Southwest Quarter of Section 4 in Township 39 South, Range 1 East of the Willamette Meridian in Jackson County, Oregon, described as follows: Commencing at the intersection of VanNess Avenue and Helman Street, to the city of Ashland, in Jackson County, Oregon, thence North 25°35'01" East (Deed Record North 25'30' East) along the centerline of Holman Street 475.81 feet to the centerline of Hersey Street, thence North 25°34'52" East (Deed Records North 25°30' East) along the centerline of Helman Street 699.74 feet to the centerline of Orange Street, which point bears South 25°34152" West 5.00 feet, from an iron pipe and bronze disk Witness Corner, thence continuing North 25°34'52" East (Deed Record Worth 25"3D' East) long the centerline of Helman Street ' 576.15 feet to a point which bears Northeasterly 1751.70 feet (Deed Record 1751.7 feet) from the intersection of VanNess Avenue and Helman Street, thence leaving said centerline, South 63"40'08" East (Deed Records South 63"45' East 30.00 feet) 30.00 feet to a point in the southeasterly right of way of Helman Street for the true point of beginning; thence North 25°34'52" East (Deed Record North 25'30' East), along said right of way, 8.415 feet to the southwest corner of the parcel described in deed recorded'as No. 89-14539 of the Official Records of Jackson County, Oregon; thence South 63'19'05' East, along the southerly boundary of said described parcel, 157.375 feet to the southeast corner thereof; thence continue South 63°19'05" East 20.35 feet to intersect the southeasterly boundary of the tract described in deed recorded as No. B1-09869 of the said Official Records; thence South 37"19152" West (Deed Record South 37'15'West), along said southeasterly boundary, 8.56 feet to the most southerly corner of said described tract; thence North 63"19'05" West (Deed Record North 63"22' West 177.29 feet), along the southwesterly boundary of said described tract, 175.98 feet to the true point of beginning. QUIT CLAIM DEED - I 90-25848 DATED this 10th day of October, 199D, at Medford, Oregon. Board of Commissioners a 1j-.t 141 .Sue Kupillas, Chair APPROVED AS TO FORM: Jeff Co ssioner county unsel _ a Henry, C mmiss n STATE OF OREGON (1 s5. County of Jackson ) SUBSCRIBED AND SHORN HE this day of Fl. 1990, by 3x YA944das, Jeff Golden, and Hank Henry, who arnown tD me, an acknowledged they are the Board of Commissioners of Jackson County, Oregon, and that they signed the foregoing instrument on behalf of Jackson County with proper authority as the act of the county for the ~puyrJpose there in stated. c.. /Q w J ~y G.:AO2y., Notar Pu Ic for State of Oregon My Commis ion Expires: /a-/7- Y'a (,DIARY : OF RECORD W1nOU7 FEE Jmds CuuntY, Olegnn OFFICIAL RECORDS PM• QUIT CLAIM DEED - 2 a; 51. OCT 1 1 1990 KATHLEEN S. BECKE7T OUC ai 6 c roeh CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Planning Action #2010-01570 - Annexation and Zoning Map Change from Jackson County RR-5 (Rural Residential) to City of Ashland E-1 (Employment) and withdrawal from Jackson County Rural Fire Protection District 5 for an approximately 3.72-acre parcel located at 590 Clover Lane. (Caldera) Meeting Date: March 15, 2011 Primary Staff Contact: Bill Molnar Department: Community Development E-Mail: bill.molnar ci ashland.or.us Secondary Dept.: Legal j~ Secondary Contact: Derek Severson Approval: Martha Bennpl~ Estimated Time: 60 Minutes Questions: I~ Does the Council approve a request to annex a 3.72 acre parcel consisting of three lots located at 590 Clover Lane and change the Zoning Map designation from Jackson County RR-5 (Rural Residential) to City of Ashland E-1 (Employment)? Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Council approve the request for Annexation, and we have also recommended that the Council include a portion of Interstate 5 freeway right-of-way, and a small remnant parcel (Tax Lot 47100) between the subject properties and the freeway in the annexation to make the extension of the City's boundaries more logical and orderly pursuant to AMC 18.106.040. A discussion of the application as it relates to the specific annexation criteria is contained in the staff report in the record (See pages 57-59). The Council may consider attaching other conditions which they deem relevant to meet the criteria for approval; in particularly staff would note that the proposed paved driveway width significantly exceeds driveways typically associated with similar light industrial development. The Planning Commission imposed conditions that the driveway width and paved areas be minimized (See condition #5i on page 26 in the record) but staff believes that the Council may also wish to require the use of permeable paving materials for some or all of the paving to further mitigate the impacts associated with the amount of paving proposed. Background: At its January 11'n meeting, the Planning Commission unanimously approved an application for a Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment/Zone Change; Site Review approval to construct a new 28,000 square foot manufacturing, warehouse, storage, tasting room and administrative office building for the production of brewing products; Lot Consolidation; and Tree Removal Permit to remove 17 trees for the 3.72 acre parcel located at 590 Clover Lane. The Planning Commission's approval also included a Modification of Planning Action 42003-112 to eliminate the previous vehicle trips per day per lot cap on Tax Lots #6800 and #6801 at 580-585 Clover Lane, and Administrative Variances to the Site Design and Use Standards to place parking and circulation between the building and the street and to the parking lot landscaping and screening requirements. Findings, Conclusions and Orders of that decision are contained in the record (See pages 12-28). The Planning Commission found that the application complied with all relevant approval criteria for Annexations as described in the Annexation Chapter 18.108 of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance, and in conjunction with their approval of the above components of the application also recommended that Page 1 of 6 CITY OF ASHLAND the Council approve the applicants' proposal for annexation of the three parcels totaling 3.72 acres in area which currently have a County zoning designation of RR-5. Two of these three parcels had Comprehensive Plan designations as Single Family Residential, while the third was designated as Employment. With the application, all three parcels are proposed to be annexed as Employment lands to be zoned E-1 and consolidated into one parcel. Annexation The application involves the annexation and subsequent development of a 28,000 square foot manufacturing, warehouse, storage, tasting room and administrative office building for the production of brewing products on a 3.72 acre parcel located at 590 Clover Lane, which satisfies the requirement that an Annexation request f6r property to be zoned E-1 be accompanied by a concurrent Site Review request for an outright permitted or special permitted use. The subject property is located within the Urban Growth Boundary, immediately south of and contiguous to the existing City limits. The Comprehensive Plan designation for one of the three lots is Employment, with the remaining two lots designated for Single Family Residential development. The applicants are concurrently requesting Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning Map amendments in order to bring all three properties into the city as Employment land, and the Planning Commission approved of this request. The proposed tasting room is an outright permitted use (restauranUstore) and the brewing facility is a special permitted use (i.e. bottling plant) within the E-1 district. Associated manufacturing, warehousing, storage and administrative office uses described in the application are also permitted uses. The application materials provided note that while the proposed new facility is nearly five times the size of the existing 6,000 square foot facility currently located on Clover Lane, with relocation of operations to the subject properties water use will increase by only about 60 percent. The application explains that this is due both to enhancements in technology that can be achieved with new, more efficient equipment and to the fact that the added space is not simply to quadruple production but also to experiment with alternative products having differing types of equipment and storage space needs. The application further notes that the existing facility on Clover Lane has a monthly electrical demand of approximately 12 Kw, or 144 Kw per year and that the proposed facility is anticipated to use approximately 40kw per month, or 480 Kw per year. With the exception of storm drainage, all utilities are in place within the Clover Lane right-of-way and are sized to accommodate the proposal. Eight- inch water and sewer mains are in place and adequate to serve the proposal, and an existing electrical transformer sits on the vacant lot immediately to the north. The Electrical Department has indicated that the facilities in the area were sized with development of these parcels in mind. The application also indicates that fire hydrants will be located on both the front and back ends of the property, and that fire apparatus access and turn-arounds are to be provided to address fire protection needs. The applicants note that in consulting with the City's Public Works Department, a deficiency in stormwater capacity was identified due to an undersized culvert at the intersection of Highway 66 and Clover Lane. The applicants are thus proposing a metering system to hold stormwater on site temporarily during large storm events and slowly release it into the city system at an acceptable rate. Instead of directing stormwater to the undersized facilities on Highway 66, the applicants propose to direct stormwater to Spring Creek Drive, after first holding it on site in multiple systems including a bio-swale which will address detention and water quality requirements. The plan also identifies an underground storm water detention facility on the east side of the property to accommodate overflows and then slowly meter them. The applicants landscapes architect and civil engineer have provided preliminary drawings addressing the siting of utilities for the project, and conditions have been Page 2 of 6 Pr, CITY OF ASHLAND recommended below to require that final electric, utility and storm drain plans be provided for the review and approval of the Public Works, Electric, Planning and Building Departments prior to submittal of building permit plans. Clover Lane is a commercial collector street, and presently terminates in a cul-de-sac just north of the subject properties. Paving, curbs, gutters, and curbside sidewalks are in place on both sides of the street. Because the existing street already exceeds the 500-foot length allowed in city street standards for a dead-end street and the property is at the terminus of the city limits, the applicants are proposing to extend a private driveway from the terminus of the existing public facility to serve the proposal without further extending city street improvements. The applicants propose to provide a scored concrete pedestrian path through the existing driveway and parking areas to provide a pedestrian connection from the existing sidewalk on the west side of Clover Lane to the building entrance. Staff has recommended a condition to require that the applicants provide signage at the end of the public street's existing turn-around clearly indicating that there is no outlet for through traffic via the private drive. The applicants have provided a traffic impact analysis, prepared by Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering, LLC which concludes that the proposed Employment designation and E-1 zoning can be accommodated through the existing transportation system without creating adverse impacts. This analysis looked at traffic impacts of the development on five study area intersections: Tolman Creek Road and Ashland Street, Washington Street and Ashland Street, I-5 southbound ramps and Ashland Street, 1-5 northbound ramps and Ashland Street, and Clover Lane and Ashland Street, focusing on the existing year 2010, the build year 2011, and future year 2030 conditions during the peak p.m. hour. With the proposed Employment designation for all three of the subject lots, they are expected to generate approximately 557 average daily trips. The analysis notes that the presently stop-controlled I- 5 northbound intersection with Ashland Street is shown to operate at a v/c ratio greater than 2.0 under future year 2030 no-build and build conditions, and 95'h percentile queue lengths are shown to exceed link distances and create potential safety concerns on Ashland Street between the I-5 ramp intersections and the off ramps themselves under existing year 2010, design year 2011 and future year 2030 conditions. Planned mitigation detailed in the analysis includes the ODOT 1-5 Exit 14 interchange redesign project which includes traffic signals at both ramp intersections, widening of Ashland Street, and extended right turn lanes on both 1-5 off-ramps. This redesign project is currently underway, with completion tentatively slated for April of 2012. With these improvements in place, the traffic impact analysis provided concludes that study area intersections are shown to be adequately mitigated throughout the future year planning horizon. In reviewing the proposal, ODOT has noted that the planned traffic signal to be installed at Exit 14 northbound may cause traffic to back-up past the intersection at times, making left turns difficult. With this in mind, ODOT has encouraged that the city to "to amend their Transportation System Plan (TSP) and identify a planned median improvement or some equivalent mitigation measure that restricts left turn movements at the Ashland Street/Clover Lane intersection." The TSP update is underway, and these improvements are being considered in conjunction with considerations of how and where traffic that is directed out to the right at the intersection will be able to turn around to return to their original direction of travel. With this in mind, the Planning Commission required that the applicants sign in favor of a Local Improvement District for the future improvements necessary to address the left turn issue at the intersection. Page 3 of 6 ~r, CITY OF -ASHLAND Issues Raised during Hearing During the Planning Commission hearing, staff raised a number of issues with the proposal. These are discussed briefly below, along with a brief explanation of how they were addressed through the Planning Commission's approval: o Placement of Parking & Circulation Between Building & Street, Resultant Challenges to Pedestrian Access and the Amount & Extent of Paving: Staff noted that the placement of car and truck circulation routes between the entrance and the street needed to be carefully considered to ensure equal consideration for pedestrians. Staff recommended the addition of a pedestrian connection from the east side of Clover Lane, as a pedestrian route in this location would more than halve the length of pedestrian travel through the driveway while also eliminating the need for pedestrians coming to the tasting room from the Spring Creek/Oak Knoll neighborhoods via the existing pedestrian path to cross Clover Lane and more than 60 additional feet of driveway. Staff also recommended that pavement areas be minimized and installed in permeable materials. The Commission required the added pedestrian crossing and that both crossings be completed in scored concrete to better distinguish them within the vehicle travel areas. While the Commission retained conditions to minimize the paved area, the recommended requirement to use permeable materials for all paving was not included as a condition. o Buffering of Property Line to Mitigate Paving & Visual Impacts of Building Mass at a Gateway: Staff recommended against the requested Administrative Variance for landscape buffers along the freeway property line, bringing forth a recommendation that a landscape buffer be required along the freeway property line, and that it incorporate some larger stature trees of a columnar form to mitigate the heat island effect as well as the visual impacts of the proposed building when viewed from and across the freeway. The Commission opted not to require the landscape buffer and associated modifications that would come from shifting the building to accommodate the buffer, but did require a revised landscape plan that would increase the landscaping to provide a buffer to the north and south of the building along this property line. o Stronger Sense of Entry: Staff recommended that the building design needed to better address the sense of entry and orientation standards by providing some further variations in color, material, base, entrance and/or fenestration to better engage the Clover Lane streetscape, particularly given the distance from the entrance to the right-of-way. During the hearing, the applicants provided a color rendering better illustrating treatment of the proposed building which satisfied the Planning Commission on this issue. o Logical & Orderly Boundary In addition to the annexation requested by the applicants, the Staff Advisor is recommending that nearby Interstate 5 freeway right-of-way from the current city limits boundary near Exit 14 south to the city limits boundary near Crowson Road be included in the annexation. AMC 18.106.040 dealing with city boundaries states that: When an annexation is initiated by a private individual, the Staff Advisor may include other parcels of property in the proposed annexation to make a boundary extension more logical and to avoid parcels of land which are not incorporated but are partially or wholly surrounded by the City of Ashland. The StaffAdvisor, in a report to the Commission and Council, shall justify the inclusion of any Page 4 of 6 ~r, CITY OF ASHLAND parcels other than the parcel for which the petition is filed. The purpose of this section is to permit the Planning Commission and Council to make annexations extending the City's boundaries more logical and orderly. (Ord 2792, 1997) The current freeway right-of-way is outside of the city limits but within the urban growth boundary, with the exception of the portion where Ashland Street crosses 1-5 at Exit 14 which is in the city limits. The present boundary configuration effectively cuts off the easternmost portion of the city from the remainder located west of the freeway, and the current freeway is largely surrounded by city lands. Staff believes that this section of the freeway right-of-way should be included within the current annexation request in order to make this annexation extending the City's boundaries "more logical and orderly" as allowed in AMC 18.106.040 (See attached Staff Exhibit S-2 on page 173 in the record). Subsequent to Hearing Agreement with neighbors: During the public hearing, neighbors on Oak Knoll Drive expressed some concerns about the impacts of the building to their neighborhood. The applicants have met with the neighbors subsequent to the meeting and reached an agreement which addresses the neighbors' concerns with revisions to the landscape and grading plans to provide some additional earthen berms and landscape buffers, and limits on lighting, noise, the placement of coolers and fenced storage areas, and the maintenance of the drainage system. Tax Lot #7100: There is a small triangular tax lot located between the southernmost of the three parcels (14AD #7000) and the freeway right-of-way. This tax lot is only approximately 400 square feet in size and is described as follows in the applicants' submittals: There is an odd remaining parcel, Tax Lot #7100, consisting of approximately 0.01 acres (400 square feet but according to the project's surveyor and preliminary discussions with the title company, this parcel is a remnant of the 1-5 installation. The applicant, if desired by the City, will request the subject lot's title to be cleared and the area incorporated into the proposed tax lot. All of the identified parcels will be consolidated into one parcel and developed as proposed... Subsequent to the Planning Commission's approval, the applicants' surveyor and city surveyor determined that this was a discreet parcel under separate ownership, and could not simply be absorbed into the applicants' parcels as suggested in the original submittal. It was determined that the owner's consent would be required before the property could be annexed. The applicants have indicated they are pursuing the purchase of the parcel, and after working with its owners have provided a copy of an agreement consenting to its annexation along with the applicants' parcels. Staff are recommending that the parcel be included in the annexation along with the adjacent freeway right-of-way to provide for a more logical and orderly boundary, and a revised annexation survey and description provided by the applicants include both the freeway right-of-way and tax lot #7100. Related City Policies: Comprehensive Plan Police VII-1 The City shall zone and designate within the Plan Map sufficient quantity of lands for commercial and industrial uses to provide for the employment needs of its residents and a portion of rural residents consistent with the population projection for the urban area. Page 5 of 6 ~r, CITY OF ASHLAND Council Options: Council can choose to approve the request, approve the request with conditions, or choose not to annex or withdraw the property from the jurisdiction of Jackson County Rural Fire Protection District 5. Potential Motions: • Move to approve the request for Annexation and withdrawal from Jackson County Rural Fire Protection District 5 of an approximately 3.72-acre parcel located at 590 Clover Lane (and th adjacent ODOT right-of-way and tax lot #7100 as recommended by stuf). P • Move to approve the request for Annexation and withdrawal from Jackson County~l ire Protection District 5 of an approximately 3.72-acre parcel located at 590 Clover Lane (and the adjacent ODOT right-of-way and tax lot #7100 as recommended by staff) with the following attached conditions. • Move to deny the request for Annexation and withdrawal from Jackson County Rural Fire Protection District 5 of an approximately 3.72-acre parcel located at 590 Clover Lane. Attachments: The record for Planning Action #2010-01570 Materials submitted subsequent to the Planning Commission's decision including the annexation survey and associated property descriptions, a Letter of Understanding outlining agreements reached between the applicants and a group of neighbors and revised plans incorporating changes proposed as part of that Letter of Understanding. (NOTE: The full record for Planning Action #2010-01570 is also available on-line at: httn://www.ashland.or.us/590c]over Page 6 of 6 CITY OF ASHLAND RECORD FOR PLANNING ACTION #2010-01570 TABLE OF CONTENTS PLANNING ACTION: #2010-01570 SUBJECT PROPERTIES: 590 Clover Lane APPLICANT: Caldera Brewing Company DESCRIPTION: A request for Annexation and Zoning Map change from Jackson County zoning RR-5 (Rural Residential) to City of Ashland zoning E-1 (Employment), and for withdrawal from Jackson County Rural Fire Protection District 5 for an approximately 3.72 acre parcel consisting of three tax lots located at 590 Clover Lane. The Council will also consider inclusion of Interstate 5 right-of-way and of Tax Lot 14AD 7100 in the annexation to make the extension of the City boundaries more logical and orderly. A Comprehensive Plan/Zoning Map Amendment to allow annexation of the three parcels, two of which are now designated Single Family, as Employment lands; Site Review approval to construct a new 28,000 square foot manufacturing, warehouse, storage, tasting room and administrative office building for the production of brewing products; Lot Consolidation; Tree Removal Permit to remove 17 trees; Modification of Planning Action #2003-112 to eliminate the previous vehicle trips per day per lot cap on Tax Lots #6800 and #6801 at 580-585 Clover Lane; and Administrative Variances to the Site Design and Use Standards to place parking and circulation between the building and the street and to the parking lot landscaping and screening requirements were approved by the Planning Commission in February of 2011. DATE ITEM l . PAGE 3/15/11 Notice of Public Hearing & Related Criteria, Affidavit of Mailing & Mailing List 1-6 2/09/11 Notice of Decision & Mailing List 7-11 2108/11 Findings, Conclusions and Orders 12-28 1/11/11 Planning Commission Minutes 29-31 1/11/11 Speaker Request Forms 32-35 1/11/11 Exhibits #1 - #7 submitted at Jan. 11 Public Hearing 36-42 1111/11 Planning Commission Packet Agenda 43-44 Public Hearing Notice, Related Criteria, Affidavit of Mailing, Mailing List, 45-51 Notice of Site Visit Vicinity Map 52 Staff Report 53-75 Aerial Photo 76 Letters from ODOT, Jackson County & Talent Irrigation District 77-80 Applicant's Submittal 81-174 11/29/10 Type III Planning Action Application 175-178 M , Planning Department, 51 Winbi,, , Way, Ashland, Oregon 97520 CITY OF 541-488-5305 Fax 541-552-2050 www.ashland.or.us TTY: 1-800-735-2900 ASHLAND PLANNING ACTION: 2010-01570 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 590 Clover Lane APPLICANT: Caldera Brewing Company DESCRIPTION: A request for Annexation and Zoning Map change from Jackson County zoning RR-5 (Rural Residential) to City of Ashland zoning E-1 (Employment), and for withdrawal from Jackson County Rural Fire Protection District 5 for an approximately 3.72 acre parcel consisting of three tax lots located at 590 Clover Lane. The Council will also consider inclusion of Interstate 5 right-of-way and of Tax Lot 14AD 7100 in the annexation to make the extension of the City boundaries more logical and orderly. A Comprehensive Plan/Zoning Map Amendment to allow annexation of the three parcels, two of which are now designated Single Family, as Employment lands; Site Review approval to construct a new 28,000 square foot manufacturing, warehouse, storage, tasting room and administrative office building for the production of brewing products; Lot Consolidation; Tree Removal Permit to remove 17 trees; Modification of Planning Action #2003-112 to eliminate the previous vehicle trips per day per lot cap on Tax Lots #6800 and #6801 at 580.585 Clover Lane; and Administrative Variances to the Site Design and Use Standards to place parking and circulation between the building and the street and to the parking lot landscaping and screening requirements were approved by the Planning Commission in February of 2011. CURRENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATIONS: Employment & Single Family Residential; PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Employment; CURRENT ZONING: RR-5 (County); PROPOSED ZONING: E-1 (City); ASSESSOR'S MAP 391E 14 AA & 14 AD; TAX LOTS: 14AA 6900 & 7000 and 14AD 7000 & 7100. ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING: March 15, 2011 at 7:00 PM, Ashland Civic Center • ~ i U .•~.-i r. -ar ~ 13 i~""`.U ) a '~'-t i J'+~~C`~v' )I - . 1 \ \ " PA 2010-01570 590 CLOVER LN. 4 a m SUBJECT PROPERTIES 0 8 Y ~ o ANA U mom' 1 \ s , v ' f d+' it z ~ b % , - % xa RYd Ll P _ y ~ ~ ~a 171 Notice is hereby given that a PUBLIC HEARING on the following request with respect to the ASHLAND LAND USE ORDINANCE will be hell before the ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL on the meeting date shown above. The meeting will be at the ASHLAND CIVIC CENTER, 1175 East Main Street, Ashland, Oregon. The ordinance criteria applicable to this application are attached to this notice. Oregon law states that failure to raise an objection concerning this application, either in person or by letter, or failure to provide sufficient specificity to afford the decision maker an opportunity to respond to the issue, precludes your right of appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) on that issue. Failure to specify which ordinance criterion the objection is based on also precludes your right of appeal to LUBA on that criterion. Failure of the applicant to raise constitutional or other issues relating to proposed conditions of approval with sufficient specificity to allow this Commission to respond to the Issue precludes an action for damages in circuit court. A copy of the application, all documents and evidence relied upon by the applicant and applicable criteria are available for inspection at no cost and will be provided at reasonable cost, if requested. A copy of the Staff Report will be available for inspection seven days prior to the hearing and will be provided at reasonable cost, If requested. All materials are available at the Ashland Planning Department, Community Development and Engineering Services, 51 Winburn Way, Ashland, Oregon 97520. During the Public Hearing, the Mayor shall allow testimony from the applicant and those in attendance conceming this request. The Mayor shall have the right to limit the length of testimony and require that comments be restricted to the applicable criteria. Unless there is a continuance, if a participant so requests before the conclusion of the hearing, the record shall remain open for at least seven days after the hearing. In compliance with the American with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Administrator's office at 541488-6002 (TTY phone number 1-800-735-2900). Notification 72 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting. (28 CFR 35.102.-35.104 ADA Title 1). If you have questions or comments concerning this request, please feel free to contact the Ashland Planning Division, 541-488-5305. 1 G:\comm-0Myluu,ingWofiw MU1c1,101 n2011-015]0 Gldcrt_Co~nal_M RY=.dm ANNEXATIONS-APPROVAL STANDARDS 18.106.030 Approval standards An annexation may be approved if the proposed request for annexation conforms, or can be made to conform through the imposition of conditions, with the following approval criteria: A. The land is within the Citys Urban Growth Boundary. B. The proposed zoning for the annexed area is in conformance with the designation indicated on the Comprehensive Plan Map, and the project, 'If proposed . concurrently with the annexation, is an allowed use within the proposed zoning. C. The land is currently contiguous with the present City limits. D. Adequate City facilities for the provision of water to the site as determined by the Public Works Department; the transport of sewage from the site to the waste water treatment plant as determined by the Public Works Department the provision of electricity to the site as determined by the Electric Department; urban storm drainage as determined by the Public Works Department can and will be provided to and through the subject property. Unless the City has declared a moratorium based upon a shortage of water, sewer, or electricity, it is recognized that adequate rapacity exists system-wide for these facilities. E. Adequate transportation can and will be provided to and through the subject property. For the purposes of this section 'adequate transportation' for annexations consists of vehicular, bicycle, pedestrian and transit transportation meeting the following standards: 1. For vehicular transportation a 20' wide paved access exists, or can and will be constructed, along the full frontage of the project site to the nearest fully improved collector or arterial street. All streets adjacent to the annexed area shall be improved, at a minimum, to a half-street standard with a minimum 20' driving surface. The City may, after assessing the impact of the development, require the full improvement of streets adjacent to the annexed area. All streets located within annexed areas shall be fully improved to city standards. Where future street dedications are indicated on the City's Street Dedication Map or required by the City, provisions shall be made for the dedication and improvement of these streets and included with the application for annexation. 2. For bicycle transportation safe and accessible bicycle facilities exist, or can and will be constructed. Should the annexation be adjacent to an arterial street, bike lanes shall be provided on or adjacent to the arterial street Likely bicycle destinations from the project site shall be determined and safe and accessible bicycle facilities serving those destinations shall be indicated. 3. For pedestrian transportation safe and accessible pedestrian facilities exist, or can and will be constructed. Full sidewalk improvements shall be provided on one side adjacent to the annexation for all streets adjacent to the proposed annexed area. Sidewalks shall be provided as required by ordinance on all streets within the annexed area. Where the project site is within a quarter of a mile of an existing sidewalk system, the sidewalks from the project site shall be constructed to extend and connect to the existing system. Likely pedestrian destinations from the project site shall be determined and the safe and accessible pedestrian facilities serving those destinations shall be indicated. 4. For transit transportation, should transit service be available to the site, or be likely to be extended to the site in the future based on information from the local public transit provider, provisions shall be made for the construction of adequate transit facilities, such as bus shelters and bus tum-out lanes. Al required transportation improvements shall be constructed and installed prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any new structures on the annexed property. F. For all residential annexations, a plan shall be provided demonstrating that the development of the entire property will ultimately occur at a minimum density of 90% of the base density for the zone, unless reductions in the total number of units is necessary to accommodate significant natural features, topography, access limitations, or similar physical constraints. The owner or owners of the property shall sign an agreement, to be recorded with the county deck after approval of the annexation, ensuring that future development will occur in accord with the minimum density indicated in the development plan. For purposes of computing maximum density, portions of the annexed area containing undevelopable areas such as wetlands, fioodplain corridor lands, or slopes greater than 35%, shall not be included. G. For all annexations with a density or potential density of four residential units or greater and involving residential zoned lands, or commercial, employment or industrial lands with a Residential Overlay (R-Overlay): 1. 35% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below 120°% of median income; or 2. 25% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below'l00% of median income; or 3. 20% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below 80% of median income; or 4. 15% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below 60% of median income; or 5. Titre to a sufficient amount of buildable land for development is transferred to a non-profit (IRC 501(3)(c)) affordable housing developer or comparable Development Corporation for the purpose of complying with subsection 2 above. The land shall be located within the project and all needed public facilities shall be extended to the area or areas proposed for transfer. Ownership of the land shall be transferred to the affordable housing developer or Development Corporation prior to commencement of the project The total number of affordable units described in this section G shall be determined by rounding down fractional answers to the nearest whole unit A deed restriction, or similar legal instrument, shall be used to guarantee compliance with affordable criteria for a period of not less than 60 years. Properties providing affordable units as part of the annexation process shall qualify for a maximum density bonus of 25 percent. H. One or more of the following standards are met 1. The proposed area for annexation is to be residentially zoned, and there is less than a five-year supply of vacant and redevelopable land in the proposed land use classification within the current city limits. "Redevelopable land" means land zoned for residential use on which development has already occurred but on which, due to present or expected market forces, there exists the likelihood that existing development will be converted to more intensive residential uses during the planning period. The five- year supply shall be determined from vacant and redevelopable land inventories and by the methodology for land need projections from the Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan; or 2. The proposed lot or lots will be zoned E-1 or G1 under the Comprehensive Plan, and that the applicant will obtain Site Review approval for an outright permitted use, or special permitted use concurrent with the annexation request; or 3. A current or probable public health hazard exists due to lack of full City sanitary sewer or water services; or 4. Existing development in the proposed annexation has inadequate water or sanitary sewer service; or the service will become inadequate within one year, or 5. The area proposed for annexation has existing City of Ashland water or sanitary sewer service extended, connected, and in use, and a signed "consent to annexation" agreement has been filed and accepted by the City of Ashland; or 6. The lot or lots proposed for annexation are an "island' completely surrounded by lands within the city limits. (ORD 2792,1997; ORD 2895, 2003) 2 Q: mm-0 plu neNm F 1d 11=11-015]0_C d=Couml_M BY2-Uda ZONING CHANGE - TYPE III PROCEDURE 18.108.060.A & B Approval Criteria A. The following planning actions shall be subject to the Type III Procedure: 1. Zone Changes or Amendments to the Zoning Map or other official maps, except for legislative amendments. 2. Comprehensive Plan Map Changes or changes to other official maps, except for legislative amendments. 3. Annexations. 4. Urban Growth Boundary Amendments B. Standards for Type III Planning Actions. 1. Zone changes, zoning map amendments and comprehensive plan map changes subject to the Type III procedure as described in subsection A of this section may be approved If in compliance with the comprehensive plan and the application demonstrates that a. The change implements a public need, other than the provision of affordable housing, supported by the Comprehensive Plan; or b. A substantial change in circumstances has occurred since the existing zoning or Plan designation was proposed, necessitating the need to adjust to the changed circumstances; or c. Circumstances relating to the general public welfare exist that require such an action; or d. Proposed increases in residential zoning density resulting from a change from one zoning district to another zoning district, will provide one of the following: 1. 35% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below 120% of median income; or 2. 25% of the base density to qualidying buyers or renters with incomes at or below 100% of median income; or 3. 20% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below 80% of median income; or 4. 15% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below 60% of median income; or 5. Title to a sufficient amount of buildable land for development is transferred to a non-profit (IRC 501(3)(c)) affordable housing developer or comparable Development Corporation for the purpose of complying with subsection 2 above. The land shall be located within the project and all needed public facilities shall be extended to the area or areas proposed for transfer. Ownership of the land shall be transferred to the affordable housing developer or Development Corporation prior to commencement of the project; or e. Increases in residential zoning density of four units or greater on commercial, employment or industrial zoned lands (i.e. Residential Overlay), will not negatively impact the City of Ashland's commercial and industrial land supply as required in the Comprehensive Plan, and will provide one of the following: 1. 35% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below 120% of median income; or 2. 25% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below 100% of median income; or 3. 20% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below 80% of median income; or 4. 15% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below 60% of median income; or 5. Tille to a sufficient amount of buildable land for development is transferred to a non-profit (IRC 501(3)(c)) affordable housing developer or comparable Development Corporation for the purpose of complying with subsection 2 above. The land shall be located within the project and all needed public facilities shall be extended to the area or areas proposed for dedication. Ownership of the land and/or air space shall be transferred to the affordable housing developer or Development Corporation prior to commencement of the project The total number of affordable units described in sections D or E shall be determined by rounding down fractional answers to the nearest whole unit A deed restriction, or similar legal instrument, shall be used to guarantee compliance with affordable criteria for a period of not less than 60 years. Sections D and E do not apply to council initiated actions. 3 G:~ plw r0e«,nwlwn11\201w1570 _cald=Cancfl~sxzv.aa AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF OREGON 1 County of Jackson 1 The undersigned being first duly sworn states that: 1. I am employed by the City of Ashland, 20 East Main Street; Ashland, Oregon 97520, in the Community Development Department. 2. On February 22, 2011 1 caused to be mailed, by regular mail, in a sealed envelope with postage fully prepaid, a copy of the attached planning action notice to each person listed on the attached mailing list at such addresses as set forth on this list under each person's name for Planning Action #2010-01570, 590 Clover Lane, Caldera Brewing Company. Signat of Employee Gft=m-de41ann1ngVoims & HandoutsWmdavIt of Malling_Planning Adion Nofmdw 4 Easy Peel® Labels i ♦ Send along line to Q AVERY® 5160® i Use Avery® Template 5160® Feed Paper expose Pop-up EdgeTO j 1 PA-2010-01570 391 E14AA 6300 PA-2010-01570 391 El4AD 4000 PA-2010-01570 391 E14AA 6002 ASHLAND LODGE NO 23 AFIAM BELL LYNDA L CHENOWETH RICHARD G TRUSTEE ET P 0 BOX 81 780 OAK KNOLL DR 671 SPRING CREEK DR ASHLAND OR 97520 ASHLAND OR 97520 ASHLAND OR 97520 PA-2010.01570 391 E14AD 5300 PA-2010-01570 391 E14AA 6700 PA-2010-01570 391 E14AD 5000 CHRISTIAN LIZA KENDALL CLOVER LANE LLC DAOUST JASON NEAL PO BOX 3481 1120 PROSPECT ST 815 OAK KNOLL DR ASHLAND OR 97520 ASHLAND OR 97520 ASHLAND OR 97520 PA-2010-01570 391 E14AD 4900 PA-2010-01570 391 E14AD 3600 PA-2010-01570 391 E14AD 4700 FARIA PATRICIA L GENISE LIVIA HOOD RICHARD DILINDA 2933 LINCOLN AVE 840 OAK KNOLL 785 OAK KNOLL DR ALAMEDA CA 94501 ASHLAND OR 97520 ASHLAND OR 97520 I PA-2010-01570 391 E14AA 6001 PA-2010-01570 391 E14AD 7100 PA-2010-01570 391 E14AD 7000 JONES JEREMIAH LEACH NERINE B MOORE CLAUDETTE 681 SPRING CREEK DR 32391 BEYMER RD 985 HIGHBURY DR ASHLAND OR 97520 EUGENE OR 97405 MEDFORD OR 97501 PA-2010-01570 391 E14AA 7000 PA-2010-01570 391 E14AA 2700 PA-2010-01570 391 E14AD 5200 MORJIG STEVEN H MUNRO CAROL CHRISTINA OGIER RICHARD AIMICHELLE L 610 CHESTNUT ST P 0 BOX 7862 835 OAK KNOLL DR ASHLAND OR 97520 BROOKINGS OR 97615 ASHLAND OR 97520 PA-2010.01570 391 E14AA 7000 PA-2010-01570 391 E14AA 6801 PA-2010-01570 391 E14AD 5100 OUTDOOR MEDIA DIMENSIONS INC PACIFIC WESTERNIMEDFORD LLC PATTERSON CLARENCE 0 - TRUSTEE 2626 WYATT DR 1175 MAIN ST 1F 6830 HWY 66 r MEDFORD OR 97501 MEDFORD OR 97504 ASHLAND OR 97520 PA-2010-01570 391E14AA 6800 PA-2010-01570 391El4AD 4800 PA-2010-01570 391E14AA 6101 REDBAND HOLDINGS LLC REINHOLZ HARVEY H TRUSTEE SCHOENFELD JILL RIKASZUBA DAVID W 585 CLOVER LN 1 1310 TALENT AVE A 680 SPRING CREEK DR ASHLAND OR 97520 TALENT OR 97540 ASHLAND OR 97520 PA-2010-01570 391E14AD 4500 PA-2010-01570 391E14AD 3900 PA-2010-01570 391E14AD 4600 SLAPNICKA ELDEN R TRUSTEE SWEET DENNIS EIBEVERLY T T & R VENTURES LLC 765 OAK KNOLL DR 1135 REITEN DR 994 MORTON ST ASHLAND OR 97520 ASHLAND OR 97520 ASHLAND OR 97520 PA-2010.01570 391E14AA 6100 PA-2010-01570 391E14AD 5400 PA-2010-01570 391El4AD 3700 TRIPOLI RICHARD TRUSTEE ET AL TURNER MARTHA I WALKER MATTHEW SICYNTHIA L 690 SPRING CR DR 8510AK KNOLL OR 826 OAK KNOLL DR ASHLAND OR 97520 ASHLAND OR 97520 ASHLAND OR 97520 PA-2010-01570 PA-2010-01570 PA-2010-01570 Urban Development Services Caldera Brewing Company Laurie Sager & Assoc 485 W Nevada St 540 Clover Ln 700 Mistletoe Rd #201 Ashland OR 97520 Ashland, OR 97520 Ashland, OR 97520 Etiquettes faciles A peler I A Repliez 8 la hachure atln de , www.avery.com I' nHn-.... L. ..~1...-:. n Veev® clcn® : Sens de rpliez 4In r ache nnn-n de 1 vvww.a LAVFRV u Easy Peel® Labels i ♦ send along line to 6 V AVERY® 51600 Use Avery® Template 61600 Feed Paper expose Pop-Up Edge*M PA-2010.01570 PA-2010-01570 PA-2010-01570 Construction Engineering Consultants Hoffbuhr & Associates Southern Oregon Traffic Engineers P.O. Box 1724 880 Golf View Or 112 Monterey Or Medford, OR 97501 Medford, OR 97504 Medford, OR 97504 PA-2010-01570 PA-2010-01570 PA-2010-01570 Steel Building Systems Inc Martin Lee ODOT - Ian Horlacher 4000 Kenney Rd 590 Allison St 100 Antelope Rd Jacksonville OR 97530 Ashland, OR 97520 White City, OR 97503 PA-2010-01570 37 Eric Niemeyer, Jackson County 590 Clover Ln 200 Antelope Rd 212212011 White City OR 97503 @tiquettes faciles a peler I A Replfez 6 la hachure afin de , www.averycom Sens de Iwlicn> In naharlt AVFRV® 51fiR® ! rAvAler le rehord Poo-lln*M ! 1-RRll-C,()-AVFRV ! I I CITY OF February 9, 2011 ASHLAND Caldera Brewing Company 540 Clover Lane Ashland OR 97520 RE: RE: Planning Action #2010-01570 Notice of Decision At its meeting of January 11, 2011, based on the record of the public meetings and hearings on this matter, the Ashland Planning Commission approved your request for a Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Amendments; Site Review Approval; Tree Removal; Administrative Variance and Modification of PA-2003-112 for the property located at 590 Clover Lane Assessor's Map # 39 IF 14AA & 14AD; Tax Lot 14AA 6900, 14AA 7000 and 14AD 7000. The Planning Commission also recommended approval of the requested Annexation to the Council. The Ashland Planning Commission approved and signed the Findings, Conclusions and Orders document, on February 8, 2011. Approval is valid for a period of 12 months. Please review the attached findings and conditions of approval. The conditions of approval shall be met prior to project completion. Copies of the Findings, Conclusions and Orders document, the application and all associated documents and evidence submitted, applicable criteria and standards are available for review at the Ashland Community Development Department, located at 51 Winburn Way. This decision may be appealed to the Ashland City Council if a Notice of Appeal is filed within 13 days of the date this notice was mailed and with the required fee ($310), in accordance with Chapter 18.108 110 (A of the Ashland Municipal Code. The appeal may not be made directly to the Land Use Board of Appeals. The appeal shall be limited to the criteria listed in Chapter 18.108.110 of the Ashland Municipal Code, which is also attached. If you have any questions regarding this decision, please contact the Community Development Department between the hours of 8:00 am and 4:30 pm, Monday through Friday at (541) 488-5305. l I f~ I DEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Tel: 54IA885305 20 E. Main Street Fax: 5415522050 j Astilvd. Oregon 97520 TTY: 800735-2900 www.ashland.or.us 7 Ii L SECTION 18.108.110 Appeal to Council. A. Appeals of Type II decisions - shall be initiated by a notice of appeal filed with the City Administrator. The standard Appeal Fee shall be required as part of the notice. All the appeal requirements of Section 18.108.110, including the appeal fee, must be fully met or the appeal will be considered by the city as jurisdictionally defective and will not be heard or considered. I . The appeal shall be filed prior to the effective date of the decision of the Commission. 2. The notice shall include the appellant's name, address, a reference to the decision sought to he reviewed, a statement as to how the appellant qualifies as a party, the date of the decision being appealed, and a clear and distinct identification of the specific grounds for which the decision should be reversed or modified, based on identified applicable criteria or procedural irregularity. 3. The notice of appeal, together with notice of the date, time and place to consider the appeal by the Council shall be mailed to the parties at least 20 days prior to the meeting. 4. A. Except upon the election to re-open the record as set forth in subparagraph 4.13. below, the review of a decision of the Planning Commission by the City Council shall be confined to the record of the proceeding before the Planning Commission. The record shall consist of the application and all materials submitted with it; documentary evidence, exhibits and materials submitted during the hearing or at other times when the record before the Planning Commission was open; recorded testimony; (including DVDs when available), the executed decision of the Planning Commission, including the findings and conclusions. In addition, for purposes of City Council review, the notice of appeal and the written arguments submitted by the parties to the appeal, and the oral arguments, if any, shall become part of the record of the appeal proceeding. B. The Council may reopen the record and consider new evidence on a limited basis, if such a request to reopen the record is made to the City Administrator together with the filing of the notice of appeal and the City Administrator determines prior to the City Council appeal hearing that the requesting party has demonstrated: a. That the Planning Commission committed a procedural error, through no fault of the requesting party, that prejudiced the requesting party's substantial rights and that reopening the record before the Council is the only means of correcting the error; or b. That a factual error occurred before the Planning Commission through no fault of the requesting party which is relevant to an approval criterion and material to the decision; or c. That new evidence material to the decision on appeal exists which was unavailable, through no fault of the requesting party, when the record of the proceeding was open, and during the period when the requesting party could have requested reconsideration. A requesting party may only qualify for this exception if he or she demonstrates that the new evidence is relevant to an approval criterion and material to the decision. This exception shall be strictly construed by the Council in order to ensure that only relevant evidence and testimony is submitted to the hearing body. DEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Tel: 541488-5305 20 E. Mai 20 E. Main Street Ueet Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 w .ashland.or.us 8 it i ' Re-opening the record for purposes of this section means the submission of additional written testimony and evidence, not oral testimony or presentation of evidence before the City Council. C. Oral argument on the appeal shall be permitted before the Council. Oral argument shall be limited to ten (10) minutes for the applicant, ten (10) for the appellant, if different, and three (3) minutes for any other Party who participated below. A party shall not be permitted oral argument if written arguments have not been timely submitted. Written arguments shall be submitted no less than ten (10) days prior to the Council consideration of the appeal. Written and oral arguments on the appeal shall be limited to those issues clearly and distinctly set forth in the Notice of Appeal; similarly, oral argument shall be confined to the substance of the written argument. D. Upon review, and except when limited reopening of the record is allowed, the City Council shall not re-examine issues of fact and shall limit its review to determining whether there is substantial evidence to support the findings of the Planning Commission, or to determining if errors in law were committed by the Commission. Review shall in any event be limited to those issues clearly and distinctly set forth in the notice of appeal. No issue may be raised on appeal to the Council that was not raised before the Planning Commission with sufficient specificity to enable the Commission and the parties to respond. E. The Council may affirm, reverse, modify or remand the decision and may approve or deny the request, or grant approval with conditions. The Council shall make findings and conclusions, and make a decision based on the record before it as justification for its action. The Council shall cause copies of a final order to be sent to all parties participating in the appeal. Upon recommendation of the Administrator, the Council may elect to summarily remand the matter to the Planning Commission. If the City Council elects to remand a decision to the Planning Commission, either summarily or otherwise, the Planning Commission decision shall be the final decision of the City, unless the Council calls the matter up pursuant to Section 18.108.070.13.5 . F. Appeals may only be filed by parties to the planning action. "Parties" shall be defined as the following: I. The applicant. 2. Persons who participated in the public hearing, either orally or in writing. Failure to participate in the public hearing, either orally or in writing, precludes the right of appeal to the Council. 3. Persons who were entitled to receive notice of the action but did not receive notice due to error. f i I DEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Tel: 5414885305 20 E. Matn Street Fax: 541-552-2050 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 w .ashland.or.us ' 9 I, Easy Pee1® Labels i ♦ send along line to i a ARY® 51600 i Use Avery®Template 51600 : Feed Paper expose Pop-up EdgeTM i ~ PA-2010-01570 391E14AA 6300 PA-2010-01570 391El4AD 4000 PA-2010-01570 391El4AA 6002 ASHLAND LODGE NO 23 AF/AM BELL LYNDA L CHENOWETH RICHARD G TRUSTEE ET P 0 BOX 81 780 OAK KNOLL DR 671 SPRING CREEK DR ASHLAND OR 97520 ASHLAND OR 97520 ASHLAND OR 97520 PA-2010-01570 391E14AD 5300 PA-2010-01570 391El4AA 6700 PA-2010-01570 391El4AD 5000 CHRISTIAN LIZA KENDALL CLOVER LANE LLC DAOUST JASON NEAL PO BOX 3481 1120 PROSPECT ST 815 OAK KNOLL DR ASHLAND OR 97520 ASHLAND OR 97520 ASHLAND OR 97520 PA-2010-01570 391E14AD 4900 PA-2010-01570 391El4AD 3600 PA-2010-01570 391E14AD 4700 FARIA PATRICIA L GENISE LIVIA HOOD RICHARD D/LINDA 2933 LINCOLN AVE 840 OAK KNOLL 785 OAK KNOLL DR ALAMEDA CA 94501 ASHLAND OR 97520 ASHLAND OR 97520 PA-2010-01570 391El4AA 6001 PA-2010-01570 391E14AD 7100 PA-2010-01570 391E14AD 7000 JONES JEREMIAH LEACH NERINE B MOORE CLAUDETTE 681 SPRING CREEK DR 32391 BEYMER RD 985 HIGHBURY DR ASHLAND OR 97520 EUGENE OR 97405 MEDFORD OR 97501 PA-2010-01570 391El4AA 7000 PA-2010-01570 391El4AA 2700 PA-2010-01570 391E14AD 5200 MORJIG STEVEN H MUNRO CAROL CHRISTINA OGIER RICHARD A/MICHELLE L 610 CHESTNUT ST P 0 BOX 7862 835 OAK KNOLL DR ASHLAND OR 97520 BROOKINGS OR 97615 ASHLAND OR 97520 PA-2010-01570 391E14AA 7000 PA-2010-01570 391El4AA 6801 PA-2010-01570 391E14AD 5100 OUTDOOR MEDIA DIMENSIONS INC PACIFIC WESTERN/MEDFORD LLC PATTERSON CLARENCE 0 - TRUSTEE 2626 WYATT DR 1175 MAIN ST IF 6830 HWY 66 MEDFORD OR 97501 MEDFORD OR 97504 ASHLAND OR 97520 PA-2010-01570 391 E14AA 6800 PA-2010-01570 391 E14AD 4800 PA-2010-01570 391 E14AA 6101 REDBAND HOLDINGS LLC REINHOLZ HARVEY H TRUSTEE SCHOENFELD JILL R/KASZUBA DAVID W 585 CLOVER LN 1 1310 TALENT AVE A 680 SPRING CREEK DR ASHLAND OR 97520 TALENT OR 97540 ASHLAND OR 97520 PA-2010-01570 391E14AD 4500 PA-2010-01570 391E14AD 3900 PA-2010-01570 391El4AD 4600 SLAPNICKA ELDEN R TRUSTEE SWEET DENNIS E/BEVERLY T T & R VENTURES LLC 765 OAK KNOLL DR 1135 REITEN DR 994 MORTON ST ASHLAND OR 97520 ASHLAND OR 97520 ASHLAND OR 97520 PA-2010.01570 391E14AA 6100 PA-2010-01570 391El4AD 5400 PA-2010-01570 391El4AD 3700 TRIPOLI RICHARD TRUSTEE ET AL TURNER MARTHA I WALKER MATTHEW S/CYNTHIA L 690 SPRING CR DR 851 OAK KNOLL DR 826 OAK KNOLL DR ASHLAND OR 97520 ASHLAND OR 97520 ASHLAND OR 97520 PA-2010-01570 PA-2010-01570 PA-2010-01570 Urban Development Services Caldera Brewing Company Laurie Sager & Assoc 485 W Nevada St 540 Clover Ln 700 Mistletoe Rd #201 Ashland OR 97520 Ashland, OR 97520 Ashland, OR 97520 10 ttiquettes faciles A peter I ♦ Repliez A la hachure afin de I www.avery.com Sens de „s„bye, :e roti.-f o..r~..wec : .-enn-r-n_evcov i v Easy Peel® Labels i A Bend along line to I Q AVERY® 5i6ow i Use Avery ® Template 57600 Feed Paper expose Pop-up Edge*^` 1 1 PA-2010-01570 PA-2010.01570 PA-2010-01570 Construction Engineering Consultants Hoffbuhr & Associates Southern Oregon Traffic Engineers P.O. Box 1724 880 Golf View Dr 112 Monterey Dr Medford, OR 97501 Medford, OR 97504 Medford, OR 97504 PA-2010.01570 PA-2010-01570 PA-2010-01570 Steel Building Systems Inc Martin Lee ODOT - Ian Hodacher 4000 Kenney Rd 590 Allison St 100 Antelope Rd Jacksonville OR 97530 Ashland, OR 97520 White City, OR 97503 PA-2010-01570 PA-2010-01570 Eric Niemeyer, Jackson County Reinholz, Andy 38 200 Antelope Rd 1490 E Main St 590 Clover Ln White City OR 97503 Ashland OR 97520 2-9-2011 AL I i I Etiquettes faciles d peler I A Repller a la hachure afln de I www.avery.com I Sens de s_ann-cn_evoav ! Y BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION February 8th, 2011 IN THE MATTER OF PLANNING ACTION #2010-01570, A REQUEST FOR ) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ZONING MAP AMENDMENTS; SITE ) REVIEW APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A NEW 28,000 SQUARE FOOT ) BUILDING TO HOUSE MANUFACTURING, WAREHOUSE, STORAGE, ) TASTING ROOM, AND ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE SPACES TO SUPPORT ) THE APPLICANT'S PRODUCTION OF BREWING PRODUCTS; A LOT ) FINDINGS, CONSOLIDATION; AND A TREE REMOVAL PERMIT TO REMOVE 17 ) CONCLUSIONS TREES FOR THE 3.72 ACRE PARCEL LOCATED AT 590 CLOVER LANE. ) AND ORDERS THE APPLICATION ALSO INVOLVES A MODIFICATION OF PLANNING ) ACTION #2003-112 TO ELIMINATE THE PREVIOUS VEHICLE TRIPS PER ) DAY PER LOT CAP ON TAX LOTS #6800 and #6801 AT 580-585 CLOVER ) LANE, AND ADMINISTRATIVE VARIANCE TO THE SITE DESIGN AND ) USE STANDARDS TO PLACE PARKING AND CIRCULATION BETWEEN ) THE BUILDING AND THE STREET AND TO THE PARKING LOT LAND- ) SCAPING AND SCREENING REQUIREMENTS. ) APPLICANTS: Caldera Brewing Company - RECITALS: 1) Tax lots #6900 and #7000 of Map 39 lE 14 AA, and Tax Lot #7000 of Map 39 lE 14AD are located at 590 Clover Lane, and are currently zoned Jackson County Rural Residential (RR-5). 2) The applicant is requesting Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Amendments; Site Review approval to construct a new 28,000 square foot building to house manufacturing, warehouse, storage, tasting room and administrative office spaces to support the applicant's production of brewing products; a Lot Consolidation; and a Tree Removal Permit to remove 17 trees for the 3.72 acre parcel located at 590 Clover Lane. The proposal involves the annexation of three lots totaling 3.72 acres in area which currently have a County zoning designation of RR-5. Two of these three lots have a current Comprehensive Plan designation of "Single Family Residential", while the third is already designated "Employment". With the proposal, all three of the lots are to be annexed as Employment lands to be zoned E-1 and consolidated into a single parcel. The application also involves a Modification of Planning Action #2003-112 to eliminate the previous vehicle trips per day per lot cap on Tax Lots #6800 and #6801 that are located at 580-585 Clover Lane, and Administrative Variances to the Site Design and Use Standards to allow the placement of parking and circulation between the building and the street and to eliminate the parking lot landscaping and screening requirements along the property line adjacent to the freeway right-of-way. The associated site improvements are outlined on the plans on file at the Department of Community Development. PA #2010-01570 February 8, 2011 Page 1 12 I I i 3) The criteria for Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Amendment approval are described in Chapter 18.108.060.13 as follows: A Standards for Type III Planning Actions. 1. Zone changes, zoning map amendments and comprehensive plan map changes subject to the Type III procedure as described in subsection A of this section may be approved if in compliance with the comprehensive plan and the application demonstrates that one or more of the following: a. The change implements a public need, other than the provision of affordable housing, supported by the Comprehensive Plan; or b. A substantial change in circumstances has occurred since the existing zoning or Plan designation was proposed, necessitating the need to adjust to the changed circumstances; or c. Circumstances relating to the general.public welfare exist that require such an action; or d. Proposed increases in residential zoning density resulting from a change from one zoning district to another zoning district, will provide 25% of the proposed base density as affordable housing consistent with the approval standards set forth in 18.106.030(G); or e.. Increases in residential zoning density of four units or greater on commercial, employment or industrial zoned lands (i.e. Residential Overlay), will not negatively impact the City of Ashland's commercial and industrial land supply as required in the Comprehensive Plan, and will provide 25% of the proposed base density as affordable housing consistent with the approval standards set forth in 18.106.030(G). The total number of affordable units described in sections D or E shall be determined by rounding down fractional answers to the nearest whole unit. A deed restriction, or similar legal instrument, shall be used to guarantee compliance with affordable criteria for a period of not less than 60 years. Sections D and E do not apply to council initiated actions. 4) The criteria for Site Review approval are described in Chapter 18.72.070 as follows: A. All applicable City ordinances have been met or will be met by the proposed development. . B. All requirements of the Site Review Chapter have been met or will be met. C. The development complies with the Site Design Standards adopted by the City Council for implementation of this Chapter. D. That adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, paved access to and through the development, electricity, urban storm drainage, and adequate transportation can and will be provided to and through the subject property. All improvements in the street right- PA #2010-01570 February 8, 2011 Page 2 13 I I~ i y of-way shall comply with the Street Standards in Chapter 18.88, Performance Standards Options. (Ord. 2655,1991; Ord 2836 S6, 1999) 5) The criteria for Administrative Variance to the Site Design and Use Standards are described in Chapter 18.72.090 as follows: A. There is a demonstrable difficulty culty in meeting the specific requirements of the Site Design Standards due to a unique or unusual aspect of the proposed use of a site; B. Approval of the variance will not substantially negatively impact adjacent properties; C. Approval of the variance is consistent with the stated purpose of the Site Design and Use Chapter; and D. The variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the difficulty. 6) The criteria for a Tree Removal Permit are described in 18.61.080 as follows: An applicant for a Tree Removal Permit shall demonstrate that the following criteria are satisfied. The Staff Advisor may require an arbortst's report to substantiate the criteria for a permit. A. Hazard Tree: The Staff Advisor shall issue a tree removal permit for a hazard tree if the applicant demonstrates that a tree is a hazard and warrants removal. 1. A hazard tree is a tree that is physically damaged to the degree that it is clear that it is likely to fall and injure persons or property. A hazard tree may also include a tree that is located within public rights of way and is causing damage to existing public or private facilities or services and such facilities or services cannot be relocated or the damage alleviated. The applicant must demonstrate that the condition or location of the tree presents a clear public safety hazard or a foreseeable danger of property damage to an existing structure and such hazard or danger cannot reasonably be alleviated by treatment or pruning. 2 The City may require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each hazard tree pursuant to AMC 18.61.084. Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit. B. Tree that is Not a Hazard: The City shall issue a tree removal permit for a tree that is not a hazard if the applicant demonstrates all of the following: 1. The tree is proposed for removal in order to permit the application to be consistent with other applicable Ashland Land Use Ordinance requirements and standards. (e.g. other applicable Site Design and Use Standards). The Staff Advisor may require the building footprint of the development to be staked to allow for accurate verification of the permit application; and 2. Removal, of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on erosion, soil PA #2010-01570 February 6, 2011 Page 3 14 stability, flow of surface waters, protection of adjacent trees, or existing windbreaks; and 3. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on the tree densities, sizes, canopies, and species diversity within 200 feet of the subject property. The City shall grant an exception to this criterion when alternatives to the tree removal have been considered and no reasonable alternative exists to allow the property to be used as permitted in the zone. Nothing in this section shall require that the residential density be reduced below the permitted density allowed by the zone. In making this determination, the City may consider alternative site plans or placement of structures or alternate landscaping designs that would lessen the impact on trees, so long as the alternatives continue to comply with other provisions of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance. 4. The City shall require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each tree granted approval pursuant to AMC 1& 61.084. Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit. 7) The Planning Commission, following.proper public notice, held a public hearing on January l lei, 2011 at which time testimony was received and exhibits were presented. The Planning Commission approved the application for Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Amendments, Site Review, Administrative Variances to the Site Design and Use Standards, and Tree Removal to remove seventeen trees from the properties located at 590 Clover Lane, and a Modification of PA #2003-112 to remove the vehicle trips per day per lot cap on the properties located at 580-585 Clover Lane, subject to conditions pertaining to the appropriate development of the site. In addition, the Planning Commission also forwarded a recommendation to the Ashland City Council in favor of the approval of the requested. Annexation and Zoning Map Change from Jackson County Rural Residential (RR-5) zoning to City of Ashland Employment (E-1) zoning for the subject properties at 590 Clover Lane and for an additional area of the Interstate 5 freeway right-of-way between Exit 14 and Crowson Road recommended by the Staff Advisor to make the extension of the City's boundaries more logical and orderly pursuant to AMC 18.106.040. Now, therefore, the Planning Commission of the City of Ashland finds, concludes and recommends as follows: SECTION 1. EXHIBITS For the purposes of reference to these Findings, the attached index of exhibits, data, and testimony will be used. Staff Exhibits lettered with an "S" Proponent's Exhibits, lettered with a "P" PA #2010-01570 February 8, 2011 Page 4 15 Y Opponent's Exhibits, lettered with an "O" Hearing Minutes, Notices, Miscellaneous Exhibits lettered with an "M" SECTION 2. CONCLUSORY FINDINGS 2.1 The Planning Commission finds that it has received all information necessary to make a decision based on the Staff Report, public hearing testimony and the exhibits received. 2.2 The Planning Commission fords that there has been a substantial change in circumstances since the existing Single Family Residential Comprehensive Plan Map designations were put into place that necessitates adjustment by amending the current Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map designations for the subject properties to an Employment designation. The Commission finds that the proximity to the freeway, the prior elimination of the street connection to the adjacent residential neighborhood off of Spring Creek Drive, and the topographic separation from that neighborhood and the subject properties renders them ill-suited to the current Single Family Residential designation. With the Planning Commission's previous decision in Planning Action #2000-091 to eliminate a street connection and vacate the street right-of-way between Clover Lane and Spring Creek Drive there is no remaining logical connection between the currently- residentially designated subject properties and the residential neighborhoods to the east. The Planning Commission further finds that this is evidenced by findings made in Planning Action #2000-091, where the decision was made not to require completion of a street connecting Clover Lane and Spring Creek Drive. These findings stated that, The significant change in elevation (i. e. 20 feet) between Clover Lane and Spring Creek Drive is an unusual situation that requires any through-street connection to be constructed at the City's maximum street grade of 15 percent, including large cut and fill banks on either side of the street. Additionally, the commercial uses generally attracted to freeway overlay areas can often be incompatible with residential areas and can generate certain types of vehicle trips (i.e. large truck and delivery trips) that could have a negative impact upon neighboring residential properties, as well as the intersection at Highway 66 and Oak Knoll. " While the Commission also recognizes that retaining the applicant's business, Caldera Brewing Company, in Ashland and accommodating its continued success is clearly in keeping with the needs of the community to encourage economic development and keep a local and diversified employment base offering living wage jobs, the Commission finds this to be a lesser basis for approval of the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Amendments given that the current' applicant could easily sell the building to a different business and the land use approval cannot impose a living wage requirement on future tenants. 2.3 The Planning Commission finds that the proposal for Site Review permit to construct a 28,000 square foot building and associated landscaping and parking, and Tree Removal permit to remove 17 trees meets all applicable criteria for Site Review approval as described in Chapter 18.72 and for Tree Removal described in Chapter 18.61. PA #2010-01570 February 8, 2011 Page 5 16 The Planning Commission finds that the proposal satisfies the approval requirements for Basic Site Review. All of the building square footage is proposed for brewing, a tasting room, manufacturing, warehousing, storage and administrative office spaces, which are permitted uses in the E-1 zone. The E-1 zoning district does not require standard setbacks from property lines unless a parcel abuts a residential zoning district. In this case, because the property abuts residentially zoned land to the east, a ten foot side yard setback along the east property line is required. The Commission finds that the building design satisfies this requirement. The maximum building height within the E-1 zoning district is 40 feet. Building height is defined as the "vertical distance from the grade'.... to the average height of the highest gable of a pitch or hip roof." In this instance, the roof form is pitched with a clearstory element incorporated along the ridgeline. This proposed clearstory element is 45 feet above grade at the peak of its ridge based on the drawings submitted. The Commission finds that while there is a distinction between the clearstory element and the remaining roof below, the clearstory itself functions as an energy saving component of the overall roof design by allowing for the most efficient use of natural light possible and is not an architecturally distinct, separate "highest gable". In considering the building height and proposed roof form, the Commission notes that were the roofline to extend from the existing lower eave to the existing ridge without incorporating a clearstory element, the building itself would be more massive with a higher roof deck yet would lack any energy savings gained from taking advantage of natural lighting by incorporating the clearstory and would meet the building height limitation based on the average height of the gable. As such, the Commission finds that the building's height is to be determined by taking an average from the peak of the clearstory element to the lowest eave of the roof, rather than considering the clearstory itself to be an architecturally distinct, separate "highest gable." On this basis, the Commission finds that the building height as proposed is 35 feet and complies with the 40 foot height limitation of the district. The. Commission finds that the proposal will result in 44.24 percent of the site being landscaped or remaining in its natural state, and that this percentage of landscaping significantly exceeds the 15 percent minimum landscaping requirement for the E-1 zoning district. The Commission finds that the building's design is typical of. manufacturing spaces with large volumes of functional interior space to accommodate operations, mobility and storage. The siding proposed is a 26-gauge.. metal, with metal roofing and trim, and the building is to be painted in earth tones with a sand-colored body and forest green trim. The proposed building incorporates architectural elements including a wrap-around awning at the tasting room entrance, various windows, and the clearstory cupola element to provide some aesthetic relief, as well as natural light, to the manufacturing building's form. A covered bicycle parking structure and a plaza space are to be provided at the front of the building near the tasting room entrance, and a trellis frame will incorporate hops vines to soften the building, provide shade, and recognize the business's agricultural basis. PA #2010-01570 February 8, 2011 Page 6 17 The Commission finds that the building and surrounding improvements will be somewhat recessed into the earth to lessen visual impacts from the side and rear. The Commission further finds that based on the cross-section drawings and photos of the site which have been provided, the topography and physical separation available due to the size of the subject properties will serve to minimize visual impacts to the residential neighbors. As noted by the applicants, their brewing operation already operates on Clover Lane in similar proximity to residential neighbors with no complaints. The Commission finds that Ashland's Site Design & Use Standards for orientation and scale require buildings to have their primary orientation to the street rather than to a parking area; that entrances be clearly visible, functional and open to the public during all business hours; that buildings be accessed from a public sidewalk; that buildings have an entrance within 20 feet of the right-of-way; and that parking and/or automobile circulation not be placed between the building's entrance and the right-of-way. These standards provide the building blocks for creating a human scale pedestrian streetscape that places people before cars as a primary design consideration. The Commission further finds that a majority of the parking proposed in this application will be in front of the front wall of the building, that the building's entrance is approximately 130 feet from the terminus of Clover Lane with 80-90 feet of asphalt driveway to be crossed by pedestrians coming to the building from the terminus of the Clover Lane sidewalk, and that these elements of the application require Administrative Variances to the Site Design and Use Standards. While the Commission finds that the color rendering (see Exhibit P-2011-07) provided during the January l1`s, 2011 hearing provides significantly more detail than the original application to address the sense of entry and orientation standards by illustrating variations in color and material, and the addition of a block or masonry band at the base of the building near the tasting room entrance, we believe the entrance and fenestration could be further modified to better engage the Clover Lane streetscape, particularly given the distance from the entrance to the right- of-way, and the placement of car and truck circulation routes between the entrance and the street. A recommendation that the applicant consider options such as a stronger base or enhancements to the entrance and fenestration to better respond to the standards and further enhance the sense of entry and orientation has been included below. The Commission finds that the current location of the terminus of Clover Lane is placed at the logical point of orientation for the building, and that the current street lay out did not anticipate development of these three parcels as a single business, but rather anticipated a development pattern similar to that found just to the north along Clover Lane, with the street extended south of its current terminus and buildings constructed to the sides, off the street, to more readily allow for the orientation to the street called for in the standards. The Commission finds that the current street placement combined with the configuration of the lot and nature of the business proposed would make it extremely difficult not to have vehicular circulation routes between the building and the street, and as such an Administrative Variance to this standard is justified. PA #2010-01570 February 8, 2011 Page 7 18 i parking facilities or driveways are located adjacent to residential zones, a sight-obscuring fence, wall, or evergreen hedge not less than five feet, or more than six feet high shall be provided on the property line as measured from the high grade side. Said wall, fence or hedge shall be reduced to 30 inches within required setback area, or within 10 feet of street property lines, and shall be maintained in good condition. Screen plantings shall be of such size and number to provide the required screening within 12 months after installation. And adequate provisions shall be made to protect walls, fences or plant materials from being damaged by vehicles using said parking areas. - The Planning Commission finds that the landscaping plan provided shows landscape materials clustered in the screening area, resulting in some gaps at the northeast comer where parking faces the Spring Creek neighborhood. To ensure adequate screening, a condition below to require a revised landscaping plan which demonstrates that the landscaping proposed will provide a five- to six-foot high sight-obscuring barrier to shield adjacent properties from headlights, etc. The Commission further finds that no landscape screening has been proposed adjacent to the driveway where it abuts the property line along the freeway, and that this lack of screening in an area of vehicular maneuvering abutting a property line requires an Administrative Variance to the Parking Lot Landscaping & Screening Standards. With the excavation necessary to address the site's topography and the amount of fill previously placed, a retaining wall is to be placed along the property line adjacent to the freeway right-of-way. The applicant has indicated that this wall will vary from four to I1 feet in height, and will limit their ability to provide the required landscape screening at the property line without shifting site disturbance into the more steeply sloped areas at the northeast corner. The applicants have noted, and the Oregon Department of Transportation has confirmed, that no landscaped materials greater than 30 inches in height can be placed within the right-of-way, which limits the ability to place requisite screen plantings on the freeway side of the property line. The applicants have noted that with removal of the row of nine cedars along the property line at the northwestern comer of the site, they will provide mitigation plantings which include a mixture of larger stature trees to replace the cedars being removed along the freeway and provide some additional screening in this area. The Commission recognizes the difficulty posed by the topography and fill on the site, and finds that allowing the retaining wall to be placed without the requisite screening plantings along the freeway property line is the minimum Variance to the standard necessary to accommodate these difficulties. The retaining wall is likely to provide a degree of screening by itself to minimize the impacts of such a variance, and a condition has been included to require that the landscaping adjacent to the freeway right-of-way to the north and south of the retaining wall area be enhanced to provide additional screening, including the row of mitigation trees at the northwest comer proposed by the applicant and additional screen plantings in the area at the southwest corner of the site where the paved area can be reduced to accommodate additional landscaping without impacting building placement or circulation. 2.6 The Planning Commission finds that a Lot Consolidation to combine the three subject lots into a single parcel, as proposed by the applicant, will be required by the Building Division prior to building permit approval as Building Codes do not allow the placement of structures PA #2010-01570 February 8, 2011 Page 9 19 over property lines. The Commission further finds that the Lot Consolidation process is an administrative procedure handled through Jackson County, and as such is not subject to approval by the city. As a proposal of the applicant and a requirement of the Building Division, evidence of completion of the proposed lot consolidation will be required prior to the issuance of a building permit to construct the proposed building. 2.7 The Planning Commission finds that a total of 30 trees which are six-inches in diameter- at-breast-height (d.b.h.) or greater have been identified on or near the subject property. Of these 30 trees, 17 trees have been proposed for removal. The trees to be removed include nine cedars of various sizes which the project arborist assesses as being in good condition, a six-inch plum with the arborist classifies as in poor condition, a 15-inch elm in moderate condition, and six oaks, four of which are identified as being dead. The application notes that these removals are due to the trees being in failing health or dead, or their locations relative to improvements proposed as part of developing the site. The application also indicates that while the nine cedars are not identified for removal in the arborist's plan, these trees are proposed for removal by the applicant as they have been aggressively topped in the past due to their location under power lines and thus provide little aesthetic benefit. The applicants propose to mitigate their removal with nine new larger stature trees of various types prior to occupancy of the proposed building, and a total of 27 new trees are proposed to be planted, more than mitigating the trees proposed for removal. The remaining 13 trees are proposed to be preserved and protected during construction, and have been incorporated into the landscape plan submitted. The application notes that the arborist has participated in discussion of the building footprints placement and has verified that the trees should be able to continue to thrive with the construction of the proposed building and associated site improvements. The Planning Commission finds that these tree removals are proposed in response to the condition of the trees and in order to permit the application to be consistent with applicable ordinance requirements and standards and will not adversely impact erosion, soil stability, flow of surface waters, protection of adjacent trees, existing windbreaks, tree density, canopy or species diversity in the vicinity. The Planning Commission further finds that the southernmost of the three lots contains a segment of Spring Creek, which is identified as an Intermittent or Ephemeral Stream and regulated under Ashland's Water Resources Protection Ordinance (Chapter 18.63). Streams of this sort have. an associated stream bank protection zone which extends 30 feet from the centerline of the stream. The proposed building is located well outside of the protection zone, and site disturbance associated with the project's landscape plan is shown as stopping approximately 100 feet from the stream. Three oak trees nearer the stream corridor which appear to have been damaged in last summer's Oak Knoll fire are proposed to be removed due to their poor health. The Commission finds that these trees are outside the stream bank water resources protection zone and that their removal does not trigger regulation under AMC 18.63. The Commission further finds that AMC 18.63.100.B requires that applications for Site Review include the Water Resource Protection Zone within a conservation easement or other recorded development restriction which makes clear that any uses or activities within the stream bank PA #2010-01570 February. 