The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2013-1001 Documents Submitted at the Meeting - - National Cohesive Wildfire Management Strategy • Wildfire Response • Restoring and Maintaining Resilient Landscapes • Create Fire Adapted Communities 2 r t + b Fire Adapted Communities is not a recognition program,- an end goal or destination. Fire Adapted Communities is a systematic, collaborative, community-based program that is continually evaluated and updated in perpetuity. M7Fir~eAcdapted Community is in ormed and prepared citizens collaboratively taking action to safely coexist with wildland fire threat • Exists in or near a fire • Hasa wildfire evacuation adapted ecosystem plan for citizens • Adequate local fire • Fuels treatments are suppression capacity properly implemented • Supports design, and maintained construction, retrofit • A Community Wildfire and maintenance of Protection Plan (CWPP) ignition resistant with risk assessment structures and used and updated landscapes regularly How does a communityadaptto wildfire? Codes e ordinainces Exterior Fuel buffer Ready Prevention Education Forest Management fuel • Popp_ Fire Adapted cooperative fire:, agreements L Communities NINE 11111,11 Fire'Ada pted Community Tool kit • Firewise Communities • Codes & Ordinances • Evacuation Planning (Ready, Set, Go) * Fuels Management and Maintenance • Prevention and Education • CWPP & Risk Assessment Fire Agreements Crux: The CWPP Ashland's CWPP was written in 2003-2004 primarily in response to USFS Ashland Forest Resiliency proposal • The CWPP is the vehicle to address the "gaps" in Ashland's Fire Adapted Communities developing movement. • CWPPs develop community risk factors, create collaboration, prioritize mitigation and monitor, progress • The CWPP needs updating, question is how far do we go and who needs to be at the table? • Ultimately, the community decides what level of risk is acceptable... but how do we measure that? Ashland Moving to FAC Approach. • Firewise Commission Becomes the FAC Steering Committee • Develop a process to update the Community Wildfire Protection Plan • Establish priorities and action plans in four areas (Built, Social, Natural, Response) based on risk • Marshal the appropriate community stakeholders at each stage of the process • Firewise Commission guides reporting and updating of the CWPP over time and reports to Council * C 4_ ex Reaching Out' • Need to explain the advantages of the Fire Adapted Communities approach to stakeholders and other decision makers. FAC benefits: include: • Protecting lives and property • Firefighter safety • Reduced impact on our watershed, forests, economy Reduced impacts from wildfire smoke Avoid/reduce psychological trauma o . Increased sense of safety and well-being Addressing City Council Goals Fire Adapted Communities Addresses the Following City Council Goals/Objectives: Mitigate fire hazards in the urban interface • Reduce risks of fire in the city via weed abatement and Firewise landscaping and building practices • Improve public communication and community partnerships re: public safety policies and best practices • Maintain and improve infrastructure that enhances the economic vitality of the community • Support and assist foundational relationships with community partners • Review and evaluate current commissions for their mission and feasibility • Provide opportunities for community members to interact and improve health and social well-being for our community Barbara Christensen From: Rich Rosenthal [rich@council.ashland.or.us] Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2013 7:38 PM To: Barbara Christensen Subject: Fwd: SOTE contract Begin forwarded message: From: "Mike Faught" <fauehtm(d@ashland.or.us> Date: October 1, 2013 1:22:03 PM PDT To: "'Rich Rosenthal"' <ricKkouncil.ashland.or.us>, "'Carol Voisin"' <carol e council.ashland.or.us>, "Greg Lemhouse" <greg_nd,council.ashland.or.us>, "Pam Marsh" <pamAcouncil.ashland.or.us>, "Dennis Slattery" <dennis(d council.ashland.or.us>, <mike(d council.ashland.or.us>, "'John Stromberg"' <ohn n,council.ashland.or.us> Cc: "'Dave Kanner... <dave.kannernd,ashland.or.us> Subject: RE: SOTE contract Hi Rich... Thank you for submitting your questions in advance of the meeting. I am copying the entire council in the event they had similar questions about the proposed increase... Question #1. The original contract didn't come to Council in January, so why does the $7K series of change orders need to be Council-approved? Answer: Staff approved the original $17,000 contract in accordance with Ashland Municipal Code 2.50.120 Personal Services Contracts. In addition, staff has already approved a change order increasing the contract by 25%, which increases the contract to $21,250, in accordance with OAR 137-047-0800 which