8, 2011 Page 10 20 water resources protection zone shall be consistent with the provisions of the Water Resources Ordinance. The Commission has accordingly added a condition of approval to require that the applicants provide evidence of a conservation easement or similar recorded development restriction to perpetually protect the portion of the stream bank corridor on the property according to the requirements of AMC 18.63 prior to submittal of building permit plans. 2.8 The Planning Commission finds that Planning Action #2003-112, which was approved by the City Council in October of 2003, annexed an approximately 1.32-acre parcel located at what was then the end of Clover Lane, immediately to the north of the subject properties being considered in the current application. That 2003 approval included a condition (#17) which required, "That a `Development Agreement' be prepared by the applicant and recorded on the properties limiting the uses to those which generate total vehicle trips of not more than 100 vehicle trips per parcel or a combined total of approximately 200 vehicle trips, as determined by the ITE Trip Generation Manual. The final agreement shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney prior to recordation of the partition plat, issuance of a building permit or final adoption of a resolution annexing the property. " The Commission finds that this condition was attached to the approval out of concern for the long-term operations of the intersection of Highway 66 and Clover Lane, despite the fact that the application at that time included a traffic study identifying an acceptable level of service for the intersection with the development of the parcels involved in that application. As a result the two properties at 580 and 585 Clover Lane, at the present end of Clover's street improvements and just north of the subject properties in the current application, have been limited by this "trip cap" to lower traffic generating uses such as light industrial and manufacturing uses. The Commission finds that the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) has commented on the current application, noting that the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Amendment components of the application trigger ODOT review under the Transportation Planning Rule. ODOT has noted that with the planned installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of the northbound freeway on-ramp may ultimately cause traffic to back up beyond the Clover Lane intersection with Highway 66/Ashland Street at times, and that lengthy traffic queues could make it difficult for vehicles turning left from Clover Lane onto Highway 66/Ashland Street to merge into westbound traffic. Their recommendation to address this issue over the long-term is that the City amend its Transportation System Plan and identify a planned median mitigation or similar measures to restrict left hand turning movements out of Clover Lane. The Commission finds that the Transportation System Plan update is already well underway, and that median mitigation or similar measures are being considered along with contextually-appropriate means to allow vehicles forced to turn right to return to their original direction of travel in a safe, timely and convenient manner. The Commission further finds that the applicant has agreed to sign in favor of a future Local Improvement District which would fund the installation of these improvements, and we have accordingly included a condition below requiring that a signed agreement to this effect be provided before the submittal of a building permit application. The Commission finds that based on the conclusions of the current applicant's Traffic Impact Analysis, the redesign work underway now on Exit 14, the Interchange Area Master Plan which PA #2010-01570 February 8, 2011 Page I I 21 the city and state are currently working to finalize, the Transportation System Plan update's addressing the left turning movements raised by ODOT, and the current applicant's agreement to participate in a future Local Improvement District, the previous concerns over the long-term operation of the Highway 66 and Clover Lane intersection no longer merit the vehicle trip limitations. The Commission therefore finds that no such limitation shall be imposed on the subject properties under the current application and that the previous "trip cap" limit imposed on the properties at 580 and 585 Clover Lane under Planning Action #2003-112 shall be removed as well. 2.9 The Planning Commission finds that the subject properties are located within the Urban Growth Boundary, immediately south of and contiguous to the existing City limits. The Comprehensive Plan designation for one of the three lots is Employment, with the remaining two lots designated for Single Family Residential development. The applicants are concurrently requesting Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning Map amendments in order allow the Annexation of all three properties into the city as Employment land. The Commission further finds that the proposed tasting room is an outright permitted use (restaurant/store), the brewing facility is a special permitted use (i.e. bottling plant), and the associated manufacturing, warehousing, storage and administrative office uses described in the application are also permitted uses within the E-1 district. The Commission further finds that the application includes a request for Site Review approval for the construction of a building to house these proposed permitted and special permitted uses'concurrently with the requested Annexation. The Commission finds that adequate public facilities can and will be provided to and through the subject property. The application notes that with the exception of storm drainage, all utilities are in place within the Clover Lane right-of-way and are adequately sized to accommodate the proposal. Public Works staff have. confirmed that eight-inch water and sewer mains are in place and adequate to serve the proposal, and the Electric Department has noted that an existing electrical transformer sits on the vacant lot immediately to the north and that the electrical facilities in place in the area were sized with full development of the subject parcels in mind. The application also indicates that fire hydrants will be located on both the front and back ends of the property, and that fire apparatus access and turn-arounds are to be provided to address fire protection needs. The Commission further finds that the City's Public Works Department has identified a deficiency in stormwater capacity at the intersection of Highway 66 and Clover Lane due to an under-sized culvert. The applicants are thus proposing an on-site detention and metering system to hold stormwater during large storm events and slowly release it into the city system at an acceptable rate. Instead of directing stonmwater to the undersized facilities at the Highway 66 intersection, the applicants propose to direct stormwater down to Spring Creek Drive, after first holding it on site in multiple systems including a bio-swale which will address both detention and water quality requirements. The applicants have also identified an underground storm water PA #2010-01570 February 8, 2011 Page 12 22 detention facility on the east side of the property to accommodate overflows and then slowly meter them to the Spring Creek Drive system. Conditions have been included below to require that final electric, utility and storm drain plans be provided for the review and approval of the Public Works, Electric, Planning and Building Departments prior to submittal of building permit plans. The Planning Commission finds that necessary transportation facilities addressing motor vehicle, bicycle, pedestrian and transit will be provided with the proposal. Clover Lane is a commercial collector street, and terminates in a cul-de-sac just north of the subject properties. Paving, curbs, gutters, and curbside sidewalks are in place on both sides of the street. Because the existing street already exceeds the 500-foot length allowed in city street standards for a dead-end street and the property is at the terminus of the city limits, with no anticipated future need to further extend the street, the applicants are proposing to extend a private driveway from the terminus of the existing public facility to serve the proposal without further extending city street improvements. The applicants propose to provide a scored concrete pedestrian path through the existing driveway and parking areas to provide a pedestrian connection from the existing sidewalk on the west side of Clover Lane to the building entrance. As noted above, the Commission also finds there to be a need for an additional similarly-surfaced pedestrian connection from the sidewalk on the east side of Clover Lane to the building's entrance, and for signage at the end of the public street's existing turn-around clearly indicating that there is no outlet for through traffic. The Commission further finds that with the improvements detailed in the applicant's traffic impact analysis in place, and the applicant's agreement to participate in future. median installation to limit left turns from Clover Lane onto Ashland Street, traffic impacts to the affected intersections are adequately mitigated over the planning horizon. The applicants have provided a traffic impact analysis, prepared by Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering, LLC which concludes that the proposed Employment designation and E-1 zoning can be accommodated through the existing transportation system without creating adverse impacts. This analysis looked at traffic impacts of the development on five study area intersections as scoped by the Oregon Department of Transportation: Tolman Creek Road and Ashland Street, Washington Street and Ashland Street, I-5 southbound ramps and Ashland Street, I-5 northbound ramps and Ashland Street, and Clover Lane and Ashland Street, focusing on the study year 2010, the build year 2011, and future year 2030 conditions during the peak p.m. hour. With the proposed Employment designation for all three of the subject lots, they are expected to generate approximately 557 average daily trips. The analysis notes that the presently stop-controlled I-5 northbound intersection with Ashland Street is shown to operate at a v/c ratio greater than 2.0 under future year 2030 no-build and build conditions, and 95a' percentile queue lengths are shown to exceed link distances and create potential safety concerns on Ashland Street between the I-5 ramp intersections and the off ramps themselves under existing year 2010, design year 2011 and future year 2030 conditions. Mitigation measures detailed in the analysis to address these impacts include the ODOT I-5 Exit 14 interchange redesign project which includes traffic i PA #2010-01570 i February 8, 2011 Page 13 I 23 signals at both ramp intersections, widening of Ashland Street, and extended right turn lanes on both I-5 off-ramps. This redesign project is currently underway, with completion tentatively slated for April of 2012. With these improvements in place, the traffic impact analysis concludes that adverse impacts are adequately mitigated for the study period. The Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) has also raised concerns with left turning movements from Clover Lane onto Ashland Street being negatively impacted by queuing likely to result from the signal installation associated with the interchange redesign that is currently underway. ODOT has recommended that the City consider placing a median or other similar measure to restrict left turning movements as part of the current Transportation System Plan (TSP) update which is now underway. The Commission finds that this TSP update is underway and will consider this issue along with ways to accommodate vehicles safely and efficiently returning to their original direction of travel, and a condition has been attached to this approval to require that the applicant sign in favor of, and agree to a proportional participation in the cost of, the future improvements associated with restricting left turn movements from Clover Lane onto Ashland Street. The Planning Commission further finds that in addition to the annexation requested by the applicants, the Staff Advisor is recommending that nearby Interstate 5 freeway right-of-way from the current city limits boundary near Exit 14 south to the city limits boundary near Crowson Road be included in the annexation. AMC 18.106.040 dealing with city boundaries states that, "When an annexation is initiated by a private individual, the Staff Advisor may include other parcels ofproperty in the proposed annexation to make a boundary extension more logical and to avoid parcels of land which are not incorporated but are partially or wholly surrounded by the City of Ashland. The Staff Advisor, in a report to the Commission and Council, shall justify the inclusion of any parcels other than the parcel for which the petition is filed. The purpose of this section is to permit the Planning Commission and Council to make annexations extending the City's boundaries more logical and orderly. " The Commission finds that the current freeway right-of-way is outside of the city limits but within the urban growth boundary, with the exception of the area where it intersects with the Ashland Street/Highway 66 right-of-way at Exit 14. The Commission further finds that the present boundary configuration effectively cuts off the easternmost portion of the city from the remainder located west of the freeway, and the current freeway is largely surrounded by city lands. The Commission concurs with the Staff Advisor that this section of the freeway right-of-way should be included with the current annexation request in order to make this annexation extending the City's boundaries "more logical and orderly" as allowed in AMC 18.106.040, and we accordingly recommend its inclusion to the City Council. SECTION 3. DECISION 3.1 Based on the record of the Public Hearing on this matter, the Planning Commission concludes that the proposal for a Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Amendment, Site Review approval to construct a new 28,000 square foot building, Lot Consolidation; Tree Removal Permit, Modification of Planning Action #2003-112, and Administrative Variances to the Site Design and Use Standards is supported by evidence contained within the whole record. PA il2010-01570 February 8, 2011 Page 14 24 Therefore, based on our overall conclusions, and upon the proposal being subject to each of the following conditions, we approve Planning Action #2010-01570. Further, if any one or more of the conditions below are found to be invalid, for any reason whatsoever, then Planning Action #2010-01570 is denied. The following are the conditions and they are attached to the approval: 1) That all proposals of the applicant shall be conditions of approval unless otherwise modified herein. 2) That the plans submitted for the building permit shall.be in substantial conformance with those approved as part of this application. If the plans submitted for the building permit are not in substantial conformance with those approved as part of this application, an application to modify this Site Review approval shall be submitted and approved prior to issuance of a building permit. 3) That the existing billboard sign shall be removed from the property, as proposed by the applicants, and a sign permit shall be obtained prior to installation of any new signage. All signage shall meet the requirements of Chapter 18.96, and signage installation shall be limited to the north and east frontages which have public entrances accessible from the sidewalk. 4) That the applicants shall obtain a demolition permit prior to demolishing the existing structures on site. With the demolition of existing structures on the site, any existing city or Pacific Power and Light electrical facilities serving these structures will need to be removed by the applicants, and their removal inspected and approval by the Building and Electrical Departments. 5) That prior to the submittal of a building permit: a)' Building permit submittals shall include identification of all easements, including public and private utility easements, fire apparatus access easements, and a conservation easement or other similar recorded development restriction to perpetually protect the portion of the Spring Creek stream bank water resources protection zone on the property according to the requirements of AMC 18.63. b) A stormwater drainage plan, including final details of on-site detention for storm water and necessary water quality mitigation, shall be submitted for the review and approval of the Planning, Building, and Engineering Divisions. Post development peak flows shall be demonstrated to be less than or equal to pre-development levels. c) A final utility plan for the project shall be submitted for the review and approval by the Planning, Engineering and Building Divisions prior to issuance of a building permit. The utility plan shall include the location of connections to all public facilities in and adjacent to the development, including the locations of water lines and meter sizes, sewer mains and services, manholes and clean-outs, storm drainage pipes and catch basins. Utility installations, including any necessary fire protection vault, shall be placed outside of the pedestrian corridor, and necessary public utility easements on the property shall be shown on the building permit submittals. d) The applicant shall submit an electric distribution plan including load calculations and locations of all primary and secondary services including transformers, cabinets and all other necessary equipment. With annexation, the property will no longer be served by Pacific Power and Light; service will be provided by the city's municipal electric utility and the necessary removal of Pacific Power services and installation of city services to PA #2010-01570 February 8, 2011 Page 15 25 I~ u make this transition will need to be installed at the applicant's expense. The electric distribution plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning, Engineering, Building and Electric Departments prior to building permit submittal. Transformers and cabinets shall be located outside of the pedestrian corridor, in those areas least visible from the street while considering the access needs of the Electric Department. e) The building permit plan submittals shall include solar setback calculations demonstrating that all new construction complies with Solar Setback Standard B in the formula [(Height - 16)/(0.445 + Slope) = Required Solar Setback] and elevations or cross section drawings clearly identifying the highest shadow producing point(s) and the height(s) from natural grade. f) The building permit plan submittals shall include lot coverage calculations including. all building footprints, driveways, parking, and circulation areas. These plans shall demonstrate that at least 15 percent of the site is surfaced in landscaping, and that at least seven percent of the parking lot area is provided in required parking lot landscaping, as required in the Site Design & Use Standards. g) The building permit plan submittals shall include and sample exterior building colors and materials for review and approval of the Staff Advisor. The exterior building materials and paint colors shall be compatible with the surrounding area and consistent with those described in the application materials. h) The Commission recommends that the applicants attempt to better respond to the sense of entry and orientation standards, which could include providing further variations in color, material, base, entrance, and/or fenestration to better engage the Clover Lane streetscape and create a stronger sense of entry for the building. i) A revised Site Plan shall be provided. This Site Plan shall include: 1) a pedestrian connection from the sidewalk on the east side of Clover Lane to the building's entrance along the east side of the drive to accommodate pedestrian traffic from the Spring Creek neighborhood. Both pedestrian connections shall be delineated from the surrounding driveway through the use of scored concrete or similar material distinction; 2) a reduction in paved surface area to the greatest extent possible, including a reduction of the driveway width to no more than the 26 feet necessary to accommodate aerial fire truck access, and the reduction of other paved areas where possible. 6) That prior to the issuance of a building permit: a) The applicant shall provide a revised Tree Preservation and Protection Plan consistent with the requirements of AMC 18.61.200 and prepared by a certified arborist which reflects the removal of the nine cedars on the northwestern edge of the property. The plan shall also incorporate silt fencing or similar approved means to protect the stream bank water resources protection zone during construction. b) That a Verification Permit in accordance with 18.61.042.B shall be applied for and approved by the Ashland Planning Division prior to removal of the 17 trees to be removed from the site, and prior to any site work including demolition, storage of materials and/or issuance of a building permit. The Verification Permit is to inspect the identifications of trees to be removed and the installation of tree protection fencing to PA #2010-01570 February 8, 2011 Page 16 i 26 i i protect the trees to be retained. The tree protection fencing shall be installed according to the approved Tree Protection and Removal Plan, inspected and approved by the Staff Advisor prior to site work, storage of materials and/or issuance of a building permit. c) The applicant shall provide a revised Landscape/Irrigation Plan which addressed the Water Conserving Landscaping Guidelines and Policies of the Site Design and Use Standards, including irrigation controller requirements to allow multiple/flexible calendar programming. The .revised landscape plan shall specifically identify mitigation trees, including the mixture of larger stature trees to replace the cedars being removed along the freeway on the northwestern portion of the site, and shall include revisions to the landscape buffer to provide the required sight-obscuring screen where the parking lot abuts residential areas to the east. Landscaping adjacent to the freeway right-of-way to the north and south of the retaining wall area shall be enhanced to provide additional screening, including in the area at the southwest corner of paving where the buffer landscaping will reduce paved area without impacting building placement or circulation. d) All exterior lighting shall be appropriately shrouded so as not to permit direct illumination of any adjacent properties. Lighting details, including a scaled plan and specifications detailing shrouding, shall be submitted to the Staff Advisor for review and approval with the building permit submittals. e) At the time of building plan submittal, bike rack and shelter details shall be submitted for review and approval by the Staff Advisor. The building permit submittals shall verify that the bicycle parking design, spacing, and coverage requirements are met in accordance with 18.92.040.1. f) Mechanical equipment shall be screened from view from adjacent rights of way and residential properties to the greatest degree possible. The locations of mechanical equipment and any associated screening shall be shown on the site plan and elevations in the building permit submittals. g) The requirements of the Building Division shall be satisfactorily addressed, including but not limited to: 1) egress, exiting, separation wall, and bathroom requirements for the tasting room area based on occupant type and occupant load determination at building permit; 2) providing necessary engineering studies to demonstrate that the fill on site is suitable for construction; 3) that the plans are to be drawn by an Oregon Licensed Design Professional; 4) that evidence of completed lot consolidation be provided; and 5) that code requirements for the use of an existing well to provide irrigation for the proposed landscaping shall be met, including but not limited to the installation of R.P. assemblies. h) The requirements of the Ashland Fire Department relating to: approved addressing; fire apparatus approach, access and tum-around; fire flow; fire department connection, fire sprinkler, fire hydrant and key box installation; hydrant clearance; high-piled storage requirements; and that any gates, fences, or other impediments to required fire apparatus access width approved by Ashland Fire and Rescue shall be addressed in the permit submittals and implemented on site prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit. Final determinations of fire hydrant distance, fire flow, and fire apparatus access requirements are to be based upon plans submitted for building permit review. i) That the property owner shall sign in favor of a local improvement district (LID) for the PA #2010-01570 February 8, 2011 Page 17 27 L' future street improvements at the intersection of Clover Lane and Ashland Street, including the installation of a median or similar measures to restrict left hand turning movements from Clover Lane onto Ashland Street prior to the issuance of a building permit. The agreement shall be signed, notarized, and recorded on the deed of the subject property, and a recorded copy provided to the city prior to permit issuance. 7) That prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy: a) That the screening for the trash and recycling enclosure shall be installed in accordance with the Site Design and Use Standards. An opportunity to recycle site of equal or greater size than the solid waste receptacle shall be included in the trash enclosure in accordance with 18.72.115.A. b) All required parking areas shall be paved and striped according to the approved plan. c) All landscaping, hardscaping and the irrigation systems shall be installed in accordance with the approved plan, inspected and approved by the Staff Advisor prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. d) That required bicycle parking spaces with a minimum of 50 percent sheltered from the weather shall be installed according to the approved plan and in accordance with design and rack standards in 18.92.040.1 and J, inspected, and approved by the Staff Advisor prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Inverted u-racks shall be used for the bicycle parking. e) The applicants shall provide a sign at the end of the existing turn-around clearly indicating that the driveway beyond is private with no outlet for through traffic. The final sign design and placement shall be approved by the Public Works and Street Departments. L ~ February 8a'. 2011 Planning Commission Approval Date PA #2010-01570 February 8, 2011 Page 18 28 i i I transportation plan which includes but is not limited to a staff ride share coordinator as proposed by the applicants, free bus passes made available to employees who request them, provisions for significant secure bicycle parking, which a portion of this parking to be provided in a location suitable for employee use, and showers and lockers to serve bicycle commuting employees. " Ex Parte Contact: No ex parte contract was reported by the commissioners. Commissioners Miller/Blake mis to approve the Findings for PA-2010.01239, 85 Winburn Way as amended by staff. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed 5.0. (Commissioner Rinaldi abstained) TYPE II PUBLIC HEARINGS A. PLANNING ACTION: #2010.01570 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 590 Clover Lane APPLICANT: Caldera Brewing Company DESCRIPTION: A request for Annexation; Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment/Zone Change; Site Review approval to construct a new 28,000 square foot manufacturing, warehouse, storage, tasting room and administrative office building for the production of brewing products; Lot Consolidation; and Tree Removal Permit to remove 17 trees for the 3.72 acre parcel located at 590 Clover Lane. The proposal Involves an annexation of three parcels totaling 3.72 acres in area which currently have a County zoning designation of RR-5. Two of the three parcels have a current Comprehensive Plan designation as Single Family Residential, while the third is already designated as Employment. With the proposal all three parcels will be annexed as Employment lands to be zoned E-1 and consolidated Into one parcel. The application also involves a Modification of Planning Action #2003.112 to eliminate the previous vehicle trips per day per lot cap on Tax Lots #6800 and #6601 at 580.585 Clover Lane, and Administrative Variance to the Site Design and Use Standards to place parking and circulation between the building and the street and to the parking lot landscaping and screening requirements. {The Planning Commission will also consider inclusion of Interstate 5 right- of-way in the annexation to make the extension of the City boundaries more logical and orderly.) CURRENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATIONS: Employment & Single Family Residential; PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Employment; CURRENT ZONING: RR-5 (County); PROPOSED ZONING: E-1 (City); ASSESSOR'S MAP 391 E 14 AA & 14 AD; TAX LOTS:14AA 6900,14AA 7000 and 14AD 7000. Commissioner Marsh read aloud the public hearing procedures for land use hearings. Ex Parte Contact: Commissioners Mindlin, Rinaldi, Dawkins, Blake, Miller and Marsh conducted site visits. No ex parte contact was reported. Staff Report Associate Planner Derek Severson presented the staff report and explained this application involves an annexation, Comprehensive Plan Map and Zone change, and Tree Removal permit. He noted the location of the site and reviewed the current zoning designations. Mr. Severson explained two of the three parcels are zoned residential in the Comprehensive Plan, and the third parcel is zoned E-1. He stated the proposal is to annex all three parcels as E-1, consolidate them into one parcel, and develop a brewery building on the property. Additionally, staff has recommended a portion of the COOT right of way along 1-5 be annexed to make the extension of the City's boundaries more logical (pursuant to AMC 18.106.040). Mr. Severson reviewed the existing site conditions and clarified the structures and trees proposed for removal. He also provided some background on the nearby pedestrian connection to the Spring Creek neighborhood. Mr. Severson stated the applicant proposes to build a 28,000 sq. ft. structure that will include a tasting room with 40 seats as well as brewery functions for Caldera Brewery Company; and reviewed the applicant's landscape plan, building elevations, and floor plan with the Commission. Mr. Severson stated staff has identified the following four issues they feel need to be addressed in the conditions for approval: l) a stronger sense of entry, 2) the amount and extent of paving, 3) placement of parking and circulation between the building and street, and the resulting challenges to pedestrian access, and 4) buffering of the property line to mitigate paving and visual impacts of the building mass. Mr. Severson commented on the Traffic Impact Analysis provided by the applicant and also noted ODOT's concerns about left hand turns at the Ashland/Clover intersection. He noted this area Is currently being looked at as part of the City's Transportation System Plan (TSP) Update, and clarified ODOT Is supportive of this issue being dealt with by the TSP. To this regard, staff recommends the Commission consider adding a LID participation agreement as a condition of approval. Ashland Planning Commission ' January 11, 2011 Page 2 of 7 29 i Mr. Severson concluded his presentation and stated staff is recommending approval of the application with the conditions as noted. Applicants Presentation Mark Knox/ Applicant's Representative/Introduced Transportation Engineer Kim Parducci, Landscape Architect Laurie Sager, Civil Engineer Mark Kamarath, and Caldera owner Jim Mills. Mr. Knox stated they have been working on this project for over a year and clarified Mr. Mills' already operates a brewery on Clover Lane that is actually closer to the neighborhood than the proposed site. He stated Mr. Mills has never received any complaints about his operations and noted they held a neighborhood meeting and received favorable comments about this project. Mr. Knox stated they have gone through a number of design scenarios to minimize the impacts to the neighbors but still provide a functioning manufacturing facility. He commented on the site constraints, including the levelness of the site and grading issues, and stated they tried to minimize the impacts of the retaining walls and the mass on'top of the embankment. He noted the grade change between this site and 1-5 is approximately 20 ft, and because of this the asphalt along the east side of the property will not be visible from the freeway. Mr. Knox commented on conditions 5(h) and 5(i) proposed by staff. He displayed a colored drawing of what the building will look like from Clover Lane and commented on the architectural elements. He stated they believe they have met condition 5(h) and asked that it be removed. Mr. Knox shared their concerns with condition 5(i), which talks to a pedestrian connection to the front entrance and a reduction in the paved surface area. He clarified they are proposing a striped crosswalk and believes this is appropriate given the level of pedestrian traffic this proposal will generate. In terms of the second part of 5(i), Mr. Knox stated they have done their best to minimize the amount of asphalt, but noted this is a manufacturing facility that has product coming and going on large trucks. He stated because of the site constraints and the need to accommodate delivery trucks and emergency vehicles, it would be very difficult to reduce the paving any further. Mr. Knox concluded his presentation and restated his request for conditions 5(h) and 5(i) to be removed. Transportation Engineer Kim Parducci was asked to comment on the issue of left hand turns off of Clover Lane, Ms. Parducci explained Clover Lane is not an ideal intersection, but it does have the benefit of a center turn lane which allows vehicles to turn left onto Ashland St. in two stages (once into the center lane, and again into the through lane). She stated the concern is with ODOT's future plans to insert a traffic signal at the 1-5 off ramp, which could create stacking issues and possibly block the Clover intersection. The applicant expressed no concern to a potential LID participation condition. Public Testimony Steve Morjig/610 ChestnutlStated he is a long-time Ashland resident and voiced his support for encouraging local businesses. He voiced his support for annexing this property and noted it is surrounded by City property. Mr. Modig stated the proposed landscaping and pavement will suppress the potential for wildfire and noted the tragic fire that occurred behind this property last ' summer. He commented on porous asphalt and recommended they encourage, but not require this. Andy Reinholz11490 East Main St/Stated he is speaking on behalf of his father and shared his concerns regarding the proposal. Mr. Reinholz stated a trucking facility is not a desirable business to have this close to a residential neighborhood and questioned how this would negatively impact their property values. He questioned whether Spring Creek would be able to handle the water load and questioned what would happen if it can't release it fast enough. Mr. Reinholz stated he has a family member who works for a brewery and stated these businesses tend to increase the rodent and feral cat population. He noted the undesirable smell that can omit from the breweries, and stated the tasting room hours of operation is another concern. Linda Hood/785 Oak Knoll/Expressed concern with how this project will Impact her living situation. Ms. Hood stated her house is across the ravine from the proposed loading deck and voiced concern with the number of trucks visiting the site and the back-up noises they will make. She commented that her home's sense of privacy will be taken away and invited the commissioners to her home to see what she is speaking about. Ms. Hood also expressed concern with the amount of water runoff this development will generate and questioned whether increased traffic will impact the Clover Lane intersection. Richard Tripoli/690 Spring Creek/Stated his property is adjacent to the proposed building site and stated the proposed building would be far better than the high grass that is there now. He stated he regularly walks his dog down Clover Lane and has never smelled anything coming from the brewery. He noted he attended the neighborhood meeting held by the applicants and thanked Ashland Planning Commission January 11, 2011 Page 3 of 7 30 them for their desire to make this building as un-offensive to the neighborhood as possible. Mr. Tripoli commented on the placement of the building and voiced support for keeping it as close as possible to the freeway. Margueritte Hickman with the Ashland Fire Department was asked to come forward and address the issue of clearance between the building and the freeway. Ms. Hickman clarified the Oregon Building Code requires a 26 ft, wide driveway in order to accommodate an aerial apparatus emergency vehicle and stated if the proposed driveway width was narrowed it would not meet this standard. Commissioner Marsh noted the submittal by the Talent Irrigation District and clarified this will be added to the record. Rebuttal by the Applicant Mark Knox/Noted the city policies regarding jobs and supporting local businesses and commented on some of the concerns raised during public testimony. Mr. Knox clarified how the bioswale and storm drain system will work and stated the only water being collected on site and fed to Spring Creek is rain runoff; Water from the brewery will go straight into the City's wastewater system. In terms of truck noise, Mr. Knox stated not only is there a distance of 80-90 feet, but the berm and thick tree canopy also provides a buffer to any potential noise. Mr. Mills added the majority of the truck traffic will occur between 10 am and 3 pm, and stated none of the trucks have beepers on the back of them. In regards to smell, it was noted that this business has never received a complaint and has neighbors closer to its current operations than the proposed site. Commissioner Marsh dosed the public hearing at 9:00 p.m. Deliberations & Decision Commissioner Dawkins motioned to approve PA-2010-01570 with the removal of conditions 5(h) and 5(i). Motion failed due to lack of a second. Commissioners RinaldilBlake m/s to approve PA-2010.01570 with the conditions of staff, but change Conditions 5(h) and 5(i) to be recommended rather than required. DISCUSSION: Rinaldi commented on the 5 ft. landscaping strip that is required along the freeway side and suggested they increase the landscaping to the north and south and keep the 26 ft. fire lane clear. Dawkins agreed that you will not be able to see the landscaping along the freeway side, and in terms of the sense of entry he feels this has been met. Mindlin stated if they are going to relax the language in 5(h) perhaps they should just remove it, and in'terms of the pedestrian connection she recommended this be scored concrete instead of striped paint. She commented on the buffer along the freeway and stated she would not push too hard for this and would be satisfied if they included some larger stature trees in the southwest comer. Rinaldi amended the motion to include a LID participation requirement; Blake seconded. In terms of the annexation request, several commissioners voiced their support for annexing this area into the City and making it E-1. Rinaldi was asked to re-state his motion before the vote. Rinaldi clarified his motion Is to approve with the following changes to the conditions: l) Change 5(h) to indicate this is preferred rather than required, 2) Require a scored concrete treatment to the pedestrian crossings in 5(i), 3) Remove the permeable paving requirement from 5(1), 4) Add a condition that the 5 ft. landscaping strip be transferred to the north and south of the building to provide additional screening, and 5) Require the applicants to sign a LID Participation Agreement. Mindlin offered a friendly amendment to 5(i) to clarify "both" pedestrian connections shall be delineated through the use of scored concrete. Rinaldi and Blake agreed to this change. Roll Call Vote on motion as amended: Commissioners Mindlin, Dawkins, Rinaldi, Blake, Miller and Marsh, YES. Motion passed 6.0. i B. PLANNING ACTION: #2010.01622 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 163 Hitt Road APPLICANTS: R. Scott Dixon and Joan Cresse DESCRIPTION: A request for a Modification of the Performance Standards Options Subdivision Final Plan Approval (PA #2003.020) for the Strawberry Meadows Subdivision. The proposed modifications Include relocation of the driveway entrance, changes to the approved building envelope, and the allocation of a portion of the lot coverage from the subdivision's approved "Open Space 'A... to allow Increased lot coverage for Lot #6, located at 163 Hitt Road. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Rural Residential within a Performance Standards Overlay; ZONING: RR-.5- P; ASSESSOR'S MAP 391E 08AC; TAX LOTS: 506. Ex Parte Contact Ashland Planning Commission January 11, 2011 Page 4 of 7 31 I Planning Commission V11, Speaker Request Form 1) Complete this form and return it to the Secretary prior to the discussion of the item you wish to speak about. 2) Speak to the Planning Commission from the table podium microphone. 3) State your name and address for the record. 4) Limit your comments to the amount of time given to you by the Chair, usually 5 minutes. 5) If you present written materials, please give a copy to the Secretary for the record. 6) You may give written comments to the Secretary for the record if you do not wish to speak. 7) Speakers are solely responsible for the content of their public statement. ILI Name { V l (please print) Ug f a ! A'ildress (no P O Box) (n'1 Phone../1.:C,~ 7s'U'I4i Emall , s . lie" C. in, Tomghfs;Meeting Date, . t i ql Regular Meeting ff~~ writ. Agenda item number . OR Topic for public forum (non agenda item) ~4A Land Use Public Hearing For: ~ Against: Challenge for Conflict of Interest or Bias If you are challenging a member (planning commissioner) with a conflict of interest or bias, please write your allegation complete with supporting facts on this form and deliver it to the clerk immediately. The Chair will address the written challenge with the member. Please be respectful of the proceeding and do not interrupt. You may also provide testimony about the challenge when you testify during the normal order of proceedings. Written Comments/Challenge: The Public Meeting Law requires that all city meetings are open to the public. Oregon law does not always require that the public be permitted to speak. The Ashland Planning Commission generally inviter the public to speak on agenda items and during public forum on non-agenda items unless time constraints limit public testimony. No person has an absolute right to speak or participate in every phase of a proceeding. Please respect the order ofproceedings for public hearings and strictly follow the directions of the presiding officer. Behavior or actions which are unreasonably loud or disruptive are disrespectful, and may constitute disorderly conduct. Offenders will be requested to leave the room. Comments and statements by speakers do not represent the opinion of the City Council, City Officers or employees or the City of Ashland. 32 Planning Commission Speaker Request Form / 1) Complete this form and return it to the Secretary prior to the discussion of the item you wish to t speak about. 2) Speak to the Planning Commission from the table podium microphone. 3) State your name and address for the record. 4) Limit your comments to the amount of time given to you by the Chair, usually 5 minutes. 5) If you present written materials, please give a copy to the Secretary for the record. 6) You may give written comments to the Secretary for the record if you do not wish to speak. 7) Speakers are solely responsible for the content of their public statement. Name' ~f' L1Q ~v~hct~2 alr (please pint) bh[av~ Address (no P O Box) `mil a 0 0.( Nm a W 8 E 0 3 \s eat ~ sv,, c>_c. cot6. K etll~I`. y €j , ` IJtI V; K '.W' bone 5~~1 4Ka 41y~ Cmarl , ' Tonight's Meeting Date ._b t I -ai570 Regular Meeting Agenda item number OR Topic for public forum (non agenda item) Land Use Public Bearing For: Against: Challenge for Conflict of Interest or Bias If you are challenging a member (planning commissioner) with a conflict of interest or bias, please write your allegation complete with supporting facts on this form and deliver it to the clerk immediately. The Chair will address the written challenge with the member. Please be respectful of the proceeding and do not interrupt. You may also provide testimony about the challenge when you testify during the normal order of proceedings. Written Comments/Challenge: The Public Meeting Law requires that all city meetings are open to the public. Oregon law does not always require that the public be permitted to speak. The Ashland Planning Commission generally invites the public to speak on agenda items and during public forum on non-agenda items unless time constraints limit public testimony. No person has an absolute right to speak or participate in every phase ofa proceeding. Please respect the order of proceedings for public hearings and strictly follow the, directions of the presiding officer. Behavior or actions which are unreasonably loud or disruptive are disrespectful, and may constitute disorderly conduct. Offenders will be requested to leave the room. Comments and statements by speakers do not represent the opinion of the City Council, City Officers or employees or the City of Ashland. i 33 Planning Commission / Speaker Request Form 1) Complete this form and return it to the Secretary prior to the discussion of the item you wish to speak about. 2) Speak to the Planning Commission from the table podium microphone. 3) State your name and address for the record. 4) Limit your comments to the amount of time given to you by the Chair, usually 5 minutes. 5) If you present written materials, please give a copy to the Secretary for the record. 6) You may give written comments to the Secretary for the record if you do not wish to speak. 7) Speakers are solely responsible for the content of their public statement. u Uj~ V~ Y r Name =<7 1 zol r - (please print) Address (no P O Box) C OLD % f Phone)/~'-~~ ~~j5 `ikEm`ail {l ~)Ut (J c% 1cJU7 t'CJ~ j ~G)r ji- Tonight's Meeting Date . ` . . Regular Meeting Agenda item number OR Topic for public forum (non agenda item) Land Use Public Hearing For: Against: Challenge for Conflict of Interest or Bias If you are challenging a member (planning commissioner) with a conflict of interest or bias, please write yourallegation complete with supporting facts on this form and deliver it to the clerk immediately. The Chair will address the written challenge with the member. Please be respectful of the proceeding and do not interrupt. You may also provide testimony about the challenge when you testify during the normal order of proceedings. Written Comments/Challenge: The Public Meeting Law requires that all city meetings are open to the public. Oregon law does not always require that the public be permitted to speak. The dshland Planning Commission generally invites the public to speak on agenda itenvs and during public.forum on non-agenda items unless lime constraints limit public testimony. No person has an absolute right to speak or participate in every phase of a proceeding. Please respect the order of proceedings for public hearings and strictly follow the directions of the presiding officer. Behavior or actions which are unreasonably loud or disruptive are disrespect d, and may constitute disorderly conduct. Offenders will be requested to leave the rooni. Comments and statements by speakers do not represent the opinion of the City Council, City Officers or employees or the City of Ashland. 34 Planning Commission Speaker Request Form 1) Complete this form and return it to the Secretary prior to the discussion of the item you wish to speak about. 2) Speak to the Planning Commission from the table podium microphone. 3) State your name and address for the record. 4) Limit your comments to the amount of time given to you by the Chair, usually 5 minutes. 5) If you present written materials, please give a copy to the Secretary for the record. 6) You may give written comments to the Secretary for the record if you do not wish to speak. 7) Speakers are solely responsible for the content of their public statement. } if -ie Name (please print) s Address (no: P O Box) f~ `r > C\ 1 . V l ~~U 4s4 PItOIIe E ' it ~6 ip ! ~~1 h tr. t Tonight's-Meeting D`ate ;+(f Regular Meeting Agenda item number OR Topic for public forum (non agenda item) Land Use Public Hearing For: Against: Challenge for Conflict of Interest or Bias If you are challenging a member (planning commissioner) with a conflict of interest or bias, please write your allegation complete with supporting facts on this form and deliver it to the clerk immediately. The Chair will address the written challenge with the member. Please be respectful of the proceeding and do not interrupt. You may also provide testimony about the challenge when you testify during the normal order of proceedings. Written Comments/Challenge: The Public Meeting Law requires that all city meetings are open to the public. Oregon law does not always require that the public be permitted to speak. 77je Ashland Planning Commission generally invites the public to speak on agenda items and during public forum on non-agenda items unless time constraints limit public testimony. No person has an absolute right to speak or participate in every phase of a proceeding. Please respect the order of proceedings for public hearings and strictly follow the directions of the presiding officer. Behavior or actions which are unreasonably loud or disruptive are disrespecl/id, and may constitute disorderly conduct. Offenders will be requested to leave the room. Comments and statements by speakers do not represent the opinion of the City Council, City Officers or employees or the City of Ashland. 35 I 1 I I 1 I I I TAX LDT6PoA W TAXLOrWM ' 201FDKK5 ~ I ZDNmRR3 I q (E)DU6bNG ~ ~ - I I CREEX DRNE U a. I 1 ___.P~ - L- - \ OEIEHIWH~AIE&ODMRT 1 n n ~ x ~ ~7TwE~.R PAPoOIIaAAFA G TAX= 1 COY ~ /4 \ i 1 i 1~1 PASIONG V ~Nz 1 if' g I PIANllRO COVERED ZONED R.1-10 RETAINNGWALL 77- s ooo D i v rA<LOrwoc 9 \ / tax LOTrDW bRS6AE , ~ . IT y 1 . 1 I l t l I ` ` / (Qnu oleos 1 1 (E) INJIIDING Fd 7Vw RETU IN~ A~i>_' \ / / / (EI-U♦ CDaFl15 10 _ _ I II - 1 DEIENIIOxN ALE EREV(EIZY/ (E)~l6 l I I1 WAI'IIY 9IOSWAIE 1, III WE 110 1 RETNMNO iA \V1./ ) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 '1 1191{1''9 ' I WI1L5 " ~-D q N qb I I I I 65 IIF, I I I I 11 I, I, ,I j __-nl ~TbzSa RETAwwowAu 1 I s aRAae 5i sPwolxq m5r rixLOrmaD arEw 9 f I1 N109ER1Y ,I 1~ II • ~ ~ TAXL1'!T 1 II'll l TAXLOT4400 I ~ zavm wln0 1 ' 7 d 1,1 I'I' `1111 I I 1 VICINRYMAP PROJECT LOCATION It's r NMro9gk . a ' lbITRFES a ,11 PROJECTTEAM PLAYING (1 01.9IER JW YILLS. WLEMBRELYNG GOI.RNIY II' Sb CLOVER UNEA.SHIAND. OREGON %1m= PUNIER: MMl( IWOX-UR&W GEVELOFAtEM 6ERVICm 11 169MNEVADA9TREETp511UWp.OREGON ' N141U63 hA31 " 1^~1 J n MRS PE A SU117 WI GAGERO. 3 G ATE9 "0 J=e• 100 MISTLETOEE ROAD D SUITE 201 ASNNIOOPEOON 511 N6 MW wwc9u6RATN-cEC ~~r ' fl1GsNEz5t RIMS MMmFORD,oaEOOU ' s11 Tr9 sse rix LOT 710D SURVEYOR W H=-HOFF1911RR8A540CIATm W GOLF`MMDRwEUW1`E201 NEOMM.OFMDON TAX LOT I9W x17701611 \ zoNm wlnS ARrnm MARr1n LEE PROJECT TASH4AN0. GREGON SII NB WII it I~ SITE INFORMATION. Iz TAA Larv9W ZONED of-1o TOTALPROIECTA PLOTSY. 156,OJ1 SOUAPE FFFT - T ' ~pEEK BPPWG TOTAL PnOPOSFD MFfI OFDEV6CPYENT: 119,501 SOVAPE FEET W. PERCENTAGE OF LOT COVEFAGE: STRUCTURES: 503623OUMEFEET-19A% 4 - OTNER WPERVIWSSURFACES: 56.730 SOYARE FEET-36.5 ,AO is TALNUM19QtKPMpNG SPACES: ETANWiD ~P I 11 COMPAQ Qp\• 2ADA 4m~ TOTALNfINBER CF &KE PA41@1G SPACES 9COYEREDWACEE TAXLMM SF-PERCEMAGEKIANOSCAPEDPAEAS: $9,032 EOUARE FEET-4431% I 20NEDR-1-10 SHEET INDEX ZONim R-11 T-1.0 liTuCs EEF W.0 TREE PROTECTION L RFMOVK6 DFWOl100N L. SRE PUN \ WA P1MTN19PW1 CA CIX9CEPII9LLORPDINO AND DRAIW.GE PUN CS CONfFP9WLUtW9Y PlPN FA FPST FLOOR F2 SECOND BOOR 441 NORM AND EAST ELEVATONS TMLOT51M A-2 SOUMANDKESTEIEVATION9 I ZONED RIAO IN ) TITLE SHEET \ - TAXLGT52W 0 SD W 90 ZONED R-1-10 z a vT 'ff 71 R CALDERA BREWERY r o LAURIE SAGER $90 CLOVER LANE - AND ASSOCIATES LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS INC O ASHLAND, OREGON Q ~K C8 700 MISTLETOE ROAD, SUITE 201 ° CT O ASHLAND, OREGON 97520 I I I , TM LOrmw ~ ~ TMLOT 58111 / W_ _B tEt BUrtnwc I cRm DRIVE \ NE _ / _ I= PRDPERNLWE 1 I TTORBMNN • 0'~O ^.fl TREE PROTECTION R. QTO"m EL 2y R Bpi OT N " 1 \ I ( ttrr66 I TO RQWN \ \ I I I / fl y 3' y m ~ I f 5T~ - A TMIDT6Po0 A \ I I i AV'fO~HEMNN ~ V I ~ r~ / r I I A II \J' / ~ ~I / ' IMLOT01W v I II / \V REMNN 0E PTO TREEE) BUECIION FENCE IV A~, \ \ /III I~~II Ik7 tRED PI ❑NE \ \\9 IET to /DDWOTOEE BE RFNOV,ED ~ \ ~ I OVERNFID PoN£RUNES TO \ / ''`I,\ \ \ I \ I EE CECOWJIDNFD In OP r/ f1OTOWREM\ O V• V~ A \ aE~OB " c) IE1CoNCREIETO T,z I r n&M1DPG 1WREUOVED << I~ ~ w Jc~1W I I;I i -III _ TREE PROTECTION DETAILS lO/. RH TO BE REMOVED ~ C I I I II I \ V I VAA / / ~)QJs (q BURIED CTPoC TAX LOI )WO I ( 1 TOBERPI ) I I I I owme \ ' \ TaaEOVED(E) On III III wIl 04 ~ ~ T;ee TVN VA ~ AA ~ r l r - ~ rl~l III F.n= w„6n,o,n BE DARDTD m ateeambm. 6'mu cnnw uwaNrnik wmpwun wenwm I REFbVEOI/ \ ~ \ \ \ / I/+ r bnWp W lsnmerogna W plw .V I V A r/ A I I I I ELEVATION PUN \ \ I ! / ` I III LEGEND NOE Fil...0n]Pwm O NFASEMEPT_ = v \ I / Tea~O bnmem: A 9 V III I WTO BE / TR. praepfar , ; r REMOVED / 1114M LGT {W0 \ \ \ \ \ I I I I II i v TREE PROTECTION NOTES `I I'" \ \ I I I III A. LenNwpe aelewaumv Pepamw W6le pwl.tlW epm tlemepe. Np amnpe etOqulpmemaiwmn•a a«aawaWnm mpmnmtwm \ \ 1 \ \ / ~ ~ I III rcmNn, Wemawnee en mli qen. AB eemeOe awwe hvwmwmenm.wunv trawWn•U6•eMpweW lw, l.renenpepctw esamdema \ \ \ \ ' ; / B. Trtestlutere•hamNremeN MeO ne pebcretl WNlmWUwFhpmpn planW«ro regWM. FentlnOWOne6'YFkvpany WNlmkp•MF II \ THE PROTECTIONFENCE I / TOR 1,1 To R~m tnnlW Mm mew Wm:awnwma.p pmm mWwemama,mw. twm We. mWmeem wa~m6pmep. apOwbnn wNn.evm \I \ Op \ \ \ \ r T o REMAN tl e~ t O C.AmtlIM eNMFt N110e tuuWW RwYprM~bPbn•tmwy SUMP mnWlM.mpewmnr;®. \ TO REMAIN o.a•t.wmeave•wtbpew Nnr®wlwm~mlcmn Oyplepa,ewaw"lawlvmcwm~•b;wa;•a.vlwm,ev.cwcwbemlpu» ~ ~P \ \ r~ Ia TORE.K E. Iltrea~imh wwT nevmwtwe3 ewly wmm;em,me cWwwv NV mrtsa•mENE mlwNlmvwemNmapmn mneomby. ( C~ 1\ \ TMLOT] TOREMNN F.CmIMw MY mI aISCfCrun el OewxNen remwbp•W apWq;mldM. •p Q \ MTO REI G. CantaawehalnanN: ma wUlrva WNnme arlp Ones aemwptrwem eaaeve pe•M1NeM1WSplcuptm imWiy6wwT YtleweOn ek N~ 'O I TO RF1yyN nue.,wex,nn.e.«..,1'..mw6,.lae.a mpwo h•cxmmiew~p pna s.,eppblmemMJ:l empa 9~ Y \ / / N.MweW'W StlNtlae: LO \ \9, fZIITO REMOVED D Tres Memabn mm 0 MewmaaeMUOeeWrovW tY wm,/erwewmM6wnafweewWOtlrn UeU•n. 1 , 1 / ~~~"`GVV~ / ) M T01iEAWN 3) ROWm'vnpeAOm amnMOeW alb amSAlwn WO war NMp me twne alamebNlbn, rtrk WaMeHmwmpbtlmmpew ])FM Wpetlbn•lwiryblM elpefetlm 0amrirom~00matew, /MYTO I rfi fT0T0 BEREWOVEO 1 / ~ TREE INVENTORY I ~ b I "I6 I r / / . II = j "LOT' Trwf 9petlw I WN Gwm rNU• Canalfen Tree pmle[Ym NeW mmGtw bgel iM•nwl•MRe[ V A T1W q/ire ~ 11~ I I I/ I 1 UlmuepwlYO, 6 7.5 pm 11 mmm•M mdleIxo cbtl \02MBE RFMOVEO / ~i~•/ A7 TOPE ] CeGU eeeeme 11 10 peas a b=:=d lW prrotbtl iry]TOBEREovio TM LOT{EW J C<GU avaabr 10 7.5 9wa 7.5 m«m .nd6,:. , { Ca tlwaia 12 10 nWtl 9 rorem•m wtl MpraleSW W6TCIRENN 5 Cean•YWi: 10 11 pcN ]s mrvmem nM Oe I.. n CW NWu: 10 0 0eW 73 romnm •MMPweSW / I ' I - _ _ ] Cemw O.dw v 0 veea 5 bremFm eM ne pam@a MITO BE r ~i % / lI _w 0 CMU4WVe 1n 1s pwa 16 mrmneb WM to gelwh] REMOVEDr /~///%.f15TO RRFEflMM6AAAWWW p CelegOUW aOienm 10 ] pma 10 mrem•m eMMpomma 10 Pwnu w. 6 ].5 pmr Ns mla rtmwee 11 ulmnpwar0u: 1s t]s mWmm N. me. nmOUW / r , / / 2 ➢ww•p.rlyom t{ t6 tleW N• mte ramw / g TAxtm.6oJ eW N. m!•nmw / y a 2 mmwW p.rtren is to e W u ouerpn p•IMne JB a ppwimtl N. mwrtmwW t5 Owrw BwYim e n mWwN M blamdn ` I,.I 7 iDOnP~ 16 Owmb OWnyNV N 2 meeaN N• mnmWb \ 1] Owran perOwu 15 15 meex•b Ne mnmb \ - 1n awrm 6xlyuro a >3 awe NW mn. nmw.a \ \ . 1B OwmnOem!n n 6 pcwaba Ne mrlmWl, , 21 0 OwmOenWn a 10 0 tl Ne mGnmwM \ IIF- 2 0 J metlwW Ne mlemeb 73 Ouewn p•rtY!n P $ b Ou•wu penywb is 6.5 pWnlmtl Ne mnmWn 9 04 OwwWpemM, • 7.5 poo0 II! bnm2n sna•ne MW pe= \ 35 Owran aWrtwro b 9e m roman plebcme w ].5 s 60M v6 Owlm aslryw v{ rort-In entlnepbmba 7.5 n owrw. wrtyw 6 a awtl e twa 4 is W rowm.ln.ne pe probcbJ 3B Owrw•w• 9 6 'iW {3 mnminmdlpro TM LOT }B Ou•mn 0•rtyau 8 6 OWe 3 mnm•b wtlnW prabd•tl ]p Cuby ObrY~ ! 3 \ 73 PeW 2 !e nm°W SPECIFICATIONS FOR DEMOLITION AND SITE CLEARING AThe UemeY00n eenvewb rembW m mMr,W M rvm!!• rapreswrotlve ama We piwm napOminpwttkbmlex YVmkp~seSew, smw \ !W M1eW rWw, Ma PM pe1M011 maMw. B.A gpaNetl el0a6t NWIO• htetlb plus e10ew b mmm.wne«mry. C. Trees le he ramevsa WO be lelma ae w m kOw•y Rem tree pmlxtim Sanee •ntlb rv4a WIAnv •na meeprp elmonawwbrmmm. N;xb en MWnW, me wmutein nqukw mNlwyarme msprvmay rmt mwW heron em•cmb be teas.TNamyOSaommpm6W 0yaE1q Wwpx qW rwbb/ hs6 Wm a ~Mm Mnlle, rwke•w, nertewbwNw WN Neq WNW, w emae{pw<C;eeepnJnpaqulpmwM1 D. smRanw eibmbnawna wmom to mWwa Wml, me trWe IxelwOm mm• W ufe W mnNblp~opmMpwWwe epvae tam TM LOTS1n0 eowNmerw pl•IWCtlangpm. , E. ARV Nm•w mtws sus m een,aBW enynk• •nYl a «wNam me Wma•np mtrww Wmb w NWpew6W rteMY eWmmeamkm rprwnwe M abca m nwm. F. rt:enmar.y nM weeuw IwN imml pew ww W reaw meow m a Imbed, • IwN•a a6lltlneallYMNY a aamW b Maeam .W. m. rewe.e mmiw:na a r•a.NWNW w m«w.lvbmmnmes:~ tlrPn. L' TREE PROTECTION AND REMOVAL PLAN AND DEMOLITION PLAN J TM LOT 5]00 0 w 66 pJ tl7 _ LAURIE SAGER m GALDERA BREWING COMPANY m 9°9 _ s ^`ny AND ASSOCIATES LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS INC Q i 59O CLOVER LANE 3 y n SH LAND, OREGON c 700 MISTLETOE ROAD, SUITE 201 c 0 CT ASHLAND, OREGON 97520 i i II I I I I w TAX LOT 6000 TN{LOT6601 'Y I I _ W N 1 I I 1 (E) RUIIGNG W SFRNG DREEKOPJVE U I PRO ER LI _ _ WNCRETE CURB • ~'N' E~~. L. - . - Pft0➢ERTY NE: \ f , 0.ANON0 I11 P G I DERMIONINRIF$OVIIIl1Y:~ _ I 1 M D~ (11 Ci \ 0'd / Ifi I a ~PSPA~ ♦ i _ SACKLP S9ACE MIOMDPNWOW PUMINOS I I T/J~Lm9 I I T- I i o-r ~fv~``v` fv __CONCREIECURS ~I I ~ I li1'f I ~u10 SIGN 23d 'S STit I' ENOOFRETAOVI GwALL PLANIINO➢ARNING EPACES PI WINO MTREES COPE I' a 5 PpRIONG:65P Op!t~ sCRFEN TRICOT 6100 PP m , Iy li V A vv 1 kumA INOWN •a `b 6p 1 ' 'L "12 4P a , ➢,v NOG iDXizENClosEo M ` ` 1` \ \ \ 7mmO FNCLOS6 APPROXS WOODSTORAGEAREA AL" 77 77,, RErAWWGPw rAXLmT66o ' STE WIIN / .x{~ SCREEN IIj~ II PwrtINGS GRADE: SEE /.I a100 El19 ENWNF'. sO GI4➢VKs PINT /i / / - / EI0003~ $ p 1'. • / :i / _ ~-STORAGE _I, 11•I 1 .',1 I I I RI SUMWG SWIOE CIISIE \V. . /I / / - PoR 1 1 NEASEMEM. \M15~ (EpUa / COOLERS I 1 l 10'Xb CONCREIESW \ F3.110 I I I f I' /125 Y'Xq /I 1 1 I I Q \ ggEy~y ([1 116 / ~I. I I ~ I I A : I, i l l RETNWNG bT ,1 (L) ~6 I I 1 1 I I WNL6 V / t III ~ 1', 1 I I ~a ONG DEIENIION ATEP ` : vV ~ ` IS JI I hit OWIIfYB1OSWM! :III 15X4f CDNCRETE5lA0 _ - 'I 1'.J I~'1 FORGMP15L03-_ I ' xb ' Ly.J ~ I II II -P -__LOADWGRURN , FENCED u II MPROX TIRTANINO WMIC. I~\v\ hkouwo )NE ~ 5 Ali it RETNNNG WNL ILL STFDWRNORAOE; SEE ENWNEFASOMOWG➢LAN _ _1__ LJ I II _ Ij I IIII TNILm NW - TM LOT 0 Fm TRUCK` I1:1 Il III _ TUW6AROUND SCREEN 111 P~Nm ~!I y ~ V A / I, : i11: Iii I m ~ II II _ _~I 8R (E) TREES AsoROXlzdErNNlliowiu; 1~.~ 'and I ','~I$ WEEEGRADING ENC PLm END OF RETARDING WALL , \ III ~ TA%Lm N00 y,\ I y Ig TMLOT49M illl_l(~~~GCREtX I TAX LOT 5000 \ I I I TAXLOTSIN \ I SITE PLAN \ a b ro b TAXtm sm Z Q tl7 r 4 X' F LAURIE SAGER N a CALDERA BREWING COMPANY e o 8 s m o~ N \I 590 CLOVER LANE AND ASSOCIATES LAN DSpCAPE ARCHITECTS INC O o ASHLAND, OREGON Q 00 700 MISTLETOE ROAD, SUITE 201 '~k 0 4 CT 6 ASHLAND, OREGON 97.520 Tq%LOTSS00 % Z , TAALOTSWI _ o ~ o I SEEM NIX 3 VA 310NP \ (EI SUBDIN O Gi ~w .C1w SPRING \ U IaINM 25PIG CRESK MOSgLLB PROPERTY ME PROPERf`YME VA ♦UVA V JRC~ _ i 5dikIS 1aINV 1-0ERD ~ F. IBOSI S + 15RP 1{OqL S~I 1C4M 25PIG 1.3%P % RAVA ISM ly~l T L J 1 E SUVA y Hy 2ARCS ARCE 1fML IMAGE 24ZRG xONp SPRC. IgBVq MRCS TAx LOrep00 TK ©.e 18ERA !p1w 1-ROSq 5M F J'ggLM 1-T .G }LAVA SM 1SERA _ ~P L 13p1G '-SPSM SPro d, 6ACRE 6AOSA SCggl( ICMK ~i- (ACES RiAV S VA SMCH • CAN f >aro )lONp 23Pro 1SI S'H0Y4 EXISTING O ES MIX NICE SMG, TREES SCISM JARCN ...1,':ry,. B{tOSA .GAIT( RL 2AMS F ,aO SCISM 1-A1CN _ SALES / 11UVA iSEgA JMUI - S ISN 11FLV Ss xONP~t" SJVtGL~ f-PINM )AACE "Ism S1AVA +b ~ TAX LOT SIM xMp • J#gCH Sft0 L <!< i 1{PAF • 14PIP t3ARCE (ARCH ~-1.1 i~- 24PIG t'BERA A 24PIG ,SERA taVi1.1 - ]SCg4K' xI3M U'A 1J3FJU 99• bCISM.~ ]NUWL w,n 1YSEPl) 12 QTR SIAVq - / i S Tj< 'Jy \ SPACE / ~ SROSA • 1Iw tp ~ )AAVq 149P SRP ZZ SPACH Ssm t Y 1 t)~' LGSM IT / ~ ~ • 3-0WV ' G, TAk IOT>pp0 / F taORL I \ / 1GPAE \ ENQOS STORAGE'.t' (E)BNLONO ARFA TN EM FOR 1aWM N FASE)CSBLEEM \ COOlIFS I - \ F8 Ht0 E xiAF E OSWgLEpONp sECURINGTE3USE \ E SEEDMIX RUBBER NOSE ATBMB( / BUBDNO: MI ROSION CONTROL "A )FEH10 , Bm MO( EFM Iy rmH ~ i cb \ / talcp T 4 IYAEMGNG ~1- \ TL t 1LGAF T: I rnooD SAKES GI SETROOTCRG r \ / / E IELAE ABOVE MORN GRIME E \ 6 MLLCX:r MW.IfEEPPIG NULCH t' E AYMYFItOMIRIIKK t-POIS sOl9gUCEi1: UGE PREPARED ML<P t-PINM SOIL ' - M. 30 ARCH PER AT TOP OF BALL SHALL BE \ FENCED t_ C cur. REMOVE TOP)SOF BIIRLIP. \ BTAREA II- I ' i' I~ NOMBIOOEOPAAAREEMTENAL - - - - - - - - - _ - - / _II_,I IEIII II III- t- SNML SE TOTALLY REMOVED. 1=I(=LjEI EIIEIIF=AEII~II EH &GARE 111111_11 =i I EII&IIEIIEIIRIF IiFI,Ii~;I =II II!=T BACFLLM HPRFPARBMM OFY% SRp IMPGREDmMPOSr ANDTOP3GLAND _ 2ABALLI 75x NATNEWIL LOT)0.V TTAAXLOTMM OIF MIN! UNDISNRBEDNgTNE SGL talcp TESTAIETREE3ONLYIFNEDEDAND gO.IOVE AFfER)YEARBMAYIINM 1 TREE PLANTING DEIAIL $ \ \ taORL 2 taERq Ism \ \ )CISSI taINM X 4mp ABERA 1SRP 6NERIN *""__5~~:MULCK MHERIN REUTIONgNTO Y MIN t~ SRNC 3£LgE TREE3 _ SARCM PRJNED~ OR III ..ILL r.' j: IIEu DESICCATED ROOTS I i ~ 2REl.v II!=11 : = - clDErtr wMPAOTEO SaLMIx ^ . III=1 -'-`,I=III` scA(R~') IIJII 1E111=TE11 sOwlsr Prt eoTTOM 1Wmm~WN. 4 t~tM S%GAMEJERI, ROOTBAJL I. - - 2 SHRUB PLANTING DETAIL AX LOT TIM PLANT LEGEND TREES TAx LOTEWp GTEOOg)( SYNSCLI SGENRRCIWAE CC4 NXME 24!E TREES ACES geer.%.Mw SMIva'MSpH 1.)5e CARE C.l .MMUS'Fw'W F.d&. aNIhI DUm l.75W O Icy - PICK Rees brae . B S". 5'nl I~ I, P mom punpm BALM 5MM BMa3mU 1 YY . PINY 1 Rms peNM Vmeemdh PytuNC Yams ffspyV Fble )dm TILE me v Ixi. S.W 9Mnv.d~lY~den 1.75 al / 2ELV L@nfMreM1 YmpF CVSm' VAeq Gmn)Mwa 1.)SW TAKLOT.WO SHRUBS. BFApW GAEEM GR COVERS PACE MPbMNpRyM'EmenW Gryaf EmrW C.mR Mp®14 tId AND mm M pbmv 6Npwa w HewuE MaMM Mepmd3 5pe1 GRASGES SEAR Nftft MMeI DmvNM1 SUDMy 5pe1 SERA BmNft Namd,wo'Abap.Pn' Red LeafJgsm"BeA 5pi I pel IMN*o I - CPII( Glemepmtls e.'IW FmtlM Kel FRSp G'a CMW Groe4PISM1n1M Nhepnp XMlS-d"dlla tOel 4Q IIL- C6N G .v- ebbmepYY6 &aged RSbvu W 9.T BIAE 6uepev e!lepei EbbNpeYS 5 PI F SURE OWN, LLymeeee GeM LR AS@Gtldfvs)Tb SSW .1\ SURE G.e). eBp CSSW ' wafTmM 10 MSM lWmuMIW. We We LAVA LI.. Ferpu®lrge H Lervkw 1 W ! RM. MUP UM pmo ..d XPng3pWe JPI N M TPK WT SWO FINN! Mm Mpp IOa gOSA RFirxN, MN'MP Mp RSO Ilia] 3%G Spie. Wmelda 'Gtld4md GWII 2 gal SPP Sphe. PrvNbY Plvu' Bdd•I - 4he. 5 W W.W SPe+ SESOm ES P737 I ErWmCWdSeM NM KMIme dillb WXpN' 2AII5WM 81. aiePNid Seed L4 H.b4Paf N.,Ift \ Geen WIW 4W1Mm' 1tNWpe1 'X.Mn ene Xpptlro 535.214M1S: NwwEpppmN.PS.sd.mm NOTES TAXLOTSIW t. PLACE 3'COMPoGT?OPXIBBIENOIH ALLTREE ANDSKKUBPWTNGMEA9IXCER WEiERIMSNRFAQY BEEN INB 1NSTgLLSTIW_ 3X4 BLBI_END ININTUSTr LIFTS BLENAND D TIMLABLE ROVGFROMHLY TO TO ]END MS AND EYTIG WI J2,SLAM ML IR E SHMIGS PER R DETFJTML I L L,NPMPROV ME J ALL ST PLPM U 1A) MA NLFA)o%R RXA TO WSTgA . N[I R 1. Slim p11 gREA4 IDENTIFIED Ep W)X SEED MIX PER IMNUFACTUAEA6 SPECIflCA110NS;54£RIFV GERMII'NTONAIO BSEEM PNY6ME AREg3. 5. MLhCH SFGARFASA ERINSTALLATON OF PINMOILLMPL WTIALOF DARK MULTWMK OR EOWL S.M0.Y DIHEREF5l9%UY TOALL N NEW PI/dITS PWORTO AND FOLLOYANG MSTPLAT0N. pN PRONDETE1dPoMRYFElIGNO TO ALLTREEGTO PROTER FROM OEERp9ADVEPFifAtYEPA. ~ - 7. I \ IM LOT C% (N ) PLANTING PIIAN w W 10 I 5 \ \ r p F LAURIE SAGER L CALDERA BREWING COMPANY m o 'a°yc AND ASSOCIATES LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS INC 500 CLOVER LANE 0 1 P~ y tr Q `I 1S 1,11), OREGON q < og 700 MISTLETOE ROAD, SUITE 201 o L ES - cT a ASHLAND, OREGON 97520 t EMSIWG s0 uANNaE rA 9'C qiy ~2 \ \ ^ i ~OoSPNCaty PSTOW O' I I I 'I CAW s15TEM 3Jib1 YAM I I ~ 1{ \ I STCM DRAW WAMR WAUIYY OCT UW I I I 1 pi °y~= I EMsw Is' MDE PUBUC FAMTY - BOTTOM E -910 MMITY EASO/ rMD Ai CA MADE EASEMENT SRRM CAW FApU/Y \t \ I I I _ Wli£T CWiRO' SIRUCiMFE - -X-4 PRO EC7 UM4ARY_ \ ~ / EM5BN050 MAreitMy _ ~I'- _ ~E~AT'EHy PROJECT BOUNDARY ' PROIIECT 6 c-gr or C - - ED,'€F• TIY ...fg - BOIJNDAKYIJ, \ I`~I - ` = _ 9 ~:~ro__. Q:~\♦P\7, / -t-\' CUBB[SROP _ % EYANWD I F"' ara y+17 ~~~_~_=2j_ I i 1 \I ~,eb$ t. \ \ i WAUS~~P \ \ '~(j - `-lro-.~ \~Y~ ~~\~~O♦ 1 STORN DRAW Gr" T ~yr.il-'E'3 T I i 111 \r,\~(GOI \ 1 k1`...y ~I COMMM STFMCNRE- D ~ x ~ f 1 1 \ \OHF\l~r 1 \ % \l I \ ( YF 'Y ~G( Y T ; i, ETCH DRAIN DETENIKW B • Z y~yif yiUtl ,\`r .I I 1 A I r; xA ; ~t I I t y"ieuy . ♦ \ \y WA TER WAUTY FAMIYY {t' y,.~ r ♦ 1 I + I / / / .r .Pe' 9'~ ~E AY{ '`.*'I `t. dt ♦ P} .l• ~.,i BDTTW EL-IDA.YS \ Y rh AF i t \ i / / r r j 1' f WdNC _ 'wJ 4 YR - N♦__.~' ~eV uYJ/ 1 _r ~I _:'<A ; A AY L OODN \ n \ i \ ♦ ♦ I RRO]~;\BDUNGARY 42 I `.r Dy CAL['~tR~BREVVEftY i `ry y I E - - - CURBDROP! wA IT U`LDI G \ y~ r I / 110 0 F~NI~TiE~ FLOOE§I uP <x l: PDC I ~ 'gyp ° \ + \ J I'w ~ 1 I n KI' n"' ~ _ - r Ex rD' PDE - TTA ~ 1• 'v / s„ ' >i H. r. '~~I.-. N.ylplY ~.a icy`; \ - ~ I', _I-, y -R ~tWEP')~'~~%`~~•~ jj~ PAl PROIKT BOUNDARY 1 a II I fi 'I Z GRAPHIC SCALE Di Ashland Exhibit 1 ~(i\ L\ Sour CAW Dr. MW DA TV Ir/10 ND. R£MAON DAZE BY bNgTRUCT~D WFwoa MP%PPU DAR: 11/I0 CITY OF ASHLAND C ENCI°c Y DAM 'y 1 CALDERA BREWING COMPANY T.D CONS UPS DATE' 590 CLOVER LANE 016 OA M- wvwcro co CEPTU eaae°Swm APB. (D~1) YYD 6EB~Prox1(~16A YYDii i°o DAIE GRADING B DRAIN GE PLAN ~ I 40 9 ~A9i J I I I ~ i g I \ I i I EXISTING 15' MOM PUBLIC \ _ UIMIIY CA"", AND \ I I I ' I DI I DRAINAGE EASEMEHi \ I / / - --.--r~-------------- PROJECT BOUNDARY I I I 1 / TLJ C;L- _ \ \ . \ \ STLpM DRAM. O ~ EK / ~ FIRE HYD. PR ECT 80ONDARY ~I ;\'b1 C''ft 4r3 <~'t~B, , y}"ryy y'~y(j /i r n,wT t~I~ yD CON !0 < \ AIL .Y. 2 ii WE nmG RNG SCOCR ! I ~~.5 !1 l ! PROJECT TO rxlsrINB BOUNDARY CITY aremc r 1 i IStss VTIG ELECTRIC 131 VAULT \ \ CALDERA BREWERY v ~ ~ T~ 4€ 1--J PROPOSED WA :ER BUILDING . 9!.._.g -EX. 10' PUC f> \ \ L J SERNCC/NEICIj n N g+ ; \ _______'In'~11 i/ ' Mlll WATER EASEMENT CLOVER IANE-SSMH I - Cx9_LvAgE__ ~L z I is Y EATS TRIG ~ ' ~ wC"Y ~ i p s •40 1 J £~cl yil O rx. !o• Pue ~ t~ Y Ir P EwsnNC TrLLrNavr 1 _ &I a L11 n ~EH\Gt'~ & Ni`U STA. Yg ~l ~1 /(P ExISRNC ELECTRIC s. 5 VAULT #ti. I a rya ( x ~ 1~ TO SIGN I I O a RE SEP RNCCE VAUI.F AND I - IIy y{ 4`N s'r• 1'g FDC PANT I I ~,Tgyftr j YYYbt Bf' AY 'aJ.: 4 I ti ~y <i, y _ ' EXISTNG Po GR TO fLCC BILLBOARD SIGN !0 METER BE REMOVED WeJ I I 'd, I / EVSWG POBER POLE &lUY VARDE TO BE - / f I ✓ y BOUNDARY PROJECT 00SPNO s' TV WOr BOl)N 0 DAR~ CABLE E C A$ENEN (N! Z f / - - GRAPHIC SCALE L; i:; GJ l~pl'~Jxed \ NOTE In;.:..nning IxLibit FINAL FIRE HYDRANT LOCATIONS SHALL BE ' APPROVED BY THE ASHLAND FIRE DEPARTMENT E.:-::'.::~fLO1l I i Ix w I lr - - OA - ~1:~ B • MAW BY. Mw DATE: 11/10 NO. RENSICH DAs BY B\ _ CITY OF ASHLAND. aECxr.o BY ML Pxx - DATE n/1D °~s' 41`• CALDERA BREWING COMPANY ~AR«s ENGINE 1 G oAS: 590 CLOVER LANE DA IT: ~ CONCEPTUAL UTILITY PLAN ry P.B. BOX 1]PA •1~DPORD ORFOON BT601 DA T. ` ~'1.2 yulBiB PH. (6U) i7B-SERB • PA% J6d1) T9B-9100 41 it; 1 t ti ANN " n. ,~t}x~8r k,'.. --2 'tr to e } Y, J Ax- ' •4 ~ ..~su r~ a ~ e tgj Say .e ~ r .L..;«~ i,' ~k.. i ...,,,_y~•~ y y a a ,i910- A ' >c r L ~ I r 4y'~L.~~ti ♦ a>w 4 t 1 iQ 4 -V i ak 4fbL,. ct~~ ,fix}kt~ ~ ; E` },}7~i+lk$ s' r ~ 1.1a 7''"M/z .5.r r y „7 t ~Iid" ti tt v`* s tp i~ ~r S*,•[a~}e` {mot g t t $ s .M W ~hd}a>~ - r p yi M _ tl! It" It, x+'(. y,~ ~ y. ~.anx _ W 1 . ~i^ ~~!Vnr t ~rt t Ttn (V 'k'. r t a °1 Txw `r( ,il~ z~ .r.Rs~ - r 1 ~ 9. • ~ E ~pvl LL ~ CM V t I. .KSfT` '4'~n 7 W M :4 Z 4 fi. - ~1 tnl i II-W tu, I /M r yF.... l.:5f ,.r. ISr4 $ lid . t S -'y YR 5 MSY ~~"Y` ~t~t x ~ i i -In y• ~ 7 i. t Imo. 1 ~t~. ° ' V ~ I`~ ~'JiN t tl Ole I M {7 I m4' G RUS. u1I I 1 I I n ` ~ + qS a. - fir' ~ a 1/ • . ' x' _ r ~ ' r r "+•a' _ v t 1r '~S M _FF 'a 'C"r - ri'LP 1'( _ , r+ {Pff4 I1 r y{I r t l., , r• k -ifiea.. 04-111. - a v 1x`"~ y, x,}1 rx}a ~~}T}}. ~r y Ip y J ,_f~'~re~ ~lj{ Y x _ r^ik".,"=3- r <s«, v , f ~ . .--.r,: - > , c x ' ~ . }>a ? P 'a ;:5t trrrr-. _ r t r~`, 4 s-- = h ,f .`1 ~ . N-• ~ - • ~ _ w e ,h+:. ¢a,~r ,~g_*. X32 ':il I ~ ~'•~"er.rx ,tl~ ~3j ~ z,e - • _ .s t,t~,f t :~a, t'~ . ski <r .z: >.;r',• o-'tt; a .,.°`r.,y to '"I Y•-t .,Ir tY.m `,'.n.,:' ~r :.f, v' &t`4°.f'G.:.,.. .u •sa" _ ` s'8. 7'""A•GZ. e':r?..~ o-'... -r`~'rT.t~ .7~f,li,. ..~a^...: .,,*a.«.. >x f; ! T x =?-.a:::,: ut~.J. ,'r..._~,,. .t r t( F _lOft, Vail -00. .1, d i~l,i "jam ~`r µ ^yE s 'o't t„+ ~ .'Y . ~ xi::;x. i M.:, F. :::,9, •'.a', r,4` y.:.. ~ ,'i# 3 Kr irf x . ::'aE!; ~ I :i i"' } , ~ ; >;t~ P ra t 7 ,t r...r r a+ k a+t `f.':: T:3 ' xc7 >r ,x _ 1 , ,....x ,a¢ Ax i, e r, I':-. li 1. 3.t~' #]~9 y X ~ r.». cxf F, a I,. r I,, i. rf:: I , It p d3 p s?~t~ L." xa !t> `i l',7+7'% 3 4 .pr"• y{ t+. •'i r W: t .r . v3.' ,:TT n , ,.^~I.*4~jI 11 x.~.. d 7, f. W.w'Y II,r: ,.r 1 I I ,i i,. ,I ,ufr'r ,d r, ..3 4 •'fs x'.. ,x-~ >I { .7 t; IrT >w~P" .d , 3 k, r z a,, TI..a 1.,.I. .,L ~ ,I . , ,J {.I rk t' F < r I I:: ':IIff~ ,,(r i ;c,.;r. € ra ~•1°$ i`~ $C 3 } , . it.:.. { t ,+St7t" ~#f a ttl:i, ILI •:.r q7E N>„I ,•:,l .1: !li <r= #.`.'a} .:w."r{ r :..9. k Y? • Y, f i I <I. (I, I r' ta:. , Y t r t,,,,_, ! X!a r 5 r{, .Ys ~ U11110 . ! a ,I r{ , ^°':Ct' " w-. I w, it u f i' ,11111; 1 ' In6 .m i I,-, $ 1.: I!, ,,.I fr . % ,,,({Yr , a, 1 r. I. 61 .t i,af :I i1., IN t 1. ,i p.. tli n. i'N *:1 a @r II II I , :i: t. dt b.t r*. w r, 'rrI'' ~Ja µ >.i l :.S :i ; I f! 0.i ~aT.(.,. i... y ,I rl I. .I: ..I i I t.. ~ :i I1~fr 1. 1.... : I.1 ♦ I 1'' : .'r l I rtl t I..,, N~tG l:I fV"'.,} IG' >~,a-` •x ¢ t1k.!ii h.. r! .I i::,r rer I I P,r t itil:l!Ir I• 1.: U l Elf! FSgc.' l.I ..,tr R.,~'{r..k•e: . ;,I, ,r..x , .,7 ,I s. tr ..f r. F +';I - at +I F r':' 1 r I' 1'Ir ~l. t. -r ~.c -"x•,. ~S' Off , i t.. )I ;r7: rlt r~.,; .S b.; I:, :1111;• ,li lr; li ;ss '1 -r.i, •f., ii..I { ..rtl i }'rL., ..Hk'As''r~;~'h' ~-7 h e. .,r..,n. - I,,' 4. ,.r ...t ; : -,.C r ! ,I..il I . ,I! : . 1 -1'.Ii.I { $r'. L', ~ .t'S•;'l' . a, k ' r' f : MEN, Flo! . If, " I% i z,. / ,y,_,. I , , I, :Yt ;+i ilNMI .+)i,- 184 . . I' P r:Ij f ail . yt ,f. r .;1 py > r,. ~i ,.v. : ~i : .,,...I I ',1 «I l~.: Y, i. ' ...i'1 Y. Jxe { rs', 1 !LI { yt „ra lu a r'Ia i•~.k`. "'f;, .#a.k _ , -1--•"... -J- ,..,.a.... ,t L; , i, ! ,..1 j " tool; , , . t. I p,-. is I;.' . , ,.X ..r. ~i~ ~b :I .I, f' p 'd i ..1 ::i:.' l k.:..t?, . _t~v . __r k a f. t. :..6ah? . ~r ?F r ..:i,,, r r f •r, ry : I . , 1 I t.. -I i, le~ .ii• ~~f a<sr " .'4 f I,,. . 1111", '(j¢}L r xa!, t. +t..*?R^ I,h „I ,1 I I.iI. ~ f. .f§ r .1. I 1 . ~ _f~ ,I. rr Y.:°~ ;1. ....1-,c i x trf.. ,t• _ .y t 1. 1:: , ° 'I I ,th J. I. 1 t s,.,. v'A,:.-. _,.r~; P.r :,k , ;x.. *3 u• id ..k . r:i .I,l II'.G.{I! tea.. ...✓Xp.. ,t r,.,i. € k.. ,v~. v~rv. .,t I . n.~ . I I : r. : r q. :I' i r, r fd: fj r I .t `.j i` #i+>r it 1 I r I:I ,t ~ i .....r r ,t",+1.,.... ,4;.k~ t.:°. I .,r: I,r,,. , 1,',, ,.i, i(I' : r _ r ':.r. ~ - t "a. r: , (r:, € A „ . I II a-.'!: r q 1 r-. I ~.I : , ~r- v i I r < .I i i ,.I, .r.v.:,,}} fi'a^r^Nr' x~... _ .i. l.. ,y.. "x. •I .E I .L; t.a.. :~!,I. ,L. i' r;_. _ ?'.:.u i~_,!:•_I: L~ll~~ll, .-~I,-t~rFt ai 'r, ~.1„1 iG:l 1,l.'il.ll~Ir,> ,71:: Ij i I,. It{ .'71J s t~ w. ~ _ - ° f• _ ! I>ll ~ ~r ~ : Ii r',, rl I f III k I mull „ - r +a r f x s ...~i, , ! .::.;r . - c+;, 3a . i•.. {Is - k:..... c. ~ r;. ~ 5•x . i,. . r aF, , k P, tx , , ; r..,. oil , p 1: 1, ia.,, r r;.v., ,F r, 1lr, t.,~C~, ru..:).. r~ft. ri , ,.,,1 ,,'•-ra-"' ,:.r..;, ttl .t,.. s: I:.; y:.E. •r tt (lt l.i 1 ~ '^'.a"^=Y."°,+?`'ts~,,. .,5 f. I 1,1vP I.: ,'1~, .r,.. xp :-I-.,: ~ 11•., h:•f.a n 9, r ii, i•,ii .I ,11 .`i ` • I i C:,:,,, ,1.1.6. i'., _N.....w).,~.{+~,I ( ..r .I rP 2 xyc• ,r. ,i iI t I'I' ryk r. r wY 1 If ..:~II71 I. i, ,*dt £ia If✓ ,.:I„ , §qS 1 4, r1',ru(I t€,e,~ I.; i - it il' L.3 t'~. '~Y,' .er..... :m... • ,.r 1 .;-._.I', yri.6 x-..11, „er t 4$3' r,~1S ~''t`{r'.. i! 1::,: ft: ~ it ~i.f 1 iLL I ~ -.`cif _ .I. n f. F.. , '.:<f„• I.rj ° t....e: , ,.L a t.". ;.a4 , is :l e^ ~ ,ra:. •d i I. :I V ' i : t..l; . r ..,,Ikk I ~ +r ivy I f ( i °:y t , 1 ` I`` f t. ! a:,.'41 P' i z' 1 I ~ ,I 13.". , a,.- -s'g`'~3'•.:. t --T1- , « I, Ir1 . - ; 1 { I~ .,.'t r?ri ri ! iI (s i, •'f'' A+•N t3 :1 Rra _.vEy„L .'.r < > r ' ri r . L,G ^ _l. : c`. :t'-f-_.:_tf~~: _ F. r.._ iI r i,. ; I { I 1 1 I ihr ~`t I ~ ~s r i'.w:. F ::w' - ri P , ,'p ! 1 .e_._ ! f , i,: y,,. c' i~ I: ql I. {I'r ~ I:~ Y ur.'. ,~1°-'='° p. ~i ,.v:: .P. ,7 - `~E.,:'. r= .c r I! r I t t, " i IIII I':I. ry s.._.,',?'~ € ' ,l .I kkC ~^.'+°5"'e ;y -ei ~ _ '1 ' 1. fI i I il. I .rl. t x<w~ 1. i . ~t3~yyxx ^ ~ yr . Ibk. IJ + 7',,, EI: L +s:#~~ ~E ; i{xxMt'~`-• , ,'rxr~~' ' r I mot. ':!x ~ .i t n~ h y~y~ 0 i Ash'an3 M ,fr t i t P I Lx.bi; ~ r ~ s! L~ 0 1 r>r ~i0 42 - _ rf f tons M .6-n Note: Anyone wishing to speak at any Planning Commission meeting Is encouraged to do so. If you wish to speak, please rise and, after you have been recognized by the Chair, give your name and complete address for the record. You will then be allowed to speak. Please note that the public testimony may be limited by the Chair and normally Is not allowed after the Public Hearing is closed. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 11, 2011 AGENDA 1. CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 PM, Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 E. Main Street II. ANNOUNCEMENTS III. CONSENT AGENDA A. Approval of Minutes 1. December 14, 2010 Planning Commission Minutes. IV. PUBLIC FORUM V. NEW BUSINESS A. Planning Commission Representative for Infrastructure Financing and Urban Renewal Feasibility Study. V. UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Approval of Findings for PA-2010-01239, 85 Winburn Way. VI. TYPE II PUBLIC HEARINGS A. PLANNING ACTION: #2010-01570 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 590 Clover Lane APPLICANT: Caldera Brewing Company DESCRIPTION: A request for Annexation; Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment/Zone Change; Site Review approval to construct a new 28,000 square foot manufacturing, warehouse, storage, tasting room and administrative office building for the production of brewing products; Lot Consolidation; and Tree Removal Permit to remove 17 trees for the 3.72 acre parcel located at 590 Clover Lane. The proposal Involves an annexation of three parcels totaling 3.72 acres In area which currently have a County zoning designation of RR-5. Two of the three parcels have a current Comprehensive Plan designation as Single Family Residential, while the third Is already designated as Employment. With the proposal all three parcels will be annexed as Employment lands to be zoned E-1 and consolidated Into one parcel. The application also involves a Modification of Planning Action #2003-112 to eliminate the previous vehicle trips per day per lot cap on Tax Lots #6800 and #6801 at 580-585 Clover Lane, and Administrative Variance to the Site Design and Use Standards to place parking and circulation between the building and the street and to the parking lot landscaping and screening requirements. (The Planning Commission will also consider Inclusion of Interstate 5 right-of-way In the annexation to make the extension of the City boundaries more logical and orderly.) CURRENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATIONS: Employment & Single Family Residential; CITY OF ASHLAND In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate In this meeting, please contact the Community Development office at 541-488-5305 (TTY phone Is 1-800-735-2900). Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting (28 CFR 35.102.35.104 ADA Title 1). 43 i i i Note: Anyone wishing to speak at any Planning Commission meeting Is encouraged to do so. If you wish to speak, j please rise and, after you have been recognized by the Chair, give your name and complete address for the record. You will then be allowed to speak. Please note that the public testimony may be limited by the Chair and normally Is not allowed after the Public Hearing Is closed. PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Employment; CURRENT ZONING: RR-5 (County); PROPOSED ZONING: E-1 (City); ASSESSOR'S MAP 39 1E 14 AA & 14 AD; TAX LOTS: 14AA 6900,14AA 7000 and 14AD 7000. B. PLANNING ACTION: #2010-01622 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 163 Hitt Road APPLICANTS: R. Scott Dixon and Joan Crosse DESCRIPTION: A request for a Modification of the Performance Standards Options Subdivision Final Plan Approval (PA #2003-020) for the Strawberry Meadows Subdivision. The proposed modifications include relocation of the driveway entrance, changes to the approved building envelope, and the allocation of a portion of the lot coverage from the subdivision's approved "Open Space 'A"' to allow Increased lot coverage for Lot #6, located at 163 Hitt Road. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Rural Residential within a Performance Standards Overlay; ZONING: RR-.6-P; ASSESSOR'S MAP 39 1 E 08AC; TAX LOTS: 506. VII. ADJOURNMENT i i CITY OF ASHLAND In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the Community Development office at 541-488-5305 (TTY phone is 1-800-735-2900). Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting (28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title 1). I 44 i Planning Department, 51 Winbum V. Ashland, Oregon 97520 G I T Y OF ,r, 541488-5305 Fax. 541-552-2050 www.ashlarld.or.us TTY: 1-800-735-2900 ASHLAND PLANNING ACTION: 2010-01570 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 590 Clover Lane OWNERIAPPLICANT: Caldera Brewing Company DESCRIPTION: A request for Annexation; Comprehensive Plan Map AmendmentlZone Change; Site Review approval to construct a new 28,000 square foot manufacturing, warehouse, storage, tasting room and administrative office building for the production of brewing products, Lot Consolidation; and Tree Removal Permit to remove 17 trees for the 3.72 acre parcel located at 590 Clover Lane. The proposal involves an annexation of three parcels totaling 3.72 acres in area which currently have a County zoning designation of RR- 5. Two of the three parcels have a current Comprehensive Plan designation as Single Family Residential, while the third is already designated as Employment With the proposal all three parcels will be annexed as Employment lands to be zoned E-1 and consolidated into one parcel. The application also involves a Modification of Planning Action #2003-112 to eliminate the previous vehicle trips per day per lot cap on Tax Lots #6800 and #6801 at 580-585 Clover Lane, and Administrative Variance to the Site Design and Use Standards to place parking and circulation between the building and the street and to the parking lot landscaping and screening requirements. (The Planning Commission will also consider inclusion of Interstate 5 right-of-way in the annexation to make the extension of the City boundaries more logical and orderly.) CURRENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATIONS: Employment & Single Family Residential,, PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION. Employment; CURRENT ZONING: RR-5 (County); PROPOSED ZONING: E-1 (City); ASSESSOR'S MAP 39 1E 14 AA & 14 AD; TAX LOTS: 14AA 6900, 14AA 7000 and 14AD 7000. NOTE: The Ashland Tree Commission will also review this Planning Action on January 6, 2011 at 6:00 p.m. in the Community Development and Engineering Services building (Sisldyou Room) located at 51 Winbum Way ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: January 11, 2011 at 7:00 PM, Ashland Civic Center ~ o PA 201 O=01570 o 590 CLOVER LN m SUBJECT"PROPERTIES 0 9~ v O vi ~ m d z3 I I ~a Amm o Q~ o o Ao ;ri " oe r~ o 0 p Property rives ore for reference aNy, net sezleable O 315 630 1,260 Feet Notice.isihereby given that a PUBLIC cHEARING 6n4fie'f6llowing;request with. respect to the ASHLAND LAND USE-''CRDINANCE'.will be held before . the ASHLAND:PLANNING COMMISSION ~onrmeeting: date'shown.above. , Themeeting will fbe-at the ASHLAND CHIC. CENTER, 1175 East. Main Street, Ashland, Oregon.. The ordinance criteria applicable to this application are',attached!to'-this :notice. Oregon law states that failure to raise an objection conceming this application,.edfienin person or by letter, or failure to provide sufficient.specificity to afford the decision maker an opportunity to respond to the issue, precludes your right of appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) on that issue. Failure to specify which ordinance criterion the objection is based on also precludes your right of appeal to LUBA on that criterion. Failure of the applicant to raise constitutional or other issuesrelating to proposed conditions of approval with sufficient specificity to allow this Commission to respond to the issue precludes an action for damages in circuit court. , :A copy of the application, all documents and evidence relied upon by the applicant and applicable criteria are available for inspection at no cost and will be provided at reasonable.cost, if requested. A copy of the Staff Report will be available for inspection seven days prior to the hearing and will be provided at Creasonable cost, If requested. All materials are available at the Ashland Planning Department, Community Development and Engineering Services, 51.. Winbum: Way, Ashland, Oregon 97520. During the Public Hearing, the Chair shall allow testimony from the applicant and those in attendance concerning this request The Chair: shall have the right 'tolimit the length of testimony and require that comments be restricted to the applicable criteria. Unless there is a continuance, if a participant so requests before the conclusion of the hearing, the record shall remain open for at least seven days after the hearing. In compliance with the American with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Administrator's office at 541488.6002 (rTY phone number 1-800-735-2900). NotfipGon 72 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibirdy to the meeting. (28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title 1). If you have questions or comments concerning this request, please feel free to contact the Ashland Planning Division, 541488-5305. 45 G?mmm-0Mp1u uvgWonw htiled l01P20t0A15 O.do SITE DESIGN AND USE STANDARDS 18.72.070 Criteria for Approval The following criteria shall be used to approve or deny an application: A. All applicable City ordinances have been met or will be met by the proposed development B. All requirements of the Site Review Chapter have been met or will be met C. The development complies with the Site Design Standards adopted by the City Council for implementation of this Chapter. D. That adequate capacity of City fadlities for water, sewer, paved access to and through the development, electricity, urban storm drainage, and adequate transportation can and will be provided to and through the subject property. All improvements in the street right-0f-way shall comply with the Street Standards in Chapter 18.88, Performance Standards Options. (ORD 2655,1991; ORD 2636,1999) ANNEXATIONS-APPROVAL STANDARDS 18.106.030 Approval standards An annexation may be approved if the proposed request for annexation conforms, or can be made to conform through the imposition of conditions, with the following approval criteria: A The land is within the City's Urban Growth Boundary. B. The proposed zoning for the annexed area is in conformance with the designation indicated on the Comprehensive Plan Map, and the project, if proposed concurrently with the annexation, is an allowed use within the proposed zoning. C. The land is currently contiguous with the present City limits. D. Adequate City facilities for the provision of water to the site as determined by the Public Works Department; the transport of sewage from the site to the waste water treatment plant as determined by the Public Works Department; the provision of electricity to the site as determined by the Electric Department urban storm drainage as determined by the Public Works Deparment can and will be provided to and through the subject property. Unless the City has dedared a moratorium based upon a shortage of water, sewer, or electricity, it is recognized that adequate capacity exists system-wide for these facilities.. E. Adequate transportation can and will be provided to and through the subject property. For the purposes of this section 'adequate transportation' for annexations consists of vehicular, bicycle, pedestrian and transit transportation meeting the following standards: 1. For vehicular transportation a 20' wide paved access exists, or can and will be constructed, along the full frontage of the project site to the nearest fully improved collector or arterial street All streets adjacent to the annexed area shall be improved, at a minimum, to a half-street standard with a minimum 20' driving surface. The City may, after assessing the impact of the development, require the full improvement of streets adjacent to the annexed area. All streets located within annexed areas shall be fully improved to city standards. Where future street dedications are indicated on the City's Street Dedication Map or required by the City, provisions shall be made for the dedication and improvement of these streets and included with the application for annexation. 2. For bicycle transportation safe and accessible bicycle facilities exist, or can and will be constructed. Should the annexation be adjacent to an arterial street, bike lanes shall be provided on or adjacent to the arterial street Likely bicycle destinations from the project site shall be determined and safe and accessible bicycle facilities serving those destinations shall be indicated. 3. For pedestrian transportation safe and accessible pedestrian facilities exist, or can and will be constructed. Full sidewalk improvements shall be provided on one side adjacent to the annexation for all streets adjacent to the proposed annexed area. Sidewalks shall be provided as required by ordinance on all streets within the annexed area. Where the project site is within a quarter of a mile of an existing sidewalk system, the sidewalks from the project site shall be constructed to extend and conned to the existing system. Likely pedestrian destinations from the project site shall be determined and the safe and accessible pedestrian facilities serving those destinations shall be indicated. 4. For transit transportation, should transit service be available to the site, or be likely to be extended to the site in the future based on information from the local public transit provider, provisions shall be made for the construction of adequate transit facilities, such as bus shelters and bus tum-out lanes. All required transportation improvements shall be constructed and installed prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any new structures on the annexed property. F. For all residential annexations, a plan shall be provided demonstrating that the development of the entire property will ultimately occur at a minimum density of 90% of the base density for the zone, unless reductions in the total number of units is necessary to accommodate significant natural features, topography, access limitations, or similar physical constraints. The owner or owners of the property shall sign an agreement, to be recorded with the county derk after approval of the annexation, ensuring that future development will occur in accord with the minimum density indicated in the development plan. For purposes of computing maximum density, portions of the annexed area containing undevelopable areas such as wetlands, floodplain corridor lands, or slopes greater than 35%, shall not be included. G. For all annexations with a density or potential density of four residential units or greater and involving residential zoned lands, or commercial, employment or industrial lands with a Residential Overlay (R-Oveday): 1. 35% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below 120% of median income; or 2. 25% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below'l00% of median income; or 3. 20% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below 80% of median income; or 4. 15% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below 60% of median income; or 5. Tilde to a sufficient amount of buildable land for development is transferred to a non-profit (IRC 501(3) (c)) affordable housing developer or comparable Development Corporation for the purpose of complying with subsection 2 above. The land shall be located within the project and all needed public facilifies shall be extended to the area or areas proposed for transfer. Ownership of the land shall be transferred to the affordable housing developer or Development Corporation prior to commencement of the project The total number of affordable units described in this section G shall be determined by rounding down fractional answers to the nearest whole unit A deed restriction, or similar legal instrument, shall be used to guarantee compliance with affordable criteria for a period of not less than 60 years. Properties providing affordable units as part of the annexation process shall qualify for a maximum density bonus of 25 percent H. One or more of the following standards are met 1. The proposed area for annexation is to be residentially zoned, and there is less than a five-year supply of vacant and redevelopable land in the proposed land use classification within the current city limits.'Redevelopable land" means land zoned for residential use on which development has already occurred but on which, due to present or expected market forces, there exists the likelihood that existing development will be converted to more intensive residential uses during the planning period. The five- year supply shall be determined from vacant and redevelopable land inventories and by the methodology for land need projections from the Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan; or 2. The proposed lot or lots will be zoned E-1 or C-1 under the Comprehensive Plan, and that the applicant will obtain Site Review approval for an outright permitted use, or special permitted use concurrent with the annexation request; or 3. A current or probable public health hazard exists due to lack of full City sanitary sewer or water services; or 4. Existing development in the proposed annexation has inadequate water or sanitary sewer service; or the service will became inadequate within one year, or 5. The area proposed for annexation has existing City of Ashland water or sanitary sewer service extended, connected, and in use, and a signed 'consent to annexation' agreement has been filed and accepted by the City of Ashland; or 6. The lot or lots proposed for annexation are an 'island' completely surrounded by lands within the city limits. (ORD 2792,1997; ORD 2895, 2003) i 46 c et.~"swoa~ tiieizo mw a o s o.eo ZONING CHANGE - TYPE III PROCEDURE 18.108.060. A & B Approval Criteria A. The following planning actions shall be subject to the Type III Procedure: 1. Zone Changes or Amendments to the Zoning Map or other official maps, except for legislative amendments. 2. Comprehensive Plan Map Changes or changes to other official maps, except for legislative amendments. 3. Annexations. 4. Urban Growth Boundary Amendments B. Standards for Type III Planning Actions. 1. Zone changes, zoning map amendments and comprehensive plan map changes subject to the Type III procedure as described in subsection A of this section may be approved if in compliance with the comprehensive plan and the application demonstrates that a. The change implements a public need, other than the provision of affordable housing, supported by the Comprehensive Plan; or b. A substantial change in circumstances has occurred since the existing zoning or Plan designation was proposed, necessitating the need to adjust to the changed circumstances; or c. Circumstances relating to the general public welfare exist that require such an action; or d. Proposed increases in residential zoning density resulting from a change from one zoning district to another zoning district, will provide one of the following: 1. 35% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below 120% of median income; or 2. 25% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below 100% of median income; or 3. 20% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below 80% of median income; or 4. 15% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below 60% of median income; or 5. Title to a sufficient amount of buildable land far development is transferred to a non-profit (IRC 501(3) (c)) affordable housing developer or comparable Development Corporation for the purpose of complying with subsection 2 above. The land shall be located within the project and all needed public facilities shall be extended to the area or areas proposed for transfer. Ownership of the land shall be transferred to the affordable housing developer or Development Corporation prior to commencement of the project; or e. Increases in residential zoning density of four units or greater on commercial, employment or industrial zoned lands (i.e. Residential Overlay), will not negatively impact the City of Ashland's commercial and industrial land supply as required in the Comprehensive Plan, and will provide one of the following: 1. 35% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below 120% of median income; or 2. 25% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below 100% of median income; or 3. 20% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below 80% of median income; or 4. 15% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below 60% of median income; or 5. Title to a sufficient amount of buildable land for development is transferred to a non-profit (IRC 501(3) (c)) affordable housing developer or comparable Development Corporation for the purpose of complying with subsection 2 above. The land shall be located within the project and all needed public facilities shall be extended to the area or areas proposed for dedication. Ownership of the land and/or air space shall be transferred to the affordable housing developer or Development Corporation prior to commencement of the project The total number of affordable units described in sections D or E shall be determined by rounding down fractional answers to the nearest whole unit A deed restriction, or similar legal instrument, shall be used to guarantee compliance with affordable criteria for a period of not less than 60 years. Sections D and E do not apply to council initiated actions. TREE REMOVAL 18.61.080 Criteria for Issuance of Tree Removal - Staff Permit An applicant for a Tree Removal Permit shall demonstrate that the following criteria are satisfied. The Staff Advisor may require an arborist's report to substantiate the criteria for a permit A. Hazard Tree: The Staff Advisor shall issue a tree removal permit for a hazard tree if the applicant demonstrates that a tree is a hazard and warrants removal. 1. A hazard tree is a tree that is physically damaged to the degree that it is dear that it is likely to fall and injure persons or property. A hazard tree may also include a tree that is located within public rights of way and is causing damage to existing public or private facilities or services and such facilities or services cannot be relocated or the damage alleviated. The applicant must demonstrate that the condition or location of the tree presents a dear public safety hazard or a foreseeable danger of property damage to an existing structure and such hazard or danger cannot reasonably be alleviated by treatment or pruning. 2. The City may require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each hazard tree pursuant to AMC 18.61.084. Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit B. Tree that is Not a Hazard: The City shall issue a tree removal permit for a tree that is not a hazard if the applicant demonstrates all of the following: 1. The tree is proposed for removal in order to permit the applicat on to be consistent with other applicable Ashland Land Use Ordinance requirements and standards, including but not limited to applicable Site Design and Use Standards and Physical and Environmental Constraints. The Staff Advisor may require the building footprint of the development to be staked to allow for accurate verification of the permit application; and 2. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on erosion, soil stability, flow of surface waters, protection of adjacent trees, or existing windbreaks; and 3. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on the tree densities, sizes, canopies, and species diversity within 200 feet of the subject property. The City shall grant an exception to this criterion when alternatives to the tree removal have been considered and no reasonable alternative exists to allow the property to be used as permitted in the zone. Nothing in this section shall require that the residential density be reduced below the permitted density allowed by the zone. In making this determination, the City may consider alternative site plans or placement of structures or alternate landscaping designs that would lessen the impact on trees, so long as the alternatives continue to comply with other provisions of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance. 4. - The City shall require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each tree granted approval pursuant to AMC 18.61.084. Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit (ORD 2951, 2006; ORD 2883, 2002) ADMINISTRATIVE VARIANCE FROM SITE DESIGN AND USE STANDARDS 18.72.090 An administrative variance to the requirements of this chapter may be granted with respect to the requirements of the Site Design Standards adopted under section 18.72.080 if, on the basis of the application, investigation and evidence submitted, all of the following circumstances are found to exist A. There is a demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements of the Site Design Standards due to a unique or unusual aspect of the proposed use of a site; B. Approval of the variance will not substantially negatively impact adjacent properties; C. Approval of the variance is consistent with the stated purpose of the Site Design and Use Chapter; and x. The variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the difficulty. 47 ¢kommd~'wwmmswooa,i 101w 1MI570. AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF OREGON ► County of Jackson 1 The undersigned being first duly sworn states that: 1. 1 am employed by the City of Ashland, 20 East Main Street, Ashland, Oregon 97520, in the Community Development Department. 2. On December 22, 2010 1 caused to be mailed, by regular mail, in a sealed envelope with postage fully prepaid, a copy of the attached planning action notice to each person listed on the attached mailing list at such addresses as set forth on this list under each person's name for Planning Action #2010-01570, 590 Clover. Signatur of Employee Gkomm-0evlplanningHortns & HandoutsWriidad of Mailing_Planniig Action Notice.doc 48 Easy Peele Labels ♦ Bend along line to AVERY® sue I Use Avery® Template 5160® 1 'eed Paper expose Pop-Up Edger- ~ 1 PA-2010-01570 391E14AA 6300 PA-2010-01570 391E14AD 4000 PA-2010-01570 391El4AA 6002 ASHLAND LODGE NO 23 AF/AM BELL LYNDA L CHENOWETH RICHARD G TRUSTEE ET P 0 BOX81 780 OAK KNOLL DR 671 SPRING CREEK DR ! ASHLAND OR 97520 ASHLAND OR 97520 ASHLAND OR 97520 PA-2010-01570 391E14AD 5300 PA-2010-01570 391El4AA 6700 PA-2010.01570 391El4AD 5000 CHRISTIAN LIZA KENDALL CLOVER LANE LLC DAOUST JASON NEAL PO BOX 3481 1120 PROSPECT ST 815 OAK KNOLL DR ASHLAND OR 97520 ASHLAND OR 97520 ASHLAND OR 97520 PA-2010-01570 391 E14AD 4900 PA-2010-01570 391 El4AD 3600 PA-2010-01570 391 El4AD 4700 FARIA PATRICIA L GENISE LIVIA HOOD RICHARD D/LINDA 2933 LINCOLN AVE 840 OAK KNOLL 785 OAK KNOLL DR ALAMEDA CA 94501 ASHLAND OR 97520 ASHLAND OR 97520 PA-2010-01570 391E14AA 6001 PA-2010-01570 391E14AD 7100 PA-2010-01570 39IE14AD 7000 JONES JEREMIAH LEACH NERINE B MOORE CLAUDETTE 681 SPRING CREEK DR 32391 BEYMER RD 985 HIGHBURY DR ASHLAND OR 97520 EUGENE OR 97405 MEDFORD OR 97501 PA-2010.01570 391E14AA 7000 PA-2010-01570 391 Ell 4AA 2700 PA-2010-01570 391E14AD 5200 MORJIG STEVEN H MUNRO CAROL CHRISTINA OGIER RICHARD AIMICHELLE L 610 CHESTNUT ST P 0 BOX 7862 835 OAK KNOLL DR ASHLAND OR 97520 BROOKINGS OR 97615 ASHLAND OR 97520 PA-2010-01570 391E14AA 7000 PA-2010-01570 391 El4AA 6801 PA-2010-01570 391 E14AD 5100 OUTDOOR MEDIA DIMENSIONS INC PACIFIC WESTERN/MEDFORD LLC PATTERSON CLARENCE 0 - TRUSTEE 2626 WYATT DR 1175 MAIN ST IF 6830 HWY 66 MEDFORD OR 97501 MEDFORD OR 97504 ASHLAND OR 97520 PA-2010-01570 391E14AA 6800 PA-2010-01570 391El4AD 4800 PA-2010.01570 39IE14AA 6101 REDBAND HOLDINGS LLC REINHOLZ HARVEY H TRUSTEE SCHOENFELD JILL R/KASZUBA DAVID W 585 CLOVER LN 1 1310 TALENT AVE A 680 SPRING CREEK DR ASHLAND OR 97520 TALENT OR 97540 ASHLAND OR 97520 PA-2010-01570 391El4AD 4500 PA-2010-01570 39IE14AD 3900 PA-2010-01570 391El4AD 4600 SLAPNICKA ELDEN R TRUSTEE SWEET DENNIS E/BEVERLY T T & R VENTURES LLC 765 OAK KNOLL DR 1135 REITEN DR 994 MORTON ST ASHLAND OR 97520 ASHLAND OR 97520 ASHLAND OR 97520 PA-2010-01570 391E14AA 6100 PA-2010-01570 391E14AD 5400 PA-2010-01570 391El4AD 3700 TRIPOLI RICHARD TRUSTEE ET AL TURNER MARTHA I WALKER MATTHEW S/CYNTHIA L 690 SPRING CR DR 851 OAK KNOLL DR 826 OAK KNOLL DR ASHLAND OR 97520 ASHLAND OR 97520 ASHLAND OR 97520 PA-2010.01570 PA-2010-01570 PA-2010-01570 Urban Development Services Caldera Brewing Company Laurie Sager & Assoc 485 W Nevada St 540 Clover Ln 700 Mistletoe Rd #201 Ashland OR 97520 Ashland, OR 97520 Ashland, OR 97520 ttiquettes faciles h peter A Repl eziil! la hachure afin de I vvww.avery.com Sens de Iltilicn7 le naharit AVFRVe 5760® ! rev61er le rebord Poo-Unl- ! 1-800-GO-AVERY Easy Peel® Labels i ♦ send along line to I Q AVERY® 5160® I Use Avery® Template 51609 . A 'eed Paper expose Pop-Up Edge' A 1 PA-2010-01570 PA-2010-01570 PA-2010-01570 Construction Engineering Consultants Hoffbuhr & Associates Southern Oregon Traffic Engineers P.O. Box 1724 880 Golf View Or 112 Monterey Dr Medford, OR 97501 Medford, OR 97504 Medford, OR 97504 PA-2010-01570 PA-2010-01570 PA-2010-01570 Steel Building Systems Inc Martin Lee ODOT - Ian Hodacher 4000 Kenney Rd 590 Allison St 100 Antelope Rd Jacksonville OR 97530 Ashland, OR 97520 White City, OR 97503 PA-2010-01570 37 Eric Niemeyer, Jackson County 590 Clover Ln 200 Antelope Rd 12-22-2010 White City OR 97503 i I Etiquettes faciles h peter ♦ ReplieU zA la hachure afin de , www.aven.com Iltilicw Ie naharit GVFRV®SifiO® Sensde ! r6v6ler le rebord Poo-Uo*a ! 1-800-GO-AVERY ! NOTICE OF SITE VISIT NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Ashland Planning Commission will conduct a site visit of 590 Clover Lane on Monday, January 10, 2011 at 3:30 p.m. The site visit is open to the public. [Planning Action #2010-01570] I Submitted to the Daily Tidings Community Notes section on 1/6/2111 , 51 Z N W N N ~U) z O ~dc ~ ETC', cUO i o v ~ E ;n Q:Wom w n.c Q Z Q a' W C/ Z O j U tq y ^a' C O d i W N m : Z c r f h Jr 4 O 1i v r D I b,~ T 1 °fl Z W C r C Q* to MS W .1. ~4 S q, 4 f 7 'V Q ~ Of m yc s Z c v # W c o D o N c v m m y `6i-~ c Nam g c_m iy >rnN W Vm r'~ OM rnma ~µlEco K aa~°4" Eir •E + J: ,g: O o c N a i z U J N 0 E n> rn o IV 0 ,ti y z~,4 i3>tin _j 'N C) X o ouSaU - o o n{~ a; P w e., a in H W d U U J n #2' x• y~ v W E N o u c 4 r x. LOD 0- L) + a'a1"z i~~ of t4i ~ ' ~-x AI ?yn v `1~ r -E * ' ~ S1 ~ ~ t` s ~a 1. - < s .fit ;{''s~it~'~ ~~{4_ a`~ k.Y" y ~+~N~x Y~ .i1 k~'<'~• R ~ M ~ JCL©UER~L~ANE~ y~ _ ❑ + #c~i "i z€...s,x, yF~ sue'., 1 - x\ RM, 5 x ~ h c ~ j" t 4Css f r S vll~ ate ~ Kt~ rat Ts c ~ - 4: c n` f. V i 4 T f_ s rNP b ~.d.A by t MtwVall, -All's P _.52 . Fr ASHLAND PLANNING DIVISION STAFF REPORT January 11, 2011 PLANNING ACTION: PA-2010-01570 APPLICANT: Caldera Brewing Company LOCATION: 590 Clover Lane COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Employment & Single Family Residential (existing) Employment (proposed) APPLICATION DEEMED COMPLETE: December 19, 2010 120-DAY TIME LIMIT: April 18, 2011 * (*Type III applications not subject to 120-day limits pursuant to ORS 227.178.7) ORDINANCE REFERENCE: 18.08.290 Height of Buildings 18.40 E-1 Employment District 18.61 Tree Preservation & Protection 18.63 Water Resources 18.72 Site Design and Use Standards 18.72.090 Administrative Variance 18.92 Off-Street Parking 18.106 Annexation 18.108.060 Type III Procedures REQUEST: A request for Annexation; Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment/Zone Change; Site Review approval to construct a new 28,000 square foot manufacturing, warehouse, storage, tasting room and administrative office building for the production of brewing products; Lot Consolidation; and Tree Removal Permit to remove 17 trees for the 3.72 acre parcel located at 590 Clover Lane. The proposal involves an annexation of three parcels totaling 3.72 acres in area which currently have a County zoning designation of RR-5. Two of the three parcels have a current Comprehensive Plan designation as Single Family Residential, while the third is already designated as Employment. With the proposal all three parcels will be annexed as Employment lands to be zoned E-1 and consolidated into one parcel. The application also involves a Modification of Planning Action #2003-112 to eliminate the previous vehicle trips per day per lot cap on Tax Lots #6800 and #6801 at 580-585 Clover Lane, and Administrative Variance to the Site Design and Use Standards to place parking and circulation between the building and the street and to the parking lot landscaping and screening requirements. Included with the application is a recommendation by the Staff Advisor to include a portion of Interstate 5 freeway right-of-way in the annexation to make the extension of the City's boundaries more logical and orderly pursuant to AMC 18.106.040. Planning Action PA # 20IM1570 Ashland Planning Division -Staff Report Applicant: Caldera/590 Clover Lane Page 1 of 23 53 I. Relevant Facts A. Background • History of Application There are no planning actions of record for the subject properties proposed for annexation, however Planning Action 42003-112 was approved by the City Council in October of 2003 to allow the annexation of an approximately 1.32-acre parcel located at what was then the end of Clover Lane, immediately to the north of the subject properties. That 2003 approval included a condition (1117) which required: That a'DevelopmentAgreement'be prepared by the applicant and recorded on the properties limiting the uses to those which generate total vehicle trips of not more than 100 vehicle trips per parcel or a combined total of approximately 200 vehicle trips, as determined by the ITE Trip Generation Manual. The final agreement shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney prior to recordation of the partition plat, issuance of a building permit or final adoption of a resolution annexing the property. This condition was imposed out of concern for the long-term operations of the intersection of Highway 66 and Clover Lane, prior to the current Exit 14 redesign or upcoming Interchange Area Master Plan, despite the fact that the application at the time included a traffic study identifying an acceptable level of service for the intersection with the development of the parcel involved in the application. As a result, the two properties at the present end of Clover Lane, just north of the subject properties, remain limited to lower traffic generating uses such as light industrial and manufacturing uses, and each building permit has been required to include a demonstration that the proposed use is in compliance with this trip cap. B. Detailed Description of the Site and Proposal The 3.72-acre subject property is relatively large, generally triangular, and is comprised of three separate tax lots situated immediately to the south of the Clover Lane cul-de-sac, just outside the current city limits boundary. While City of Ashland topographic maps identify the property as sloping downhill from west to east, away from the freeway, at six to 11 percent, there is a significant amount of fill on the mount of fill on the eastern portion of the site which has clearly altered the natural grade significantly in places. In addition, on the southernmost of the lots where Spring Creek, an intermittent or ephemeral stream, crosses the property its banks are heavily treed and exceed 35 percent slopes in places. There is an existing structure located near the south central area of the northernmost lot (Tax Lot 46900), and a large billboard is located adjacent to the freeway right-of-way. All of the existing structures are proposed to be removed with the current proposal. (See attached Staff Exhibit S-1). The subject properties are more specifically described as follows: I 391E 14AA Tax Lot #6900 - This is a 1.49 acre roughly trapezoidal lot, currently designated as "Employment", and the northernmost of the three lots. 39 1E 14AA Tax Lot #7000 - This is a 1.09 acre lot, roughly trapezoidal and currently designated as "Single Family Residential." This is the middle of the three lots. Planning Action PA # 2010-01570 Ashland Planning Division - Staff Report Applicant: Calde2/590 Clover Lane Page 2 of 23 54 39 1E 14AD Tax Lot #7000 - This is a 1.14 acre lot, triangular in shape and currently designated as "Single Family Residential." This is the southernmost of the three lots. The adjacent properties within the city limits to the north along Clover Lane are all generally zoned E-1 (Employment), as are the nearest properties on the opposite side of the freeway to the west. To the east of the subject properties, there are residential neighborhoods along Sutton Place, Spring Creek Drive and Oak Knoll Drive, all of which are zoned R-1-10 (Single Family Residential). Interstate 5 freeway right-of-way runs along the full western boundary of the property, and is presently outside the city limits. The applicants have provided a Tree Inventory which identifies 30 trees on the subject properties. 17 of the site's 30 identified trees are proposed for removal due to their failing health, being dead or located within the area proposed for improvements. In addition to the site's trees, the southernmost of the three lots contains a segment of Spring Creek, an intermittent or ephemeral stream regulated under Ashland's Water Resources Protection Ordinance (AMC 18.63). A water resources protection zone extends 30 feet upland on either side of the centerline of this stream, and activities within that stream bank protection zone are regulated under Ashland's recently adopted Water Resources Ordinance (AMC 18.63). The current application includes the following requests for the properties located at 590 Clover Lane: • Annexation. The three subject parcels totaling 3.72 acres in area which currently have a County zoning designation of RR-5 are to be annexed into the City. • Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment/Zone Change/Lot Consolidation. Two of the three parcels have a current Comprehensive Plan designation of Single Family Residential, while the third is already designated as Employment. With the proposal all three parcels are to be annexed as Employment lands to be zoned E-1 and will be consolidated into one parcel. Lot consolidation is a procedure handled through the county's Mapping Division, and it is included here only to clarify the proposal. • Modification of PA #2003-112. The application also involves the I modification of Planning Action #2003-112, which had previously required a 100 vehicle trip per day per lot cap on Tax Lots #6800 and #6801 at 580-585 Clover Lane. With improvements to Exit 14 now well underway and an Interchange Area Masterplan under consideration, this application would include a removal of the vehicle trip cap from the lots at 580 and 585 Clover Lane, and would have no trip cap for 590 Clover Lane. • Site Review. The requested approval will allow the applicants to construct a new 28,000 square foot manufacturing, warehouse, storage, tasting room and administrative office building for the production of brewing products. 22,000 square feet of the building is proposed for manufacturing/brewing; 3,000 square feet for cold storage/coolers; and 3,000 square feet for a tasting room and administrative offices. The applicants note that 32 parking spaces are required to serve the proposal, and they have shown 32 parking spaces to be provided in their plans. Planning Action PA # 2010A1570 Ashland Planning Division - Staff Report Applicant: Caldera/590 Clover Lane Page 3 of 23 55 i Administrative Variances to the Site Design & Use Standards. The proposal requires Administrative Variances to the Site Design and Use Standards to place parking and circulation between the building and the street, and to the parking lot landscaping and screening requirements. • Tree Removal Permit. The application includes a request for Tree Removal Permits to remove 17 of the 30 trees identified on the site due to their being dead or in states of failing health, or due to their location within an area proposed for improvements. In addition to the annexation requested by the applicants, the Staff Advisor is recommending that nearby Interstate 5 freeway right-of-way from the current city limits boundary near Exit 14 south to the city limits boundary near Crowson Road be included in the annexation. AMC 18.106.040 dealing with city boundaries states that: When an annexation is initiated by a private individual, the Staff Advisor may include otherparcels of property in the proposed annexation to make a boundary extension more logical and to avoid parcels of land which are not incorporated but are partially or wholly surrounded by the City of Ashland. The Staff Advisor, in a report to the Commission and Council, shall justify the inclusion of any parcels other than the parcel for which the petition is filed. The purpose of this section is to permit the Planning Commission and Council to make annexations extending the City's boundaries more logical and orderly. (Ord 2792, 1997) The current freeway right-of-way is outside of the city limits but within the urban growth boundary, with the exception of the portion where Ashland Street crosses I-5 at Exit 14 which is in the city limits. The present boundary configuration effectively cuts off the easternmost portion of the city from the remainder located west of the freeway, and the current freeway is largely surrounded by city lands. Staff believes that this section of the freeway right-of-way should be included within the current annexation request in order to make this annexation extending the City's boundaries "more logical and orderly" as allowed in AMC 18.106.040 (See attached Staff Exhibit S-2). H. Project Impact The project requires site review approval since it involves the construction ofanew building in the E-1 zoning district. A tree removal permit is required to remove 17 trees greater than six-inches in diameter-at-breast-height. Along with an annexation request, the application includes requests for comprehensive plan map and zoning map amendments, all of which are "Type III" procedures. By code, the Planning Commission has the authority to take such action as is necessary to make the amendments to maps and zones without further action from the Council, unless the decision is appealed, however the annexation requires final approval through a public hearing before the City Council and as such, the Planning Commission's decision on the map amendments, site review, administrative variances, modification, and tree removal permits should be supplemented by a clear recommendation to the City Council with regard to the annexation request. Planning Action PA#2010-01570 Ashland Planning Division - Staff Report Applicant: Calderal590 Clover Lane Page 4 of 23 56 Annexation The approval standards for an Annexation require that the subject property be located within the City's Urban Growth Boundary, that the proposed zoning for the annexed area be in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan Map designation, that the proposal be for an allowed use within the proposed zoning district, and that the land be currently contiguous with the present City limits. In this instance, the subject property is located within the Urban Growth Boundary, immediately south of and contiguous to the existing City limits. The Comprehensive Plan designation for one of the three lots is Employment, with the remaining two lots designated for Single Family Residential development. The applicants are concurrently requesting Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning Map amendments in order to bring all three properties into the city as Employment land. The proposed tasting room is an outright permitted use (restaurant/store) and the brewing facility is a special permitted use (i.e. bottling plant) within the E-1 district. Associated manufacturing, warehousing, storage and administrative office uses described in the application are also permitted uses. Annexation standards also require that for lots which are to be zoned E-1 under the Comprehensive Pian, the applicant must obtain Site Review approval for an outright permitted or special permitted use concurrently with the annexation request. The application includes a request for Site Review approval to construct a building which would include manufacturing, warehouse, storage, tasting room and administrative office uses relating to the production of brewing products which satisfies this requirement. Adequacy of Public Facilities Annexation requests must demonstrate that adequate public facilities can and will be provided to and through the subject property. I The applicant, Caldera Brewing Company of Ashland, has an existing 6,000 square foot brewing operation which is already located on Clover Lane a bit north of the subject properties. Caldera also operates its Tap House retail outlet at 31 Water Street in Downtown Ashland. The application materials provided note that the brewing operation will relocate to the subject properties with approval, but that the Tap House will continue to operate on Water Street. They also indicate that while the proposed new facility is nearly five times the size of the existing facility, its water use will increase by only about 60 percent. The application explains that this is due both to enhancements in technology that can be achieved with new, more efficient equipment and to the fact that the added space is not simply to quadruple production but also to experiment with alternative products having differing types of equipment and storage space needs. The application further notes that the existing facility on Clover Lane has a monthly electrical demand of approximately 12 Kw, or 144 Kw per year and that the proposed facility is anticipated to use approximately 40kw per month, or 480 Kw per year. The application notes that with the exception of storm drainage, all utilities are in place within the Clover Lane right-of-way and are sized to accommodate the proposal. Eight-inch water and sewer mains are in place and adequate to serve the proposal, and an existing electrical transformer sits on the vacant lot immediately to the north. In conversations with the Electrical Department, they have indicated that the facilities in the area were sized with Planning Actlon PA If 2010-01570 Ashland Planning Divislon -Staff Report Applicant: Caldera/590 Clover Lane Page 5 of 23 57 development of these parcels in mind. The application also indicates that fire hydrants will be located on both the front and back ends of the property, and that fire apparatus access and tum-arounds are to be provided to address fire protection needs. The applicants note that in consulting with the City's Public Works Department, a deficiency in stormwater capacity was identified due to an undersized culvert at the intersection of Highway 66 and Clover Lane. The applicants are thus proposing a metering system to hold stormwater on site temporarily during large storm events and slowly release it into the city system at an acceptable rate. Instead of directing stormwater to the undersized facilities on Highway 66, the applicants propose to direct stormwater to Spring Creek Drive, after first holding it on site in multiple systems including a bio-swale which will address detention and water quality requirements. The plan also identifies an underground storm water detention facility on the east side of the property to accommodate overflows and then slowly meter them. The applicants landscapes architect and civil engineer have provided preliminary drawings addressing the siting of utilities for the project, and conditions have been recommended below to require that final electric, utility and storm drain plans be provided for the review and approval of the Public Works, Electric, Planning and Building Departments prior to submittal of building permit plans. Adequacy of Transportation Facilities Annexations must also provide necessary transportation facilities to and through the subject property; transportation facilities must address vehicular, bicycle, pedestrian and transit transportation. Clover Lane is a commercial collector street, and terminates in a cul-de-sac just north of the subject properties. Paving, curbs, gutters, and curbside sidewalks are in place on both sides of the street. Because the existing street already exceeds the 500-foot length allowed in city street standards for a dead-end street and the property is at the terminus of the city limits, the applicants are proposing to extend a private driveway from the terminus of the existing public facility to serve the proposal without further extending city street improvements. The applicants propose to provide a scored concrete pedestrian path through the existing driveway and parking areas to provide a pedestrian connection from the existing sidewalk on the west side of Clover Lane to the building entrance. A condition has been recommended below to require that the applicants provide signage at the end of the public street's existing turn-around clearly indicating that there is no outlet for through traffic. The applicants have provided a traffic impact analysis, prepared by Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering, LLC which concludes that the proposed Employment designation and E-1 zoning can be accommodated through the existing transportation system without creating adverse impacts. This analysis looked at traffic impacts of the development on five study area intersections: Tolman Creek Road and Ashland Street, Washington Street and Ashland Street, I-5 southbound ramps and Ashland Street, 1-5 northbound ramps and Ashland Street, and Clover Lane and Ashland Street, focusing on the existing year 2010, the build year 2011, and future year 2030 conditions during the peak p.m. hour. With the proposed Employment designation for all three of the subject lots, they are expected to generate approximately 557 average daily trips. The analysis notes that the presently stop- controlled I-5 northbound intersection with Ashland Street is shown to operate at a v/c ratio Planning Action PA # 2010-01570 Ashland Planning Division -Staff Report Applicant: Calderaf590 Clover Lane Page 5 of 23 58 greater than 2.0 under future year 2030 no-build and build conditions, and 95'h percentile queue lengths are shown to exceed link distances and create potential safety concerns on Ashland Street between the I-5 ramp intersections and the off ramps themselves under existing year 2010, design year 2011 and future year 2030 conditions. Planned mitigation detailed in the analysis includes the ODOT I-5 Exit 14 interchange redesign project which includes traffic signals at both ramp intersections, widening of Ashland Street, and extended right turn lanes on both I-5 off-ramps. This redesign project is currently underway, with completion tentatively slated for April of 2012. With these improvements in place, the traffic impact analysis provided concludes that study area intersections are shown to be adequately mitigated throughout the future year planning horizon. Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Map Amendment and Lot Consolidation The applicants propose to change the two southernmost of the subject properties' Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning designations from Single Family Residential to Employment (E-1). The approval of a Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment and Zone Change requires that the applicants demonstrate one or more of the following: a) the change implements a public need, other than the provision ofaffordable housing, supported by the Comprehensive Plan; b) a substantial change in circumstances has occurred since the existing zoning or Plan designation was proposed, necessitating the need to adjust to the changed circumstances; or c) circumstances relating to the general public welfare exist that require such an action. The application suggests that the applicants, as the owners of a small existing business, are an Ashland success story that began locally and now ship their products internationally. Their business is growing and this growth to the subject properties is in keeping with the needs of the community to encourage economic development and keep a local and diversified employment base offering living wage jobs. The application indicates that the owners had considered relocating the business regionally or out of state, but found that these options did not have the various intangibles offered by Ashland. Ashland is the current place of business, with all employees living in or near Ashland, and continues to provide the "sense of place" and small town atmosphere that the owners desire. In addition, the applicants note that their existing business is already located on Clover Lane, and the subject property is well suited to their needs and will accommodate their anticipated development timeline. The applicants also contend that there has been a substantial change in circumstances since the existing Single Family Residential Comprehensive Plan Map designations were put into place that necessitates the need to adjust to the new circumstances. The applicants explain that the proximity to the freeway makes the site ill-suited to its original residential designation, and that with the Planning Commission's previous decision in Planning Action #2000-091 to eliminate a street connection and vacate the street right-of-way between Clover Lane and Spring Creek Drive there is no remaining logical connection between the subject properties and the residential neighborhoods to the east. As was noted in the record of PA #2000-091: i The significant change in elevation (i.e. 20 feet) between Clover Lane and Spring CreekDrive is an unusual situation that requires any through street connection to be constructed at the City's maximum street grade of 15 percent, including large cut and fill banks on either side of the street. Additionally, the commercial uses generally Planning Action PA # 201041570 Ashland Planning Division -Staff Report Applicant: Caldera/590 Clover Lane Page 7 of 23 59 h attracted to freeway overlay areas can often be incompatible with residential areas and can generate certain types of vehicle trips (i, e. large truck and delivery trips) that could have a negative impact upon neighboring residential properties, as well as the intersection at Highway 66 and Oak Knoll. In staff s view, retaining Caldera Brewing in Ashland and accommodating its continued success is clearly, as suggested by the applicants, in keeping with the needs ofthe community to encourage economic development and keep a local and diversified employment base offering living wage jobs. The proposal represents a significant benefit to the community and merits the proposed Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Amendments on that basis alone, although we would also concur with the applicants that the proximity to the freeway, elimination of the street connection to the adjacent residential neighborhood Spring Creek Drive, and the topographic separation from that neighborhood render the property ill-suited to its current single family residential designation. Lot Consolidation Lot consolidation, as proposed by the applicants, will be required by the Building Division prior to permit approval as structures cannot be placed over property lines. However, the lot consolidation process is an administrative procedure handled through Jackson County's Mapping Division, not subject to review or approval by the city, and it is included here only to clarify the proposal. Logical & Orderly Boundary (AMC 18.106.040) In addition to the annexation requested by the applicants, the Staff Advisor is recommending that nearby Interstate 5 freeway right-of-way from the current city limits boundary near Exit 14 south to the city limits boundary near Crowson Road be included in the annexation. AMC 18.106.040 dealing with city boundaries states that: When an annexation is initiated by a private individual, the StaffAdvisormay include other parcels of property in the proposed annexation to make a boundary extension more logical and to avoid parcels of land which are not incorporated but are partially or wholly surrounded by the City of Ashland. The Staff Advisor, in a report to the Commission and Council, shall justify the inclusion of any parcels other than the parcel for which the petition is tiled. The purpose of this section is to permit the Planning Commission and Council to make annexations extending the City's boundaries more logical and orderly. (Ord 2792, 1997) The current freeway right-of-way is outside of the city limits but within the urban growth boundary, with the exception of the portion where Ashland Street crosses I-5 at Exit 14 which is in the city limits. The present boundary configuration effectively cuts off the easternmost portion of the city from the remainder located west of the freeway, and the current freeway is largely surrounded by city lands. Staff believes that this section of the freeway right-of-way should be included within the current annexation request in order to make this annexation extending the City's boundaries "more logical and orderly" as allowed in AMC 18.106.040 (See attached Staff Exhibit S-2). Planning Aclion PA # 2010-01570 Ashland Planning Division - Staff Report Applicant: Calderal590 Clover Lane Page 8 of 23 60 Site Review Requirements of the Employment Zoning District All of the building square footage is proposed for brewing, a tasting room, manufacturing, warehousing, storage and administrative offices, which are permitted uses in the E-1 zone. The E-1 zoning district does not require standard setbacks from property lines unless a parcel abuts a residential zoning district. In this case, because the property abuts residentially zoned land to the east, a ten foot side yard setback along the east property line is required. As proposed, the building design satisfies this requirement. The maximum building height within the E-1 zoning district is 40 feet. Building height is defined as, "The vertical distancefromthe grade'tothehighestpointofthecoping ofaflat roof or to the deck line of a mansard roof or to the average height of the highest gable of pitch or hip roof." In this instance, the roof form is pitched with a clearstory element incorporated along the ridgeline. This proposed clearstory element is 45 feet above grade at the peak of the ridge, based on the drawings submitted. As noted above, the land use ordinance provides for an averaging of the ridge peak height and the eaves for the highest gable. If the height were to be calculated considering this clearstory element as the highest gable of the pitch roof, its height would average to 43.75 feet. However, in considering the building's height, staff believes that while there is a clear distinction between the clearstory element and the remaining roof below the clearstory itself functions as an energy saving component of the overall roof design by allowing for the most efficient use of natural light possible, and in staff s view, calculating the building's height from the peak ofthe clearstory element to the lowest eave of the roof, rather than considering the clearstory itself to be an architecturally distinct, separate "highest gable", is consistent with the intent ofthe code with regard to building height and results in a building height of 35 feet. Here, staff would note that were the roofline to extend from the existing lower eave to the existing ridge with no clearstory element, the building itself would be more massive with a higher roof deck yet would lack any energy savings gained from taking advantage of natural lighting by incorporating the clearstory. (See Staff Exhibit S-3). The proposal will result in 44.24 percent of the site being landscaped or remaining in its natural state, which significantly exceeds the 15 percent minimum landscaping requirement for the E-1 zoning district. Site Design & Use Standards and Administrative Variances The building's design is typical of manufacturing type spaces with large volumes for interior function, mobility and storage. The siding shown will be 26 gauge metal, with metal roofing and trim, and the building is described as being done in earth tones with a sand-colored body and forest green trim. The applicants note, however, that unlike many steel buildings designed for manufacturing, the proposed building incorporates architectural elements in an attempt to create a positive appearance, including a wrap-around awning at the entrance with complimentary surface improvements for guests and employees to assemble and enjoy views of the eastern Ashland hillsides. They note that the design includes various windows and a clearstory cupola element for aesthetic qualities and natural light. The applicants indicate that they have provided additional landscaping area beyond that required and created a plaza space at the front of the building, along with a trellis frame to grow hops and a covered Planning Action PA # 2010-01570 Ashland Planning Division - Staff Report Applicant: Caldera/590 Clover Lane Page 9 of 23 61 Ii l bicycle parking structure. They note that the building will be somewhat recessed into the earth to lessen visual impacts from the side and rear. Cross-section drawings and photos of the site have been provided to demonstrate that the topography and physical separation available due to the size of the subject properties will minimize visual impacts to the residential neighbors, and the applicants note that the brewing operation already operates on Clover Lane in similar proximity to residential neighbors with no complaints. Staff would note an anecdotal recollection here that there were complaints several years ago due to the use of a refrigerated trailer for temporary on-site storage as the compressor operating created a noise issue for one of the residential neighbors to the current location. The applicants were responsive in dealing with the issue when made aware of the complaint, and there have been no complaints on this or any other matter since the issue was resolved. Ashland's Site Design & Use Standards for orientation and scale require that buildings have their primary orientation to the street rather than to a parking area; that entrances be clearly visible, functional and open to the public during all business hours; that buildings be accessed from a public sidewalk; that buildings have an entrance within 20 feet of the right- of-way; and that parking and/or automobile circulation not be placed between the building's entrance and the right-of-way. These standards note that: i One area in which Ashland's commercial [development] differs from that seen in many other cities is the relationship between the street, buildings, parking areas, and landscaping. The most common form of modern commercial development is the placement ofa small buffer of landscaping between the street and the parking area, with the building behind the parking area at the rear ofthe parcel with loading areas behind the building. This may be desirable by the commercial use.., however, the effect on the streetscape is less than desirable because the result is a vast, hot, open parking area which is not only unsightly but results in a development form which the city discourages. The alternative desired in Ashland is to design the site so that it makes a positive contribution to the streetscape and enhances pedestrian and bicycle traffic. While the standards recognize that there may need to be exceptions for some requirements granted due to topographic constraints, lot configuration, or where a building is not accessed by pedestrians, such as warehouses and industrial buildings without attached offices, these standards provide the building blocks for creating a human scale pedestrian streetscape that is designed first for people rather than for the automobile. While the subject properties have topographic constraints and a triangular lot configuration which somewhat limit development options, in reviewing the proposal staff have noted that a majority of the parking to be provided is shown in front of the front wall of the building, and the building's entrance is approximately 130 feet from the terminus of Clover Lane with 80- 90 feet of asphalt driveway to be crossed by pedestrians coming to the building from the terminus of the Clover Lane sidewalk. In addition, while a covered area is provided over the building's entrance, in the drawings provided there seems to be no material distinction between the roof covering and the building's siding, and the scale of the entry door and Planning Action PA # 2010-01570 Ashland Planning Division - Staff Report Applicant: Caldera/590 Clover Lane Page 10 of 23 62 surrounding windows does little to provide emphasis to the entry given the scale of the building and its distance from the terminus of Clover Lane. The project as proposed would require Administrative Variance to these standards. While staff believe that the lot's triangular configuration and topography do limit the applicants' options to some extent, and the nature of the proposed use as a large manufacturing facility served by large trucks has been the driving force in the design, we believe that there needs to be a stronger consideration for the standards of orientation and scale and that the lot's substantial size should provide some measure of design flexibility to better respond to these standards, or where Administrative Variances may be called for, to mitigate the impacts of varying from the standards. In particular, staff believes that the building design needs to better address the sense of entry and orientation standards by providing some further variations in color, material, base, entrance and/or fenestration to better engage the Clover Lane streetscape, particularly given the distance from the entrance to the right-of-way, and that placement of car and track circulation routes between the entrance and the street needs to be carefully considered so as to provide equal consideration for pedestrians. Staff recognizes that the current location of the terminus of Clover Lane is placed at the logical point of orientation for the building; the current street lay out did not anticipate development of these three parcels as a single business, but rather anticipated a development pattern similar to that found just to the north along Clover Lane, with the street extended south of its current terminus and buildings constructed off the street and readily oriented to the street as called for in the standards. Staff believes that the current street placement combined with the configuration of the lot and nature of the business proposed would make it extremely difficult not to have vehicular circulation routes between the building and the street, and as such we believe an Administrative Variance to this standard is justified. However, with this in mind, staff believes that approval of an Administrative Variance adds to the need for a strengthened sense of entry and also calls for the addition of a pedestrian connection from the east side of Clover Lane, as a pedestrian route in this location would more than halve the length of pedestrian travel through the driveway while also eliminating the need for pedestrians coming from the Spring Creek neighborhood via the existing pedestrian path to cross Clover Lane and more than 60 additional feet of driveway. Staff do not believe that pedestrians coming from the Spring Creek neighborhood are likely to cross Clover Lane and two large driveway sections, and will instead continue their direction of travel along the east side ofthe driveway to the building entry and the site needs to be planned accordingly. Conditions to better address both the building's sense of entry and pedestrian access from Clover Lane have been recommended below. I Parking The materials submitted note that based on square footage, uses, number of employees and number of seats available in the tasting room, the proposal will require 32 parking spaces, and the applicants are proposing to provide 32 spaces including two accessible spaces with the proposal. Eight bicycle parking spaces are also proposed, with four of these to be covered as required by ordinance. (The application's written submittals note that 36parking spaces are proposed, and that 34 spaces are required. However, the plans provided clearly illustrate only 32 spaces. The 34 space requirement noted includes two handicapped i i I Planning Action PA # 2010-01570 Ashland Planning Division -Staff Report Applicant: Calderar590 Clover Lane Page 11 of 23 63 accessible spaces which may be provided from among, rather than in addition to, the required spaces and as such only 32 spaces are required as shown in the plans provided.) While driveway standards call for driveways of 20 feet in width to serve parking areas of more than seven spaces, the driveways shown on the site plan vary up to 40 feet in width to accommodate aerial fire truck access (which requires a 26 foot clear width) and large truck turning and circulation. This driveway width exceeds the required curb to curb pavement width of a two lane avenue under current street standards by a full seven feet and the existing Clover Lane improvement is only 27 feet in width. Staff has some concern with the resultant amount of impervious surface associated with the parking and circulation areas, and we believe that the applicants should look more closely at ways to minimize the amount of pavement installed to the greatest extent possible in order to minimize adverse impacts including stormwater run-off and the heat island effect. Where paving is absolutely necessary to accommodate the design parameters of the proposal, staff believe that is should be installed in permeable materials. Staff have raised the issue with the applicants, and have also noted that we would support a phased implementation of some of the required parking as was allowed with the recent Modern Fan 11 annexation, where a portion of the parking was approved for a future second phase where its installation would be triggered by demand or a change to a more intense use for the building. Recent Council goals and policies have pressed more sustainable development measures, as evidenced in the adopted requirements to "Design Green Surface Parking" as part of the Croman Master Plan. Previous Council decisions have emphasized the discretionary nature of annexation approvals and in staff s view, the City Council will ultimately be looking for measures to reduce the environmental and microclimatic impacts of surface parking and circulation areas on the subject properties through the site design and material selection if the property is to be annexed. As such, conditions have been recommended below to require that a revised site plan be provided with the building permit submittals to demonstrate that the use of pavement has been minimized to the greatest degree possible, including a reduction in driveway width to no more than necessary to accommodate aerial fire truck access, and that paved parking and circulation areas that are retained be installed in a permeable/porous paving material. Parking Lot Landscaping & Screening and Administrative Variances The Site Design and Use Standards' "Parking Lot Landscaping & Screening Standards" require that all parking areas, including areas of vehicle maneuvering, parking and loading, shall be screened according to the standards where abutting required yard areas or property lines. As noted in the Site Design and Use Standards, "[bjecauseparking areas are usually large in size to accommodate cars and trucks they are insensitive to the human scale. j Additionally, noise, light, heat, and exhaust odors are commonly associated with parking areas. The ill effects associated with parking areas can be mitigated through good design and well placed landscaping." These concerns are the underlying basis for Ashland's parking lot landscaping and screening requirements, and at least part of the reason for the Off-Street Parking Chapter (AMC 18.92) limitations which cap parking provided at no more than ten percent above what is required for the use. This limitation avoids an auto-centric focus in development, while reducing the overall amount of paving installed, thus reducing Planning Action PA # 2010-01570 Ashland Planning Division - Staff Report Applicant: Calderat590 Clover Lane Page 12 of 23 64 the heat-island effect of summer sunlight reflecting off of asphalt while also allowing precipitation to be absorbed directly into the ground rather than creating excessive run-off and the associated water quality impacts. AMC 18.92.070.E.6.b specifies that where parking facilities or driveways are located adjacent to residential zones, a sight-obscuring fence, wall, or evergreen hedge not less than five feet, or more than six feet high shall be provided on the property line as measured from the high grade side. Said wall, fence or hedge shall be reduced to 30 inches within required setback area, or within 10 feet of street property lines, and shall be maintained in good condition. Screen plantings shall be of such size and number to provide the required screening within 12 months after installation. And adequate provisions shall be made to protect walls, fences or plant materials from being damaged by vehicles using said parking areas. As proposed, the landscape plan appears to show landscape materials clustered with some larger gaps at the northeast corner where parking faces the Spring Creek neighborhood. A condition to address the standards has been included below to require a revised landscaping plan which demonstrates that the landscaping proposed will provide a five- to six-foot high sight-obscuring barrier to shield adjacent properties from headlights, etc. In addition, staff has noted and discussed with the applicants that despite the requirement for a landscape buffer adjacent to the driveway where it abuts the property line along the freeway, no landscape buffer of any kind has been proposed here despite the presence of a driveway that is in places proposed at 40 feet in width adjacent to the property line. Such a configuration would require an Administrative Variance to the standards. Given the size of the lot and its location near the freeway at the entrance to Ashland, staff believes that some form of landscape buffer is crucial here not merely for its lessening the "heat-island effect" adjacent to so much paving, but also aesthetically as the building presents an approximately 200-foot generally blank (but for two grain silos) metal wall at what is for many freeway travelers the gateway to Ashland. Staff is accordingly recommending against such a Variance and instead recommending that a condition be attached to the approval to require that a landscape buffer be provided along the freeway property line as well, and that it incorporate some larger stature trees of a columnar form to mitigate the heat island effect as well as the visual impacts of the proposed building when viewed from and across the freeway. AMC 18.72. 100 empowers the Commission to require such modifications in the landscaping plan as will ensure proper screening and aesthetic appearance. If the applicant were able to come to an agreement with the Oregon Department of Transportation for planting of this buffer landscaping within the adjacent freeway right-of-way, staff believes that this would be an appropriate solution. Modification of PA 2003.112 Planning Action 42003-112, approved by the City Council in October of 2003, annexed an approximately 1.32-acre parcel located at what was then the end of Clover Lane, immediately to the north of the subject properties here. That 2003 approval included a condition (417) which required: That a'DevelopmentAgreement'be prepared bythe applicant and recorded on the properties limiting the uses to those which generate total vehicle trips of not more than 100 vehicle trips per parcel or a combined total of approximately 200 vehicle trips, as determined by the ITE Trip Generation Manual. Planning Action PA # 2010-01570 Ashland Planning Division -Staff Report Applicant: Caldera/590 Clover Lane Page 13 of 23 65 , The final agreement shall be reviewed and approved by the C#yAttorney prior to recordation of the partition plat, issuance of a building permit or final adoption of a resolution annexing the property. This condition was attached to the approval out of concern for the long-term operations of the intersection of Highway 66 and Clover Lane, despite the fact that the application at the time included a traffic study identifying an acceptable level of service for the intersection with the development of the parcel involved in the application. As a result, the two properties at the present end of Clover Lane, just north of the subject properties, have been limited to lower traffic generating uses such as light industrial and manufacturing uses, and each building permit has been required to include a demonstration that the proposed use is in compliance with the trip cap. Based on the conclusions of the applicant's Traffic Impact Analysis, the redesign work underway now on Exit 14, and the Interchange Area Master Plan which the city and state are currently working to finalize, staff believe that the previous concerns over the long-term operation of the Highway 66 and Clover Lane intersection no longer merit these vehicle trip limitations, and we are accordingly recommending that no such limitation be imposed on the subject properties under the current application and that the previous limit imposed on the properties at 580 and 585 Clover Lane under Planning Action #2003-112 be removed as well. Tree Removal Permit Ten ofthe 17 trees greater than six-inches in diameter identified on the subject property have been proposed for removal with the application. These include nine cedars of various sizes with the project arborist assesses as being in good condition, a six-inch plum with the arborist classifies as in poor condition, a 15-inch elm in moderate condition, and six oaks, four of which are identified as being dead. The application notes that these removals are due to the trees being in failing health or dead, or their locations relative to the proposed improvements. The application notes that the arborist has participated in discussion of the building footprints placement and has verified that the trees should be able to continue to thrive with the construction of the proposed building and associated site improvements. The application indicates that while the nine cedars are not identified for removal in the arborists plan, these trees are proposed for removal by the applicants as they have been aggressively topped in the past and thus provide little aesthetic benefit. The applicants propose to mitigate their removal with nine new maples or similar trees prior to occupancy of the proposed building. A total of 27 new trees are proposed to mitigate the trees being removed. In staff's view the finding can be made that the tree removals are proposed in response to the condition of the trees and in order to permit the application to be consistent with applicable ordinance requirements and standards and will not adversely impact erosion, soil stability, flow of surface waters, protection of adjacent trees, existing windbreaks, tree density, canopy or species diversity in the vicinity. The Tree Commission has not reviewed the application as this is being written, and a condition is therefore recommended below to require that their recommendations, where consistent with the Site Design and Use Standards and with final approval by the Staff Advisor, be incorporated into a revised landscaping and/or tree protection plan. Planning Action PA # 2010-01570 Ashland Planning Division -Staff Report Applicant: Caldera/590 Clover Lane Page 14 of 23 66 Water Resources Protection In addition to the site's trees, the southernmost of the three lots contains a segment of Spring Creek, an intermittent or ephemeral stream regulated under Ashland's Water Resources Protection Ordinance (AMC 18.63). Streams of this sort have,an associated stream bank protection zone which extends 30 feet from the centerline of the stream. The proposed building is located well outside of the protection zone, and site disturbance associated with the project's landscape plan is shown as stopping approximately 100 feet from the stream. Three oak trees nearer the stream corridor are proposed to be removed due to their poor health; however these trees are outside the protection zone as well. AMC 18.63.100.13, requires that applications for Site Review include this Water Resource Protection Zone within a conservation easement or other recorded development restriction which makes clear that any uses or activities within the stream bank protection zone shall be consistent with the provisions of the Water Resources Ordinance. A condition of approval has been included below to require that the applicants provide evidence of a conservation easement or other recorded development restriction to perpetually protect the portion of the stream bank corridor on the property according to the requirements of AMC 18.63 prior to submittal of building permit plans. III. Procedural - Required Burden of Proof The criteria for Annexation approval for a property to be zoned E•1 are described in 18.106.030 as follows: An annexation may be approved if the proposed request for annexation conforms, or can be made to conform through the imposition of conditions, with the following approval criteria: A. The land is within the City's Urban Growth Boundary. B. The proposed zoning for the annexed area is in conformance with the designation indicated on the Comprehensive Plan Map, and the project, if proposed concurrently with the annexation, is an allowed use within the proposed zoning. C. The land is currently contiguous with the present City limits. D. Adequate City facilities for the provision of water to the site as determined by the Public Works Department; the transport of sewage from the site to the waste water treatment plant as determined by the Public Works Department; the provision of electricity to the site as determined by the Electric Department; urban storm drainage as determined by the Public Works Department can and will be provided to and through the subject property. Unless the City has declared a moratorium based upon a shortage of water, sewer, or electricity, it is recognized that adequate capacity exists system-wide for these facilities. E. Adequate transportation can and will be provided to and through the subject property. For the purposes of this section "adequate transportation " for annexations consists of vehicular, bicycle, pedestrian and transit transportation meeting the following standards: i Planning Action PA If 2010-01570 Ashland Planning Division -Staff Report Applicant: Caldera/590 Clover Lane Page 15 of 23 67 i 1. For vehicular transportation a 20' wide paved access exists, or can and will be constructed, along the full frontage of the project site to the nearest fully improved collector or arterial street. All streets adjacent to the annexed area shall be improved, at a minimum, to a half- street standard with a minimum 20' driving surface. The City may, after assessing the impact of the development, require the full improvement of streets adjacent to the annexed area. All streets located within annexed areas shall be fully improved to city standards. Where future street dedications are indicated on the City's Street Dedication Map or required by the City, provisions shall be made for the dedication and improvement of these streets and included with the application for annexation. 2. For bicycle transportation safe and accessible bicycle facilities exist, or can and will be constructed. Should the annexation be adjacent to an arterial street, bike lanes shall be provided on or adjacent to the arterial street. Likely bicycle destinations from the project site shall be determined and safe and accessible bicycle facilities serving those destinations shall be indicated. 3. For pedestrian transportation safe and accessible pedestrian facilities exist, orcan and will be constructed. Full sidewalk improvements shall be provided on one side adjacent to the annexation for all streets adjacent to the proposed annexed area. Sidewalks shall be provided as required by ordinance on all streets within the annexed area. Where the project site is within a quarter of a mile of an existing sidewalk system, the sidewalks from the project site shall be constructed to extend and connect to the existing system. Likely pedestrian destinations from the project site shall be determined and the safe and accessible pedestrian facilities serving those destinations shall be indicated. 4. For transit transportation, should transit service be available to the site, or be likely to be extended to the site in the future based on information from the local public transit provider, provisions shall be made for the construction of adequate transit facilities, such as bus shelters and bus tum-out lanes. All required transportation improvements shall be constructed and installed prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any new structures on the annexed property. and H. One or more of the following standards are met: 1. The proposed area for annexation is to be residentially zoned, and there is less than a five- year supply of vacant and redevelopable land in the proposed land use classification within the current city limits. "Redevelopable land" means land zoned for residential use on which development has already occurred but on which, due to present or expected market forces, there exists the likelihood that existing development will be converted to more intensive residential uses during the planning period. The five-year supply shall be determined from vacant and redevelopable land inventories and by the methodology for land need projections from the Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan, or 2. The proposed lot or lots will be zoned E-1 or G1 under the Comprehensive Plan, and that the applicant will obtain Site Review approval for an outright permitted use, or special permitted use concurrent with the annexation request; or Planning Action PA If 2010-01570 Ashland Planning Division -Staff Report Applicant: Caldera/590 Clover Lane Page 16 of 23 68 3. A current or probable public health hazard exists due to lack of full City sanitary sewer or water services; or 4. Existing development in the proposed annexation has inadequate water or sanitary sewer service; or the service will become inadequate within one year; or 5. The area proposed for annexation has existing City of Ashland water or sanitary sewer service extended, connected, and in use, and a signed "consent to annexation"agreement has been filed and accepted by the City of Ashland; or 6. The lot orlots proposed for annexation are an "island" completely surrounded by lands within the city limits. The criteria for approval of Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning Map Amendments are described in 18.108.060.B as follows: 1. Zone changes, zoning map amendments and comprehensive plan map changes subject to the Type 111 procedure as described in subsection A of this section may be approved if in compliance with the comprehensive plan and the application demonstrates that one or more of the following: a. The change implements a public need, other than the provision of affordable housing, supported by the Comprehensive Plan; or b. A substantial change in circumstances has occurred since the existing zoning or Plan designation was proposed, necessitating the need to adjust to the changed circumstances; or c. Circumstances relating to the general public welfare exist that require such an action; or d. Proposed increases in residential zoning density resulting from a change from one zoning district to another zoning district, will provide 25% of the proposed base density as affordable housing consistent with the approval standards set forth in 18.106.030(G);or e. Increases in residential zoning density of four units or greater on commercial, employment or industrial zoned lands (i.e. Residential Overlay), will not negatively impact the City of Ashland's commercial and industrial land supply as required in the Comprehensive Plan, and will provide 25% of the proposed base density as affordable housing consistent with the approval standards set forth in 18.106.030(G) The total number of affordable units described in sections D orE shall be determined by rounding down fractional answers to the nearest whole unit. A deed restriction, or similar legal instrument, shall be used to guarantee compliance with affordable criteria for a period of not less than 60 years. Sections D and E do not apply to council initiated actions. The criteria for Site Review approval are described in 18.72.070 as follows: A. All applicable City ordinances have been met or will be met by the proposed development. B. All requirements of the Site Review Chapter have been met or will be met. Planning Action PA # 2010-01570 Ashland Planning Division -Staff Report Applicant Caldera/590 Clover Lane Page 17 of 23 69 u C. The development complies with the Site Design Standards adopted by the City Council for implementation of this Chapter. D. That adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, paved access to and through the development, electricity, urban storm drainage, and adequate transportation can and will be provided to and through the subject property. All improvements in the street right-of- way shall comply with the Street Standards in Chapter 18.88, Performance Standards Options. (Ord. 2655, 1991; Ord 2836 S6, 1999) The criteria for an Administrative Variance to the Site Design and Use Standards are described in AMC Chapter 18.72.090 as follows: An administrative variance to the requirements of this chapter may be granted with respect to the requirements of the Site Design Standards adopted under section 18.72.080 if, on the basis of the application, investigation and evidence submitted, allot the following circumstances are found to exist: A. There is a demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements of the Site Design Standards due to a unique or unusual aspect of the proposed use of a site; B. Approval of the variance will not substantially negatively impact adjacent properties; C. Approval of the variance is consistent with the stated purpose of the Site Design and Use Chapter; and D. The variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the difficulty. The criteria for a Tree Removal Permit are described in AMC Chapter 18.61.080, as follows: An applicant for a Tree Removal Permit shall demonstrate that the following criteria are satisfied. j The Staff Advisor may require an arborist's report to substantiate the criteria for a permit. A. Hazard Tree: The Staff Advisor shall issue a tree removal permit for a hazard tree if the applicant demonstrates that a tree is a hazard and warrants removal. 1. A hazard tree is a tree that is physically damaged to the degree that it is clear that it is likely to fall and injure persons or property. A hazard tree may also include a tree that is located within public rights of way and is causing damage to existing public or private facilities or services and such facilities or services cannot be relocated or the damage alleviated. The applicant must demonstrate that the condition or location of the tree presents a clear public safety hazard or a foreseeable danger of property damage to an existing structure and such hazard or danger cannot reasonably be alleviated by treatment or pruning. 2. The City may require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each hazard tree pursuant to AMC 18.61.084. Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit. B._ Tree that is Not a Hazard: The City shall issue a tree removal permit for a tree that is not a hazard if the applicant demonstrates all of the following: Planning Action PA # 2010-01570 Ashland Planning Division -Staff Report Applicant: Caldera1590 Clover Lane Page 18 of 23 70 1. The tree is proposed for removal in order to permit the application to be consistent with other applicable Ashland Land Use Ordinance requirements and standards. (e.g. other applicable Site Design and Use Standards). The Staff Advisor may require the building footprint of the development to be staked to allow for accurate verification of the permit application; and 2. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on erosion, soil stability, flow of surface waters, protection of adjacent trees, or existing windbreaks; and 3. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on the tree densities, sizes, canopies, and species diversity within 200 feet of the subject property. The City shall grant an exception to this criterion when alternatives to the tree removal have been considered and no reasonable alternative exists to allow the property to be used as permitted in the zone. Nothing in this section shall require that the residential density be reduced below the permitted density allowed by the zone. In making this determination, the City may consider alternative site plans or placement of structures or alternate landscaping designs that would lessen the impact on trees, so long as the alternatives continue to comply with other provisions of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance. 4. The City shall require the applicant to mitigate for the°removal of each tree granted approval pursuant to AMC 18.61.084. Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit. IV. Conclusions and Recommendations Staff are generally very supportive of the application, and believe that retaining Caldera Brewing on Clover Lane and accommodating its continued success in Ashland holds significant benefit for the community. We are accordingly recommending that the Planning Commission approve the proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Maps and forward a recommendation of approval to the City Council with regard to the Annexation. While staff recognizes the nature of the location and the proposed business, and the constraints of the site, we believe the size of the property should bring with it some measure of flexibility on the applicants' part to enable the building design and site lay-out to respond not only to the applicants' design parameters but the city's design standards as well. We are accordingly recommending approval of the Site Review and associated Administrative Variances, as well as the Tree Removal Permit, with a number of conditions to be attached addressing city design standards, including: establishing a stronger sense of entry for the proposed building; better addressing pedestrian access from the city sidewalk to the building's entrance; reducing the amount of paving and impermeable surfaces on the site; and better buffering remaining paved areas that are to remain. i Planning Action PA # 2010-01570 Ashland Planning Division- Staff Report Applicant: Caldera/590 Clover Lane Page 19 of 23 71 V 1) That all proposals of the applicant shall be conditions of approval unless otherwise modified herein. 2) That the plans submitted for the building permit shall be in substantial conformance with those approved as part of this application. If the plans submitted for the building permit are not in substantial conformance with those approved as part of this application, an application to modify this Site Review approval shall be submitted and approved prior to issuance of a building permit. 3) That the existing billboard sign shall be removed from the property, as proposed by the applicants, and a sign permit shall be obtained prior to installation of any new signage. All signage shall meet the requirements of Chapter 18.96, and signage installation shall be limited to the north and east frontages which have public entrances accessible from the sidewalk. 4) That the applicants shall obtain a demolition permit prior to demolishing the existing structures on site. With the demolition of existing structures on the site, any existing city or Pacific Power and Light electrical facilities serving these structures will need to be removed by the applicants, and their removal inspected and approval by the Building and Electrical Departments. 5) That prior to the submittal of a building permit: a) Building permit submittals shall include identification of all easements, including public and private utility easements, fire apparatus access easements, and a conservation easement or other similar recorded development restriction to perpetually protect the portion of the Spring Creek stream bank water resources protection zone on the property according to the requirements of AMC 18.63. b) A stormwater drainage plan, including final details of on-site detention for storm water and necessary water quality mitigation, shall be submitted for the review and approval of the Planning, Building, and Engineering Divisions. Post development peak flows shall be demonstrated to be less than or equal to pre-development levels. C) A final utility plan for the project shall be submitted for the review and approval by the Planning, Engineering and Building Divisions prior to issuance of a building permit. The utility plan shall include the location of connections to all public facilities in and adjacent to the development, including the locations of water lines and meter sizes, sewer mains and services, manholes and clean-outs, storm drainage pipes and catch basins. Utility installations, including any necessary fire protection vault, shall be placed outside of the pedestrian corridor, and necessary public utility easements on the property shall be shown on the building permit submittals. d) The applicant shall submit an electric distribution plan including load calculations and locations of all primary and secondary services including transformers, cabinets and all other necessary equipment. With annexation, the property will no longer be served by Pacific Power and Light; service will be provided by the city's municipal electric utility and the necessary removal of Pacific Power services and installation of city services to make this transition will need to be installed at the applicant's expense. The electric distribution plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning, Engineering, Building and Electric Departments prior to building permit Planning Action PA # 2010-01570 Ashland Planning Division - Staff Report Applicant: Caldera/590 Clover Lane - Page 20 of 23 72 submittal. Transformers and cabinets shall be located outside of the pedestrian corridor, in those areas least visible from the street while considering the access needs of the Electric Department. e) The building permit plan submittals shall include solar setback calculations demonstrating that all new construction complies with Solar Setback Standard B in the formula [(Height -16)/(0.445 + Slope) = Required Solar Setback] and elevations or cross section drawings clearly identifying the highest shadow producing point(s) and the height(s) from natural grade. f) The building permit plan submittals shall include lot coverage calculations including all building footprints, driveways, parking, and circulation areas. These plans shall demonstrate that at least 15 percent of the site is surfaced in landscaping, and that at least seven percent of the parking lot area is provided in required parking lot landscaping, as required in the Site Design & Use Standards. g) The building permit plan submittals shall include and sample exterior building colors and materials for review and approval of the Staff Advisor. The exterior building materials and paint colors shall be compatible with the surrounding area and consistent with those described in the application materials. h) The building permit plan submittals shall include revised elevation drawings for the building entry which better respond to the sense of entry and orientation standards by providing further variations in color, material, base, entrance, and/or fenestration to better engage the Clover Lane streetscape and create a stronger sense of entry for the building. i) A revised Site Plan shall be provided. This Site Plan shall include: 1) a pedestrian connection from the sidewalk on the east side of Clover Lane to the building's entrance along the east side of the drive to accommodate pedestrian traffic from the Spring Creek neighborhood. This pedestrian connection shall be delineated from the surrounding driveway through the use of scored concrete or similar material distinction; 2) a reduction in paved surface area to the greatest extent possible, including a reduction of the driveway width to no more than the 26 feet necessary to accommodate aerial fire truck access, the reduction of other paved areas where possible, and the use of permeable paving materials for all remaining parking and circulation areas. 6) That prior to the issuance of a building permit: I a) The applicant shall provide a revised Tree Preservation and Protection Plan consistent with the requirements of AMC 18.61.200 and prepared by a certified arborist. This plan shall incorporate the recommendations of the Tree Commission's January 6`h, 2011 meeting as conditions of approval where consistent with applicable standards and with final approval by the Staff Advisor. The plan shall also incorporate silt fencing or similar approved means to protect the stream bank water resources protection zone -during construction. b) That a Verification Permit in accordance with 18.61.042.B shall be applied for and approved by the Ashland Planning Division prior to removal of the 17 Planning Action PA # 2010-01570 Ashland Planning Division -Staff Report Applicant: Caldera/590 Clover Lane Page 21 of 23 73 trees to be removed from the site, and prior to any site work including demolition, storage of materials and/or issuance of a building permit. The Verification Permit is to inspect the identifications of trees to be removed and the installation of tree protection fencing to protect the trees to be retained. The tree protection fencing shall be installed according to the approved Tree Protection and Removal Plan, inspected and approved by the Staff Advisor prior to site work, storage of materials and/or issuance of a building permit. c) The applicant shall provide a revised Landscape/Irrigation Plan which addressed the Water Conserving Landscaping Guidelines and Policies of the Site Design and Use Standards, including irrigation controller requirements to allow multiple/flexible calendar programming. The revised landscape plan shall specifically identify mitigation trees on a one-for-one basis to offset the 17 trees to be removed, or alternatively may propose replanting off-site or payment in lieu of planting as provided in AMC 18.61.084. The Landscape Plan shall include revisions to the landscape buffer to provide the required sight-obscuring screen where the parking lot abuts residential areas or property lines, including along the driveway adjacent to the freeway. The freeway side buffer shall include larger stature, columnar screening trees both to reduce the heat-island effect and to screen the visual impacts of the proposed building. d) All exterior lighting shall be appropriately shrouded so as not to permit direct illumination of any adjacent properties. Lighting details, including a scaled plan and specifications detailing shrouding, shall be submitted to the Staff Advisor for review and approval with the building permit submittals. e) At the time of building plan submittal, bike rack and shelter details shall be submitted for review and approval by the Staff Advisor. The building permit submittals shall verify that the bicycle parking design, spacing, and coverage requirements are met in accordance with 18.92.040.1. f) Mechanical equipment shall be screened from view from adjacent rights of way and residential properties to the greatest degree possible. The locations of mechanical equipment and any associated screening shall be shown on the site plan and elevations in the building permit submittals. g) The requirements of the Building Division shall be satisfactorily addressed, including but not limited to: 1) egress, exiting, separation wall, and bathroom requirements for the tasting room area based on occupant type and occupant load determination at building permit; 2) providing necessary engineering studies to demonstrate that the fill on site is suitable for construction; 3) that the plans are to be drawn by an Oregon Licensed Design Professional; 4) that evidence of completed lot consolidation be provided; and 5) that code requirements for the use of an existing well to provide irrigation for the proposed landscaping shall be met, including but not limited to the installation of R.P. assemblies. - h) The requirements of the Ashland Fire Department relating to: approved addressing; fire apparatus approach, access and turn-around; fire flow; fire department connection, fire sprinkler, fire hydrant and key box installation; hydrant clearance; high-piled storage requirements; and that any gates, fences, or other impediments to required fire apparatus access width approved Planning Action PA# 2010-01570 Ashland Planning Division - Staff Report Applicant: Calderai590 Clover Lane Page 22 of 23 74 by Ashland Fire and Rescue shall be addressed in the permit submittals and implemented on site prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit. Final determinations of fire hydrant distance, fire flow, and fire apparatus access requirements are to be based upon plans submitted for building permit review. 7) That prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy: a) That the screening for the trash and recycling enclosure shall be installed in accordance with the Site Design and Use Standards. An opportunity to recycle site of equal or greater size than the solid waste receptacle shall be included in the trash enclosure in accordance with 18.72.115.A. b) All required parking areas shall be paved and striped according to the approved plan. C) All landscaping, hardscaping and the irrigation systems shall be installed in accordance with the approved plan, inspected and approved by the Staff Advisor prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. d) That required bicycle parking spaces with a minimum of 50 percent sheltered from the weather shall be installed according to the approved plan and in accordance with design and rack standards in 18.92.040.1 and J, inspected, and approved by the Staff Advisor prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Inverted it-racks shall be used for the bicycle parking. e) The applicants shall provide a sign at the end of the existing turn-around clearly indicating that the driveway beyond is private with no outlet for through traffic. The final sign design and placement shall be approved by the Public Works and Street Departments. it Planning Action PA # 20IM1570 Ashland Planning Division - Staff Report Applicant: Calderar590 Clover Lane Page 23 of 23 75 I s o ~ O y 1 ~ ~ 1 1 ti ~ r r ~ J . x • . Q f i ;..z = L1 C ~ C B-3 LL LL u Q 76 ~ o rDepartment of Rogue Transportat ue Valley lley O ion ffice 'ncoodore R. Kulongoski, Governor 100 Antelope Road White City, OR 97503-1674 (541) 774-6299 Fax: (541) 774-6349 January 5, 2011 City of Ashland Planning Department Derek Severson, Associate Planner 51 Winburn Way Ashland, OR 97520 RE: Caldera Brewing Company Plan Amendment/Zone Change/Site Review (City File. 2010-01570) Dear Mr. Severson: Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on the proposed Caldera Brewing Company request for Annexation, Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment/Zone Change and Site Review to construct a new 28,000 square foot commercial building located off of Clover Lane (Map 39-01-14AA Tax Lot 6900 & 7000; and 14AD Tax Lot 7000). We reviewed the proposed project and determined that it triggers our review under the Transportation Planning Rule (OAR 660-012-060). A planned traffic signal located at the 1-5 Exit 14 northbound on-ramp terminal may cause Ashland Street traffic to back-up past the Clover Lane intersection (See Attached Technical Memorandum). There are concerns that lengthy traffic queues will make it difficult for vehicles making left turns out of Clover Lane to merge with Ashland Street westbound traffic. We encourage the City of Ashland to amend their Transportation System Plan and Identify a planned median Improvement or some equivalent mitigation measure that restricts left turn movements at the Ashland Street/Clover Lane intersection. If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact myself at (541) 774-6399, Respectfully, in K. Horlacher Development Review Planner Vi{ ^Y gg "1 C F . tylm. _ JAN 6 5 2K-;. : ty of Ashland Attachment ldfiiirc, :~l mt Cc: RVDRT Fie - y__~ Mark Knox, Planning Consultant Min Parduccl, S. Oregon Transportation Engineering cgs 77 I N/04/2011/TUE 07:37 JACKSON COUNTY ROADS FAX No,541 774 6295 P.001/001 Roads EngUteerR,g JACKSON COUNTY Run Lague Comovedon M, mlagC/ 200 hi Antelope Road WPhon Gry, ) 7 97503 P Roads Fax: ex: (6$41) y„ 77477d-5295 pg5 logueTo@lackaoncounty.org w"jackaonoountywg December 27, 2010 Ashland Planning Department City Hall 61 Winburn Way Ashland, OR 97520 RE: Development off Clover Lane a city-maintained road. Planning File: 2010-01670 Dear Planner: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the request for Annexation; Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment/Zone Change; Site Review approval to construct a new 28,000 square foot manufacturing, warehouse, storage, tasting room and administrative office building for the production of brewing products; Lot Consolidation; and Tree Removal Permit to remove 17 trees for the 3.72 acre parcel located at 590 Clover Lane. Jackson County Roads has no comment. If you- have any quest onsd furgter infor-ma It on feel-le Tree to-oN kus' L Construction Manager I:\EnglneeringlDevelopment\CI7IESWSHL4ND\2010-01570 annexation.doc 78 Updated 5/21/08 TALENT IRRIGATION DISTRICT LAND USE AGENCY RESPONSE FORM 104 W. Valley View Rd. Phone: 541-535-1529 P.O. Box. 467 Fax: 541-535-4105 Talent, OR 97540 Email: tid@talentid.org NAME OF ENTITY REQUESTING RESPONSE: City of Ashland Planning Commission ENTITY REFERENCE NUMBER: 2010-01570 MEETING REVIEW DATE: January 11.201.1 MAP DESCRIPTION: 39-lE-14AA 6900/7000 and 39-lE-14AD 7000 PROPERTY ADDRESS-.590 Clover Ln ® NO COMMENT ON LAND USE ISSUE (IF NOT MARKED, CONTINUF, BELOW) NO IF CHECKED COMMENT COMMENTS ARE APPLICABLE ❑ A. WATER RIGHT ISSUES ❑ 1. Water rights need to be sold to someone or transferred back to Talent Irrigation District. Number of Irrigated Acres: Comments: ❑ 2. Must have District approval for water rights to remain in place on subject property. Comments: B. EASEMENTS DISTRICT EASEMENTS ❑ I. Easement needs to remain clear. No permanent structures or deep rooted plants will be allowed within the easement limits. Comments: ❑ 2• if facility is to be relocated or modified, specifications must meet the District's standards and be agreeable to the District. A new written and recorded easement must be conveyed to the District. Comments: 3. If a written and recorded casement does not exist for an existing facility, then one must be provided in favor of the District. Comments: PRIVATE EASEMENTS ❑ 1, Property may have private facilities (ditch or pipeline) that the District does not manage. Arrangements may need to be made to provide continued service through the subject property for downstream water users. Comments: sllOrcd/wnrdffortn5 Talent Irrigation District Agcy Response Form Page I of 2 ' I I updnmd 521/08 NO IF CHECKED COMMENT COMMENTS ARE APPLICARLF,. PRIVATE, EASEMENT PROVISIONS FOR MINOR PARTITIONS AND/OR LOT LINE A JUSTMENTS ❑ 1. If the property currently has water rights and it is being partitioned or a lot line adjustment is being in de, easements must be written and recorded which allow access for all n the pieces of property with water rights to continue to have access to the wa r. Comments: WATER METER RE IREMENT ON TRANSFERRED WATER RIGHTS ❑ 1. If the water right on t is property is a transferred water right that currently has a water meter requires lent, then each of the properties split off of the original parcel all need to have water meters installed prior to the use of irrigation water on the newly fo -med parcels. Comments: ❑ C. FACILITIES (including but not limited to pipelines, ditches, canals, control checks oil, boxes) ❑ 1. Upgrades to District facilities may be required to support any land use changes or developments, sued as pipe installations or encasing existing pipe under roads or concrete. Comments: ❑ D. DRAINAGE/ STO WATER ❑ The District relies on *Bureau of Reclamation's Storm Water Policy. No urban storm water or point sou}ce flows will be allowed into the D'istrict's facilities without going through the Bureau of Reclamation process. (Developments in historically agricultural .1reas need to be aware of agricultural run off water and take appropriate action to protect the development from upslope water.) Comments: GENERAL COMMENTS: 1. No interruptions to irrigation water deliveries will a allowed. 2. T.I.D. is a Federal Project and some facilities and/o easement issues may need Bureau of Reclamation approval. 3. The developer/sub-divider will take all appropriate ctions to ensure the reliability and protection of the original function of the District's facilities. As required by ORS 92.090(6) the entity must receive a certification form from the District before approval of the fine at. i Date Signed: 10 Lott) Ti endleton alter ; Talent irrigation District sho.odlwordrfom,< Talent Irrigation District A etff Response Form Page 2 of 2 I NARRATIVE & FINDINGS OF FACT FOR AN ANNEXATION, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT, LOT CONSOLIDATION, TREE REMOVAL PERMIT & SITE REVIEW PERMIT 1 ~ ~'}._~'100 I FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTIES: f ` j 01 ,y (590 CLOVER LANE, ASHLAND) % p 401 C j _ 5 \J i 1 ewo i ~ ASSESSOR'S MAP 391E14AA TAX LOT 6900 ASSESSOR'S MAP 39IE14AA TAX LOT 7000 W4 u~v t 4 Itiao~ 7 ASSESSOR'S MAP 391E14AD TAX LOT 7000 I,j " ioo6 40~~' C' 1 L' ' PROJECT NAME: CALDERA BREWING COMPANY EXPANSION SUBMITTED TO CITY OF ASHLAND PLANNING DEPARTMENT SUBMITTED BY URBAN DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, LLC. 485 W. NEVADA STREET ASHLAND, OR 97520 4. 2fWA 4 n a I.ai'h'i wa:.ii✓ NOVEMBER 15TH, 2010 ' NOV 19 2010 I Ci'Y hShklnd 81 l I. PROJECT INFORMATION: PLANNING ACTION: The applicants are requesting an Annexation, Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Tree Removal Permit and Site Review Permit to construct a 28,000 square foot manufacturing, warehouse, storage, tasting room and administrative offices for the production of brewing products located on 3.72 acres of land located at the southern end of Clover Lane - 590 Clover Lane in Ashland. TEAM INFORMATION: OWNER: LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: Caldera Brewing Company Laurie Sager & Associates Jim Mills, Owner 700 Mistletoe Road, Suite 201 Ashland, OR 97520 Ashland, OR 97520 Tel: 541-840-8222 Tel: 941=7659 LAND USE PLANNING: CIVIL ENGINEERING: Urban Development Services, LLC Construction Engineering Consultants 485 W. Nevada Street P.O. Box 1724 Ashland, OR 97520 Medford, Oregon 97501 Tel: 541-482-3334 Tel: 541-779-5268 SURVEYOR: TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER: Hoffbuhr & Associates, Inc. Southern Oregon Traffic Engineers 880 Golf View Drive 112 Monterey Drive Medford, OR 97504 Medford, OR 97504 Tel:541-779-4641 Tel: 541-608-9923 DESIGN / BUILDER: ARTIST: Steel Building Systems, Inc, Martin Lee 4000 Kenney Road 590 Allison Street Jacksonville, OR 97503 Ashland, OR 97520 Tel: 541-944-3057 Tel: 541-488-0011 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION Low Density Residential (Existing County Designation) Employment (Proposed City Designation) ZONING DESIGNATION: RR-5 (Existing County Designation) E-1 (Proposed City Designation) 2 82 i LOT AREA: 391E14AA Tax Lot #6900 1.49 acres (Currently Employment Designated - City) 391E14AA Tax Lot #7000 1.09 acres (Currently Residentially Designated - City) 391E14AD Tax Lot #7000 1.14 acre (Currently Residentially Designated - City) BUILDING DATA (enclosed space): Manufacturing / Brewing: 22,000 sq. ft. Cold Storage / Coolers: 3,000 sq. ft. Tasting Room / Admin: 3,000 sq. ft. Total Proposed Area: 28,000 sq. ft. LOT COVERAGE: Building Footprint 30,282 sq. ft. (19.4%) Impervious Surfaces 56,720 sq. ft. (36.35%) Landscaping: 69,032 sq. ft. (15% Required / 44.24% Proposed) PARKING: Required: - Manufacturing/Industrial: 1 per 2 employees Tasting Room: 1 per 4 seats Office: 1 per 450 sq. ft. Handicap Spaces: 1 per 25 parking spaces Company Vehicles: 1 per vehicle Proposed: j Manufacturing/Industrial: 1 per 2 employees = 13 / 17 (seasonal) Tasting Room: 1 per 4 seats = 8 / 10 (seasonal) Office: 1 per 450 sq. ft. = 1 Handicap Spaces: 1 per 25 parking spaces = 2 Company Vehicles: 1 per vehicle = 4 Total Required: 34 Total Proposed: 36 Total Allowed (10% over): 38 Bike Parking Required / Proposed: 1 per 5 auto spaces (50% sheltered) Bike Spaces Total: 8 / 4 covered APPLICABLE ORDINANCES: Employment District, Chapter 18.40 Tree Preservation & Protection, Chapter 18.61 General Regulations, Chapter 18.68 Solar Access, Chapter 18.70 Site Design & Use Standards, Chapter 18.72 i Site Design & Use Standards (Site Design Standards) Basic Site Review, Section II 3 83 Parking Lot Landscaping & Screening Standards, Section II Street Tree Standards, Section 11 Off-Street Parking, Chapter 18.92 Annexations, Chapter 18.106 Procedures, Chapter 18.108 ADJACENT ZONING/USE (see map below): WEST: E-1; 1-5 Freeway & Washington Street Employment Area; EAST: R-1; Oak Knoll Residential Neighborhood; SOUTH: R-1; I-5 Freeway & Oak Knoll Residential Neighborhood; NORTH: E-1; Bauer Reels / Bauer Fly Reels and Pacific Domes r ' 3ob6 {Vicinity Use Man 7 a y- (non shaded area is Ashland City boundaries) 6024 f i'o . ~E¢ j ~gav~ , bky ~3 201 .@~. Subject Tax Lots:'6900 7000 & 7000 ?C)~~,~,Fia t § 6600 - - r' l s,4,~'l y l@~, . ~d' ' s `1,•g«60 - • Tax Lot #6700: Holiday Inn Express 6700 } • Tax Lot #6300: Hillah Temple Lodge 3rl~0 tqod~ Tax Lot #6400: KFC Drive-thru (vacant) "vV Tax Lot #6500: Bramo Motors Tax Lot #7300: Caldera Brewing (existing site) df,{hR' $r r' vm9i V Tax Lot #6200: Bauer Fly Reels /Pacific Domes r ,rs,' G wt l r 'h v 4n Tax Lot #6201: Vacant (Employment Zoned) C* Tax Lot #6001: Residential Tax Lot #6100: Residential 2`~i~~'•F l ~ wf, l 4.t Tax Lot #4800: Residential '~~~~°I1' Tax Lot #600: Oak Street Tank & Steel i x'+ n,wg4tiQt ' 30o~..syQ. 66 ) ~y+ Wlvti` t`y" ~(j~? Tax Lot #300: Modern Fan 41' ' :y$ ly - 3 Note: Tax Lots 6200 (Bauer Fly Reels / Pacific Domes) and 6201 (vacant) have since been annexed into City f limits since this map was created. TABLE OF CONTENTS: EI. Site Description & Proposal 111. Annexation Findings of Fact IV. Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment Findings of Fact V. Site Review Permit Findings of Fact (including Site Design and Use Standards) VI. Tree Removal Permit Findings of Fact 4 84 it. SITE DESCRIPTION & PROPOSAL: Jim Mills, the applicant and owner of the Caldera Brewing Company of Ashland wishes to construct a 28,000 S.F. (approximately) building for the brewing of beer products. Included with the manufacturing process, the applicant is proposing a tasting room. The company's existing brewing operations are located in a 6,000 S.F. building located at 540 Clover Lane and there is also the well known Caldera Tap House (retail outlet) located at 31 Water Street in the downtown. The Tap House on Water Street will remain and continue to function as it successfully does today. The applicant proposes to relocate his business on the subject property as it is one of the few properties in town that can accommodate the company's manufacturing and warehouse needs. The property provides the business a large enough area to accommodate trucks, is relatively flat, is close to a major transportation corridor, has some freeway visibility and is affordable. Although other sites have been exhaustingly considered over the last two years, they proved problematic for a variety of reasons and did not have this site's expansion capabilities or qualities for a manufacturing operation. In addition, the applicant is proposing a small on-site manager's residential unit (ancillary unit) in order to provide on-site supervision of the brewing facilities. This would be an ancillary use which has been granted in various other similar type projects in the E-1 zone districts. The unit would be within a loft space and not visible from the exterior of the building. In the pre-application conference report, staff acknowledged that... "the application represents an Ashland success story in that the owner has started a small business locally that continues to grow in Ashland". Staff also supports the application due to recent community discussions regarding economic development and the desire to keep local companies in Ashland. The applicant agrees with staff and also believes that this highly desirable project that allows for the expansion of a successful local business will provide additional living wage employment for the city. The applicant has a strong desire to remain in the City and not depart for less expensive land in the County or outside of the local region. Subject Parcels: There are three parcels involved in this application totaling 3.72 acres. The parcels are located south of the Clover Lane extension from the cul-de-sac. The properties are currently in the County but within the City's Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) and adjacent to the Ashland City limits. Due to the existence of the 1-5 corridor, the subject properties form an odd triangular shaped island that is physically separated by 1-5 to the south and west, steep slopes and single family housing to the east and commercial/manufacturing buildings to the north. Prior to the interstate's existence, Clover Lane extended from Highway 66 over to Washington Street which is evident on maps. At that time, the properties were occupied by a residence and likely were considered "rural" from today's perspective. All of the three subject parcels are proposed to be annexed into the City. The northern line of Tax Lot #6900 abuts two E-I parcels that were annexed into the City in 2004 (PA-2003-112). 5 85 i One of these parcels remains vacant while the other is occupied by Bauer Fly Reels and Pacific Domes in a 10,667 S.F. metal building (PA-2006-01085). The request will extend the City limits to incorporate Tax Lots 391E14AA #6900 and #7000 and 391E14AD #7000 as identified on the Jackson County Assessor's Map. Note: There is an odd remaining parcel, Tax Lot #7100, consisting of approximately .01 acres 400 sq. ft.) but according to the project's Surveyor and preliminary discussions with the Title Company, this parcel is a remnant of the I-5 installation. The applicant, if desired by the City, will request the subject lot's title to be cleared and the area incorporated into the proposed tax lot. All of the identified parcels will be consolidated into one parcel and developed as proposed including any mitigating conditions imposed by the Ashland Planning Commission. The City's Comprehensive Plan identifies Tax Lot #6900 as Employment and Tax Lots #7000 and #7000 as Single Family Residential. The circumstances with this area's Comprehensive Plan designation as residential appears to be a remnant of historical zoning and use as at one time there was a residence on the property since removed. In addition, it's residential zoning likely made "some" sense at one point when Spring Creek Drive was slated to connect, but when the Planning Commission decided, at the urging of the Spring Creek neighborhood, to eliminate the connection (due to severe grade differences and neighborhood opposition of commercial traffic), it clearly no longer makes sense. In fact, many of the neighbors, during the neighborhood meeting, continued to express the concern about potential street connections and agreed with the applicants the use of the site as a residence would be inappropriate considering its close proximity to the freeway and connectivity through Clover Lane and its commercial businesses. The E-1 Zoning designation is a more appropriate zoning which... "is designated to provide for a variety of uses such as office, retail or manufacturing in an aesthetic environment and having a minimal impart on surrounding uses." Further, residential uses (with restrictions) are allowed with an R-overlay, but in this case, the applicants are not proposing an overlay. However, the applicant does intend to provide for some form of temporary living accommodations such as a nighttime security guard residence or an accessory type of residence during inclement weather (owner currently lives in Greensprings area) and such an accommodation would provide for both an on-site presence during the evenings and/or intermittent sleeping accommodation during inclement weather conditions. This type of accessory use has been permitted with other manufacturing type of applications most notably along Benson Way - across the freeway from the subject properties. Physical Characteristics: As stated, the property is triangular shaped and has slopes in multiple directions creating a unique circumstance of constraints and opportunities. Generally, the property slopes gradually towards the north (Clover Lane), but also has significant slopes to the west towards the I-5 freeway and east towards Spring Creek (a seasonal creek). Overall, the site is generally level creating a logical building and parking footprint and there are unobstructed views to the mountains on all sides. There is an existing structure and an above ground tank on the site which will be removed. There are a couple of large trees along the site's perimeter, but only a few are proposed to be removed due to their health (see Arborist's Tree Protection Plan - Sheet L-1.0). 6 86 it Clover Lane } ry4 M1~ Right-of-Way North Section: 20' Lane Width 5 yts* 29' Right-of-Way Middle Section: 4i r Li E { VR 32' Lane Width 53' Right-of-Way ~ ~~1t 5 a r,+ t ~ F i td'a n 1$3 n R! Southern Section: 27' Lane Width 41' Right-of Way r~'' t; `~yr`aMY}~a itptltl CProposed Site: Private Driveway rt xr `i``Yi31~ ;'q'~r•,~r.~f-SRS tfo! 40' Lane Width t' Q l ~tp j 4 C S A• ~ k ~51~: Yl~ih~Sry~dr~• ~ ~ 39, Access to the Property: The property has access from Highway 66 via Clover Lane which is classified as a local street with variable widths for its right-of-way, but has curbside sidewalks on both sides. The entrance portion of Clover Lane is a very narrow road (20' lane width with a 29' right-of-way) primarily due to its history when it was once a single lane road, prior to the installation of 1-5, when it extended from Highway 66 to the southern end of Washington Street. Because of this history and the concentration of the incremental development that occurred near the Highway 66 corridor and later the I-5 corridor, the narrow right-of-way remained, infrastructure was sporadic, buildings were haphazardly placed and, most importantly, there was a lack of planning (Note: To be fair, there were not any City or ODOT Planning Departments during this period and all/most decisions were made by DOT Civil Engineers with little to no public input). Nevertheless, the middle portion of Clover Lane, adjacent to the Holiday Inn Express / Bramo Motors, widens to a 32' lane width with a 53' right-of-way width and the southern end of Clover Lane, south of cul-de-sac, has a reduced lane width of 27' and a right-of- way width of 41'. At the point the street enters the property it will terminate and become a private driveway with sections of paving ranging from 24' for vehicles to 40' for large truck access and maneuverability. At the rear of the property, a large truck turnaround area is proposed to accommodate both City Fire Department needs as well as the businesses needs. Utilities and Services: City underground utilities are located within the Clover Lane right-of- way and are sized to accommodate the proposal. A final Electrical Plan, addressing electrical 7 87 loads, will be reviewed with the Ashland Electric Department, but an existing electrical transformer box sits on the vacant lot immediately north of the property. At the present time, it's understood the transformer can accommodate the proposed electrical demands. Storm water run- off will be held in multiple systems for water detention and water quality. The storm water system has been designed by a licensed Civil Engineer which includes a bio-swale to be located at the entrance of the property providing storm water treatment and aesthetic qualities to the site. The plan also identifies an underground storm water detention facility on the east side of the property that accommodates overflows and then slowly meters out water. Both systems eventually flow to the existing storm water system in Spring Creek Drive. Fire hydrants are located on both the front and rear ends of the property as well as an oversized access lane and turn around area for both company vehicles and City Fire Department vehicles. The water needs of the facility, based on actual water demand at the existing facility on Clover Lane which will now close, will increase by approximately 60% even though the new facility is four times the size. The current usage is approximately 12k cubic feet (typical household average is 3.5k cubic feet) and will likely increase to around 19k. This is due to enhancement in technology with new equipment to be purchased that is significantly more efficient and that the added space is not simply to quadruple production, but to experiment with alternative products which need different types of equipment, storage spaces, etc. Building Design: The building's design is typical of manufacturing type spaces with large volumes for interior function, mobility and storage. However, unlike many steel buildings designed for manufacturing, the proposed building has been designed with some architectural elements in an attempt to create a positive appearance. These include a wrap-around awning at the entrance with complimentary surface improvements for guests and employees to assemble and enjoy the Ashland hillsides. The design also includes various windows and a clear-story cupola for aesthetic qualities and natural light. The design is similar, except for more windows, to the building located along I-2 south of Yreka and west of Granada. Adding to the building's interest is the additional landscaping and plaza space located at the front of the building. Combined with hops that grow between the trellis' framework and the placement of the bike parking structure, the applicant contends the building's design will attractive. Further, because the building is recessed into the earth, the rear and side visibility is lessened. The applicants attempted to add additional landscaping along the property's shared boundary with I- 5, but its ODOT's policy to not allow any private improvements. The applicants looked at shifting the building towards the east (towards residences on down hill side), but this created massive retaining wall demands and created an uncomfortable mass of structure above for the residences below. Nevertheless, the applicant has attempted to propose a building that is not unsightly nor impact its residential neighbors, but still attempt to build a structure that meets the City's design criteria and remain within the applicant's budget. Building Perspective: A sample building color and material board will be submitted at the time of the hearing. Generally, the building is a steel frame structure with metal siding that includes numerous windows and doors for natural light and function. A clear-story element sits on the top 8 i I j 88 ! of the roof to enhance the building's aesthetics and allow for interior lifts to be accommodated. The colors are intended to be earth tone in nature with the intent to minimize unnatural colors. The building's roof and trim will be forest green with a sand body. A front elevation rendering, two cross-sections and multiple photos have been submitted to show the subject building on the property and how it relates from various viewpoints. Overall, the applicant believes the subject building will not be predominately visible from the adjacent residential areas to the east due to heavy tree canopy, contrasting topographical elevations, on-site elevated berming, distance, planned landscaping and fencing. In fact, the most visual perspective of the building will come from Washington Street (Employment zoned and is located on the other side of I-5) where its road height is relatively level with the subject property's. Parking: The applicant is providing vehicle parking for manufacturing, office and the tasting room. Specifically, manufacturing uses require 1 space per 2 employees (13,/ 17 spaces) and a tasting room requires 1 space per 4 seats (8 / 10 spaces). In addition, the office and company vehicles require an additional 5 parking spaces for a total of 34 required parking spaces, The applicant is proposing to construct 36 spaces including two handicap accessible spaces. The purpose of the two additional parking spaces is to insure that sufficient parking is available for future parking demand or accommodations are available for odd peak periods. The City allows a maximum of 10% increase over the required parking. In general, due to the odd shaped lot and truck circulation, the parking spaces are located as shown on the Site Plan to accommodate access to the roll-up doors for the manufacturing spaces, see Site Plan and Exterior Elevations. The Site Plan also shows that the parking spaces conform to the City Standards of 9 foot by 18 foot with a clear back-up area of 24 feet. The project covered bicycle parking spaces are to be located in the front of the building. Signage: The property is located out-side the freeway overlay zone. A wall and small ground monument sign are proposed to be located on the building's front entrance. A sign permit will be requested by the applicant prior to receiving a Building Permit. The existing freeway pole sign currently on the property will be removed as it does not comply with the City's sign code. I Energy Use: The method of energy proposed to be used will be both a consumption of electric and natural gas for the operation of the building. Lighting will be a combination of natural light, fluorescent uplighting and low voltage halogen down lighting where necessary. On average, the i monthly energy usage for the existing facility is approximately 12Kw or 144Kw per year. It is expected that with modern efficiencies applied, the proposed building will use approximately 40Kw per month or 480Kw per year. Lot Consolidation: The subject three lots are to be consolidated into one lot prior to issuance of a Building Permit in order to develop the lot as proposed. The procedure for a lot consolidation is completed through the Jackson County Mapping Division. Method of Financing: The project will be financed privately and/or with a conventional mortgage package from a commercial lender. Site improvements will begin after completion of 9 II 89 construction drawings and City Building Permit approval. It is anticipated that construction will be completed within one year of approval. Demolition: It's also expected that a Demolition Permit for the existing buildings on the property will be applied for prior to any site improvements. Fire Department Requests: The various items noted in the July 29`h, 2010 correspondence from the Ashland Fire Department have to will be addressed at time of Building Permit or occupancy of the facility. These include such items as addressing to be plainly visible from the street, fire apparatus clearance and staging area, fire apparatus access with 26' wide lane with no parking, fire apparatus turn around at the rear of the property (front too), appropriately located fire hydrants, key box, etc. Neighborhood Outreach: The applicant, Land Use Planner and Landscape Architect met with the residents of the Spring Creek Drive neighborhood and Oak Knoll Drive neighborhood on Tuesday, August 315, 2010 to discuss the proposal. After reviewing the proposal with the neighbors and walking the around the site, there didn't appear to be any major concerns that were not already contemplated and addressed within the preliminary plans as mitigation measures. Overall, the neighbors who attended were very positive. General Regulations: 18.68.010 Fences: No fences, wall, hedges or screen planting are proposed in the front yard that are greater than 3 V2 feet in height, see Landscape Plan. All other fences will not exceed six and one-half (6 %2) feet in height as permitted by code. 18.68.020 Vision Clearance Area: Not applicable: The subject property is not proposed to be in a residential zoning district. Further, no streets traverse the subject property. 18.68.030 Access: The subject property does abut the adjoining right-of-way which has a width of 41'. 18.68.050 Special Setback Requirements: Not applicable 18.68.140 Accessory Buildings and Structures Not applicable: Property is not in a residential j district 18.70 Solar Access: Not applicable: Solar Setback Standard B automatically applies to the E-1 zoning district per 18.70.040 item B; however, the applicant has located the proposed building 100' from the north property line and the zoning for the lot to the north is E-1. 18.72.060 Submittal Requirements : The applicant is providing a written Narrative and Findings which describe the scope of the project, addresses applicable findings and shows compliance with the Basic Site Review Standards. Further, the application package includes Site/Landscape 10 90 Plans, Preliminary Civil Engineering Drawings, Topographic Survey/Aerial Photograph and Building Elevation drawings. Further, a tree inventory/removal/protection Plan, a Traffic Report, a Visual Study and Findings are included. A Demolition Permit will be provided prior to receiving a building permit. III. FINDINGS OF FACT: The following information has been provided by the applicants to help the Planning Staff, Planning Commission and neighbors better understand the proposed project. In addition, the required findings of fact have been provided to ensure the proposed project meets the Site Design & Use Standards as outlined in the Ashland Municipal Code (AMC), Section 18.72.070, Site Design & Use Standards (Design Standards Booklet, adopted August 4'h, 1992), Tree Preservation and Protection Standards identified in AMC Chapter 18.61 and Annexation criteria noted in AMC Chapter 18.106. For clarity reasons, the following documentation has been formatted in "outline" form with the City's approval criteria noted in BOLD font and the applicant's response in regular font. Also, there are a number of responses that are repeated in order to ensure that the findings offact are complete. ANNEXATIONS (CHAPTER 18.106) i I A. The land within the City's Urban Growth boundary. As shown on the City's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Maps, the subject property (Legal Description attached) is within the City of Ashland's Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). The area within the City's UGB generally extends to the south to Crowson Road approximately 4,000 feet surrounding this property. The City's limit line extends inward, along the I-5 corridor abutting a number of parcels, some of which have already been annexed into the City (Modern Fan and Brame, Motors along the west side of 1-5). B. The proposed zoning for the annexed area is in conformance with the designation on the Comprehensive Plan Map, and the project, ifproposed concurrently with the annexation, is an allowed use within the zoning. The application includes an entitlement request to amend the map of the Comprehensive Plan in order to provide consistent zoning with the proposed use as well as consistency of existing zoning and use along this section of the I-5 corridor. The proposed use is a permitted use within the E-1 zoning district and the application is being proposed concurrently with the annexation request. C. The land is currently contiguous with the City limits. As stated with the response to Criterion "A", above, the subject property lies directly adjacent to 11 91 li the City limit line to the north and east. D. Adequate City facilities for the provision of water to the site as determined by the Public Works Department; the transport of sewage frove the site to the waste water treatment plant as determined by the Public Works Department; the provision of electricity to the site as determined by the Electric Department, urban storm drainage as determined by the Public Works Department can and will be provided to and through the subject property. Unless the City has declared a moratorium based upon a shortage of water, sewer or electricity, it is recognized that adequate capacity exist system-wide for these facilities. The applicants have had various meetings with the Public Works and Electrical Department staff to discuss the site's utility needs. At no time was it indicated there was a deficiency in the utilities other than storm water capacity due to the undersized culverts within the Highway 66 and Clover Lane intersection. This situation is similar to a number of other developments along Clover Lane that addressed this issue with a metering system which holds storm water temporarily during large storm events and then slowly releases the storm water at an acceptable rate. In this case, the applicants are also proposing similar measures to address the site's storm water needs, but instead of directing storm water down Clover Lane, the water will drain to Spring Creek Drive where it will first be held on-site in multiple systems for water detention and water quality. The storm water system has been designed by a licensed Civil Engineer which includes a bio-swale to be located at the entrance of the property providing storm water treatment and aesthetic qualities to the site. The plan also identifies an underground storm water detention facility on the east side of the property that accommodates overflows and then slowly meters out the water. Both systems eventually flow to the existing storm water system in Spring Creek Drive. All other utilities are located underground within the Clover Lane right-of-way and are sized to accommodate the proposal. A final Electrical Plan, addressing electrical loads, will be reviewed with the Ashland Electric Department, but an existing electrical transformer box sits on the vacant lot immediately north of the property. At the present time, it's understood the transformer can accommodate the proposed electrical demands. Fire hydrants are located on both the front and rear ends of the property as well as an oversized access lane and turn around area for both company vehicles and City Fire Department vehicles. The applicant's Civil Engineer and Landscape Architect have provided preliminary drawings, see attached, which address the sites various utilities and storm water facilities. E. Adequate transportation can and will be provided to and through the subject property. For the purposes of this section "adequate transportation" for annexation consists of vehicular, bicycle, pedestrian and transit transportation meeting the following standards: L For vehicular transportation a 20' wide paved access area exists, or can and will be constructed along the full frontage of the project site to the nearest fully improved collector or arterial street All streets adjacent to the annexed area shall be improved, at a minimum, to a half-street standard with a teeinineune 20' driving surface. The City nay, after assessing the 12 92 impact of the development, require the full improvement of streets adjacent to the annexed area. All streets located within annexed areas shall be fully improved to City standards. Where future street dedications are indicated on the City's Street Dedication Map or required by the City, provisions shall be made for the dedication and improvement of these streets and included with the application for annexation. The applicant has submitted a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA). These documents were prepared by the applicant's Traffic Engineer in consultation with the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) and the City's Public Works and Planning Departments. All proposed transportation facilities are in compliance with the City of Ashland's Engineering Design Standards for public improvements and ODOT's guidelines to ensure that the proposed development does not adversely impact the operation and/or safety of Clover Lane and its intersection with Highway 66 and I-5 on/off ramps. The analysis takes into consideration the current "pipeline" trips generated along Clover Lane as well as the expected improvements associated with the I-5/HWY 66 overpass currently under constructions. Refer to attached TIA for further information. The private driveway extending from the end of Clover Lane and through the property complies with the City's Standards in regard to width dimension, surface material and Fire Department Regulations. This driveway is delineated by curbing and plant material. Z For bicycle transportation safe and accessible bicycle facilities exist, or can and will be constructed Should the annexation be adjacent to an arterial street, bike lanes shall be provided on or adjacent to the arterial street. Likely bicycle destinations from the project site shall be determined and safe and accessible bicycle facilities serving those destinations shall be indicated. Clover Lane is secondary street connecting with Highway 66 an arterial street. Bicycle transportation is being provided with the new Interstate Access Management Plan (IAMP) currently under construction on the I-5 / Highway 66 overpass which will include bike lanes to serve this area of Ashland. Bicycle facilities are proposed near the entrance of the proposed building that complies with the City's bike rack and shelter standards. 3. For pedestrian transportation safe and accessible facilities exist, or can and will be constructed. Full sidewalk improvements shall be provided on one side adjacent to the annexation: for all streets adjacent to the proposed annexed area. Sidewalks shall be provided as required by ordinance on all streets within the annexed area. Where the project site is within a quarter of a mile of an existing sidewalk system, the sidewalks from the project site shall be constructed to extend and connect to the existing system. Likely pedestrian destinations front the project site shall be determined and the safe and accessible pedestrian facilities serving those destinations shall be indicated Clover Lane is currently improved to the site with curbside sidewalks on both sides of the street. The applicant has proposed continuing the sidewalk along the west side of the street to the ! 13 93 I~ entrance of the building's entrance via the private access drive. This sidewalk will include scored concrete to visually contrast the surface paving for the parking and driveway areas providing safe and accessible pedestrian facilities to the building. 4. For transit transportation, should transit service be available to the site, or be likely to be extended to the site in the future based on information front the local public transit provider, provisions shall be made far the construction of adequate transit facilities, such as bus shelters and bus turn-out lanes. All required transportation improvements shall be constructed and installed prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any new structures on the annexedproperty. At the present time, no transit services are proposed to extend along Clover Lane according to the Rogue Valley Transit District administrative staff. There is an existing bus stop and shelter near the intersection of Clover Lane and Highway 66 which is within a mile (5 minute walk) distance. F. For all residential annexations, a plan shall be provided demonstrating that the development of the entire property will ultimately occur at a minimum density of 90% of the base density for the zone, unless reductions in the total number of units is necessary to accommodate significant natural features, topography, access limitations, or similar physical constraints. The owner or owners of the property shall sign an agreement, to be recorded with the county clerk after approval of the annexation, ensuring that the future development will occur in accord with minimum density indicated in the development plan. For purposes of computing maximum density, portions of the annexed area containing undevelopable areas such as wetlands, Jloodplain corridor lands, or slopes greater than 35%, shall not be included. Not applicable as no residential units, other than the proposed ancillary accessory unit, are proposed. The ancillary accessory unit will function like an on-site manager's residential unit in order to provide 24 hour operational supervision. This unit is an ancillary use which has been granted in other similar uses in manufacturing applications in E-l Zoning Districts. The unit is located within a loft space and not visible from the exterior of the building. G. For all annexations with a density or potential density of four residential units or greater and involving residential zoned lands, or commercial, employment or industrial lands with a Residential Overlay (R-Overlay): 1. 35% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below 120% of median income, or 2. 25% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below 100% of median income; or 3. 20% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below 80% of median income; or 14 94 4. 15% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below 60% of median income; or 5. Title to a sufficient amount of buildable land for development is transferred to a non-profit (IRC 501(3)(c)) affordable housing developer or comparable Development Corporation for the purpose of complying with subsection 2 above. The land shall be located within the project and all needed public facilities shall be extended to the area or areas proposed for transfer. Ownership of the land shall be transferred to the affordable housing developer or Development Corporation prior to commencement of the project The total number of affordable units described in this section C shall be determined by rounding down fractional answers to the nearest whole unit. A dead restriction, or similar legal instrument, shall be used to guarantee compliance with affordable criteria for a period of not less than 60 years. Properties providing affordable units as part of the annexation process shall qualify for a maximum density bonus of 25 percent. Not applicable. H. One or more of the following standards are met. 1. The proposed area for annexation is to be residentially zoned, and there is less than a five- year supply of vacant and redevelopable land in the proposed land use classification within the City limits. "Redevelopable land" means land zoned for residential use on which development has already occurred but on which, due to present or expected market forces, there exists the likelihood that existing development will be converted to more intensive residential uses during the planning period The five-year supply shall be determined from vacant and redevelopable land inventories and by the methodology for land need projections from the Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan; or Not applicable as no residential units, other than the proposed ancillary accessory unit, are proposed. The ancillary accessory unit will function like an on-site manager's residential unit in order to provide 24 hour operational supervision. This unit is an ancillary use which has been granted in other similar uses in manufacturing applications in E-1 Zoning Districts. The unit is located within a loft space and not visible from the exterior of the building. 2. The proposed lot or lots will be zoned E-I or C-1 under the Comprehensive Plan, and that the applicant will obtain Site Review approval for an outright permitted use, or special permitted use concurrent with the annexation request; or The application proposes a Zoning and Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment designating the subject property as Employment (E-1). The application includes a proposal for a Site Review Permit to construct a manufacturing building to provide employment opportunities. 15 95 li 3. A current or probable public health hazard exists due to lack of full City sanitary sewer or water services, or To the best of the applicant's knowledge all public facilities unless otherwise addressed herein are available to service the property. No current or probable public health hazard exists. 4. Existing development in the proposed annexation has inadequate water or sanitary sewer service; or the service will become inadequate within one year, or To the best of the applicant's knowledge all public facilities unless otherwise addressed herein are available to service the property. According to various communications with City Department staff, all public facilities are adequate and available to service the property. 5. The area proposed for annexation has existing City of Ashland water or sanitary sewer service extended, connected, and in use, and a signed "consent to annexation " agreement has been filed and accepted by the City of Ashland; or The area proposed for annexation has existing City of Ashland water and sanitary sewer service extended, connected, and in use to the subject property. The utilities will extend from Clover Lane to the proposed building. Attached is the consent to annexation agreement form which has been filed with the City as part of this application submittal. 6. The lot or lots proposed for annexation are air "island" completely surrounded by lands within the City limits. (ORD 2792, i997) As shown on the City's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Maps, the subject property (Legal Description attached) is within the City of Ashland's Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) and surrounded by City limits on three sides forming, not an island, but an acute peninsula around the subject property. The City's limit line extends inward, along the I-5 corridor abutting a number of parcels, some of which have already been annexed into the City (Modern Fan and Brame Motors along the west side of I-5). COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP AMENDMENT (CHAPTER 18.108) 1. Zone changes, zoning map amendments and comprehensive plan map changes subject to the Type III procedure as described in subsection A of this section may be approved if in compliance with the comprehensive plan and the application demonstrates that one or more of the following: a. The change implements a public need, other than the provision of affordable housing, supported by the Comprehensive Plan; or As discussed above, in the benefits to the City section of this document, City Staff acknowledged that the proposed project is an Ashland success story of an existing small local business that has 16 96 i succeeded and is growing. Further, the application is in concert with recent community discussions regarding economic development and the desire to keep a local and diversified employment base offering living wage jobs. Over the last two years, the applicant has also considered other sites that are local as well as regional and out-of-state. However, for a variety of reasons these properties did not have the various intangibles Ashland has to offer. Ashland is the current place of business with all employees and administrative staff living in or near Ashland. Also, Ashland continues to provide a "sense of place" and small town atmosphere the owners desires to be associated with. Finally, the subject property has been deemed "perfect" for Caldera's operations as the site has qualities other sites within Ashland did not have. First, the property is level enough to accommodate the various manufacturing facilities needed to expand the operations without having to overly cut or fill the site's grade. Secondly, the site offers easy access and maneuvering, primarily due to the site's level status, for larger trucks delivering supplies or shipping out the products. Third, the site is close to the 1-5 freeway which allows deliveries and shipping easy and quick access to the site or to the various shipping destinations. Small truck deliveries, such as those delivering locally, will continue to occur via the smaller delivery trucks. Considering the existing Caldera Brewing Company is currently located along the same street, the applicants are very comfortable with the area. Finally, the subject property was chosen for various other reasons such as affordability which includes the obvious fact that required infrastructure (streets, sidewalks, water lines, sewer lines, transmission lines, etc.) that are needed to serve the company's expansion are already in existence and directly abut the site. Many other manufacturing sites within the City do not and can be extremely burdensome for a small business to finance. i The applicant contends the proposal is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan goals and policies, specifically the goal of the Chapter VII, Economic Element, which states: GOAL To ensure that the local economy increases in its health, and diversifies in the number, type and size of businesses consistent with the local social needs, public service capabilities, and the retention ofa high quality environment The applicant further contends that various policies of the Economic Element are applicable which include the following: VII-I Policy-The City shall zone and designate within the Plan Map sufficient quantity of lands for commercial and industrial uses to provide for the employment needs of its residents and a portion of rural residents consistent with the population projection: for the urban area. With the recent adoption of the Croman Mill Master Plan, there is an adequate amount of commercial and industrial lands for employment needs within existing City limits. But, because the Cromam Mill Master Plan remains in its infancy and there are no plans determining the financing of the areas infrastructure, the applicant contends the subject property is better suited to accommodate his company's business needs and address the employment needs addressed in the Comprehensive Plans goals and policies as well as the recently adopted 2007 Economic 17 97 Opportunities Analysis`. Further, the City's recent decision in the Regional Planning Solving (RPS) to not include future urban reserve areas while doubling its population growth over the next 50 years - combined with the historical decisions associated with the subject street (i.e., eliminating a Spring Creek Drive connection with Clover Lane) the applicant contends the site allows for a more appropriate land use category for the site as it relates it the I-5 corridor (Policy IV-56) and addresses the desire for a diversified land use system that increases the local economy's health and allows diversification in the number, type and size of businesses that are also consistent with the City's desire to provide for services in a timely, coordinated manner that minimizes costs (Policy IX-2). VII-3 Policy-The City shall develop and implement an economic development program which will attempt to increase the number, variety and size of family wage retail, service, and light industrial activity employers within the urban area, with particular emphasis on employers paying wages at or above the median County wage, and employing from 5 to 100 people, or who are locally owned. The City shall work with regional economic development agencies on coordinating regional economic development activities. The City does not have an economic development office or specific employee designated to work with existing businesses or potential businesses desiring to locate to Ashland, but recently allocated more funding to the Administrative staff to assist in economic development opportunities. In that regard, the applicants have discussed the application at length with the City's Administrative Department, Adam Hanks, in an attempt to retain a locally owned business and increase the number and variety of jobs within Ashland that provide family wage incomes. Mr. Hanks has been very helpful with his guidance on various conflicting matters. The applicants have also discussed the application with regional economic development agencies such as SOREDI and the State's Economic and Development Department who have been supportive of the proposal. VII-4 Policy-In accordance with policies VII-2 and VII-3 above, the City shall take such actions as are necessary to ensure that economic development can occur in a timely and efficient manner. Such actions may include the following: a) Use of the Local Improvement District process to reconstruct or install public facilities to commercial, employment, and manufacturing zoned lands. Land and buildings should be suitable for use by small service and manufacturing industries of about 10 to 50 employees. Two areas of the City that would benefit from this policy are those lands designated Ennploy- ment served by Exit 14 of the I-5 freeway and Hersey Street and "A"Street. The subject site is directly adjacent to I-5 and within a close distance to the Exit 14 interchange. The site can easily be developed in a timely and efficient manner as all public streets, sidewalks and infrastructure are already available and extend to the property. It's expected that construction will begin on the site immediately after final City approval. Construction should take up to six months with the goal of expanding the Caldera Brewing Company's employee base by 18 98 it September of 2011. VII-5 The City shall encourage economic development of the local resources and enhance employment opportunities for existing residents. The City's policy is that economic development shall always have as its prirnmy purpose the enhancement of tine community's economic health. The Caldera Brewing Company of Ashland has started from very humble beginnings and has expanded into a local success story with shipments throughout the Pacific Northwest and in some cases internationally. The vast majority of employees reside in Ashland or within a close proximity to the facility. The company's existing brewing-operations are located in a 6,000 S.F. building located at 540 Clover Lane and there is also the well known Caldera Tap House (retail outlet) located at 31 Water Street in the downtown. The Tap House on Water Street will remain and continue to function as it successfully does today. The proposal is to expand operations to a `new facility of 28,000 S.F. for the brewing of beer products. Included with the manufacturing process, the applicant is proposing a tasting room which may or may not operate immediately and is principally intended to be a facility similar to the Roxy Ann Winery in Medford where customers can visit and experience the facilities and taste the various brews the company offers in a comfortable and presentable environment. All of the spaces noted are intended to be constructed as part of this application's initial construction, but finishing the spaces in an economical and timely manner, without additional discretionary entitlements, is prudent. i b. A substantial change in circumstances has occurred since the existing zoning or Plan designation: was proposed, necessitating the need to adjust to the changed circumstances, or The applicant contends there has been a substantial change in circumstances since the plan's designation was proposed that now necessitates the need to adjust to the new circumstances. Although the applicant contends the property should have never been designated a residential classification due to its adjacency to I-5 and a variety of other factors including noises, vibrations, lights, glare, etc. In fact, during the project's neighborhood meeting, the residents agreed the proposed building would actually reduce the noises, lights and other negative visual elements. (NOTEl: Comprehensive Plan Policy IV-56 specifically discourages residential development along the 1-5 freeway due to noise). Further, the existence of the I-5 corridor (on the west and south) as well as the steep slopes on the east and having access only from Clover Lane has created an odd triangular shaped island. Recognizing these constraints and existing conditions, the City designated the properties from the intersection of Highway 66 and Clover Lane to the north boundary line of the subject parcel commercial (C-1) and employment (E-1) leaving the subject property, outside City limits, residential. The most apparent substantial change in the areas circumstances occurred when the Planning Commission decided, at the urging of the Spring Creek neighborhood, to eliminate the connection (due to severe grade differences and neighborhood opposition of commercial traffic). The decision was followed with a vacation of street right-of-way and later street and pedestrian improvements that clearly, especially when considering the severe grade change from Clover I 19 99 Lane to Spring Creek Drive, no longer makes sense. That said, if the land was to remain residential, the new residents would be subject to the noises, lights, vibrations more than the existing residences in contrast to Policy IV-56. In fact, it is the applicants understanding from a recent conversation with an ODOT official, the residents along Oak Knoll Drive where the recent fire occurred, are petitioning ODOT for taller concrete walls to mitigate against fire (and noise). This type of large blank wall, often seen along freeways in urban areas such as Los Angles or San Diego wouldn't be necessary on the subject property if its land use classification was appropriately designated as employment. c. Circumstances relating to the general public welfare exist that require such an action; or Not applicable. The applicant is not aware of circumstances relating to the general public welfare exist that require such an action. This criterion typically relates to cases where there is a failure in the system (i.e. sewer) where the welfare of the public is at stake. d. Proposed increases in residential zoning density resulting front a change from one zoning district to another zoning district, will provide 25% of the proposed base density as affordable housing consistent with the approval standards set forth in 18.106.030 (G); or Not applicable as the proposal is not for a residential zoning designation. e. Increases in residential zoning density of four units or greater on commercial, employment or industrial zoned lands (i.e. Residential Overlay), will not negatively impact the City of Ashland's commercial and industrial land supply as required in the Comprehensive Plan, and will provide 25% of the proposed base density as affordable housing consistent with the approval standards set forth in 18.106.030(G). Not applicable as the proposal is not for a residential zoning designation. The total number of affordable units described in sections D or E shall be determined by rounding down fractional answers to the nearest whole unit. A deed restriction, or similar' legal instrument, shall be used to guarantee compliance with affordable criteria for a period of not less than 60 years. Sections D and Edo not apply to council initiated actions. Not applicable as the proposal is not for a residential zoning designation. SITE REVIEW PERMIT (CHAPTER 18.72) A. All applicable City Ordinances have been met or will be met by the proposed development To applicant's knowledge all City regulations are or will be complied with unless otherwise stated herein. Chapter 18.40 Employment District, allows a variety of uses such as 20 i 100 j i manufacturing, office, and retail establishments. The proposed development is in concert with above uses by providing retail, tasting room, office and manufacturing uses. The E-1 Zone District does not require either yard restrictions or Solar Setbacks except when the subject parcel adjoins a residential district. Adjoining property to the north and west are either zoned E-1 or the I-5 freeway; therefore, no setback is required. The land to the south and east are residentially zoned; however, the proposed building setback is greater than 10 feet per story. As shown on the Preliminary Exterior Elevations, the average height of the proposed building is less than the maximum height requirement of 40' (Note: Height is based on the mid- point between the peak of the roof and the gable line). As shown on the Site Survey, there is a 1,152 S.F. structure and an above ground tank. The existing structure and tank will be removed. The applicant will request a Demolition Permit prior to final plan approval. The driveway has been designed to accommodate both emergency vehicles and delivery trucks. Additional fire hydrants, as requested by the City of Ashland's Fire Department, have been provided with one being at the rear of the property and the other at the front. I B. All requirements of the Site Review Chapter have been met or will be met. To the applicant's knowledge all Site Review regulations are or will be complied with. As further addressed below, all requirements listed in the Site Review Chapter (18.72) have or will be complied with. C. The development complies with the Site Design Standards adopted by the City Council for implementation of this Chapter. As further addressed below, all requirements listed in the Site Design Standards have or will be complied with unless specifically addressed herein. D. That adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, paved access to and through the development, electricity, urban storm drainage, and adequate transportation can and will be provided to and through the subject property. All improvements in the street right- of-way shall comply with the Street Standards in Chapter 18.88, Performance Standards Options. The applicants have had various meetings with the Public Works and Electrical Department staff to discuss the site's utility needs. At no time was it indicated there was a deficiency in the utilities other than storm water capacity due to the undersized culverts within the Highway 66 and Clover Lane intersection. This situation is similar to a number of other developments along Clover Lane that addressed this issue with a metering system which holds storm water j temporarily during large storm events and then slowly releases the storm water at an acceptable j it 21 ~ 101 li rate. In this case, the applicants are also proposing similar measures to address the site's storm water needs, but instead of directing storm water down Clover Lane, the water will drain to Spring Creek Drive where it will first be held on-site in multiple systems for water detention and water quality. The storm water system has been designed by a licensed Civil Engineer which includes a bio-swale to be located at the entrance of the property providing storm water treatment and aesthetic qualities to the site. The plan also identifies an underground storm water detention facility on the east side of the property that accommodates overflows and then slowly meters out the water. Both systems eventually flow to the existing storm water system in Spring Creek Drive. All other utilities are located underground within the Clover Lane right-of-way and are sized to accommodate the proposal. A final Electrical Plan, addressing electrical loads, will be reviewed with the Ashland Electric Department, but an existing electrical transformer box sits on the vacant lot immediately north of the property. At the present time, it's understood the transformer can accommodate the proposed electrical demands. Fire hydrants are located on both the front and rear ends of the property as well as an oversized access lane and turn around area for both company vehicles and City Fire Department vehicles. The applicant's Civil Engineer and Landscape Architect have provided preliminary drawings, see attached, which address the sites various utilities and storm water facilities. SITE DESIGN & USE STANDARDS - II-C-1. BASIC SITE REVIEW Approval Standard: Development in all commercial and employment zones shall conform to the following development standards: II-C-1a) Orientation and Scale 1. Buildings shall have their primary orientation toward the street rather than the parking area. Building entrances shall be oriented toward the street and shall be accessed from a public sidewalk. Where buildings are located on a corner lot, the entrance shall be oriented toward the higher order street or to the lot corner at the intersection of the streets. Public sidewalks shall be provided adjacent to a public street along the street frontage. Buildings shall be located as close to the intersection corner as practicable. As shown on the submitted plans, the proposed building will be orientated towards the terminus of Clover Lane at an approximate 45 degree angle with its main front entry centered on the street. The street's sidewalk extends to the building's front entrance. Parking is both located to each side of the building and are not focal points from the public right-of-way as much as the building is. In fact, the existing building (Bauer Fly Reels) screens the western side parking lot and a future building on Tax Lot 6801 and the site's bio-swale will screen out the eastern side parking lot. 22 102 During the pre-application meetings, it was suggested the subject building be shifted to the east along the embankment with all access and parking along the western side of the property (adjacent to I-5). The applicant did consider this idea and generated various concept plans, but none of the plans either met the applicants access needs and were really intrusive onto the residential neighbors to the east due to the fact the building's height, in combination with the severe grade change between properties, created a massive looming effect which virtually eliminated sunlight to neighbors and created a tenuous relationship between properties. Overall, the applicants contend the proposal meets this criterion and addresses the need to provide safe truck access, safe pedestrian access, be considerate of the neighbors to the east and be streetscape friendly as the criteria intends. 2. Building entrances shall be located within 20 feet of the public right of way to which they are required to be oriented. Exceptions may be granted for topographic constraints, lot configuration, designs where a greater setback results in an improved access or for sites with multiple buildings, such as shopping centers, where this standard is met by other buildings. Automobile circulation or parking shall not be allowed between the building and the right-of-way. The entrance shall be designed to be clearly visible, functional, and shall be open to the public during all business hours. Due to the site's triangular shape, location at the end of a street terminus and its physical attributes (severe grade changes along east and west boundaries), the building needs to sit further back from the end of the Clover Street right-of-way in order to obtain access and accommodate the businesses needs. Simply analyzing the site plans illustrates how the proposed building and access needs eliminate the possibility of meeting this standard and therefore the exception within the standard is necessary. Nevertheless, the building's entrance has been designed to be clearly visible, functional, and will be open to the public during all business hours. 3. These requirements may be waived if the building is not accessed by pedestrians, such as warehouses and industrial buildings without attached offices, and automotive service stations. At this point in time it is unclear how many pedestrians would access the facility, but clearly the City's Site Design and Use Standards attempt to address circumstances that "one day" may apply and therefore attempt to create designs that contribute to alternative modes of transportation. In this case, the applicants agree and believe that although the building will primarily generate auto and truck trips, its design will allow for future uses or unforeseen circumstances accommodating a more pedestrian atmosphere. II-C-1 b) Streetseaae One street tree chosen from the street tree list shall be placed for each 30 feet of frontage for that portion of the development fronting the street. 23 103 The subject property does not have typical street frontage as the street terminates at the property line. Nevertheless, the landscaping plans (L-3.0) identify two trees along the pedestrian path leading to the buildings entrance that attempt to address the purpose of this standard. II-C-lc) Landscaping 1. Landscaping shall be designed so that 50% coverage occurs after one year and 90% coverage occurs after 5 years. The site's landscaping was designed by a local professional landscape designer, in close consultation with the project's Arborist, familiar with the City's Landscaping Standards within the Site Design Standards as well as the Southern Oregon climate zones. The landscape plan identifies a variety of plants designed to enhance the buildings architecture as well as the identified activity areas. The landscaping has been designed so that 50% coverage is accomplished within the first year and 90% within five years. 2. Landscaping design shall utilize a variety of low water use and deciduous and evergreen trees and shrubs and flowering plant species. The landscape plan utilizes a variety of low water use and deciduous evergreen trees, shrubs and flowering plans typically found in the Southern Oregon region. 3. Buildings adjacent to streets shall be buffered by landscaped areas at least 10 feet in width, except in the Ashland Historic District. Outdoor storage areas shall be screened from view from adjacent public rights-of-way, except in M-1 zones. Loading facilities shall be screened and buffered when adjacent to residentially zoned land. The application complies with this standard as the site's storage area is partially dug into the earth and will be screened behind a combination of retaining walls and a wooden fence along its perimeter. This area is also screened from the adjacent residential houses due to the severe slopes between the properties, distance between the properties, and significant tree canopy. 4. Irrigation systems shall be installed to assure landscaping success. The landscape plans include an irrigation plan designed by the project's Landscape Architect to assure the plant's success. 