limits the contract increase to 25%. Increases above 25% require Council approval. Question #2. Additional expenses have already been incurred. What happens if the Council rejects the request? Answer: If the council rejects the request to increase the contract from $21,250 to $26,000 then the following deliverables will have to be eliminated: • October data collection and subsequent analysis • Sheridan Street and Grant Street specific traffic counts • Additional APD crash data review • Road Diet modification design review input • Final Council meeting Question #3. Who requested the change'orders? t Answer: All of the change orders have been generated by staff based on public input. We have strived to provide a detailed review of citizen concerns about potential safety issues raised during the one year pilot project. As a result of that input, the consultant increased the number of intersections evaluated and will be making some recommendations to modify the road diet configuration if the council decides to keep the road diet in place. Question #4. What projects will not be completed or considered as a result of reallocation of $7K in ODOT grant funds? Answer: Since staff has already approved the 25% increase the remaining request from council is $4,750 in potential ODOT Bike and Ped grant funds... While I am not sure how ODOT might reallocate the funds, I do know that they felt that it was important to have a good road diet monitoring program in place. The coordinator indicated that this project has the potential of generating interest in road diets on other ODOT facilities around the state. Question #5. What was the significance of the contractor's presentation to the OTC? Did it have tangible benefits, or was it strictly informational? Answer: I was on vacation and unable to attend the OTC meeting that day and our consultant was the only other person that could have presented the information to the OTC. Staff felt that it was important to give the OTC, as requested, a general overview of the project. My understanding is that it was a brief presentation. Question #6. Invoice 414 lists six hours of meetings with you. Is this accurate? Answer: Yes it is accurate. The consultant and I have had a couple of meetings with citizens that live in the surrounding area around the road diet as well as meeting on site to review concerns raised by citizens. In addition, we met to review the documents presented to the council at the last road diet update. Question#7. Is it essential that the consultant attend a JPR interview at $125/hour? Also, will the interview really last three hours? Answer: Staff believes it is essential from two different perspectives. The first perspective is that there are some citizens that believe that I have a specific bias to the road diet because I ride a bike, so having a consultant with nothing to gain answer questions from a radio announcer and subsequent citizens who might call in is important. The second perspective is that our consultant is the one who has been studying the pilot road diet and can provide the detailed responses to questions surrounding the study in a concise format. Michael R. Faught Public Works Director City of Ashland z 51 Winbum Way Ashland, OR 97520 fauehtm(a,ashland.or.us 541/552-2411 541/488-6006 Fax 800/735-2900 TTY This email is official business of the City of Ashland, and it is subject to Oregon public records law for disclosure and retention. If you have received this message in error, please let me know. -----Original Message----- From: Rich Rosenthal [mailto:rich@council.ashland.or.us] Sent: Sunday, September 29, 2013 10:26 PM To: 'Mike Faught' Cc: 'Dave Kanner' Subject: SOTE contract Hi Mike, I have a few questions about the SOTE contract on the Council consent agenda: 1. The original contract didn't come to Council in January, so why does the $7K series of change orders need to be Council-approved? 2. Additional expenses have already been incurred. What happens if the Council rejects the request? 3. Who requested the change orders? 4. What projects will not be completed or considered as a result of reallocation of $7K in ODOT grant funds? 5. What was the significance of the contractor's presentation to the OTC? Did it have tangible benefits, or was it strictly informational? 6. Invoice 414 lists six hours of meetings with you. Is this accurate? 7. Is it essential that the consultant attend a JPR interview at $125/hour? Also, will the interview really last three hours? I apologize for throwing these at you, but I figured you'd probably rather have these in advance of Tuesday's meeting and not be ambushed. Thanks, Rich PUBLIC RECORDS LAW DISCLOSUREThis is a public document and is subject to the Oregon Public Records Law. Messages to and from this email may be available to the public. 3