5. Efforts shall be made to save as many existing healthy trees and shrubs on the site as possible. Efforts have been made to save as many existing healthy trees and shrubs on the site as possible. The projects Landscape Architect and Arborist has reviewed all of the site's trees in order to determine their health as well as their ability to withstand change to their environment. In doing 24 104 so, eight trees are proposed to be removed primarily due to their "existing" failing health or dead condition. II-C-1d) Parking 1. Parking areas shall be located behind buildings or on one or both sides. 2. Parking areas shall be shaded by deciduous trees, buffered from adjacent non- residential uses and screened from non-residential uses. I ' The applicant contends the site and the resulting building and parking configuration are unique and that the site's parking is on both sides of the building. The applicant believes the parking design meets the purpose and intent of this standard which is to avoid streetscapes primarily dedicated to parking lots. In this case, Clover Lane terminates at the property, the parking areas are screened by adjacent buildings, pedestrian connections lead directly to the building and the street's primary focus is the buildings entrance. Further, the two parking areas will be shaded by deciduous trees and shrubs and buffered and screened from adjacent non-residential and residential uses. I1-C-le) Designated Creek Protection 1. Designated creek protection areas shall be considered positive design elements and incorporated in the overall design of a given project. 2. Native riparian plan materials shall be planted in and adjacent to the creek to enhance the creek habitat. A small portion of Spring Creek flows through the property's southern most corner. The applicants are not proposing to disturb or utilize the creek in anyway. The applicant is proposing some landscaping near the top of the embankment, approximately 100' away, but primarily this improvement is intended for aesthetic purposes and site delineation. II-C-1 t1 Noise and Glare Special attention to glare (AMC 18.72.110) and noise (AMC 9.08.170(c) & AMC (9.08.175) shall be considered in the project design to insure compliance with these standards. Once the building is constructed and operating, the standards identified in AMC 18.72.110 (glare). AMC 9.08.170(c) and 9.08.175 (noise) will be met to insure compliance with such nuisance laws. Caldera currently functions along Clover Lane and in a similar proximity to residential housing and to the best of his knowledge has not received any complaints. The applicant believes the proposal has taken into consideration potential nuisance issues and has designed the structure with the neighboring properties in mind. II-C-1g) Expansions of Existing Sites and Buildings For sites which do not conform to these requirements, an equal percentage of the site must be made to comply with these standards as the percentage of building expansion, e.g., if a i 25 105 i I, building area is expanded by 25%, then 25% of the site must be brought up to the standards required by this document. Not applicable as the building proposed will be new and comply with the above design standards where applicable. II-D PARKING LOT LANDSCAPING & SCREENING STANDARDS All parking lots, which for purposes of this section include areas of vehicle maneuvering, parking, and loading, shall be landscaped and screened as follows: II-D-1) Screening at Required Yards 1) Parking abutting a required landscaped front or exterior yard shall incorporate a sight obscuring hedge screen into the required landscaped yard. 2) The screen shall grow to be at least 36 inches higher than the finished grade of the parking area, except for required vision clearance areas. 3) The screen height may be achieved by a combination of earth mounding and plant materials. 4) Elevated parkinglots shall screen both the parking lot and retaining wall. The project's parking area is screened from the adjacent rights-of-way and residential properties by either structures, earth mounding, or landscaping. II-D-2) Screening Abutting Property Lines Parking abutting a property line shall be screened by a 5' landscaped strip. Where a buffer between zones is required, the screening shall be incorporated into the required buffer strip and will not be an additional requirement. The parking area abutting the property lines includes a 5' landscape strip. II-D-3) Landscape Standards: 1) Parking lot landscaping shall consist of a minimum of 7% of the total parking area plus a ratio of 1 tree for each seven parking spaces to create a canopy effect. Approximately 40% of the parking area consists of ground level landscaping and tree canopy. Of the 32 parking spaces proposed, a total of 6 shade trees within or near the parking spaces are to be planted which is approximately 1 tree for every 5 parking spaces. 26 106 I 2) The tree species shall be an appropriate large canopied shade tree and shall be selected from the street tree list to avoid root damage to pavement and utilities, and damage from droppings to parked cars and pedestrians. The proposed parking lot trees and their placements have been chosen by a professional landscape architect with the intent to provide shade and a canopy effect over parked automobiles. The Landscape Architect has reviewed the applicable landscaping standards within the Municipal Code as well as the Site Design and Use Standards to ensure compliance. All trees were chosen from the City's adopted street tree list which includes a variety of tree species recommended for parking lots. I i 3) The tree shall be planted in a landscaped area such that the tree bole is a least 2 feet from any curb or paved area. All trees to be planted near a hard surface area will be setback at least 2'. 4) The landscaped area shall be planted with shrubs and/or living ground cover to assure 50% coverage within 1 year and 90% within 5 years. The Landscape Architect has reviewed the applicable landscaping standards within the Municipal Code as well as the Site Design and Use Standards to ensure compliance. The landscaping coverage will be 50% within the first year after planting and 90% within 5 years. 5) Landscaped areas shall be evenly distributed throughout the parking area and parking perimeter at the required ratio. The submitted landscape plan shows the parking lot landscaping being evenly distributed throughout the parking lot. Shade trees are evenly distributed near and between spaces and along drive isles to also help in reducing heat gain. 6) That portion of a required landscaped yard, buffer strip or 'screening strip abutting parking stalls may be counted toward required parking lot landscaping but only for those stalls abutting landscaping as long as the tree species, living plant material, coverage and placement distribution criteria are also met. Front or exterior yard landscaping may not be substituted for the interior landscaping required for interior parking stalls. The project complies with the above standard. II-D-6) Other Screening 1) Other screening and buffering shall be provided as follows: 27 i 107 h Refuse Container Screen: Refuse containers or disposable areas shall be screened from view by placement of a solid wood fence or masonry wall from five to eight feet in height. All refuse materials shall be contained within the refuse area. The project's refuse area is located along the eastern side of the building and is enclosed for screening purposes. Service Corridor Screen: When adjacent to residential uses, commercial and industrial service corridors shall be screened. Siting and design of such service areas shall reduce the adverse effects of noise, odor and visual clutter upon adjacent residential uses. The application complies with this standard as the site's service area, rear of building and associated turn around area, is partially dug into the earth and will be screened behind a combination of retaining walls and landscaping. This area is also screened from the adjacent residential houses due to the severe slopes between the properties, distance between the properties, and a significant tree canopy that screens the site. Light and Glare Screen: Artificial lighting shall be so arranged and constructed as to not produce direct glare on adjacent residential properties or streets. I No offsite direct light or glare will be directed towards any residential uses as all on-site lighting is intended to be directed either on the building or for the site's adjacent pedestrian sidewalks. TREE REMOVAL. PRESERVATION & PROTECTION CHAPTER 18.61 18.61.042 A. Tree Removal - Staff Permit: 1. Tree Removal-Staff Permits are required for the following activities: a. Removal of trees greater than 6" DBH on any private lands zoned C-1, E-I, M-1, or HC. 2. Applications for Tree Removal - Staff Permits shall be reviewed and approved by the Staff Advisor pursuant to AMC 18.61.080 (Approval Criteria) and 18.108.030 (Notice Requirements). If the tree removal is part of another planning action involving development activities, the tree removal application, if timely filed, shall be processed concurrently with the other planning action. The application is subject to this requirement as the proposal is to remove seventeen trees due to their failing health, dead status or location within improvement area. The trees are identified on the attached Tree Preservation and Removal Plan with the trees to be removed include: #1 - 9 (various sizes) Cedar Trees (good)* #10 - 6" Plum (poor), #11 - 15" Elm (moderate) 28 108 #12 - 14" Oak (dead) #13 - 15" Oak (dead) #14 - 30" Oak (poor to moderate) #18 - 6" Oak (dead) #20 -19" Oak (dead) #30 - 12" Oak (good) The subject trees have been evaluated by a local Certified Arborist for their stature, health and effects on adjacent trees. None of the trees were deemed significant by the Arborist, impacting to other trees or of such stature to warrant retaining. Other than tree #30, all of the sites large, healthy and mature trees are to remain. The project's arborist has participated in the various discussions of the building's footprint and has verified the trees will continue to thrive with the development of the proposed building and various site improvements. NOTE: The Cedar Trees, #1 - #9, are also proposed to be removed with this application although the Tree Removal Plan does not indicate their removal. These trees are healthy according to the project's arborist, but due to the aggressive topping of the trees, they are unattractive and provide little benefit to the project. The applicant is agreeable to replant nine new Maple or similar type of trees prior to Certificate of Occupancy. 18.61.080 Criteria for Issuance of Tree Removal - Staff Permit: An applicant for a Tree Removal-Staff Permit shall demonstrate that the following criteria are satisfied. The Staff Advisor may require an arborist's report to substantiate the criteria for a permit. The applicants are requesting a Tree Removal Permit to remove eight trees: #1 - 9 (various sizes) Cedar Trees (good)* #10 - 6" Plum (poor), #11 - 15" Elm (moderate) #12 - 14" Oak (dead) #13 - 15" Oak (dead) #14 - 30" Oak (poor to moderate) #18 - 6" Oak (dead) #20 -19" Oak (dead) #30 -12" Oak (good) The applicants are proposing to remove the above seventeen trees to allow for the property to be developed in accordance with project goals. The applicants have retained the services of Laurie Sager, Sager & Associates, to assess the health of the site's trees. The seventeen trees to be removed will be mitigated with 27 new trees that will be planted with amended soils and in appropriate locations designed by the project's Landscape Architect. Applicants will follow 29 i i i 109 li City requirements as well as the tree protection measures outlined by the attached Tree Protection and Tree Removal narrative. A. Hazard Tree: The Staff Advisor shall issue a tree removal permit for a hazard tree if the applicant demonstrates that a tree is a hazard and warrants removal. The trees to be removed are not considered hazardous trees. B. Tree that is Not a Hazard: The City shall issue a tree removal permit for a tree that is not a hazard if the applicant demonstrates all of the following: 1. The tree is proposed for removal in order to permit the application to be consistent with other applicable Ashland Land Use Ordinance requirements and standards. (e.g. other applicable Site Design and Use Standards). The Staff Advisor may require the building footprint of the development to be staked to allow for accurate verification of the permit application; and The applicants are proposing to remove the seventeen trees due to their health status or to allow for the property to be developed in accordance with the projects various objectives. Other than tree #30, none of the trees would be considered significant trees by type, shape, size or stature and sit within the proposed construction area and will likely not survive the construction phase. 2. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on erosion, soil stability, flow of surface waters, protection of adjacent trees, or existing windbreaks; and The removal of the trees will not have a negative impact on erosion, soil stability, flow of surface waters, protection of adjacent trees, or existing windbreaks. 3. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on the tree densities, sizes, canopies, and species diversity within 200 feet of the subject property. The trees in question will be replaced with new trees and common area trees that create a diverse canopy. According to the-project's arborist, the trees in question will not have a significant negative impact to trees within 200 feet of the subject property. The City shall grant an exception to this criterion when alternatives to the tree removal have been considered and no reasonable alternative exists to allow the property to be used as permitted in the zone. Nothing in this section shall require that the residential density be reduced below the permitted density allowed by the zone. In making this determination; the City may consider alternative site plans or placement of structures or alternate landscaping designs that would lessen the impact on trees, so long as the alternatives continue to comply with other provisions of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance. 30 110 No exceptions are requested with this application. Various alternative designs have been considered during the preliminary stages of the site planning. 4. The City shall require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each tree granted approval pursuant to AMC 18.61.084. Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit. See section below referencing and addressing AMC 18.61.084. 18.61.084 Mitigation Required An applicant may be required to provide mitigation for any tree approved for removal. The mitigation requirement shall be satisfied by one or more of the following: A. Replanting on site. The applicant shall plant either a minimum 1 '/2-inch caliper healthy and well-branched deciduous tree or a 5-6 foot tall evergreen tree for each tree removed. The replanted tree shall be of a species that will eventually equal or exceed the removed tree in size if appropriate for the new location. The tree shall be planted and maintained according to the specifications in the City Tree Planting and Maintenance Guidelines as approved by the City Council. i The applicants will replace the seventeen trees, (25% of which are dead) to be removed with 27 new trees to be planted within and around the site. The proposal includes a variety of trees that will be appropriate to the site and mature overtime due to their type, placement, and planting methods. B. Replanting off site. If in the City's determination there is insufficient available space on the subject property, the replanting required in subsection A shall occur on other property in the applicant's ownership or control within the City, in an open space tract that is part of the same subdivision, or in a City owned or dedicated open space or park. Such mitigation planting is subject to the approval of the authorized property owners. If planting on City owned or dedicated property, the City may specify the species and size of the tree. Nothing in this section shall be construed as an obligation of the City to allow trees to be planted on City owned or dedicated property. Applicants are not proposing to replant trees off site but is proposing to plant 27 new trees on- site as described in Section 18.61.084 A. above. C. Payment in lieu of planting. If in the City's determination no feasible alternative exists to plant the required mitigation, the applicant shall pay into the tree account an amount as established by resolution of the City Council. 31 i i Applicants are proposing to plant 27 new trees on site as described in Section 18.61.084 A. above. 18.61.200 - Tree Protection Applicant intends to protect all remaining trees on the site following the guidelines listed below. Tree Protection as required by this section is applicable to any planning action or building permit. A. Tree Protection Plan Required. See attached Tree Protection Plan (L-1.0). All requirements noted in Section 18.61.200 A. are noted on the plans. All of the site's remaining trees will be protected and monitored by the project Arborist during construction activities. No physical development or excavation activities shall commence prior to installing and maintaining tree protection measures. Applicants will follow City requirements as well as the tree protection measures outlined by the attached Tree Protection Plan and narrative. B. Tree Protection Measures Required. Applicants understand and agree with the Tree Protection Measures listed in 18.61.200 B. Also, applicants agree to adhere to the tree protection plan as outlined in the attached Tree Protection Plan and narrative. C. Inspection. The applicant shall not proceed with any construction activity, except installation of erosion control measures, until the City has inspected and approved the installation of the required tree protection measures and a building and/or grading permit has been issued by the City. Applicants understand and agree to abide by Section 18.61.200 C. 32 112 ` 'i ~ i ' . ~,1-`sal #925 169;tfi+ /fi~ ~ • • 'E. Ir 'I y 319b911 r~ 74bj1` .f.= _,r biz >."44A},.. I 1. .....~J 1 ! SdAU , WF0YM4TI0NMCHN0L0GY lot i . 3t9b 60'24 7399 y9 4 5299 Map Maker y " ' Q_ f "`f 4t90 ` Application Frord Counter Legend I IIII y 3299 tiyl i Tar. WI Outlines _ i L r ry.9b: Tex Lou Numbers r 5~„ ..r ~2~ hp r ' 'I ~ ~ " tdp51 tUll COnlours til 699a i f r Y. d99tt Building. 4 I I 9~ i~ I r G JJ 3ry . k r i~H~ d~AIU r, y 67~b i } / f f i ti ~ ~ ' ~Y~`t ! ~ y'i I ~ / i,d9~a4 , ,•t J ✓ 4r' t I .lL w i / lb{w I ~ i L~yT'4 ' I ;s ` j9t9t a~m9~` I~ya9`q s t f.+~ 69bIF 1 I r r 901 ' r 11 1 a ' ~'7O , - + w ~ I't _ _ ~ 1 1 C~. ~si99 >t ' t~^b any, tag _ , y ~ I ?b9b I ~ ~ 2~r + + 2798 , Y~ ',t t \ t l ! , 1 d. a I jrirw~n^,t 259Q, f 2~i0~ f4 6~ ..,dZ49 V 17-1 ~\y i. $b j 39901 21:0J7 1/54 to ~Jj t, ~a37{tA I. [ 7s 7399 6, moo f -'.I('__• '799 _ f ~>»i~ ~t~y _ 1 1~~5'9 } ~ ~~~ti^y . 7✓"~' &61 R , 1 . (W. ~30F¢d r 7399 \ d ; . t ~9U ^}/8~ ' n 17 \ ~ . r+ f., t i` sm49? '"5suin'!'6f99 JACKSON a ; ~a 9 COUNTY IJ2w 9Lgon ~ 6299 f"++y~ 4Q'~ ~ Tm+m.o mwamaaemimams. 999• r'.:...... .c r, k'y# m pae e~n.wee w. F~m...n • Mwn o ~ ~14b V~.. 7599 ~c. 0 a ~ , dL15 vmrm.rl>. wn~N.bn.. mq . u..i.awn ww...•~ wom.+b~yurvm,o:mmvu,e:~.nepaw..m.mrw Pkav..,a. wm maew.na, v.:+. r-cce: 113 I, fret - 1 fif f a. + ~r IT. IV, bh{fl njx' ( .aa "'w !4 fl ni n t ~$t S ruvawnnonn:awatncv IF -TMap Maker r ti l r ` tau '~q4 'h Application 1 00, ~'r qr^ ' 'w xi, - !v4`~' 4J Front Counter Legend 44 r•,sL uR tFv~TCf _ iii y ; Ys (r.T..~ Y. a ' Tan Lot Ou0lnos Ile ty .~isfib~^ qG t~?' grip 's f -r. x~.( Tv 1Y r~ { Tor Lul Numbers r¢xt b748ii V.~, € to , v v µy' r vY s Caunl tle0alur Aerial 2905 Im:rt{+;r}Fr`~t r~j e~ s a , t b3•UvrT v +k - 3~'~y?~"ti ,1^.R'~ 'y F S K YwL~ g F6 A`kba{`.'S 3i F{~t 4 ' 'ma.jyr r P (r fi'S f'l { lE7 t i' a. [ " tyV}A 5,iIle x max" v' `,qr rGi7{r' S X.aN y . OR,, IT T 1 TI, it F r 1 t Vld f i- 1 F f 4p~IY~ ~q~n I r 1 r: Nt~ - ~W ` _ iW1 l ilWVt 1 '1 IT T in: a yf to $ yY" x s r, `K e42 ~w 4 y~' ItI, ey {3~v +f W n r, ~l f x .1 x ~~al q 4 x Y ~F i - it Syr IT" 'TtI { s ] x ""4444 1 >n' t, - ~t r v v, t p TrIT 1,,l -T- I l a ? y ~'~xlk xa ' r f h t y7,i _ r ai! 1 4r - tat i . r to ~y k fY: .'rf r , s` '~`+t n 7609 -9 t, qrrr if It. }a i IT IT ~ y f _2.5ay 1 .v - r y 4599 li is • x %~~yS. , R h "LL Nf~ i }}y4.1~ t 1 A y Y i #r ,5y 3 't owl S ~1y ~ W ~ L •w _ 1 :V ik{ K 1) ;1St 'pY""y ; f a4 LL ¢J f - G,yt Et ~ r ~ s _ ✓ti Y JACKSON COUNTY IIL- tr IT It 1. _ I y' 41 V pp'l~l[[a~r~ey~.1M \ J' ne. ° " pW oY. ..*F~w oe,.v Wfr 114 CITY OF ASHLAND ENGINEERING DIVISION IRREVOCABLE CONSENT TO ANNEXATION The undersigned, referred to in this document as "owner" whether singular or plural, owns or is the purchaser under a recorded land sale contract of real property in Jackson County, Oregon, described below and referred to in this document as "the property": See Exhibit "A" In consideration of the City of Ashland annexing the approximately 3.72 acre'parcel(s) located at 590 Clover.Lane (Assessor's Maps and Tax Lots 391E14AA Tax Lot #6900 & #7000 and 391E14AD Tax Lot #7000), Owner declares and agrees that the property shall be held, sold, and conveyed subject to the following covenants, conditions, and restrictions which shall constitute covenants running with the land and shall be binding on all parties, their heirs, successors and assigns, having any right, title, or interest in the property or any part thereof: i Whenever a proposal to annex the property is initiated by the City of Ashland or otherwise, Owner shall consent and does consent to the annexation of the property to the City of Ashland. Owner agrees this consent to annexation is irrevocable. Owner further agrees to deposit an amount sufficient to retire any outstanding indebtedness of special districts as defined in ORS 222.510. Dated this ~ day of GJoV6M64/L , 2010 Signature: Owner State of Oregon ) ss: County of Jackson ) Personally appeared the above named`Whl j m p[Js and acknowledged the foregoing instrument to be his voluntary act and deed. Notary Public for Oregon My Commission expires:-' OFFICIAL SEAL r- ° h' I BILLIE K. BOSWELL ~ "N I •"t I NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON MY COMMISSIONIEXPRESgpfl3742013 NOV 19 2010 i Fiulcl. ~~fiico- _ Sounty_- EXHIBIT A (ANNEXATION DESCRIPTION) Commencing at the Northeast corner of Government Lot I in Section 14, Township 39 South, Range I East, Willamette Meridian, Jackson County, Oregon; tlience South 00°00'21" East, along the east line of said Lot 1, 1023.69 feet to the southeast corner of land partition filed for record November 14, 2005 as Partition Plat No. P-82-2005 of the records of Partition Plats in Jackson County, Oregon and is on file in the office of the Jackson County Surveyor as No. 18963 for the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence along the southerly boundary of said land partition, WEST 387.95 feet to the easterly right-of-way line of Interstate Highway 5; thence along said right-of-way line, South 18°12'09" East 47.83 feet; thence continue along said easterly right-of-way, South 26°38' 12" East 832.19 feet to the east line of Government Lot 2 in the aforesaid Section 14; thence along the east line of said Lot 2 and Lot 1, North 00°00'21 West 789.31 feet to the point of beginning. h eG lGTE nro p1;OFESSIC)N1iaL' LAND " T'n'TEYQI3 I EJ~ tfucG-- wway W481 L HUCK 1 xoxx Darrell L. Huck L.S. 2023 - Oregon Expires 6/30/2011 Hoffb4hr & Associates, Inc. (10032 annex desc rl.doc) NOV 19 2010 116 IP,ICI_.._..... •`flrt~= ..-_iiUC:IIy...~.M I I I C______________________ _ PARCEL 2 W PARCEL 1 S PARTITION PUT P-82-2005 zz PARTITION PUT P-82-2005 \ ]I d I i o WI % \1 Zi ie H---~~ l I I I \ I aw om mrt. j a f6 NSfj N•! 2 032 R wmmpxm w~. (PARCEL 1)/ °"°°pM M0' }'VO' AREA OF ANEXATIO/j ^ j a EXHIBIT MAP POR ANNEXATION " Located N1 y THE NE V4 BEG. 14, T. 399, P.M. WM, JACKSON C0194T7, OREGON a I i (Ll/! 6 7750 a S), py: 99-03 T R '(PARCEL 2: 2 9 1 100' a I. ~ ~ ~ ~xa1MY 1 g ru icr «w 410 J, i 14io0 g v~ 8 I, o 4 z i % Q TAX WT 7100 x ie fu0 Y x YA 9ENNANf F 32W O 0. . 9hS0 x f[ 14D G Tx ur uao REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR x1[1. Tx w exa ELECTRONIC COPY OREGON FEWANARR1. 4, 198 DARRELL L HUCK 2023 n ro Expires 813012011 NOV 19 2010 OM6MAA TA%LOli i0On 1'lOaO) [DB H xl.D TAft LOfe lM0) 41111 lit [~::i'.~1(:[I \ xalun Field 01,';i 117 I c aw r i tu7 j $ n tau o"D a' yl{K Ultuut ,Y ,z ~'l 'tiYl {4 i.e L \~{f r 10 fz, S$ xi 'zf i- s.a h` L 7< ~ Y ~ Z~ Lp rye 4~}. 4 a t1R t _ ~ J•y a ,Fr c i471~ ' a z ` Caldera Brewery Zone Change Traffic Impact Analysis November 20, 2010 I Prepared By: NfinfDORTATION rlIGIII6dAlnG, LL( IOUT!l~RN OREGON TRanfDORTATION ~NGIN~ERING, LLC raw ~ s za~o Caldera Brewery Zone Change Traffic Impact Analysis November 201 2010 Prepared By: LOOT-Yun Lo-con TRANfPORTATION-[N6/N.CF!?IN6, LL( 0D'PNOFE9r/oL 53200PE r 14` PJ---: OREGON T. 10, 1 4V Y P PP~J RENEWS: 72/31/10 120 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................................................5 If. INTRODUCTION 6 Background ...........................:..................................................................................................................6 Project Location .......................................................................................................................................6 Project Description ...................................................................................................................................6 III. EXISTING CONDITIONS ....................................................................................................................9 Site Condition ..........................................................................................................................................9 Roadway Characteristics ..........................................................................................................................9 Traffic Counts 9 Seasonal Volume Adjustment ..................................................................................................................9 Intersection Capacity and Level of Service 13 Planned Improvements 14 Existing Conditions 95" Percentile Queuing 15 Crash History 16 Site Distance 17 Existing Conditions Turn Lane Criterion 17 Pedestrian and Bicycle Accessibility 17. IV. DESIGN YEAR 2011 NO-BUILD CONDITIONS l8 Year 2011 No-Build Description ...........................................................................................................18 Year 2011 No-Build Background Growth and Traffic Development 18 Year 2011 No-Build Intersection Operations .........................................................................................18 Year 2011 No-Build 95" Percentile Queuing 19 V. SITE TRAFFIC .....................................................................................................................................22 Trip Generation ......................................................................................................................................22 Trip Distribution and Assignment ..........................................................................................................22 VI. DESIGN YEAR 2011 BUILD CONDITIONS ....................................................................................25 Year 2011 Build Description .................................................................................................................25 Year 2011 Build Intersection Operations ...............................................................................................25 Year 2011 Build 95" Percentile Queuing ..............................................................................................26 VII. FUTURE YEAR 2031 NO-BUILD AND BUILD CONDITIONS ...................................................28 Future Year 2031 No-Build Description ................................................................................................28 Future Year 2031 No-Build Background Growth Development ............................................................28 Future Year 2031 Build Description 28 Future Year 2031 No-Build and Build Intersection Operations 28 Future Year 2031 No-Build and Build 95" Percentile Queuing ............................................................29 VIII. CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................................................33 I 121 I, LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Roadway Classifications and Descriptions .......................................................................................9 Table 2: Existing Year 2010 Intersection Operations ...................................................................................13 Table 3: 95" Percentile Queue Lengths, Existing Year 2010 ........................................................................15 Table 4: Study Area Intersection Crash Rates 16 Table 5: Crash History by Type, 2005-2009 16 Table 6: Design Year 2011 No-Build Intersection Operations .....................................................................18 Table 7: 95"' Percentile Queue Lengths, Design Year 2011 No-Build ..........................................................19 Table 8: Development Trip Generations .......................................................................................................22 Table 9: Design Year 2011 Build Intersection Operations ............................................................................25 Table 10: 95" Percentile Queue Lengths, Design Year 2011 Build ..............................................................26 Table 11: Future Year 2030 No-Build and Build Intersection Operations ....................................................28 Table 12: 95" Percentile Queue Lengths, Future Year 2030 No-Build and Build ........................................29 FIGURES Figure 1: Vicinity Map ................................................................................................................................7 Figure 2: Site Location ................................................................................................................................8 Figure 3: Raw Count Data (A.M.)P.M ......................................................................................................10 Figure 4: Background Growth and Seasonal Adjustments 11 Figure 5: Year 2010 Design Hour Volumes (A.M.)P.M 12 Figure 6: Year 2010-2011 Background Growth and Pipeline Trips (P.M.) ..............................................20 Figure 7: Year 2011 No-Build Design Hour Volumes (P.M.) ..................................................................21 Figure 8: Development Trip Assignments - 28,000 SF Brewery (P.M.) ...................................................23 Figure 9: Development Trip Assignments - 3.72 Acre Business Park (P.M.) ..........................................24 Figure 10: Year 2011 Build Design Hour Volumes (P.M.) ........................................................................27 Figure 11: Year 2010-2030 Background Growth and Pipeline Trips (P.M.) ..............................................30 Figure 12: Future Year 2030 No-Build Traffic Volumes (P.M.) ................................................................31 Figure 13: Future Year 2031 Build Traffic Volumes (P.M.) ......................................................................32 APPENDICES ` Appendix A: Traffic Count Data, Seasonal Trend Table Information Appendix B: ITE Trip Generation Data, COOT Future Volumes Table Appendix C: Crash Data, ODOT 1-5 Exit 15 Interchange Project Information Appendix D: Existing Year 2010 Synchro Output Appendix E: Existing Year 2010 SimTraftic Output Appendix F: Design Year 2011 Synchro Output Appendix G: Design Year 2011 SimTraffic Output Appendix H: Future Year 2030 Synchro Output Appendix 1: Future Year 2030 SimTraffic Output Appendix J: Site Plan Appendix K: Agency Requirements 122 THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY I I i 123 li I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Summary Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering, LLC prepared a traffic impact analysis for a proposed Zone Change from County RR-5 (Rural Residential) to City E-1 (Employment) on Township 39S Range lE Section 14AA,tax lots 6900 and 7000 and Township 39S Range IE Section 14AD, tax lot 7000 in Ashland, Oregon. Two of the three tax lots (391 E 14AA TL7000 and 391E14AD TL7000) also require Comprehensive Plan Map amendments from Single Family Residential to Employment. All three parcels total 3.72 acres and are located south of Ashland Street on Clover Lane. Access is provided from Clover Lane. A traffic impact analysis is required by the City of Ashland and the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) to address the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) and evaluate potential development impacts to the transportation system. Potential development impacts were based on a 28,000 square foot brewery with tasting room for the day of opening analysis, and a 3.72 acre business park for the future planning year analysis. Development impacts were analyzed during the P.M. peak hour, which was shown to be the peak period of the day in the study area. Five study area intersections were identified as key intersection for the analysis. These included: 1. Tolman Creek & Ashland Street 2. Washington Street & Ashland Street 3. I-5 SB ramps & Ashland Street 4. I-5 NB ramps & Ashland Street 5. Clover Lane & Ashland Street Study area intersections were evaluated under existing year 2010, build year 2011, and future year 2030 conditions during the p.m, peak hour. Conclusions The findings of the traffic impact analysis conclude that the proposed Employment designation and E-I zoning on Township 39S Range lE Section 14AA, tax lots 6900 and 7000 and Township 39S Range IE Section 14AD, tax lot 7000 in Ashland, Oregon can be accommodated on the existing transportation system without creating adverse impacts. Intersection operations and safety were evaluated to address project impacts to the surrounding area. Results of the analysis show the following: • The stop-controlled I-5 NB ramp intersection with Ashland Street is shown to operate at a v/c ratio >2.0 under future year 2030 no-build and build conditions. • 95'I' percentile queue lengths are shown to exceed link distances and create potential safety concerns on Ashland Street between the I-5 ramp intersections and the off ramps themselves under existing year 2010, design year 2011, and future year 2030 conditions. Planned mitigation includes an ODOT 1-5 Exit 14 Interchange project, which includes traffic signals at both ramp intersections, widening of Ashland Street, and extended right turn lanes on both I-5 off-ramps. With improvements in place, study area intersections are shown to be adequately mitigated throughout the future year planning horizon. Construction is currently on- going and estimated to be completed by April of 2012. 1.0. TRROf DORT11Tw11 THQH66Rlnc, U November 20, 2010 Caldera Brewery ZC Traffic Impact Analysis 5 124 i II. INTRODUCTION I Background I Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering, LLC prepared a traffic impact analysis for a proposed Zone Change from County RR-5 (Rural Residential) to City E-1 (Employment) on Township 39S Range lE Section 14AA,tax lots 6900 and 7000 and Township 39S Range IE Section 14AD, tax lot 7000 in Ashland, Oregon. Two of the three tax lots (391 E 14AA TL7000 and 391E14AD TL7000) also require Comprehensive Plan Map amendments from Single Family Residential to Employment. All three parcels total 3.74 acres and are located south of Ashland Street on Clover Lane. Access is provided from Clover Lane. A traffic impact analysis is required by the City of Ashland and the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODO`f) to address the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) and evaluate potential development impacts to the transportation system. To determine potential development impacts, proposed development trips were estimated using an existing count trip rate (based on a 28,000 SF brewery with tasting room) for the day of opening analysis and an Institute of Transportation Engineer's (ITE) "Business Park" trip rate (based on 3.72 acres of business park use) for the future planning year analysis. Under the existing count trip rate, the 28,000 square foot brewery with tasting room generated 64 P.M. trips. Under the "Business Park" trip rate, the 3.72 acre site generated 63 P.M. trips. The P.M. peak hour was determined to be the peak hour of the day according to study area count data, and was the peak hour evaluated in the analysis. Refer to chapter V for more information on trip generations. Five study area intersections were identified as key intersection for the analysis. These included: 1. Tolman Creek & Ashland Street 2. Washington Street & Ashland Street 3. I-5 SB ramps & Ashland Street 4. I-5 NB ramps & Ashland Street 5. Clover Lane & Ashland Street Study area intersections were evaluated under existing year 2010, build year 2011, and future year 2030 conditions during the p.m. peak hour. Project Location The subject parcels are located south of Ashland Street along Clover Lane on 391E14AA tax lots 6900 and 7000, and 391E14AD tax lot 7000 in Ashland, Oregon. Refer to Figures I and 2 for a site vicinity and site location map. Project Description All three tax lots are currently zoned County RR-5 (Rural Residential) and are proposed as City E-I (Employment). Tax lot 6900 (391E14AA) already has a comprehensive plan map designation of Employment, but tax lot 7000 (391E14AA) and tax lot 7000 (391E14AD) currently have Single Family Residential comprehensive plan map designations and are proposed to have Employment designations. With Employment designations the three tax lots are estimated to generate 557 ADT with 63 trips occurring during the P.M. peak hour. Access is provided from Clover Lane. i (A NnwpuBTArmH b61tlfrPfn6. II f 1 November 20, 2010 1 Caldera BreweryZC Tmi is Impact Analysis ~ 6 I 125 1 Figure 1 : Vicinity Map TF r, s r ' h 3 ASHLAND j \ MUNICIPAL F~ AIRPORT i i 1 SITE 0 0 ASHLAND ST. T ` p V \ N NA : OGI / y i e<pO i F by , 9 . ; z I ' ' r } NOT TO SCALE SOUTJ l-Rh 0MOH TUMSPURUTIUH ~NGIN~EJ2ING, u< Caldera Brewery Zone Change /I Medford, Oregon 97504 Traffic Impact Analysis ph 541.608.9923 fax 541.535.6873 email. kwkpl@q.com 126 Figure 2: Site Location I Ashland Hills Inn Shell Station ASH - Chevron - Union 76 Station Station S OC, Z j A yA 700 Best Wetern inn 0 = O % o O Qf Z, Caldem Brewing O . O A Q T R6 WASHINGTON ST. V Holiday Inn Express SITE C i Za 7~ i 1 1 i I I ; A\ 'I ( NOT TO SCALE 1 SOUTHIM "140" TAMPOATTITION -IMMUH16, U( Caldera Brewery Zone Change Medford, Oregon 97504 Traffic Impact Analysis ph 541.608.9923 fax 541.535.6673 email.,kwkpl@q.com i 111. EXISTING CONDITIONS Site Conditions The proposed site is located on Township 39S Range IE Section 14AA, tax lots 6900 and 7000, and Township 39S Range I E Section 14AD, tax lot 7000. Together the three lax lots total 3.72 acres. They are currently vacant. Roadway Characteristics Table 1 provides a summary of existing roadway classifications and descriptions in the study area. Table 1 - Roadway Classifications and Descriptions OHP City Functional Mobility Operational Posted Roadway Jurisdiction Classification Lanes Standard Standard Speed Ashland Street (OR 66, Green District Highway/ Varies Springs Highway) ODOT Boulevard 2-5 v/c = 0.90 - 35 City of Tolman Creek Rd Ashland Avenue 2 - v/c = 0.90 45 City or Neighborhood Washington Street Ashland Collector 2 - v/c=0.90 25 Interstate I-5 Ramps ODOT Highway I v/c=0.85 - 45 City of - Not Clover Lane Ashland Local Street 2 - v/c = 0.90 Posted Traffic Counts ODOT provided 16 hour counts at the intersections of Tolman Creek / Ashland Street, I-5 SB ramps / Ashland Street, and 1-5 NB ramps / Ashland Street. Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering, LLC gathered manual counts at the intersections of Washington Street / Ashland Street and Clover Lane / Ashland Street in September of 2010 during the A.M. (6:30-9:30 A.M.) and P.M. (3:30-6:30 P.M.) peak hours. The A.M. peak hour was shown to occur between 8:00- 9:00 A.M. and the P.M. peak hour between 4:30-5:30 P.M. Refer to Appendix A for count data. Refer to Figure 3 for raw traffic volumes during the A.M. and P.M. peak hours. Seasonal Volume Adjustment Count data was seasonally adjusted using the ODOT Year 2010 Seasonal Trend Table. The Seasonal Trend Table averages statewide seasonal trends according to highway type. Count data is adjusted seasonally to represent 30th highest design hour volumes (DHV). For purposes of the Ashland Street corridor, a seasonal factor of .1.05 was used to adjust September data based on Interstate, Summer, and Commuter trends, consistent with methodology used in the Exit 14 Interchange Area Management Plan (LAMP) study. The Interstate trend produced a seasonal factor of 1.03, and a combination of Summer/Commuter trends (25/75) produced a seasonal factor of 1.05. A 1.05 seasonal factor was used for all movements to assist with balancing between intersections. Refer to Appendix A for seasonal trend information. Refer to Figures 4 and 5 for seasonal adjustments and year 2010 design hour volumes (DHV). fff Tpompaarnnan [twintpiY6, l November 20, 2010 1 Caldera Brewery ZC Traffic Impact Analysis 19 128 i Figure 3: Raw Count Data (AM) PM HLAND \A NICIPAL RPORT i% : 3421(2]])4x '182(136) ` s ~~413(309) V 209(190) 14P2)~~ ¢ 5 1 1 (4) ]33(442) 658(598 may' s\~ 314(188)y f- 294(23]) 31(60 X11{ IS(40j) t 66(48) ti ` 8(16) 91(23) ~ 4]3(302) t 415(393)' i a R 46(26) 1]6(120) 1 s I \ ASHLAND ST. N \ J Z ~ QQQZj \ O $ ~ ~ Z y u F I h < 1 o 3 a 1 684(423)} 124](193)" . ' i NOT TO SCALE SOUTAFRH 04160H TRANSPORTATION IMIN-IM G, ll( Caldera Brewery Zone Change Medford; Oregon 97504 Traffic Impact Analysis ph 541.606.9923 fax 541.535.6673 email., kwkpi &q.com Figure 4 : Background Growth and Seasonal Adjustments (AM) PM ASHLAND MUNICIPAL AIRPORT E 414,,,V 'P 26(19) II( ` \ c ~ 26(19) ~ 1312) , g(ig)-~ r f 54(43) 94(56) r 33(15)` 2(3)' 1 1(2) 3(2)~ `00) L 6(1). 4(9) ` .3x79)-►;. r-•26(25) ~ 3(2) II(8) I ~ \ T. 1 ASHLAND T. I dl H: 2 Z W V ± 0 P 43(26) 13(12) 3(2y 1(i) i - / Y. / NOT TO scale SOUTJl~RN 0~2~GON TWIMBANTION -I MIKIRIM, LL( Caldera Brewery Zone Change Medford, Oregon 97504 Traffic Impact Analysis ph 541.608.9923 fax 541.535.6673 email., kwkplC&q.com i I i Figure 5: Year 2010 Design Hour Volumes (AM) PM ASHLAND MUNICIPAL I1411V AIRPORT i 447(299) 1 193(145)a 432(295)y ,256(202) 15(13) \ 1(4) III ]41(461)•622 36fl(23I)388(293) 25 (613) 1 n• a .33(63) 16M) J 69(50) 8(17) • 98(25),~~ 73(48) 507(324) 411(476) i \ .99(28) ~r 189(129) ASHLAND ST. ~i Z C QFZ Z Q Q p ]27(449), 262(205f ' SO(40)~ ~ 6(20).,, NOT TO SCALE i SORT-HUM DAMN TAAHSPO-ATAT10H M1HFL-J W, LK Caldera Brewery Zone Change Medford, Oregon 97504 Traffic Impact Analysis ph 541.608.9923 fax 541.535.6873 email: kwkplwq.com 1 i 434 Intersection Capacity and Level of Service Intersection capacity calculations were conducted utilizing the methodologies presented in the Year 2000 Highway Capacity Manual. Capacity and level of service calculations for signalized and unsignalized intersections were prepared using "SYNCHRO" timing software. Level of service quantifies the degree of comfort afforded to drivers as they travel through an intersection or along a roadway section. The level of service methodology was developed to quantify the quality of service of transportation facilities. Level of service is based on total delay, defined as the total elapsed time from when a vehicle stops at the end of a queue until the vehicle departs from the stop line. Level of service ranges from "A" to "F", with "A" indicating the most desirable condition and "F" indicating an unsatisfactory condition. The Ashland Municipal Code requires that traffic operations on City facilities do not exceed a level of service "D", but defer to ODOT Oregon Highway Plan (OHP) performance standards for intersections with State highways within the City. ODOT's performance standard for intersections along Ashland Street is a volume to capacity ratio of 0.90 per the 1999 Oregon Highway Plan (OHP), with the exception of the Interstate 5 ramp intersections. The performance standard for ramp intersections is 0.85 or the value of the crossroad v/e, whichever is less. Mitigation is required if design year intersection operations exceed the given performance standard or build conditions in the planning horizon year exceed no build conditions. Table 3 summarizes study area intersection operations under existing year 2010 conditions during the A.M. and P.M. peak hours. Table 2 - Existing Year 2010 Design Hour Intersection Operations Critical A.M. P.M OHP Mobility City Intersection Movement Peak Peak Standard Standard Tolman Creek/ Ashland LOS D, Street NA B, 0.48 C, 0.70 We = 0.90 We = 0.90 Washington Street / Ashland LOS D, Street NBL B, 0.08 B, 0.13 We = 0.90 v/c = 0.90 1-5 SB Ramps / Ashland Street SBUr 0.57 0.50 We=0.85 v1c=0.85 1-5 NB Ramps / Ashland Street NBUT 0.14 0.30 v/c=0.85 v1c=0.85 LOS D, Clover Lane / Ashland Street NBUR B, 0.12 B, 0.14 v/c - 0.90 We = 0.90 All study area intersections are shown to operate acceptably (within performance standards) under existing year 2010 conditions during both the A.M. and P.M. peak hours. Peak hour volumes along Ashland Street were shown to be highest and intersection operations worst during the P.M. peak hour with the exception of the I-5 SB ramp intersection with Ashland Street. At this location, the A.M. peak hour was shown to produce a slightly higher v/c ratio. Queue lengths, however, were larger in the P.M. peak hour. Refer to Appendix D for Synchro output sheets. f. fl. Nninpapinuati [ti mycrRum, W November 20, 2010 Caldera Brewery ZC Traffic Impact Analysis 13 132 Planned Improvements within the Study Area ODOT I-5 Exit 14 and Greensnrings Highway Interchange Project Exit 14 Interchange Improvements • Bridge widening over Interstate 5 to allow two lanes in both directions. When complete, the updated bridge will have two travels lanes, a center turn lane, bicycle lanes, and sidewalks on both sides of the bridge • Traffic signals at both 1-5 ramp terminals with right turn lanes extended on both ramp terminals • Implementation of a non-traversable center median along Ashland Street west of the interchange that restricts left turn movements from driveways Timeline for Improvements i • Construction began in July of 2010 • Work is scheduled through April of 2012 ~i I f.U.Tnamf PORTRrIOrv ~rvG1rvFFAlrvG, LL( jNovember20, 2010 Caldera Brewery ZC Traffic Impact Analysis 14 133 i 95th Percentile Queuing and Blocking Queuing is the stacking up of vehicles for a given lane movement, and it can have a significant effect on roadway safety and the overall operation of a transportation system. Long queue lengths in through lanes can block access to turn lanes, driveways, and minor street approaches, as well as spill back into upstream intersections. As a result of this, the estimation of queue lengths is an important aspect of the analysis process for determining how a transportation corridor operates. Queue lengths are reported as the average, maximum, or 95"' percentile queue length. The 95t" percentile queue length is used for design purposes and is the queue length reported in this analysis. Five simulations were run and averaged in SimTraffic to determine 95th percentile queue lengths. Queue lengths were then rounded up to the nearest 25 feet (single vehicle length) and reported for P.M. peak hour existing conditions unless noted as an A.M. queue length in Table 3. A full queuing report is provided in Appendix E. Table 3 -95" Percentile Queue Lengths, Existing Year 2010 Available Link 95t" % Intersection Movement Distance (Feet) Queue Impact Tolman Creek / Ashland Street SBL 100' 125' Exceeds storage WBL 650' 175' None NBL too' 125' Exceeds storage EBL 800' 150' None Washington Street/ Ashland Street WBL 350' 50' a.m. None NBR 100' 50' None EBL 650' 50' None 1-5 SB Ramps / Ashland Street SBR 100' 175' Exceeds Storage SBUr 1050' 1450' Exceeds Link Distance WBUT 500' 50' None 1-5 NB Ramps / Ashland Street NBR 100' 100' None NBUT 925' 750' Exceeds Link Distance E.BL/r 500' 600' Blocks Downstream Intersection Clover Lane / Ashland Street WBL 500' 25' None NBL/R 50' 75' Blocks Downstream Driveway Results of the queuing analysis show that link distances at study area intersections are exceeded at Tolman Creek Road and the I-5 ramp intersections under existing year 2010 conditions during the P.M. peak hours. Left turn storage bays are exceeded on Tolman Creek Road northbound and southbound and will cause increased queuing in the adjacent through lane as a result. Both 1-5 ramps are shown to experience 95"' percentile queue lengths that exceed ramp distances to Interstate 5. Excessive ramps queues form as a result of a large eastbound queue length on Ashland Street at the I-5 NB ramps. Once queues build up on Ashland Street between the 1-5 ramp intersections, ramp queues have no place to vent and begin to queue themselves. Planned improvements, per the ODOT Exit 14 Interchange project, include bridge widening and traffic signals at both ramp terminals. These improvements were shown to mitigate safety concerns and operational deficiencies at the ramp intersections throughout the future year planning horizon. Refer to Appendix C for ODOT Exit 14 Interchange project information. f.0. Taantpo unrian ~nGIHF6RlMQ LLC November 20, 2010 Caldera Brewery ZC Traffic Impact Analysis 1 15 134 i Crash History Crash history at study area intersections on Ashland Street (OR 66, Highway 21) between mileposts 1.18 (Tolman Creek Road) and 1.45 (Clover Lane) was requested from ODOT's Crash Analysis and Reporting Unit for the most recent five year period. Results were provided for the period of January 1, 2005 through December 31, 2009. Refer to Appendix C for crash data. Intersection safety is generally evaluated by determining the crash rate in terms of crashes per j Million Entering Vehicles (MEV) at intersections. The details of crash data are examined to identify any patterns that could be attributable to geometric or operational deficiencies. A crash rate higher than 1.0 crash/MEV or trends of a specific type of crash may indicate the need for further investigation at an intersection. Tables 4 and 5 provide crash rates and types of collisions at study area intersections. Table - 4 Study Area Intersection Crash Rates Intersection Total Crash 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Crashes ADT Rate Tolman Creek 0 0 0 0 0 0 20,120 0.00 /Ashland Street Washington Street 2 3 3 0 0 8 15,150 0.29 /Ashland Street - 1-5 SB Ramps 2 2 t 2 0 7 15,840 0.24 /Ashland Street 1-5 NB Ramps 0 4 1 0 0 5 13,780 0.20 /Ashland Street Clover Lane /Ashland Street 1 0 0 0 1 2 9,090 0.12 Table 5 - Crash History by Type, 2005-2009 Intersection Collision Type Severity Rear- Side- Fixed Non- Turning end Pedestrian swipe Object Injury Injury Fatal Tolman Creek /Ashland St 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Washington St 5 3 0 0 0 3 5 0 /Ashland St 1-5 SB Ramps 5 2 0 0 0 5 2 0 Ashland Street 1-5 NB Ramps 2 2 1 0 0 1 4 0 /Ashland St Clover Lane 1 0 0 I 0 2 0 0 /Ashland St The crash analysis showed that none of the intersections within the study area have crash rates exceeding 1.0 or revealed crash trends that raise concerns. No further investigation was shown to be needed. Refer to Appendix C for crash data. j. D. TROOmDORTOTIOO CHOMEFRltl6, C L ( I November 20, 20101 Caldera Brewery ZC Traffic Impact Analysis 16 135 I Site Distance Access to the site is provided from Clover Lane: Sight distance was evaluated at its intersection with Ashland Street and shown to be unobstructed in both directions, Turn Lane Criterion An eastbound right turn lane and westbound left turn lane currently exist on Ashland Street at Clover Lane. No further turn lane analysis is necessary. Pedestrian and Bicycle Accessibility Pedestrian and bicyclist activity was observed to be low along Ashland Street within the study area. Pedestrian and bike facilities are currently located along Ashland Street on both sides of the interchange. Planned Interchange improvements, per the MOT Exit 14 Interchange project, provide for preformed detector loops in bicycle lanes and push buttons for actuation by pedestrians at signalized ramp intersections. Refer to Appendix C for ODOT Exit 14 Interchange project information. f.O. Naaf Pak Tarim-Immircwim, LL( November 20, 2010 Caldera Brewery ZC Traffic Impact Analysis 117 136 IV. DESIGN YEAR 2011 NO-BUILD CONDITIONS Year 2011 No-Build Description No-build conditions represent future conditions for a study area without consideration of proposed development trips. This condition is evaluated to determine how a study area will operate with background growth but no traffic from proposed development trips. Comparing build conditions to no-build conditions indicates what kind of impacts will result from proposed development. No-build conditions are evaluated in this analysis for the projected development design year of 2011. Year 2011 No-Build Background Growth and Traffic Development Background growth was determined according to ODOT Future Volume Tables for Ashland Street within the study area. Growth rates were applied to existing year 2010 design hour volumes to develop year 2011 no-build volumes. Potential pipeline trips for Clover Lane were then generated and added to develop final year 2011 no-build volumes. Pipeline traffic was generated for two tax lots along Clover Lane (391E14AA TL 6800 & 6801) that currently have trip cap restrictions, but may eventually have restrictions removed. Pipeline trips were included for potential traffic generations. Refer to Figure 7 for year 2011 no-build traffic volumes at study area intersections during the P.M. peak hour. i Year 2011 No-Build Intersection Operations Design year 2011 no-build traffic volumes were evaluated at study area intersections under P.M. peak hour conditions. Table 6 summarizes intersection operations under no-build conditions. Table 6- Design Year 2011 No-Build Intersection Operations 2011 Critical No-Build OHP Mobility City Intersection Movement P.M Standard Standard Exceeded Tolman Creek /Ashland LOS D, - St NA C, 0.70 We = 0.90 We = 0.90 No Washington St /Ashland LOS D, St NBL B, 0.14 We = 0.90 v/c = 0.90 No 1-5 SB Ramps /Ashland St SBUf 0.52 v/c=0.85 We=0.85 No 1-5 NB Ramps /Ashland St EBIAT 0.46 We=0.85 v/c=0.85 No LOS D, Clover Lane /Ashland St NBL/R B; 0.17 We = 0.90 v/c = 0.90 No All study area intersections are shown to operate acceptably (within performance standards) under year 2011 no-build conditions during the P.M. peak hour. Synchro output sheets are provided in Appendix F. l.0. T kampopmrion EBonicip 86, LL C November 20, 2010 Caldem Brewery ZC Traffic Impact Analysis 18 137 u Year 2011 No-Build 95th Percentile Queuing Five simulations were run and averaged in SimTraffic to determine 95a' percentile queue lengths at study area intersections under design year 2011 no-build conditions. Queue lengths were then rounded up to the nearest 25 feet (single vehicle length) and reported for P.M. peak hour no-build conditions in Table 7. A full queuing report is provided in Appendix G. Table 7 - 95'" Percentile Queue Lengths, Design Year 2011 No-Build Available Link 951" % Intersection Movement Distance (Feet) Queue Impact Tolman Creek/ Ashland Street SBL 100' 125' Exceeds storage WBL 650' 175' None NBL 100' 125' Exceeds storage EBL 800' 150' None Washington Street / Ashland Street WBL 350' 25' None NBR 100' 50' None Ent, 650' 50' None I-5 SB Ramps / Ashland Street SBR 100' 175' Exceeds Storage SBA' 1050' 1425' Exceeds Link Distance WBLT 550' 50' None 1-5 NB Ramps/ Ashland Street NBR 100' 75' None NBL/T 925' 925' At Link Distance EBUT 550' 575' Blocks Downstream Intersection Clover Lane/ Ashland Street WBL 500' 25' None NBLR 50' 75' Blocks Downstream Driveway Results of the queuing analysis show that link distances at study area intersections continue to be exceeded at Tolman Creek Road and the I-5 ramp intersections under design year no-build 2011 conditions during the P.M. peak hour. Left turn storage bays are exceeded on Tolman Creek Road northbound and southbound and will cause increased queuing in the adjacent through lane as a result. Both 1-5 off ramps are shown to experience 95'h percentile queue lengths that reach or exceed ramp distances to Interstate 5. Excessive ramps queues continue to farm as a result of the large eastbound queue length on Ashland Street at the I-5 NB ramps. Once queues build up on Ashland Street between the I-5 ramp intersections, ramp queues have no place to vent and begin to queue themselves. As stated previously, planned improvements, per the ODOT Exit 14 Interchange project, include bridge widening and traffic signals at both ramp terminals. These improvements were shown to mitigate safety concerns and operational deficiencies at the ramp intersections throughout the future year planning horizon. Refer to Appendix C for ODOT Exit 14 Interchange project information. f. 0. Tnnn(Po nrim Cnooccpin4. L LNovember 20, 2010 Catdera Brewery ZC Traffic Impact Analysis 19 138 Figure 6 : Year 2010-2u11 Background Growth and Pipeline Trips (PM) ASHLAND M~\ MUNICIPAL E. 1411V AIRPORT Aj, 9 9 1 1 \ \ \ ASHLAND ST. Qi 1 U o u I u o ggJ _ 4 u 5 ,h c 0! ~ 1 11 @: 4v~ 9. I p i / NOT TO SCALE WU HAN 041160N T-ROMWO NTION -1WH4;4;AIN6, LL( Caldera Brewery Zone Change Medford, Oregon 97504 Traffic Impact Analysis ph 541.608.9923 fax 541.535.6873 email. kwkp Ica q.com Figure 7: Year 2011 No-Build Traffic Volumes ASHLAND / MUNICIPAL 414 AIRPORT ~1rV,rp 452 ~ ~ 200 i 1 411 265 \ , lti a\ 1. r, lye n . , e \ ; ]53 J~ 635 Y 1\ 372 L-~ 393:; v 99 ~ 75 z ~ $ k » _ 1 \ \ r P f ASHLAND ST. I ~ t N U 2 0 .Q , ]39-- " 2]I - ! 51~ ~76` I ~ \ i 1 NOT TO SCALE i I SOUTH-10 ORI ON TRANSPORTATION 1N6INAERIN6, LK Caldera Brewery Zone Change Medford, Oregon 97504 Traffic Impact Analysis ph 541.608.9923 fax 541.535.6673 email., kwkp 1 [3a q.com jAn it V. SITE TRAFFIC Trip Generation I Trip generation calculations for proposed development scenarios were prepared utilizing the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation, 8" Edition and existing count data. An ITE trip rate for land use code 770 - Business Park was compared to a trip rate developed using existing count data from Caldera Brewing Company and Roxy Ann Winery (which currently includes a well-established tasting room). The existing Caldera Brewery does not include a tasting room but proposes to have a tasting room in its new location. Counting a similar facility with an established tasting room was performed to determine a more accurate trip rate for the proposed Caldera facility. Both trips rates were used in the analysis. A proposed 28,000 square foot brewery with tasting room (using the existing count trip rate) was used for the day of opening analysis, and a 3.72 acre business park (using the ITE business park trip rate) was used for the future year planning horizon analysis. Refer to Appendix B for ITE trip generation sheets and Appendix A for count data. Refer to Appendix J for a proposed site plan of the brewery. Table 8 summarizes trip generations examined for the proposed property. Table 8 - Development Trip Generations PM PM P.M. P.M. Land Use Unit Size Trip Rate Trips Inbound Outbound r Business Park-770 Acres 3.72 16.84 63 13 50 Existing Caldera Brewing Co. 1000 SF 20.0 1.14 8 4 4 Roxy Ann Winery (with tasting room) 1000 SF 23.8 2.27 54 28 26 Proposed Caldera Brewing Co. (with tasting room) 1000 SF 28.0 2.27 64 33 31 Trip Distribution and Assignment Development trips were distributed in accordance with existing traffic patterns at study area intersections. Existing count data showed 71 % of outbound trips going to the west along Ashland Street and 29% to the east. Similarly, count data showed 90% of inbound trips coming from the west and 10% from the east along Ashland Street. Refer to Figures 8, 9a, and 9b for development distribution percentages and trip assignments. I f.O. TBantnanr0tlon fnoHrrwyn , LL ( I November 20, 2010 Caldera Brewery ZC Traffic Impact Analysis 22 141 i Figure 8: Development Trip Assignments - 28,000 SF Brewery (PM) * \ ASHLAND MUNICIPAL AIRPORT "'41t V ~A ~ is ~q ti l- \ ~ ~ 0 0 t i 23 ~ 10 ~~p 1~ 3p ~ 3 1 f a - I If ASHLAND ST. \ ~zl 1 - - H; Qi I~ y! . Vi C 2 > 1 2 o Q u 01 3 , 23' ~ 10~ j t i I NOT TO SCALE SOUTHIPH ORI ON TRANSPORTATION -[WHIMM, LL( Caldera Brewery Zone Change l , Medford, Oregon 97504 Traffic Impact Analysis ph 541.608.9923 fax 541.535.6873 email: kwkpl@q.com 4An I Figure 9 : Development trip Assignments - 3.72 Acre Business Park (PM) ASHLAND MUNICIPAL F4k411V AIRPORT ST i \J I ~ I\ 1jZ 1 \ . 3 \t \ \ 3v +LI 19 ? 4 \ \ Aa\'Oj S)3~ \ r 1~ yI,_ 2 o. ASHLAND ST. Ui C I1 Zf W 2. 2 I = ~ i ; 9l ~~i IB`\ \ f O'~ I \ 1 I 1 i~a \ I / % NOT TO SCALE QUTHUM OREGON TUMPOATATION MINIF M6, uc Caldera Brewery Zone Change Medford, Oregon 97504 Traffic Impact Analysis ph 541.608.9923 fax 541.535.6873 email., kwkp1C q.com JAI t I; VI. DESIGN YEAR 2011 BUILD CONDITIONS Year 2011 Build Description Build conditions represent future conditions for a study area with background growth, pipeline, and proposed development trips considered. Build conditions are compared to no-build conditions to determine what kind of impacts will result from proposed development. Build conditions are evaluated in this analysis for the design year of 2011. Refer to Figure 10 for year 2011 build design hour volumes at study area intersections. Year 2011 Build Intersection Operations Design year 2011 build traffic volumes were evaluated at study area intersections under P.M. peak hour conditions. Table 9 summarizes intersection operations under build conditions. Table 9- Design Year 2011 Build Intersection Operations 2011 Critical Build ollp Mobility City Intersection Movement P.M Standard Standard Exceeded Tolman Creek /Ashland C, LOS D, St NA 0.71 v/c = 0.90 Vic = 0.90 No Washington St /Ashland B, LOS D, St NBL 0.14 v/c = 0.90 v/c = 0.90 No 1-5 SB Ramps /Ashland St SBLrr 0.52 We=0.85 v/c=0.85 No 1-5 NB Ramps /Ashland St EBL/T 0.47 v/c = 0.85 We = 0.85 No B, LOS D, Clover Lane /Ashland St NBL/R 0.23 v/c=0.90 We=0.90 No All study area intersections are shown to operate acceptably (within performance standards) under year 2011 build conditions during the P.M. peak hour. Synchro output sheets are provided in Appendix F. i i S_O. TQQerOanrarloe ~aGlacr{rING, LCC November 20, 2010 Caldera Brewery ZC Traffic Impact Analysis 25 144 I Year 2011 Build 95th Percentile Queuing Five simulations were run and averaged in SimTraffic to determine 95'h percentile queue lengths at study area intersections under design year 2011 build conditions. Queue lengths were then rounded up to the nearest 25 feet (single vehicle length) and reported for P.M. peak hour build conditions in Table 10. A full queuing report is provided in Appendix G. Table 10 - 951h Percentile Queue Lengths, Design Year 2011 Build Available Link 950' % Intersection Movement Distance (Feet) Queue Impact Tolman Creek / Ashland Street SBL 100' 125' Exceeds storage WBL 650' 175' None NBL 100' 100' At storage EBL 800' 150' None Washington Street/Ashland Street WBL 350' 25' None NBR 1o0' 50' None EBL 650' 50' None 1-5 SB Ramps/ Ashland Street SBR 100' 175' Exceeds Storage SBUI' 1050' 1425' Exceeds Link Distance WBUr 550' 50' None 1-5 NB Ramps / Ashland Street NBR 100' 50' None NBUr 925' 925' At Link Distance EBUr 550' 600' Blocks Downstream Intersection Clover Lane/Ashland Street WBL 500' 25' None NBL/R 50' 100' Blocks Downstream Driveways I Results of the queuing analysis show that link distances at study area intersections continue to be exceeded at Tolman Creek Road and the 1-5 ramp intersections under design year 2011 build conditions during the P.M. peak hour. Left turn storage bays are exceeded on Tolman Creek Road northbound and southbound and will cause increased queuing in the adjacent through lane i as a result. Both 1-5 off ramps are shown to experience 95a' percentile queue lengths that reach or exceed tamp distances to Interstate 5. Excessive ramps queues continue to form as a result of the large eastbound queue length on Ashland Street at the 1-5 NB ramps. Once queues build up on Ashland Street between the I-5 ramp intersections, ramp queues have no place to vent and begin to queue themselves. As stated previously, planned improvements, per the ODOT Exit 14 Interchange project, include bridge widening and traffic signals at both ramp terminals. These improvements were shown to mitigate safety concerns and operational deficiencies at the ramp intersections throughout the future year planning horizon. Construction is currently on-going and estimated to be completed by April of 2012. Refer to Appendix C for ODOT Exit 14 Interchange project information. I f. 0. TknmpoiawIOH -EHGIHF[RIMG, W November 20,20101 Caldera Brewery ZC Traffic Impact Analysis 126 i 145 Figure 10 : Year 2011 Build Traffic Volumes (PM) ASHLAND i E \ MUNICIPAL 414/,V AIRPORT 2A l~ \1 t x 452 ~ {210 1 } ~ ~ \ S 469 2]0 " '15 ~]]5 545 rv t 371'y 104 12", . \ 33 16 1 76 SO~~fI96 1 \ i II I ASHLAND ST. 2 ~ 21 = O 1 to 1 ~ 1 - ]6Z~ ~t 1 1281 t I /IY 1% NOT TO SCALE SOOT-HUM OPIUM TRANSPOATAT10H WIN-11AW, LK Caldera Brewery Zone Change Medford, Oregon 97504 Traffic Impact Analysis ph 541.608.9923 fax 541.535.6873 emaih kwkp 19a q.com lAr i i VIL FUTURE YEAR 2030 NO-BUILD AND BUILD CONDITIONS Future Year 2030 No-Build Description Future year 2030 no-build conditions represent future planning year conditions for a study area without consideration of proposed development trips. This condition is evaluated to determine how a study area will operate with future background growth but no traffic from proposed development trips. Comparing future build conditions to future no-build conditions indicates what kind of impacts will result from proposed development. Future no-build conditions are evaluated in this analysis for the planning horizon year of 2030. Future Year 2030 No-Build Background Growth Development Future year 2030 background growth was determined according to ODOT Future Volume Tables for Ashland Street within the study area. Background growth rates were applied to existing year 2010 design hour volumes to develop future year 2030 traffic volumes. Pipeline trips were then added to develop final year 2030 no-build traffic volumes. Refer to Figure 12 for future year 2030 no-build traffic volumes at study area intersections during the P.M. peak hour. Future Year 2030 Build Description Future year 2030 build conditions represent future conditions for a study area with background growth, pipeline, and proposed development trips considered. Build conditions are compared to no-build conditions to determine what kind of impacts will result from proposed development under future conditions. Future build conditions are evaluated in this analysis for the planning horizon year of 2030. Refer to Figure 13 for future year 2030 build traffic volumes at study area intersections during the P.M. peak hour. Future Year 2030 No-Build and Build Intersection Operations Future year 2030 no-build and build traffic volumes were evaluated at study area intersections under P.M. peak hour conditions. 'rabic II summarizes intersection operations under build conditions. i Table 11-Future Year 2030 No-Build and Build Intersection Operations i Critical 2030 2030 OHP Mobility City Intersection Movement No-Build Build Standard Standard Tolman Creek / Ashland LOS D, Street NA C, 0.82 C, 0.83 We = 0.90 v/c = 0.90 Washington Street/ Ashland LOS D, Street NBL C, 0.19 C, 0.20 v/c = 0.90 v/c = 0.90 1.5 SB Ramps/ Ashland 0.79, 0.82, Street NA 0.73` 0.73+ We = 0.85 v/c = 0.85 1-5 NB Ramps / Ashland >2.0 >2.0 Street NA 0.66' 0.67+ v/c = 0.85 v/c = 0.85 C, 0.35 LOS D, Clover Lane/ Ashland Street NBWR B, 0.24 C, 0.34' v/c=0.90 v/c=0.90 • Analysis includes the ODOT 1-5 Exit 14 Construction Project f. 17. NAHf 00RWIDff Cnom"aw(;. LLC November 20, 20101 Caldem Brewery ZC Traffic Impact Analysis 28 147 All study area intersections are shown to operate acceptably (within performance standards) under future year 2030 no-build and build conditions during the P.M. peak hour with planned mitigation in place (ODOT I-5 Exit 14 Interchange project). The planned improvements were shown to mitigate safety concerns and operational deficiencies at the ramp intersections throughout the future year planning horizon. No further mitigation is shown to be required. Synchro output sheets are provided in Appendix H. Future Year 2030 No-Build and Build 95th Percentile Queuing Five simulations were run and averaged in SimTraffic to determine 95a' percentile queue lengths at study area intersections under future year 2030 no-build and build conditions. Queue lengths were then rounded up to the nearest 25 feet (single vehicle length) and reported for P.M. peak hour conditions in "Cable 12. A full queuing report is provided in Appendix I. Table 12 -95" Percentile Queue Lengths, Future Year 2030 No-Build and Build 95" % 9511' % Available Link Queue Queue Intersection Movement Distance (Feet) 2030 No-Build 2030 Build Tolman Creek/ Ashland Street SBL 100' 150' 150' WBL 650' 200' 200' NBL 100' 150' 150' EBL 800' 200' 200' Washington Street / Ashland Street WBL 350' 50' 50' NBR 100' 100' 100' EBL 650' 50' 50' 1-5 SB Ramps /Ashland Street SBR 200' 225'* 225'* SBLT 1050' 375" 375'* WBL 100' 501* 50'* WBT 550' 300'* 300'* I-5 NB Ramps/ Ashland Street WBR 275' 275'* 275'* _ WBT 300' 300'* 300'* NBR 100' 75'* 50'* NBLT 925' 175'* 175'* EBL 400' 400'* 375'* EBT 550' 375'* 400'* Clover Lane/Ashland Street WBL 500' 25' 25' NBL/R 50' 225' 425' *Analysis includes the ODOT 1-5 Fxit 14 Construction Project Results of the queuing analysis show that queue lengths at the 1-5 ramp intersections with Ashland Street are adequately mitigated as a result of the ODOT I-5 Exit 14 Interchange project under future year 2030 no-build and build conditions during the P.M. peak hour., The northbound and southbound left turn movements on Tolman Creek Road at Ashland Street continue to exceed storage lengths, but are not shown to get worse as a result of proposed development due to the small contribution of development trips to these movements (2 P.M. trips to SBL). The westbound queue length on Ashland Street east of I-5 is shown to reach Clover Lane under future year 2030 no-build and build conditions as a result of the traffic signal at the I-5 NB off-ramp. What was once a free movement westbound becomes a controlled stopped movement with a traffic signal in place, and this creates a westbound queue length that wasn't previously present. This contributes to an increased queue length for the northbound movement on Clover Lane. The section of Ashland Street east of the interchange should be monitored in future years to determine if and when median control may be necessary. No further mitigation is shown to be required. (A TRAnfPORrnrlnn fnonFLF7n6, LL( I November 20, 20101 Caldera Brewery ZC Trafc Impact Analysis 129 148 I C;igure 11 : Year 2010-2030 Background Growth and Pipeline Trips (PM) I ASHLAND MUNICIPAL -F 41474s \ AIRPORT r I F I 11 ~ 4\:4 ~ A ~ `V121 ~y~ 57 \ ,.4 \\Y121 ~ 75 \4y ' 20l ~ 01]4 a ~ 99 ~ 105 139-! .x.114 ~ .w ! _ A 13! 53 a; - S 1 ` ASHLAND ST. o I H j - I I O 2i 2 u H 4 ! 199" 4]]u / i % NOT TO SCALE i SOUTAR H ORMH TRANSPOWAT10H FH6IHERRIM, LL( Caldera Brewery Zone Change Medford, Oregon 97504 Traffic Impact Analysis ph 54 1. 608. 9923 fax .54 1. 535. 6873 email., AwkpIc q.com 149 Figure 12: Future Year 2030 No-Build Traffic Volumes (PM) _ • 5 r' ASHLAND / MUNICIPAL !1g97Nsr \ AIRPORT 1 \ 1 I p 553 331 ~7. 19 944 996 , 1 46) ~ 493 ' 92 ~ ~ll 8 ' 1 47'~~~ 20 ~ i ' 1 ti~ Il 646 58 F ♦ 1 \ 62. 242 1 t,• l \ ASHLAND ST. alww. ~I \ 2 \ C i 2i 2 \ 0 I - r 926 ` 339 : I ' - I NOT TO SCALE SOUTII~RN OR~GOU TAMPOUruTION WHIUM, LL( Caldera Brewery Zone Change Medford, Oregon 97504 Traffic Impact Analysis ph 541.608.9923 fax 541.535.6873 email: kwkpl(?q.com irn Figure 13: Future Year 2030 Build Traffic Volumes (PM) \ \ ASHLAND \ MUNICIPAL F MAC AIRPORT NST I F v1 4 1 ` y " 568 ~ 266 ~ k, \ ~ A ° 1v 56.9 350 + - lllii 19 i \4 46] 493 ~ 953~~~814 t1, ]1 101 (12- ~ t~1 \ 41 ~ ~ 20 i i~ _ 1. \ 124~~ 96 o = c 652 \ ~--536 \ 62 ~ ~ (29] ~ \ 1 ~ e ASHLAND ST. G, H ? C ~ Z' K UI 0 J ~ Z l Z U +4~, a \ 01 1 v~ 936'r a X35] \ X. F~ { ( NOT TO SCALE i SOUTIlFA2N ORAGON TRANSPOATATION [KINA-EAW, LL( Caldera Brewery Zone Change Medford, Oregon 97504 Traffic Impact Analysis ph 541.608.9923 /ax 541.535.6873 email: kwkp1Ca q.com irl VIII. CONCLUSIONS The findings of the traffic impact analysis conclude that the proposed Employment designation and E-I zoning on Township 39S Range 1 E Section 14AA, tax lots 6900 and 7000 and Township 39S Range lE Section 14AD, tax lot 7000 in Ashland, Oregon can be accommodated on the existing transportation system without creating adverse impacts. Intersection operations and safety were evaluated to address project impacts to the surrounding area. Results of the analysis show the following: • The stop-controlled 1-5 N13 ramp intersection with Ashland Street is shown to operate at a v/c ratio >1.0 under future year 2030 no-build and build conditions. • 95th percentile queue lengths are shown to exceed link distances and create potential safety concerns on Ashland Street between the I-5 ramp intersections and the off ramps themselves under existing year 2010, design year 2011, and future year 2030 conditions. Planned mitigation includes an ODOT I-5 Exit 14 Interchange project, which includes traffic signals at both ramp intersections, widening of Ashland Street, and extended right turn lanes on both I-5 off-ramps. With improvements in place, study area intersections are shown to be adequately mitigated throughout the future year planning horizon. Construction is currently on- going and estimated to be completed by April of 2012. (17. Tpampon[nilaN fimm ,ginc, L l C November 20, 2010 Caldera Brewery ZC Traffic Impact Analysis 133 152 i Cald;era Brewery Zone Change Appenaices A-K NOTE: Appendices A-K are posted with the online packet on the City's Website (www.ashland.or. us). i A hard copy of the Appendices is available for review at the Planning Division and copies will be provided to Planning Commissioners at their request. 153 I 1 ) I 1 I 1 I 1 TAZLOT •6m Z TAIL LOT 6W1 zoxm wa6 ~ _g ~ zonmRRs \ (E)BUmING ML SPRING w \ 1 p I CPEEK IXUVE P IJ6)%_ I Pfl ERTY~LN PUNTING ~ ~ TI E)TPE98 PM GAREA \ I ( ` T LOT `I 1 I~ II ♦``I I 4 PNNING `II I +y u }~r'`,`\\``•~\ \ \ ~ Fw+nxG ~ 'I i . i rl II ~ I ii "`\rr MANNNGI I j l/ j Ir b jj ; 11 I` II; II; ; ~ ~ L I`~\` 1' 1111 PWlfING I~~' I'I I .,.•I:1' I ZONEDR-1-10 ; RETM NG WN "m PMKIN ~f ; 1 l % g I 119 W000 \ 1 `.j / r L .iB I. \•11 ;tYt?'~ ITT ` + TOMCE. I i f Y` I IE)BuB TVi WE . 1 / FMEA 1 I 443 an ALL \ /,J//{/• /}~/a /y/ ~ FS-110 1 , K -{i `I'• li I oETFN1IOWNAlE0. O ` B R l '(P!>b~ ''.I `e ~ \ 'II 'III wBUTrwoswuR ` ~ ~ G/I1/r I 1Yw+1 i III \ / ~T - I, RETAINMG / / I III WPll6 \y 4 / l ✓ I I: i I ~ I I I 7 2. I ~ ~l 1 ~Ir I I I I ~ 1(p loll dir. L II ii \ 1 II REfNNNO WALL ~ `t i 'I • I 1 I, III ' 6ME SC SPfl111G3 ; I'\ TA%IOT7= OWDW d PROFE0.tt LIE 1 Ax OT) jjr 1 1 N LOTM00 1~~jY y \ I ` \ , j II ZCNED R-1-10 'A' As Ian ` I I 1,1 ♦ \ ' I I d~ :q ♦ 1\V•I A.• I II I{I li I lY i TQI Z\ i 1r~~1 I VICIIN MAP PROJECT LOCATION •1` •j ' 4 ` ` , ! li I PROJECTTEAM I ! \ I I l l i i i 1 I 1 1 I OWNER POI MILS-CAIDmABREYANO DOBPANY \ 60'x BS 1 ''I I i RIM&ERlA1@A&6NID. piEGIX1 FE11t® 6i16b BYE I:'WomGEM PUWNQl MN U( MO%-GRBNI DEMM.OMFM RVICFB 1,' \ FSHt~ % r I / % r r /l I S ABS WE6TNEVAD151HE£IASHWIO, CPEGCN ~ \ 1 1 \ / {IS l LANOSGPEPALHREm:LAURIE BBGERBA99CCNTE9 `I t 7W MIBILEfCERWOSIINEX110.4NW10.OREGON 1 J, i i wuee sue _ r i I it IBNG ; r ; ; , l ; ; ri ENGWEER MWFR TH.mc wtkL I I I • Ir!i i I^• vo eoz lru MEOFOflo,oREGDn \ - : 5117m 4LB \\TA%LOT710D 1 i I~ i I I i r! 1:( SUItYEYOx: OARnLM1O(-HRFBUPH SASSOCNTE6 \ jI I ! I 1 ~f I TMLOTK BBIG0.FVIEW ORIVESIITIBDI MEDFORD. QiEG011 i i I 1 F ~ ZONEDR-1-10 AtTIwi ,11 i I I l' I IEE Ir rll ~l IIl _ WZT: MARTIN • =ALLI 6TREETASXID.OPFDIXI l Wmamil PROJECT SITE NFORMATION'+:~_~//~; ( TAx lnraBm SSS zonEO Rana TmAL PROJmiANFA (l LOTS] 154 N1 WIIARE FEET I Ii11` - 'apt 11 - • TOfK PROPOBEOAREI.OF OEVElDPMENT 119.W1S0UM MET SF-PptCENTAGE OF LOT COIERIL'E eIRUCNIF.S 30jYt $pUMEPEEf-1BF% OINFA MFElM0.L. SURFA9: 54]X1 eDIIME FEEL-b3TA rmALnuMeEa of PARNwcsPBDES 1RSrAnwflo r-_.__ zAw TmAL NUMBE0.pF BIKE PAWUNG6PhL'F8: BCPIEREDSPACES SF.PER TAGEOFI.MDBCAPEOAR : ZOW 68.0323DUAPE fEEi-M21% OT-'DJ \ I IXEO R-t-10 SHEET INDEX TN{ Lm T ZONED Wl 1 • T-1.0 TIR swu \ LAD TIEE PRmECIgNEPEMOIILB OFNOIITON PLAN - L20 SRE PI \ WO PlN1TWG PLNI 0.1 CONCEPfWLL' JING ANOORAWAGE p{AN C] COH~PRNLUrlRYRNI F2 SECOND FLOOR h1 NORIn ANDf EAL I Z~T" LOT m 6 MD 1N A2 SWIM O WEBT ELEVtEVATOTON$ • IN 1 TITLE SHEEP T,GCLOTSmD 0 30 NW I z V=''"' ~ ZONED RI-10 Y Cyr ~ b J Z i r_,~ I L~ Nd'T x Q ( LAURIE SAGER 590 m CAMERA BREWERY Sqo Qovea LANE AND ASSOCIATES LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS INC O No ASWAN D, OREGON 4`dK o ~n~A xb 700 MISTLETOE ROAD, SUITE 201 0 ASHLAND, OREGON 97520 't TA%L0r60.tl y, Z y, TA%LOT 6901 ' IEJ BURDWO o ~ CI ELOPIVE P C - ' j~ _ _ PftOPEftIYLWF ' ; 44 HTOI♦EMAW THEE PROTEC91Orv Ell Eo rv I , \ 1I F ;STO RQANN TA%LOTWW I \\1\OT011EMAP1 \ ':I (i , / / r , `\\.\n\I11) ~j. (~//%//fJ/)/jfJ////~//J~ > .)I!i 1. z TAXLOTHW 1` 6 ( \II \ 1 \ \ \ ~yPa (E)TM'KT°BE } `Y//~ ( 1 $ \ \ flH0U5Ero I \ i n0REAAAN~ BE FaE \ BE REMOVED ` /r II TREE TION FENCE I\ \ \ BU4 wOroaE / I ,'I (E) e~ au wl:D n E) ; ' roMREa1DV~m~ DvEDEC0ODECOP~vAEw.l~rasro\\ %I j BE 6m6pNEO BY ~ \ ` 1) ` ~ I •l 1 gmroseadloJ® \ \i / \ • t I 1 7 I TO (PE M ERJT IlEMOVN BE REMPIE\B\ 8LI / (E)CIXICRETETO j i \ (EJ DURDwO / I I i.I \ it / 1BEREAUVEfl TREE PROTECTION DETAILS \ \ \ \ \ / Lo 5ERENOVED. (5)\I,e i' II \ \ MBu; EO ch.6 TA%LOT]Wa 111 ELI \ TOPEREM `d Oypls \ r 9 V" I \ / / ' I 111: \ I, Q OAptlm cm fE' III i':' \ I i III WEP hi 6 T. TIW \ _ i' I\ \ VIII F- mnbwMy BI 'ARDTO~, mam a®Hps DEREMOVED. \1 i~,rl li, '1 PI v w.t m nk crmlwJm. a'.n ! 1,/ \ r., 1I I;II luM:b m. mnrnbDl.:• mgen \ 1\ '1 1• \ ELEVATION PLAN \ \ \ ~l G / ~/i 1 j 11~ II / t%` Il jl LEGEND " a;amro u.m rveyspMExn A ' j .;1(D -re,g Ts.,a mwwlm \ _ 1 / rnm:m \ v \ \ r \ li 1 sea TO BE ` T. pmbDean \ 1 \ \ REMOVED ! l,,' lsdm ~ ~y \ \ :y I I rAZ LDrswo I\, \ \ \ i III I N TREE PROTECTION NOTES I f6 \ \ \ i 1 ALm~e.Of•wMm Ne PN'eMmsaMmpmb~e0m dmo+NO.mnaarFwlDlmnom.blmnm omrlwmuro mmumrb \ ~S \ % I li %iII mmtsmn.mL•awtlispbn.A➢a.mm. mma by mbal.NOnbmhbgtw tlvlbmM•N•bA6r•Efimv Pti•UMtYmsbW , \ • BST WJYan Lwm k: mlWnmYYpNtltl Mm MCLgm•nm:on bve M:w•:gd t FrdnDltlb6'tl Ylmaa9'WnbY:{rwl• I I ` \ P9LOrECf1ON `IFNCE i 1 I/ !r IgmnuwAIN Imr6l MnlmW mq~2bmmatl•1 pmM. en mlpnbymwsblwYW NmuYMmp:dm6pmgeMpKlmmbbmtraYtlm 1 I $ \ \ a \ p mm REMVN \ \ ro RE1MW C.AnNM6.lbretYeJmmvWW bury DnNrybnemmyWWnDmWnGb\m4•mb:meh \ , ~w TOKEMUN D. DYMMmsNgm Onblmbn®PbtmmmpblYn Ngaled•WlGap•nnltltlmymmm 'p•b l•ryLS]w1tNMloao•MtlN tln<Ogn• \ \'Q \ 1 •1 i TO REMUX YWW tea (1i , na \ TAX LOT] r / 126 TORE9MW E. 116w lmbowrT arv alKalmbM aJArymreWCCm,tlre mntr Ar Wa mMlk•pltlM aMrbtbpsfM ntrprvnm roamary. 1 F.contvctor Nllml6st nmb MYem Mm nmMWem Orpatlmemtl. 'P b 1 Q, TO RESWN In O.Cmac bWl.L Ynwl MrslMNlpNe 6Ap IMmNmblYpOwbetlYm wlN. 6etimae, bmptbnMtllpMmuN WUefbuM N~ \ T 1 1 TO REMIIW dN U.n.n,'m.n.rw.aA.amvY t.cxmmbNg DNa•.ln.pp:mnw/a,f mD. TA , \9 \ MT06EREM°VEO l i W jns sdsLY¢ tt` 1)TI..Dnbemn M1nCyp.nm.nt.wlN.Dpmm6tye.:.r, nP®mm\.eMw. ammR'al tops. \ \ , 1 1 /r 1 TO PFAwN 2)ROJUm'vugCinm:J4ntiy•Ip ab mMlWnvr9lemrtEb'vgd:•mumamn.Wtlnn,vM4:Y ~e21eVMbgenrgmw v qII mwO1MOMPbl.prrwtlm pn*d.M.t > \I I( / ! , / a]FtwxvD•bmYmmpYmVD:oltbmaw::nwm:evLnYma gl'e TREE INVENTORt l YO6EREAToeEO rn•q s e J G ( / J nEn T. Gn Hdm TAX LOY~ 7 peas OEM Cmwn 9u Co110m .10 I ! l a l t in rrt mw MMh MI \ 1'•\ I TIW~ i 1 U..p vom 6 7.5 poor 11 mnmunbtlaepmbC.a 012TO0EREMOYID 41 TJREMk ! 11 2 .m d• . 11 10 amJ 0 mnm•Inand ePlYeL1 g1STODE PETAOVEO j 1, TAXLOTY a GWwaeNin 1a 7.5 ym] ]s mnm.In:W [e pnAOH \ 1 - \ I A CeE:u EetJip 12 10 Qe F ml.m.InMMp:<m6m \ gf6tO w:AW/ I I i 5 C.- Eemex 10 11 yom ]a mnm.IneMNprt.6 6 CNw6Wa 10 6 9-d 7.5 bn n naMaep24dtl ] Cepnm MWV2 6 e ypW 6 mrun.N.Ma•pRbt1N \ )91iro D/E / / • / i/ IE','~ - a CMne WOlia 16 1s sooJ 1e la=na MDrts]tl I RfM01/FD, / H5T° : 13 6 CWalw aivme 10 ] pepJ 1o m.inMMprtVfM is Pwnmw 6 75' peer M ma. n.nNH I / 11 Wnu. {vn1Ha 1s 17s mvl•rA M mMT M1 / i i / / 12 Wuoupmyv 1{ 1o asa M mYSTeM 13 psvnqury.b 15 1o m•A IW btO runaW / i rAx LOTAYY 1a owmamry.. W u paewlba N• mwl n. I 11( is 0-".+ 6 s n1eA.N. N. mmmWn % I ~ , D4Ed• \ 16 gn,gpamryJre m 12 a,.a. N. mnmYn \ l\ Y is aeibu°..,yw ii is amen N xt. nnwA 19 2ymmb9uryJS 6 5 P rn N. mnftn \ m mxrvvsWMVV 1a 6 Geetl Ne mmnrta.M \ 21 OuemmgaM!w 5 a pmwmtl aft bnmam 22 Osw•6eMVV a 9 mW.nb N. bnm•In m gnnys 9my'ym 1a 85 Pun-1 N. bmnvN \ - 2e p:,e 9•Mw m ]5 Soul 225 bnmaln uq NpnYbf x Ouumn ama'w W >s Oeo6 225 b..!I ad MpmImJN rq 25 OummnmJfvb 24 7.5 ammo 1s bmngln.MNpnWm F Zl O-ga," e e a~ . bnnuN Utlmp:cbrmJ m oJ..va~:ybe a s weq .s nmYl Nbmpnbm rwX LOr ema m °wmmabrya~ 5 5 OeeA 3 bnrtvln eMMDnbrb2 30 Omuveu:l'uu 12 rs a-d 12 bmr•mmM I SPECIFICATIONS FOR DEMOLITION AND SITE CLEARING A Tm6emomnn mne.ti.b naumammrMm wep.n.re npnmmwnYU»w nbrn apunmpnoammm.Y.mKpmmenv..cmm \ _ _ I.NL nuW.eM Im peY[Lmm.ms . A p W IM •RONI eMa w Nle] m Pm• Y trm• b ml W M1 m ~.mry. C. T:w m M nnunE.EY ae lJe! n m bblvny M1ants pebblen IDnm •M b•wn ryNry.M alwWgalxb Ytw bmlWrt Yrtvb n.nmlwe, N..mr•ultinl:eman. mnYmwrnm melm.eeey:eel m.m Nren.WeW W un aee..rN•ImyN•®mMYNtl ayomlNm:wp: p•mob by NM.WMarmntlrq 4tlb.mY•M.:MOn'mntl:rMN NUp tmAm.mMMSPeM LW(N4+mn'M1 0. aWCtme•M uMegwrm fstnsb m snwetl.m:in tlu is pdcbl xu:e•IWI us NemYW qupmtpwmebtlmunb SOm umn.tlu Ow pldC6lme. TAX I°T61W E. AM6•m.w m tesdie mEmW®m vntlls•aY M I.m:bA n tl1. mnulWp uaMn MNin W MunngwsmdelafM a, d blurt Tm1.IU1w's mmd m tee 11mmL F. b Wpmry b6m•®s IwMrtmlpmwu M:mtw Mew b M IwbM, • Ip.m.Eaf 6 MivealmWltlYb asbabpobbte 411u ~tH mfariL eta0 b npuJ.Atl s wmq m nuLmhn 6YG15ga1 TREE PROTEI ON AND REMOVAL PLAN b AND DEM UTION PLAN TM LOT 5200 Li J i( g iJ 7 r 1 LAURIE SAGER 1 a CALDERA BREWING COMPANY i p °AS a E j SIjO CLOVER LANE AND ASSOCIATES LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS INC Q ASHLAND, OREGON 700 MISTLETOE ROAD, SUITE 201 oc ,3 2, Y. ~ - ~C'F ASHLAND, OREGON 97$20 F" \ i . TAX l0TW00 ,5 Tm L0TOA1 _ 0 W _ (E)RUILDIM P-' O SPRING V I \ ; GREEN DRIVE PR~ T__I rWNCRETE CUPS : PRf~P~ \ .N PlAM11N0 ft P E9 ♦'-~.l..?" `"T'C .1-: r iii /I 1 I \ 1,~LQ\ I I I 11 I I' I SAC!(LP SPACE % ( PWRpGS 1 ~ T/.>S LQT I i i 1 1 ~ ~ I ` ~ CONCPEIE WRS I I I ' ~ I I ` \\T\~9 YC1051GN 1 I //4~ S' \ vuvtwc ~PIANRNG Z~A '~ARMINGSPAGE9 r /i \ / it ♦CE) PPIWN4 B50 II'I III' , ,1 \,I~ .I \o ♦ Tr (St111EEH~lr~ r~r/(/ ~i•a TMLOT61M vunTlnn ! I \ I~ 'IAININGWALL; sTEP wrtN Cave \aETUrfING tour. Tm , \ \ ,i F• \t ' y~ 1N tmnzlwclns'EO \ \ i \ I \ TRASNIPEDYLCINO i, ~ . ~ ~ / r J~• I 1DT¢o\ Efk~b8 tin Y ~ ~ I WOW 410RAGEAPFA~ ',r ~ waWEO 1. $ra 'j-sTORAGE. 11 M1-, J \ I 1 (E)RaIIDWG FOR rvFASwwr• r .1 a^^ it 1viaJ'ZoxWeTe LRAS \ nfi WOIERS `♦♦O~ tt\ / r t// - X11 111 `h'W_;5 _♦I ` a, t\ t 11, ' :i, li C tl. -1 If:. `♦•1\ ~%J'/1 1 / III: fe3a i IIII L, I rl I • r sCREEFI k tl ♦ 1 I `t`t / I ' ~ r. kIPNtN\GS n I v t I y / 1 C.q ; I D~owrvnrw ` t / \ = ' •,I/ t I\ it ii auurrc alDStvAle RGRVNSROS-_.. ♦ FO - ' ` ♦I'I ~J i i' II mo NOZGNE' i RETAI WING WkL TRE}NNIN(I WZLL;♦ \\t i li 'r .I 'J ' - ! STEP WNN GPME i 1 ( ~ L',I ~l~ \ ~ Y5♦`♦ II I~il T♦~ \.,1 Tm LDT>WJ ~i TAXLOTN ♦1 ♦ (1 III ~ ` ♦ `•'I ``'I ♦ FIRETRUCK i I ! ( 1 I ~I I I. NRNPAWNO `v : SGREw I Illl. III I ~fUWTINGS 222 , ) \ ,,t ~ , I. \ ``~\\I \11 I i I 11 i 1 _ _ Q, (FJ TRFEs i i \ A I 1~ I 11 WARP l r I i t F tvRETiirymOw%u I ' • Sl01MGE ANEA / / /I f Fs.the i / ~ T ~ 9 ♦ ♦ 11 r Rafrx ING~YN1 % . TAX LO`TICO i I 11 1 I ! I11 I ` I a / //r I I I I:, TAC LOT.Bt] r \ r r r. 1V I" r:l}-- _ ;'n i'' Ig rAZ LOTAWo i it _X I • s \ TAA WT Lam I TA%LOT 11W SITE PLAN t D W w W 7 ~T,r+` TAXLOT3tW CA + . r s o Ic If i a kc S o tiy._ ; v v N LAURIE SAGER CALDERA BREWING COMPANY ~ o N 590 CLOVER LANE j ``I C~im>€ AND ASSOCIATES LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS INC O No ASHLAND, OREGON 700 MISTLETOE ROAD, SUITE 201 ° { I c[ ASHLAND, OREGON 97$20 I _ ~ I I 'J Tm LOTSSV ZaW, I Tm LOT US, 1 3 J Y~., BIOSWAI£PGID \ N '9' SEEOMM 5" xAix xonP (E)BUBINN _ 0 3UVn tsRP SPRwG U I VR PM fSPIWG DPEEK DRF/E aROSA t.TOe PEfLIYL E _ I PRCVERTYLwE tC SM I- 1 v G P 3RGSe 1! F i S:0'`1CE _ 'RP 1REPD- I-PICP 1 PIP 4CISM I2SVIG H ) MLAVA C "OSA 4 S4M "PIG 2aLA ~RE SUVA / MCSA 3PW ].ARCE ..Ml1E ]REPO 1SPIP x H VA ]LAN ,ems. TA%LOT68'.U xO1P SARCE ~ 13EM iINM fL'1`-• .'ROSH RM I.1 7 LCISM 3VG "O~VA 4C RE SAOSA BCARI( BALK SPM kALK Cl 1AGES t}UV TORCH 3MCH <"~k LMV I T74,ONV 23PIG O•i3NV OSA~ ]ACLSA EW~wG Y105A S VA TREES 6CBM 20dACE SMCH >.WGI ACNx SCLSM 13EM 11LAVA ; 1rWd1 2ACE9 13EM 6 6M 1.IILV 6 F 6PRCE ! 1-PINM ].ARCS : 6UVA VA "S / > TAx LDT°1W IM.ONP 3AFtC ]-ARCH v ARCH LRG 13EM 23PIG / REM 1'P~ SGtSM 1 fON.\ AREM f"` Z e T j/ "ED IsM/ A REM y~ 5?ON? 1 ISM tU .Ip / / 13PIP :-0YN \ / ]CORE ENOOS / SRXinGE IEJ BURLYNG AREA r YADEG°LE j, FOR 1-0wM a-110 NGAEM@Ji / COOLERS \ F°•110 SEGIRINGTE.4 USE E 9103WALEPGNG I pp RUBBERHOSEATBMI( / B E SFFD MIX C6 EROSION IO CONTROL O ROSMIX C ~ r• aru+E b ~ 1PICP YABMGNG 'P,L ~ ~ ~ 1LRG rWOOD T OROWN2' AJ FIH Fa AW YFROMTRUNK wG M1LCN 1' \ / E t4' $ SORSMICE0. USE NiEPMFO `l F 1fdLL Rcl SGLMIXP q .;?y 11004 ROPf3ATlOP OFBAIL SNNI BE \ ~ i::_... CUT.REMDVE TOP$OF°UTBAP. NONBNOEGWYAOIENATERLLL I l SHALLBETDTALLYPFMOVED. - - - - - - - - - - - - - i=Ru"Ty II._ry. :,ZrT BAG6ILLWRH PREPARED M%DP 29% -k t'-'. I,•W T ESOL TAND TOPSOILND 1 A3PH TswNA MTNESOa sAR zxeau \ LOT= T Ax smwsD DIA niw. CT UX0151UPBEO MTNE SGL WICP J NOTE STAI~IREEe ONLY FNEEDm AND ~ PEMGY£ AFf FA 2 HEMS A W UMUM 1 TREE PLANTING DTAIL I (a \ TLISM 1FINM J LARCH RFM $PP SXR11035141LBE 9LGXM1Y HT#R w RFIATIONTO FwISHED GRME NG MULCH YMIN i1E~LA5°fE BARCH TREES PMEOA GEDOR ST EA IIINM DF&CGIED ~jLP ROOT9 F8e1N 1& DENY COMP TDSOLL Imt ^ / SCNBFYPTS0I 01A SG/JIU( I / xDWNEiEii 1~9N ROOTe 2 SHRUB PLANTING'DEDJL PLANT LEGEND TwzLOrnW-t-/ TREES LOTeOW CATEGORY SYM°CL SCIFHIIfICNN.H COMMON RUNE SUSE TREES ACES AanArvm' Vw Sun Vd%MMAm 1.75. CARP C.Mmu MU-T..S' ' Fa°FWe fig .Hm 1.. PIGS PI®6mx - Binary Spun SM11 ' POP Pli-puiGmnf'Bdpf Bfbfi Oluebplw 74W PTV PMU0e.RmvV ,w NpHz v VercMmtlry Pym Piro TS'W / ERF Dw TPU tpBd,t0drT1 9M1envxF LLtlen 1.73 A 2ELV L(mv .Vft'a f VBIryF GSn2tlbn 1.75d Qa TAC LOTAOm GscumCOYERS AROE AM.UPINS. VNN*J CP Emu.H CPpatMHVaIMe 1FN SPPFR'GP~ AND ARO1 AMWIMIIAW O. HM MlM Hash MWFn ALlml6a 5,1 GRASSES REND B else. D.Mn'f BSMny 5F+ BEM B..ft M.bMgr'p,.Prp ' RMLMJaPsnM Bsbny 5F.I CNx GYmprvNNa'XaII Fa.iW XM FesMw FWMIRW Crw AFY GRK i Cerv 6pdtlve%MP Wwpry lUM81Je AFY C4M CBWf W.KetlroaYS EbtAVO Shvctm 50 EUE FWepnsebb.pa y 5 ryNa 0 FORL FwryM.6 LymvLCM Lyn F -0 6" HN GMI IvP' CwtSG`SaTW °FX \ MumuW Np. GpLMnNgsVM LAVA tW UVA lmW uSiS W. ATevWILMW 3gw M MM F*nryaKW Ftl FINN NN pl k PMtl. TAx LOTM]J ROS P11MMU2J AgSNPYn 1F.I ROY. _ RumWnuf'Ny Ary RwpmD SNP 80L.. °uT°tl° GOMtmi Sib_ 20 GNP eP.w mmrm.Pr.' ereM wmmsp.s. °pN I..... SEEGmGms ® Em.b.CSnb MM NSbG.M NSpMIMParpFa' 21mm, Bbv. \ ,,Mw Mk Hmm.ndI . - thMNW.wwmM 1NAOWtl 'Hebbf.n6 H,P 601 7510;'www.peYnWnsal.mm NOTES TA%LOT StW INACE C COdWSI?CPSORBlE1ND IN ALLTREEAN0SHRUB K D GRAIEXCEPFNA6RE RH/9AWFMT BEEN ISTINST EL.GE IL SAOAVMAOIEFROMCMTERSANDERNANOMD 2 1NSTALLSOIL IL BLEND IN IN Y LIF05PERD MYTO TIHGNG 50 SOA-1. l I L1PfE5OEN5 UN5PFR M I&Z 1 ILUUFA APPR PROWVEALL PLAN PWORTOwSfAIIMD 4. SEW SEED /JJ.ARFJS IDENIHIEDWITH SEW EO MLxPERMMUFACNPERS9PECIFICARMONS; S;VERIFYGERMMTpNMDRE5EE0 5. MULLEPRFAS. II M11LCNPWITIMGAREAS ER INSTALLATION OF PUMMATERNLWITH OFO~K NULDBMIL OR EOIPL B.PPPLY OEERSPMYTOALL NEW PUNTS PWORTOMDFOLLOMNG wSTALAXIH. TION T. PR[PAOETEMPOPMYFFNGNGTO PLLTPEESTO PROTECTFRON DEER PFNOYE ARERIYFM - r PLANTING PLAN D W eD F5 Ax LOT6zm >.C v t v ZL ~p 7 k { P~ r. A LAURIE SAGER 3 CALDERA BREWING COMPANY o o A h h= y N 5~-9.0'CLOYER LANE o § 3 j Q AND ASSOCIATES LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS INC HSH Ll' OREGON b 700 MISTLETOE ROAD, SUITE 201 o ! d CT ASHLAND, OREGON 97520 E Sq EXISTING SO MANHOLE qy,A ~ IV---CONNECuom PANT TO } O I DRAW SYSTEMSi0.4M I I 1 9 a~ tWAA J_jp1]131 a-3 -JIM] `I1. AA \ I STORM DRAIN WATER WAUTY & DETENHQ I I I ` EXISBND 15' WOE PUBLIC FACILITY - BOTTOM ELEU-95.0 URLITY EASEMENT ANO hl DRAINAGE EASEMENT STORM DRAW FAL9M7Y \ \ I I _ OUTLET CONTROL STRUCNRE ~j-- - LJ PROECI _ I ' ' ~QUN@AR~'_ ~ I / / ///i 7~r~`~.`~~es_ ua EATSnNC SD MANHOLE mc •~a^F"_ PROJECT BOUNDARY PRO ECi BONDAR, ~ 1 'CURB"6ROP I 1 r / 1 1 ~ \ , o\ \/i PSG _ \ I STORM DRAIN - 1 \ I NEOI 1 I I°x\\\\\`~\\\\\,.~~ ' / " "~\O`\\ ~I i FAdLITY WHET CLW/ROL STRVCNRE l STORM DRAIN DETENHON& WATER QUALRY FACILITY I I t 1 j / / ? / / ~"0 ` 111111 I BOTTOM EL-104.75 1 / 1 4'HIOH LOADING \ III II - AREA DQGK P I \ r RET AW&,_ CURB DROf 1 UM4INP`, /-I I - - p r~ 110,0 F~NI$46 FLOOR EX. 10'PUf I s'Hn.-\ Li I / I I n / I / ~ATCHr/ BAST , Cl)OVE BASIN fX. x i _ IrEX. 10'PUE ~Op~ it ( TeFi {N\0 / rys S P.(S y1fl , to v i-nv 192010 PROTECT III I r-- N 1 BOUNDARY I I ~:,,.;1iJ z+.'1Sf7!flfid.I I -I S i I l l~-lip GRAPHIC SCALE 1 w PCPT ) 1 mee - s6 DRAW BY. Mw DATL• I1/YO ND RENSION DATE BY CITY OF ASHLAND O,ySTRUCTtO CHECKED BM MIW,, PWI DATE? 11/10 \S4\~~QO G f 9 BG cENGIN~DEERING DAM. 1 CALDERA BREWING COMPANY NS ULT A~ 590 CLOVER LANE o~ P.O. 9ax 1724 •tEHa6HD) ORSO061 97601 DATE 156 ~FD eotP CONCEPTUAL B peYd 61o PH. (641) 996-6268 • PAX `641) 779-3139 DAZE' e't \i GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN (C.1 0 II s C pPi 0 08 j i I ~ 9~~o I I ~ .~,3~~,`J~3~;3J;J 3.3 -3J3~J'l1~JJ;J I I I I \`R i~ 1 \ I I I 1 EX D \ \ I I 1 unuTY ISnNC 13' EASEMENT ENT AND 0?"A RAMACE EASEMENT T I I 1 - If I--------- ----L J-------------- PROJECT BOUNDARY I I TI -L___-__- _CX'.IT:52--~1 TURM IN - - - - I ~ - - ~ SpgLN ~ \FfK i I 'S~RM ORA/N O O O FIRE ' i - HYD. PRIECT BOUNDARY I I I ENSPNC "5' WIDE TV l I\ I I CABLE EASEMENT l CONNECT TO FIRE _ EVSnNG SEWfR HYD. STORAGE LINE 4 I I r( It AREA CONNECT TO VOSTING PROJECT BOUNDARY CITY ELECTRIC i'4 I Ip / / EXISTING ELECTRIC o l VAULT i \ I CALDERA BREWERY I IR PROPOSED WAR BUILDING Ex /0'PLIE C, RN \ \ LJ SERNCE/METEI~ ^ S / E~ \ W PROPOSED 10' NECT TO _ .S~yEp - XISBNG CITY I 2 I ) / WA2 EASEMENT CLOV RLANE 5 ATER'MAIN ' I I /I EX FlRE ~~~1I / / NNMAm ANT - EK 10' PUE \ = lORM j / ^NPyS "5ON6 ..EPN0.NE FlR E s~.., / / / • ,\F•N\G\~~ I TV PEDESTALS EXISnNG ELECIRICI VAULT L 7 \ ' PROPOSED FlRE / / EXIOARD AGN SERNCE VAULT AND I \ % / TO BE 8E R £MOVENOVED EOC POINT IW( ✓X EXISTING POWER TO Ex EEC BILLBOARD SIGN TO cJ I I METER BE REMO4 VVVVVV I / EXISTING POWER POLE _ k WY WIRE TO BE / PROIECT EXISTING 3' INDE TV NOV 19 2010 O BOUNDARY \I CABLE EASEMENT 12 .GRAPHIC SCALE, T i NOTE: „ ~"it;1h C11 tlIG2 f~;i11,1Y)I` i - FINAL FIRE HYDRANT LOCATIONS SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE ASHLAND FIRE DEPARTMENT I m eser ) mee . aB n w DRAWN Br.. MW'X CA IV 11110 NO. REMSION DAZE BY CO~ygT R~UCTt O~ CHECKED Br MWx. PWN DATE II/iD CITY OF ASHLAND ENGINEERING DATE: CALDERA BREWING COMPANY .Ba c~Ng U°T`' DA 'E' W 590 CLOVER LANE Na ma DATE: CONCEPTUAL UTILITY PLAN s V Dx x.s~ cItLYHOVO P.O. BOX 1424 •tlRDFORD ORRCON 97501 ~Tauop PH. (641) T/8-52BB • PAX 641) 448-2199 DA W. 159 ~ ~"'+tr 1\ c° z6o-o' 61'-6• Bq 1222ECN Rte' : • IdMU GONCRE E P.N SPECIA 2LFHOPPER B EQMCES OFi1CE V PECIA STORAGE SR.0 9Rfl'MWY TANK fMY 9L0 RA, ' PAD- - II 4JJAL~JAii "LOUNGE UPSiNflS. SEE V1.00R R.W SHEET 2. 20'-0 20'-6' 12-6 55'-6' STAIRS T 6'-6' W-6' 22'-10' r UP I aP[ryINCSO CPENINGE0 gig woo, OATH ^3 OATH 6'x10' 6'a10' ORDER STORAGE BAM 9AM rl CRICE RITCHEN KITCHEN 6.10' RATH A. HALLWAY 20 ~V WOO LACER COOLER SHW pS HALL 16'x2!• r HOP COOLER SWA ANEA 6-015. "MING I I 12' SING I "-STAIRS aT AP a-I T SEE fiWi PL.W. i I b 8~ ~ k } t rROK Ra SEATS) {{{y I • -i I I ~ u y Y ~ ~ I K I • t ~k ORGEN, STAGAID AREA J) V 19 ?"If I I I sp 1; L r GAX SNLif GGH 'OfiICC i - ' - t ."3 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 5' CAN SHEET )T FORKE~ MARGINS GLASSSSS2peADE A F'I`.'.___ "v:. lii lLl, AREA T 0)OR bNW 0001ER oWW SEE FLOOR PLAN. SNFEI 2 Y R CALDERA BREWERY SCALE: 1/16'=V0' 160 SHEET1 of2 1 5• GN 91Et£ 5 GN s 1( fOFK4R CKMPHC GLASS STORAGE AREA UNVE9NEAT1 T T OI R Ir II ~ll it II II II II II II II II II ~ I~~J~~~I COOLER PLAN II SCALE: 1/18"=1'-0" I JL L d - I-I- r=- \ III II I II ~ II II II II II L_ II 12'-B~ 0{C1C2 I I II M TASTNG ROM 1 I I RFLGW C >ryTy L 'I 12 AN WLL ROOM I I I I LWNGE r ~ b 1r.2' 1 I ARAniuwi ~ I us Roan I II II II KICCNw AREA STORAGE I r 1 v "WIM -UPST--AIRS-OFFICEMPARTMENT 1n6 10 ~I~~/ 1.9 ?010 UPSTAIRS LOUNGE SCALE: SCALE: 1116'=1'-0' Ftc1C! - 161 SHE 2o12 METAL T26 GA. METAL SIDINGMETAL TRIM li li 1 I, pa o_ ZZ ItiN 26 GA. METAL SIDING Q Q U no METAL ROOFIN U FJ Z O Rio o. METAL Q U NI to TRIM Q OZ I i W O I. V --0 WE250 I IT . Fir 0) Z _ m M a NORTH ELEVATION ' o (NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION) w 3 0 0 SCAIZVi8'-T-0' 0 U i p 0- »>0 50 U rn 26 GA. METAL RO OFING METAL TRIM ~ 26 GA. METAL SIDING t 1 ii I'.: s O p~ 4 26 GA. METAL f4W ROOFING METAL TRIM I 26 GA. I ~ ~ METAL SIDING 0 iv a 26 GA. METAL ROOFING o n a 10 'F#-'F I: it !i II j `p I iv ' I I (V oawm . JWP I, ! :!li :I is l !j l o m JWP a¢~o er JWP AS NOTED EAST ELEVATION . - y 100100 APP (NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION) SCALD 1118- - T-0' S a I~'=` . • + W v e, E r3; 09/OJ/10 NOV 19 2010 A / City of A-~hiaznd 162 t-I~1C1 Ui71f:r ;ra+~ y,f - R°~ 100100 : o P METAL 26 GA. METAL SIDINGmwES amreu n, saro i jl 1 a O III II ! < II i, METAL TRIM 26 GA. METAL SIDING ,-1N I L 26 GA. METAL ROOFING o_ iv Q O 10- W I I : £ .2 coo Q 26 - in f0 p Z Y ' l L : I! I' j ETA ROOFING O Z U 8 I ~ I U a~ ~ METAL ar~ltin Z QU + N (7 ~ QQ W _ TRIM o Q I ~ I I _ co I V 7 m i OI ~~n0 Z lm O I: ! it o N W g O m~Z~a Mai i. a 0 J SOUTH ELEVATION W ZJ 0 a- cc (NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION) Q J !Y SCALE:1AW - r-S• oU o 0 U 0 rn hh al 26 GA. METAL ROOFING e2~ o METAL TRIM ! tPO! °p c°~ 26 GA. METAL SIDING ~~III °m~ h o 26 GA. METAL ROOFING ! ''I cr METAL TRIM METAL SIDING', l j ! 26 GA. 26 GA. METAL o ROOFING' : - ~n i.: ° II I I N I ~ - O I - I I: 1° ~ I I I I ~ N o L N N oavm JWP lWP ' u¢am a JWP AS NOTED WEST ELEVATION 100100 APP - (NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION)- 09/03//0 SCALE: Vur - r-W n v Nov ] 9 20 i0 100100 I • ~ e - i'• ' r~ 4 •L ;'r . as,~-rtx`I' I' "rtT..:.~,, fi It ry • f k j~ , i p~T.~ t F} l!'!1" t,' ,f I I ~ S his f 1401-1111' y~}~r' ~.n lfl/~~ rJ: .0.,Sl~l ~1 r!•`' .5 p'S~$.~r. LL. ,~g.W; ji{•} fr~~gkYti,y. 3 x orr✓ 5Y' }a• - 1 x ,r t 1 1Y / •^(+fj,lf I ej,~ 1.!E~ i f bf l ~ ~ _ ~1 ~ 1 ° Y "1•" n - _ f ) I ~ r I (`'i, I~-~--~j°--~-~"."° iP ( iS;.Yt n~_? F yin 41 -i ~j fl? V ~'4~'1,! ~lyt kt: s~;Lfw vt`3S.@@~'',~ a`t {``3f'v f ' I 'I~ .~4 \ r'1 ' II ' ~r' L$(t'~,~P !'18 A`' ~ f~•- ~ i v'`~ yrr ~ > , I V _ 1'~(Y 5 ,~p f `tl~, ~S J .$ltr, e...' i i f liYiti I lk ~L\\` ;,f`~ ~ - - X S, ~ h 4r! .•`fe~"fF~l~ ' •'l~`I 'F ('/J~j., II t 1 1 - I ~r~ 5~~i~~~y>>> YV+ r . t 6t r '{I ~~r e S ILA I 1. 5 \ i~ } t. i fl 1 'gy'p I e~ i;, i 1 ~ r -1.. . 'r 1 ~ I~ ~ ~ ~ ` I ff ~ f'~~ ff ; " ~'r t r, V t,.... / • .iw ! .tiff . I 1 I %,%°iCs',lp,~ t•... . } al'r `lli i`.. ~R.. 14``x-"". r ,~5+` r ~~r,-• iS 40 1, ' / i - ,!C~~~¢~'8. 751 '7 d U I ! +J-.. _ J t-k=..t.. l I •Yl~' I ~ ~ t i ~j t l '.f4~~ '~~3 t~ I '.,r ° i?~ - , i., ~ II ~ ~ 5S{, 5 f I I ^a` C L ¢ 1 ~ ~j{,~~I~ ~ ' . I C s I ~I - l qy • ~Y 'p k @__ Ay ~jf` it T"/i~~ ._o-c i1 I i~ .1 ~ ~ _Jl I I I I It } 1 a '~•.a 3! , 1 lA I ~ ; s" L ~t ✓ ~ rIUL~'~v k~' 1( ~ - ~'1 I I #,'6 q I f+,, II I~~4 ,l4.. ! ~ ~ ~ _ 'i ' ' it : r}~~~~r~~,~ r , l4 T„~ ) r / • I 'r' T j ! s , I I' 'a w..~ ~I ~T ' 't ~•1:✓ i - 1 1 ~ ._ru,1`e ,g,,r{a~'r.,- \ I ; S I ~ t ' ~ - . JC*ow- R` r %i 'r gyp. l.. " T\ v f S a „t:' ;-..1 • a . dl QoN J ty. F I KsuN•eO,cR 1 ~~1. ':~f•['(f~~ 11 ~ ~~1~ ~r- .I T' ~ .,:.a`. ~.i' ~-r ~ cn' t',.. r 'y. `".-:A_r'~_+' r~e'.ie')~p e.s•tr1~ :r , fi' i 3 r ~P - C%. 1/ NC 'P-5'Y tif I -x. f o1 A lL , Irv e" . Al 4'p Z' NOV 19 2010 t t City r;f Ash;la ld 164 1'IC~CI--- i.)iflC?T_ C;v.;rty^ /i~^ i i C.L_E C'.EIQl~~.;~. ouT N 6-A) euo - _ ._tf:..i moo. 1 o LZO-- N l to - i NOV 19 2010 C il'y'r) Ashlland 165 01,4TLlN1~- $Ll7~C~ - - - - - -----1140 AA~l KqQ.,IL rte: - - - - .r...---- - _ :O - - I R~l - - 5p1211~4C-i ~12EGK- - --._0.... b ~ ~ ;A4 ~ y'Jp ~ 3i f~l-d.9 NOV 19 2010 r"!v ( A"Wand Field. 166 0 0 p t -y r -aw s a „ Y 1 Ja o. .-m: n . ,~L Ay :.'j ~~r~~.' ~ . 4>~4 i _ N... ~C^f' - cs•vJ~ ~ _ - + ® a `y r u~ ` 1 - - _ TTT . t ~ ? ~ A}~'w~ f~^ it Y4 •x'i a} ~ ,'CJ ~J , 9i~n.+ir r ~ r J r t- ' ~s • f 1 +r 1a~4~4 r 4Y r Y, t ~ i u a ~ _ - rAV4T' A~i {t t ~ <+-5 P. 4 ~Il F~. f t ♦ T - ~y~ 'r a a`5 r ~s.~ 1'lrl~~ ~J r :r.. .T'..~r' l~'~il rfl ~WJ iu>. qh@,~{s> ft . z l }1 h .r a rr .1~v,.~s" r. r :'F3'. .^!jl'. t rG L t +i ~1 ; r"1h .F F*sh ar t !)i+l ,~.isl > ,a. a'Yf0. '1 10 ~ tp1 y . , r y,. . ~ .j 4Lx.Y".}~ o . ~ if r~l. s sr 1 ed } 4 x -.i. ,a: 1 n '1 ~ r ,4'W /Y. i ~ j ,~ryy N S •{1" t . V ' t ~i " ~`L = •111 { I I ~ ' ?1 t i I r8y. i F r Til~ 7r'~:*. a'IEr!' .~a.F .~.r t .i ~ f.. •'nf .-3•,,„J ~S'K i~'f tr,^ J ,S ~ (y i-. i' .,~r fi rU Y.i- ~r yr:. r tJh.{.~~' t~,S r a~ ~,1 1~. l Y 1+ iSl~ I r r .r ` _ ;Y7 ~-.ti~-{fir ~l f• [:1 r AA. .i.. 4 ! tyih wt r lei'' ~}r. 1'A'a. i~r.. yE~ i~a" Ie1J. p ~.r r +•T'i t r ..y, r R F ~a r`' r ,~~sa?~. r• Iu'aY...:~a•r.h tn;.e1 ..'tkyr?C{ •a.^.t IeaA t~ fry-7Yrry _ .,r~ uts~t .f~ I ~a .,qa.~} p. 4 r ~ {.~~.lr'4 .3f~Ja, f tld k•t L+ri ~H <Ifr hf ~G z. ^1-f:. n" . ~ > . r.1G'> ~ y '~.M1: ~ ~l ~ :?r.,✓'~ ~'..:i i.'f :Sr . Tl,..d) G • ~ . f1't ' . ,l ~ - - y - ~.X' :r . 4-. . 1. .r.. .~'Y^ - u a~'( . 1. . .~Y, •a, ~ ,,t . ~h...~1• SA 'i .F'r!~. . S~. er t. rF•r~ 1 r'. 1.. ~ ~'J~.' - ~2 i°a ~'::,f +ir g„ .Z..u .4' Kri.. 'r X •~i'v J ..i~>s . 1 v a....- r. Fh, r } .r. S. 4; '~~~rl Yst L rr....{.„t try r, rY F' .;,ly w, 1V1 .ad ar... s.p " F ? ya ry y. .ohs f. :~~.r.,~. s.{{,.a. ~Yd ~'s itls~a. vr. ~ .a?5~~1. ~.g .i' ~'C~N.. r(.~.✓t r..l 'Ff. tt .s t'.i, .'S ti)"~~/yp o J tita.1 ~.e4 T ~ v. 14llI V'u) :17p ~ ~tYt ^i r Erd. r... s"~ . i.. % l• x 4'..:A. lr2 K i"'. r`•` N D k'1 •~'."+`t .r b.-le ~1~~ £i'pX. Y~ r .4-...lr"?'iI.~. ._w~I~Eri 4.-x~&'~~ ~.y.2p bpi 1 i..t -~L' A.5 ..F f . •P'e~f'.~. .,1s'1 e aset .'1:.•;e' .r r y ~N.,t.; [l,r.,• y. « r.o a• r.., j,.4 aY.rr~ v;-bra .;i fit, f, - a ~r'..I y. . s .Y+.r lr n sc,+.,.~:.)1' n.lp#~~ .+'~~.i .o•.:,¢l.+'. .Ll ~ 'earl+:,t':>t ~ ' : • ~1 1» . r s 4.. k` s:-~ s- Cam. * p: t. ~-.1....~ ltt}.~ i1 ` u'•,'~rJ' . - - .a... 1 r` d•,. ~ ,gFir ♦ ♦ .V-. ~i TL r~iJ~ Ar.. { ~.1 P?fCl ~ni ,a _n).. Ll1H E.'+A. r.,.r F 1 *i, ~tVp!! Ja •4f i. .9 f!. 4 'V. . a r!' tY •ri' .t ~✓w. ~!,`~^~I .w ld:[I }i.P ..^~~.r 'rvS f. {..i~ 'c^ f'.. µji 11 . Oa'% 'L1Y S z S 4v I . - iFrr ra.......7,!, A i.l, t. r~;ti w 4^ ,ns t ~4 ..l: n `'fp'tn C4•. ~ mn : r~. Mur J. J ~l • 7x ~{..r, F5 . ~r,t~ .:-1!, f Ja ~ x rk,• ~~ti~1 a, r :t. a,a i e1 ~.-.e b. r, f} (e rr •1 n . :1e....F.. 1J: f a~fy r .4 1, .S r. ~3L':- V t ~ „-r..• •°i a M41' ),l' ti: 2`?s•d a4+ r ri;. ~~'f r .:-..'k- :+."'~l :N•,Y" r,- ' r'~ ..r n. ??t.. ✓r~n. s. :v'::..s y> .r. 't. .r..z ra4~jjF r~ Ir anu r• ...t ~.ic+t~v ^i.n.~ :cti• z, r-:`rA rP .'b«.t.. ev ra f'xr ;p.l .A.1h.Si, ,yy, :n..~._ v' C,i'~,• 1. '`4'.r.''-^ ,y Fall,. f-'r ,.,.>:r 14i 7r_. L .f.R'~ r ;a ~ r '±ti,~ :~Yf',~ ~r' .4, y. i'u' ?+a r: .1 '-q 3:r}''4~~ cif.. ~ '.c ~a.; .r7 1;tt~1~ 2.. . r.-.. ri:.-'Y%~`~• t`.< :i <:.-.rh, ty, 1.~ 's :124 iyt •l';r' 4.Y~, ~Il. TI} 'l~'': v-. f.f4k •hq. rl. ..-t :9~5.Y_.. ~1'.~cv+.`..~ riJ" ..~i a. ir~.~ .3> f. JF a~~.~f~ .rt ~ , •7 ~ ~ : 1k:. . >Jr ,..~fw ..a ~ . ~ ~ r. .e It Z., ..z, d _ X. ~ ia`+1. ~.ky r r Yil }i ~.1; b+:, d.,r,.. ;1' 7 s .N:...d 1. 'i 's "t: aa. s.~ ~r •wti ..r?. t,r. ..t. i'~1"..- (..t. ,9' .r. jf SiLA.L'~it U- wX~r f r^ C.~s.. h ^ it}: f Y Cn o ria +~ri^ 'l~, c Y .`.~i,'•xi,~ .dry.. r t : t.._=r.. . h, ~Y° '.+v ~ y y t _~5,~. ,~c,Y,~ - ~ ~ :'"~k n ~-l f~- i, ~'~J~,.S y.. tr.. yr fp.s J..k)s:.h,./, `pt .Y <'b~D:[ .Y-..'~~i r .~-.~YR......r .•`Ld r~A ~1i>, - - «B. r^. r a• 7.. ti. - - e.• `r.- - 'i 2 's .w 'v.~ ':r='. .-F. l° 1 iv. Y"34 tC CA 'E :4` ,vl -7~•! 'Yr Air`' ~ 'Q,. r yaa:~. 'y . 6 l~ 4f `L• ,hr. 1 r°tt,y r~3^IY r~e~ ~ `•1 i.. t' ~ e - p ~ . Y. , i.~ Vii: a p . ~,v ./.✓r j$`' +s' ~ y r^; ~s > 'GD ~ ~'r?i~.'- :,'~f° •l rb...~" ~~w t r ~ 1"r~ ~-c`r. i. z... '4a. .4~.i:' 4 „r ! ~ x'4 ':+G~~ a t A. •a'L ~ • ~ S ~ ti$.{.r py~ .Sa - '~14..~'1 ~(,,y~t, ~ 'i. :re s.-.. 1 1.. t s. ~ l /A'. z ....ab3. L'~rP .~`dd'i,/t„ R k ' t r :xi^rf ?t I ,~i. ...~hc .1 il' i "h}7 ~ I o w. .exr^ , r r r t.. r Y r- o^ r -A v. i .t 4~ Yl: T' ti CCV 1{, t' p^i.:+C...yn ...~a i,{i ~~,.n i.. rJ p... ~ h. s~~^. t- ~.Yt S. 'r' ,ti i' p w:.'d.. a. ! d~:.e `x'a~ A. .~t rt v'..' ..s •:z yr.. `a .4t, r,. x. t °'a S. ,d t~. .r rs1-uAf .r-. .n.r.v v•~, ..~:Sc ~:'k ~ '~y c\ :.:d r,. r... Xil F.,. ✓.,ta•"3..i ~:k. .~b!`-r'"{s Ir~pp ~,,3..i ~$y a ^.i,iLvA' c• 1} t, e w~...tf •i 4..AV iY y 51; y•,~:.~ • ~ r.:r rS i .a.. P Ih } k ,il. j r`+~p. t. ~N'•.. ~A, ,l "'Y . :rr. ~n ':Oir~ .~?yy1" •4'.yo .f` 4w% ti v. rl ~ a a r, 4.. r . 1. h . ~ f,.[~ r r >ti ' to - . ! ' h~...a.. 1 t !111 -y\~ ~~i. •',7if { /.'S lu .r .'.f . Qi •j t` u.,l. a :a:~.r - r 1 1 S'tatls N tr'.[ (•1[ t 'S. v• M r.. . f . ; t.. .r k✓ „s y a ,ie ( j~ri;! .ffi.,a. Trf lk 1.~. R~.x•'i va.~,,..1• irR S~~ it2 • ` .wY.o~©~-,A. IY •L a i.a'`~~+, Y ir:. „J w ~~.i}~J fi. c., ~5~.. ,f .3''9,,.~r .'~'~`l~..p~s ~y ~r~. ~#"',?',~J, rt`. ^b ~ /s ..v; "EeA r: r .1:~ l}i. ♦r s>r r' ~ ks '{4. ~ i .c:` _'1•~.. '~~,~.rV .v...a. rt .R• Ji 1. r.~((7~ l.e. .f diSi G J1..,.{..F. 3.,,// ~..7 rlAa..-.~"•,C Tn' 1~ ,.~~.!/{J.'~'C r,i" ~y1• w. y .f'.f. t1t ..fin. o; V. ~}~y ^i ra. r a:..o`a w.n f' ..ni old.. q,Jti ~A`~?Jt q$r'.c'.. 4.. is.7~i.~fi•., .d; P'jr~1 ,f ~~~.tl~~"4e W/- ~n1 'LaIP ~r rµ~.,~~j~..l},r~~:~'T~:1. ett ~t4 5~:--H-..[:~:} st...~ .~~...i i~y~..~...LL3.;L~R~.~~J`GCia:.;.r~i..n~7NtG.~~c.3- A.44..... VIEW 2- EXISTING BUILDINGS ON CLOVER LANE Fe1d_0ttic*_counry_ 0 0 rf • r aR • i ~"4 :per"• .a I L4 {1~ 1 l~ r • ea 1 ~~~-1•...7F'.. ° ~ y~AF.>!~2 rr,.. a rl.~ r~ & w ~y • n ' •n ~ ; 4' ,ti, l.. 9~ • . •T"x~ S . R~tl ~rlc ~ A'r_~c ~ a n p ~fi sl~s ` 1 M u, f- "1~ ~ ~ ~ ~1e t Vic. _ ,f" .lY •1~ :al.. cer r~ fl rry y*.>•`b.. * it - M B > r 1 ~ ~ u y_ 1 `1 { rf~.- y TI p• *a ~"A~i l~ht;\'}. , I e~~l ~.~1 (}~1^f,' r1~ ~'Ry}M✓~N .y~W. 6• • . Y ~~~t~~~'b`;i~ •;Y~• yt.4~e L ~">~f,u~ ! Y..~~{{iy~..~V Y" aU lM1 i ~r~"ti'..".11 r itiy l r •A~~ `I"`C" 1 iJy ;i>' ..yty~1 fn`7r 1 G-. ♦ b•~r1~a I ~ f t. 1 ~ Y ~M•^ ~ r NI'4 ~ Jt A !fro'4 •ir.:~ x rf 1~y ~7 ~,[fi~V +c7~'..',`^~ +y,,,^~~ µi yl x„~f r M1 s r ' w ~ f?y.%ylyy~4tr v~'`'~ #~1,. y.~ ~•~l ✓5 F rti^n'' {~'~C~~i m. ..5.~` • ~ 'v r 9 ~}iir ~ret }'~1 y ~ t.~.. f~~' t~,~~a x S.: ~.r i e~> ` {~/tro . ' -.rl r rS~w^{bF .i'+ .•.xY/. .n ~ ~ ~i:'a~ iyt~••.>1"1`•' irYe c.?! t.' ~ .F.^ ~'.'Jk~/. 1 fl i.~.,)i~.r r .:~-T±rff f!,•~r' ~'.w~!. \ r t,,(~.~ ant ^~`t.. I / j «yl`'o.r .9F'~h v '1 ! •ir"tl.}' s •t~/V~ ~~;1+yet... s Y~-~y 1 h ~ir ~.F vy;~5\i.~Sf:,t. _r. ,`..r • el,...v ,~yC"iP' ~ t ~he'~ '~lr•".'~,~./4, t.s. 'r. .'s}Y'~:' n1 .'t' ,.j,Y,. 1ri 7~. .r ~ Z L{~~>l. _t .~.•,G.I~.i '?'S~3,.~bM~ ~~•,'P. t7•~'LF .:7 .Y1..~•ttrf*~}. a t.~ hi m-`` .i~a s. t~i. `•'i" y--sV ' i:s J- .3, i 1 H~~~lr'~t<~ ~Ct,Jrb J' ;rj`~ .te 5i_`tr J••'~i 4V •Y"°"~~ .~e~~i?). jj ~`~C ,^.r 4..0 i'h. ~ .p•~'.'/1.4~:. ♦•i'{ -3 li. i~t y.~ tr y,. qq1. r,A. .ice .l trbT11 ~'t. 7✓,~(+t ,:S ^~1" ~y>y '•f bl`&Sri I 4 .5~'~fr`«w,rv.,,~. S 1,7 ~.{."t' ~te. aT~• •v5l >o•Hf~~,{;i""'vii W v. .A,••.t X11. .~i.o.' '~'i 'Y.. tr. .•.i +r,r •,.r 71:'~ 7;r.V• -t"Trt~~'lW -r 1t,•. 1. ,•1 i 1:~...a Q~•: -t•c4 MN" E1/_ z._.,..r3~1 > ~ i'~r1~~~ fi - : i ' ~ ~T n?". r t• 0 1 1 ~ • r,#'.4R...rt, VIEW 3- FROM SPRING CREEK DRIVE 0 0 lam.. y ,'i( d - 3 ~y F ^ 4 .3dn3 c , . 2- p y'wu. Y n , a L'1 1 ! fi r r: - fin ar _ 'x' ti ~1 _ 4 A ~ ~r j I ~ M 1'14,-, ~ • ~ ~ + 4 • ' ~ ° _ t ♦ v----._._._a_.- ~mj, ~ .f:-'•-.-r~r°_ 4~~ F4'[ trxi. r^ ~ c ^D' ~ 1 < - a+ o •r r. ~i {.yr,w,i~•} ~ _ _ F -•.J f i, : ' fJf a - _ . 1 ~7 , 1 • r ~~o *t o nit if o~'y5 ,4Tf'rY~~, _ - -~+h- a 1~' `i - N .s. f t 1k < 'A alb yr ,e r( 1~. lir•' k~~' ~ ~ , u~ P~ 4{~' ;'fi A r .+f ~ " , ~ , 1 1 r11 If ~ i ~ .,f.,eC '.~J.'e' t, r, w'7 ~~n4 ::..::.V'Y-•-Jg~~~a~f'--• - - . , 9~. •.r:•f k 1,.~,k ir.+•. .~-rv~ti •,..y. .I. - fo♦ f__t fi. s 12 tt r Esc - - _ ['-.°+4 _ .fib e rt [ t r tt V Y a - o ~ 4r ~s1Ay t 1 r r. - tx X94 n r - , + C7 do & D y ° a,~ a", 3 ~ r a~ ; 0 1'- ~ iyvN°: , ~`7f. r r T , . - ° ' _ ; ' v, T , p to&pa ys ~ ° { , t~ g;oY 4rn x fir. cbrv ! 3'f a i.''`' i -r ° 1. e r w tSrY<. a` Gu,t„~3>, .'`i.. • c v. : :.3 t ~ l~" t ~1. .~'1.f ~±-L. r r .A: raj t.,y S .ft'✓ f ~ r, ;H ~r- .'k'i. - < J. r j r _ - _ c -G}.~ ~.t ^:7 3?' r^..y~~ w,•>!':~ +k '>i51.N' of ,G`•~ F ~ .,['f r ';,F ~4P,'o Vi.ntr,Y u ♦ N S M"S~^ yd. .e. ~y ~ a. 5 , al J 1 ^vs ''t. i~,l r 7 ~ ♦~vYn '..n' ^ 'k r ♦ q^y^ fl t .o ..•,ro 'r,o„~ f ,y~err. 'd* ~-0•: ri ar<D^-ci: +i` - r e•f f rb. a. ,.c a, ~ w .y}.•cz'•:.~.t t'~ 'K~ ~sci(R'( r~ar+lDh;%, e~J k v:,"~ ~ `a `_c ~'9'. .!n -`"..~Y a,^ r "~t, r *r ' " A lr a, .s 'q' ~ ! `~,4 qtr {r r4 •r^ry.' f ~~tA ~34 ~j 'tJ :,p sr~l iY YF^..q~n, 4 f•5,.}:' ~ . .t - : ~ti't ' - .M Y,F .r'.~+;+ 'o i. y v.y c:'~ ~.~rtl} ~ '?~C 6 oG'. °f'h vo: i+ ?~`•~'s'r'y yCt~` "AJ .~tr q - ~ t ♦ .-~;t '{f-, t` ! s > J o .1 i. ~Z. ♦r' A x ..s > f, j. `r. ..:1. C.. 4` ~~'~'t4• J. 14r`~ 'Dt: ~n'z.",t x "3` o to V- . - yj. ~ 'vrr ~S b~-4J t: b a... r Q n'3 v ~ ,tea ^'d ~ ,t:~'. - 'd, ,t' ~ w 'a.. 3 G !,-5..;. ri y,_ yA. ~R,.n~ i~ a 1S t ~j.. 4}~ - s y K'O c. L - (}y ~ yT41 i~. -b.M -i✓•/~ 'it,: ..f+t y. °yy trS: ~.7 t~i'~'h ~1`ri` Jd-l:yA• S=. x r n1. v E !N(}`~V' ~47.~U 1Q r f 4`3;~ x/~' f r 3 :d' f o,.'* t : ._rt IR t,Qc,.3-~ :F, ,..n •~..7"f1a r• e . o .4 c ! Y• ' ',r S. _ r•. ~ .v~, ^~'iu - ti. •,l~y, a,p. 1 1 _ -f 1 _ , ,yyy S~f c 4. ~a: v .14~d ~ gyn. 8, Ft Ja+<, ..`o ,.r. v- l " + ` ..k t. •..v -r ~t~J..c .s', ~~.y `S't .a.aiw 1,~t~- 5 „>t/.:4 ...x 1>',c'_h'i 1 _ ~.d. r. .sr ?:~„°_~`i t ✓ Lq'Nd VIEW 1- ENTRMCE TO SITE Field ruficc--- ~Qunty- # .llryti & k f p o M1 j( yC ~ i t " P r Y riy , R'J , f Jt i J A tr 1 xd~ i x, j t.1 L ~i , ~ , rr r , J 6 a • s Y' • r ~ ~ r r'r Na `k. . i M r r ~~li; c W~yky . ' f4 - S:•~ r,t •r'. r '+1~ Pr rt•~ . f r r - . , ~ F a~ Afff a Yr:fh tr 5..~~... : 4t r,~ r.v. t' r,. J tl`' tlf ~y'f -..t-}li,' y '}l. f• r t..~ r ` ~(t.~I~ °:,`r 3e' ScLr 'r al ~j-.`y 1: tr,+~~ t r• ` -f _ a ~ 1Y v iq.. . .r '.w jt. :*~:~%Ga~, "~f, :fit'",rt~F•~xv..1 E4M: 4r1.f ifiJ "11~;. r'= r, ~p]] .f. ~ I „ V I .r A NOV 19 2010 I G 4y of Ashland Field tJi~ic'3 Gounly,~ j VIEW 4- ALONG THE TOP OF BANK TOWARD"SPRING CREEK AND OAK KNOLL DRIVES •1 j Ell Sir. 9 4 t 'T Yx tp +f! 1 ~ ~It 1}Vy~l' S 'b6/lW ~~!'~6. Iyl~^~ •~.Y. fait ~S~ ~ aJl ~ v , 1~;[~1 ,fir % TWIT, PIP ;ily 17 1 ~1.M'4 4•} :.+qj ~f .~r~ 1~ 11C ~ ~r~ rf4 4t ~~~FTx tya.~: 4~ ~ +kak. 1 in ~ .yr ~GG~n ..it a~''t~~!/~ VJf. ,a w H~ J.•r4 Y.L {4~T1 (,fit .'>'>rl~ ~8' tt , ~*e o 'i°.' 1~'~4~~• a~M, .y { ~ ~C ~ ~ Mme.'. 'iW~>y w4( r~ ' I" T ' t tJ -1 y'~y.., •n~sr: cr 1 ~ ~1 t.a s.IJ J F.. ` \'1 y . t ^r ~ f ~ r S.¢t^.y*a'S' ; - - l.t 3^S ~ ~h . c yr 'n~ r ' ~ c ' eta ;tt ~ ' 1 . S:d- r ♦h~ Std t ~ ^ $FI• a~ r alin r, wl.,~'~' 4~'tr • "l ~ ' r~, 1r' f m,{oy' y" e a Ik~~?+~` ~ r~;, S<, *:r i .5 ,a ,~_"L..~ p. k/ +Yl'~f 4'iicM 'J 1 j A~ dr ~'e: ~n ~ i< 0.1' a. - _ s~ t 3~-~i~~!@ y' >s ~K •'.y7' d aS,.~ ~ h' tr a:;j: ~<'s a " 3 e : t- r C r vt i 1 •G f _ W, I~z '4 I / , e p Z c'i ay ~ N T.~e .•~f, S t n. 's• s L;.' 4".Y't t v ~.J 9 a y 1-•• t 'j_ t 5 "~..a SJ.a _ ~s x ~ It.~y ~ » ~ 39 r T ~ r 1 + ssf _ 4,. 1 f ~ f nrfl 4 , a4 < r ~ w 8 { t r d 4 ;,,t ~ ~ ~ c 'JIiP, f u 1,y?~+ j Ii.C ~i ` c K °^t ,'l t • - , t _ +t ! 4. 'w.'.° -y~ w x'~,, t : tr. x~ky~ +rh S°t h+rdt;' rW y 9o,r` r@/p~~~.' ,s,~ f 1 .r ~ et. T f ! Iv fi y~, a 3.71~a t ~ t v ~ i v- .1._-• ' r t :S z^rT r'f'fW- ~rt' 4 f~ti+n t JIC' r ~.yY, ttt r~ ti• t ~ 'rte ' ~h~r J~ 1• ~~'~~;y~(~ ~6; Ay'< i 9 , °i,~s }rr n : ...s,_+ - f ~ 1~ r..' t , 1 < ~,n l .i ~"R' KP 0.f4 4S ~1~Ty.t `C °I vCh+1 4r "k { * h r'.et..~~. • r ~ V~. i ~ e~ ,,Y~ .aS R / r r t ~ A 1 1 d' .~,,,a,li t t~^f~',A~l'.'trb(i IS Y) ~ yl , t~. .'y9. 1 ~r ?'j,rt y ~ nh~ 1 { w _ <n ~ ! t t , ~ ' I `V i?`1 1. ,~G K~' I' ~ Y1 •J" -,r r ~ Y\ t ~n' ~ 4 ~ 1 f~`~~`I bil: ~t ~I}y ><`rr • ~~rt~. a a ~~>.1 '~`a~ ly,ti.+ y L ~'•r~~e'~ ~ ~ y ~ -t ~ / a , r r ~n 1 ~ r~ . '~'~j1~{ir, j0•' s a' / ' 1 lu r.' ~'R. t.{.c t . Ir J~:• l II.'1~f'~ :eL+/ T---_ l IZ-N JP 71 , V~ ~ I • ~ ~ ~ irk '1. P•- _ 70 I t 'r r 12 rf. ;~+t ~ sT'~1 yy e _ c~• M1 ~ 'r.. V ~t SS ~ # Ttg ` / ~ ~~7 ` ~ 1 ~ld~•,~+ Y Y~ n~ ` c rl r, Al 1 w 1 ,J a A j t"U r I, .gyp c f !}J~n eV S ~~tl ~ ! ~.3~ 0~ 4•~ r;. ~t i \s.p ~~Y„f+ b j~ ~t ~,ipr...~ C' - ~t~ J L ' ~ ~ O' Y R` 4 },T~ C A. f _ YYYY r ~~j ~nE h ~n-Y ~'7 d` t l(j 3w+ T tR ~2'• 1 'i.y 'l~'"s~' 1 ft r ~ L R Yyi 'D ~ 51. ~ ~*,zZ rr}, 'JU r ?F , ~c e}6 ~ _ v •i 1 0 1 ~i~~ .5 '~r'Y'~~ •r= r o i d£ " _ ,A i ± ; '~-C'~~•-`r~r.,-.est.. y Vz b r Q ~ ~r~i ',~i- r >,F fn J : it ~ ~if ° =r,~~~C~`~2`•F. 1L~ e f'Y o~ I F~. a " f~ ~ r r l I! r K rx Q { r ILI, Wl. Y~ ! Y . ` , I ' ~ 1 ~T„.t -~.J A V•n~'~ "'^q~~\• "y C~'CY3-c F . ~ ' : Jr ~ ~ 1 ~ti' t t :t~~°""te~•~i-»°v''xy~~"~.' '~qr4~,, ~ LL LL 1{(qqa .E tJ{ p1o~~ t' .r i yr'YR`~`t+ih` T.".yi . I, , 3A ~i C 'a ' ~ k ~ I 51 L ~r ,k 9 1 A { ~ln, F .'^s ypG i w av • s- v _ i + w 1 t At r, e I _ I i 51 h DPW GN1N~r a ru 2 h S~ _ 'Ti W p m ~ ~ r ~ 'p wns~¢orisr Cf) Boa W ~ C1 N IAA . tgryq (4~1-. I ~ ~ 0 Q ❑ 9 0 p 4 (D (D S p Z ~O OO i 1v L-j 0 p a Q w v m Ali, s 'fa. y. PFZ CD Ul ~e ® C3 0: CAD dad,` 0/0 W o ~+p ~ 5 ~ n r0 p , r ~ ODD b, ° Q m ❑u OINDLAR m po CO) ~ v ~ p cp o Q ~ i ~ a9ty~ CJ ~ ~ ~ o f~0 N Ep d7c I I H n,~ $ ~JtnlO`dd NOLL`d011ddd -'ND-400l1'dN4d :71VM-3 0 • O 'SN &Ewa vmw doomm LS6F-196 OK) 3NOHd 2 aNV MUM NRAaW lOSL6 N003UO 'OXOl03YY p `l p 'Od a ~~&&& 000E ANb'dW00 JNIM388 `dlfla'lt/J 069 °9519 6909 xos ~D~ = z o-r .9-,Z4 ? Z X01-,9£ 4 m .0-,SZ d1~ K s vl .0-,8t 3 V~*0 0 w W W Z W „9-,Zt - Q `r T m m .0-,Ot tD W 0O W tO W 6'~ 4K N f N N Nd' f Nm N A 1 O t 14p ~ V z O O U - Z U - - - 0 - O TU - - W U M W 02 a2 W. F- - - - - - O O m U' Z r p J N W Q i L r T 0-,01 .9-,Z t ffl N sir W 1-- .0-,91 .0-,O t 9-,8 L dOl-,9£ -'SZ V1 .0-,S4 i i I (ice a z,~~ ~ 1 _ x_ ,t~~x _ :o;_y.,;,'s-.3•,0 Bu O. Job Address: 590 CLOVER LNG Contractor: tx ASHLAND OR 97520 ` Address: xF b C Owner's Name: MORJIG STEVEN H =Phone: - P'. kN` State Lic No: t Customer 04791 ~,w P. CALDERA BREWING COMPANY nsTs't City Lic No: LApplicant: 540 CLOVER LN 1R Address: ASHLAND OR 97520 (C Cy Sub-Contractor: ,:Ai Phone: (541)840-8882 T Address: N° Applied: 11/19/2010 ~Tt Issued: Expires: 05/1812011 Phone: ESA- State Lic No: r Maplot: %c'-~ City Lic No: DESCRIPTION: Caldera, Site Review, annexation, comp plan amendment New Owner: Caldera Brewing Company ,s,:VALUATION NO ;W a?E''.t Occupancy Type Construction Units Rate Amt Actual Amt Constuction Description Total for Valuation: -'e Yb',i? s J.:[:+c . 'kz w 4 Vo u ~ 'V. ~ frc} r tr r"y5d~ & ^ELEOTRICALa S 'rc. Neuli~ rv ra4 s ru iy e. s Y ~ T 4T s'w` m f,".4 i* t 4 ~ x Y.. - I.t max- s~''a,_ s??.'"`..~ wv--~4~'•i~_ `STRUCTURAL -,.i'` s,. z t' f s },.:_m is °.s+~'_ x~~' v Rr{FGt -e,-~ ~,F ~eIM ,_.a:y,nt PERMIT FEE DETAIL T3iM,. Y~ ME ,J xva-'S' }'~^suq ;,V~ e J Fee Description Amount Fee Description Amount Type III Planning Action 14,395.00 s.~_ s'~+.a~x",d•.ks~ t,t%-.._-. ,a e,.~ ?nn~S. :..~e~€ : `~,s' gl-~4~''CONDITIONS OF'APPROVAL~? Ste`! « d~' da`~.',:xs-_:.:: ,.f i.`r~ ~ ,u'~'., COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Tel: 541-488-5305 20 East Main St. Fax: 541-488-5311 ' shland, OR 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 -,hland.ocus .equest Line: 541-552-2080 CITY OF ASHLAND i ZONING PERMIT APPLICATION Planning Division ur x o r n n S1WinbumWay, Ashland OR97520 FILE# PA- ~dlD - 0 I,7 ASHLAND 541-488-5305 Fax 541488-6006 II DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT Shfl. AIlA((~c~ DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Pursuing LEEDO Certification? ❑ YES ❑ NO Street Address 4eit? C/141/64- LA'Jpj Assessor's Map No. 391E I tAA Ate) ~ k k!D Tax Lot(s) ~ 9 00 ?OCO AA 2000 Zoning j RIB'S 16uv,vrl~ Comp Plan Designation Low 144 : ~r ✓r n~ APPLICANT ) 7 Name /~e/r~FOA I~ItE JiKr [ rrkaA J7 Phone s-41- 910 - 9ZLZ E-Mail by"d F J r,hq aN I d / Address ~/Gg Co y6l, L9--. City kIll'o x Zip l7SZ 3 PROPERTY OWNER Name 'r, ti jU - Ik S Phone SA E-Mail Ca Ki-4 Aa6W ANd I0'= Address 0 C /Ot y4/ to = City / -s Zip 771^z0 SURVEYOR ENGINEER, ARCHITECT, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. OTHER Title Name Phone E-Mail Address 5 ~ 7_A9 - r~ i~gillLa ✓~ji Zip Title Name Phone E-Mail Address City Zip I hereby ceflJy that the statements and information contained in this application, including the enclosed drawings and the required findings of fact, are in all respects, true and correct. I understand that all property pins must be shown on the drawings and visible upon the site inspection. In the event the pins are not shown or their location found to be incorrect, the owner assumes full responsibility. I further understand that it this request is subsequently contested, the burden will be on me to establish: 1) that 1 produced sufficient factual evidence at the hearing to support this request, 2) that the findings of fad fumishedjuslifies the granting of the request; 3) that the findings of fad furnished by me are adequate; and further 4) that all structures orimprovements are property located on the ground. Failure in this regard will result most likely in not only the request being set aside, but also possibly in my structures being built in reliance thereon being required to be removed at my expense. If I aviy doubts, I am advised to seek competent prolessionaladvice and ssist nce. Applicant's Signature Date As owner of the property involved i ihisl quest have read and understood the complete a plicati n and its consequences to me as a property owner. ~ J/ le / O Property Owner's Signature (requi d) Date FF. M,. vd by Off ftq / Date Received U / ' , l f Zoning Permit Type Filing Fee $ / 1 i OVER 177 O:4ommdev~plennin4'Pa,m~d: HaMwls~Zwins P.1t Rppli~adondrc 11/22/2010 11:05 5414004456 REMAX PLATINUM PAGE 01/01 NCV-22-10 12:38 PH STEVEN NCR]IG 541488413514 P.01 ® Plinnint~aytnman{ NI P jD un or 71 Wilburn Way, Adlhnd OR 9'1520 -ASHLAND 54l-"S105 Fn5C1-4914 x FILEI ION 911aat Addliss_ Almsso(sUOONo.391E. TuLOViI.,_. Z"9 Comb Pin G71l9A7tlO11 - • . . APPLICAMI E.Mal Aidnn _ PAMRTYOYMER X541-46Vloiy Addiu~~~, ~1CLCS~___CM.L51U~ ~G_ . yi. Q7S1 d 11Ltl EORYEYOR DMINEFi. MCHRECT UDS AROff OTIMA TNe- Addrgi_ CM-- z0_ T&. E• Addriss _ CAy__-_ Lp_ I nameyraoA• Wlkirafmordrann aprmxla, cnAnwx IM ipr2or~plt ar1WpM7 aTgayd e77N9' .tQib+nxatlfnAny dw..a x drrdr. NWAm btny . . W Ww elono ecWld wwb1OM71 BaoadNMh'ri'a eninii N uflgyaladMlawhoanaty, o,mr IMtlpa edsab wan ppd{r rrsaulon hlEa gtNMranr e. narNQlln bYe• ~,n7pt gpd lhlfYAh n9uale+aawhdyaewct ak gxd»aY Ormrren, alkb"Ih 71 BNIIpidlCaaraWM kcludMdmn rffiNnNmlbNWOOrrPln7wn n h>r lAr M1leiprdleu~xwwdjadaxrn. prwlMparMrelv4: S Male.edrgr drrplxnkAev byxinn ndoPuaA'ala anMr n mddrYUiuubxlwo+a.an a. aaoeny lxlroywnipraulL 60MM^~+"p°b'°°'°'aF*D+tlArh'.r N~naft)&*wetla 4ddwPornM'mnr lll~~~ppp od On MOarYrmrrrfMW tllhara..T,• l im idn17dM7ark n Iowa fhaw O ""Wk a~rroNay aakrr avl+onre aw m / Appkotws Oignalure ---~.L / U A, owner dlhoproyerp•InMW" Ask muert. lAOWMR4 W .Idirdaadfhi WW* arp&abn xudr M. °b+SBQYaKea a pB LTa ROPorY Pro0e41er s~' Slpnptute ~_.LL.L7_! / _ . '•+rwW ~lnv, ~ ~ Ow Rioewl, _ ImYq Rrm1T Mai Filp Fai S.. groep Atbsn lypi gefF'p I { Pat Yf 144,a.µ .v4v,.leanm.. .u. it • 176 ZONING PERMIT APPLICATION Planning Department 51 Winbum Way, Ashland OR 97520 FILER "six ox 541-488-5305 Fax 541-488-6006 ASHLAND DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Street Address Clover Lane Assessor's Map No. 391 E 14 AD Tax Lot(s) 7000 Zoning RR5 Gomp Plan Designation PLAP ICANT . Name James P. Mills phone (541) 840-8882 E-Mail C/of Gateway 5 N. Main St. Address CIty Ashland Zip 97520 PROPERTY OWNER Rgn McKinle Name Claudette Moore Phone (541) 774-6868 E-Mail Address 985 Highbury Drive City Medford zip 97501 SURVEYOR. ENGINEER. ARCHITECT, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT, OTHER Title Name Phone E-Mail Address City Zip Title Name -Phone -E-Mail Address City LP 1 hereby comfy that the statements and information contained in this application, including the enclosed drawings and the required findings of fact, are in aft respects, hue and correct. I understand that all propertypins must be shown on the drawings and visible upon the site inspection. In the event the pins are not shown or their location found to be incorrect, the owner assumes (ua responsibility. I hrrther understand that If this mquesf Is subsequently contested the burden vnR be on me to establish: 1) that lpodiced sufficient factual evidence of the hoofing to support this request 2) that the PoNings of fact turnishedNstdres the grenthg oftherequest 3) that the findkrgs offact Nrnishedby me are adequate; and hinder 4) that elfshuctures crimprommenls are propedylocatedw the ground. Fadve in Misr and will result most hke rmt on the uest babe set aside, but also eg H ~n y re9 g possibly in my structure beurg Mntl in reliance thereon being requiredto I beremovedefmyexpense. 111 havefydo If l am advised to seek competent prolessfonsladvico end essisto - Applicant's Signature Dates As o of the property tavo IN equosf, /have read and understood the complete application d Is consequences tome as a property o r.1 //a~ Props , Owner's'Sigoature (requi ed)+, Da i n=e.m„a.W qcn oral j Date Received Zoning Permit Type Fling Fee E i Planning Aclion Type OVER CbOCIWE-INmEV4CCA15-I:Tm,pZWnS lm,i, Apllkartv, F-d i 175 ' 1 CITY OF ASHLAND PLANNING ACTION #2010-01570 590 CLOVER LANE, CALDERA BREWING CO. ADDITIONAL MATERIALS SUBMITTED AFTER THE CLOSE OF RECORD • EXISTING SO MANHOLE - - - - ~--CON POINT TO I I 1 ~y c n EXISTING NC CITY STORM \ OA,,FP i \ DRAIN SYSTEM \ 9t o9 o I ~il~~il ~pilJil j jJ Dl `J1 j1J;1 I I 1 \ L I STORM DRAIN WATER DUALITY & DETM71M \ I I I XI5TING IS. WIDE PUBLIC FACILITY - BOTTOM ELC✓=95.0 of n BLIIY EASEMENT AND Z \ \ I I I NI I STORM DRAIN FACILITY nl INA GE EASEMENT ~DRA _ _ ourzET cavT L ~raucNRE _ PROJEC7$OUNDARY \ \ I I II / / - ✓ i ' ° aaav r I 9 spg/N ♦ _ .C_ l - - CA7fU°5 PROJECT BOUNDARY EXISTING SD MANHOLE / o ♦ - - - 'BASINS ~ e~ PR EC OJT BO NDARY~.- I. •EENCED Tdf' \ ♦ a5 _ ♦ / i -I-" Ji. -'CURB DROP \ / 1-. jp9 aETAwIIJc 1 1 3, xi / - - \ . ~IIl~--1 I / I k\-O T \ Is /t 105 _ \ i~~ STORM DRAIN - I ~ l \ I , _ HF'~I 1 \ • \ \ FACILITY DUnET \ I . • l \ \ \ \ .C CONTROL STRUC NRC - i .I I .\\Obll\T . ♦ \ ♦I11`\\\ ♦ /i I \ - ~ 1- - I \ \ 1 1111\I / STORM DRAIN DETENTION G `q n~ 1 \\I \ \ \ 111 li•\\o I -l' \ \ ; J WATER OALITY FACILITY 111 / to"" l ` 1 \I\\ ,Z ~l \ \ 111) I 'I $ \ - _ BOTTOM EL=104.75 1 'k / 1 \\1 \ / \ /r II111 4 1JJ GOBI ALV\ERA,\R\"\ J ~c`C / ~OS ),fi? j -//RRO~GT\BOUNDARY CURB DROP 's"'' \\\\\1 UI b ~3\~ ^ h\n\y\~~~ y jjj ' \ \ 4 \ \ o LI v vvvv` .lob I\~Iro~ HNy lbHhD *1oog, \•Y~~: 1~'\t111~~~ z BASINH , CATCH' r\c•F \\\l•\\\,~`\,~\ I/mil'':-` ~s CLOVER L'A j"/ S,F+ BA51 / ♦ T\ \ \ \ I'\ \ \ \ ♦ ~\.c\~\\\ I / 77 \ S,~M D o c Ilf h \p I - r 4`y~ I I / nz .,.I P+ \ ti r r7' . yam/ I IS 'i\~ ICJ J / " I / PROTECT qII I Ix BO NDARY 1~ i 1 f 1 1 "1 y 7 Z 11 \ A p i - = " - - - '.v ,W- GRAPHIC SCALE i MAR 0 7 20 i1 IN FEET ) 1 mm - So a DRAWN RC MWK DATE 11/10 NO. REN90N DATE BY pltrz' CITY OF ASHLAND CTE CKED BY.MWX, PW DATE 11 10 ' DATE: CALDERA BREWING COMPANY ~FC DATE 590 CLOVER LANE DATE , CONCEPTUAL PN. alas Dare . GRADING &DRAINAGE PLAN owIl 6CI9-OU. (U9) "A - 99ZS-GU (119) Nd e0ro+~~ b v".~ AJl 3tv0 I0940 N003N0'UNOdQ3N- 1Z4r xoa 0d w ~nw.va Ntlld Allllln lVn-LAONOJ oa>° 1 31 vD vev 3NVl b3AOlD 06S xa 3iY0 SYNdoNoo nxllwr INVdWOD JNIM3219b2f34lVJ sl 31 bo ~DNit<303 ONbIHSV~OAll7 ~S\ oflu 3/VO INId''M" A&OJXJ3I O~GJ121y5S10 AV 31 b0 NO5N38 ON 01/11 31YO XIIM pe MIVN0 a H } r43t:i~]V i•:7 f-~:1 v a-v>ul! 3 A NI I 1N3W1NVd30 311I1 ONb'lHSV 3H-LAG O3AONddV t!07 L 0 ON \ 99 llVHS SNOIlVOOl 1NVNOAH 31114 lVNld r310N ~ HIV 09 OIHdVHD 5 _ sa / Z 'LJ1 1 u. r x .=1 f 0 LN3rv3SO 3MY3 I-AWaNpO9 T _ Al 300 ,S JNr1SX3 I 173I1O11d k 1 031 vx Ud 39 Ol 3dW A/YJ 3wd L 'Od ONUSIX3 / / 1 I 03AOM38 38 V313M / `5 y qC\}A 01 MIS ONVO8]]I9 'J3]] X3 Ol N3MOd ONUS1X3 / \ A N 803 ONV ,,WA 3J9835 019 O Ol / S\, 3N/J 0350oONd M6 ODYO977D]IlD NII ILSX3 lInVA I ~"jY / / ~ ~ I JIDI J]]3 ON05IX3 9\N~iyd1 • r ~ i~-~ LtC ~ t"' Nn / i ~ I s]rJS3a]du n 3NONd3]31 JNllSX3 r, ld' ~ / % - ` o r19°d NI ~ s t[f ]nd .D: x] / / i. A1~3 ~ ~ - F - tNtld'(RN ~j ~ ti ~ a ~ M a ~ . ~ _ 3tllJ ONl61X3 1 / _ NMSS ail YM ,8 X3 - . \ NIVM N3LbM a f}- 3N'0'I H3AOlO aAt D1ON05X3-` i,~:. 83033-~ X3 2 N3M]SV] 831 vM / ~ O1 IJ3NNOJ~ ,OI 03504084 / / _ ' s,=F•„>„a 83]3 - and .01 X3 nnVA of 1 ' ♦ OS " . I 8Itl1J33 A113 ABVONn0910310Nd = rx',,.' - al I ~x, ,o i ; 9ND SX] OL 1J3NN09 / 4 bCZ` dWN JMLSIX3 -NMj l 1Nm SV33]8V8 I a V ~ 1 / / - AL 30NI S ONU SX3 I- I ~ _ - O08 A C / 'GAH Rld - 30VHO LS, rr 3MId/ I I:O3ON3 d ' I O I b0 ON1UdS 00 \ I Nir rvdots c ~ off'.5-3 ' \ --•----ice-K I I I I kdVCINno91]3foud ---------I i?_--1 - I I ' \ \ V IN3N3V3 H3S3JYNIVNO I I I \ ON 30 M]Stl3 A1nH0 I io JI]Bnd 30N1 S1 ONl[SIX3 I I I I I I V b y II r, Gf arr rcf 11 p as rErErrrarE~ Era od, '1, I I I I I I I\ TAX LOT6BA TXKLOTGWI 20N _``Z ED RWS ZONED S ~ I ZONED RR-S -0 \ 9 W___C > (EIBUMINO _ SPRING B T LL 1 _ 1 V IAUTOMATED CREEKORNE 1 PR _ - I`•♦ (GATE 6]TALL FENCE 1361.95 1 PROPERTYLNI~~~U~ ~ PIL"G 6'TALL FENCE J J , .`tl `g 1 1 _ 1 x ~ I O I j PARKING ARE, PLANING If''V II 1 j II I ` 1 / I i I i i I .IjP1I/I `I 1 II { / ♦ `1 I I 11 I / $ j I V 4 " ♦T\ PUNTWG I I I I II 1y` \ SIGN y\♦BJ TALL NCE l'b PAN / I II PLANTING 1 PLANTING 1j a P ~•+\\~.I `r COVEPED PATIO COVFRED~` I w _ TAXLOre+w P, PUNTING / PAPo(ING `I 20NEO RA-00 ` \ _ M1~ ` I p I I~ ~ ~ I; I l gy I A % ~SreM1rECT CEp w ~ \ I ~ ~~~89lt~ I SFO~P1AG F'--N y I . P E 4N A9 LI na /TAk COT )D6o~ P G k~~ °I~il l j" / I' IAN Ali ENCLOSED / r S ORAGE. (E)BU"NG S WIDE C~BLE II AaEA I I a" FCR IIII l NEA9ElAEM /1. `CWIERB 11 I I ~ I 111 / ~ h~j/ FS.itC ; 11I f Yf ♦ / IIII • S DETENTONM'ATER \ O / / p/Ektlil i!/ 111 11 t ; III II OUPLRTBIOBWAIE Q 9 IbIH I 11 1 I 1 1 I I I I RUNNING 1 G'f~ r%~~ ~ ~I I I I I ~ H I IIII WALL / 1 / I IZ I 4 1 (III Ipr~Flc "I w iii L II 'z` I I ~3 \ / / 7 I I li qq. -'I ~ I H a°rc 1~ / 1 I -tfl0 (v'1 I Ili I I CED l i ♦ 1 u \\\\,A / / _ % ~ TOFNGE 1 I II II AREA j ; I ,i~♦ `l J_TAX LOT Two - µl l Iy II ii SF SPWNG6 µyT t I; ill - ' a 9¢ PROARTYLI E2119 Y ri. II ' ♦I I li; 1 Sg c II; T.I.T. + rIIX LO, ZONED R-1d0 B~T ` FENUS I Ij 1 1q II I~IIj t 1y ♦ ull I d ♦ ~ I I I M1v Sy ~ I I I I I VI ICN ITY MAP PROJECT LOCATION I' \ 1~`♦ ♦ t /i n msw. \`TS 1 'v % ` I (E) TREES PROJECTTEAM t 1 i ~ I 1/ i , 1 OWNER: JIM MILLS- GAIDERA SPEWING COMPANY I++\ I I i I !(R) PSAFES SIOCLOVERIANEASHLANO,OREGON 11 &1860 BZ12 I PWli1NG PUNTER MARK KNOX. URBAN OEVELOPMENTSERVICE9 ♦ 1 4 4. WESTtEVAGSTREETASHIPND, OREGON I\ / / / %I SA1 bY3S3t t m ~ ' / I I IANGSGPEARCNItELi:IAURIE SAGER8A590CN1E5 ~ 1 J l y j'I/ l j// ~ -I )W M6TLETOE ROPP SUREAtA5HLM8).OREGgV fj, y,: ~ ~ &1 b61NB ` ~ i '1 I/ ENGINEER MARKKAMPATH-CEC +P Y 6Y+ N I I 11 '1 PO aUX 926 MEOFORD, OREGON TAX LOT H W / I 1 I.I II 541 V9 T95]L6 , SURVEYOR VA LHUGA-HOFFSURRBASSOCNTES 1 I II / t/ el li I TAX LOT 48M A ZONEDR-1-10 660 GOLF VIEW DPNE 6UIiE ID1 MEDFORD,OREGON 11 \r" / 1 541 77. .1 0 I ARTIST: MARTIN LEE I/. I Sw ALLISONSTREETASHUNOOREGON I' •F~ 54148a w11 _ PROJECT SITE INFORMATION TAXLOT65W ZONED R-1-10 TOTAL PROJELTAREA PLOTSk ue.we SQUARE FEET i II1\ 'SPRN GREEIL TOIN.PROPOSED AREAOF DEVELOPMENT: tt9,50150UMEFEET \ BF-PERCfHtAGE OF LOTCOVERAGE ♦ OTRI2NRE5: 10,048 SQUARE FEET-3015 % OTHER IMPERVIW55URFpCEO: 60,SU SGUARE FEET-30.85% ;A• TOTAL NUMRER OF PARKING SPACES: t95TANDARO q tt cwwncr ♦I _ '13 YAG 4 \ TOTAL NUMBER OF EKE PARKING SPACES. BCOVEIZEDSPACES A TAX LOTS. SF- PERCENTAGE OF LANDSCAPED AREAS: r1R9)SQUAREFEET4509% \ I W.'. R-1-10 SHEET INDEX TAX LOT Two ZONED R-1 T-1.0 TLRE SHEET \ L-1.0 TREEPROTEC110N5REMOVALBDEMOLTOONPIPN L8.0 SITE PUN W.0 PLANTING PUN i C.1 CWCEPNPLGRAOIN3 NVO DRNNWfPVN Cl CCNCEPIIML UILLITTPUN M1 NCRTN AND EAST ELEVATIONS \ A-T BWTH ANO WESTELEVATONS i TAX LOT Sim \ ZONED R-1-10 i m (TITLE SHEET 1 • J J// TAXLOTS200 0 30 80 90 - ZOWDagdO ` JO Z 'q 3 - x 8 3 A ~"S LAURIE SAGER CALDERA BREWERY d° D ° My B p~oy $90 CLOVER LANG n i r p = 9 a o uo ti AND ASSOCIATES LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS INC ASHLAND, OREGON o o ° pOyIN 'xo.$~ 700 MISTLETOE ROAD, SUITE 201 I CT ASHLAND, OREGON 97520 i - i I I I i i \ TAN LOT 6900 y W y~ TA%IOTBB'1, - ~ ~ 6 \ (E)BUR➢MG 1 CRSPRINGNE P E G ~ `y ~ i /1 PROPEaLY LINFn 11\\` ~ ~ ~ ~1 IN TO BE REMOVED TREEPROTECTION F\ENLE\ \ J r 1 1\ b3 iO BE PEfAOVEV \ \ 1 _ 1 /y 1 I - 1\,iRR \ - - l~0 - :M,Td BE RE~fovt;D ' / ( B IsIIWlm~ljEO s / - \ TAXLOT6D00 \ ) 66 T1~6E REMOVED \ \ HJ I l~~ III J J% l I \ BTO BE MOVE / / / `r~r ~ , ( ~ I,I 11 ~ TPX LOT 6IW IEWA(EOOBE REMOVED ( ~ ~ V 1 as i~~REM0VE0 (E)PUMPHOUSE TO I VA O \ \ \ \ BE REM(MD I l g \ ///III \ 1\II (E)OL FlocNNf`, 1\ ` \ TOB R O D J (E)BUILDING TO BE I ' \ R MOVED \ ' 1 IFAPOL~AN01\(~ \ •n M9~\ 1\ \ _ OVERHEADPPN'RthIESTO\ BE DEOOMISIOOMISIONED BT PPµ\ i \ b10 TO BE~~OVED_ (E) ELECTRIC MfTERTO', \ l \ BE REMOVED BVD 6L I (E)CONCRETE Til (E) 1+2 1 `I 1 \ M)BUILOMG I( / .BEREMWEO ' / J ' II WI \ TREE PROTECTION DETAILS .OVA ~ \ ! v ~ III I\ ~ ~ - \ \ X11 Tlf BE REMOVED II / (E~I6 I' III I \ \ (f)6ValEV ELECTRIC / 1 Tp%LOT TNO 4 DdpEro TOLE REM VED J i~/ A I A I I I III V A DdgMe \ V 'A$~`V\ r ; I ~ _ ~ III \ , l 0 P~L ty0~ ve _ \ \ .mil \ ♦~B~ wp TMTrwk !m 1 / \ ` J JV1D(E) N9 'III III III I F.. mnMUwAl ~ ; Y I l l I 1 ' I mm~d lne [1ddFBm B BOAROTO \ Gam' I / I ./I ` O 6lall iaMnuwe tlaFinA wbbwlln.amalgm lendnp on coroseh plan mplan IBE REMOVFOI ELEVATI(M PIPN \ V I / A V : LEGEND r\ V• V A A _ V 1 ~ O 6W OEWBE , / v VIII Wn A NEASEMFM EahWglmb Han nmot ~ Mnrmved e4c Tn[pMVabnfwtln9 \ v - r % ! TatlL9 ioW: 13 \ \ \ w / \ \ III F \ 19 \ :130 TO BE RvnwEO ~ ~ I III Trx w.uro TREE PROTECTION NOTES I I \ \ I , II A. enevwwadpa,I Un OM.dem[[Ae96e pgbUed loam d[mega. Ne[binge afegulpm[MarinalembanbararwbOndtlpbweglree[b \ \I \ ~ \ / I I 1 /II I mmgely,it-toali.")= . AD danwge wVaW W mnHusat eeJ[14p nen vAalm wmwroaled br, bbeUn pnry. wq boa }LrM \ I \ \ \ I r B. Trwalml en[Awm bnmaM[MDle Dnbdm wMfantlrq as[Awm Dn ppnewmro npuMe. FondngsiQSeff Wl,mwnrytlM,NMkpnN% TPEE P0.0LECTIONFENCE In TO REMAM InsWkdwllA malelcdnnecYmswlNl ell wnehan lnlegrelM,Ynse(erce[[I:YI ba IrelNN bprcMdpuvpea(peas[E9mvrYareMtlse L DQ \ \ \ \ J 1129TOREMAIN NmrBA It Q 1 \ \ '-V TO REMAIN C. AseNfiaearWdal eAal Ee[emulbd Harry pmnlrg lamw[varyduMg ansWdkn,mLen lonmM. \ . v\ \ 1 135 TO REMAIN D. OhWNennaleen pmbcWnlennapMrb mmdemn dpnaq MCDMwrm11'aeunlyb oomphhnpdm]wonwN[AO~n MWrMm{8n \ Oi \ \ I l X35 TO REMAIN .'.49na 4na. Zj, I C(~L 1 \ TA%LOi) 0 I / I `r MN T°REANW Ellin mau merT aro enwunbrse dvMg mnWUCOen.MmnlnclweAUl mneclenNRM SNamlmmsmaM mlpwnnnaeeeery. (a ~ \ \ F. CwOacb- Aalnot dBNN mct. dlrcuwMn IeTwFgvW or daM nminFd 'p G.COm,a.'Nplna`nk. Me IW MwI wIUalW ddp llnnelaal[Wg ben tometie pOajIAW>ye. eemµbmaWlgnMVV.MeIdewYASeM NA \ 1\ OT \ 11 X3I TO REMAIII r / ag]TO REMAM wNa, aneln NO[e anva, levNer Ne eddM bgp96stlrbnlsWq Brveaelneppw4nalMy Sl ebw. 9~ / H.Impectlm 6tlweuN: (O \ \ \7L X2UTOBERULaMD 1lTroe pmMdtm M1rtlnB placamanwMO M[ppravee by wmeM1 lepmenWNe LalaedmailWnbgW. I / #MTOFENAIN 31 RwdwlnspactlcrtdleMrp eN VM wMNpmrvOamremNp Ne m.Irteelmn4v:Om,swkseeD maw Hfentlrq kmmvgNa \ / / 3, / / / Oroawlbneancn. 1 \ \ , / % / /p / mpv.dMftlvoto Xdmn. Y ' ])FlrWlmpedbn[ImmdeOOndpldvCbdennnYromr9ln \ r rS JXI9N RE IN % p1tlTO BE REMOJEO TREE INVENTORY I F 9. ~ I /I ~ l l / ~ % T-# 6p DOH C-n rwM Cmp10n Tne Dmle lon N. \ \ MP' T" LNpi1 I I I I i / / l l , In IrGn In foal n. raAn In fnl \ \ J 1 Ulmw tlpdy B T.5 a12MBE REMOVED I N "'Ass m W. W. robe nmonE at T, 1, I% TN,LOTOBW 3 C eenadetl[n 1t ID Imtl W' p1JTOBEREMOVED I J I ] Ceeru.ee%ara 10 7.5 Boa, Na b nmawi rvnme] 4 d.r . 13 10 pmA nJ[ to,ed • X/6 TO REh✓AI s 10 n'. ycW a use mrwrtl 11 Owndeeden 9 W".d aWere ,0 B a gwtl Na robe rawiad \ /j, / W . Cedma eabn 9 B gem Na lomreraree I14709E 9 Cedrve de Nnn 16 i5 gm Ne robe rermvi I RE610VED /R15TO NNNENAIa B CabceMUS tlewmv to T BoM Nv to be removed B- 10 Prurev ap._ 9 T.9 pzr la romrumnf Q n uHnnf wquda 15 ns Rani N. nobannbw 12 Ouewe genryu 1a 10 dead m. bp[nma77J t3 Dnemw gampmd ,5 ,0 dow Na Rabe rammed r r'^ ..T49Q0 U vmwaguryane 30 16 Po-ad W. le be nmmetl II u Ou.mw'n,nru a 6 mWenle Na Ip nmeM p IX 19 Du.mnq`OAnI m 12 .2. N. bnmvh 1 1 I;I \ SEa~a fl Dnraa Baryn[ 15 15 nn raw No to nmvb \ \ 18 a.. grrryau. 14 7.5 mm W. roue nmasd \ 1B Z.-. gYryBw 6 5 atc. nla bnmM 20 DuerweR "Bre 10 6 dam Na bhenmm. 21 Ouewe plryew 9 3 ponrM Na bnmeF \ \ 9• _ v Qn-,rOane 9 a mooW. N. to remah QIF 23 puarcva garyn 15 6.5 wrv Ne mnmab \ p, 24 Q. .Wnryw 90 T,5 qpM 22p b nmarn [nd Mprpbcmd 2 25 Duercue Barr3ew 30 T.5 gow 225 ronmin end bepnbtled 26 Ouerwv"n"a'a 24 TS Bom 18 W m"h ne M pprxlae gF 21 Guertmperryeru 5 6 good 4 ro nmaN ene Is prdesbe bmmalnaMbepMegN - TA%LOTSW] 19 OVertuegarryare D 5 qwd 44 29 O.arwyaR)". 6 5 good 3 bnrmin aM be pMeUtl 22 'l-B.rlrin 12 7.5 Boos 12 robe nmaae I , SPECIFICATIONS FOR DEMOLITION AND SITE CLEARING A. TAe mmdlWn mneador is ramdrm lp mselWN TO wmeh nvmmIlvW. at lM IsS ttr m baBlnnlry sqM b oe e M adA pmcedum.amfa \ - - _ _ _ _ _ and Aad mule, ene Bpe pmle[IprrtpesNee. - B. Am.EHedarG mlvnell m Mred b pmmal ban b nmW, earcmaaary. C. Trees b b nmm.d atwl be b6ld.Oef bha wsy from Im pnbctbn am'e[ srq to avWd pdHrq em beWtrg drmYOfban blerNkr.Yrmb n en~rW.111ecancHbnfIpVDebb62t[nar DM Rra}Tfncpdy mal Rana Bebn eaV DO Ne Vau Ms mryb aoo,,i Mb/aNbq PIUgA Im noh ny Mne, w4M1v NhnHrg knHe, rvcAUx, remw InrcAawM alury badn, prmAwepaw+m raFwlnk9 aTrYrmbrL D. ..Idam IM v. eM uMirymwrd(Nunsbbe nmaaad wlWn Ns Vee DmIxIM inMalw6 VaeIM ameNNegulpmenlgondaane pwlala loan TAXLOT5100 M. pnmclbnamn. 11Mr eamaw toal ea b eemalbbn aclNNnaAN m nporled N lM 49na1[61p.fMNIwMm flaMUAm ummrruDYedAilRanmlakR Tlmellneuh[h.alletotonhegN. F. Xlamwnry Ael[ OrCCCBn rnem mu4nnOwr We roalern d4ees Io m n01md, a medbN el a IMneaNmukhtlW ne vnMb pmM Ne fN.IM rNdbad meb:bl anell Be ndanlNM av nxsaury b meNWna&rrdl dapOr, * I TREE PROTECTION AND REMOVAL'-PIAN=' - [~N/1 AND DEMOLITION PLAN TAX LOT 521)0 0 w 60 Bo 4 T~ Z o LAURIE SAGER D CALDERA BREWING COMPANY aaaA m 590 CLOVER LANE AND ASSOCIATES LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS INC 0 N ASHLAND, ORecoN -.o 700 MISTLETOE ROAD, SUITE 201 o b_' n CT 6 ASHLAND, OREGON 97520 c I 1 1 I I TARLOT 65W w ~ I T/Jl LOT 85111 i I \ 11 Z I , fl W___~y ~ O I CREED( GRNE ` A 1 VW.AMONATEOOATE -PR F - \ CCNCRETECJRB 0TALL FENCE 1 PROREW 44E:~,?. j 6'TALL FENCE ` PANRN3 11 P O P Ng's 1 4E,I${JTQIWM//SfA ~cyr ` , 1 N I 5 HM]NFANFAO O-0' / MI SCREEN 1 BACKAIP SPICE ~ I N - ~ PIANflYf6 \I i TAl(LOL' ilI V 1 `I I` 1T T OARO ARI IHG PA EG \`I I j 1 j ~ 1 ~_coNCRaTE CURB ``''q1 TALL ` 1X18 SwN M1•'~ 'IB OiANGAR I ili PIRQBIG / 'pAP15VO SPACES i II ` PIANiNG - \ j,.3S OOVE!✓EO I,;IIi / 11 CIE. 5 ,I 1 II ''S PUMWG / 1Clf`_ ` 111111 \I11, TMLOT61W 11 \ t PUN SCR i \ \ i ` I I I \ PIA \V ,AV A EV 1 `1111,111 A 1 12 / 9f LCTN tRAFNCSWAELY)O MI I TMO_ ,SIC~f e' ano 2 sc N • • \ i~ % / ENCLOSED `I 1 `\1\, \ 1~ / / / /STOPAGE., _ I II i ~=1 11 (E)BU6MIG SNDE MENT - AA 11 FOR 1 1 1 ~y:i III I NFASEMO? \ Gpy_ER$ i III (1\~ ` Fs.nS III 1 11 1S%45 CONCRETE SIFB \ / LAC///' _ I III WITR FFNCE FORCHRLFII 1 O 1\ i / / YBREL~E0.C/ ' ~~j 1111. ~35 ` 1 RETPINING wAll \5\1 SA 1 / ~ TJ>~ lii lii'I t_~1 I jl 10%RPAIP WR ` PVw,IIN33 C.`..ii~III eytnLi\c ~ can o s / I 1 t q11 1 CONCRETEPAO / OW_//. 1 . 1 : / O•'- I q 80 ~ 1 11 DETENIROWNATER NfEO 4 11 {1f. I~ I it II WAt1tT 9K6WN.E ALE ~iSX4T3'~T~iApE / ~~/~~y ~SOPYLE v I 11111 FOR GRNN SILOS-- ; i _ I- 1 \ ` -11 1 11 / --_MOUND LORE-~-ib ~I T T1J(LCI ]1111 TN(LOT- \ FRE TRUCK 1 1 \1 ``11 `11 \ ``1 NRNMOUM \ I Y Nrl GS 1\%y YI' ' qll I A GtTA ONCE (E)TREES , I \ 11, \ .I I I I I 1 1 Y~^ ,.`1 \a5.6 I I' I ' (st AuTFs 1 \Y I t 1 1 nIrvTRGS / ~ I / 1 b ~ ~ I 1yf ; i I I ~i.~ 1 P ~ l 1 / Iw TAX LOT TICO afi 1 I / ~ I I / I 1 11 I III s1 i 111/ 11~9 i1 \ / ` I i i II IE REES I I I J' TAX LOTXSW ''.C I6 I.L.T. i 1 - /15vaL 1 ' 1 1 \ 1 \ \ \ - TAXLOT5 I_______ \ I TAXLOT5IW IN 1 SITE PLAN \ 4 NSW OGY TAX LOT Sdb Z a v'7 LAURIE SAGER N a CALDERA BREWING. COMPANY P o r N^ w V 590 CLOVER LANE.: = = a ; a„ u oQ m AND ASSOCIATES LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS INC i? ASHLAND OaecoN 700 MISTLETOE ROAD, SUITE 201 ° - 0 9~ C7 O ASHLAND, OREGON 97520 i \ TAX LOT 6tl0 y Z y TAK LOT 6e01 / \ 22 BKEWKFNONO B W rHU MS. MIX 3CKK SLONP IEI BUILOIN - >IAAYA 1S%P \ SPRING \ U 4CISM 2p G \ \ CREEK ORNE L - - / uDmm'SA i ma PROCeRiYt\A v HAVA 34NME iMCE }j~O`• 0N5A 1sDILL Z~S'P~ 1B "9 ]UVF.i "BID \ NAAG1 48P / -ONP _ scRM /AD6A Ir r SCNK 3ARCE. 1O MRCE / '12AEFO HOHD L HONP 0SVA H.My I LOT 1AM SARCE 1'R SARCE \ \ I 1AI~ / 1SERA 1:PINM IT1~^R^ WOSA (0151.1 HAVA 4CI6M I I I GOPIG NACRE "Col, 6CARK aC6M B.NCM' I(' ISAO, 1S%D, 1 ! ' "/5 SE~s\\\ ACES 121AV TARCH ISEM \ \ \ L l ~ T{pIVP SARCH F \ \ BCH 1HR" ( J I / 1LALK ':ARCM tAEM 1 •3 5'ROSA 1FORL 1.ZE V 3ACFS % 1NN~ F / 1dEM \ \ \iµAQR S \ HONP ? L 6AXCE 6CISM A V 1SPIO SARCH` SRCM Y d I~ I 1 TA%LOT 81M 1+WCM 1A p / 1CAPF 1~AEL'E~5 1s RI / S` lsRG \IfWN 14EM yl >+LONP • SCISM I<',pNA NB te. ISE'URCHRD 9A P~ \ C5y 3A I z 1415M I \ \1 l \\T . \ ~ j„~xwK' i ~ ~a j j / % 11 aawv VA\ V A A K`NRm F pI ~ vvA\ A ~ / ~Tnk ~ i lsou GGViE LOSETI f-~ END VA A % ~V -STOFAGE (E) BUILDING SN9DE LE ~~i NFA6EMENT v \ 1 ~ / / / ~ fOR ` YPINM OOGlER6 ]FIRE SECURING TIES USE E SEED MNOIYI \r RUSBERHOSEATeAra \ Oo \ L 1 / I EI t I I FED nox \ Q UIL~ SIGN CONTROL rmtl AY \ \ /~fEp ~ jj , \ vp VA V'L \ • ' . I~ I tcus TWOODST 1Cl9R HO9MP0)E I II'yy?~ I\ 1I II (l \ ~ / 'b {l/l Il l ~E I '":e • m I TAE MULCH: V MAN. BEEPPIG HI. 1 / ( / / It"• AWAY FROM DRUNK L\\ SOIL 6NICERMEPPFIARED \ \ J G j LACED F 1SORL 601E MU(P E "Bal ROPE6ATTOPCFBKLSHAIL BE \ \ \ \ e\ J \ \ / / NOCUT.HREdgOECiPEGRN-DPY>OABLE OF MATE1Wl BU AM \ \ / - \ ~ / \l \ / 411 I I= 111 I I &VLLLBE TOTKLYPEMOYEO. \ \ \ ' ~ - ~ - I- ~ - SCARE I H \ - - ~ - BACKFILL WITH PPEPAREO MX OF]5% \ / 4 I 14PPP IMPg1TED C0111PO4TAND TOP60RAND \ \ \ / ~ \ - O'w~ pXpAll T5%NATNE SOIL \ / 1 1CJAE DIA.MPI. • / \ \ \ \ • \ \ \ \ T 11 TPX LOTMW I UIID6NRBED NATNESpL \ \ \ \'~•IAI~ NOTE: STAKETREE90NLY IFNEEDEDIWD \ RENAVE AFTER 3YEA941.WSMUM 1• I I \ \ I II y, \ \ \ I ISEOG 1 TREE PLANTINGIDETAIL \ Li I i. I -F°RL I I `n \ >ss rsm \ \ \ \ 1AEM \ SHRUBS SHALL BE SWIRLY 1SPIP HIGHERINREUTIONTO I \ ~FNSNEO GRACE MULCNrMW \ I \ \ 11 ` SING .t ICTREES RODYS DESICCATED - - L EDSOLLH SCMUF \ L \ l' {BGAttET/ / - : o. 9CARIfY PIT N BOTTOM, iWmm(B') MINN. I f I 1sEOY. 3XOPMETERO I \ \ I • IAMB{ ~/111y~~/ SALL 2 SHRUB PLANTING DETAIL \ I\ I I?Et( PLANT LEGEND \ TLO\nw I 1 ( / ( I II I. SIN CATEGORY SYMBOL SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMOHNAME 6RE \ \ I / YI / l OI I G' TAX LOT fB:p TREES ACED AmvMm~5u VW/ Sun V.4YMCLM 1.75 vl CMN GrPFU>EeFtlue TPH,dw FWB.. CaP- Hunoe.m 1.71 nl PILE Poe.A 4. B..e. a'.a SIM PICP Pbm W^Lem DPW B>Xex Bbe Spam T.B.1 PMV, Plnutllegb Y.Melxyryg2MP VFMamFds Pynmtl owe T.B'W SEGO SemwYlup:cn plpeMrvm 6 TRB; Tmdolwdl yr SK, Wn 1 sm ZELV zNPN... w;> GMdd` vm.p. Gn.n Lo-n., ,lfim / ( ri, / . Tex LOr.poO SW/BS. A 0 ARM RCS A AnbFWp" CVFK Emm tlCerpelAW®rie AND / } OCRFD` _ GIIOLPAMID SEND PIM1o>&N w.vJ MT.On' . Hmm:E 9 MC®IN 5,4 , I 6E~ BERG naxe nnH DenNt awmny sOm \ \ QUSSES BERA G.NeKS BaMeryA'ALPpppnn' R.LevJ:=.1 Bad \ CAI:{ old. 'Polls S.'K.II FmnW K.d FPNIVFft9Pr RmdGme IN, CARK Cve.SepslIN.n,W1 Weaplnp KNASgpe 1pN \ cmm ChhPodenll.r lreWepl. BR'ieyed Rxio. 1pv \ EIAE' Eweepnn.EMrpM EEWge'.&I-Mmy 50>I FORE FmytW 1. Yymra~G%1 LymnW Gold FV.)AN 6pv \ GARB G.eM e4Wm CPPdISIkTPMPl flow NUMB H.mmm NP.•e:ey' ORM.n H.,M- fpm qLAVA' Lev.MUY.ryu1R0 WnaMp layMer t0 in 10 LONP LWmn Plod, %MIHOneaolb 30 PIIM PMa Mmo Myt•FM lope) IMLOTSOAI RMA .-W AN Roemnry Son] Spr.e Numlls YrJdtlnN' OCtlrym. Spin 101 spm' sPpen putm.Pr.• Blwl W.MUP Sp., 5Rd SE.MIKES E-Ion Col.S.q Mh H.hand NOPNm9DKp.e TAAm. I- - µ1r BbewtlWOMBen MY HeCM.NHOPMU t.pWoL \ - 'CJe>nWWr'hMAw' 'Hadd> W Hep4F>SN1]Ar51R'm'rr.povnbenaWmn NOTES 1. PV4E B' LOMPO6TROPSOROIENOIN KL iPEEel1D 6NRU0 PIANTWOME4S IXGEPT WNEAE RNASNAEADYBEpJ TAK LOTSIM INSTALLED. COWMTROMOIL BLEND AVAMBLE FROM CMMR SMD AIm GMYEI. 2INSTALL SOIL BLEND IN W UFTSAND DLL THORWGHLYTO BURR) WIMSTNG SOL S. PIPNT KLTREES PV D SHRUBS PER DETAIL 1 S T U SHALLAPPROVE AL- PIANTIAYOUTPRKRTOINSTKIATION. SEED ALLAREAS H71TIFIEO WRN SEED MX PER MAWFACNREAS SPECFILATCNS; VEPYY GEM1WOibNPNO RESEED ANYELMEMEX 5. MULCHPLANTINGAREASAFTER INSTAL MNOFPW MATENALYATNYWDMKWLTOB CREp 6.APPLYOEERSPMYTOALLNEWPWJT6PMMTOMDRJLLOJ/WGWSTALL ON T. FPUM0101B INSTALLED PRRGRTO PERMPIJENTRNK*N3. PRONDETEAO'OMRYFENCING TOKLTREE9 ttf PROTECT FROMI OEER. FEMME AFTER 1 TEAR ~ Ti TAXLOTWX ~N ) PLANTING PLAN S ro • so w \ 1 ytl7 LAURIE SAGER r m i s>a: ; o A a">S~ Rc 3 CALDERA BREWING COMPANY' W 590 CLOVER LANE c a N g as a s, .gym ? AND ASSOCIATES LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS INC Q ASNUND, OREGON Imo' ,.o ~K _ oS 700 MISTLETOE ROAD, SUITE 201 _ b J JFf 9f CT 6 ASHLAND, OREGON 97520 I lillll IIII III II II II II III i III lilll II'I illl III II II IIi!IIII lll. I III !F -ii IIIIIII11111111 it I II III 111111111! 11111 I IIIIII III I I I lilll lh~111111 ;1 111 1 lll!Ilillllll II lll~lillllillllll, II lrl 11111111 llnullC l I Ii I II 'I I I I 'III 1 I I I I I I II I I i I 11 I I II I III I Y II i l I ,['1 II II I II II P II II II II II II II I I II I ILII II II I II II tl I I II II II Il•II„I IIIIII II III i II II II I I II II I I. II II I IIII II I II ILII II ~ ~ I' I III I I .I I ~I I~;I I I I I ~I 11 1;11 .IIII I III irllill II IIIIIIIIII!IIIIIIIIIII III!IIII II I III III ~ II I I ' ~ I~I ~ ~ ~:IIIIIIII~~IIIIIII slll1111111~..:.- ' I ICI IIII I I I I I ! II i I II I .III I I I i I III ~ I ~ I ~ EAST ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8'-1'-0' I I I I III I I II I I .o III II 1111111 i ~I~ ! I ~ ' iI , II I ~ i! II. ` I! I ~ I I I I I i I; II ~.R ; _a'a , s J I IIIIII !.I Lllc ill IIIIII_IIII!Illli I III I III I I~~II ' I ' ' ~ I ~ I I ! I I ~ ~ ~ MAN r~~ I - 111 II I I I I (..IIIIII I I lu lgi~ll IIII!': IIII ° `~I~ 'I I! II I I !oul I _ li IIII II p 11 NORTH ELEVATION SCALE: 118'=1'-0" Sl~ETM7 IUII!III!Iplll!il lP lillll hill'IllilIIIIIIIIIIII11;, 1111111111'.1 II II 11,11111!1111111111 111 III II II III III11111Hi'I !111 111 1111 11 111 1111!!111 j11111]1111!!1111111 !1 11 1111 I 1-1711 IIII ICI!'IIIIIp11!III11111111111lillii 1111liIIii III . I ! i I !j' I I 1' ' I I !I i I t. I 1 III II I I ; ; ~I ~ I I I III ~I I I II I!'~; III I Hi I I ► II I ! 11 Iil ~ III'.. VIII ~ 111 i I i~!.~ ill i!.I ~ ;l I I ~ I.II! rv o : 1 , I' II II I Il it 11111! 111 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 li !III I I I I I 1 l i I I III I~ I ~II li ! I! ; I ~ it II I I'. ►1 I I II I I I II I! ~I II I II II li it I I II II u I , ^ `IR ! I ! I ! I I i ' IiIt ! ► ; ; I 'I ! i ( I I►''! I I II 11 1® I I II i I I II®I ill 11111111 I AIR I ! I 1111H111111011 11111111 II li li it II li I II II II II I II II , I I I I I I :I b II !I II II P II I I.: , ( ! i l' li I ~ I I ! 1 , I I I is III ii 1 i' ! U11111!;1111114:11119 H R11111 11 Mg- 1141 I I; l l I III I I WEST ELEVATION SCALE II I ~I, II I I II III 111 11 it I I'~ I I II I 'I I i ; t~ , ,fill I' ; (III I ~ I I 'I ~I I, ! ,j III I' ; I I l ,I j I I j l I I I I ~ ;I ! lI ! Illii III I I 'Ii ~'1 IiI!! ;I 1 II I:I ~~!jII 1111111 ~ ; I I' I I!' - ~.1~ I I I II ! ~ I i II I I L j i ~I I I I I I I i i it I! I ' II 11 I II I j !j I it ' i Ij it I I ' III ! .III! I I~ a' ~ , . ' f I ,I I~ l I I! II MAR 07 fG;i - aov rri-EL`Evr nviv - - - - - SCALE: 1/8"-1'-0 ~ 4:If) r SHEUA-I 2121/11 Letter of Understanding Between: 3 „ hm M)ills; Caldera Brewing Company (Caldera) FE~,2 2 2011 ~t`et SM R Ry r i t _ v a Lt y 3£ p. vt, T,xs ik c 4 r _ e d ~ •c z t :''x xxS=alv 1 i1 -r~ 1. L1~~ t.l { ~ 'AA fy~ tY v a s j fi< }r r 4'riiCt Wc-,3 f. ~i4nt`~ } < Rrchazd & Linda Hood & Harvey Remholz (Neighbors) n' {I i y~ ~ 6 x ~ Ay ~r The letter. of understanding details the mitigation items verbally agreed upon by Caldera and i' eighbors on'Saturday 'Febmary 5, 201 1, where Caldera and Neighbors,°'along with Mark'Knox, Land Use Planning Consultant arid Laurie Sager, Landscape Architect, met at the Neighbor's residences (785 and 795 Oak Knoll Drive, Ashland; Oregon) to discuss Caldera's proposal to construct a new brewing facility on the properties located at the end of Clover Lane in Ashland (Tax Lots 391E 14AA 6900 & 7000 and 391E 14AD 7000). THEREFORE, the agreed upon mitigation measures relating to this Letter of Understanding are as follows: 1) Conditions of Approval. Caldera agrees that is shall submit this agreement to the City Council of Ashland for its meeting tentatively scheduled on Marcos 15, 2011 on the Annexation of the subject property, Planning Action 2010-01570 and request that the obligations specified herein shall be adopted by the City as conditions of approval for 2010-01570. Caldera shall submit said agreement to the City as soon as possible, to ensure that said materials shall be part of the public record available for review prior to the hearing 2) Revised Grading Plan: Caldera agrees to amend the Grading Plan to add additional earth berming as identified on Exhibit C.1, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, generally described as the area immediately south of the truck turn-around area. The additional earth berm is approximately 15' higher in the southwest comer of the turn around area tapering to approximately 2' as the berming extends toward the east., Additional earth berming, in concert with lowered truck loading/unloading area as identified on Exhibit C.1, is intended to minimize visibility of loading/unloading area, but preserve hillside views to the west. I 3) Revised Landscaping Plan: Caldera agrees to amend the Landscape Plan (including any related landscape plans) to add trees and shrubs on and within the general vicinity of said earth berating with the intent to minimize visibility of Neighbors residences. 1 3) Additional Landscaping After Initial Planting: At the time of landscape planting and prior to final irrigation installation, Caldera and Neighbors agree to meet on site to add additional trees or hedges to ensure screening. Neighbors may select up to ten trees and/or hedges, in an amount not to exceed $-1000.00, to be paid by Caldera, and Caldera shall install said landscaping at its sole expense, with the intent to ensure screening is reasonably adequate. 4)'Freeway Pylon Sign Caldera agrees to remove site's existing Freeway ,Pylon Sign at h> timeFOf project construction -v y, y ti R , 5 - 14- b? r t ~',k 4 'f .,rr -°ns 4 ~t l j . 5)*Exterior Ueliting Other than lights for secuitty or unloading Caldera; agrees to lirmt - yhght glarekas canbe~seen from Neigh'hors residences All lighting should be ",`down lor projected directly on subject building or on Caldera's loading and unloading areas. 6) Compressor%Cooler Relocation Caldera agrees to relocate project compressors/coolers along west side of building-(area between building and,I-5 Freeway)., In the'event the City prohibits'Caldera from relocating said compressors/coolers, Caldera.shall install alternative `methods of mitigating the noise from said compressors/coolers such a5 through construction of a wall and landscaping enclosing said equipment. 7) Fenced Storage Relocation: Caldera agrees to relocate fenced storage area currently located along properties shared I-5 Freeway property line to the area as identified on plan C.1 and L-3.0, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. i 8) Excessive Noise: Caldera agrees to adhere to City of Ashland noise ordinance. 9) Bio-swale / Drainage System: Caldera agrees to maintain drainage system as design d by project's Civil Engineer and as identified on final Civil Engineering plans (as approved by Ashland Building Department). Such plans shall identify industry recognized screening improvements and include a periodic maintenance schedule to maintain flows and reduce rodent invasion. 10) Appeal Rights. In consideration for this agreement, Neighbors agree they will not appeal or oppose the Planning Commission's final approval of Planning Action 2010- 01570. Notwithstanding the foregoing, unless and until the City Council adopts this agreement to ensure that adequate mitigation is imposed, Neighbors retain the right to appeal or oppose the Annexation to be heard by the City Council in Planning Action 2010- 01570 and to further raise issues related to mitigation before the City Council and on appeal or other related action. NOTICE: The Neighbors are advised to review Letter of Understanding with an Attorney licensed to practice within the State of Oregon. 1.,~, ~ t~ 1 ( M1 f A yy 5 FE 2 2 2011 z!z I Feb 11 11 07:57p Ulysses J. Arretteig (561)743-2722 p.1 CITY OF ASHLAND IRREVOCABLE CONSENT TO ANNEXATION The undersigned, referred to in this document as "Owner" whether singular or plural, owns or is the purchaser under a recorded land sale contract of real property in Jackson County, Oregon, described below and referred to in this document as "the property": See attached Exhibit "A" In consideration of the application for annexation and subsequent connections from the property to City of Ashland services, Owner declares and agrees that the property shall be held, sold, and conveyed. subject to the following covenants, conditions, and restrictions which shall constitute covenants running with the land and shall be binding on all parties, their heirs, successors and assigns, having any right, title, or interest in the property or any part thereof: Whenever a proposal to annex the property is initiated by the City of Ashland or otherwise, Owner shall consent and does consent to the annexation of the property to the City of Ashland. Owner agrees this consent to annexation is irrevocable. Dated this day of . p~ 2011. Signature: ~w:p- ~1 GYs~~'~ Owner Mori cls. State of Oregon• ) wsmcfl) ss: County ofackseta ) Personally appeared the above named } evieiP g ~eaC and acknowledged the foregoing instrument be his voluntary act and deed. JEZEBEL RO MGM " 2M2^^~ otary P c o F-1 QYic~r- 411 rycammbsw eooeaztss My ommiss ion expires: Se~J Itf .90 (-1 City Ashland 20 E. . Main Street Ashland, Oregon 97520 w oshland.ons i i i Richaz Hood, ighbor Date a `!y 54 # ~'a^ F'' sir v z`. s n, kt 1. ~~v., tC '7a{ v1s# 4 t S '"x>w=~fl vbc q0., Neighbor `u i uDate m: 3 y x a y a °~vf - T 1 '.fer < t x 25, is, 2Y, - F e.. r+.. r f } 3 -.z Y d ~a W3 -F •~~i~litolD) n.~ ~^'oala~l~'~ d...Sxbn ,.f "`wiz.-.. 'wl,' ~'n f sar 3T~:: r, 1-9 ,.Andrew Remholz; Neighbor' Date x - 4 L. Jl J £ > iY.l r,- sh p " g'S- Cs y P } Y ~1 Y .,y r~ df i w ,y~ 1{ 1 z x t x 3S Y1 _ ~t5 i~ ii'? tr n eMe,~ z- 4 µo'5 rcp r i .31 a t c 26 xYn r ;91afl 'Z 4 k' v - r vi Caldera Brp g Gompariy s ' , ?5 { B'y Jim Mills; President v z Date }fi ; at ..„,h v a- ~as~(e~ -4 ;n t h FEB l 2 2011 =isif C " i MAP of SURVEY FOR JIM MILLS Located in: AsxIAND s \~_~aDL_sPN~lg~nvn_ THE NE 1/4 SEC. 14, T. 393., RTE, WM. I JACKSON COUNTY : OREGON : : i3iz :ir F::::::;' :-:::si: i is?:: %.S:s \ SURVEY NARRATIVE TO COMPLY WITH PARAGRAPH 200.250 ,50 1E 14ai TAY IaT SP 1E iMB OREGON REVISED STATUTES TAX taT 300 i Purpeee: To eu and monument Mar free% of land deeerMed as Pa 7 and Parcel 2 M Inefnmrnt No. 2000-0.72070 and lrh=*nf Mo. 09-30410 of the . '1 u IE I/ deed records of Jenloen County. Oregon for annezotlon TAX Lm 3000 Into the City of Ashland. i _ and n - 2 at bra t The N pMtY described as bParesh een pro 1 2 20 0 h a per filed m No. 2017 . surveyed ane menrun _ and rf amo d per mw nmey q office for Survey mMal that o rlabdehtl Mb o/Or ...:....1 that art boundary &I th for Purposes of this survsy. :::::::::::TA IE I`ukB JI The em boundary ot co property controlled by Gr N 39 :1.;~;:.:_:;:::3:;:;:'i::;:: TIJt IDT 3100 ImhumeM No. 99_ I 3 10 WOO boundary , mar Is by b the subdhistol, and wM controlled 1-5 he rlphf-et-~. I set t Is Southerly comer r of metract aqy the aYy of e Intereeellm PeiM of f the M right-of-way SubdNbim dm. The - - P W am - One with the being annexed InahMr a Perotm of the 0 3e E 14V1 that to new Ma 1 h5 -5 to located - TAX LOT 3200 anon-o S to yh a n e S7en3 from Ashland! ~ highway Street, loway No area has been and 3e 1E 1418 ` located m'tl per ad survey No. 20291. y - Trimble 56 nbodo TAX ID'f 200 i ~InsturuPen) ue anW for this survey i t` I IE IcAA 5 TAX 1DI 0600 11...... n 1E 14a TAX lay 100 WASHINGTON ST. y+ SR IE 1410 ' \ 7~i1X 'LOT ' JIM I" IDT 2800 ......_.~t::ii:::h:Sav :?:7 ...i....:: 11:11111 . w (WP PEN fs::5i~::..~x. 'id'i a s Isar PAR Sl 2 - PARRIION PLAT P-52-2005 PARCEL I S 18eN DRIVE .......WISEY].PS'.: .1............x:............1 ~Y s~`" N..3M ddRl P0/ 1 IAA f \ . Dsr tam-o3w7D pz y I 9 :0'AROEL 1) n 4 k. ARG 0~ NOIDIATnN 1E 2425 ` Z~ ae 'a - HOFFBUHR d ASSOCIATES, INC. ' R 660 COEF VIEW DRIVE. SURE 201 TAX 1E1- Lor 2300 ` .dP _ TAx lar Tadg g * MEDF(5441j77 1 ~ - r "3w Dar Na 2mR-daai0 D.a 3 g BY: DARRELL L HUCK PIS No. 2013 39 fE 241E S/N loin (PARC61) g. SCALE 1 Inch =200' February 2, 2011 TAX tar tao_~. D~ T'r pf. g i 3tl3 BASIS OF BEARDiR N.O.A.A. Trw Meridian al the ` ` yp EpEp'E/ : i north-south No hm[ru of section 14.The mamfw c~. Yy ap~iSPRWNs line for mh ss odlTlsntl Nos ; rvY Is the earl Orr at filled survey S\ No. 18678 3. fE fue d O Sal 6 -D. S 202 hlp pin well PfasNo oop TAX tin 2DD ~ IrrtT Na Nn-3wto o.k damped ed 'D. Huck uak IS 2013'. all • Found 5/6' Iron pin pay S/N 20173 unless noted otherwise 30 1E 141C Found 3e b. dho In coup, kWnMW as point no 1006 TAX tin 300 \ / Per Sure" No. 20261 (nperled to be 0.20' right at os"Iterlina) D/R - Deed Racced, Jackson Coudy, Oregon l TAX Im n , F u g ~ TaIINW proNfl3Nr~M ` d S/N M Scam Number . ` ` E $ u isl air az DR 1E 14AV g~\.~ . CPRO I TAX lm 7200 LAND SURVEYOR % ' e/n wxx 3e fE fuD Y 8. seppee 6/60/301f TAX lar 7300 ( TTT i (35! IAAA TAX LOn clap *T ) (35 E WAD TAX LOM IOW) e r"k a I,, ,4 % FEB 08 2G'.1 C j ow Ashland i EXHIBIT A (ANNEXATION DESCRIPTION) Commencing at the Northeast corner of Government Lot 1 in Section 14, Township 39 South, Range 1 East, Willamette Meridian, Jackson County, Oregon; thence South 00°00'21 East, along the east line of said Lot 1, 1023.69 feet to the southeast corner of land partition filed for record November 14, 2005 as Partition Plat No. P-82-2005 of the records of Partition Plats in Jackson County, Oregon and is on file in the office of the Jackson County Surveyor as No. 18963 for the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence along the southerly boundary of said land partition, WEST 387.95 feet to the easterly right-of-way line of Interstate Highway 5 (I-5); thence along said right-of-way line, South 18°12'09" East 47.83 feet; thence continue along said I easterly right-of-way, South 269811211 East 533.02 feet to the northerly line of that tract of land described in Instrument No. 94-32851 of the Official Records of Jackson County, Oregon; thence along the northerly line of said tract, North 89°59'39" East (Record East) 35.92 feet to the northeasterly comer thereof; thence along the southeasterly line of said tract, South 42°36'39" West (Record South 42°37' West) 34.34 feet to the easterly right-of-way line of the aforesaid Interstate Highway 5; thence along said right-of-way, South 26°38' 12" East 207.90 feet to the east line of Government Lot 2 in the aforesaid Section 14; thence along the east line of said Lot 2 and Lot 1, North 00°00'21" West 789.31 feet to the point of beginning. I ALSO CONSIDERED TOGETHER WITH Tax Lot 7100 of Assessor's Map 39 1E 14AD which is being considered for annexation on the recommendation of the Staff Advisor pursuant to AMC 18.106.040, pending owner's consent to annexation; being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the Northeast comer of Government Lot 1 in Section 14, Township 39 South, Range 1 East, Willamette Meridian, Jackson County, Oregon; thence South 00°00'21" East, along the east line of said Lot 1, 1439.04 feet; thence leaving said east line, South 42036'39" West 145.00 to the northeast corner of that tract of land described in Instrument No. 94-32851 of the Official Records of Jackson County, Oregon for the POINT OF BEGINNING; thence along the southerly line of said tract, South 42°36'39" West (record South 42°37' West) 34.34 feet to the easterly right-of Ivay line ^f L^terstate Highway No. 5; thence along said right- ` of-way line, North 26°38' 12" West 28.27 feet to the northerly line of the aforesaid Instrument No. 94-32851; thence along said northerly line, North 89°59'39" East (record East) 35.92 feet to the point of beginning. TOGETHER WITH and including that portion of the Interstate Highway No. 5 right-of-way located southerly, along Interstate Highway No. 5, from Ashland Street, in the City of Ashland, to Highway station 1593+32.8 RL'.9,iY4rru PROFESS ICNAl, LADJT) R1TRV ;Y.OR _ r. QAEGON MWARY 4. NU Mau d mat i 2f1 Darrell L. Huck L.S. 2023 - Oregon Expires 6/30/2011 Hoffbuhr & Associates, Inc. (10032 annex desc r3.doc) q i p Ir . # , Y, E FEB 0 8 2011 L,q of AsSlfled Fief vYic~ ~ouni~+~ I 02/08/11 If you are able to submit at the planning commission meeting please include the following on my behalf. Planning Action: 2010-01570 Subject Property: 590 Clover Lane Owner/Applicant: Caldera Brewing Company I am raising an objection to the approval of the proposed Annexation, Zone change and Site design for Caldera Brewery based on the following violations of city building codes. • Section 18.40.050 subsection C This building exceeds more than 40' in height. • Section 18.68.030 Each lot Requires a minimum width of 25' of frontage. • Section 18.80.020 subsection 9 The driveway as designed exceeds 50'. When the long driveway is taken into consideration this exceeds the maximum length of 500', also creating a safety issue as there is only one outlet. • Section 18.76.060 Flag driveway requires screening • No record of analysis findings by the city on the element of need for annexation of properties. Please note that we are currently in negotiation with Caldera Brewery. We are currently working through the building planner Mark Knox, representing Caldera and Jim Mills, on an agreement to improve the adjacent residential exposure of the commercial brewery operation. If the agreement is successful, we would then remove these objections. Thank you for your consideration Linda & Richard Hood 785 Oak Knoll Drive Ashland, OR 97520 A ~Z~, "15 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Public Hearing on Water and Wastewater Utility Rates Meeting Date: March 15, 2011 Primary Staff Contact: Lee Tuneberg Department: Administrative Services E-Mail: tuneberl@ashland.or.us Secondary Dept.: Public Works Secondary Contact: Mike Faught Approval: Martha Benn Estimated Time: 30 minutes Question: Will Council increase Water Utility Rates 10% including the potable water irrigation surcharge during summer months and increase Wastewater Rates 6% with a combined, average monthly impact (excluding irrigation) on a single family residence of $4.29 per month? Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that Council adopt new rates consistent with staff's proposal or as amended through discussion. The additional residential monthly cost is estimated at $2.99/month for water and $1.30/month for sewer. These estimates are made on the "average" of all residential bills excluding large meter types and multi-family dwellings. To reduce confusion and to facilitate orderly adjustments, staff proposes that approved rate increases for these funds are staggered with Water adjustments effective May 1, 2011 and Wastewater rates on June 1, 2011. Background: Each year the City must evaluate the need to adjust utility rates. This involves evaluating revenue trends and changes in operations. Often, contractual requirements, environmental mandates and the economy impact proposed increases. Staff also considers whether rate increases are affordable for residents. Staff proposals balance the needs of the utility with affordability to the consumer in the current economy. The actual dollar impact is provided for to illustrate the impact on customers. Common issues between both utilities are: 1. Federal and/or state mandates for treatment that must be met. 2. Treatment costs like chemicals, filtration and processing are increasing. 3. Considerable, aging infrastructure that requires routine, ongoing maintenance. 4. Debt service load is a significant element of the monthly utility charge. 5. Major additions to the system are needed and some components require upgrading or replacement. This fiscal year the City did not raise rates for Transportation, Storm water and Electric systems. Staff finds the need in the Water and Wastewater funds significant enough to recommend increases. Based on the information available at this time a minimum rate increase in the 10% range should be recommended for the Water Fund and 6% for Wastewater. Page 1 of 6 CITY OF ASHLAND Budgeted and Proposed Increases 2011 Budget 2011 Proposed 0.0%. Water Fees 8.0% T(.0% Wastewater Fees 8.0% The estimated impact of such adjustments, if done "across the boards" on all rates is estimated as: Fund Water Wastewater Operational Rate Increase 10% 6% Additional Revenue (I" year) $432,000 $201,000 Monthly impact on a SFR 52.99 $1.30 The above table primarily addresses operational needs only. Additional amounts should be considered to cash fund capital projects or to pay for related debt service. Often we are asked how Ashland's rates compares to those communities around us. Comparisons between agencies are tricky for many reasons. Some of those are: 1. Rates change often and at different times of the year for those compared. 2. Supply/collection systems and related operational costs vary by community, 3. Policies for financing and managing enterprises can impact rates, 4. Size of system, community and economics can cause variations. For informational purposes we offer the following tables of existine average rates: Water & Sewer Billing Comparisions Average Household Usage of 700 Cubit Feet per Month Ashland Grants Pass Talent Jacksonville Phoenix Medford Water $25.71 Water $14.76 Water $24.15 Water $18.31 Water $13.49 Water $9.87 Sewer $21.60 Sewer $29.59 Sewer $18.40 Sewer $15.90 Sewer $15.90 Sewer $15.90 $47.31 $44.35 $42.55 $34.21 $29.39 $25.77 Water Fund and Proposed Rate Increase Last year the City raised rates 8% and added a surcharge for residential irrigation of 2% on the top rate teir. Weather was such that reduced water consumption was achieved. Unfortunately, the 8% increase did not generate sufficient revenue to aid the fund at meeting fixed operational costs included in the base charge and those costs that are also covered by the charges on consumption. This resulted in further weakening of the fund's financial capacity. The fund is undergoing a master plan study that will likely lead the City to consider an overhaul of the existing water rates methodology. Such a change may not be up for consideration until later this calendar year. A significant change in methodology will take considerable time and effort by council Palle 2 of 6 CITY OF ASHLAND and staff before it can be implemented. Thus, staff is recommending rate changes at this time as an interim solution to the fund's financial condition. The table below shows recent history of rate increases, the budgeted increase and the proposed rate adjustment. rr r: r r 11: 11' I I I rr 1 rrr r 7'Approved Fees' 4.7.8% 10.0% 8%* 8.0% 10.0% with a surcharge for irrigation in summer months. Staff is in the process of reviewing recent revenue and expense trends in preparation for the 2012 budget process. An overview of the Water Fund with operations as the primary focus and including preliminary estimates is as follows: FY 2010-2011 Comparison Water Water Water Water Water and Three Year Projection • Projected 2012 2013 2014 CarryForwardfrom Prior Year $ 1,755,937 $ 1,851,885 $ 1,860,588 $ 1,623,246 $ 1,524,258 Revenue: Charges for Service $ 4,718,710 $ 4,320,900 $ 4,752,900 $ 5,235,900 $ 5,499,900 Additional Revenue (May & June) 72,000 79,200 43,600 45,800 Taxes & Intergovernmental 343,540 302,832 1,844,050 50,000 50,000 Miscellaneous 36,017 31,499 31,200 25,000 25,000 Interest 24,015 13,500 13,200 13,200 13,200 System Development Charges 69,816 100,000 75,000 75,000 75,000 Interfund loan - 800,000 Financing & other 2,626,256 - - - Total Revenue 7,818,354 5,640,731 6,795,550 5,442,700 5 708 900 Total (Carry Forward t Revenue) S 9,574,291 $ 71492,616 $ 8,656,138 $ 1065 946 $ 7,233J58 Expense: Personal Services $ 1,602,507 $ 1,581,849 $ 1,657,196 $ 1,643,000 $ 1,726,000 Materials & Services 2,538,907 2,520,567 4,005,646 2,521,000 2,597,000 Existing Debt Service 635,867 633,317 725,190 486,746 481,478 Interfund Loan Repayment - - 200,000 200,000 200,000 SDC Projects & Debt 583,495 437,295 444,860 690,942 540,500 Other- Projects/Equipment 761,515 459,000 - - - Contingency 150,000 Total Expenditures 6,272,291 5,632,028 7,032,892 5,541,688 5,544,978 Projected Ending Fund Balance $ 3 302 000 $ 1,860,588 $ 1 623 246 $ 1,524,258 $ 1,688,180 Less: Projected Restricted (SDC) $ 1,499,419 $ 1,858,629 $ 1,488,769 $ 872,827 $ 407,327 Target (City policy of 20% of Revenue) 900,000 900,000 975,000 1,064,000 1,117,000 Difference $ 902,581 $ (898,041) $ 840 523 $ (412,569) $ 163.853 Proposed increase 10.00/6 10.0% 5.0"/0 5.0"/0 Annualized Revenue from Increase $ 432,000 $ 483,000 $ 264,000 $ 277,000 Omitted from the table are capital projects to be paid from borrowing and Contingency for 2012-2014. Page 3 of 6 IPFFM CITY OF ASHLAND The table above shows the importance of the proposed increase. With the estimates and proposed increases the fund gradually reduces the shortfall in the Difference line. However, this improvement does not address funding for capital projects. A 10% increase on all rates is reflected in the table. The percentage increase could be different between base charges and consumption rates but that may not be more effective than an across the board adjustment. Staff recommends that the City wait for the master plan and sufficient time to evaluate methodology changes before implementing significant changes in base charges, blocks and block rates. That formal rate review should ensure that the approved structure's base and commodity rates adequately address fixed and variable charges for a community that has significant seasonal variations including pressures caused by temperature, irrigation and dramatic shifts in tourism needs. Irrigation Staff is recommending that the City continue with the residential irrigation rates during the summer as was approved last year. Summer 2010 was probably not a good test of what this additional rate block will do for the water supply during a period of extended high temperatures and severe draw downs from irrigation. With a 10% rate increase it is estimated that this added block rate would cost an average of S 18.00 per month for high water use by approximately 500 residential customers. That impact (the amount above what they would normally pay for water use above 3600 cubic feet in a month) can be reduced by the consumer through conservation efforts such as drip systems in garden areas to avoid over watering and waste. Wastewater Fund and Proposed Rate Increase The City increase rates 9% last year and it improved revenues 6.7%. The City also refinanced the DEQ loan which helped to take pressure off rates. This table shows recent history of rate increases, the budgeted increase and the proposed rate increase recommended: M. M4. willill Wastewater Fees 3.0% 20.0% 9.0% 8.0% With refinancing the DEQ loan the State requirement for a reserve to pay debt service went away. Staff still recommends setting money aside throughout the year to ensure adequate cash flow for the semi-annual payments. Staff is in the process of reviewing recent revenue and expense trends in preparation for the 2012 budget process. An overview of the Wastewater Fund with operations as the primary focus and including preliminary estimates is as follows: Page 4 of 6 CITY OF -ASH LAN D FY 2010-2011 Comparison Wastewater Wastewater and Three Yea ection le r 2013 r. Carry Forward from prior year $ .3,326,484 E 3,496,009 E 3,131,224 $ 2,729,818 $ 2,735,446 Revenue: Charges for Service $ 3,348,200 $ 3,357,000 $ 3,558,000 $ 3,737,000 3,925,000 Additional Revenue (June) 17,000 14,800 15,600 16,400 Taxes 1,648,000 1,648,000 1,728,000 1,780,000 1,833,000 Miscellaneous 8 intergovernmental 1,000 - - 1,000 1,000 Interest 23,326 30,000 31,000 32,000 33,000 System Development Charges 39,055 40,000 40,200 41,200 42,400 Interfund loan - Financing 8 other 361,250 324,400 Total Revenue 5,420,831 5,416,400 5,372,000 5,606,800 5,850,800 Total (Carry Forward d Revenue) $ 8,747,315 $ 8,912,409 $ 8,503,224 $ 8,336,618 $ 8,586 246 Expense: Personal Services $ 919,210 $ 902,104 $ 966,947 $ 1,015,000 $ 1,066,000 Materials & Services 2,580,093 2,604,100 2,762,824 2,845,000 2,930,000 WWTP Debt Service 1,771,979 1,771,979 1,641,900 1,639,100 1,629,300 Other- Projects/Equipment 366,750 123,500 - - - SDC Projects 574,750 353,500 373,162 73,500 20,000 Other Debt Service 54,575 26,002 28,573 28,572 28,572 Contingency 151,000 Total Expenditures 6,418,357 5,781,185 5,773,406 5,601,172 5,673,872 Projected Ending Fund Balance $ 2,328,958 $ 3131 224 $ 2,729,818 $ 2,735,446 2 912 374 Less: Projected Restricted $ 1,484,671 1,514,091 1,181,129 1,148,829 1,203,529 Target & Cash Reserve 1,613,125 1,565,000 1,600,000 1634 000 1,671,000 Difference $ (768,838) $ 52,133 $ (51,311) $ 47 383 $ 37,845 Proposed increase 6.00% 5.0% 5.0% 5.01/0 Annualized Revenue from Increase $ 201,000 $ 179,000 $ 188,000 $ 197,000 Omitted from the table are capital projects to be paid from borrowing and Contingency for 2012-2014. The table above shows the importance of the proposed increase. With the estimates and proposed increases the fund "manages" the Difference line, keeping it near zero and providing an adequate ending fund balance to: • Reserve SDC balances • Provide debt service cash • Meet the target for operational needs. However, this improvement does not address funding for budgeted capital projects or those still sitting in the Unfunded Column of the CIP. Summary The proposed increases for these systems will not resolve all financial issues, quickly. They are meant to help improve them this year and into the future. More aggressive adjustments could be pursued to resolve the problems sooner but the impact may be too much for the consumer. Both systems are close on their comprehensive master plan processes and subsequent rate studies. Such studies will evaluate Page 5 of 6 15 CITY OF -ASH LAN D rates required to fund necessary capital and operations and will assist in restructuring our base and consumption rates to be appropriate for our costs and fair to the customer classes. Related City Policies: Financial Management Policy Council Options: Council can: 1. Accept staffs proposal to raise rates. 2. Direct staff to take other steps in funding operations and financing capital needs for either or both funds. 3. Take no action and direct staff on what additional information is needed. Potential Motions: Council moves to approve the attached resolutions (as amended) raising Water rates % May ]s' and implementing summer irrigation rates from June 1 s' to September 30'h each year and raising Wastewater rates % effective June I". Attachments: Water Rate Resolution Wastewater (Sewer) Rate Resolution Page 6 of 6 RESOLUTION NO. 2011- A RESOLUTION REVISING RATES FOR WATER SERVICE PURSUANT TO ASHLAND MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 14.04.030 AND REPEALING RESOLUTION 2010-10. THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The water rate charges and rates as shown on the water rate schedule attached as Exhibit "A" shall be effective for actual or- estimated consumption on or after May.l, 2011. Prorated calculations are permitted for any bills prepared for a partial month or billing period that overlaps the effective date of this Resolution. Miscellaneous Charges and Connection Fees established by previous resolutions remain in effect until revised by separate Council Action. SECTION 2. Copies of this resolution shall be maintained in the Office of the City Recorder. SECTION 3. Classification of the fee. The fees specified in Section 1 and Section 2 of this resolution are classified as not subject to the limits of Section 1 Ib of Article XI of the Oregon Constitution (Ballot Measure 5). SECTION 4. Resolution 2010-10 is repealed. This resolution was duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of March, 2011, and the effective date is May 1, 2011 upon signing by the Mayor. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of March, 2011. John Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: Doug McGeary, Interim Attorney Pagel of 4 EXHIBIT "A" WATER RATE SCHEDULE 10% INCREASE EFFECTIVE MAY 1, 2011 METERED SERVICE All water service provided by the City of Ashland will be in accordance with Chapter 14.04 of the Ashland Municipal Code. 1. WATER RATES' WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS A. MONTHLY SERVICE CHARGE: The basic service charge applies to all metered water services and does not include any water consumption. OLD NEW 0.75 Inch Meter $13.49/month $14.84/month 1 Inch Meter $26.95/month $29.65/month 1.5 Inch Meter $38.42/month $42.26/month 2 Inch Meter $50.61/month $55.67/month 3 Inch Meter $105.81/month $116.39/month 4 Inch Meter $161.76/month $177.94/month 6 Inch Meter $303.31/month $333.64/month 8 Inch Meter $505.49/month $556.04/month B. WATER QUANTITY CHARGE: All customers will be charged the following rates per cubic feet of water used. Single Family Residential Consumption OLD NEW 0 to 300 cf per month $1.54/ccf $1.69/ccf 301 to 1000 cf per month $1.90/ccf $2.09/ccf 1001 to 2500 cf per month $2.53/ccf $2.78/ccf Over 2500 cf per month $3.27/ccf $3.60/ccf Multi-Family Residential Consumption OLD NEW 0 to 300 cf per month per unit $1.54/ccf $1.69/ccf 301 to 1000 cf per month per unit $1.90/ccf $2.09/ccf 1001 to 2500 cf per month per unit $2.53/ccf $2.78/ccf Over 2500 cf per month per unit $3.27/ccf $3.60/ccf Page 2 of 4 Non-Residential Consumption OLD NEW 0 - 50,000 cf per month $2.17/ccf $2.39/ccf Over 50,000 cf per month $2.24/ccf $2.46/ccf C. TID IRRIGATION WATER RATES: Unmetered Service $107.25/acre or portion of an acre-OLD $117.98/acre or portion of an acre-NEW Metered Service Base Service Charge Same as "A" above Water Consumption $0.35/ccf-OLD $0.39/ccf-NEW D. BULK WATER RATE: For water provided on a temporary basis through a bulk meter on a fire hydrant, The following charges apply: OLD NEW Deposit* $1,172.83 $1,290.11 Basic Fee $148.10 $162.91 Cost of Water Same as Commercial *Deposit is refundable less basic fee, cost of water, and any damage to the city meter, valve, wrench, and/or hydrant. E. FIRE PROTECTION SERVICE WATER RATE: This rate shall apply to all fire protection services or fire guards. The basic service charge will be equal to the minimum basic service charge. Water will be billed at commercial rates. 2. RATES OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMITS All rates and charges for water service provided outside the city limits will be 1.5 times the rates for water service provided within the city limits. Page 3 of 4 3. SURCHARGE IRRIGATION RATES - WATER QUANTITY CHARGE All customers will be charged the following rates per cubic feet of water used for the months of June through September. Single Family Residential Consumption OLD NEW 0 to 300 cf per month $1.54/ccf $1.69/ccf 301 to 1000 cf per month $1.90/ccf $2.09/ccf 1001 to 2500 cf per month $2.53/ccf $2.78/ccf 2501 to 3600 cf per month $3.27/ccf $3.60/ccf Over 3600 cf per month $4.25/ccf $4.68/ccf Multi-Family Residential Consumption OLD NEW 0 to 300 cf per month $1.54/ccf $1.69/ccf 301 to 1000 cf per month $1.90/ccf $2.09/ccf 1001 to 2500 cf per month $2.53/ccf $2.78/ccf 2501 to 3600 cf per month $3.27/ccf $3.60/ccf Over 3600 cf per month per unit $4.25/ccf $4.68/ccf Page 4 of 4 RESOLUTION NO. 2011- A RESOLUTION REVISING RATES FOR WASTEWATER (SEWER) SERVICE PURSUANT TO ASHLAND MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 14.08.035 AND REPEALING RESOLUTION 2010-08. THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The wastewater (sewer) rate charges and rates as shown on the wastewater (sewer) rate schedule attached as Exhibit "A" shall be effective for actual or estimated consumption on or after June 1, 2011. Prorated calculations are permitted for any bills prepared for a partial month or billing period that overlaps the effective date of this Resolution. Miscellaneous Charges and Connection Fees established by previous resolutions remain in effect until revised by separate Council Action. SECTION 2. Copies of this resolution shall be maintained in the Office of the City Recorder. SECTION 3. Classification of the fee. The fees specified in Section 1 and Section 2 of this resolution are classified as not subject to the limits of Section I Ib of Article XI of the Oregon Constitution (Ballot Measure 5). SECTION 4. Resolution 2010-08 is repealed. This resolution was duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of March, 2011, and the effective date is June 1, 2011 upon signing by the Mayor. r Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of March, 2011. John Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: Doug McGeary, Interim City Attorney Page t of 4 EXHIBIT "A" SEWER RATE SCHEDULE 6% INCREASE EFFECTIVE JUNE 1, 2011 All sewer service provided by the City of Ashland will be in accordance with Chapter 14.08 of the Ashland Municipal Code. 1. SEWER RATES WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS Single Family Residential May 2010 June 2011 Monthly Service Charge $17.64 $18.70 Quantity Charge per 100 cf $2.64 $2.80 Quantity Charge is based on average winter water consumption in excess of 400 cubic feet (cf) per month. Winter consumption is defined as the average of water meter readings taken in the months of January, February and March. Annually on April 1 the bill will be adjusted based on the water meter readings taken during the previous three months. Single family residential water accounts with no consumption during the months of January, February and March will be based on 700 cubic feet. Multi-Family Residential May 2010 June 2011 Monthly Service Charge per Unit $17.64 $18.70 Quantity Charge per 100 cf $2.64 $2.80 Quantity Charge is based on average winter water consumption in excess of 400 cubic feet per month per unit. Winter consumption is defined as the average of the water meter readings taken in the months of January, February and March. Multi-family residential accounts are all accounts in which more than one residential dwelling is attached to the same water service. Annually on April 1 the bill will be adjusted based on the water readings taken during the previous three months. Multi-family residential water account with no consumption during the months of January, February and March will be based at 500 cubic feet. Two dormitory rooms are equal to one multi-family residential unit. Page 2 of 4 Commercial, Industrial and May 2010 June 2011 Governmental Monthly Service Charge $18.43 $19.54 Quantity Charge per 100 cf $2.93 $3.11 Quantity Charge is based on actual monthly water consumption. Mixed residential and commercial accounts will be billed as commercial. For commercial, industrial or governmental users where monthly water consumption is not measured through city water meters, the sewer rate will be established as follows: The annual water consumption will be determine by an estimate made by the Director of Finance who shall use water consumption records of similar users or water consumption record of past use, if available. The annual water consumption will be multiplied by the Quantity Charge set forth above and the product divided by twelve. The quotient will be added to the Monthly Service Charge set forth above. The sum shall be the monthly sewer rate for the user. This rate shall be effective beginning in the month after the rate is determined until the rate schedule is amended by resolution of the council. At such time the Director shall redetermine the annual water consumption and compute the monthly sewer rate using the formal assets forth above. Water consumption determined in this manner shall be lowered if the user can demonstrate through the use of a meter approved by the city that the user's actual consumption is less than the estimate. 2. ADDJUSTMENTS AND EXEMPTIONS TO COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL SEWER RATES A. If a commercial, industrial or governmental user can demonstrate that the volume of sewage discharged by the user is less than 50% of the water consumed, the City Administrator may adjust the sewer user charge accordingly. Methodology for Special Cases for City Administrator 1. Greenhouses, Churches, and Schools (grades K-12) operating on a nine month school year. May 2010 June 2011 Monthly Service Charge $18.43 $19.54 Quantity Charge per 100 cf $2.93 $3.11 Page 3 of 4 Quantity Charge is based on average winter water consumption. Winter consumption is defined as the average of the meter readings taken in the months of January, February and March. Annually on April 1 the bill will be adjusted based on the water meter readings during the previous three months. 1. Bed and Breakfasts and Ashland Parks Bathroom May 2010 June 2011 Monthly Service Charge $18.43 $19.54 Quantity Charge per 100 cf $2.93 $3.11 Quantity Charge is based on winter water consumption. Winter consumption is defined as the total of water meter readings taken in the months of January, February and March. Annually on April 1 the bill will be adjusted based on the water meter readings during the previous three months. B. Water sold through an irrigation meter is exempt from sewer user charge. 3. SEWER RATES OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMITS A. The sewer user charge shall apply to those sewer users permitted under Section 14.08.030 of the Ashland Municipal Code. B. The sewer rates for outside the City limits shall be two times the sewer charges for inside the City limits. Unmetered residential accounts will be calculated on an average winter usage of 700 cubic feet of water for single family residences, and 500 cubic feet per unit for multi-family residences. Page 4 of 4 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Second Reading of two separate Ordinances, one amending Chapter 18.62 of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance, one amending Chapter 15.10 of the Ashland Municipal Code, and adoption of the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps and Flood Insurance Study. Meeting Date: March 15, 2011 Primary Staff Contact: Brandon Goldman Department: Community Development E-Mail: goldmanb@ashland.or.us Secondary Dept.: None Secondary Contact: Bill Molnar Approval: Martha Bennet, Estimated Time: 10 Minutes Question: Should the Council approve Second Readings of ordinances amending the Ashland Land Use Ordinance Chapter 18.62 (Physical and Environmental Constraints), the Ashland Municipal Code Chapter 15.10 (Flood Damage Prevention Regulations), and revisions to the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps and move both ordinances on to second reading? J Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends the Council adopt the revised FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps, and related Land Use and Building Code amendments regulating development within designated flood hazard areas. Background: The City Council conducted a duly advertised public hearing on March 1, 2011, and approved first reading of the proposed ordinance amendments to the Ashland's Land Use Ordinance (Ch 18.62), and Building Code (Ch 15.10). These ordinance amendments include recommended and mandatory code language proposed for consistency with the Oregon Model Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance, and further approve by reference the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) and Flood Insurance Study for Jackson County and Incorporated Areas (FIS). Subsequent to the First Reading of the proposed ordinances Staff determined that as proposed amendment to the definition of "Development" within the Physical and Environmental Constraints Ordinance (I 8.62.030H4) may be misinterpreted to indicate a Planning Action would be required for even minor alterations to a property within the Floodplain, such as reroofing an existing building, or landscaping. The amended definition was intended only to provide a cross reference to the existing definition of "Development" in the Building Code section. As defined in the building code (15.10.070) any man-made change to improved or unimproved real estate is currently required to obtain a Development Permit from the Building Department. Staff believes eliminating the definition in the Land Use Ordinance (I 8.62.030H(4)) as originally proposed, and instead including the necessary reference within Approval and Permit Required section of the Physical and Environmental Constraints ordinance (I 8.42.040A) will provide greater clarity as to its application. Additionally, as the indexing letters for the definition section (18.62.030) will change upon approval of the ordinance amendments, the following reference changes within the Land use Code also need to be amended for consistency: Pagel of 3 CITY OF ASHLAND Section 18.62.040 [Approval and Permit Required] should be amended to read as follows: A Physical Constraints Review Permit is required for the following activities: A. Development, as defined in 18.62.030.15 H, in areas identified as Flood plain Condor Land, Hillside Land, or Severe Constraint land. In addition all activities located within an area of special flood hazard are subject to the provisions for a Development Permit under 15.10 Flood Damage and Prevention Regulations. B. Tree removal, as defined in 18.62.030 Z in areas identified as Flood plain Corridor Land. Section 18.63.060 [Activities and Uses Exempt from these Regulations] should be amended to read as follows: A. Exempt Activities Within Water Resource Protection Zones. The following activities and uses do not require a permit or authorization under this chapter to be conducted or to continue in a Water Resource Protection Zone. Exempt activities and uses may qualify as development as defined in section 18.62.030.15 H and may require a permit for development in Floodplain Condor Lands Chapter. All of the above changes to the ordinance which was provided at First Reading have been incorporated into the attached ordinance presented to the City Council for Second Reading. Related City Policies: Comprehensive Plan Environmental Resources 4.17 Goal: To protect life and property fi-om flooding and flood hazards, and manage the areas subject to flooding to protect the public's interest. Policy: 27) The City shall continue to participate in the National Flood Insurance Program, complying with all applicable standards. Council Options: Approve Second Reading of the ordinance amendments to Chapter 18.62 Physical and Environmental Constraints of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance (ALUO), Chapter 15.10 of the Ashland Municipal Code and the proposed revisions to the Flood Insurance Study and FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps. Potential Motions: 1) Move to approve second reading of the ordinance amendments Chapter 15.10 of the Ashland Municipal Code, and revisions to the Flood Insurance Study and FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps and schedule second reading for March 15, 2011. 2) Move to approve second reading of the ordinance amendments to Chapter 18.62 Physical and Environmental Constraints of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance (ALUO) as amended to revise Page 2 of 3 ~r, CITY OF -ASHLAND the definition of development in section 18.62.030(H)4, and correct cross references to the definition section. Attachments: Ordinance updating Ashland Land Use Ordinance 18.62 Ordinance updating Ashland Municipal Code, Chapter 15.10 Please note: The City Council Packet from March 1, 2011 contains all attachments relating to this action. Flood Insurance Study (FIS), and revised Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMS) are available in full at: www.ashland.or.us/femaupdates Page 3 of 3 11FALAW, ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY OF ASHLAND PHYSICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS (CHAPTER 18.62), AND INCORPORATING NECESSARY CHANGES BASED ON THE ADOPTION OF THE FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY FOR JACKSON COUNTY OREGON AND INCORPORATED AREAS, AND ACCOMPANING FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAPS. Annotated to show deletions and additions to the code sections being modified. Deletions are bold hned4hfough and additions are bold underlined. WHEREAS, Article 2. Section 1 of the Ashland City Charter provides: Powers of the Citv The City shall have all powers which the constitutions, statutes, and common law of the United States and of this State expressly or impliedly grant or allow municipalities, as fully as though this Charter specifically enumerated each of those powers, as well as all powers not inconsistent with the foregoing; and, in addition thereto, shall possess all powers hereinafter specifically granted. All the authority thereof shall have perpetual succession; WHEREAS, the above referenced grant of power has been interpreted as affording all legislative powers home rule constitutional provisions reserved to Oregon Cities. City of Beaverton v. International Ass'n of Firefighters, Local 1660, Beaverton Shop, 20 Or. App. 293, 531 P 2d 730, 734 (1975); WHEREAS, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) published a preliminary Flood Insurance Study (FIS), and Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMS) on June 30, 2009, and both, after public input and revision, are completed and will be effective on May 3, 2011 for Jackson County, Oregon and the incorporated areas; WHEREAS, the City of Ashland is a participant in the National Flood Insurance Program, and each participating community is responsible for planning, adoption and enforcement of regulations to accomplish proper floodplain management; WHEREAS, notice of the proposed Ordinance Amendment was sent to the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) on May 14, 2010 as required by State law; WHEREAS, public notice was mailed on May 7, 2010 consistent with Oregon state law. (ORS 227.186) directly to property owners whose property is currently located in the floodplain, and those whose properties will be in the floodplain when the new floodplain maps become effective; WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Ashland conducted a duly advertised public hearing on the above-referenced amendments on March 1, 2011; Page I of 8 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Ashland, following the close of the public hearing and record, deliberated and conducted first and second readings approving adoption of the Ordinance in accordance with Article 10 of the Ashland City Charter; WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Ashland has determined that in order to protect and benefit the health, safety and welfare of existing and future residents of the City, it is necessary to amend the Ashland Municipal Code Flood Damage and Prevention regulations and Physical and Environmental Land Use Ordinance in the manner proposed; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Ashland has determined that an adequate factual base exists for the amendments, the amendments are consistent with the comprehensive plan and that such amendments are fully supported by the record of this proceeding. THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The above recitations are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 2. Section 18.62.030 [Definitions] is hereby amended to read as follows: 18.62.030 Definitions. The following terms are hereby defined as they apply to this Chapter: A. Architect - An architect licensed by the State of Oregon. B. Average slope - average slope for a parcel of land or for an entire project, for the purposes of determining the area to remain in a natural state shall be calculated before grading using the following formula: S = .00229(I)(L) A where "S" is the average percent of slope; ".00229" is the conversion factor for square feet; "I" is the contour interval in feet; "L" is the summation of length of the contour lines in scale feet; and "A" is the area of the parcel or project in acres. C. Base Flood: means the flood having a one percent chance of being equaled or exceeded in any giving year. D. Base Flood Elevation (BFE): means the water surface elevation during the base flood in relation to a specified datum. The Base Flood Elevation (BFE) is depicted on the FIRM to the nearest foot and in the FIS to the nearest 0.1 foot. E. Building Code: Means the combined specialty codes adopted under ORS 446.062, 446.185, 447.020 (2), 455.020 (2), 455.610, 455.680, 460.085, 460.360, 479.730_(1) or 480.545, but not include regulations adopted by the State Fire Marshal pursuant to ORS chapter 476 or ORS 479.015 to 479.200 and 479.210 to 479.220. Page 2 of 8 G.F.Buildable area - That portion of an existing or proposed lot that is free of building restrictions. For the purpose of this ordinance, a buildable area cannot contain any setback areas, casements, and similar building restrictions, and cannot contain any land that is identified as Flood plain Corridor Lands, or any land that is greater than 35% slope. D.G Cohesive Soils - Residual or transported soils, usually originating from parent rock which contains significant quantities of minerals which weather to clay. Cohesive soils have a Plasticity Index of ten or more, based on laboratory testing according to AASHTO methods, or a site-specific scientific analysis of a particular soil material. R.H. Development - Alteration of the land surface by: 1. Earth-moving activities such as grading, filling, stripping, or cutting involving more than 20 cubic yards on any lot, or earth-moving activity disturbing a surface area greater than 1000 sq. ft. on any lot; 2. Construction of a building, road, driveway, parking area, or other structure; except that additions to existing buildings of less than 300 sq. ft. to the existing building footprint shall not be considered development for section 18.62.080. 3. Culverting or diversion of any stream designated by this chapter. 14. deleted] F.L.Designer - a person not registered as an architect or engineer, approved to plan and design single family homes and other buildings defined as exempt by the building code. G.J. Engineer - A registered professional engineer licensed by the State of Oregon. J.K..Engineering Geologist - A registered professional engineering geologist licensed by the State of Oregon. L. Flood or flooding: means a general and temporary condition of partial or complete inundation of normally dry land areas from: 1) the overflow of inland or tidal waters: or 2) the unusual and rapid accumulation or runoff of surface waters from any source. M. Flood Insurance Rate May (FIRM): means an official map of a community, issued by the Federal Insurance Administration, delineatine the areas of special flood hazard and/or risk premium zones applicable to the community. N. Flood Insurance Study (FIS): means the official report by the Federal Insurance Administration evaluating flood hazards and containing flood profiles, floodwav boundaries and water surface elevations of the base flood. I.O. Floodway Channel - The floodway ehannel as defined by . channel of a river or other watercourse and the adjacent land areas that must be reserved in order to discharge the base flood without cumulatively increasing the water surface elevation more than one (1) foot. J.P. Geotechnical Expert - An engineering geologist or an engineer with demonstrable expertise in geologic hazards evaluation and geotechnical engineering. Page 3 of 8 K.Q Gully - A drainage incision, commonly caused by erosion, which does not experience regular or seasonal stream flow, but does act as a channel for runoff during periods of high rainfall. L.R. Landscape Professional - arborist certified by the International Society of Arboriculture, landscape architect licensed by the State of Oregon, or other expert with demonstrable expertise in tree and erosion control vegetation maintenance, and erosion control vegetation methods. M-.S..Natural Grade - the elevation of the ground level in its natural state, before construction, filling, or excavation. (see graphic) .r , na ~ _/-HAT1IiI.l a~..oa r-UT MID FILL CROrS SGGTION N- T.Natural State - all land and water that remains undeveloped and undisturbed. This means that grading, excavating, filling and/or the construction of roadways, driveways, parking areas, and structures are prohibited. Incidental minor grading for hiking trails, bicycle paths, picnic areas and planting and landscaping which is in addition to and enhances the natural environment is permitted. Incidental brush removal for lot maintenance and ecosystem health is permitted. Further, vegetation removal for the purposes of wildfire control in conjunction with an approved fire prevention and control plan shall also be permitted. 9.UNon-cohesive Soils - Residual or transported soils containing no or very little clay, usually from crystalline granitic parent rock. Non-cohesive soils have a Plasticity Index of less than ten, based on laboratory testing according to AASHTO methods, or a published scientific analysis of a particular soil type. I' V.. Professional Arborist - arborist certified by the International Society of Arboriculture and licensed by the State of Oregon State Landscape Contractors Board or Construction Contractors Board, or landscape architect licensed by the State of Oregon. QW. Riparian - That area associated with a natural water course including'its wildlife and vegetation. R-.X..Slope - The deviation of a surface from the horizontal, usually expressed in percent. (see graphic) ~znvG oc. sl..o PU ~ io ax r- _ .L CFO F~VTO ~H~Q.LONTPL t .'~MCG ~H) V SLOPE GALGULATION = H DEGREE OF SLOPE = ARC TANGENT OF V/H 8-M-Stripping - Any activity which significantly disturbs vegetated or otherwise stabilized soil surface, including clearing and grubbing operations. T-.Z...Tree Removal - the following activities are defined as tree removal: 1. The removal of three or more living trees of over six inches diameter at breast height (d.b.h.), or the removal of five percent of the total number of living (or Page 4 of 8 dead trees) over six inches d.b.h., whichever is greater, on any lot within five year period, or any form of commercial logging; 2. The removal of one or more living conifers greater than two feet d.b.h., or living broadleaf trees greater than one foot d.b.h.; U-.AA..Wildfire - Fire caused by combustion of native vegetation, commonly referred to as forest fire or brush fire. SECTION 3. Section 18.62.040 [Approval and Permit Required] is hereby amended to read as follows: A Physical Constraints Review Permit is required for the following activities: A. Development, as defined in 19.62.030.15 H, in areas identified as Flood plain Corridor Land, Hillside Land, or Severe Constraints Land. In addition all activities located within an area of special flood hazard are subiect to the provisions for a Development Permit under 15.10 Flood Damage and Prevention Regulations. B. Tree removal, as defined in 18.62.030.T Z, in areas identified as Flood plain Corridor Land. SECTION 4. Section 18.62.050 [Land Classifications] is hereby amended to read as follows: 18.62.050 Land Classifications. The following factors shall be used to determine the classifications of various lands and their constraints to building and development on them: A. Flood plain Corridor Lands - Lands with potential stream flow and flood hazard. The following lands are classified as Flood plain Corridor lands: 1. All land contained within the 100 year Flood plain as defined by the Federal Insurance Administration and identified in the Flood Insurance Map (FIRM) defined by the Federal Flood insur-anee Program, and *a-jnnps adopted by the Council as provided for in Chapter 15.10 of the Ashland Municipal Code. 2. All land within the area defined as Flood plain Corridor land in maps adopted by the Council as provided for in section 18.62.060. 3. All lands which have physical or historical evidence of flooding in the historical past. 4. All areas within 20 feet (horizontal distance) of any stream identified as a Riparian Preservation Creek on the Physical and Environmental Constraints Floodplain Corridor Lands maps adopted pursuant to section 18.62.060 5. All areas within ten feet (horizontal distance) of any stream identified as a Land Drainage Corridor on the Physical and Environmental Constraints Floodplain Corridor Lands maps adopted pursuant to section 18.62.060. SECTION 5. Section 18.62.070 [Development Standards for Flood Plain Corridor Lands] is hereby amended to read as follows: 18.62.070 Development Standards for Flood plain Corridor Lands. Page 5 of 8 For all land use actions which could result in development of the Flood plain Corridor, the following is required in addition to any requirements of Chapter 15.10: A. Standards for fill in Flood plain Corridor lands: 1. Fill shall be designed as required by the International Building Code Oregon Structural Specialty Code (OSSC) and international Residential Code Oregon Residential Specialty Code (ORSC), where applicable. 2. The toe of the fill shall be kept at least ten feet outside of floodway channels, as defined in section 15.10, and the fill shall not exceed the angle of repose of the material used for fill. 3. The amount of fill in the Flood plain Corridor shall be kept to a minimum. Fill and other material imported from off the lot that could displace floodwater shall be limited to the following: a. Poured concrete and other materials necessary to build permitted structures on the lot. b. Aggregate base and paving materials, and fill associated with approved public and private street and driveway construction. c. Plants and other landscaping and agricultural material. d. A total of 50 cubic yards of other imported fill material. e. The above limits on fill shall be measured from April 1989, and shall not exceed the above amounts. These amounts are the maximum cumulative fill that can be imported onto the site, regardless of the number of permits issued. 4. If additional fill is necessary beyond the permitted amounts in (3) above, then fill materials must be obtained on the lot from cutting or excavation only to the extent necessary to create an elevated site for permitted development. All additional fill material shall be obtained from the portion of the lot in the Flood plain Corridor. 5. Adequate drainage shall be provided for the stability of the fill. 6. Fill to raise elevations for a building site shall be located as close to the outside edge of the Flood plain Corridor as feasible. SECTION 6. Section 18.63.060 [Activities and Uses Exempt from these Regulations is hereby amended to read as follows: A. Exempt Activities Within Water Resource Protection Zones. The following activities and uses do not require a permit or authorization under this chapter to be conducted or to continue in a Water Resource Protection Zone. Exempt activities and uses may qualify as development as defined in section 18.62.030.E H and may require a permit for development in Floodplain Corridor Lands Chapter. SECTION 7. 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 8. Savings. Notwithstanding this amendment/repeal, the City ordinances in existence at the time any criminal or civil enforcement actions were commenced, shall remain valid and in full force and effect for purposes of all cases filed or commenced during the times Page 6 of 8 said ordinance(s) or portions thereof were operative. This section simply clarifies the existing situation that nothing in this Ordinance affects the validity of prosecutions commenced and continued under the laws in effect at the time the matters were originally filed. SECTION 9. Codification. Provisions of this Ordinance shall be incorporated in the City Code and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "code", "article", "section", "chapter" or another word, and the sections of this Ordinance may be renumbered, or re-lettered, provided however that any Whereas clauses and boilerplate provisions (i.e. Sections 1, 7, 8, and 9) need not be codified and the City Recorder is authorized to correct any cross-references and any typographical errors. r Page 7 of 8 The foregoing ordinance was first read by title only in accordance with Article X, Section 2(C) of the City Charter on the day of 2011, and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of 2011. Barbara M. Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this _ day of , 2011. John Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: Megan Thornton, Interim City Attorney Page 8 of 8 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY OF ASHLAND FLOOD DAMAGE PREVENTION REGULATIONS (CHAPTER 15.10), ADOPTING BY REFERENCE REVISED THE FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY FOR JACKSON COUNTY OREGON AND INCORPORATED AREAS, AND ACCOMPANING FLOOD INSURANCE RATE.MAPS. Annotated to show deletions and additions to the code sections being modified. Deletions are bold Iined-threngh and additions are bold underlined. WHEREAS, Article 2. Section 1 of the Ashland City Charter provides: Powers of the Citv The City shall have all powers which the constitutions, statutes, and common law of the United States and of this State expressly or impliedly grant or allow municipalities, as fully as though this Charter specifically enumerated each of those powers, as well as all powers not inconsistent with the foregoing; and, in addition thereto, shall possess all powers hereinafter specifically granted. All the authority thereof shall have perpetual succession; WHEREAS, the above referenced grant of power has been interpreted as affording all legislative powers home rule constitutional provisions reserved to Oregon Cities. City of Beaverton v. International Ass'n of Firefighters. Local 1660, Beaverton Shop, 20 Or. App. 293, 531 P 2d 730, 734 (1975); WHEREAS, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) published a preliminary Flood Insurance Study (FIS), and Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMS) on June 30, 2009, and both, after public input and revision, are completed and will be effective on May 3, 2011 for Jackson County, Oregon and the incorporated areas; WHEREAS, the City of Ashland is a participant in the National Flood Insurance Program, and each participating community is responsible for planning, adoption and enforcement of regulations to accomplish proper floodplain management; WHEREAS, notice of the proposed Ordinance Amendment was sent to the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) on May 14, 2010 as required by State law; WHEREAS, public notice was mailed on May 7, 2010 consistent with Oregon state law. (ORS 227.186) directly to property owners whose property is currently located in the floodplain, and those whose properties will be in the floodplain when the new floodplain maps become effective; WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Ashland conducted a duly advertised public hearing on the above-referenced amendments on March 1, 2011; Page I of 13 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Ashland, following the close of the public hearing and record, deliberated and conducted first and second readings approving adoption of the Ordinance in accordance with Article 10 of the Ashland City Charter; WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Ashland has determined that in order to protect and benefit the health, safety and welfare of existing and future residents of the City, it is necessary to amend the Ashland Municipal Code Flood Damage and Prevention regulations and Physical and Environmental Land Use Ordinance in the manner proposed; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Ashland has determined that an adequate factual base exists for the amendments, the amendments are consistent with the comprehensive plan and that such amendments are fully supported by the record of this proceeding. THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The above recitations are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 2. Those documents entitled "Flood Insurance Study (FIS) for Jackson County, Oregon and Incorporated Areas" effective May 3, 201 1; with accompanying Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMS) are hereby adopted as the basis for establishing the special flood hazard areas for floodplain management in the City of Ashland. The special flood hazard areas documented in the FIS and the FIRMS are the minimum area of applicability of the floodplain management regulations and may be supplemented by studies for other areas as allowed in the regulations. SECTION 3. Section 15.10.040 [Methods of Reducing Flood Losses] through 15.10.090 [Variances and Appeals] are hereby amended to read as follows: 15.10.040 Methods of Reducing Flood Losses. In order to accomplish its purpose, this section includes methods and provisions for: A. Restricting or prohibiting uses which are dangerous to health, safety and property due to water or erosion hazards, or which result in damaging increases in erosion or in flood heights or velocities; B. Requiring that uses vulnerable to floods, including facilities which serve such uses, be protected against flood damage at the time of initial construction; C. Controlling the alteration of natural flood plains, stream channels; and natural protective barriers, which help accommodate or channel flood waters; D. Controlling filling, grading, dredging, and other development which may increase flood damage; and E. Preventing or regulating the construction of flood barriers which will unnaturally divert flood waters or which may increase flood hazards outside of identified flood hazard areas. F. Coordinating and supplementing the provisions of the state building code with local land use and development ordinances. Page 2of13 15.10.050 Definitions. Unless specifically defined below or elsewhere in this Code, words or phrases used in this Chapter shall be interpreted as to give them the meaning they have in common usage and to give this Chapter it' s most reasonable application. A. Appeal means a request for a review of the Building Official's interpretation of any provision of this Section or a request for a variance. B. Area of Shallow Flooding means a designated AO or AH zone on the Flood Insurance Rate Map. The base flood depths range from one (1) to three (3) feet; clearly defined channel does not exist; the path of flooding is unpredictable and indeterminate; and, velocity flow may be evident. AO is characterized as sheet flow and AH indicates ponding. C. Area of Special Flood Hazard means the land in the flood plain within a community subject to a one percent (1%) or greater chance of flooding in any given year. Designation on maps always includes the letters A or V. D. Base Flood means the flood having a one percent (I%) chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year. Also referred to as the "100-year flood". Designation on flood maps always includes the letters A or V. E. Basement, for the purposes of this chapter, means the portion of a structure with its floor sub-grade (below around level) on all sides, or the definition provided in Section 18.08.078 of the Ashland Municipal Land Use code, whichever is more restrictive. F. Below-Grade Crawl Space means an enclosed area below the base flood elevation in which the interior grade is not more than two feet below the lowest adjacent exterior grade and the height, measured from the interior grade of the crawlspace to the top of the crawlspace foundation, does not exceed 4 feet at any point. G. Building Code means the combined specialty codes adopted under ORS 446.062, 446.185, 447.020 (2), 455.020 (2), 455.610, 455.680.460.085, 460.360, 479.730 (1) or 480.545, but not include regulations adopted by the State Fire Marshal pursuant to ORS chapter 476 or ORS 479.015 to 479.200 and 479.210 to 479.220. H. Critical Facility means a facility for which even a slight chance of flooding might be too great. Critical facilities include but are not limited to schools, nursing homes, hospitals, police, fire and emergency response installations, installations which produce, use, or store hazardous materials or hazardous waste. f _Fr Development means any man-made change to improved or unimproved real estate, including but not limited to, buildings or other structures, mining, dredging, filling, grading, paving, excavation or drilling operations located within the area of special flood hazard. C.F. Flood or Flooding means a general and temporary condition of partial or complete inundation of normally dry land areas from: 1. The overflow of inland or tidal waters; and/or 2. The unusual and rapid accumulation of runoff of surface waters from any source. Page 3 of 13 H G.Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) means the official map of a community on whieh the issued by the Federal Insurance Administration has delineated both delineating the areas of special flood hazards and/or the risk premium zones applicable to the community. I H. Flood Insurance Study means the official report provided by the Federal Insurance Administration that includes flood profiles, the Flood Boundary - Flood way Map, and the water surface elevation of the base flood. J 1. Flood-way means that channel of a river or other watercourse and the adjacent land areas that must be reserved in order to discharge the base flood without cumulatively increasing the water surface elevation more than one (1) foot. i. Habitable Floor- menns aBy floor usable for- living purposes, whieh inelude flear used only for- star-age purposes is not ik "habitable" floor-. K. Lowest Floor means the lowest floor of the lowest enclosed area (including basement). An unfinished or flood resistant enclosure, usable solely for parking of vehicles, building access or storage, in an area other than a basement area is not considered a building's lowest floor, provided that such enclosure is not built so as to render the structure in violation of the applicable non-elevation design requirements of this ordinance found in Section 150100080(B)(1)(b). L. Manufactured Home means a structure, transportable in one (1) or more sections, which is built on a permanent chassis and is designed for use with or without a permanent foundation when connected to the required utilities. For flood plain management purposes the term "manufactured home" also includes park trailers, travel trailers, and other similar vehicles placed on a site for greater than one hundred eighty (180) consecutive days. For insurance purposes the term "manufactured home" does not include park trailers, travel trailers, and other similar vehicles. M. Manufactured Home Park or Subdivision means a parcel (or contiguous parcels) of land divided into two (2) or more manufactured home lots for rent or sale. N. New Construction means structures for which the "start of construction" commenced on or after the effective date of this Ordinance and includes new mobile home parks and mobile home subdivisions. 0. Recreational Vehicle, as it pertains to the provisions of this chapter, means a vehicle which is: a. Built on a single chassis, b. 400 square feet or less when measured at the largest horizontal proiection• c. Designed to be self-propelled or permanently towable by a light duty truck, and d. Designed primarily not for use as a permanent dwelling but as temporary living quarters for recreational, camping, travel, or seasonal use. P.O-. Start of Construction includes substantial improvement, and means the date the building permit was issued, provided the actual start of construction, repair, reconstruction, placement or other improvement was within one hundred eighty (180) days of the permit date. The actual start means either the first Page 4 of 13 placement of permanent construction of a structure on a site, such as the pouring of a slab or footings, the installation of piles, the construction of columns, or any work beyond the stage of excavation; or the placement of a manufactured home on a foundation. Permanent construction does not include land preparation, such as clearing, grading and filling; nor does it include the installation of streets and/or walkways; nor does it include excavation for a permanent basement, footings, piers, or foundations or the erection of temporary forms; nor does it include the installation on the property of accessory erection or temporary forms; nor does it include the installation on the property of accessory buildings, such as garages or sheds not occupied as dwelling units or not part of the main structure. 9..4zStructures as it pertains to the provisions of this Chapter is a walled and roofed building, including a gas or liquid storage tank that is principally above ground. R.XX. Substantial Damage means damage of any origin sustained by a structure whereby the cost of restoring the structure to its before damaged condition would equal or exceed 50 percent of the market value of the structure before the damage occurred. S.Q.Substantial Improvement means any repair, reconstruction, or improvement of a structure, the cost of which equals or-exceeds fifty percent (50%) of the market value of the structure either: 1. Before the improvement or repair is started; or 2. If the structure has been damaged and is being restored, before the damage occurred. For the purpose of this definition, "substantial improvement" is considered to occur when the first alteration of any wall, ceiling, floor, or other structural part of the building commences, whether or not that alteration affects the external dimensions of the structure. The term DOES NOT, however, include either: a. Any project for improvement of a structure to comply with existing state or local health, sanitary, or safety code specifications which are solely necessary to assure safe living conditions, or b. Any alteration of a structure listed on the National Register of Historic Places or a State Inventory of Historic Places. T.R. Variance means a grant of relief from the requirements of this Chapter which permits construction in a manner that would otherwise be prohibited by this Chapter. 15.10.060 General Provisions. A. Lands to which this Chapter applies. This Chapter shall apply to all areas of special flood hazards within the jurisdiction of the City of Ashland, Oregon. B. Basis for establishing the areas of special flood hazard. The areas of special flood hazard identified by the Federal Insurance Administration in a scientific and engineering report entitled "The Flood Insurance Studyi City of Ashland, Oregon, for Jackson County, Oregon and Incorporated Areas" dated June 1 1981> May ~ 3'a 2011, with accompanying Flood Insurance Rate Maps is hereby adopted by reference and declared to be a part of this Ordinance. The Flood Insurance Study and accompanying maps (as updated) are on file at City Hall, Ashland, Oregon. Page 5 of 13 C. Compliance. No structure on land shall hereafter be constructed, located, extended, converted, or altered without full compliance with the terms of this Ordinance and other applicable regulations. D. Abrogation and Greater Restrictions. This Chapter is not intended to repeal, abrogate, or impair any existing easements, covenants, or deed restrictions. However, where this Ordinance and another Ordinance, state building code, easement, covenant, or deed restriction conflict or overlap, whichever imposes the more stringent restrictions shall prevail. E. Interpretation. In the interpretation and application of this Chapter, all provisions shall be: 1. Considered as minimum requirements; 2. Liberally construed in favor of the governing body; and 3. Deemed neither to limit or repeal any other powers granted under state statutes and rules including the state building code. F. Warning and Disclaimer of Liability. The degree of flood protection required by this Chapter is considered reasonable for regulatory purposes and is based on scientific and engineering consideration. Larger floods can and will occur on rare occasions. Flood heights may be increased by man-made or natural causes. This section does not imply that land outside the areas of special flood hazards or uses permitted within such areas will be free from flooding or flood damages. This Ordinance shall not create liability on the part of the City, any officer or employee thereof, or the Federal Insurance Administration, for any flood damages that result from reliance on this Ordinance or any administrative decision lawfully made thereunder. 15.10.070 Administration. A. Establishment of Development Permit. A development permit shall be obtained before construction or development begins within any area of special flood hazard established in Section 15.10.060(B). The permit shall be for all structures including manufactured homes, as set forth in the Definitions, and for all other development including fill and other activities, also set forth in Definitions. Application for a development permit shall be made on forms furnished by the Building Official and may include, but not be limited to, plans in duplicate drawn to scale showing the nature, location, dimensions and elevations of the area in question; existing or proposed structures, fill, storage of materials, drainage facilities; and the location of the foregoing. Specifically, the following information is required: 1. Elevation in relation to mean sea level, of the lowest floor (including basement) of all structures; 2. Elevation in relation to mean sea level to which any structure has been flood- proofed; 3. Certification by a registered professional engineer or architect that the flood- proofing methods for any nonresidential structure meet the flood-proofing criteria in Section 15.10.090(B)(2); 4. Description of the extent to which any watercourse will be altered or relocated as a`result of proposed development. Page 6 of 13 B. Designation of the Building Official. The Building Official is hereby appointed to administer and implement this Chapter by granting or denying development permit applications in accordance with its provisions. C. Duties and Responsibilities of the Building Official. Duties and responsibilities of the Building Official shall include, but not be limited to: 1. Permit Review: a. Review all development permits to determine that the permit requirements of this Section have been satisfied. b. Review all development permits to determine that all necessary permits have been obtained from those federal, state or local governmental agencies from which prior approval is required. c. Review all development permits to determine if the proposed development is located in the flood way. If located in the flood way, assure that the encroachment provisions of Section 15.10.080)C)(1) are met. 2. Use of Other Base Flood Data. When base flood elevation data has not been provided in accordance with Section 15.10.060(B), "Basis for Establishing the Areas of Special Flood Hazard", the Building Official shall obtain, review, and reasonably utilize any base flood elevation and flood-way data available from a federal, state or other source, in order to administer Sections 15.10.080(B)(1) "Specific Standards: Residential Construction", 15.10.080 (13)(2) "Specific Standards: Nonresidential Construction, and 15.10.080(C) "Flood-ways". 3. Information to be Obtained and Maintained. a. Where base flood elevation data is provided through the Flood Insurance Study or required as in Section 15.10.070(C)(2), obtain and record the actual elevation (in relation to mean sea level) of the lowest habitable floor (including basement and below grade crawlspaces) of all new or substantially improved structures, and whether or not the structure contains a basement. b. For all new or substantially improved flood-proofed structures: i. Verify and record the actual elevation (in relation to mean sea level); and ii. Maintain the flood proofing certifications required in Section 15.10.070(A)(3). c. Maintain for public inspection all records pertaining to the provisions of this Section. 4. Alteration of Watercourses. a. Notify adjacent communities and the Water Resources Commission Department of Land Conservation and Development and other appropriate state and federal agencies prior to any alteration or relocation of a watercourse, and submit evidence of such notification to the Federal Insurance Administration. b. Require that maintenance is provided within the altered or relocated portion of said watercourse so that the flood carrying capacity is not diminished. 5. Interpretation of FIRM Boundaries. Make interpretations where needed, as to exact location of the boundaries of the areas of special flood hazards (for example, where there appears to be a conflict between a mapped boundary and actual field conditions). The person contesting the location of the boundary shall Page 7 of 13 be given a reasonable opportunity to appeal the interpretation as provided in Section 15.10.090. 15.10.080 Provisions for Flood Hazard Protection. A. General Standards. In all areas of flood hazards the following standards are required: 1. Anchoring: a. All new construction and substantial improvements shall be anchored to prevent flotation, collapse or lateral movement of the structure; b. All manufactured homes must likewise be anchored to prevent flotation, collapse, or lateral movement, and shall be installed using methods and practices that minimize flood damage. Anchoring methods may include, but are not limited to, use of over-the-top or frame ties to ground anchors (Reference FEMA's "Manufactured Home Installation in Flood Hazard Areas" guidebook. 2. Construction Materials and Methods: a. All new construction and substantial improvements shall be constructed with materials and utility equipment resistant to flood damage. b. All new construction and substantial improvements shall be constructed using methods and practices that minimize flood damage. c. Electrical, heating, ventilation, plumbing, and air-conditioning equipment and other service facilities shall be designed and/or otherwise elevated or located so as to prevent water from entering or accumulating within the components during conditions of flooding. 3. Utilities: a. All new and replacement water supply systems shall be designed to minimize or eliminate infiltration of flood waters into the system; b. New and replacement sanitary sewage systems shall be designed to minimize or eliminate infiltration of flood waters into the systems and discharge from the systems into flood waters; and c. On-site waste disposal systems shall be located to avoid impairment to them or contamination for- the during flooding. 4. Subdivision Proposals. a. All subdivision proposals shall be consistent with the need to minimize flood damage; b. All subdivision proposals shall have public utilities and facilities such as sewer, gas, electrical, and water systems located and constructed to minimize flood damage; c. All subdivision proposals shall have adequate drainage provided to reduce exposure to flood damage; and d. Where base flood elevation data has not been provided or is not available from another authoritative source it shall be generated for subdivision proposals and other proposed development which contain at least fifty (50) lots or five (5) acres, whichever is less. 5. Review of Building Permit: a. Where elevation data is not available, either through the Flood Insurance Study or from another authoritative source (Section 15.10.070(C)) Page 8 of 13 applications for building permits shall be reviewed to assure that proposed construction will be reasonably safe from flooding. The test of reasonableness is a local judgment and includes use of historical data, high water marks, photographs of past flooding, etc., where available. Failure to elevate the lowest floor at least two (2) feet above grade in these zones may result in higher insurance rates. b. To determine the flood base elevation, the applicant's Oregon registered engineer or land surveyor shall investigate all available sources of information, such as historic flooding profiles, high water marks, photographs of past flooding, soil characteristics, or any other feasible methods. A report shall be submitted to the City by the applicant, setting forth said elevation and citing the evidence upon which the estimate is made. Said report may be accepted or rejected by the City. The Oregon registered engineer or surveyor shall place a permanent elevation marker on the property. B. Specific Standards. In all areas of special flood hazards where base flood elevation data has been provided as set forth in Section 15.10.060(B), "Basis for Establishing the Areas of Special Flood Hazard", or Section 15.10.070(C)(2), "Use of Other Base Flood Data, the following provisions are required: 1. Residential Construction: a. New construction and substantial improvement of any residential structure shall have the lowest floor, including basement, elevated to at least two (2) feet or above base flood elevation. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy by the City, the property owner shall furnish certification by a registered engineer or surveyor of the actual elevation of the lowest habitable floor, including a basement. b. Fully enclosed areas below the lowest floor that are subject to flooding are prohibited, or shall be designed to automatically equalize hydrostatic flood sources on exterior walls by allowing for entry and exit of flood-waters. Designs for meeting this requirement must either be certified by a registered professional engineer or architect or must meet or exceed the following minimum criteria: i. A minimum of two openings having a total net area of not less than one (1) square inch for every square foot of enclosed area subject to flooding. ii. The bottom of all openings shall be no higher than one (1) foot above grade. iii. Openings may be equipped with screens, louvers, or other coverings or devices provided that they permit the automatic entry and exit of flood-waters. 2. Nonresidential Construction: New construction and substantial improvement of any commercial, industrial or other nonresidential structure shall either have the lowest floor, including basement, elevated to the level of the base flood elevation; or together with attendant utility and sanitary facilities; shall: a. Be flood-proofed so that below the base flood level the structure is watertight with walls substantially impermeable to the passage of water; Page 9 of 13 b. Have structural components capable of resisting hydrostatic and hydrodynamic loads and effects of buoyancy; and c. Be certified by an Oregon registered professional engineer or architect that the designs and methods of construction are in accordance with accepted standards of practice for meeting the provisions of this subsection based on their development review of the structural design, specifications and plans. Such certifications shall be provided to the official as set forth in Section 15.10.070(C)(3)(b). d. Nonresidential structures that are elevated, not flood-proofed, must meet the same standards for space below the lowest floor as described in 15.10.080(B)(1)(b). e. Applicants flood-proofing nonresidential buildings shall be notified that flood insurance premiums will be based on rates that are one (1) foot below the flood proofed level (e.g., a building constructed to the base flood level will be rated as one (1) foot below that level). 3. Manufactured Homes: All manufactured homes to be placed or substantially improved within Zones Al-30, AH, and AE shall be elevated on a permanent foundation such that the lowest floor of the manufactured home is at least two (2) feet above the base flood elevation and be securely anchored to an adequately anchored foundation system in accordance with the provisions of Section 15.10.080(A)(1). 4. Recreational vehicles placed on sites are required to either: a, Be on the site for fewer than 180 consecutive days, b. Be fully licensed and ready for highway use, on its wheels or iackina system, is attached to the site only by quick disconnect type utilities and security devices, and has no permanently attached additions; or C. Meet the requirements of Section 15.10.80 the elevation and anchoring requirements for manufactured homes. 5. Critical Facility: Construction of new critical facilities shall be, to the extent possible, located outside the limits of the Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) (100-year floodplain). Construction of new critical facilities shall be permissible within the SFHA if no feasible alternative site is available. Critical facilities constructed within the SFHA shall have the lowest floor elevated three feet above BFE or to the height of the 500-year flood, whichever is higher. Access to and from the critical facility should also be protected to the height utilized above. FloodprooTing and sealing measures must be taken to ensure that toxic substances will not be displaced by or released into floodwaters. Access routes elevated to or above the level of the base flood elevation shall be provided to all critical facilities to the extent possible. 6. Below-grade Crawl Spaces: Below-grade crawl spaces area allowed provided they conform to the guidelines in FEMA Technical Bulletin 11-01, Crawlspace Construction for Buildings Located in Special Flood Hazard Areas. Page 10 of 13 C. Flood-ways: Located within areas of special flood hazard established in Section 15.10.060(B) are areas designated as flood-ways. Since the flood-way is an extremely hazardous area due to the velocity of flood waters which carry debris, potential projectiles, and erosion potential, the following provisions apply: 1. Prohibit encroachments, including fill, new construction, substantial improvements, and other development unless certification by a registered professional engineer or architect is provided demonstrating that encroachments shall not result in any increase in flood levels during the occurrence of the base flood discharge. 2. If Section 15.10.080(C)(1) above is satisfied, all new construction, and substantial improvements shall comply with all applicable flood hazard reduction provisions of Section 15.10.080, "Provisions for Flood Hazard Protection". 15.10.090 Variances and Appeals. A. Appeals shall be granted consistent with the standards of Section 1910.6 of the Rules and Regulations of the National Flood Insurance Program ( 24 C-FR '909 ete 44 CFR 60.6.). B. The Board of Appeals established by Section 15.04.200 of this Chapter shall hear variances and appeals from the final decisions of the Building Official. C. In passing upon applications for appeal or variance, the Board of Appeals shall consider all technical evaluations, all relevant factors, standards specified in other parts of this Code; and 1. The danger that materials may be swept onto other lands to the injury or loss of others; 2. The danger to life and property due to flooding or erosion damage; 3. The susceptibility of the proposed facility and its contents to flood damage and the effect of such damage on the individual owner; 4. The importance of the services provided by the proposed facility to the community;. 5. The necessity to the facility of a waterfront location, where applicable; b 6..The availability of alternative locations for the proposed use which are not subject to flooding or erosion damage; 6. 7..The compatibility of the proposed use with existing and anticipated development; 7. 8..The consistency of the proposed use with the policies of the Comprehensive Plan and flood plain management program for that area; 8. 9..The safety of access to the property in times of flood for ordinary and emergency vehicles; 9.10-The expected heights, velocity, duration, rate of rise, and sediment transport of the flood waters and effects of channel movement, if applicable, expected at the site; and 4-011.3he costs of providing governmental services during and after flood conditions, including maintenance and repair of public utilities and facilities such as sewer, gas, electrical, and water systems, and streets and bridges. Page 11 of 13 D. Upon consideration of the factors of and the purpose of the Chapter, the Board of Appeals may attach such conditions to the granting of variances as it deems necessary to further the purposes of this Chapter. E. The Building Official shall maintain the records of all appeal actions and report any variances to the Federal Insurance Administration upon approval. F. Conditions for Variances: 1. Variances shall not be issued within any designated flood-way if any increase in flood levels during the base flood discharge would result. 2. Variances shall only be issued upon a determination that the variance is the minimum necessary, considering the flood hazard, to afford relief. 3. Variances shall only be issued upon: a. A showing of good and sufficient cause; b. A determination that failure to grant the variance would result in exceptional hardship for the applicant; and, c. A determination that granting the variance will not result in increased flood heights, additional threats to public safety, extraordinary public expense, create nuisances, cause fraud on or victimization of the public, or conflict with existing laws or Ordinances. 4. Any applicant to whom a variance is granted shall be given written notice that the cost of flood insurance will be commensurate with any increased risk that may result from development for which the variance is issued. SECTION 4. Section 15.10. 100 [Penalties] is hereby amended to read as follows: 15.10.100 Penalties Any person, firm or corporation, whether as principal, agent, employee or otherwise, violating or causing the violation of any of the provisions of this ordinance has committed an infraction, and upon conviction thereof, is punishable as prescribed in Section 1.08.020 of the Ashland Municipal Code. Such person, firm or corporation is guilty of a separate violation for each and every day during which any violation of this Chapter is committed or continued by such person, firm or corporation. In addition, violation of this Ordinance shall constitute a public nuisance and may be regarded as such in all actions, suits and proceedings. Said nuisance may be prosecuted in the courts of the State of Oregon. SECTION 5. 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 6. Savings. Notwithstanding this amendment/repeal, the City ordinances in existence at the time any criminal or civil enforcement actions were commenced, shall remain valid and in full force and effect for purposes of all cases filed or commenced during the times said ordinance(s) or portions thereof were operative. This section simply clarifies the existing situation that nothing in this Ordinance affects the validity of prosecutions commenced and continued under the laws in effect at the time the matters were originally filed. Page 12 of 13 SECTION 7. Codification. Provisions of this Ordinance shall be incorporated in the City Code and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "code", "article", "section", "chapter" or another word, and the sections of this Ordinance may be renumbered, or re-lettered, provided however that any Whereas clauses and boilerplate provisions (i.e. Sections 1, 2, 5, 6, and 7) need not be codified and the City Recorder is authorized to correct any cross-references and any typographical errors. The foregoing ordinance was first read by title only in accordance with Article X, Section 2(C) of the City Charter on the day of 2011, and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of 12011. Barbara M. Christensen, City, Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this _ day of , 2011. John Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: Megan Thornton, Interim City Attorney Page 13 of 13 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Renewal of Ashland Gun Club Lease Meeting Date: March 15, 2011 Primary Staff Contact: Michael R. Faught Department: Public Works E-Mail: faughtm@ashland.or.us Secondary Dept.: Legal Secondary Contact: Mike Morrison Jr. Approval: Martha Benne Estimated Time: 30 minutes Question: Does the Council wish to approve an order authorizing a lease of real property to the Ashland Gun Club? Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Council take public testimony and approve the attached lease. If Council wishes amendments to the lease, then Staff recommends Council direct Staff to negotiate directly with the Ashland Gun Club. Background: The Ashland Gun Club (Gun Club) has been leasing approximately 32 acres of the 65 acres the City owns in that area to use as a gun club facility since at least 1968. The Gun Club provides pistol, rifle, bow and arrow, and shotgun facilities. The current Gun Club Lease expired in June 2009. The Council authorized a one year extension in 2009 and 2010. The current extension will expire on May 30, 2011. The current lease has been in negotiation since the Gun Club presented a proposed lease to the City in June of 2007. On June 16, 2008, the gun club lease was discussed at a Council Study Session, and on July 15, 2008, staff proposed a lease to the Council that incorporated modifications. At the July 2008 Council Meeting, the Council made additional changes to the lease which were reviewed on August 5, 2008; however, many of those changes substantially changed the lease terms that the Gun Club had approved prior to the July 15th meeting. In addition, the Council decided to undertake an environmental assessment before entering into a long term lease with the Gun Club. At the conclusion of the environmental assessment, the City reevaluated the lease and its terms and began renegotiating a lease with the Gun Club. Draft Lease Terms: Staff has modified the draft lease in an attempt to incorporate feedback received from the study session from the Council, gun club members, and neighboring property owners. The terms of the lease are a major concern for the Gun Club because, if they cannot demonstrate that they will have use of the property for at least 10 years, they will not be eligible for many available grants. Therefore, the term of the proposed lease is 10 years with a maximum possible term of 15 years. The lease also contains two important types of provisions discussed at length: 1) good neighbor issues, and 2) environmental issues, such as lead clean-up. The good neighbor issues include: • Section 4.2(1): Limiting hours of operation; • Section 4.2(4): Limiting the types of weapons that can be fired; • Providing notice to neighbors for unusual uses such as night training for police or military: • Limiting access to the property. Page I of 2 ~r, CITY OF ASHLAND The environmental issues that are addressed in the lease include: • Limitations on hazardous substances in Section 4.3; • Development of an Environmental Stewardship Plan that specifies prevention strategies as well as remediation strategies in Section 4.4(2); • Lead remediation and removal pursuant to a schedule in Section 4.4(3); • Completion of a lead distribution study by the City in Section 4.4(3); • Protection of the riparian corridor in Section 4.6, which includes completing a lead distribution study and surface water testing. Land Use Issues: It is important to be aware that the property leased to the Gun Club is outside of city limits and the urban growth boundary. It is zoned Open Space Reserve (OSR) by the county and it is surrounded by properties that are zoned for Exclusive Farm Use (EFU). This designation would limit the Council's ability to utilize the property if it chose not to renew the Gun Club lease. City Funds Expended on the Gun Club: Not including staff time, the City has expended $66,398.20 for the environmental assessment. In addition, as required by DEQ, staff has contracted JBR Environmental Consultants to review historical and current site operations, develop the required site characteration and then submit a work plan for DEQ's approval at a cost of $8,050. Once DEQ approves the work plan, additional funds will be required to complete the second phase of the gun club environmental study. Clean Up Cost Estimates: Staff had JBR Environmental generate estimated clean up costs with the understanding that there are a number of variables in determining clean up costs. To that end, JBR Environmental estimates clean up costs at between zero to $950,000. The costs options assume cleanup will be accomplished using urban residential standards (mid-range) and occupational (least stringent) with no water impacts and/or the cleanup will be accomplished using urban residential and occupational standards cleanup with values for leaching to groundwater. JBR's email detailing their costs estimates is attached for your review. Council Options: 1) Approve an order authorizing the proposed lease of real property; 2) Provide direction to staff for further revisions to the lease agreement; 3) Decline to renew the lease agreement. Potential Motions: 1) Move to approve an Order of the City Council authorizing the lease of real property to the Ashland Gun Club; 2) Move to continue the matter to Attachments: • Revised Lease Agreement with attachments • Existing Lease Agreement -June 1, 1994 to June 1, 2009 • Study session Council Communication for June 16, 2008 (attachments available online) • Email from JBR • Documents submitted at March 1, 2011 Council meeting Page 2 of 2 Imo, ASHLAND GUN CLUB LEASE AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is entered into between the CITY OF ASHLAND, OREGON, by and through the City Council, hereinafter referred to as Lessor, and the ASHLAND GUN CLUB, INC., hereinafter referred to as Lessee. Whereas, Lessor is the owner of certain real property located in Jackson County, Oregon; and Whereas, the Lessor has formally leased the Property to Lessee since 1968 so that the Lessee could use the property as a shooting range and Ashland Gun Club facility; and Whereas, the current lease has been in effect since 1994 and it expired on May 30, 2009; Whereas, the Lessee has been allowed to continue leasing the property on a month-to- month basis until May 30, 2011, to allow for lease negotiations and completion of environmental testing; and Whereas, the Lessee would like to be eligible for grants from the State of Oregon and Federal agencies that provide funds for Hunter/Shooter Safety training, range improvements, lead abatement and other programs; and Whereas, many grant programs require applicants to have remaining lease periods of ten years or more; and Whereas, the Lessor wishes to enter into a new lease that will further the public interest by meeting grant requirements, requiring lead remediation, and establishing conditions and restrictions on the use of the Property that will address the concerns of abutting property owners and the City. NOW THEREFORE, LESSOR AND LESSEE HEREBY AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. DEFINITIONS. The following definitions shall apply to this document: (1) Agreement: this document, entitled Ashland Gun Club Lease Agreement, and any exhibits incorporated herein. (2) Alterations: include the addition or removal of any buildings, sheds, structures, or the installation of any utilities, pipes, wiring, cables, and conduit on the Property. (3) Automatic Weapons: a firearm that reloads itself and continues to fire until the trigger is released. (4) Bodily lniurv: any damage to a person's physical condition including pain or illness, including but not limited to, an injury resulting in death. (5) Effective Date: July 1, 2010, the date this Agreement will take effect. (6) Emergency: any human caused or natural event or circumstances causing or threatening loss of life, injury to person or property, human suffering or financial loss that is declared an emergency pursuant to AMC 2.62, and includes, but is Ashland Gun Club Lease Agreement Page I of 12 not limited to, fire, explosion, flood, severe weather, drought, earthquake, spills or releases of oil or hazardous material, contamination, disease, blight, infestation, civil disturbance or riot. (7) Environmental Law: any federal, state, or local statute, regulation, or ordinance or any judicial or other governmental order pertaining to the protection of health, safety, or the environment. (8) Hazardous Substance: any hazardous, toxic, infectious, or radioactive substance, waste, or material as defined or listed by any Environmental Law and shall include, without limitation, lead, petroleum oil and its fractions. (9) Lessee: Ashland Gun Club, Inc. (10) Lessor: the City of Ashland. (11) Premises: the Property described on Exhibit A (except for remnants, structures and areas with historic significance, including, Pompadour Springs, all pipes, facilities and sources for obtaining Lithia water and all features marked on Exhibit C) and any alterations or improvements constructed by Lessee. (12) Proe : certain real property located in Jackson County, Oregon, and described fully in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. (13) Sunset: the setting or descent of the sun below the horizon in the evening as determined by the Astronomical Applications Department of the United States Naval Observatory. 2. LEASE OF PROPERTY AND TERM OF LEASE. .2.1. Agreement to Lease. In consideration of the rent to be paid and covenants to be performed by Lessee under this Agreement, Lessor hereby agrees to lease the Property to Lessee, and Lessee agrees to lease the Property from Lessor on the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement. 2.2. Original Term. The term of this lease shall be for a period of fifteen years, commencing on the Effective Date and the lease may be extended after expiration of the first 10 years in accordance with Section 2.3, unless terminated earlier as provided in this Agreement. 2.3. Extension Option. If the Agreement is not in default after the first ten years of the lease term has elapsed, the lease shall operate as follows: (1) Method of Extension: Lease Term. After the initial ten years of the lease has elapsed on June 30, 2021, the lease must be extended each year for the remainder of the lease term by giving written notice to Lessor at least 90 (ninety) days before June 30th starting in the year 2021. Each of the extension terms shall commence on July 1 st (the day following expiration of the preceding year) and shall continue for ten years. (See Table next page). Giving such notice shall be sufficient to make the Agreement binding for a renewal term of ten years unless the Lessor objects to the renewal request. (2) Resection of Extension Request. The Lessor may reject Lessee's request to extend and renew the lease by providing written notice to the Lessee that the extension request will not be accepted within forty-five (45) days of receipt of the extension request from the Lessee. Failure to respond within 45 days of receipt Ashland Gun Club Lease Agreement Page 2 of 12 of the extension request indicates that the Lessor accepts the renewal of the lease. (3) Adiustment of Rent Provision. The Lessor shall have the opportunity to adjust the rent established by this Agreement in section 3 once every three (3) years, starting in 2021. (See Table next page.) All other terms of this Agreement shall remain the same. Accepted Deadline to Renew Lease 13-e g in-n i -ng o f L e a s e t e r m i f -E ri-d aflue a -se- *r e r-m by Letter . March 30, 2021 Jul 1, 2021 June 30, 2032 March 30, 2022 Jul 1, 2022 June 30, 2033 March 30, 2023 Jul 1, 2023 June 30, 2034 March 30, 2024' Jul 1, 2024 June 30, 2035 March 30, 2025 Jul 1, 2025 June 30, 2036 • = years the rent terms may be reviewed. Section 2.4. Emergency Termination. In the case of an Emergency the Lessor may immediately terminate the lease and take possession of the Premises. If the Lessor exercises this right, the Lessor assumes all obligations of any grants and any obligations associated with any environmental assessments and/or any management plan adopted pursuant to Section 4.6 that Lessee has incurred 89tained due to this lease. In addition, Lessee will not be required to return the Premises to its original condition if the Lessor exercises this right. 3. RENT AND OTHER CONSIDERATION. 3.1. Rent. All taxes, insurance costs, utility charges, and other costs that Lessee is required to pay by this Agreement, and any other sums that Lessee is required to pay to Lessor or third parties shall be considered rent. 3.2. Required Community Events. (1) Sighting-In Weekend. The Lessee shall provide access to its shooting ranges, during normal operating hours, free of charge for one weekend prior to the regular deer and elk hunting seasons as published in the Oregon Big Game Regulations by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. Lessee shall also provide Range Officers and other assistance as necessary to enforce regulations, safety and otherwise, during the weekend. (2) Community Open House Weekend. The Lessee shall provide access to the Premises during normal operating hours for all neighbors and community members at least one weekend per year to explain the programs and opportunities provided by the Lessee. Lessee may provide the opportunity for visitors to fire weapons on the range under strict control of the Lessee's Range Officers. (3) Historic Day. Lessee shall provide access to the Property for all neighbors and community members during normal operating hours for at least one day per year in which the shooting ranges will be closed to shooting. During the event activities will be focused on the historic importance of the site. Ashland Gun Club Lease Agreement Page 3 of 12 4. USE OF PREMISES. 4.1. Permitted Use. The Premises shall be used as a firearms training facility that provides indoor and/or outdoor facilities that allow the use of rifles, pistols, shotguns, and archery equipment. A number of facilities are already present on the facility and Lessee shall have the rights to such facilities. The Lessee shall have the right to construct such facilities as are normally associated with such use, including, but not limited to, ranges, berms, targets, target sheds, club buildings and parking lots, with the approval of Lessor and Jackson County. 4.2. Restrictions on Use. (1) Hours of Operation. Lessee shall post the hours of operation for the shooting ranges with a phone number where a responsible party can be reached. The hours of operation for the shooting ranges shall be: Monday through Friday from 8AM to 813M or Sunset, whichever is earlier, and Saturday and Sunday from 9AM to 813M to Sunset, whichever is earlier. (a) EXCEPTION. The Ashland Police Department may utilize the shooting ranges outside of the standard hours of operation for specialized training by having the Ashland Gun Club provide notice of specialized training sessions in its newsletter and to the Lessor in accordance with Section 13.3 at least thirty (30) days before the training session. If a training session is scheduled after the monthly newsletter is published, or so that the newsletter will not be received in time to give nearby property owners adequate notice, the Lessee must notify nearby property owners of the event by other means at least two weeks before the event. (2) Holiday Closures. The Lessee shall dose the Premises completely for four holidays each calendar year. The four dates for which the Premises will be closed to all shooting activity will be listed in the first Gun Club Newsletter of each calendar year. (3) Areas not Subject to Permitted Use. Lessee shall not be permitted to use the pipes and access points for Lithia water, the remnants of historic buildings or structures, or the remnants of Pompadour Springs. The Lessor retains all rights to use and maintain areas of historic significance on the Property without interfering with scheduled events and uses of Lessee. (4) Firearm Restrictions. The following firearms shall not be used on the shooting ranges: (a) Firearms that exceed 6000 foot-pounds of muzzle energy; and (b) Automatic Weapons, unless the weapon is being fired in a standard or semi-automatic mode. (5) Shotgun Range. Lessee may be required to reorient the shotgun range, discontinue skeet or trap shooting, or install mitigating measures, such as a shot curtain, to prevent harm to wetlands and other properties affected by shot distribution if necessary pursuant to the lead distribution study completed by Lessor. (6) Overnight Events. Lessee shall only be permitted to have one (1) overnight event per calendar year in which participants stay overnight for a multiple day event on the Premises. The hours of operation for the shooting ranges must be strictly complied with during the course of the event. Ashland Gun Club Lease Agreement Page 4 of 12 (7) Removal of Minerals and Gravel. Lessee shall not relocate or remove any minerals, rock, gravel or soil on or from the premises without the permission of the Lessor. 4.3. Hazardous Substances. Lessee may use or otherwise handle only those Hazardous Substances typically used or handled in the prudent and safe operation of the use specified in section 4.1. Lessee shall refrain from causing Hazardous Substances, other than lead, to be spilled, leaked, disposed of, or otherwise released on or under the Property. Lessee may store such Hazardous Substances on the Property only in quantities necessary to satisfy Lessee's reasonably anticipated needs. Lessee shall comply with all Environmental Laws and exercise the highest degree of care in the use, handling, and storage of Hazardous Substances and shall take all practicable measures to minimize the quantity and toxicity of Hazardous Substances used, handled, or stored on the Property. 4.41-ead Remediation. (1) Range Designer and Best Management Practices. Lessee, in coordination with Lessor, shall hire a range designer to evaluate the premises and specify specific range management practices to implement with recommended deadlines in an Environmental Stewardship Plan (Plan), which shall be attached as Exhibit E upon completion. (2) Environmental Stewardship Plan. Lessee, in coordination with Lessor, will develop and adopt a management plan, also known as an Environmental Stewardship Plan, that, at a minimum, identifies remediation, prevention, and control strategies for lead within 18 months of lease signing. All range management practices must comply with the Environmental Protection Agency's most current version of the Best Management Practices for Lead at Outdoor Shooting Ranges (EPA's Best Practices) to minimize and manage lead contamination of the Premises. All requirements of the Plan shall be binding on Lessee. Lessee shall comply with the terms and timelines of the Plan developed as a result of the range designer's assessment and Lessor's environmental assessment and studies. Failure to develop an Environmental Stewardship Plan shall constitute grounds for termination. (3) Lead Removal. Lessee shall begin an initial lead removal operation on the Premises pursuant to the Lead Remediation & Removal Schedule (Schedule) that will be attached as Exhibit F at the conclusion of the lead distribution study completed by Lessor. Lessee agrees to remove lead as required by the Schedule in accordance with all applicable laws. If the existence of lead at any time in the future warrants testing and/or removal by requirement of environmental law, Lessor and Lessee agree to share the cost equally. On the expiration or termination of this Agreement, Lessee shall remove, at its own expense, all lead from the Property, wetlands and other properties with shot distribution that exceeds permissible levels, as identified in the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality's regulations for the potential uses of the properly pursuant to a beneficial use determination or equivalent study. (4) Financial Security. Beginning in 2021, Lessor shall have the right to require Lessee to post financial security for environmental clean-up of the site related to the Gun Club's use as a condition of an extension under Section 2.3. Each year an extension is granted Grantee may be required to post at least a proportion of Ashland Gun Club Lease Agreement Page 5 of 12 the total amount deemed necessary to perform lead removal on the site. The amount and the form of the financial security must be approved by the Finance Director and City Attorney. It is the intention of the Lessor and Lessee that grants and other environmental remediation programs during the term of the Agreement will either reduce the amount of security or make posting financial security unnecessary. However, if Lessee is more than six months late in complying with the Schedule or the Plan, Lessor can require Lessee to post financial security. 4.5. Compliance with Laws. Lessee shall, at Lessee's own cost and expense, comply with all federal, state, and local statutes, ordinances, regulations, rules and requirements, relating to Lessee's use and occupancy of the Property. This Lease does not authorize any use of the Property in violation of applicable land use laws and regulations. 4.6. Environmental Assessment / Riparian Corridor. The Lessor and the Lessee agree to complete additional testing recommended by the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, including a lead distribution study and surface water testing, by December 31, 2011. At a minimum the lead distribution study shall: 1) determine the distribution of lead on the premises and surrounding areas, 2) determine the volume of impacted soil, and 3) develop feasible remediation options that include time frames, costs, and ongoing monitoring and removal for the entire Property and other affected properties. The Lessee shall abide by the Water Resources Protection Chapter of the Ashland Municipal Code, including all prohibitions against alterations in the riparian corridor. If lead is discovered in the riparian zones, then a plan will be developed to be approved by the Community Development Department Director that will address lead removal, disposal, and restoration of the riparian zones. After lead abatement is complete in the riparian area and a containment screen is constructed to prevent future contamination of the riparian zone, or earlier upon written request of the City, the riparian area will be removed from the leased premises by formal amendment. 5. MAINTENANCE, REPAIRS AND RESTORATION. 5.1. Lessor's Obligations. Lessor shall be under no obligation to make or perform any repairs, maintenance, replacements, alterations, or improvements on the Property. except for repairs and maintenance of the Lithia Springs Water facilities and other historic areas on the Property, including any existing lines or new lines that need to be installed to maintain Lessor's access to Lithia water, and maintenance of the riparian zones marked on Exhibit D. Lessor retains the right to adopt and institute a historical resource management plan for the benefit of historic areas marked on Exhibit C. Lessor will assume responsibility for any environmental clean-up that is required if the environmental assessment shows that there is contamination that is not the result of Lessee's activities. 5.2. Lessee's Obligations. Lessee shall be responsible for: (1) Repairs and maintenance of the boundary fence of the Property and Lessor's adjacent property described in Exhibit B. (2) Any repairs necessitated by the negligence of Lessee, its agents, employees, and invitees. Ashland Gun Club Lease Agreement Page 6 of 12 (3) Any repairs or alterations required under Lessee's obligation to comply with laws and regulations as set forth in Section 4.4. (4) Any relocation or reorientation of Lessee's facilities that is required to allow for future construction, protection, and safe use of the Bear Creek Greenway. (5) The removal of lead and lead contamination from the Property, wetlands and other properties with shot distribution, that exceeds permissible levels, and payment for such removal as long as the lead contamination is caused by Lessee's activities. 5.3. Lessor's Interference with Lessee. In performing any repairs, replacements, alterations, or other work performed on or around the Property, Lessor shall not cause unreasonable interference with use of the Premises by Lessee. Lessee shall have no right to an abatement of rent nor any claim against Lessor for any inconvenience or disturbance resulting from Lessor's activities performed in conformance with the requirement of this provision. 5.4. Lessee's Duty to Restore Premises. If at any time during the term of this Agreement, any improvements now or hereafter on the Premises are destroyed in whole or in part by fire, theft, the elements, or any other cause not the fault of Lessor, this Agreement shall continue in full force and effect. In such event, Lessee shall have the option of either causing the damaged or destroyed improvements to be removed from the Premises or, alternatively, Lessee may repair and restore the damaged improvements. In the event that Lessee causes the damaged or destroyed improvements to be removed from the Premises, Lessee may, at Lessee's discretion, cause replacement structures to be erected on the Premises. 6. OWNERSHIP OF ALTERATIONS. 6.1. Alterations Prohibited. Lessee shall not make Alterations or improvements on the Premises without first obtaining Lessor's written consent, and Lessor's consent will not be unreasonably withheld. All Alterations shall be made in a good and workmanlike manner, and in compliance with all laws and building codes. 6.2. Ownership and Removal of Alterations. Title to all Alterations or improvements, existing or hereafter constructed on the Premises by Lessee shall be and remain the property of Lessee and may be removed by Lessee at expiration of this Agreement. In the event that Lessee fails to remove any Alteration located on the Premises at the expiration of this Agreement, then such Alteration shall be and become the property of Lessor. However, Lessor may elect to remove such Alterations and charge the expense of such removal, and the physical damage resulting from the removal, to Lessee. In the event Lessor elects to remove the Alterations, Lessor shall make its election within 60 days after expiration or termination of this Agreement and shall notify Lessee of any such election. 7. INSURANCE; INDEMNIFICATION; LIENS 7.1. Liability Insurance. Lessee, at its sole cost and expense, commencing on the Effective Date, and continuing during the lease term, shall procure, pay for and keep in full force and effect comprehensive commercial general liability policy (occurrence version) in a responsible company with coverage for Bodily Injury and property damage liability, personal and advertising injury liability, blanket contractual liability, contractual Ashland Gun Club Lease Agreement Page 7 of 12 liability for obligations assumed under this Agreement, and medical payments with a general aggregate limit of not less than $2,000,000 per occurrence for combined single limit bodily injury and property damage claims, or $500,000 per occurrence for bodily injury and $250,000 per occurrence for property damage. Such insurance shall cover all risks arising directly or indirectly out of Lessee's activities on the Property or any condition of the Property. Such insurance shall name Lessor as an additional insured. Certificates evidencing such insurance and bearing endorsements requiring 10 days written notice to Lessor before any change or cancellation of the policy shall be furnished to Lessor before Lessee's occupancy of the property. 7.2. Indemnification. To the fullest extent permitted by law, Lessee shall indemnify, defend, and hold Lessor harmless from, and reimburse Lessor for, any cost, claim, loss, Bodily Injury (including injury resulting in death), or liability that is suffered directly or from a third-party claim arising out of, or related to: 1) any activity of Lessee, or any agent, contractor, servant, invitee, licensee or employee of Lessee on the Property, 2) any condition of the Property in the possession or under the control of Lessee, 3) an act or omission of Lessee or any agent, contractor, servant, invitee, licensee or employee of Lessee, or 4) any failure by Lessee to perform all of its obligations under environmental laws, including any failure to perform during Lessee's previous occupation of the Property, or 5) any breach by Lessee under this Agreement. Lessor shall have no liability to Lessee for any injury, loss, or damage caused by thins parties, or by any condition of the Property, unless it is caused in whole or in part by Lessor's negligence. This obligation to indemnify shall survive termination of the lease and include reasonable attomeys' fees, including attomeys' fees on appeal, and investigation costs and all other reasonable costs, expenses and liabilities incurred by Lessor or its attorney from the first notice that any claim or demand is to be made or may be made. In case that an action or proceeding is brought against Lessor because of such claim, Lessee, upon notice from Lessor, agrees to defend such action or proceeding by hiring counsel reasonably satisfactory to Lessor. 7.3. Liens. (1) Except with respect to activities for which Lessor is responsible, Lessee shall pay as due all claims for work done, services rendered, or materials fumished to the Property, and shall keep the Property free from any liens. If Lessee fails to pay any such claims or to discharge any lien, Lessor may do so and collect the cost as additional rent. Such action by Lessor shall not constitute a waiver of any right or remedy which Lessor may have on account of Lessee's default. (2) Lessee may withhold payment of any claim in connection with a good-faith dispute over the obligation to pay, as long as Lessor's property interests are not jeopardized. If a lien is filed as a result of nonpayment, Lessee shall, within 10 days after knowledge of the filing, secure the discharge of the lien or deposit with Lessor cash or sufficient corporate surety bond or other surety satisfactory to Lessor in an amount sufficient to discharge the lien plus any costs, attorney fees, and other charges that could accrue as a result of a foreclosure or sale under the lien. 8. TAXES; UTILITIES. 8.1. Payment of Taxes. Lessee shall pay all real property taxes and special assessments levied upon the leased Property during the term of the Agreement. Ashland Gun Club Lease Agreement Page 8 of 12 Lessee shall not cause any liens or encumbrances to be imposed upon the leased Property and if any lien or encumbrance is imposed upon such Property, Lessee shall proceed to remove the lien or encumbrance immediately. 8.2. Proration of Taxes. Lessee's share of real property taxes and assessments for the years in which this Agreement commences or terminates shall be prorated based on the portion of the tax year that this Agreement is in effect. 8.3. Utilities. Lessee agrees to pay or cause to be paid all utilities utilized in connection with the Property during the term of this Agreement. 9. REPRESENTATIONS. 9.1. Lessor's Warranty. Lessor warrants that it is the owner of the Property and has the right to lease it free of all encumbrances. Lessor will defend Lessee's right to quiet enjoyment of the Property from the lawful claims of all persons during the lease term. 9.2. Lessee's Warranty. Lessee warrants that it has the power to enter into this Agreement and that Lessee will abide by all of the terms and conditions of this Agreement. 10. ASSIGNMENT AND SUBLEASING. No part of the Property may be assigned, mortgaged, or subleased, nor may a right of use of any portion of the Property be conferred on any thins person by any other means, without the prior written consent of Lessor. This provision shall apply to all transfers by operation of law. No consent in one instance shall prevent this provision from applying to a subsequent instance. Lessor may withhold or condition such consent in its sole and arbitrary discretion. 11. DEFAULT. 11.1. Default in Other Covenants. If Lessee fails to comply with any term or condition or fulfill any obligation of this Agreement within 20 days after written notice from Lessor specifying the nature of the default with reasonable particularity, the Lessee shall be held to have breached the terms of this Agreement. If the default is of such a nature that it cannot be completely remedied within the 20-day period, then Lessee will not be found in default as long as Lessee begins correction of the default within the 20-day period, and thereafter proceeds with reasonable diligence and in good faith to effect the remedy as soon as practicable. 11.2. Abandonment. Failure of Lessee to occupy the Premises for 90 days or more shall result in default unless the Lessor consents to the absence in writing. 12. REMEDIES ON DEFAULT. 12.1. Termination. In the event of a default, the Agreement may be terminated at the option of Lessor by written notice to Lessee. Whether or not the Agreement is terminated by the election of Lessor or otherwise, Lessor shall be entitled to recover damages from Lessee for the default, and Lessor may reenter, take possession of the Property. Lessor may remove any persons or property by legal action or by self-help with the use of reasonable force, without liability for damages, and without having accepted a surrender. Ashland Gun Club Lease Agreement Page 9 of 12 12.2. Damages. In the event of termination or retaking of possession following default, Lessor shall be entitled to recover immediately, without waiting until the due date of any future rent or until the date fixed for expiration of the lease term, the following amounts as damages: (1) The loss of rent from the date of default until a new Lessee is, or with the exercise of reasonable efforts could have been, secured for the Property. (2) The reasonable costs of reentry and re-letting including without limitation the cost of any cleanup, refurbishing, removal of Lessee's property and fixtures, costs incurred, or any other expense occasioned by Lessee's default including but not limited to, costs of environmental studies, assessments, and clean-up associated with the remediation of lead on the Property, any remodeling or repair costs, attorney fees, court costs, broker commissions, and advertising costs. 12.3. Condition of Property. (1) On expiration of the lease term, or earlier termination on account of default, Lessee shall deliver all keys to Lessor and surrender the Property free from all lead and lead contamination in excess of permissible levels at its own expense. Alterations constructed by Lessee with permission from Lessor shall not be removed or restored to the original condition unless the terms of permission for the Alteration so allow. Depreciation and wear from ordinary use for the purpose for which the Property is leased shall be excepted, but repairs for which Lessee is responsible shall be completed to the latest practical date before such surrender. (2) All Alterations, improvements and fixtures placed on the Premises during the lease term, other than Lessee's trade fixtures, shall be removed in accordance with Section 6.2. If Lessee fails to remove such fixtures, Lessor may do so and charge the cost to Lessee with interest at the legal rate from the date of expenditure. (3) Before expiration or other termination of the lease term, Lessee shall remove all furnishings, furniture, and trade fixtures that remain its property. If Lessee fails to do so, this failure shall be an abandonment of the property, and Lessor may retain the property and all rights of Lessee with respect to it shall cease or, by giving written notice to Lessee within 20 days after removal was required, Lessor may elect to hold Lessee to its obligation of removal. If Lessor elects to require Lessee to remove, Lessor may effect a removal and place the property in public storage for Lessee's account. Lessee shall be liable to Lessor for the cost of removal, transportation to storage, and storage, with interest at the legal rate on all such expenses from the date of expenditure by Lessor. 12.4. Remedies Cumulative. The rights and remedies of Lessor under this Agreement upon a breach thereof by Lessee are not exclusive and Lessor shall have all rights and remedies allowed under applicable law in addition to the rights and remedies contained in this Agreement. 13. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS. 13.1. Non-waiver. Waiver by either party of strict performance of any provision of this Agreement shall not waive or prejudice the party's right to require strict performance of the same provision or any other provision in the future. Lessor's acceptance of Lessee's Ashland Gun Club Lease Agreement Page 10 of 12 I failure to perform an obligation required annually under this Agreement, such as payment of taxes or hosting of the community events in Article 3, shall not affect Lessor's remedies for failure to perform such other obligations. 13.2. Attorneys' Fees. If any litigation is commenced between the parties to this Agreement concerning the Property, this Agreement, or the rights and duties of either party, the prevailing party in that litigation shall be entitled, in addition to any other relief that may be granted in the litigation, to a reasonable sum for that party's attorneys' fees, .including attomeys' fees on appeal., The amount of the fees shall be determined by the court in that litigation or in a separate action brought for that purpose. 13.3. Notices. Except as otherwise expressly provided by law, any and all notices or other communications required or permitted by this Agreement or by law to be served on or given to a party of this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed duly served and given when personally delivered to the party, any managing employee of the party, or, in lieu of personal service, when deposited in the United States mail, first class postage prepaid, addressed to the appropriate party as follows: LESSOR LESSEE City of Ashland Ashland Gun Club 20 E. Main St. P.O. Box 953 Ashland, OR 97520 Ashland, OR 97520 13.4. Governing Law.. This Agreement, and all matters relating to this Agreement, shall be governed by the laws of the State of Oregon in force at the time any need for interpretation of this Agreement or any decision or holding concerning this Agreement arises. 13.5. Binding on Successors. This Agreement shall be binding on and shall inure to the benefit of the heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns of the parties hereto. 13.6. Entry for Inspection. Lessor shall have the right to enter on the Property at any time to determine Lessee's compliance with this Agreement or to make necessary repairs to the Property. Whether or not such inspection is made, the duty of Lessor to make repairs shall not mature until a reasonable time after Lessor has received written notice from Lessee of the repairs that are required. In addition, Lessor shall have the right, at any time during the last twelve months of the term of this Agreement, to place and maintain on the Property notices for leasing or selling of the Property. 13.7. Severability. If any provision of this Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be either invalid, void, or unenforceable, the remaining provisions of this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect unimpaired by the holding. 13.8. Entire Agreement. This Agreement and its attachments constitute the sole and only agreement between Lessor and Lessee respecting the leasing of the Property to Lessee. Any agreements or representations respecting the Property, their leasing to Lessee by Lessor, or any other matter discussed in this Agreement not expressly set forth or incorporated into this Agreement are null and void. Ashland Gun Club Lease Agreement Page 11 of 12 I 13.9. Recording of Agreement. Lessor and Lessee may execute a memorandum of this Agreement, which shall be recorded in Jackson County, Oregon. The Memorandum of Lease shall describe the parties, set forth a description of the Property, specify the term of the Agreement and incorporate this Agreement by reference. 13.10. Holdover by Lessee. If the Lessee does not vacate the Property at the time required, the Lessor shall have the option to treat the Lessee as a Lessee from month to month, subject to all provisions of this lease except the provision for term. 13.11. No Partnership or Joint Venture. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to render the Lessor in any way or for any purpose a partner, joint venturer, or associate in any relationship with Lessee other than that of Lessor and Lessee, nor shall this Agreement be construed to authorize either party to act as agent for the other. 13.12. Extraterritorial Regulation. Nothing in this Lease shall interfere with the legislative authority of Lessor under ORS 226.010 or any other provision of state law. 13.13. Non-appropriation. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement to the contrary, in the event that insufficient funds are appropriated for any obligation of the Lessor hereunder and the Lessor has no other lawfully available funds, then Lessor may terminate this Agreement at the end of its then current fiscal year and Lessor shall not be obligated to make subsequent payments under this agreement and this agreement shall terminate. Lessor agrees to deliver notice to Lessor of such termination within ten (10) business days from the determination by Lessor. INTENDING TO BE BOUND, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date written below. LESSEE: President, Ashland Gun Club, Inc. Date ORDER Pursuant to ORS 271.360 the governing body hereby approves and authorizes the terms of this lease as set forth above. LESSOR: Mayor, City of Ashland Date Ashland Gun Club Lease Agreement Page 12 of 12 Exhibit 'A' L A N D D E S C R I P T I O N City of Ashland, c/o Parks and Recreation Commission Page 2 THENCE South 89 degrees 57 minutes 38 seconds East along the Southerly boundary line of Donation Land Claim No. 51, said Township and Range for a distance of 594.40 feet to a 30 inch long by 1 inch diameter galvanized iron pipe with 3 inch diameter bronze cap situated at the Southeast corner thereof; THENCE continuing South 89 degrees.57 minutes 38 seconds East along the Southerly boundary line of Donation Land Claim No. 38, Township 39 South, Range _2 East of the Willamette Base and Meridian, Jackson County, Oregon for a distance of 680.35 feet to a 30 inch long by 1 inch diameter galvanized iron pipe with a 3 inch diameter bronze disk situated at the Southeast corner of said Donation Land Claim No. 38; THENCE North.00 degrees 11 minutes 51 seconds East along the boundary line common to Donation Land Claim No. 38 and Government Lot 5 for a distance of 73.37 feet to a 30 inch long by 1 inch diameter galvanized iron pipe with a 3 inch diameter bronze disk situated at the Northwest corner of Government Lot 5, Township 39 South, Range 2 East of the Willamette Base and Meridian, Jackson County, Oregon; THENCE South 89 degrees 47 minutes 06 seconds East along the Northerly boundary line of said Government Lot 5 for a distance of 306.00 feet to a 5/8 x 30 inch iron rod with aluminum cap marked: City of Ashland, Prop.Cor., 1992, LS 759; THENCE leaving said government lot line, South 42 degrees 17 minutes 06 seconds East for a distance of 130.70 feet to a 5/8 x 30 inch iron rod with aluminum cap marked: City of Ashland, Prop.Cor., LS 759; THENCE South 63 degrees 07 minutes 06 seconds East for a distance of 347.00 feet to a 5/8 x 30 inch iron rod with aluminum cap marked: City of Ashland, Prop. Cor. 1992, LS 759; THENCE South 10 degrees 37 minutes 06 seconds East for a distance of 185.50 feet to a point; THENCE North 89 degrees 57 minutes 38 seconds West for a distance of 942.11 feet to a point;. THENCE South 60 degrees 30 minutes 00 seconds West for a distance of 200.00 feet to a point; THENCE North 90 degrees 00 minutes 00 seconds West for a distance of 303.02 feet to the point of beginning. Together with and subject to covenants, easements, and restrictions of record and those apparent on the land. LESSOR: City of Ashland March 11, 1996 c/o Parks and Recreation Commission 340 S. Pioneer Street Ashland, Oregon 97520 LESSEE: Ashland _G.u-n..Club, Inc. ref: C92T17RR.leg R£Gls TERRPJ S. SURVEYOR Exhibit 'A' 2oa ' L 30 /9QL r, E O o N Jut.T b. 12a9 d1i£R~i'* ~ rwAiN °C Z w ~O u~ Cap co Sm J} M cc 0w 0Z 0 z • t Ln ° U a C=7 000 p 'Cot Y- Jb Cot / Iy~~JJ~ O O X1 a C9 I VI O G J a m ~ ~ / -I - ~ .1111 ^ Room m LAI s~ X w cc s W co w ~ a 40 Y ht tyl" rt LLJ *i g_ cn n9 1 Ra °a NIJ J u .i11 Z I r"; = w Q : m J U 13 W. I .rrm V I z / s Sig a D I 30 .19.111 I r Q LO ! w g fell EXHIBIT C P S w E W dgm&k o F- p► ti . a 0 w~ /w~ « a V/ O Yf Y/ Y • • p O w Z0 W a • N IL C It It z • • C) ' o f J {e + w n0A Q = r°1i+~ d ~ d; it (a~~ ro~~ pP i W\ si \ P y w ] I'Y .0'90t N 0 _ LI Y ~ ~ el Y w ~ s ~ O g Ipa►y yo O *X 9E OYfO ~ 'M1tlON / u IP w S yJy~ ` ~a d~~ed / A i a a A. .0bQ01 "Ivan ~Ag tl w M N O J AA+~ VA In N c - X . d n >N C \ \\\X 7 y > ~ !\\\\N\,\ 4) a ¢ o Vie;\:~v v \ vA C W Z \ r. .C LL y \ C \ } \~~v v\Avv\\,AV v\VAvAvA INX e ,\~\\v H t :i Z. rto \ ~R$ i N\\ O \ o 8 \\Q,~.\:~w., r' S T', X45 8 s D, \ \ o N\NN LEASE Lease between the City of Ashland, by and through its Parks and Recreation Commission, ('Lessor) and Ashland Gun Club, Inc. ('Lessee') RECITALS: A. On July 27, 1983 Lessor and Lessee extended a sublease on certain property owned.by..Lessor outside the City of Ashland. This sublease was extended for a term . expiring March 31, 1998. B. 4ssee desires an extension beyond 1998 and the parties have determined that the best mgMod In which to accomplish this extension Is to enter into a new lease and ferroihate what leases, subleases and extensions that may exist between Lessor and Lessee.` Lessor and Lessee agree: 1. Termination of previous leases and subleases: Any lease, sublease or extension In effect prior to the date of this lease, including but not limited to a lease .dated.May 21, 1968; a document entitled "Sublease' dated December 16,1969; a document entitled 'Modfication of lease' dated December 16 1969; a document entitled 'Sublease' dated March 30, 1978; a document entitled 'Extension of Lease' dated November 10, 1978; a document entitled 'Extension'of Sublease' dated March 30, 1983, and a document entitled 'Extension of Lease' dated July 27, 1983 between Lessor and Lessee concerning the property described In paragraph 2. Is tern-tinated effective June 1, 1994. 2. Description of property. Lessor leases to Lessee on the following terms and conditions the property described in the attached Exhibit A and referred to in this lease as the leased property'. Unless from the context a different meanlog_isJntended, the term 'property' refers to unBi~ real property, and the term 'j9eft be' s' refers to the real property and any Improvements located or const Wed during the term of this lease. Lessor reserves from this lease: -2.1. Lithia Springs water or water faclUdes Including existing and new lutes which the lessor shall have the right to install at such places as it deems advisable. 2.2. The right to remove any rock or gravel from the premises, No rock or gravel shall be removed except after consulting with the Lessee as to the appropriate areas to remove rock in order to attempt to minimize any impairment of the future development of the property by Lessee. Lessor shall make no use of its adjoining property that unreasonably interferes with regularly scheduled events and uses of Lessee on the leased property. PAGE 1-LEASE w,~%w .".ko 3. Term. The term of this lease is 15 years commencing on June 1, 1994, and terminating 15 years from such date. It is the desire of the Lessor to encourage the utilization of the property by the Lessee and in the event there is no regular use by the Lessee for any six month period, the lease shall be considered abandoned and the Lessor may revoke the same. 4. Rental. Lessee shall pay Lessor for the use of the leased property during the lease term the rental sum of one dollar. In addition, Lessee shall maintain the boundary fence on the leased property and on the Lessor's property adjacent to the leased property. 5. Use. Lessee shall use the leased property for the purpose of a rile, pistol and shotgun and archery range, and shall have the right to erect and construct such facilities as are normally associated with such use, such as ranges, targets, target sheds, dub buildings, parking lots, etc. It Is specifically agrW at the. Lessee previously cohstructedl range with a backstop _ 12 feet high, 100 fe n ngth with wings at each .e~dWo>~ safety; targets are raised at 50 yards, , 100 yards and yen s 5.1. Any restoration of facilities, such as Pompadour Springs, must first have the approval of the Lessor. 5.2 Lessee shall refrain from storing on or discharging from or onto the premises any hazardous wastes or toxic substances as defined in 42 USC §§9601- 9657 and shall not use the property in a manner to violate any statute or regulation regarding hazardous substances. These laws and regulations include, but are not limited to, the federal Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act; Resource Conservation and Recovery Act; Toxic Substances Control Act; Clean Water Act; Clean Air Act; regulations of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA); Of~ 7, 466.205, 466.640 and 468.790 andiations of the Department of EnvirohmeWualiity (pEQ) and are collectively referred in this agreement as "environmental laws." 5.3 Lessee shall indemnify and defend Lessor from and against any and all liabilities, losses, and costs, including reasonable attorney fees, which Lessor may Incur because of Lessee's failure to perform all of its obligations under environmental laws, including any failure to perform during Lessee's previous occupation of the property under leases dating from 1968. 6. Utilities. Lessee shall initiate, contract for, and obtain, In its name, all utility services required on the leased property, including gas, electricity, telephone, water, and sewer connections and services, and Lessee shall pay all charges for those services as they become due. If Lessee falls to pay the charges, Lessor may elect to pay them and the charges will then be added to the rental installment next due. PAGE 2-LEASE Lessee shall be liable for any injury or damages to the equipment or service lines of the utility suppliers that are located on the leased property, resulting from the negligent or deliberate acts of Lessee, or the agents, employees, invitees or guests of Lessee. 7. Compliance with law. The Lessee agrees that it will at its expense promptly observe and comply with all laws, orders, regulations, rules, ordinances and requirements of Federal, State, County and City governments with respect to the use, and control of the leased property. 8. Representations. 8.1. Inspection. Lessee acknowledges that this lease Is accepted and executed on the basis of Lessee's own examination and personal knowledge of the ,value and condition of the„leased property; that.no.representation as to the value; oondition. or repair of the leased property has been made by Lessor or its agents and that,t4q lessee agrees to take the leased property in the condition it Is in at the time of the execution of this lease. 8.2. Prior agreements. This lease Is the entire, final and complete agreement of the parties and supersedes and replaces all prior and existing written or oral understandings except as otherwise continued In effect by the terms of this agreement 9..Improvements, alterations, maintenance. 9.1. Alterations or Improvements. Except for alterations or Improvements to Increase safety on the existing range, Lessee may make no alterations or improvements to the leased property without the prior written consent of Lessor, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. AN alterations, or Improvements that ee may desire toe-to the leased property shall be dome by Lessee WdTM& expense of Lessee. The term 'improvements' means any buildings, structures, or fadlitles placed or erected on the leased property. Ali such work shall be done in a good and workmanlike manner in compliance with all applicable building and zoning laws and ordinances. 9.2. Ownership of Improvements. The parties agree that improvements placed on the leased property by Lessee shall remain the property of the Lessee and may be removed by the Lessee upon expiration or termination of this lease. All improvements on the leased proper =which remain 30 days aftbr the expiration or termination of this lease shall, at the option of Lessor, become the property of the Lessor without additional compensation to the Lessee, free and dear of all such claims of Lessee or anyone claiming under Lessee and Lessee shall Indemnify and defend Lessor against all liability and loss arising from such claims. However, Lessor may . elect to remove such improvements and charge the expense of such removal to Lessee. In the event Lessor elects to remove the improvements, Lessor shall make its PAGE 3-LEASE fp:,"%. ".i.w election within 60 days after expiration or termination of this lease and shall notify Lessee of any such election. 9.3. Maintenance and Repair. Lessee shall be responsible for maintaining and repairing the premises. Lessee shall be responsible for Lessee's use and its employees', agents', or invitees' use of the premises. Lessee shall, at the expiration of termination of this lease, surrender the premises in as good order and condition as when received, reasonable wear and tear, damage from the elements, fire, acts of God or other casualty excepted. Lessee shall be responsible and shall pay for all damage or injury done to the premises by Lessee or any person who may be in or on the premises with the consent of Lessee. in the event Lessee or Lessee's representative removes any or all improvements from the leased property upon expiration or termination of the lease, Lessee shall be responsible and shall pay Lessor for all damages to the leased property. 10. IndemnKicatlon. Lessee agrees to defend, indemnify and save Lessor its agents, and employees harmless from any and all losses, claims, actions, costs, expenses, judgments, subrogations, or other damages resulting from injury to any person (including injury resulting in death,) or damage (ncluding loss or destruction) to property, of whatsoever nature arising out of or Incident to Lessee's use of the leased premises, Lessee's activities on the premises, or any condition existing on the leased premises (including but not limited to the acts of employees, agents and others designated by Lessee to perform.work or services attendant to this agreement). Lessee shall not be held responsible for any losses, expenses, claims, subrogations, actions, costs, judgments, or other damages, directly, solely, and proximately caused by the negligence of Lessor. Lessor shall promptly notify Lessee of any claim subject to this paragraph and cooperate with Lessee in all reasonable requests for information necessary to defend any such claim. 11. Insurance.. Lessee shall, at its own expense, at all times during the term of this agreement, maintain in force a oompreheps mgeneral liability policy including coverage for contractual liability for obligations assumed under this agreement, blanket contractual liability, products and completed operations and owner's and contractor's protective insurance. The liability under each policy shall be a minimum of $500,000 per occurrence (combined single. limit for bodily injury and property damage claims) or $500,000 per occurrence for bodily injury and $100,000-per occurrence for property damage. Liability coverage shall be provided on an 'oocurrence' not 'claims' basis. The City of Ashland, Its officers, employees and agents shall be named as additional insureds. Certificates of Insurance acceptable to the City shall be filed with City's Risk ~Mariager prior to the possession of Lessee of the leased property under this ? agreement. These certificates shall contain provision that coverages afforded under the policies can not be canceled and restrictive modifications cannot be made until at least 30 days. prior written notice has been given to City. A certificate which states merely that the issuing company "will endeavor to mail" written notice is unacceptable. PAGE 4-LEASE i,:p..k.%,,,,,-dubA.1 12. Default. The following shall be events of default: 12.1. Rent Delinquency. Delinquency in the payment of rent in excess of ten days beyond the rental due date unless specifically extended in writing by Lessor. 12.2. Noncompliance. Failure of Lessee to comply with any term or condition or fulfill any obligation of this lease (other than the payment of rent or other charges. within thirty days) after written notice by Lessor specifying the nature of the default with reasonable particularity. II the default Is of such a nature that it cannot be completely remedied within the thirty day period, this provision shall be complied with if Lessee begins correction of the default within the thbly.day.pedod and thereafter proceeds.with reasonable diligence and In good faith to effect the remedy as soon as practicable. 12.3. Liens, Failure to rempUjigy lien or encumbrance -placed upon the leased lands. _ 13. Remedies. Lessor shall have the following remedies In addition to other equitable or legal rights and remedies in the event Lessee Is in default under the terms of this lease agreement . 13.1. Re-enter. Lessor may re-enter the premises Immediately and remove the property and personnel of Lessee, store the property in a public warehouse or at a place selected by Lessor, at the expense of Lessee. 13.2. Terminate. After re-entry Lessor may temtinate the lease on giving written notice of termination to Lessee. Without such notice, re-entry will not terminate the lease. On termination Lessor may recover from Lessee ell damages proximately resulting from the breach, including the cost of recovering the premises and the worth of the balance of this lease over the reasonable rental value of the premises for the remainder of the lease term, which sum shall be immediately due Lessor from Lessee. 14. Taxes, liens. Lessee shall pay all taxes or assessments levied upon the leased premises during the term of the lease. Lessee shall not cause any liens or encumbrances to be Imposed upon the leased premises and If any lien or encumbrance is Imposed upon such premises, Lessee shall proceed immediately to remove the lien or encumbrance. 15. Holdover. If the Lessee does not vacate the leased premises at the time required, the Lessor shall have the option to treat the Lessee as a Lessee from month to month, subject to all the provisions of this lease except the provision for term. 16. Assignment. Lessee shall not assign this lease or sublet the premises without first obtaWng' Lessor's written consent which shall not be unreasonably withheld. PAGE 5-LEASE m v. a.y -a ro.k,~ 17. Successor interests. All the covenants, agreements, conditions and terms contained in this lease shall be binding upon, apply and inure to the benefit of the heirs, executors, administrators and assigns respectively of the Lessor and the Lessee and all of such covenants shall be construed as covenants running with the land. This paragraph shall not be construed as consent by the Lessor to•the assignment or subletting of the premises. 18. Waiver. Failure of the Lessor to insist upon the strict performance of the terms, covenants, agreements and conditions in this lease contained, or any of them, shall not constitute or be construed as a waiver or relinquishment of the Lessor's right to hereafter enforce any such term, covenant, agreement or condition, but the same shall continue in full force and effect. 19. Entire Agreement. This lease contains the entire agreement between the parti_ •e~ except as otherwise-provided, can be changed, modified, amended; or terminated only by an instrument In writing executed by the parties. It is mutually acknowledged and agreed by Lessee and Lessor that there are no verbal agreements, representations, warranties, or other understandings affecting this lease. Lessor. Lessee: CHAIR gsii~nuo PARksQy{~'OCA110W Co~r~~ss~oa - : ;1y. PAGE 6-LEASE 4:P, w.a~-a b:k~i CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Discussion on Ashland Gun Club Lease Meeting Date: June 16, 2008 Primary Staff Contact: Don Robertson Department: Parks E-Mail: robertsond@.ashland.or us Secondary Dept.: Administration Secondary Contact: Martha Bennett Approval: Martha Bennett Estimated Time: 45 minutes Question: Does the Council wish to extend the lease to the Ashland Gun Club? If the lease is extended, under what conditions and for how long will it last? If it is not extended, how will the property be used? Staff Recommendation: This is a study session item for discussion purpose only. Background: The Ashland Gun Club has been leasing property from the City to use as its gun club facility since at least 1968. The current Ashland Gun Club Lease will expire at the end of June 2009. Members of the club first requested a lease extension in February 2004. On July 20, 2005 the Council and Parks Commission had a joint study session to discuss a possible lease extension. At that time, input was provided by the Ashland Gun Club membership, but community members did not get an opportunity to speak. The specific issues for consideration at that meeting were: • Does the City have an interest in extending the lease for the Ashland Gun Club? • Does the Parks Commission have an interest in continuing the management agreement? At the conclusion of the City Council study session, staff was directed to develop a draft Lease for City Council to consider, which would extend the years of operation by the Ashland Gun Club. Ashland Gun Club members prepared and presented a proposed lease to the City in June of 2007 but review of their draft was put on hold during the time while the City was hiring a City Attorney. Ashland Gun Club members and supporters have sent dozens of letters to the City requesting renewal of the lease. City legal staff developed a draft lease in March of this year. This draft attempted to address the issues raised about the Ashland Gun Club's relationship to their neighbors. This draft was circulated to the Ashland Gun Club and to many of the neighbors of the property. The draft agreement is attached. After they received a copy of the draft lease, several of the neighbors contacted City and Parks and Recreation staff to discuss their concerns. Before raising particular concerns about Ashland Gun Club operations (addressed on page 5), one of the neighbors asked whether the City Council had already decided to extend the lease. These neighbors asked to address the City Council to make their case both, about whether a gun club is an appropriate use of this property and about the particular conditions that should be placed on the operation if the City signs a new lease with the Ashland Gun Club. Page 1 of 7 061608 Gun Club Lease CC doc CITY OF ASHLAND Discussion: Should the property be used as a shooting ranee/gun club? The Ashland Gun Club property, along with all other City lands, is being studied for potential other uses as part of the facilities master plan. For the purpose of preparing for this study session, staff considered all of the options that the City Council has for use of this property. In all of the options, we assume that the City will retain some form of ownership (whether it's direct ownership or an easement of some kind) over the portion of the property that contains the Lithia Water wellhead and other related historic structures. Some of the options we considered are: 1. Allow the Ashland Gun Club Lease to expire, retain City ownership of the property, and convert the property to another use, as allowed by County zoning (addressed on page 4). 2. Allow the Ashland Gun Club Lease to expire, retain an easement or ownership of the Lithia Water wellhead, declare the remainder of the property surplus, and sell this remaining portion. As a variation on this option, the City could declare a portion of the property surplus and seek to exchange it for another piece of land, such as Clay Street. 3. Offer a new lease to the Ashland Gun Club which includes terms that limit the liability of the City for potential lead contamination and for all security issues and that address at least some of the "good neighbor" issues. The lease would also allow some limited use of the property for Public Works purposes. 4. The City could declare a portion of the property surplus (again, not the portion with the Lithia Water) and offer to sell it directly to the Ashland Gun Club. The City would address the good neighbor issues through deed restrictions, which could be enforced in court. Staff has not thoroughly explored this option, so if Council is interested in it, we'd want to do further work. The City does use the property not only for Lithia Water but for disposal of some of the spoils from public works projects and the street sweeper. The sweeper spoils were moved to this property after the City received numerous and repeated complaints from the neighbors of the "B" street yard. What Issues Need to be Addressed if the Ashland Gun Club Lease is Renewed? If the determination is to extend use by the Ashland Gun Club, the following issues will need to be addressed: • Good Neighbor Issues. Many of the concerns raised by the neighbors related to how early and often the Ashland Gun Club is used. Neighbors also are concerned about particular types of noise, such as that from repeating weapons or from weapons that have a great deal of power. o Hours of Operation. Should the use be restricted on weekends? Should there be one weekend day of no use or a later start time on weekend mornings? Should evenings, particularly summer evenings, be more restricted? o Limitations on the types of weapons that are fired (automatic, semi-automatic, and weapons that have a high degree of force and are therefore noisy) o Noticing to neighbors of unusual/special use o Traffic o Security o Use for National Guard Training. • Term of the Lease. A major component of improvements on the site is funding via grants from ODFW, DSL and other entities, most of which require a minimum of 10 year lease. Page 2 of 7 061608 Gun Club Lease.CC.doc 11FALAR CITY OF ASHLAND • Environmental clean up issues. One of the key issues for this property will be to ensure that the Ashland Gun Club can comply with the Best Management Practices for Lead at Outdoor Shooting Ranges as defined by the EPA. The City may want to require regular lead removal every three to five years. Federal and state grants are one of the means of obtaining funding for lead abatement. What Issues Need to be Addressed if the Ashland Gun Club Lease is Allowed to Expire? If the determination is not to renew the lease, Council will need to discuss these issues prior to deciding whether to retain the property for an alternative use or to declare the property surplus (and sell or trade it). • Land Use regulations that affect the uses of the property (see page 4 and attachment) • Lithia Water Access and Historic Resource Preservation • Environmental Cleanup Needs and Costs • Public Infrastructure issues, including the condition of the road and the lack of available electric, telecommunications, water and wastewater utilities • Bear Creek Greenway Extension (the original plan calls for the Greenway to link Bear Creek with Emigrant Creek on the north side of the property and eventually link to Emigrant Lake) Facilities Master Plan In January 2008, the City Council initiated a Facilities Master Plan. The Council appointed a Committee to make recommendations for future improvements, uses, and dispositions of all City buildings and properties The Committee has identified the need to combine the city yards, currently located on B Street and 90 North Mountain and East Nevada, and has determined ten acres are needed. The Committee has considered the gun club property as a possible future site for the city yard. Pros: • Land is sufficient in size to meet the needs of City yards and equipment • Reduces conflicts with the existing neighbors of the B Street and North Mountain Neighborhoods. Cons: • Property is outside city limits and outside UGB • Road is sub standard, is failing rapidly and will not support heavy equipment traffic • Property is low lying and parts of it are in the flood plain • No city utilities (water/sewer, electricity) • Several different well heads that produce Lithia water are on the property - if another well is needed city will need the flexibility to drill • Surrounding residential neighbors could be impacted by traffic and noise • Property location poses operational challenges: o Approximately 70 employees would add 7.3 miles to their driving time to work. o Staff estimates additional drive distance (from Hwy 66 to property) would result in approximately 330 additional gallons of fuel per week for city vehicles. Page 3 of 7 061608 Gun Club Lease.CC.doc ~r, CITY OF ASHLAND o City vehicles represent approximately 1250 round trips per week in and out of current city yard. • Property topography is hilly and not conducive to storage and access needs of a city yard. • Possible environmental concerns regarding installing fuel pumps, storage and equipment. The committee has not yet reached a decision on the best use of this property. Land Use Issues Affecting the Property Background and Site Characteristics The Ashland Gun Club is part of three city-owned properties (400, 700 & 800) totaling approximately 66-acres. Access to the property is from Emigrant Creek Road, a county road that passes through the northwest comer of the property. The topography of the area is varied, consisting of an expansive, relatively flat area along the property's northerly boundary, with the south and southeast potions of the property having slopes ranging between 10 and 30 percent. Additionally, Emigrant Creek, and its associated 100-year floodplain, traverses the north easterly corner of the property. Jackson County Zoning Designation The zoning is primarily Open Space Reserve (OSR), which is a Forest Resource Zone. A very small, insignificant comer of the property, lying just south of Emigrant Creek Road, is zoned EFU, Exclusive Farm Use. According to Jackson County Planning Department records, the Ashland Gun Club is a conforming use, permitted under the OSR zoning designation with a valid Jackson County land use approval in place (File 00-35-DAR). The purpose of a Forest Resource (FR) zoning Districts is to conserve forest lands. Various zoning districts, including Open Space Reserve (OSR), are applied to areas identified as forest land by Jackson County's Comprehensive Plan. A variety of permitted uses are described under the County's zoning code, including: • Farm and Forest Uses • Natural Resource Uses • Residential Uses • Commercial Uses • Mineral, Aggregate, Oil and Gas Uses • Transportation Uses • Utility/Solid Waste Disposal Facilities • Parks/Public/Quasi-Public Uses • Outdoor Gathering Uses City or public yards are not listed as an allowable use in the OSR Zone, and county planning staff did not feel, at least preliminarily, that it would fit under any of the permitted or conditional uses listed for the property. Additionally, only large-tract residential use is permitted, consisting of a minimum lot size of 160-acres; thus, the gun club property is too small to allow this use. Page 4 of 7 061608 Gun Club Lease CC doc CITY OF ASHLAND On-site Contamination Staff from the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) indicated that shooting ranges are required to go through an environmental assessment process for almost any change in use. Any activity that would involve grading or removal of soil also requires an assessment. There are various clean-up options that can come out of the assessment process and some similar gun club sites are currently undergoing cleanup at this time. Draft Lease: Staff has prepared a draft lease for council review and consideration. The draft lease agreement is an attempt to incorporate feedback from a number of meetings and conversations with gun club members and neighboring property owners. The provisions of the draft lease can be changed to address additional concerns. The draft was reviewed by two neighbors who met with staff to share their concerns. It should in no way be construed that the opinions of the two neighbors is representative of the entire neighborhood. Nor should this list be considered the definitive list of concerns of other neighbors. However they do present a thoughtful list of concerns that are believed to be shared by many of the neighbors. The concerns from the two neighbors that provided comments after the draft lease was completed include: 1. Grants should not dictate City Policy: This is in reference to the need to extend the lease beyond 10 years. • Response: There are federal and state grants for a number of activities. For example, the FAA awards grants for airport development, the Oregon State Marine Board provides funding for docks on public property, and the Oregon Department of Transportation supplies monies for transportation improvements. The terms associated with grant monies must be considered in all of these situations if the City wishes to receive the funding. Grant money is available for lead abatement, but the terms require a ten-year lease. It is in the City's best interest to take steps to make sure that lead abatement continues on the property, and grant funding is one means of ensuring that the City will not have to finance a clean-up in the future. 2. Automatic weapons/semi-automatic weapons - should they be there? • Response: Section 4.2(3) of the draft lease agreement prohibits the use of automatic weapons and weapons that exceed 6000 foot-pounds of muzzle energy. 3. National Guard or Paramilitary organizations (except APD) -should they be there? • Response: The National Guard utilizes the Gun Club facility for training approximately 4 times a year during normal facility hours. Generally the National Guard's use of the facilities consists of individual soldiers in the community using the facility to meet requirements. Section 4.2(1)(a) of the draft lease agreement allows use by law enforcement agencies and military units outside of the normal hours of operation by giving notice to nearby property owners at least two weeks in advance. It is the police force that may be utilizing this night time exception for special training. 4. How do we determine true noise context and restrict decibels? • Response: Section 4.2(3) of the draft lease agreement, which prohibits automatic weapons and weapons with a muzzle energy that exceeds 6,000 foot-pounds, is a means of restricting noise. The muzzle energy of the weapon is what determines how loud the weapon is when it is fired. 5. Reasonable hours - 10 am - 6 pm, closed either Saturday or Sunday, restrictions on Holidays Page 5 of 7 061608 Gun Club Leme.CC.doc C I T Y OF .-ASHLAND • Response: Section 4.2(1) of the draft lease agreement restricts the hours of operation during the week from 8AM to sunset, and on the weekends from 9AM to sunset. These hours were a compromise that came out of a number of discussions with the gun club and the neighbors since 2005. The ORS would allow shooting from 7AM to 1 OPM or any shooting conducted for law enforcement training purposes. ORS 467.131(3). Thus, the proposed hours are more restrictive than what Oregon law allows. 6. Paper Targets only, no metal targets • Response: The draft lease agreement does not currently address the types of targets that can be used, but the lease can be modified to restrict the use of metal targets. Currently the gun club requires the use of official paper or metal targets only. 7. No overnight or only once per year • Response: Section 4.2(4) of the draft lease agreement limits overnight events to one per calendar year; however, during the event the shooting range hours must be strictly complied with. 8. Require permission from City Council for any improvements • Response: Section 6.1 of the draft lease agreement requires the Gun Club to obtain the City's written consent before making any alterations or improvements. In addition, the Gun Club must comply with all laws, including zoning regulations, and building codes. 9. Financial Responsibility for hazards materials retroactive to current activities • Response: Section 4.3 of the draft lease agreement requires the Gun Club to comply with all Environmental Laws and specifically with the Environmental Protection Agency's Best Management Practices for Lead at Outdoor Shooting Ranges. Section 4.4 states that the Gun Club shall comply with all federal, state, and local laws at its own cost and expense. 10. Comply with DEQ noise regulations • Response: Oregon law exempts shooting ranges from civil liability for noise pollutions between the hours of 7AM and LOAM, or during law enforcement training; thus, the Gun Club is not subject to any noise restrictions. ORS 467.131. In addition, the Oregon legislature has pre-empted the City's ability to regulate the Gun Club property and declare shooting activities as a nuisance or a trespass. ORS 467.136. 11. Insurance coverage is too low • Response: Section 7.1 of the draft lease agreement requires the Gun Club to maintain a comprehensive commercial general liability policy of $1,000,0000. The City's general policy is to require $1,000,000 worth of insurance; however, the Gun Club currently has $2,000,000 in coverage. The lease could be modified to require more insurance. 12. Indemnification (who is the Gun Club organization? Bond?) • Response: Section 7.2 of the lease requires the Gun Club to indemnify the City to the fullest extent permitted by law, including reasonable attorneys' fees, investigation costs, and all other costs and expenses. 13. Default - who is responsible • Response: Section 11.1 of the draft lease agreement states that a default in any of the lease covenants must be remedied by the Gun Club. If the default is not remedied (generally within a 20 day period) the lease may be terminated and the City may collect damages. Page 6 of 7 061608 Gun Club Lease.CC.doc Mme, CITY OF -ASHLAND 14. Lease rate • Response: Article 3 of the draft lease agreement addresses the lease rate. The Gun Club is required to pay all taxes and insurance costs and provide at least three community events during each calendar year. Related City Policies: None Council Options: Provide direction to staff. No decision is needed at this time. Potential Motions: None Attachments: • Draft Agreement • Property Maps • Jackson County Land Use Code Chapter 4.3 • Lithia Springs Property Historic Significance The Council packet and minutes of the July 20, 2005 meeting are available on-line. Hard copies can be made available on request. Page 7 of 7 061608 Gun Club Lease.CC.doc 11FAWA Rebekah Brooks, LG, LHg JBR Environmental Consultants NW Division Manager/Sr. Hydrogeologist Once: 425-977-4994 Ext 101 Cell: 206-947-0325 Website: www.ibrenv.cdm In Response to Concerned Citizen Letter Regarding Environmental Issues at the Ashland Gun Club: Based on our review of the letter from concerned citizen, Cathy DeForest, her main concerns relating to the environment appear to include the following topics. Information that the City can relay to the City Council is provided with each of these topics below. 1) Impacts to human health and the environment through exposure to lead from gun club activities • The City has recently procured the services of a different environmental consulting firm (JBR Environmental Consultants) to prepare a work plan for conducting an investigation to determine the nature and extent of contamination at the Gun Club property. This action was in response to the comments from DEQ on the previous environmental investigations and the City's desire to address environmental concerns on the Gun Club property. • This investigation will be used to evaluate lead concentrations in soil and groundwater and assess any risks to human health and the environment. • It is the City's intent to obtain agreement with DEQ early in the process to control costs to the City and manage the schedule, so that decisions on the lease renewal can be made in a timely manner. • It is true that lead can leach to soil and groundwater, is persistent in the environment, and can be considered hazardous at certain concentrations. However, until the concentrations in soil and groundwater can be evaluated, the level of impacts to the environment, if they exist, cannot be fully assessed. • The schedule for submittal of the work plan to DEQ is March 28. 2) Potential migration of any impacts via flooding and to adjacent wetlands The floodplain for Emigrant Creek and the Greenway Setback can be identified during the planning process for the lead investigation. Depending on the results, the need for protection of these areas from the Gun Club activities or modification to the orientation of the shooting ranges will be evaluated. 3) DEQ's comments on previous investigations DEQ's comments contain requirements for the investigation, but they also allow for continuation of the gun club as long as any risks to humans and the environmental are addressed, as necessary, and as long as Best Management Practices (BMPs) are established to manage impacts to the property from Gun Club activities (i.e., lead recovery, reduction in erosion of berms, protection of wetlands). 4) Costs to City • The state of Oregon has programs by which municipalities can acquire grants or low-interest loans for cleanup of contaminated properties (e.g. Oregon Coalition Brownfields Cleanup Fund). 1BR has experience with assisting public entities with preparation of these types of grants. • As mentioned earlier, the City will be meeting with DEQ and getting concurrence on the planned investigation prior to implementation to control costs to the City and expedite the schedule. 5) Cultural Resource Site? JBR has archaeologists on staff that can help with determining whether the Gun Club activities have the potential to adversely impact any cultural resources associated with Lithia Springs. Hope this helps. CLINICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE ✓l~Saulh,mn Ors PC rv 3860 Crater Lake Ave., Sure B, Medford, OR 97504 March 1, 2011 Pbwr:541.858.1018 i}7r: 54L8581091 „ „ %clinicalresearchoregon.core Edward M. Kerwin, M.D, Medical Dinlor E.orcl(rnn arzr) To: Ashland City Council Conrmtlird to Public Meeting of March 1, 2011 Cmnpn...inu in Clminrl Rr.varrh Hand Delivered From: Edward Kerwin, MD Medical -Director Clinical Research Institute of Southern Oregon, PC 3860 Crater Lake Ave. Medford, OR 97504 Homeowner, WineryNineyard Owner Genesee Estate, LLC 955 Dead Indian Memorial Rd. Ashland, OR 97520 Regarding: Notification of Intent to File Lawsuit against the Ashland City Council Members and the city for breach of fiduciary duty, and suspected RICO charges if the Ashland Gun Club lease is renewed without required due diligence testing requested by Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. Dear City Council Members, This letter is to make it crystal clear that each and every member of the Ashland City Council, as well as the City of Ashland and the Ashland Gun Club, will be sued for breach of fiduciary duty and for possible racketeering charges if you today extend the lease of the Ashland Gun Club for more than a twelve month extension. The Ashland City Council and City of Ashland have a clear fiduciary duty to protect citizens of Ashland and Ashland public lands from chemical pollutants, heavy metal pollutants and other chemical exposures. Ashland city parklands do not have any certification or licensure to act as toxic landfills. Therefore, the city council has a fiduciary duty to ensure that all parklands under your trust and contract are protected from ongoing toxic waste, heavy metal pollution, etc. Not only does Ashland have a fiduciary duty to protect city parklands, but the following facts are clear: 1. The Ashland City Council in approximately 2009 commissioned a formal study to determine if lead wastes are building up in soils and groundwaters at the Ashland parklands leased by the gun club. This report's primary recommendation was that more study was needed to assess these potential risks. 2. The City of Ashland also referred the matter to the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ) in 2010. This body provided a detailed formal report. The primary recommendation of the Oregon DEO was that the original soil and groundwater study #I above was not correctly done. Groundwater samples were not obtained in correct wetland locations and soil was not sampled in correct locations. Therefore, the Oregon DEO recommended additional much more credible testing be done with additional groundwater and soil samples to assess potential or likely environmental damage at the Ashland park leased by the gun club. In summary, the science is clear. Both assessments #1 and #2 above recommended and essentially required further tests before any decision can be made. Since the City of Ashland has a clear fiduciary duty to protect city parklands from ongoing toxic pollution; and since the City of Ashland commissioned and requested two studies (#1 and #2 above), and since BOTH STUDIES recommended additional environmental sampling and testing be done, therefore proceeding to renew a long-term lease is in violation of the fiduciary duty incumbent on every member of the Ashland City Council. I and others will sue the city and the Ashland City Council for breach of fiduciary duty if the gun club lease is renewed for longer than a 6-12 month renewal without obtaining the additional soil and water and environmental tests recommended and required by scientific assessments 111 and #2 above. Racketeering law (RICO) rules apply when there is inside influence, favoritism or conspiracy used to illegally influence governmental agencies to make oversight decisions in ways that are outside of the law or outside of good governance. Traditionally, mobsters and organized criminals made payoffs to police officers, aldermen, city council members, etc., or they appointed relatives or friends to police positions or governmental offices. In those cases, governmental officers acting under the influence of friendships, or associations, or other non- fiduciary influences are guilty of racketeering. Racketeering crimes immediately go to federal court. Triple damages are assessed. The law is very broad to allow considerable scope of investigation when governmental agents are believed to be involved in racketeering. Jail sentences are possible as well. With regard to the Ashland Gun Club, any member of the Ashland City Council who has ever been a gun club member, or has ever shot guns at the gun club, or who has relatives who are members of the gun club, or who has close friends who are members of the Ashland Gun Club is immediately disqualified from deciding any question of soil and groundwater pollution at the Ashland park leased by the gun club. They must disqualify themselves. Even an appearance of impropriety must be avoided per good government rules, and do prevent racketeering influences on City of Ashland's municipal decisions. City council members cannot vote to sell city land to a friend or acquaintance, or colleague or family member. Similarly, they cannot vote to lone-term lease city land for $1 per year to a friend, a colleague- or family members or an acquaintance. With this letter 1 notify the city council that I will join in a lawsuit against the City of Ashland and each individual city council member who votes for a renewal of a long-term lease of the Ashland park currently leased to the gun club on suspicion of racketeering. Any Ashland City Council member who has ever been a member of the gun club, or any gun club, who has ever fired weapons there, who has friends, family members or long-term acquaintances who are members of the gun club, must recuse themselves, or they are in violation of good government rules and potentially engaged in racketeering. This notice is duly provided to the Ashland City Council at your meeting on March 1, 2011. Edward M. Kerwin, MD Landowner 955 Dead Indian Memorial Rd., Ashland, OR 97520 BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF ASHLAND, OREGON: IN THE MATTER OF: Preparation and Execution of a ) Lease Document Between the ) Request For Continuance of Public Meeting City of Ashland, Oregon, a ) Municipal Corporation, and the ) Ashland Gun Club, Inc., a ) Private, Non-Profit Entity: ) WHEREAS, the City of Ashland (City) owns a property located off Emigrant Creek Road, specifically in Townwhip 39 South, Range 1 East, abutting Sections 7, 8 12, and 13, Jackson County, Oregon, and, WHEREAS, the Ashland Gun Club, Inc. (AGC) has operated a shooting range facility on a portion of the property since 1968 under lease from the City, and, WHEREAS, the parties have been in negotiations for several years over the language and application of terms and conditions of a new lease, and, WHEREAS, the City has prepared a new lease document and sent it to the AGC for review, and has called a public meeting for March 1, 2011 to discuss the lease, and, WHEREAS, the AGC, in co-operation with the Oregon Shooting Ranges Association, has retained counsel to review certain language in the lease, and, WHEREAS, due to the timing involved in corresponding with the out of area parties and the fact the AGC received the draft lease less than two weeks ago as of the date of this correspondence, and, WHEREAS, the AGC believes that an Executive Session with the Council and representatives of the AGC and the Oregon Shooting Ranges Association is necessary to properly define certain language and conditions in the lease, NOW, THEREFORE, the AGC respectfully requests that the City Council for the City of Ashland continue any public meetings, public hearings or public discussions of the AGC/City lease agreement to a date and time specific, preferably April of 2011, to allow time for the proper notice of an Executive Session to finalize the lease agreement. St" SUBMITTED THIS DAY OF MARCH, 2011: 0 ASHLAND GUN CLUB, INC. C_ Parlier, President Cathy DeForest RECEIVED 1067 Emigrant Creek Rd. Ashland, OR 97520 MAP, 01 2011 541-690-6976 cathy@jubilationpress.com February 28, 2011 Mayor Stromberg & Ashland City Council 20 East Main Street Ashland, Oregon 97520 Via: Email Re: City Renewal of Ashland Gun Club Lease Dear Mayor Stromberg and City Council, 1 am out of town and would like my comments to be read at the March 1, 2011 City Council meeting. 1 appreciate the environmental studies the Concil has done in the past two years, but there is much more to do regarding the fiscal and environmental issues facing the City. Since you are poised to approve the renewal for the Ashland Gun Club lease for $1.00 a year for the next 25 years, 1 am would like to summarize the concerns I and the Citizens for Fiscal and Environmental Responsibility have raised since 2005. 1. Lead is a highly toxic substance that requires over 10,000 years to dissolve. 2. The City owns 66 acres of valuable property, renting 32 of the 66 acres to the Gun Club for one dollar a year since 1968. Because it is not safe for anyone to use the property adjoining the 32 acres, the Gun Club's activities actually control the use of the entire 66-acre parcel. Your new lease would rent the 32 acres to the Gun Club until 2036..Fiscally, the 68-year, zero income arrangement with the Gun Club does not seem fair to the Citizens of Ashland. 3. Even after spending over $60,000 of City money to assess the magnitude of the lead problem, DEQ has sent a report discussing the inadequacy of the study which was done and the need for further soil testing and environmental assessment. To renew the lease without such data is not responsible. 4. The Gun Club says they need a 10 year lease in order to receive grants for cleanup. However, in the past The Gun Club has said that these grants are very small in scope and the cost of cleanup in similar sites has ranged from $100,000 to millions of dollars. 5. The third and extremely important issue relates to the Historic and Cultural value of the Gun Club site related to its Native American relics and the heritage of Lithia Springs which helped to found the City of Ashland. Prior to earl settlers. Native American tribes used the Lithia Springs to take care of their sick and aged. Between 1911-1915; the 1_ithia waters were developed by the City of Ashland to promote mineral treatments. The water was piped from the I-nhia Springs to 111e Plaza in 1915 and is still piped there today. Statue 358.920 states that it is illegal in the State of Oregon to damage or destroy any archaeological site in Oregon. Leasing a nationally registered historic site seems illegal and fiscally and morally irresponsible. 6. DEQ stated in their Jan 19, 2011 letter to the City of Ashland that the layout of the Gun Club "discharges lead shotgun into the wetlands, which is widely recognized as a a practice that leads to increased environmental risk and liabilities." How can the Council renew a lease that continues these hazards? 7. Emigrant Creek runs the Gun Club site. Accordine to a report disc ibuted by the EPA. "When lead ammunition contacts the soil, it corrodes. similar to car rusting. the lead oxidizes to form corrosion products, precipitate onto soil particles and as a layer around the pellcls. The corrosion products are able to dissolve into the soil water (fixes) some of the lead. The conosiun process is effectively dissolving the pellets into the soil.' And "Contaminated shootine range soil: -has too much lead for the soil to soak up -much higher concentrations of lead are the result -chronic leachine of lead from the topsoil is likely to occur' How can the Council approve a lease that is known to conatminate soil and is ater sources that Ashland depends on? 8. The PEMA 100 year flood plan delineates acreage by Emigrant Creek that includes Ciun Club acrrage. What is the impact of lead if there is a flood? The recent DF:Q report also raised the issue of flood concerns. 9. Non lead ammunition is available, and City Council could make this a requirement of leasing the property. If lead ammunition continues to be used, constant risk will occur and consatnt cleanup wil be needed. 10. Between 1967-1998 the former Reeder Pistol Ranee near Granitc St. and Lithia Park was active as a shooting and skeet range. 1 ligh concentrations of Icad and leachable lead were litund and as a result. over 285 tuns of soil were removed at sienilicant cost. Nationally. Gun Club cleanup costs have ranged from 5200.000 (11 acres in lAichigan) to 525.0011 ,000 (b acre site in SI area). Neither the Gun Club or the Cite of Ashland has the money to clean up the site. Many law- suits have also occurred nationwide, some against cit governments. some against gun clubs. The City has an obligation to analyze its risks and utilize its assets for the benefit of the most people possible. Neither the City or the Ashland Gun Club have adequate sources of money to face such fiscal challenges. 1 I. Bear Crcek Greenwav Extension original plan calls for the Cirecriwar to link Bear Creek N\ iih Emi mrn Creek on north side of property and eventually link to Emi-,rant Lake. Potential lead erosion is an important issue related to the Gieencvay Plan and the Valdez principles adopted by the City to "render no harm`' to the environment. L. The Ashland Gun Club propery is surrounded h\ orrvanic farms; homes and cattle ranches. The property is also in unofficial bird sanciuarv with owls nesting on property a I'm acres awav. ~Ihe Min icsota Department of Resources in 2006 researched o0 citations worldwide on the impact of lead on wildlife, the cm~ironn-ent and humans. -['be)- found over 130 species of wildlife that have been reported as being exposed or killed bN lead ammunition. "phis includes birds, raptors, waterfowl and reptiles. II California has outlawed Iead in Condor breeding areas throughout the State. Recent]., a program in conju ction with the Porikind Oregon Zoo has developed a breedim-, program in Clackamas Comte to raise and reintroduce the Condors to Southern Orc'-ml. California and the Grand Canvo n. Grandmother Ames Pilgrim. Chairperson of the International Council of 13 Indigenous Grandmothers; and the oldest living member of the Taklima Siletz nation of Southern Oregon, publiclxstated that a tribe li~imp in Oregon is also workin- to reintroduce the native "Thunderbird' Condor to Oregon. Agnes Pilgrims main mission is to protect the waters and she is willing io supilorl efforts to protect land and waters so that the Condor will return. If the Cir approves the lease r%ithout taking further measures to protect the environment and the historic sites, ire regretfullN feel complelled to join with other environmental groups in i law suit against the City and the Ashland Gun Club. We are not opposed to the Ashland Gun Club, nve are opposed to the destruction of the environment and historic sites. We are also opposed to what appears to be fiscal irresponsibility in a time of challenging economic deficits. Sincerely. i tit Cathv Deforest Cc RGSC Barbara Christensen From: Melissa Huhtala [huhtalm@ashland.orus] Sent: Monday, February 28, 2011 11:56 AM To: 'Barbara Christensen' Subject: FW: Public comments for March 1 City Council Meeting Re Ashland Gun Club From: Leon Pyle [mailto:leonpyle@q.com] Sent: Monday, February 28, 2011 11:51 AM To: Martha Bennett; Carol Voisin; Meg Thorton; Russ Silbiger; Don Robertson; Dennis Slatterly; Greg Lemhouse; Mike Morris; Mike Faught; Mayor Stromberg; David Chapman; huhtalm@ashland.or.us; boswellb@ashland.or.us; Dale Shostrom Subject: Public comments for March 1 City Council Meeting Re Ashland Gun Club LEON PYLE, PhD 189 Clear Creek Drive Suite I Ashland, OR 97510 541 482-0491 leonpylephd(-,q.com www.tandemiourney.ore February 28, 2011 Mayor Stromberg & Ashland City Council 20 East Main Street Ashland, Oregon 97520 Via: Email Re: City Renewal of Ashland Gun Club Lease. Dear Mayor Stromberg and City Council, I am out of town and would like my comments to be read at the March 1, 2011 City Council meeting. As I and other citizens of the Rogue Valley have stated in previous Council meetings and in numerous letters to the City, the use of lead ammunition at the Ashland Gun Club is dangerous to the environment, to wildlife, to the wetlands, to Bear Creek. and to the preservation and public access to the historic Lithia Springs and Native 1 American relics. The majority of the Council has ignored the gravity of this information. Consequently, if the Gun Club lease is renewed, we will regretfully consider joining in a legal suit with other environmental groups to insure that the Council will take these concerns seriously. Sincerely, /s/ Leon Pyle Leon Pyle Cc: RGSC z Speaker Request Form THIS FORM IS A PUBLIC RECORD ALL INFORMATION PROVIDED WILL BE MADE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC 1) Complete this form and return it to the City Recorder prior to the discussion of the item you wish to speak about. 2) Speak to the City Council from the table podium microphone. 3) State your name and address for the record. 4) Limit your comments to the amount of time given to you by the Mayor. 5) If allowed, and not part of a Land Use Hearing, you may present written materials to the City Recorder for the record. 6) If allowed, and not part of a Land Use Hearing, you may give written comments to the City Recorder for the record if you do not wish to speak. 7) Speakers are solely responsible for the content of their public statement. Please Note: Comments or questions from the public that are of a defamatory nature, such as statements directed at individual Councilors' character, intentions, etc., are out of order because they interfere with the work of the Council. The Council as a whole will not answer questions but may direct staff to answer such questions at a later time. The Public Meeting Law requires that all city meetings are open to the public. The Ashland City Council generally invites the public to speak on agenda items and during public forum on non-agenda items unless time constraints limit public testimony. Please respect the order of proceedings for public hearings and follow the directions of the presiding officer. Tonight's Meeting Date~- ~ ` ( ~ f .~i(~S h~ Lc1lJ C~ I NameCA'~ uktK '_26 rL i.6T~.I T ( \G ti ~~I(b q9 '('Please, print) Address (no P.O. Box) X I Phone' 9 Z"o cy 6 Email Regular Meeting Agenda topic/item number - OR Topic for public forum (non agenda item) Land Use Public Hearing For: Against: Challenge for Conflict of Interest or Bias If you are challenging a member (planning commissioner) with a conflict of interest or bias, please write your allegation complete with supporting facts on this form and deliver it to the clerk immediately. The Chair will address the written challenge with the member. Please be respectful of the proceeding and do not interrupt. You may also provide testimony about the challenge when you testify during the normal order of proceedings. Written Comments/Challenge: