The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2013-337 Findings - Schofield & Monte Vista BEFORE THE ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL JACKSON COUNTY, OREGON October 1, 2013 IN THE MATTER OF RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND ) ORDERING THE LOCAL IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE ) CONSTRUCTION OF IMPROVEMENTS TO SCHOFIELD & ) MONTE VISTA STREETS CONSISTING OF GRADING, ) PAVING AND CONSTRUCTION OF CURB ) FINDINGS CONSTRUCTION OF CURB AND GUTTERS, SIDEWALKS, ) CONCLUSIONS STORM DRAINS AND RELATED APPURTENANCES AND ) AND ORDERS AUTHORIZING THE CITY TO BORROW MONEY AND ) ISSUE AND SELL NOTES FOR THE PURPOSE OF ) PROVIDING INTERIM FINANCING FORTHE ACTUAL ) COST OF THE LOCAL IMPROVEMENT ) APPLICANT: City of Ashland ) RECITALS: 1) On February 20, 2007 Council approved Resolution No. 2007-03 setting a public hearing with intent to form a local improvement district (LID) for the construction of improvements to Schofield and Monte Vista Streets consisting of sidewalks, curbs and gutters, paving, drainage and associated improvements.. 2) The Council has declared by Resolution No. 2007-03 to assess upon each lot or part of lot benefited by the improvement its proportional share of the cost of the improvement; and it appears to the Council that such improvements are of benefit to the City. All property to be assessed will be benefited to the extent of the probable amount of the respective assessments to be levied for the costs. 3) The Council, following proper public notice, held a public hearing on April 3, 2007, at which time a staff presentation was made, citizen testimony received and exhibits presented. Council approved Resolution No. 2007-10 authorizing and ordering the local improvements for the construction of improvements to Schofield and Monte Vista Streets consisting of grading, paving and construction of curb and gutters, sidewalks, storm drains and related appurtenances. 4) On April 3, 2007, Council approved Resolution No. 2007-10 authorizing the City to borrow money and issue and sell notes for the purpose of providing interim financing for the actual cost of the local improvement. 5) The Schofield and Monte Vista Streets LID No. 87 boundary was approved by Council as being all those lots with frontage on or taking sole access from Schofield and Monte Vista Streets. CADocuments and Settings\christeb\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\9EP311FQB\101513 Schofield Monte Vista LID Findings Conclusions and Orders (final).docx Page 1 of 5 ~I 6) Improvement Process A. Engineering On June 6, 2011, the City entered into a contract with Marquess and Associates of Medford, Oregon to perform preliminary and construction engineering for the Schofield and Monte Vista Streets LID project referred to as Project No. 2005-08. The engineering services contract was for $23,600 B. Neighborhood Consensus City staff met with the Schofield and Monte Vista Streets neighbors on April 14, 2011 a design review meeting to discuss the preliminary design for the project. Following some minor adjustments resulting from the neighborhood review, the plans were completed and prepared for bidding. C. Bidding Process An advertisement for bids was placed in the following publications: • Daily Journal of Commerce - 02/21/2012 • Medford Mail Tribune - 02/21/2012 Plans and specifications were distributed to plan centers and builders exchanges, and to potential bidders. A non-mandatory pre-bid conference was held on February 28, 2012 with seven potential bidders in attendance. On March 8, 2012 at 2:00 p.m., two bids were received for the construction of the Schofield and Monte Vista Streets LID project. The low bid of $344,164 was submitted by Pilot Rock Excavation Inc. of Central Point, Oregon which was $34,289 over the engineers estimate. The second bid was received from Kogap Enterprises sInc. ($373,800.00). On March 20, 2012, the Council approved the award of a contract to Pilot Rock Excavation in the amount of $344,164.00 for the construction of the Schofield and Monte Vista Streets LID. D. Construction Process A pre-construction conference was held on site on March 26, 2012. Following the conference, a notice to proceed was issued on March 27, 2012 with a 90 day construction timeline per the contract. Construction commenced on March 29, 2019. The project was completed in June of 2012. During the project there was one contract change order totaling $6989.60 in extra costs for additional retaining wall and concrete work. The final contract amount which was paid on July 5, 2012 was for $335,958.60. Now, therefore, the City Council of the City of Ashland finds, concludes and recommends as follows: CADocuments and Settings\christeb\Local Settings\Temporaryy Intemet Files\Content.Outlook\9EP3HFQB\101513 Schofield Monte Vista LID Findings Conclusions and Orders (flnal).docx Page 2 of 5 SECTION 1: EXHIBITS For the purposes of reference to these Findings, the following exhibits will be used: Exhibit 1 - Council Communication dated February 20, 2007 Exhibit 2 - Minutes of the February 20, 2007 Council meeting Exhibit 3 - Resolution No. 2007-03 setting a public hearing date Exhibit 4 - Council Communication dated April 3, 2007 Exhibit 5 - Minutes of the April 3, 2007 Council meeting Exhibit 6 - Resolution No. 2007-10 authorizing and ordering the improvement of Schofield and Monte Vista Streets under the Schofield and Monte Vista Streets LID No. 87 Exhibit 7 - Council Communication dated March 20, 2012 Exhibit 8 - Minutes of the March 20, 2012 Council meeting Exhibit 9 - Resolution No. 13-29 setting a public hearing date for assessments to be charged against lots within the Schofield and Monte Vista Streets LID No. 87 Exhibit 10 - Council Communication dated September 3, 2013 Exhibit I 1 - Minutes of the September 3, 2013 Council meeting Exhibit 12 - Resolution No. 13- levying special benefit assessments for the Schofield and Monte Vista Streets LID No. 87 Exhibit 13 - Council Communication dated October 15, 2013 Exhibit 14 - Minutes of the October 15, 2013 Council Meeting SECTION 2: CONCLUSORY FINDINGS REGARDING NATURE OF IMPROVEMENTS 2.1 The City Council authorized the improvement of Schofield and Monte Vista Streets from the end of current improvements northerly and easterly to the end of the right of way. The improvements consist of grading and paving, construction of curbs and gutters, sidewalks, storm drains and related appurtenances. 2.2 The proposed LID is in the best interest of the City. Evidence presented indicated that the City will have an improved street for all modes of transportation with reduced maintenance costs; enhanced environmental effects due to improved air quality and Ct\Docurnents and Settings\christeb\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\9EP3HFQB\101513 Schofield Monte Vista LID Findings Conclusions and Orders (final).docx Page 3 of 5 better storm water controls; and a demonstrated improved safety with construction of curbs, sidewalks and an asphalt road surface. SECTION 3: CONCLUSORY FINDINGS REGARDING BOUNDARY DETERMINATION 3.1 The City Council finds that it has received all information necessary to make a decision based on the Council Communications dated February 20, 2007 and April 3, 2007, public hearing testimony and the exhibits received. 3.2 The proposed LID boundary includes all lots fronting on or taking sole access from Schofield and Monte Vista Streets Liberty Street as depicted on the map attached to Resolution No. 2007-10. This boundary was selected as these 16 properties would be directly benefited by the improvements to Schofield and Monte Vista Streets. The benefit to these lots is readily definable and is much more direct than those who might simply use the street as a throughway to access their property. 3.3 The proposed Schofield and Monte Vista Streets LID is consistent with the 2007- 2012 Capital Improvement Plan and identified in the 2010-2011 budget adopted by Council in June, 2010. 3.4 The City Council did not receive a remonstrance sufficient to postpone authorizing and ordering the construction of the local improvement district. SECTION 4: NOTIFICATION OF PUBLIC HEARING 4.1 A notice of public hearing was sent to all listed property owners (determined from Jackson County Tax Assessment rolls) within the proposed assessment district. The public hearing notice was also published in the Ashland Daily Tidings. SECTION 5: ALLOCATION OF ASSESSMENT UNITS 5.1 Each of the 16 lots within the proposed assessment district has been allocated one assessment unit. In addition, several lots have been allocated additional units of assessment. Those lots with additional units are those lots that the Planning Department has determined can be further divided. The number of assessment units is equal to the number of current and future potential residential lots as defined in Resolution No. 99-09 and as shown on the attachments to Resolution No. 2007-03. The total number of assessment units under this LID is 20. SECTION 6: COST 6.1 The maximum assessable rate per unit is established by Resolution No. 99-09. The maximum rate established in 1999 was $4,000 per unit. This rate is adjusted each April in accordance with the Construction Cost Index established by the Engineering News Record Index (ENR record) for Seattle, Washington. The current rate to be charged for the Schofield and Monte Vista Streets LID No. 87 is $5,138.00 which is C:\Documents and Settings\christeb\Local Setings\Temporary Intemet Files\Content.Outlwk"\9EP3fiFQB\101513 Schofield Monte Vista LID Findings Conclusions and orders (final).docx Page 4 of 5 the maximum rate as of Resolution No. 2007-03 establishing the Public Hearing date. All costs over and above the assessment amount will be borne by the City. SECTION 7: DECISION 7.1 Based on evidence contained within the whole record on this matter, the City Council concludes that the establishment of the LID boundary is in the City's best interest, is justified as presented by staff and is supported by evidence contained within the record. 7.2 Council finds that the public hearing was properly noticed. 7.3 Council further concludes that the allocation of assessment lots and associated cost complies with Resolution No.99-09 and represents the benefit received by each affected property. 7.4 On September 3, 2013 the Council heard a staff report and public comment on the final completed project and the cost associated therewith and, based on the evidence presented adopted Resolution No. 2013-29 setting the date of October 15, 2013 for a public hearing to levy special benefit assessment costs. On October 15, 2013 the Council heard a staff report and public comment regarding the final assessments to be levied against properties within the Schofield and Monte Vista Streets LID No. 87. Following the hearing, the Council adopted Resolution No. 13 - Levying Special Benefit Assessments for the construction of the Liberty Street LID. The Council finds and determines that the final assessment as set forth in the Resolution and supporting documents is consistent with the requirements of AMC Chapter 13. Jo Stromberg, Mayor Date CADocuments and Settings\christeb\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Coment.Outlook\9FP3liFQB\101513 Schofield Monte Vista LID Findings Conclusions and Orders (6nal).docx Page 5 of 5 EXHIBIT 1 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication A Resolution Setting a Public Hearing with Intention to Form a Local Improvement District to Improve Schofield and Monte Vista Streets Meeting Date: February 20, 2007 Primary Staff Contact: Paula Brown, 488-5587 Department: Public Works / Engineering E-mail: brownp@ashland.or.us Contributing Departments: I,anal / City Recorder Secondary Staff Contact: James Olson, 488-5347 Approval: Martha Benne E-mail: olsonj@ashland.or.us Estimated Time: 15 Minutes Statement: In response to a petition submitted by a number of property, owners on Schofield Street, it is proposed that a public hearing be held to consider the formation of a Local Improvement District (LID) to improve Schofield Street and Monte Vista Street. The attached resolution (Attachment 2) will establish a public hearing date of April 3, 2007 to consider the formation of the Schofield / Monte Vista Street LID to construct curbs, gutters, paving, storm drains and sidewalks which would be funded, in part, by assessments levied against all lots within the proposed assessment district. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the attached resolution (Attachment 2 with exhibits) setting a public hearing to consider the formation of an LID to improve Schofield and Monte Vista Streets. Background: LID Support Staff received the most recent petition requesting the improvement of Schofield Street and Monte Vista Street through the LID process on May 20, 2006 (Attachment 4). The petition is signed by eight property owners with frontage on Schofield Street or Monte Vista Street. The number of accessible units represented on the petition is nine since one of the lots has the potential of being divided and is shown with a potential assessment of two. The percentage of accessible units represented on the petition is 39% of the total potential assessment units (See LID Boundary Map Displaying Current Petitioners, Attachment 5). The City-owned Hargadine Cemetery is also included within the proposed assessment district at four equivalent assessment units. If the City's assessment units are included with the currently petitioning lots in support of the LID, the percentage increases to 57%. There were originally thirteen lots with previously signed agreements indicating support for the proposed LID. The thirteen lots are represented on the attached map (See LID Boundary Map Displaying Prior Sgned-In-Favor Properties, Attachment 6) and constitute fifteen assessment units or 65% of total assessable units. Besides the Citys property, only one lot (at four equivalent assessment units) has not previously signed in favor. If the City s assessment units are included with the lots previously signed-in favor of the LID, the percentage rises to 83%0. Schofield Street and Monte Vista Streets are two of three remaining unpaved streets within the northwest area of Ashland, the third remaining unpaved street being Walnut Street. Schofield and Monte Vista Streets are two of the City's more challenging streets in that both streets have sections of extremely steep grades and surface erosion is a continual problem. The existing gravel surface can also be a hazard during dry weather as traction is difficult on the steep grades. G:\pub-wdcskn,\dept-adminlLID\Scho6cld Monte Vista CC Seaing Public Hearing I 07.doc Page I of 6 tl/~ Proposed Improvements The Engineering staff has met with the neighborhood on two occasions to discuss the proposed improvements, funding, schedule, etc. It was agreed that the design should incorporate the following parameters: Parameter Schofield Street Monte Vista Street Street Width 22 feet 18-20 feet Sidewalk 4 foot wide on one side None Curb & Gutter Both sides Both sides On-street Parking One-side only None Parkin Bays None None Actual street design will not commence until authorized by the Council, however, the Schofield LID design work has been tentatively added to the scope of work for the existing contract with Marquess and Associates, one of the City's pool of consulting engineering firms. Marquess is prepared to begin work as soon as the project is authorized. History On July 15, 1997 a public hearing was held to consider the formation of an LID to improve Sheridan Street, Schofield Street and Monte Vista Street. This public hearing was the culmination of efforts by the developer of Blossom View Subdivision (Bob Sullivan) to form a local improvement district to provide paved access to his subdivision. Resolution No. 97-25 set the date for the public hearing and proposed that the $238,115 project be funded as follows: $ 57,461 to be paid by Sullivan for the Blossom View Subdivision $ 180,654 to be assessed against the remaining 24 lots within the proposed assessment district. At the time the City did not participate in LID costs and the assessment rate was based upon a combination of lot street frontage and number of units. The proposed assessments varied widely from $2,960 to $22,723 per lot with the average assessment cost being $9,922. The proposal had few supporters amongst the neighbors as the consensus was that the developer should bear a much larger portion of the cost. At the public hearing more than two thirds of the proposed assessment district remonstrated against the formation of the LID thereby effectively stopping the LID process. The developer elected to improve only Sheridan Street to half street standards as part of the Blossom View Subdivision construction and was able to satisfy the planning commission requirements for access without forming an LID. LID Boundaries The proposed assessment district is comprised solely of those lots having direct frontage on or taking sole access from Schofield Street or Monte Vista Street. The benefit to these lots is readily definable and is much more direct than those who might simply use the street as a throughway to access their property. Many of the surrounding lots outside the proposed district, have already participated in LIDs to improve lower Sheridan Street, Tucker Street and the north section of Walnut Street. The district boundary is proposed to encompass only 16 lots representing 23 units as shown on the attached maps (Attachments 5 and 6). G.pub-wrks\cngWept-adminWDlSchofmld Monte Viva CC Sating Public Hming l 01doc Page2of6 Funding Estimated construction costs and proposed funding options for the Schofield / Monte Vista Street LID areas follows; 1. Estimated Construction Cost $353,000 2. Engineering and Administration Cost 34,000 Estimated Total Project Cost $387,000 3. City Credits; per Resolution No. 99-09 the City will contribute the following amounts to assist in the funding of LIDS: 60% of sidewalk construction costs 75% of storm drain construction costs 70% of street surface construction costs 50% of engineering and administration costs Based upon the estimated cost for the improvement of Schofield and Monte Vista Streets, the City would contribute: Sidewalk costs $27,040 @ 60% = $16,224.00 Storm drain costs $29,650 @ 75% = $22,237.50 Street surface costs $296,310 @ 20% = $59,262.00 Engineering/administrative costs $34,000 Q, 50% = $17.000.00 Total City Contribution: $114,723.50 4. Assessable Cost Estimated total project cost $387,000.00 Less credits $114,723.50 Assessable Total Costs: $272,276.50 Number of Assessment Units 23 Computed Cost per Unit ($272,276.50 + 23) $11,638.11 Maximum Assessment Rate per unit; Resolution 99-09 $5,138.00 (2006 costs) Amount to be paid by non-City owners ($5,138 x 19) $97,622.00 Amount to be paid by City property (cemetery) $47,352.44 Remaining Amount to be paid by City (SDCs and fees) $242,02556 Percent of cost born by non-City property owners 25.2% Percent of cost bum by City 74.8% 5. Sources of City Funding: LID from non-City owners $93,309.00 LID from Cemetery assessment (4 x $11,838.11) $47,352.44 Street SDC (15% of street, sidewalk & engr project costs) $53,174.13,; Strom Drain SDC (15% of storm drain & engr costs) $4,875.87 Street Fees $168,522.66 Storm Drain Fees $15,452.90 Total Project Cost: $387,000.00 G9pub-wrkskag\dept-adminU.ID\Schofiold Monte Vista CC Setting Public Hcaring 1 07.doc Pagc 3 ofb OWALO was 14 Related City Policies: AMC Chapter 13.20 sets forth the requirements and regulations of Local Improvement Districts Council Options: Council may either approve or reject the attached resolution setting a public hearing to consider the formation of an LID to improve Schofield and Monte Vista Streets- Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the attached resolution setting a public hearing to consider the formation of an LID to improve Schofield and Monte Vista Streets. Potential Motions: Council may move to adopt the attached resolution setting a public hearing to consider the formation of an LID to improve Schofield and Monte Vista Streets. Alternatively, Council may move to reject or take no action on the attached resolution and may direct staff to provide further information. Attachments: 1. Photographs 2. Resolution wl Exhibit A and B 3. Vicinity Map 4. Petition 5, LID Boundary Map Displaying Current Petitioners 6.. LID Boundary Map Displaying Prior Signed-In-Favor Properties G:\pub-w ks\eng\depl-admin\I-ID\Sch afield Monte Vista CC Sitting Public Hearing 107.doc Pap 4 of6 PHOTOS: Attachment 1 f u' Fem. " t i ,r - >.r Looking south toward East Main Street b .r r r.?r I Intersection of Schofield and Monte Vista Streets looking northwest G.\pub-wrks\eng\dcpt-adminUlD\Schofwld Monte Vista CC Sefling Public Hearing 107.doc Page 5 of 6 r! au Schofield Street from Blossom View Subdivision looking southeast f •t. Monte Vista Street looking north G:\pub-wTks\engWcpt-admin\LID\Schofdd Monte Vista CC setting Public Hearing 1 07.doc Page 6 of6 RESOLUTION NO.07- A RESOLUTION SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING WITH INTENT TO FORM A LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF IMPROVEMENTS TO SCHOFIELD AND MONTE VISTA STREETS CONSISTING OF SIDEWALKS, CURBS & GUTTERS, PAVING, DRAINAGE AND ASSOCIATED IMPROVEMENTS. THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. It is the intention of the Council to commence improvements to construct sidewalks, curbs, gutters, paving, drainage and associated improvements to Schofield and Monte Vista Streets. SECTION 2. The boundary description of the local improvement district is described as those lots fronting on or having sole access from Schofield and Monte Vista Streets as depicted on the map referred to as Attachment No. 1 to Exhibit A. SECTION 3. The city engineer's estimated cost of the improvement, including engineering and administration costs, and the proposed allocation of the cost among each of the property owners specially benefited is $387,000.00 of which $144.974.44 will be.paid by special assessments on benefited properties. Costs will be allocated based on Resolution 99-09 capped amount of $5,138.00 per equivalent dwelling unit or potential equivalent dwelling unit and the full amount of $11,838.11 per City-owned equivalent unit within the assessment area as depicted on Exhibit B. SECTION 4. The council will hold a public hearing in the Council Chambers, Ashland Civic Center, 1175 East Main Street on April 3, 2007, at 7:00 p.m., at which time and place the owners of the benefited properties may appear or submit written comments prior to or at the hearing as to why the improvement should not be constructed or why the benefited properties should not be assessed in the manner proposed. SECTION 5. The city recorder is directed to serve notice to the property owners by publishing a notice of the public hearing once in the Daily Tidings, not less than 30 days prior to the hearing, and by mailing copies of the notice by first class mail to the owners of each lot benefited by the proposed improvement as shown on the latest tax and assessment roll. The notice shall be in the form of Exhibit "A" attached to this ' resolution. SECTION 6 This Resolution takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. PAGE 1-IMPROVEMENT RESOLUTION G:\pub-wrks\erg\dept~admin\LID\Schofeld Monte Vista LID ResolNbn for PH 1 07 pcb.doc This resolution was read by title only in accordance with Ashland Municipal Code §2.04.090 and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of 2007. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of 2007. John W- Morrison, Mayor PAGE 2-IMPROVEMENT RESOLUTION G:tputfwfkslengldepl-adminlLlD'Schofeid Monte usta LID Resolution for PH 1 07 Pcb.doc EXHIBIT "A" NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING The City Council of the City of Ashland will meet on April 3, 2007 at 7 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street, to hold a public hearing to consider the formation of a local improvement district.as follows: NATURE OF THE IMPROVEMENT: Sidewalks, curbs, gutters, paving, drainage and associated improvements to Schofield and Monte Vista Streets. BENEFITED: Those lots fronting on or having access solely from Schofield and Monte Vista Streets as depicted on the attached map referred to as Attachment No. 1. ESTIMATED COST: The estimate of the local improvements including engineering and administration costs is $387,000.00 of which $144.974.44 will be paid by special assessments on benefited properties. Costs will be allocated based on Resolution 99-09 capped amount of $5,138.00 per equivalent dwelling unit or potential equivalent dwelling unit and the full amount of $11,838.11 per City-owned equivalent unit within the assessment area as depicted on Exhibit B. Additional information regarding the proposed improvement or method of assessment may be obtained at the Engineering Division, 51 Winburn Way, Ashland OR, phone number 488-5347, weekdays during the hours of 8:00 AM to 4:30 PM. All affected property owners may appear at the hearing or submit written comments prior to or at the hearing, as to why the improvements should not be installed or why the benefited properties should not be assessed in the manner proposed. If two-thirds of the property owner's to be benefited object to the improvement, the improvement will be suspended for six months. PAGE 3-IMPROVEMENT RESOLUTION G:tpub-wrksleng`dept-adminlLID\Schofield Monte Vista LID Resolution for PH 1 07 pcb.doc Ali (D Cn N m LL m m L----~ I m 2 U C O In ro r--.--~I 1 m N Z J Q O f; LL 7 K W r NA 1a- D1 6. m H z~m = o f M N L_o w W y Z 3 C F i _ m N V Z m O In 10 1[f -M M I n N F n x0'10 _ i Z O / I o° W C ~ Of O O C F ~ M t7 Q N N M co 1 U O ~~Oo Z W O on I.. Lnj °o° Ll1 om o~ I vn °n LL J O In o M I W~ = O ~ M M 0) - Q O ON L N0 ~ yn m ° U I a~ m r I Sn ~ ~ o c U I m~ N I N a i i I 4" ° n .c ~ N° Q I W ~i O ° W .yf M O! ON W O Y (Q C/1 N V T Cl) mm tom- ..m and ~ `0 Ob 1 I r ' Mm 1 MN N 6 1'. i 1 I ~ N ' N ry r IM ~ 1 . 1 N _ ry I m ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o v - ~ o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o v m-ai of cv ai ai ~ti ai ai ai ao <ti ai aim ~.id E j M NAp M N m M r M M M M r M [7 .M N n - M 01 ^ m E ui ~ o vi ai o vi ~ ~ vi o ui vi h r Q f9 Hi M fA fA fA k9 Ui m N fn M t9 NS bi H 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m .6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ .6 ,6 ao ai ai ai m ac ai ai ai ai ai ai ao - M M M- M M M M M M M M- M M N N N N N N N h IA to N N N h w N OI N N Q O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N ry N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N n n n r r r n n n n n r n n n o mrnrnrnrnrnrnrnmmmmmmo~r- 0 0 0 m 0 m m m 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 000000000000000 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c r m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m fA L L L L L L L L L L L Z L L L O G Q <<< Q Q" << Q Q Qm ¢ Q ~ m m m m v v ar m W m Qi w m m m m Q a m w m in M in W in w in in U) N N N N m m m m m m m y m m ja~a>>5 m>~>'>>in W c c a' d m m m- m N m m m c = - 'ma U U Z $ t o o o o x o o o 2 o n m y N N o N O m m a o 0 o v n W o u O m O N V M M M O M ~ 0 0 'at O W F ~ O V r Ol V V V< ~ V d V V V N S m W m m m `6 H m d M x z m w m: w W c m aCi F m m F y 5 v m m O =H m -i ~aU aw n w m.6 av 2 "M .5 c m ILL ~ eC U °b O U N m ~ vi u~ ~ 5 O O m2v6 may m U °K a>a Nm c N N J O W W m C m m 2 c a N E m U) x> m m 3 3 C LL y 0 C o O of o c f o o o n v O w w Q E~ ° N C c c y= c u o o 5 C 4 O U~o'1=CL a ~ciy Um' m`im U S a O ~ w m m 0 3 EL ~ ~ c N Q i v ~ ~ o m c d cL cL O O N T~ v m Z o m m m v az 5 d a a s m w m D W Z o Oni Onf m- N m Z Z> d E 2 N n n N tp n N y m O 4 °Q ♦ O N O O N N m' W- f 6666C:64 O m m 0 4F a n m d m m 0 m m m D) O O O. R J U Q O N M 0 0 O N 00- 't O O c J 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 W C m m O N N M M M N N m z Z N N N! v W Q Q Q Q Q O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n a o M M M M M M M M m m m mm m a' Z N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N p c 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m ~ W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W n r r r r Y_ O) O O> O> OI Ql OI OI Of CA Oi W W W Of M M M M M M t7 M M M C) M M M M lV ~j p N M Q N m r m Ol O r N M Q N . Z f tlr. q MI'~"'1 C ~ C~/~ W\ O W ® a o ~a' L.y { ~ v 5 f v O ' 1 ICI H~ G:, .r • oil. V V 0 . o avYiaeairv3nui _ `:r` F4 ~ . yr - antl ntl'n,H T + l\ q~ W Y,y 4 ,o. ~ ~ wt lyY v W MItlMnM J a' 15 Zo yN - i '15WtlN53tl9 ! m F n E NW ~ I ~ E41ji o PETITION FOR STREET IMPROVEMENT LOCATION: MONTE VISTA & SCHOFIELD STREET RECEIVED BY THE CITY ENGINEER: DATE: NOTICE TO PETITIONERS: Persons signing this petition must be legal owners of record, or purchasers in possession under a recorded land sale contract of real property abutting the proposed street improvement. If title to any parcel of property is in the name of two or more persons, all must sign. Petitioners should sign using their names as they appear on the records of ownership. TO THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND: We, the undersigned owners of record of real property in the City of Ashland, Jackson County, Oregon, hereby petition that: AU of the remaining unimproved sections of Monte Vista Street and Schofield Street to be improved with curbs, gutters, paving, sidewalks and drainage control features in. accordance with plans and specifications therefor as shall be adopted by the City of Ashland and the cost of such paving and improvements be assessed upon the real property benefited thereby and that we are the owners of the real property fronting (or benefiting) on said street. Name (Please Pimp Address / Tax Lot J ~u~7eF~~~~//%er"1 e ~i 1`f~efarl ~{(a5r~r~~f'F~d ac3 Z~ ~ u l4 ve`~ ~ rZS ~ R9aiol S~• # L/UO df~ 1 iCH & S ENDlZ C/ qMq-16( I? P7 4? A-W f ~f (o -7 O `/z/ ~ -Aso l Hy ~ct,u rel :tt 5BA210 Glp lewTWengWept-adminUMSchoreld Monte Vista Street Pang PeGtion.doc ~ bm I Z A go d f N O] f N C/) y ml o m T Q m r, M N N Ilk- i; (n z LL LL 0 U Q 0c 0 O m _ w rv Ut Q f' m° nC O Z U- W J N o N % (7N _[ON lL Q ~ Cd (Lm F Z~N Z U)WC ~~m go W ~ U)O ° I n -f -°nn F m o Qaci Z U, s Q p^ j J O O W U) q- Q O O J ! O U - (n o n o N rvQ1 ~ i °m~ p H ~ C Q U a~ U ^ ) oN ~ ~ i ~ N N a Q U) O nC ry~ I u)' ; Lr) f y O 0 O O ~ M Q ~ L /O a Q m ~ pQ lV yh ~'/n~ 1 ~O ~.C ~J ON M ' r m p N I, MIn i I in. m Q p ~ o o I 1 NQ M Qh I ('1 OI a o - p vi or ~ o N a i N n p ,O I N Om'.. ~ pp p N~ 1 N~ INr ~O I NN ~rpjN NH f m U V) E N Oro `N ~ (n a m i' N N I D _ I OmN Q 1n / / Mw > < WHO - z U) U-0 Oo X w I om m d d m f' Z~m / O N m N $ C L--- W F- W d 3 f. - Z W ZZ Q> C .n / mm 1 °m°n oo rn C7 ai 2 O J O m N L2 N Z (nW~ 00 W W ~`o^ U) 0 n M - U) I VF Q Z o22C) C) PM on 'Lf] °o~ L °m on ~w Qr R W LO Q O ----..__i J m_~-- LL a = rn U) o m o N m f Nm \ ~ ~an .~Oa ' OQ C v Op N p m t'~ c I Mo i f\ RQ Q pQ \ In Cn oo' W \ /N~ No Lf) co ) W S/ s rQ ~ ! Lo o~ mQ _ I p T QO I C1 Q. / L U) - 1 o Q N m .~-'~n~ ~ I ° N m m~ N ~Ob I ,r. Q ~ p Q Q EI I v v v ~ I I I _ 1 l Nm N Q 1 f I p m N m N N CJ N f~1 ~ • N Q } 1 NN NN N O I ~ I m m O O m - N M ~p • \ ryQ I Nn O - M iry ~ N _ N 1 Q m m O N m M b m m N m N n m N N N EXHIBIT 2 ASHLAND 0TY000NCIL MEF_71NG FEBRD'ARl'20, 200: PAGE I ofS MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL February 20, 2007 Civic Center Council Chambers 1175 E. Main Street CALL TO ORDER Mayor Morrison called the meeting to order at 7:15 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers. ROLL CALL Councilor Hardesty, Navickas, Hartzell, Jackson, Silbiger and Chapman were present. Councilor Hartzell/Navickas m/s to add to the agenda, items not properly noticed in the local newspaper, but noticed on the City's website. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the Regular Council meeting of February 6, 2007 and Continued Regular Council meeting of February 7, 2007 were approved as presented. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS Mayor's Proclamation of the week of February 26 - March 4 as "Peace Corps Week" and Proclamation of the week of March 5 - I I as "Multiple Sclerosis Awareness Week 2007" were read aloud. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Minutes of Boards, Commissions, and Committees. 2. Rio Communications Internet Service Provider Contract Approval. 3. Liquor License Application - Wild Wines. 4. Approval of Public Contract greater than $75,000 for Municipal Audit Services. Councilor Chapman requested Item #3 be pulled for discussion. Councilor Hartzell/Jackson m/s to approve Consent Agenda Items # 1, #2 and 44. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. City Recorder Barbara Christensen provided an explanation of the City's liquor license approval process and stated the application for Wild Wines meetsthe City's criteria. Ms. Christensen clarified this business will be making their own wine and they were required to obtain a home occupation permit, although the applicant has indicated they will not have customers visiting their business location. Councilor Chapman/Jackson m/s to approve Consent Agenda Item # 3. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. , PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Capital Improvement Plan Program (CIP) and Long Range Financing. Item delayed due to lack of proper notification. PUBLIC FORUM Paula Sohlt283 Scenic Drive/Stated she is a member of the Ashland branch of the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom. Ms. Sohl commented on: 1) keeping water services and watercommons under local democratic control and stopping the commoditization of water for private profit, 2) the Mt. Ashland expansion and its affects on the water, and 3) discouraging the use of bottled. water. Ms. Sohl provided ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MFET/N'G FF13RU4R}' 20, 11107 PAGE2rJti refillable water bottles and a Brila water filter system to the Council. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Approval of Ballot Measure Language for revised City Charter and City Manager Language. - Management Analyst Ann Seltzer explained that the Council has reached the point of approving the ballot measure language. She noted the packet materials include the updated explanatory statements as well as statements submitted by former City Councilor Don Laws. John Stromberg/252 Ridge Road/Shared his concerns with the city manager amendment provision that allows council members to remove a fellow member for indirect coercion of the city manager or a candidate for the city manager position, and stated this language is extremely broad and vague. Art Bullock/Stated the ballot measure language fails to describe the effects of the changes and therefore does not meet the Oregon requirements. Mr. Bullock submitted potential problems and remedies for the proposed charter ballot language to the Council. He commented that there is no effect of changing the current charter to align with State law, since State law already trumps City law. He also commented on the city manager amendment and stated this change gives the city administrator (renamed city manager) the power to hire and fire department heads without approval of the Mayor or Council. He stated the law requires the City tell the voters the effects ofa "yes" or "no" vote and noted there are also typographical errors that need to be corrected. Ralph Templel,150 Myer Creek Road/Briefly commented on his recent experience with the Ashland Hospital and stated the community should be proud of this facility. Mr. Temple urged the Council to remove the charter provision that allows four councilors to remove the other two. He stated this is a d isastrous element to include in the City's constitution and he could not find anywhere where the Charter Review Committee discussed this. He also noted the water provision and the selling ofparks lands provision and suggested these controversial provisions be placed as separate ballot measures to give voters a clean vote on every issue. Comment was made questioning if the Council should remove Section (i) completely. City Attorney Mike Franell clarified the CityCouncil discussed this provision at the Study Session meeting held last February. He stated this provision is included in the model charter and it is important in the city manager form of government to deter interference on the part of the Council with the manager's abilityto properly manage the city department heads. He added if Council is concerned with the four out of six requirement, they could switch it to five out of six. Mr. Franell clarified the term "indirectly" used in Section (i). Ile stated this would apply to councilors using a th ird party to tryto place influence on the city manager. Writing letters to the editor or submitting coercion via email would also be considered indirect coercion. Comment was made that this language was included because coercion can occur, and the purpose of this provision is provide the professional city manager some autonomy in terms of hiring or firing. Mr. Franell added if the Council decides to removes this language it would not fatally flaw the charter, but it will make the city manager's authority weaker. - Councilor Hartzell and Navickas voiced support for removing Section (i). City Administrator Martha Bennett suggested the Council could choose to remove "or administrative decisions" if they are uncomfortable with this language. Mr. Franell commented on the water provision language listed in Chapter 12, Section 43 and clarified the wording is the same as that in the existing charter, except the term "residents" has been changed to "inhabitants'. He noted the Council discussed this issue back in December and made the decision to use the term "residents". Councilor Jackson/Silbiger m/s to accept the materials and place them on the ballot, using the question statements presented by staff and the explanatory statements presented by Don Laws, with no changes ASHLAND C/T)' COUNC'll- ;l1EETING 17£QRUAR)'20, 1007 PAGE3 ofS to the proposed charter, but allowing for typographical and grammatical corrections. DISCUSSION: Councilor Jackson voiced her concern that they are starting to wordsmith the document. She stated if they are going to move towards a city manager form of government she would prefer to rely on the work done by the Charter Review Committee and their study of the model charter components. She added the proposed language is clear that the administrative decision regarding personnel matters are to be handled by the city manager. Councilor Hartzell stated she is not readyto accept Mr. Laws'submission and questioned the term "franchise" in the water provision language. Mr. Franell clarified this language would prevent the City from selling off its treatment works or contracting out to a private entity to operate the City's treatment works. Councilor Hardesty commented that she could not find where the Charter Review Committee discussion Section (i) of the city manager amendment. Councilor Hardesty/Hartzell m/s to amend the motion so that Section (i) of the City Manager amendment reads, "Neither the mayor nor a councilor may attempt directly or indirectly to coerce the manager of a candidate for the office of manager in the appointment or removal of any city employee." DISCUSSION: City Recorder Barbara Christensen requested advice from the City Attorney and stated the amendment appears to change the intent of the original motion. Mr. Franell agreed that the amendment would not be allowed since it changes the intent of the original motion. Motion died. DISCUSSION (Cont.): Councilor Navickas stated he would not support the motion and stated he would prefer to see staff come back with something that is more of a combination of what Mr. Laws' wrote and what staff put forward. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Chapman, Silbiger, and Jackson, YES. CouncilnrNavickas, Hardesty, and Hartzell, NO. Mayor Morrison, NO. Motion failed 4-3. Mayor Morrison explained he voted no because it included Don Laws' language and voiced support for the wording proposed by staff. Councilor Hardesty/Hartzell m/s accept this ballot language with the exception of Don Laws' proposal and Section 35(i) should read "Neither the mayor nor a councilor may attempt directly or indirectly to coerce the manager or a candidate for the office of manager in the appointment or removal of any city employee". DISCUSSION: Councilor Hardesty clarified for staff the motion allows for changes to correct grammatical errors, as well as the removal of Section 3l(b)7 to maintain consistency. Mr. Franell clarified State statute currently prohibits the selling of land that has been purchased with funds dedicated for park purposes. Councilor Silbiger voiced his concern with eliminating the penalty language in Section 35(i). Mr. Franell clarified this motion would remove the penalty language from the charter, but noted the Council could specify disciplinary action for breach of councilor duties in their Counci l Rules. He added generally fora rule to be effective there has to be some mechanism for enforcement. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Silbiger, Navickas, Hardesty, Chapman, Hartzell, and Jackson, YES. Motion passed. 2. Library Short-Term Funding Discussion. City Administrator Martha Bennett explained at their last meeting, Council discussion levying $.32/1,000 assessed property value for library operating costs and directed staff to determine where additional funds might be found. She stated staff anticipates it will cost approximately $1.2M to $1.4M annually to operate the Ashland library. The levy would generate approximately $560,000, which leaves a short fall of roughly $860,000 per year. Ms. Bennett explained at the end of FY06, there was roughly $IM in unanticipated carry-forward in the general fund, and the City anticipates this money will still be available at the end of FY07. Ms. Bennett suggested this money could be used to support the library and recommended using half the $l M for this year and the other half for next. She stated staff is assuming the City would have to operate the library fortwo years before a regional solution can be formed. She stated the remainder of funds could come from a utility ASHLAND CITY COUN'C'IL 41EE77N'G FEQRUARY20, 200' PAGE1 rfS surcharge of approximately 1.5%, with 1% going to the library and .5% allocated to the Low Income Assistance Program. Administrative Services Director Lee Tuneberg commented on how the City ended up with excess money in the ending fund balance and explained the Council has the ability to use this money for a specific project, such as this, to offset future increases, or pay for other operations. Ms. Bennett noted that some of this money was saved due to staffing shortages in some ofthe departments and cautioned that once department are fully staffed this reduced spending level will not continue. She voiced her support for using this money for a one-time occurrence such as this. Mr. Tuneberg clarified $173,000 of this moneycame from contingencies and he provided a brief explanation of the City's Low Income Energy Assistance Program. Comment was made voicing support for keeping the library open, but having reduced levels of service during this interim and finding out what the County is willing to contribute. Management Analyst Ann Seltzer stated the only thing staff knows for certain is the cost of facilities and utilities. She noted staff is in the process of setting up meetings with Jackson County to discuss what it will take to keep the library open. Ms. Seltzer clarified staffs assumption is that the City will operate the library at a "bare bones" level; but stated if this is the only library in the County that is open, it will be much busier than it is now and noted the City also needs to consider a potential user fee for non-residents. Council discussed their preferences for the library funding options. Councilor Navickas voiced his interest in maintaining the current hours and staffing at the library. He stated he does not support raising utility fees and suggested they look at other funding sources within the budget, and suggested possibly deferring capital improvement projects or using private fundraising. Councilor Silbiger voiced support for placing a measure on the ballot, even just an advisory measure, to see if the citizens support this endeavor. Councilor Jackson noted the importance of the Ashland citizens voting to support the County measure and stated the City should not place a funding measure on the ballot that is in competition with the County's measure. Councilor Chapman voiced support for placing a parallel $.66 measure on the ballot and stated the Ashland citizens would realize that if the County measure passes, the local measure would not take affect. Mayor Morrison noted if the County's $.66 measure passes, all the money might not be dedicated to the library system. Councilor Hartzell suggested the City influence the County to dedicate the $.66 to the library. She also questioned if there would be a way for the City to work with Southern Oregon University and combined the best of the two systems for less than the $1.2M figure in the event the County measure fails. Ms. Bennett agreed that the City could make a constructive suggestion to the County and believes they will be open to the City's concern. Councilor Navickas motion to maintain the $32 property tax increase; look to allocating any fund balance to our libraries; and direct staff to continue to search for more alternatives for funding, including Capital Improvement Project deferment. Motion died due to lack of second. Ms. Bennett suggested the Council direct staff to build the budget and a funding strategy for the library and bring this back to Council as part of the budget process. She clarified staff would meet with the County, contact SOU and see what they can offer, and continue to look for relationships to buy down the costs. Councilor Jackson/Silbiger m/s todirectstaffto build an operating budget and funding mechanism for the libraries as part of the budget process, and include relationships with SOU and Ashland School District. DISCUSSION: Ms. Bennett clarified the purpose is to keep the Ashland Public Library open but noted staff would not have the problem solved by the April 7 closing date set by the County. Roll Call Vote: ASHLAND C IT)' 000NC'IL MEETING FEBRUAR)'20, 2007 PAGE 5 of S Councilor Silbiger, Navickas, Hardesty, Jackson, YES. Councilor Hartzell and Chapman, NO. Motion passed 4-2. 3. Decision on North Ashland Bike Path Funding. Public Works Director Paula Brown explained this issue was originally brought before Council at their Study Session on December 4, 2006 and reported the Bicycle & Pedestrian Commission issued their approval of Option 2 at their meeting held on January 18, 2007. She explained Option 2 involves terminating the funding agreement with ODOT/FHWA, repaying the approximate $90,000, and redirecting staff to proceed with looking foraltematives forthe bike path. Ms. Brown reported that ODOT cannot transfer this fundingpackage to another project at this time. She also reported that the Federal Highways Administration is a 10-year program and the City notify ODOT and FHWA that the City's wishes to repay, the $90,000 at the end of the 10-year period. Ms. Brown recommended that Council accept Option 2. Art Bullock/Spoke in support of Option 2 and stated this is a good example of the need for localization. Mr. Bullock stated there is a need in the community for this bike path and stated the path along the railroad tracks is a major and needed alternative to biking on Main Street. He stated the section between Laurel Street and Jackson Road is 60% done and recommended that the City work to finish this section. Councilor Jackson/Chapman m/s to approve staff recommendation of Option 02. DISCUSSION: Councilor Jackson clarified her motion is to accept Option 2 which stops work on the current design and reimburses ODOT/FHWA the grant funds expended to date within an appropriate time frame. Ms. Brown clarified staff could put what they have set aside for this project in the bank and let it grow in anticipation of the $90,000 repayment. Councilor Hartzell request Ms. Brown contact her to discuss the significance of the County vacating Jackson Road. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. 4. Mt Ashland Discussion and Follow-Up. City Administrator Martha Bennett provided a brief report. Stated staff contacted the attorney representing ML Ashland Association based on their letter and asked them if they would entertain mediation. They replied that they would be open to mediation and would like to have the first of a series of mediation sessions within the next two few weeks. Ms. Bennett requested Council discuss the designation of a mediation team during an Executive Session and formalize their appointments in operrsession. She clarified any tentative mediation agreement would have to come back to the full council for approval in open session. Ms. Bennett stated staff would schedule an Executive Session and Special Meeting following the Study Session on Thursday, January 22. Suzanne Frey/1042 Oak Knoll Drive/Stated she is pleased to hear the Council and Mt. Ashland Association are discussing mediation and submitted a handout into the public record. Ms. Frey stated she is a skier and supports the expansion, but is also an environmentalist and does not want to see the watershed harmed. She commented on the lease itself and the role of the City, stated the lease does not give the City much authority > over the ski area and the expansion, and stated the Forest Service is the entity that is accountable and has the authority for protecting the environment. Ms. Frey briefly commented on the map attached to the 1992 agreement and encouraged the Council to read pages 30-34 of Judge Panner's opinion. Councilor Hartmil[Hardesty m/s to extend meeting until 10:30 p.m. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS 1. Designate of Elected Official Liaison to ICLEI. Councilor Chapman motion to appoint Mayor Morrison. Motion withdrawn. I ASHLAND CITY COUNCII, .HEETING FEBRUARI"20, 200% PAGE 6 ujb' Councilor Hardesty/Chapraan m/s to appoint Kate Jackson. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. 2. Comment on Jackson County Ordinance on Destination Resorts. Art BullockNoiced support for the letter and suggested they send a councilor, the Mayor, or the City Attorney to the hearing scheduled for tomorrow, February 23. Mr. Bullock stated the County's ordinance is not well planned or well thought out and encouraged the City to be represented at tomorrows hearing. Councilor Chapman/Hartzell m/s to authorize the Mayor to sign letter and send to Jackson County expressing the City's position on proposed amendments to Jackson County Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Ordinance. DISCUSSION: Councilor Hardesty noted there are some typographical errors that she will submit. Councilor Jackson stated she would be attending the hearing tomorrow and invited the other councilors to join her. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Jackson, Silbiger, Hartzell, Hardesty, Navickas and Chapman. Motion passed. ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS 1. First Reading of a Resolution Titled "A Resolution Authorizing Signatures, Including Facsimile Signatures, for Banking Services on Behalf of the City of Ashland." Councilor Jackson/Hartzell m/s to approve Resolution 42007-05. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Navickas, Hartzell, Silbiger, Hardesty, Chapman and Jackson, YES. Motion passed. 2. First Reading of a Resolution Titled "A Resolution of the City of Ashland, Oregon, Declaring Official Intent to Reimburse Expenditures." Administrative Services Director Lee Tuneberg explained the proposed resolution allows the City to reimburse itself for a project that has been budgeted. He noted the Conservation Commission recommended last year that the City consider issuing bonds to fund a project to build solar energy that could be sold to the public. Mr. Tuneberg explained in order to do so, the City needs to pass this resolution which states if we go ahead with the project, and we do issue bonds to finance it, we will reimburse ourselves for any costs paid up front. Art BullockNoiced support for the resolution and urged the Council to pass the resolution to move forward quickly to purchase the panels. Mr. Bullock explained there is a worldwide shortage of solar panels because: 1) the industry is not able to get the silicon they need to produce the panels, 2) there is a dramatic demand from Eastern Europe, and 3) the United States is being hit hard by the dollar devaluation and there is only one company in the U.S. making the panels. Councilor Jackson/Hartzell m/s to approve Resolution #2007-04. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Silbiger, Hartzell, Chapman, Navickas, Jackson and Hardesty, YES. Motion passed. 3. First Reading of a Resolution Titled "A Resolution Setting a Public Hearing with Intent to Form a. Local Improvement District for Construction of Improvements to Schofield and Monte Vista Streets Consisting of Sidewalks, Curbs & Gutters, Paving, Drainage and Associated Improvements." Public Works Director Paula Brown explained this item has been brought forward in response to a petition submitted by eight of the property owners on Schofield Street. As of today, only 39% of the property owners are in favor of the petition, however ifyou look at those who previously signed agreements indicating support it is 65% of the property owners, which excludes the City's property. Ms. Brown noted the Council is scheduled to discuss the overall LID process in April, and clarified this resolution would setthe public hearing for the Schofield/Monte Vista LID. Ms. Brown clarified the City does own property within the proposed assessment district and will pay as a ASHL tND CITY" COUNCIL MEET/NC FEBRUARY' 20, 2007 PdOE7of8 property owner for those four lots. Austin Brayfield/400 Monte Vista Drive/Stated there are a lot of residents in this neighborhood that are against the paving and suggested these dollars be used to fund the library instead. Art Bullock/Stated the Council should not proceed with a public hearing forthe following reasons: 1) the LID process review has not been completed, 2) the majority of the neighborhood does not support the LID, 3) the City's ownership of property within the proposed assessment means the Council is an impartial party and cannot participate in the quasi judicial hearing, 4) the language of the resolution does not meet the legal requirement and notice should be sent to all properties that will be affected bythe LID, not just those that will benefit, and 5) this LID is dealing with numbers that are extremely high and one property owner will owe more than $20,000. Mr. Bullock urged the Council to not set a public hearing until these issues have been resolved. Comment was made that this LID should be postponed until the Council has had the opportunity to discuss the LID process. Opposing comment was made that staff has been aware of this project and had it on the capital improvement plan for some time, and suggesting Council proceed with scheduling the hearing. Councilor JacksonfHartzell m/s to approve Resolution #2007-03. DISCUSSION: City Attorney Mike Franell clarified in the past the Council has interpreted the word "affected" as those who would be issued an assessment for the LID, however Council could change their interpretation. Councilor Jacksou/Hartzell m/s to amend motion to add noticing to the Sheridan Street residences. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Hardesty, Chapman, Jackson, Silbiger, Navickas, and Hartzell, YES. Motion passed. Roll Call Vote on Amended Motion: Councilor Hartzell, Silbiger, Jackson and Chapman, YES. Councilor Navickas and Hardesty, NO. Motion passed 4-2. 4. First Reading by title only of an Ordinance Titled "An Ordinance Amending AMC 3.08.020 To Apply Ethics Provisions to Employees, Appointed Officials and Elected Officials." Colin Swales/461 Allison Street/Voiced support for the proposed ordinance, but noted he had submitted some suggested amendments to staff. _ Art Bullock/Distributed to Council his suggested revisions and stated the City needs an ethics law that does the following three things: l) keep public officials out of hot water, 2) defines a transparent and fair process to resolve ethics disputes, and 3) saves taxpayer money from needless employee lawsuits due to ambiguity in the code. Mr. Bullock stated the proposed ordinance does not accomplish any of these objectives and stated the ordinance is unconstitutional because it restricts the political rights of cityemployees. Ile stated the ordinance has no explanation of how to resolve ethics violations and voiced his concern with the special exceptions included forthe City Attorney and City Administrator. City Attorney Mike Franell provided an explanation of the amendments submitted by Mr. Swales_ He stated Section E(4) of the proposed ordinance expands on the State's prohibition and prohibits an appointed official from representing a client for hire before any City board or commission. He noted elected officials were not included in this provision because councilors are already restricted by the State from representing client for hires in this manner. However, Mr. Swales correctly pointed out that city councilors are not the only elected officials in Ashland and the proposed language would not apply to the City's Parks Commissioners. Mr. ASHLAND CITFCOUNC'IL A1F.ETING FF_8RU.4RY' 20, 700' PAGE S c jS Franc]] stated if Council.wishes to extend the prohibition, the ordinance would need to be re-worded to specifically include the Parks Commissioners. Mr. Franell commented on the State's standards forjudicial conduct that applies to municipal judges and recommended the Council review the State's provision as a separate itern and adopt a separate ordinance. Councilor Navickas noted he is a designer and will have to come before the Hearings Board soon to ask for a conditional use permit. It was recommended that Councilor Navickas meet with the City Attorney about his particular situation since the law currently prohibits him from doing this. Mr. Franell commented on the pro bono loophole identified by Mr. Swales and Mr. Swales' suggestion to add in the pro bono aspect and include a mirror of the State language of "represent or represent for hire" so that officials could not side step the prohibition by working pro bono for a client. Remainder of discussion and decision delayed due to time constraints. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS (None) ADJO~7RN"'Td Mee ' g adjourned at 103 tf~f f \ Barbara Christensen, City Recorder t ,n W. Morrison, Ma or S EXHIBIT 3 RESOLUTION NO.2007- A RESOLUTION SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING WITH INTENT TO FORM A LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF IMPROVEMENTS TO SCHOFIELD AND MONTE VISTA STREETS CONSISTING OF SIDEWALKS, CURBS & GUTTERS, PAVING, DRAINAGE AND ASSOCIATED IMPROVEMENTS. THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. It is the intention of the Council to commence improvements to construct sidewalks, curbs, gutters, paving, drainage and associated improvements to Schofield and Monte Vista Streets. SECTION 2. The boundary description of the local improvement district is described as those lots fronting on or having sole access from Schofield and Monte Vista Streets as depicted on the map referred to as Attachment No. 1 to Exhibit A. SECTION 3. The city engineer's estimated cost of the improvement, including engineering and administration costs, and the proposed allocation of the cost among each of the property owners specially benefited is $387,000.00 of which $144.974.44 will be paid by special assessments on benefited properties. Costs will be allocated based on Resolution 99-09 capped amount of $5,138-00 per equivalent dwelling unit or potential equivalent dwelling unit and the full amount of $11,838.11 per City-owned equivalent unit within the assessment area as depicted on Exhibit B. SECTION 4. The council will hold a public hearing in the Council Chambers, Ashland Civic Center, 1175 East Main Street on April 3, 2007, at 7:00 p.m., at which time and place the owners of the benefited properties may appear or submit written comments prior to or at the hearing as to why the improvement should not be constructed or why the benefited properties should not be assessed in the manner proposed. SECTION 5. The city recorder is directed to serve notice to the property owners by publishing a notice of the public hearing once in the Daily Tidings, not less than 30 days prior to the hearing, and by mailing copies of the notice by first class mail to the owners of each lot benefited by the proposed improvement as shown on the latest tax and assessment roll. The notice shall be in the form of Exhibit "A" attached to this resolution. , 1 04 SECTION 6 This Resolution takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. PAGE 1-IMPROVEMENT RESOLUTION GaecorderlCity Council PacketsTacket Files12006-200712007-0220\DONE6RESO-Schofield Monte Vista LID.doc This resolution was read by title only in accordance with Ashland Municipal Code §2.04.090 and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this o20 day of UOIGE?ltc~ 2007. C, Barbara Christensen, City Recorder 6 SIGNED and APPROVED this ~L day of2007. J it W. Morriso , Mayor Reviewed as to form: e W. r 1 City Attorney PAGE 2-IMPROVEMENT RESOLUTION GArecordeACity Council PacketslPacket Files12D06-200712007-02201DONEURESO -Schofield Monte Vista LID. doe EXHIBIT "A" NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING The City.Council of the City of Ashland will meet on April 3, 2007 at 7 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street, to hold a public hearing to consider the formation of a local improvement district as follows: NATURE OF THE IMPROVEMENT: Sidewalks, curbs, gutters, paving, drainage and associated improvements to Schofield and Monte Vista Streets. BENEFITED: Those lots fronting on or having access solely from Schofield and Monte Vista Streets as depicted on the attached map referred to as Attachment No. 1. ESTIMATED COST: The estimate of the local improvements including engineering and administration costs is $387,000.00 of which $144.974.44 will be paid by special assessments on benefited properties. Costs will be allocated based on Resolution 99-09 capped amount of $5,138.00 per equivalent dwelling unit or potential equivalent dwelling unit and the full amount of $11,838.11 per City-owned equivalent unit within the assessment area as depicted on Exhibit B. Additional information regarding the proposed improvement or method of assessment may be obtained at the Engineering Division, 51 Winbum Way, Ashland OR, phone number 488-5347, weekdays during the hours of 8:00 AM to 4:30 PM. All affected property owners may appear at the hearing or submit written comments prior to or at the hearing, as to why the improvements should not be installed or why the benefited properties should not be assessed in the manner proposed. If two-thirds of the property owners to be benefited object to the improvement, the improvement will be suspended for six months. PAGE 3-IMPROVEMENT RESOLUTION 6:tpub-wrkslengklept-admin%LID%Schofwld Monte Vista LID Resolution for PH 1 07 pcb.dw . I Nt0 q MA m W Q Q-0 Y N0 I m N C 0 W -J C a o x r a m I---. Z m am H Z~w II O mN~ lI °mN W J i _ W > O V Z ~ _.I OC n fpm 1 mm e~]M ~N Z U O 1 co ( m m _I ( 'r vl m W ICI ~r r. LL W J $m o^m I Mn W~ oo I.n i' = a Q U U) O J m LL af a cn O m I- ~ N O O f W~ m Nm ~ i Om 0 ~ I C yr o ~ . OOH I " O o< i C U I ~N Nm Nd I o ~ dr co w\ tu 00 I I I Yy NO 'cu V/ W I I Y 0O Q~ V/ I W ~r C i /~o vl m ! m s~ Q ! s o w ' tJ`°nt j W I o m ~ r m map . N mN O d ~ I Q j dd '1 N y N m O p! 'I N d J L .'I NN II NN NO i V o 0 0 ~ I n.w m aQ - OO " m0 .Om NO Om pN Om N~ .QUOi N~ N~ Nr N^ o p o 0 o p o 0 0 0 0 0 0 o v ~ o 0 0 0 o p o 0 o p o 0 0 o v m m a0 iV N a0 m Op OD 00 CO m W W W N 0 E M M N-- N M M M M N M M M O a"i E m M O~ In O N N to N O Vi N Y'1 r p a Q N Y ~T Q w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w o p o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o p o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ao ao tti ai ao mm moo aom aim ed ao m M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M G N ~[1 N m N Y1 N N m N 10 m YJ N ~ y~ w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w N N --Nr -Nr - YN Q O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N jp N N 10 10 10 N ~O t0 N N ~O N N N Yl r r n n n n n n n n n n r r n o m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m H F m 0 0 0 m o m 0 0 0 U O O O 0 O 0 O O 0 O 0 O 000 O O O O a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a C C C C C C C C C C C C G G C ~ N R R R R R R R RLR R R R R R 11 R L L t t t L L L .C L L t .C L o a" a a a Q" a Q" a a a ~ a w v m v m v d d w W Q S p N m m rn Co CO d W w fn w N O m ~jj y ~S 5 m9 m A A W a s= a a y y 7 a y 5 W oom50RR0 s$aR= a u u Z ouco o o =o u o x =o o o m o a a vi cn N 0 m mo 222 a m N mvi o ~n0mmooo ovnW o y 1.- R R O z 1§ W cO m ~ N pN~ c = Q F2- W d RoO~ p Eo a F F `RUC 2 li 3 e6 O O r 3 u o p O dg of ya m ci ~~~a m~ _ 'RO c c J o W W (O Y C R U y j 'V 's Se R R w LL O a E y Y co c 3 3 O c .a Y o w 'c o N O C~ Y Y N U O R V N a E ^o W o N c c _ v` o o w R A N m L° cm R N m v w o on d U~0Y2 CL 2U0 mm coo c d' ~i m m E 'o e a Y = e r n a u~i m S a d d 10 ° o o n Z w a a a o m W O N m 0 0 m Z , m m w W N N Z Z O O E O N N - O m m m W C6 N N O R m LL a W W m m O O d m J U Q o m p N M O O O N M O ~ a 0 O aJ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 IJ ry z N N N N N M M M W m to z y F : W 3 Q Q Q Q Q 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n o o ca mlDto m mm mm to mmmm m v z m m N 10 10 N N ~O N ~O ~O ~O m 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W E ~ m of rn rn rn w rn m rn rn rn rn rn rn a u° M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M rv p N M V N W r m m 0 N M N Z EXHIBIT4 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Public Hearing, Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing and Ordering the Formation of the Schofield / Monte Vista Local Improvement District and Adoption of Findings Meeting Date: April 3, 2007 Primary Staff Contact: Paula Brown, 488-5587 Department: Public Works E-mail: brownp@ashland.or.us Contributing Departments: Legal/City Recorder Secondary Staff Contact: James Olson, 488-5347 Approval: Martha Bennett E-mail: olsonj@ashland.or.us Estimated Time: 45 min Statement: On February 20, 2007, Council approved Resolution No. 2007-03 setting April 3, 2007 as the date for a public hearing to consider the formation of a Local Improvement District to improve Schofield Street and Monte Vista Street. The hearing notice has been published in the Daily Tidings and notices have been mailed to all owners within the proposed district and to those citizens residing above the assessment district who might use Schofield Street or Monte Vista Street as an access route to and from their homes. Approval of the attached resolution would authorize and order the improvement of Schofield Street from North Main Street to the Blossom View Subdivision and all of Monte Vista Street. In addition, acceptance of the attached findings would document the City's decisions regarding the formation of the assessment district. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the attached resolution authorizing and ordering the formation of an LID to improve Schofield and Monte Vista Streets specifying Option 1 for financing the LID. In addition, staff recommends approval of the attached findings supporting the formation of the LID. Background: Ashland's Street System Ashland has a firm understanding of the importance of its public street system. As stated in the Ashland Street Standards Handbook adopted by Council in March of 1999, Ashland's streets are some of the most important public spaces in the community and can shape and define a neighborhood. Ashland's streets are intended to enhance, accommodate and promote all modes of travel including bicycle, pedestrian, vehicle and transit use. Although many profess to enjoy the rural feel provided by a gravel or dirt surface street, it is impossible to provide enhanced and safe accommodations for all modes of travel under unimproved street conditions. The Ashland Comprehensive Plan and the Ashland Land Use Ordinance both address the importance of well designed, well constructed streets. These documents along with the Ashland Transportation System Plan and the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan all deal with the need to improve streets and to provide a uniform set of development standards, All streets in Ashland shall be designed using the following assumptions: • All designs encourage pedestrian and bicycle travel. • Neighborhood streets (neighborhood collectors and neighborhood streets) are designed for 20 mph. G9pub-wrks\eng\05-08 Schofield & MonteVista LIDU1_Admin\Cons Pre ContractUins Eng 05-08\05-08 CC Schofield Monte Vista PH, 11FW Ln).doc 1 • All new streets and alleys are paved. • All streets have standard vertical, non-mountable curbs. • Gutter widths are included as part of the curb-lo-curb street width. • New avenues and boulevards have bicycle lanes. • Parkrow and sidewalk widths do not include the curb. • Sidewalks are shaded by trees for pedestrian comfort. • All streets have parkrows and sidewalks on both sides. In certain situations where the physical features of the land create severe constraints, or natural features should be preserved, exceptions may be made. Exceptions could result in construction of meandering sidewalks, sidewalks on only one side of the street, or curbside sidewalk segments instead of setback walks. Exceptions should be allowed when physical conditions exist that preclude development of a public street, or components of the street. Such conditions may include, but are not limited to, topography, wetlands, mature trees, creeks, drainages, rock outcroppings, and limited right-of-way when improving streets through a local improvement district (LID). • Parkrows and medians are usually landscaped. • Garages are set back from the sidewalk so parked vehicles are clear of sidewalks. • Building set back and heights create a sense of enclosure. The Land Use Ordinance further stresses the. importance of improving streets under Chapter 18.76.050 "Preliminary Approval by the Planning Commission" even for land parldions. This section requires that the partitioning be in accordance with the design and street standards contained in Chapter 18.88, Performance Standard Options. Chapter 18.76.050(G) further states that the Public Works Director MAY waive the requirement to improve the street only when ALL of the following conditions exist: 1 • The unpaved street is at least 20-feet wide to the nearest fully improved collector or arterial street. • The centerline grade on any portion of the unpaved street does not exceed ten percent. • Should the partition be on an unpaved street and paving is not required, the applicant shall agree to participate in the costs and to waive the rights of the owner of the subject property to remonstrate both with respect to the owners agreeing to participate in the cost of full street improvements and to not remonstrate to the formation of a local improvement district to cover such improvements and costs thereof. Full street improvements shall include paving, curb, gutter, sidewalks and the undergrounding of utilities. This requirement shall be precedent to the signing of the final survey plat, and if the owner declines to so agree, then the application shall be denied. From a Public Works viewpoint there are a number of equally compelling reasons to improve gravel streets with curb and gutter and paving including: 1. Reduced Maintenance Cost - Each year the Public Works Department spends thousands of dollars to maintain gravel surfaces and drainage ditches. Annual maintenance costs for Schofield and Monte Vista are estimated to be $6,800 - 7,500. Once the street is paved, maintenance costs are reduced to near zero for the first 10 to 15 years. 2. Drainage Control - The use of concrete curb and gutter with catch basins and stone drain piping prevents the uncontrolled surface flow of water along an unimproved street which eliminates the need for unsafe and unsightly drainage ditches and eliminates erosion within the ditches. 3. Safety Improvement - The vertical curb contributes to safety by defining the edge of the street for drivers, pedestrians and childit;n. The curbs show drivers where to drive, where to turn and where to` park. Curbs also provide protection for street lights, fire hydrants, signs and mail boxes. The uniform paved surface also provides a much safer surface for all modes of transportation. This is especially true in granitic surface streets such as Schofield Street where loose individual grains of decomposed granite act as ball bearings beneath shoes and tires. In steep areas the asphalt surface can be "roughened' to provide an even better traction surface for wintertime travel improvement. G9pub-wd<s\eng%5-08 Schofield & MonteVista L1MA_Admin\Cons Pre Contm Wims Eng 05-08\05-08 CC Schofield Monte Vista PH, LID.doc 2 4. Environmental Improvements -The paving of dirt or gravel surfaced streets is a proven remedy to reduce dust . and particulate levels in the air and water born silt from the storm system. Proiect History On July 15, 1997, Council held a public hearing to consider the formation of an LID to improve Sheridan Street, Schofield Street and Monte Vista Street. This public hearing was the culmination of efforts by the developer of Blossom View Subdivision (Bob Sullivan) to form a local improvement district to provide paved access to his subdivision. Resolution No. 97-25 set the date for the public hearing and proposed that the $238,115 project be funded as follows: $ 57,461 to be paid by Sullivan for the Blossom View Subdivision $ 180,654 to be assessed against the remaining 24 lots within the proposed assessment district. At the time the City did not participate in contributing to the LID costs and the assessment rate was based upon a combination of lot street frontage and number of units. The proposed assessments varied widely from $2,960 to $22,723 per lot with the average assessment cost being $9,922. The proposal had few supporters amongst the neighbors as the consensus was that the developer should bear a much larger portion of the cost. At the public hearing more than two thirds of the proposed assessment district remonstrated against the formation of the LID thereby effectively stopping the LID process. The developer elected to improve only Sheridan Street to half street standards as part of the Blossom View Subdivision construction and was able to satisfy the planning commission requirements for access without forming an LID. Proposed Improvements The Engineering staff has met Parameter Schofield Street Monte Vista Street with the neighborhood Street Width 22 feet 18-20 feet on two occasions to Sidewalk 4 foot wide on one side None discuss the proposed Curb & Gutter Both sides Both sides improvements, On-street Parking One-side only None funding, schedule, etc. Parkin Bays None None It was agreed that the design should incorporate the following parameters: Actual street design will not commence until authorized by the Council, however, the Schofield LID design work has been tentatively added to the scope of work for the existing contract with Marquess and Associates, one of the City's pool of consulting engineering firms. Marquess is prepared to begin work as soon as the project is authorized. LID Boundaries The proposed assessment district is comprised solely of those lots having direct frontage on or taking sole access from Schofield Street or Monte Vista Street. The benefit to these lots is readily definable and is much more direct than those who might simply use the street as a throughway to access their property. Many of the surrounding lots outside the proposed district, have already participated in LIDS to improve lower Sheridan Street, Tucker Street and the north Wpuh-cvrks\eng\05-08 Schofield & MonteVista LID\A_AdminlCons Pre ContractUims Eng 05-08\05-08 CC Schorield Monte Vista PH. I-m.doc 3 section of Walnut Street. The district boundary is proposed to encompass only 16 lots as shown on the attached maps. LID Support The attached petition which was received on May 20, 2006 contains 12 signatures representing eight property ownerships and nine potential assessment units. One of the original singers of the petition, Kendel Clarke, has sold his house on Schofield Street and his signature is no longer valid. However, the new owner, Teresa McCants, has indicated that she is in favor of the improvement and will also sign the petition. At the February 20, 2007 Council meeting there was discussion as to how to assess the Hargadine Cemetery which is owned by the City. The amount of City participation and the percentage of the "in favor" votes are dependent upon the number of assessment units to be assigned to the lot. Following are two options to be considered depending upon the number of assessment units assigned to the cemetery. OPTION NO. 1 A. Cemetery Assessment Units - 4 B. Total Assessable Units - 23 C. Amount to be paid by Assessment District - $149,974.44 D. Percentage in favor by petition - 39% E. Percentage in favor including cemetery - 57% F. Percentage in favor by prior agreement* - 65% *excludes cemetery property and Lot 2000 OPTION NO. 2 A. Cemetery Assessment Units - [If the cemetery was removed completely, there B. Total Assessable Units- 20 would be 9lots out of 19total -or 47.4% in favor.] C. Amount to be paid by Assessment District - $102,760.00 D. Percentage in favor by petition - 45% E. Percentage in favor including cemetery - 50% F. Percentage in favor by prior agreement* - 75% *excludes cemetery property and Lot 2000 Funding Estimated construction costs and proposed funding options for the Schofield / Monte Vista Street LID are as follows; 1. Estimated Construction Cost $353,000 2. Engineering and Administration Cost 3$ 4.000 Estimated Total Project Cost $387,000 3. City Credits; per Resolution No. 99-09 the City will contribute the following amounts: 60% of sidewalk construction costs 75% of storm drain construction costs 70% of street surface construction costs 50% of engineering and administration costs Based upon the estimated cost for the improvement of Schofield and Monte Vista Streets, the City would contribute: Sidewalk costs $27,040 @ 60% = $16,224.00 Storm drain costs $29,650 @ 75% = $22,237.50 G:\pub-wr sang\05-08 Schofield & MonteVists LID1A_Admin\Cons Pre ContracNims L'ng 05-08\05-08 CC Schofield Monte Vista PH, rr, LID.doc 4 Street surface costs $296,310 @ 20% = $59,262.00 Engineeringladministrative costs $34.000 (c), 50%= $17.000.00 Total City Contribution: $114,723.50 4. Assessable Cost Estimated total project cost $387,000.00 Less credits $114,723.50 Assessable Total Costs: $272,276.50 OPTION NO. 1 Number of Assessment Units 23 Computed Cost per Unit ($272,276.50 + 23) $11,838.11 Maximum Assessment Rate per unit; Resolution 99.09 $5,138.00 (2006 costs) Amount to be paid by non-City owners ($5,138 x 19) $97,622.00 Amount to be paid by City property (cemetery) $47,352.44 Remaining Amount to be paid by City (SDCs and fees) $242,025.56 Percent of cost born by non-City property owners 25.2% Percent of cost born by City 74.8% Sources of City Funding: LID from non-City owners $97,622.00 LID from Cemetery assessment (4 x $11,838.11) $47,352.44 Street SDC (15% of street, sidewalk & engr project costs) $53,174.13 Strom Drain SDC (15% of storm drain & engr costs) $4,875.87 Street Fees $168,522.66 Storm Drain Fees $15,452.90 Total Project Cost: $387,000.00 OPTION NO.2 Number of Assessment Units 20 Computed Cost per Unit ($272,276.50+20) $13,613.82 Maximum Assessment Rate per unit; Resolution 99.09 $5,138.00 (2006 costs) Amount to be paid by non-City owners ($5,138 x 19) $97,622.00 Amount to be paid by City property (cemetery) $13,613.82 Remaining Amount to be paid by City (SDCs and fees) $275,764.18 Percent of cost born by non-City property owners 25.2% Percent of cost born by City 74.8% Sources of City Funding: G:\ b-wd-s\eng\05-08 Schofield & MordcVi57a LIDW_Admin\Cons Pre Contoctu ms Eng 05-08\05-08 CC Schofield Monte Visa P , Wes, LID doc 5 LID from non-City owners $97,622.00 LID from Cemetery assessment (1 x $13,613.82) $13,613.82 Street SDC (15% of street, sidewalk & engr project costs) $53,174.13 Strom Drain SDC (15% of storm drain & engr costs) $4,875.87 Street Fees $202,261.28 Storm Drain Fees $15,452.90 Total Project Cost: $387,000.00 G:\pub-wrks\eng\05-08 Schofield & MonteVista LUA_Admin\Cons Pre ContmctVinns Bng 05-08105-08 CC Schofield Monte Vista PH LYD,doc 6 Related City Policies: AMC Chapter 13.20 sets forth the requirements and regulations of Local Improvement Districts Council Options: A. Council may either approve or reject the attached resolution authorizing and ordering the formation of an LID to improve Schofield and Monte Vista Streets. 1. Option 1 allows the City to assess the Cemetery as 4 units, providing more "equity" in City participation in the LID. 2. Option 2 assesses the Cemetery property as only one unit. If Council selects Option 2, the resolution Section 2 would need to be modified as follows: SECTION 2. The council intends to make local improvements to provide the improvements described in the above title. Such improvements will be in accordance with costs estimated to be $387,000.00 of which $111,235.82 will be paid byspecial assessments on benefited properties. Costs will be allocated based on $5138.00 per equivalent dwelling unit or potential equivalent dwelling unit within the assessment area. 3. In either case, the assessment to residents within the district is exactly the same at $5,138.00. B. Council is also being asked to adopt the attached findings pertaining to the formation of the assessment district. Council has three options in this action and may 1. approve the attached findings as written. 2. reject the attached findings and direct staff to rewrite. 3. review and amend the attached findings. Potential Motions: Council has two potential actions to approve or reject the resolution, and if the resolution is adopted, then to approve, reject or modify the findings. Staff suggests the following motions: 1. Council moves to adopt the attached Resolution Authorizing and Ordering the Local Improvements for the Construction of Improvements to Schofield Street and Monte Vista Street Consisting of Grading, Paving and Construction of Curb And Gutters, Sidewalks, Storm Drains and Related Appurtenances and Authorizing the City to Borrow Money and Issue and Sell Notes for the Purpose of Providing Interim Financing for the Actual Cost of the Local Improvement specifying Option No. 1 as the adopted funding mechanism (or Option 2 if Council so determines which would adjust Section 2 to read as shown above). A. Assuming the resolution is adopted; Council further moves to accept the attached findings as written (or with adjustments as shown above). 2. Alternatively, Council moved to reject or take no action on the attached resolution and may direct staff to provide further information. Attachments: 1. Photographs 2. Resolution wl Exhibit A (Option 1 and 2) 3. Vicinity Map 4. Petition 5. LID Boundary Map Displaying Current Petitioners G1pub-wrks\cng\05.08 Schofield & MonteVista LT AA_Admin\Cons Pre ConrractVims Eng 05-08\05-08 CC Schofield Monte Vista PH. LID.doc 7 6. LID Boundary Map Displaying Prior Signed-In-Favor Properties 7. Findings 8. PHOTOS: Attachment I Y 1L~1 f Y ~ 1 y ~ y 'Is Looking south toward East Main Street G9pub-wrks\eng\05-08 Schofield R MontcVistuLID\A_Admin\Cons Pre ContractVims Eng 05-08\05-08 CC Schofield Monte Vista PH, LID.doc 8 PHOTOS: Attaclimentl i 1.5 Y ~Yr ~ F v ~r .Ir i c. yLw Lv ':ze~`..tr u~ x\ i :''•vs .f ~krir'G~,,~~ --F, _ ~ :'kc,S'>' ~'~z; .a b~ Mf y i Looking south toward East Main Street N. 1 . Intersection. of Schofield and Monte lrAsta Streets looking northwest _G:yrub-w24.s\e'n `dept admen F<GfhGFN P201ECT2p05~05{)R l l 140 nlc Yi.t PH'uthenzing LlD&v WAIm: 1 ~ yF t ~ 3 d y 4L Schohold.Street from Blossom View Subdivision look no'southeast t. v ! u~{ks Ya T say i a 4Y°' T. 'a `[y~ i1.1 l fuMonte.Visra Street looking north i OPpub xf ~nx(dm, adm mFNGI\F.CRNROJ[CTQ10050 5{LS Gt Scboric0.l Meq a lh.m VI l Ault ona S L[2dnc 8 RESOLUTION NO. 2007- A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND ORDERING THE LOCAL IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF IMPROVEMENTS TO SCHOFIELD STREET AND MONTE VISTA STREET CONSISTING OF GRADING, PAVING AND CONSTRUCTION OF CURB AND GUTTERS, SIDEWALKS, STORM DRAINS AND RELATED APPURTENANCES AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY TO BORROW MONEY AND ISSUE AND SELL NOTES FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING INTERIM FINANCING FOR THE ACTUAL COST OF THE LOCAL IMPROVEMENT RECITALS: A. The Council has declared by resolution its intention to develop the improvements described in the above title and in the improvement resolution previously adopted and to assess upon each lot or part of lot benefited by the improvement its proportional share of the cost of the improvement; and B. Notice of such intention was duly given, a public hearing was held and it appears to the Council that such improvements are of benefit to the city and all property to be assessed will be benefited to the extent of the probable amount of the respective assessments to be levied for the costs. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES: SECTION 1. A local improvement district is created and shall consist of all the tax lots described in the attached Exhibit A. The district shall be called the Schofield/Monte Vista Local Improvement District, No. 87. SECTION 2. The council intends to make local improvements to provide the improvements described in the above title. Such improvements will be in accordance with costs estimated to be $387,000.00 of which $144,974.44 will be paid by special assessments on benefited properties. Costs will be allocated based on $5138.00 per equivalent dwelling unit or potential equivalent dwelling unit within the assessment area. Lots will be assessed as specified on the attached Exhibit A. SECTION 3. The City of Ashland is authorized to borrow money and issue and sell notes for the purpose of providing interim financing for the actual cost of the local improvement. The notes may be payable from the proceeds of any bonds, issuance of additional notes or from any other sources from which the bonds are payable. This borrowing shall be issued according to the terms of ORS 223.235(7). SECTION 4. The City of Ashland expects to make expenditures from its available funds to pay for the costs of the improvement project. The City reasonably expects to issue PAGE 1-FORMATION RESOLUTION G-.pub-wrksleng\deptadminlENGINEER\PROJECT2005W5-08 CC Re Iufion Authodring & Ordering.doc bonds or other obligations (the "Reimbursement Bonds") and to use the proceeds of the Reimbursement Bonds to reimburse the City for the expenditures it makes from its available funds for the improvement project. To permit interest on the Reimbursement Bonds to be excludable from gross income, the Internal Revenue Code of the United States requires that the City declare its intent to reimburse itself from Reimbursement Bond proceeds within 60 days after the expenditures are made. The City expects that the principal amount of the Reimbursement Bonds will not exceed $117,200.00. SECTION 5. The assessment imposed upon benefitted properties is characterized as an assessment for local improvement pursuant to ORS 305.583(4). SECTION 6. The city recorder is directed to prepare the estimated assessment of the respective lots within the local improvement district and file it in the lien records of the city. SECTION 7. This resolution takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. This resolution was read by title only in accordance with Ashland Municipal Code ,2.04.090 and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of , 2007. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of '2007. John Morrison, Mayor PAGE 2-FORMATION RESOLUTION G:1pub-mksterg`dept-admin\ENGINEEMPROJECIV005W oa CC Resolution Auff"iang 8 OrderingAm EXHIBITA OPTION NO.1 PROPOSED SCHOFIELD I MONTE VISTA ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 87 Tax L Assess A mrnerd No. Map No. No. Description Oemer Address Unit Esl. Ass. Rat Amount 1 391 E05BA 1802 2006-062572 McCants, Teresa 445 Schofield Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5.138.00 2 391E05BA 1803 Parcel M.2 Partition P47-199 Uttleton, Vance C. 8 Theresa M. 465 Schofield Sheet Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 3 39JE058A 2000 91-22856 Dutton, Bran M.8 Ma A. 1007 N. Main Street Ashland, OR 97520 4 $ 5138.00 S 20,552.00 4 39IE05RA 2100 97-01838 Kra, Traci L.8 Douglas D. 925 Schofiileld Skeet Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 5 391 E05BA 2101 05-011060 Hardison, Robert C. 44 Schofield Sreel Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 6 391 EOSBD 100 89-27972 PentkoWSkl, Judith J., Trustee 436 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 7 391 E05SO 102 89-27972 PentkoW ki, Judith J., Trustee 436 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 8 391ED580 103 Groseth, Mark 8 Mar rel 3302 Dallas Street Houston, TX 77019 1 $5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 9 39IE05BD 201188-15873 Mann. Margaret 434 Monte Vista Streel Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 10 391 E053D 203 99-16910 Cobs, Stuart M. 100 Schofield Steel Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 11 391E05BD 300 02-07580 Spence, Gary C., Trustee 430 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 12 391E058D 301 9629873 Gall, Denise PO Box 624 Ashland, OR 97520 2 $ 5,136.00 $ 10,276.00 13 391EOSBD 304 00-22039 Bra eld, Francs. Trustee 400 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5.138.00 14 39IE05BD 500 Parcel No. 1 Partition P-71-199 Hendrickson, Richard H., Trustee 444 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5.138.00 15 39IE05BD 501 Parcel Nc.2 partition P-71-199 Belcasao, Pete J.8 Christine 447 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,136.00 $ 5,138.00 16 39IF058D 600 Lot 10. WC Myers Adtlrtbn G of Ashland 20 E. Main Street Ashland, OR 97520 4 $11,838.71 $ 47,352.45 Totals 23 $ 14,974.45 City properties pay fug assessment, not minimums defined In the 99-09 resolution ENR April 1, 2006 ENR ® 769540 per resolution 99-09 ails poses a $5138 -DO Cap par unit W7/ 0011h. GGVryegW,A_Wrka\ErylCepllEminLLlW3Le CC 5 ftldM YaG&h AW 1.xK 1 EXHIBIT A OPTION NO.2 PROPOSED SCHOFIELD I MONTE VISTA ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 87 T. Lo Assess Assessment No. Map No. No. Description Dwner Address Units at. Ass. Rat Amount 1 391E05BA 1802 2006-062572 McCri is, Teresa 445 Schofield Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5138.00 2 39IE05BA 1803 Parcel No.2 Partition PA7-199 IJttleton, Vance C. & Theresa M. 465 Schofield Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5138.00 3 391EOSBA 2000 91-22856 Dolton, Bran M. & Ma A. 1001 N. Main Street Ashland, OR 97520 4 $ 5,138.00 $ 20,552.00 4 391E05BA 2100 97411838 Kraft Traci L & Douglas D. 925 Schofield Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5.138.00 $ 5.138.00 5 391 E05BA 2101 05-011060 Harrison, Robert C. 44 Schofield Street Ashland. OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 6 391 E05BD 100 89-27972 Pentkowski, Judith J., Trustee 436 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 7 391 E05BD 102 89-27972 Pentkowski, Judith J., Trustee 436 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 6 391E058D 103 Groseth, Made & Mar aret 3302 Dallas Street Houston, TX 77019 1 $5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 9 391E05BD 201 &8-15873 Mann, Ma aret 434 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 10 391EOSBD 203 99-16910 Calls, Stuart M. 100 Schofield Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 S 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 11 391 E05BD 300 01 Spence, Gary C.. Trustee 430 Monte Visa Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5.138.00 $ 5,138.00 12391E05BD 30196-29873 Gall, Denise PO Box 624 Ashland, OR 97520 2 $ 5,13800 $ 10,276.00 13 391EU51313 304 00-22039 Bra old, Francs Trustee 400 Monte Vista Street Ashland. OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 14 391ED55D 500 Parcel No. 1 Parttion P-71-199 Hendrickson, Richard H.. Trustee 444 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 15 391EDSBD 501 Parma No.2 Partition P-71-199 Belcastro, Pete J. & Christina 447 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 16 391EO58D 600 Lot 10. WC Myers Addern CI of Ashland 20 E. Main Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $13,613.82 S 13.613.82 Totals 20 $ 111,235.82 City pmpertias pay Ml assessment. not minimums defined In the 99-09 resolution ENR April 1. 2006 ENR @ 7695.40 per resolution 99-09 this poses a $5138.00 cap per unit 32]l1trJ]ITa G:~1WE_W"e,VY AbeUOMiK eC SdofiB k VW Fie A Op:2tl2 r K_ /TA- No. 1 to Exhibit A CITY OF ASHLAND -ENGINEERING DIVISION SCHOFIELD I MONTE VISTA LID PROPOSED DISTRICT BOUNDARIES Legend y 90o N 1700 1600 ' \ 1x61 1045 ~d%/~ 39 lE 5 AB ® Proposed District Sf Boundary 2000 I T".ts 1602 Imn N 1603 445 2100 465 925 W+E 391E 5 BA s 2101 2300 One inch = 150 Feet z3oo Schofield St 44 90 Feet 5 2304 / j - I 0 75 150 300 601 I 2311 70 3 oo 01 I 03 470 ,h?y511 O / nm 100 103 100 ,goy 657 . ~ sa 5 . 2312 4W \ 5 555 _ 300 306 \ 430 43, / 102 I 101 ` 655 \ 2S 391E 5 BD 436 I 31, n1fi 503 2314 aci \ ~ 500 i ' 515 - 441 307 303 305 629 1 405 319 301 r 425\\ 600 306 ;'15 403 5m Hargadine Cemetery 337 II so \ 465 u7 (city) 300 Boe 500 323 325 309 ~ 301 2&9 267 - Sheridan St - - --L- 391- 5 A _ lie =5 735 701 7 420 - i To ! 702 I 4600 ae03 400 soo 20o B01 eoo n1i1141f z2o r\ 400 73a 731 730 aoI 30o Ne ze6 262 265 716 I I 563 . . CITY OF.: ~Sf iLAND V1CI\ITYMAP 2006 ` 3 ? PhOPOSEA SCHOFTELD / MONI1; VISTAIT\1PROVLr,FLNT / Syr A ~ ~ ~ s i c ~ 1 i tf _ ~ n. A x ~ r nj ASE v'FC'.. ~ ] s ~'°"ef ~l S . ~ ♦ ~ ~ r.~'^ hy;, f ~w r Mies a ozs ,5:' o>s T:' 908 \ + CITY OF ASHLAND -ENGINEERING DIVISION PROPOSED ASSESSMENT DISTRICT for IMPROVEMENTS to 1 SCHOFIELD ST & MONTE VISTA ST. J\ Legend 900 1700 1600 T I10' ~ • ® In Favor by 16m yl Petition 1045 a%n \ 391E 5 AB ® Proposed District Boundary 2000 TazlOts W1 N 4 n 442 00 W+E 92 391E 5 ]BA s 01 020 °5° One inch = 150 Feet 23w Schofield St 44 Feet 5 2w1 0 7550 300 11 2311 304 2 I ' 470 400 k % 2310 ' 100 103 100 570( 490 657 II\\ 30 312 \ 55309 555 app 201 ]O6 \ 430 431 / 102 101 655 -1 25;5 39'IE5BD 436 311 23161 503 11 ' 2314 402 305 515 307 303 629 405 I 318 301 425 600 200 \'S 9s I 403 1 Hargadine Cemetery iii 304 6m 465 2322 500 2323' \ \ \ I ~i u (city) 13300 3309 26B I 3267 01 2071 Sheridan St 39 5 A -~iL 1 02 aa 725 2205 701 e20 7 0 7400 Fm 7303 I 230 401 300 298 60 292 1264 262 220`.'` 5 3B3 Ifiw j CITY OF ASHLAND - ENGINEERING DIVISION PROPOSED ASSESSMENT DISTRICT for IMPROVEMENTS to SCHOFIELD ST. & MONTE VISTA ST Legend 1900 1700 Iwo In Favor by 1601 Prior Agreement . 1oa5 ain 391E 5 AB Proposed District Sr ® Boundary Ta2.1ols are 1602 twt - N / / . . W~E 465 1 :9w 391E 5 BA \ s 2290 T ~ 123m Schofield St ~M01 905 One inch = 150 Feet 2 Feet so, o 75 150 300 / 2311 / 161 470 40Cr 490 100 103 - 100 79 j 65] 555@ 560 555 855 __1 0 101`\\ 3„ 535 391E5 BD /436 2316, 5w 2314 4w ` 500.' l 515 / 444 307 B 9 3w aos , .319 I 301 425 600 200 asss 403 i 501 Hargadine Cemetery 3]7 n3 2322 465 (city) 300 306 30l I 301 500 2321 325 309 269 I 26] Sheridan St I 229, , 39 E 5 A _ 25 2205 735 701 ]01 ](E4 460D 46w 400 Sw )w w1 6w 01141113111 2206,, 420 ]30 131 I ]JO 401 300 296 266 262 1266264;26 ~3w 715 PETITION FOR STREET IMPROVEMENT LOCATION: MONTE VISTA & SCHOFIELD STREET RECEIVED BY THE CITY ENGINEER: DATE: 5 /3 n6 NOTICE TO PETITIONERS: Persons signing this petition must be legal owners of record, or purchasers in possession under a recorded land sale contract of real property abutting the proposed street improvement. If title to any parcel of property is in the name of two or more persons, all must sign. Petitioners should sign using their names as they appear on the records of ownership. TO THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND: We, the undersigned owners of record of real property in the City of Ashland, Jackson County, Oregon, hereby petition that: All of the remaining unimproved sections of Monte Vista Street and Schofield Street to be improved with curbs, gutters, paving, sidewalks and drainage control features in--accordance with plans and specifications therefor as shall be adopted by the City of Ashland and the cost of such paving and improvements be assessed upon the real property benefited thereby and that we are the owners of the real property fronting (or benefiting) on said street. Name (Piece PAM) Address Tax Lot 1 I C4)7ff yew, ~;°tf(Efar~ felcf P/a/ '/djr ~ GG~ yr ~ 4-D,- Z) I t~ re 9zs . /Y/arr9 S~. # zkyo '1} rtcy & s ~ k~s~n1 ~y 00 qvu Ix, S '1) ly / aI[ yy 5BA21~ G.VibwrksWgldepl- 6dAIMSDWmid!Mote Yaia Sbmt Paving Peftm dx BEFORE THE ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL JACKSON COUNTY, OREGON April 3, 2007 IN THE MATTER OF RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND ) ORDERING THE LOCAL IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE ) CONSTRUCTION OF IMPROVEMENTS TO SCHOFIELD ) STREET AND MONTE VISTA STREET CONSISTING OF ) FINDINGS GRADING, PAVING AND CONSTRUCTION OF CURB AND ) CONCLUSIONS GUTTERS, SIDEWALKS, STORM DRAINS AND RELATED ) AND ORDERS APPURTENANCES AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY TO ) BORROW MONEY AND ISSUE AND SELL NOTES FOR ) THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING INTERIM FINANCING FOR ) THE ACTUAL COST OF THE LOCAL IMPROVEMENT ) APPLICANT: City of Ashland ) ) RECITALS: I) On February 20, 2007, Council approved Resolution No. 2007-03 setting a public hearing with intent to form a local improvement district (LID) for the construction of improvements to Schofield and Monte Vista Streets consisting of sidewalks, curbs and gutters, paving, drainage and associated improvements.. 2) The Council has declared by Resolution No. 2007-03 to assess upon each lot or part of lot benefited by the improvement its proportional share of the cost of the improvement; and it appears to the Council that such improvements are of benefit to the City. All property to be assessed will be benefited to the extent of the probable amount of the respective assessments to be levied for the costs. 3) The Council, following proper public notice, held a public hearing on April 3, 2007, at which time a staff presentation was made, citizen testimony received and exhibits presented. Council approved Resolution No. 2007-_ authorizing and ordering the local improvements for the construction of improvements to Schofield and Monte Vista Streets consisting of grading, paving and construction of curb and gutters, sidewalks, storm drains and related appurtenances. 4) On April 3, 2007, Council approved Resolution No. 2007-_ authorizing the City to borrow money and issue and sell notes for the purpose of providing interim financing for the actual cost of the local improvement. 5) The Schofield / Monte Vista LID No. 87 boundary was approved by Council as being all those lots with frontage on or taking sole access from Schofield Street between North Main Street and the cast boundary of Blossom View Subdivision and Monte Vista Street between Sheridan Street and Schofield Street. G:\pub-wrkskng\dept-admin\ENGINEERNROJECT2005b5-OS CC Scho6cld Monte Vista Firdings 3 07.dnc Page I of4 Now, therefore, the City Council of the City of Ashland finds, concludes and recommends as follows: SECTION 1. EXHIBITS For the purposes of reference to these Findings, the following exhibits will be used: Exhibit I - Council Communication dated February 20, 2007 Exhibit 2 - Minutes of the February 20, 2007 Council meeting Exhibit 3 - Resolution No. 2007-03 setting a public hearing Exhibit 4 - Council Communication dated April 3, 2007 Exhibit 5 - Minutes of the April 3, 2007 Council meeting Exhibit 6 - Resolution No. 2007- authorizing and ordering the improvement of Schofield Street and Monte Vista Street under the Schofield / Monte Vista Street LID No. 87 SECTION 2: CONCLUSORY FINDINGS REGARDING NATURE OF IMPROVEMENTS 2.1 The City Council intends to improve Schofield Street from North Main to the easterly boundary of Blossom View Subdivision and Monte Vista Street between Sheridan Street and Schofield Street. The improvements are to consist of grading and paving, construction of curbs and gutters, sidewalks, storm drains and related appurtenances. 2.2 The proposed LID is in the best interest of the City. Evidence presented indicated that the City will have an improved street for all modes of transportation with reduced maintenance costs; enhanced environmental effects due to improved air quality and better storm water controls; and a. demonstrated improved safety with construction of curbs, sidewalks and an asphalt road surface. SECTION 3. CONCLUSORY FINDINGS REGARDING BOUNDARY DETERMINATION 3.1 The City Council finds that it has received all information necessary to make a decision based on the Council Communication dated February 20, 2007 and April 3, 2007, public hearing testimony and the exhibits received. 3.2 The proposed LID boundary includes all lots fronting on or taking sole access from Schofield Street between North Main Street and the east boundary of Blossom View Subdivision or Monte Vista Street between Sheridan Street and Schofield Street as depicted on the map attached to Resolution No. 2007-03. This boundary was selected as these 16 properties would be directly benefited by the improvements to Schofield and Monte Vista Streets. The benefit to these lots is readily definable and is much more direct than those who might simply use the street as a throughway to - G.\pubwA¢kng\depoadminVENGINEER\PROJECT?OOM-og CC Schofield Monte Vista Findings 307.doc Paget of4 access their property. Many of the surrounding lots outside the proposed district, have already participated in LIDS to improve lower Sheridan Street, Tucker Street and the north section of Walnut Street. The district boundary is proposed to encompass only 16 lots as shown on the attached maps. 3.3 The proposed Schofield Street Local Improvement District is consistent with the 2007-2012 Capital Improvement Plan and identified in the 2006-2007 budget adopted by Council in June, 2006- 3.4 The City Council did not receive a remonstrance sufficient to postpone authorizing and ordering the construction of the local improvement district. SECTION 4. NOTIFICATION OF PUBLIC HEARING 4.1 A notice of public hearing was sent to all listed property.owners (determined from Jackson County Tax Assessment rolls) within the proposed assessment district. In addition a notice has been sent, for informational purposes, to all property owners within the affected area. The affected area is defined as those lots situated near Schofield Street and Monte Vista Street which could be reasonably expected to use Schofield Street and/or Monte Vista Street as a residential access route. The public hearing notice was also published in the Ashland Daily Tidings. SECTION 5. ALLOCATION OF ASSESSMENT UNITS 5.1 Each of the 16 lots within the proposed assessment district has been allocated one assessment unit. In addition, several lots have been allocated additional units of assessment. Those lots with additional units are those lots that the Planning Department has determined can be further divided. The number of assessment units is equal to the number of current and future potential residential lots as defined in Resolution No. 99-09 and as shown on the attachments to Resolution No. 2007-03. SECTION 6. COST 6.1 'the maximum assessable rate per unit is established by Resolution No. 99-09. The maximum rate established in 1999 was $4,000 per unit. This rate is adjusted each April in accordance with the Construction Cost Index established by the Engineering News Record Index (ENR record) for Seattle, Washington. The current rate to be charged for the Schofield / Monte Vista LID No. 87 is $5,138.00 which is the maximum rate as of Resolution No 2007-04 establishing the Public Hearing date. All costs over and above the assessment amount will be borne by the City. SECTION 7. DECISION 7.1 Based on evidence contained within the whole record on this matter, the City Council concludes that the establishment of the LID boundary is in the City's best interest, is G:pob-wiles4ngWepladminmENGINEERiPROJECT?005\05-08 CC Schofield Monte Vista Findings 307.dot Nge3 of4 justified as presented by staff and is supported by evidence contained within the record. 7.2 Council finds that the public hearing was properly noticed. 7.3 Council further concludes that the allocation of assessment lots and associated cost complies with Resolution No. 99-09 and represents the benefit received by each affected property. 7.4 Therefore, based on our overall conclusions, the City Council authorizes and orders the construction of improvements for the Schofield / Monte Vista Local Improvement District No. 87. Gtpub-wrks'' ng\depaadmin\ENGINEER\PROIEC'IV.005115-O8 CC Schofield Monte Vista Findings 307.doc Page 4 of4 CITY OF Memo ASHLAND Date: April 2, 2007 From: Paula Brown, Jim Olson To: Mayor John Morrison and City Council LETTERS RECEIVED IN OPPOSITION TO THE PROPOSED SCHOFIELD / Re: MONTE VISTA LID As of this date we have received three letters expressing opposition to the proposed Schofield / Monte Vista LID. We have also received several faxed statements in opposition to the projects. Following is a brief summary of the letters and statements: 1. Faxed statements objecting to the Schofield / Monte Vista LID as proposed received from: a. Groseth, Mark and Margaret 391E05BD 103 (1) b. Martinez, Floyd H. and Garduno, Rosemarie 391E05BD 300 (1) (purchased from Spence) c. Pentkowski, Edward and Judith 391 E05BD 100 (1) d. Pentkowski, Edward and Judith 391EOSBD 102 (1) e. Mann, Margaret 391E05BD201 (1) f. Brayfield, Austin 391E05BD 304 (1) g. Platt, Ychudit 391E05BA 1802 (0) (This signature is from a renter, not an owner. The owner of this lot, Teresa McCants has signed the petition in favor of the project.) It. Datton, Mary A. 391 E05BA 2000 u TOTAL UNITS OBJECTING 10 2. Letter from Austin Brayfield received March 30, 2007. (Received too late for a response.) A copy of the Brayfield letter is attached. 3. Letter from Margaret Mann received March 28, 2007. This letter was directed to the Engineering Division and was answered on March 28, 2007. A copy of both letters are attached. 4. Letter from Ychudit Platt received on March 28, 2007. As mentioned above, Mr. Platt is not part of this proposed assessment district as he is a renter. The owner of record is in favor of the project and has signed the petition. The Platt letter lists eight areas of concern which are commonly heard objections to any LID. The response to these listed points is as follows: (1) One of the things that makes this street so nice is the natural feel dnd appearance, due to natural vegetation, the unpaved road, and the lack of sidewalks. ENGINEERING DIVISION Tel: 5011488-5947 20 E. Main Street Fm: 5411488-M Ashland OR 97520 r Y: 800x35-2900 Kill www.ashland onus Van M G:oib,w6slen9ldepl4dminU4GINEEWROJECT120C510549Respm mpudiclettersmemoioCamd3O7.dw This is the most common argument in opposition to paving. Unfortunately, when one makes the choice to live within an incorporated city and enjoy the benefits and services provided by that city, the opportunity to live in a rural area are rare and for several good reasons. As in any city decision, the needs, concerns and demands of the city as a whole are paramount and are sometimes in conflict with the desires of the few. The standard of paved streets applies to all, but is especially critical in steep areas where soil erosion and dust pollution is prevalent. . The negative impact of air and water pollution is felt by a much larger community than just those who live on the street. (2) We need to do whatever we can to /aster and maintain the uniqueness and diversity ofstreets within Ashland and ofAshland as a whole. Do we really want to become another cookie-cutter community, and to force each neighborhood to conform to the average American model of manicured, paved-over, squared-off surfaces? Let's find another way to address our neighborhoods. The development, growth and character of our City are very clearly and plainly set forth in the City's Land Use Ordinance, Comprehensive Plan and Transportation Plan. Each of these documents has been adopted following exhaustive review by citizen groups, committees and commissions. The City's direction and obligation regarding development of streets does not foster the continued use of dirt of gravel surfaced streets. (3) The proposed pavement ofroads and sidewalks would significantly increase the amount ojblack and paved surface along our street, which has several negative (and cumulative city-wide) environmental impacts-11 would • Significantly increase absorbed heat and ambient temperature in our neighborhood in the hot summer months; reduce ambient moisture; • Add to sue ofpower and water for cooling and gardening; and e Increase the amount of runoff and reduce the local groundwater. To leave the road unpaved would help in maintaining a cooler and more moist environment, for humans, animals and plants alike, and in maintaining groundwater levels. The more natural our environment, the healthier, and the less we contribute to environmental degradation. The above statement is an example of a scientific conclusion made without evidence or supporting documentation. There is basically nothing natural about a dirt street. It is much more detrimental to the environment than is a paved one as it is impossible to control the amount of soil erosion which enters the streams via the storm drain system. The nature of the common granitic soils of this area is that they can be densely compacted, but are susceptible to constant surface erosion. The street proper becomes so densely compacted by constant traffic that runoff is nearly equal to a normal paved street and more so than a porous pavement. The steep grades of the Schofield area add to a quick and hid runoff coefficient. ENGINEERING DIVISION ret.54148&5347 20 E. Man Street Fax: 541148&M Ashland OR 97520 TTY: 0007735.2900 w .ashbnd.orts - ®tl~ G:Ipub,wd¢k"WeptaANnIENGMEERPROJECT12005105M Respw to pubfic IaMm memo b Cowdl 307.doc Runoff on Schofield Street has become so problematic that we have had to construct a complete storm drain system to control the constant erosion and rutting. Without a piped storm system we would find that the drainage ditch would soon erode to a depth of several feet; all of which would be deposited in downstream watercourses. Because of compacted surfaces and steep grades, very little water is being retained on site. The color of the surface has less impact on heat retention than does the density of the material. For instance a stone or boulder retains heat longer than does loose soil and compacted soil retains heat longer than does loose soil. Asphalt concrete pavement can have a very similar density to compacted decomposed granite. We are unaware of any scientific study comparing heat retention and dissipation of asphalt pavement and decomposed granite. (4) Paving this steeply inclined road would add to the occurrence offrozen icy surfaces on cold days and nights in winter, making the street more frequently undrivable - which greatly inconveniences the residents as well as service vehicles such as postal and delivery trucks, police and utility vehicles. / was told that this has been a major problem on Strawberry Lane which was paved in recentyears, and other hilly streets. Similarly, paved sidewalks would pose an icy hazard. Paving does not make a steep street less safe during the winter months, in fact we hove found the opposite to be true. We have found paved streets to be safer in both summer and winter for the following reasons: • The fine-grained granitic soils that comprise most of Ashland's unpaved streets are very susceptible to surface raveling. A thin layer of this loose material is generally present on the surface which can be extremely slippery, especially in dry conditions, and is even worse for pedestrians. This surface can also become slick in wet weather- • Paved streets are much easier to plow. The firm surface allows the plow to rest directly on the street surface for better snow removal. Because of the rougher surface condition of unpaved streets, it is usually impossible to remove the last 1 to 2" of snow. • Drainage ditches are especially hazardous in snow and ice conditions where many cars tend to slide into the ditch where it is often impossible to get out without considerable effort. Paved streets have no drainage ditches and instead use curbs to control runoff. These curbs also help to keep a sliding vehicle within the street proper. • Snow and ice tends to melt more rapidly from asphalt paved surfaces. It is also possible to apply de-icers to paved streets to prevent ice build-up which is not possible on unpaved surfaces. • The use of porous pavements, which we are looking into for the steeper section of Schofield Street. have several additional benefits. These open ENGINEERING DIVISION Tet. 51148&5347 20 E. Man Street Fax: 541M8WO6 AsNaod OR 97520 TTY: W01735-2900 w .ashtand a.n G,*bvrksWng!deptadminlENGINEERIPROJECT12o05105DB Response m pobtic Ieftrs memo b Cowd7 3 07.dw graded pavements allow water to pass through the surface to the underlying rock base. Porous material also provides a rougher surface with better traction and skid resistance; eliminates rain water flow over the surface as water is allowed to permeate through the pavement mix; and allows for quick dissipation of surface water that reduces ice buildup. (5) Paving could encourage more traffic and higher speeds on this residential hilly street with quite a few young children residents. We have found no evident to substantiate this claim. We generally find that in residential streets that are not collector streets the traffic patterns are well established and rarely change after paving. On steep unpaved streets we find that traffic often travels faster before paving as drivers strive to maintain traction of the loose surface. (6) Theproposed installation ofsidewalks on ourstreet is absurdly unnecessary. What little foot traj5ric there is now is f7 om people walking leisurely in appreciation ofthe increasingly rare natural environment. Sidewalks are required on all street projects whether they be new streets or paving of unimproved existing streets. With the exception of the Tolman Creek LID, sidewalk installations have been adamantly opposed by citizens on every LID for the past ten years. Sidewalk construction conforms to the adage that, "If you build it, they will use it-" There is nothing that provides for the safety of pedestrians as well as sidewalks. For years pedestrian needs were ignored as the nationwide trend in the 1940s to 1960s was to provide for vehicular traffic only. We are now finding ourselves in a position of needing to retrofit streets with sidewalks years after their initial construction; a condition resulting in much more expensive installations. The City is committed to provide equal opportunities and benefits to all modes of travel. (7) Any problematic issues such as dust raised by traffic can be addressed in much less costly and much more environmentally friendly ways, such as applying natural substances to the road periodically, spreading wood chips or other organic matter. Some of these approaches have probably not been considered, some of them have been used successfully in limited ways in the past, come of them may be newly developed technologies, and all of these approaches can certainly be looked into and applied in a systematic way to fully address the problems. Once the pavement is put in, there's no taking it out_ Dust palliatives, which generally consist of Lignon Nitrates or Sulfates, can be applied as a temporary dust control measure. Unfortunately these DEQ approved treatments ore only temporary as they are water soluble. The first heavy rain shower will wash the treatment into the storm system and on into our streams. ENGINEERING DNISION Tel: 5 7 1148 8-5 3 4 7 27 E. Man Street Fn: 541(408£006 ASNand OR 9757) TTY: 830(735-291)0 www.nl`Jand.a.us GiputrwrkskeNUeptadmimENGINEERPPROJEGT12005105-08 Response to pudic letters memo 10 Council3 07.doc (8) Finally, and very significantly, to spend the amount.of money required for this project would be., ! believe, extremely irresponsible - given the context of current and recent cutbacks in services, and the urgent need for funds for far more important priorities - the library, schools, fire and police departments, etc. it is incumbent upon us to allot our financial resources - both public and private - to address these needs. There are always demands for the public dollar and capital improvements plans are developed to help meet those demands. As with any private household, cities must develop budgets to meet all of its needs. In the case of street paving the cost of long term and continued maintenance must also be measured in the balance between paved and unpaved streets. Once a street is paved, maintenance costs drop to near zero for the first 10 to 15 years. The life expectancy for a paved street is at least 25 years with many lasting more than 50 years. 5. Petition The former owner of 391 E05BA 1802, Kendal Clarke, who was one of the original signers of the petition recently sold to Teresa McCants. Ms. McCants is also in favor of the project and has singed the petition as well. A copy of the petition is attached. 6. Summary As of this date the following lots have indicated support of the LID: a.391B05BA 1802 Units (1) b. 391E05BA 1803 Units (1) c. 391E05BA2100 Units (1) d. 391E05BA 2101 Units (1) e. 391 E05BD 203 Units (1) f. 391E05BD 301 Units (2) g. 391E05BD 500 Units (1) h. 39IE05BD 501 Units 1 Total Units 9 The following lots have indicated opposition to the LID: a. 391 E05BA 2000 Units (4) b.391E05BD 100 Units (1) c. 391 E05BD 102 Units (1) d. 391E05BD 103 Units (1) e. 391E05BD201 Units (1) f. 391E05BD300 Units (1) g. 391E05BD 304 Units 1 Total Units 10 Eight owners representing 9 assessment units are in favor, seven owners representing 10 assessment units are opposed. All owners within the assessment district, with the exception of the City, have recorded votes on this LID. ENGINEERING DIVISION Tel:54IM8&5347 20 E. Man Sheet Fax: 5411486 M AsMW OR 97520 TTY: 800f735-19W w .ashlandor.m G.4pM,wksiaV%deptadnnENGINEERVROJECTM5105 W Respome to Wd'c lifers memo to Cqia 3 07.doc I - support V object the Schofield/Monte Vista LID as proposed. Date: 2007 C t Ll. ignature c4 A. Tats Printed Name C70 Tax Lot SSCSSMCN ( At Q ~a~i 55 . O C~ Second Property Owner: Signature Printed Name I _ support ✓ object the Schofield/Monte Vista LID as proposed. Date: tk '2 2007 a 2_Signature -CuR2EN n'eNTC-A Printed Name Tax Lot Second Property Owner: Signature Printed Name I I _ support object the Schofield/Monte Vista LID as proposed. Date: 3 _Z Y 2007 e.i~_ Signature / I / 7 E •c s,-; Printed Name O Tax Lot Second Property Owner: i GrrCLxa~Ue~n~f~7 r +4 Signature ~u ~~L. ~rN n r k n w S) Printed Name I _ support _ object the Schofield/Monte Vista LID as proposed. Date: _q 2 51 - 2007 (d t, f .~z 4.. t Signature Printed Name i c>_2- Tax Lot Second Prop" Owner: ~Cignature 5: a' l ~ ?,Qtj}S Lw~Printed Name rI3-dor-r1kN 70:15414881793 P.1 Mar X23 UU3: Uti p~ The Main Source 1 311 ♦HU 1'/y3 p.i r support ^ ubjact the schoficldtMonte Vista LTD as proposal. Dattl= 2007 igruturc Printed Namc L Lot M+ 341 F 05 B D Si& mture o YtucdNamo I _ support _)~_object the SchofietdfMonte Vista LID as proposed. Date: J 7 U 72007 Signature /VIN R6hR~T Jai f 4l)4 Printed Name O Tax Lot Second Property Owner: Signature Printed Name II I support object the SchofieldlMonte Vista LID as proposed. Date: 1 z / 2007 t `w~ u ~L l (7,L( ct, . t Signature AdeltlA2iC Cfi4f-, AI Printed Name 3 od Tax Lot Second Property Owner: ?Signature t o N. hf a r~ n c z Printed Name I support ! object the Schofield/Monte Vista LID as proposed. Date: . 5Z,)-.3 2007 4 c - j Aignature Printed Name -_y QV Tax Lot Second Property Owner- 67 Signature 13P-A eJFc4-~ Printed Name i RECEIVED To: City Council Members and Mayor MAR ! 0 '1107 From: Austin Brayfield City of Ashland 400 Monte Vista Drive Date: March 29, 2007 Re: -Monte Vista/Schofield Proposed LID I live on the comer of Monte Vista and Schofield and love the character of this neighborhood. My late husband and 1 bought this property about 20 years ago after looking for months for a home close to downtown but that had a relaxed, natural, country-lane feeling. We wanted a home in a neighborhood that had some individuality. Frankly, the house was so-so, but the unpaved roads and the natural look of the area sold us. I can't tell you how often first-time visitors to my home exclaim how wonderful and "hidden" the area is. And these visitors are usually from Ashland . Some of us don't want our neighborhood to look like every other neighborhood . The city of Ashland should foster this individuality; it's an important ingredient for a vital. community- There are still buyers who want that special-feeling.- In fact,-atta0s an mgsrr as Wtd-onty last week and the new owners do not want the streets paved and oppose the LID. The argument that paved streets and sidewalks increase the value of one's property depends on the buyer. If one is buying a house for investment only, maybe that's important; but for others who want to make a home and have their surroundings give them comfort, it's a moot point. 1 ask you to preserve some individuality in our town and rethink not only the paving of Monte Vista/Schofield but also the meager 10 or so miles of remaining unpaved roads. Another consideration: the more paving, the hotter it gets. Granted it's not much, but why do we need to add even a little to the global warming problem by laying down more asphalt or cement? The two houses that are at the top of Schofield and of Monte Vista apparently have a problem with debris after heavy rains. With a little creative thinking and engineering couldn't we solve that problem with a portion of the estimated $387,000? The same goes for the dust during dry months. We spray the streets once in the summer. We could do that as often as necessary to abate the dust and still not use $387,000. And perhaps there's a more effective spray to use_ Lastly, it is fiscally irresponsible for the city and residents to spend $387.000 at this time with the library closing, the huge AFN and Water Treatment Plant debts confronting us. Please consider priorities. Thank you for your consideration., ~vpkkwr 7 MAR 2 3 2007 'By v ' -ot/1,c~rF2~cv •-'~'2t~t~ ~(N '~"-y(~ ~'.U-.v •-a~~e-~-- ~-ue. -QQ.e(, :tlvio~~ ~~a.~" max. . 4-ud-4-v4~- c~--O1t, gt.yc Ml'ST -os~ Y~ler~, t ~ ~ 4 a~~ ~r 6 Ada, eCovt c 42 ~x hoe~a~i ,u KC, -gas "9 'a 7 c~l~d -'i • ~~~~.tY-~~~= ~/,-{~{6~i~JG..c~v/~.',}d'c~-~"4c.YC:~ ~ v ~'~Jpc~te, /~d~CLCGdJ~~,OI,cA~• G t'( s'L d (ti Ii L x a, d C4tvV Cw, l4iD ht ~~c~i2 -.A-~•4iV z- L+,^✓ '7~'f.~'- J • ~ 17 CITY OF March 28, 2007 -AS H LAND Margaret Mann 434 Monte Vista Street Ashland OR 97520 RE: PROPOSED PAVING OF MONTE VISTA / SCHOFIELD STREET Dear Ms. Mann, Thank you for your letter of March 23, 2007 regarding the proposed paving of Schofield and Monte Vista Street. I am sorry to hear of your husband's condition, but I appreciate you letting me know about his need to travel for dialysis. Our street division maintains a list of similar situations where access is extremely critical. This list receives priority treatment for snow and ice removal during winter months and we can assist when needed in providing safe access to North Main Street. It would be very helpful if we could receive a copy of your husband's dialysis schedule so that we can strive to keep access available on those days. This will also be important information if the street is improved. Your concems regarding the paving of Schofield Street and Monte Vista Street are common and understandable. As you are aware, Ashland is a city of steep grades. There are over 50 streets with grades in excess of 18% and 20 streets with grades steeper than 20%. All but five of those steep streets are paved. Over the years we have learned that paved streets are much safer in both summer and winter. Some of the reasons for this are: The fine-grained granitic soils that comprise most of Ashland's unpaved streets are very susceptible to surface raveling. A thin layer of this loose material is generally present on the surface which can be extremely slippery, especially in dry conditions, and is even worse for pedestrians. This surface can also become slick in wet weather. Paved streets are much easier to plow. The firm surface allows the plow to rest directly on the street surface for better snow removal. Because of the rougher surface condition of unpaved streets, it is usually impossible to remove the last 1 to 2" of snow. • Drainage ditches are especially hazardous in snow and ice conditions where many cars tend to slide into the ditch where it is often impossible to get out without considerable effort. Paved streets have no drainage ditches and instead use curbs to control runoff. These curbs also help to keep a sliding vehicle within the street proper. Engineering Tel: 541/488-5347 20 E. Main Street Fax: 541x488-6006 Ashland, Oregon 97520 M 8001735-2900 w .ashland.or.us G:pub- rt steNg dept-admintENGINEERIPROJECT12005%05-08 Itr to Mann re access issues 3 07.doc • Snow and ice tends to melt more rapidly from asphalt paved surfaces. It is also possible to apply de-icers to paved streets to prevent ice build-up which is not possible on unpaved surfaces. On the steeper sections of Schofield Street a new product called "porous pavement" is proposed. Porous pavement is a very open graded pavement which allows water to pass through the surface to the underlying rock base. This has several advantages including: providing a rougher surface with better traction and skid resistance; eliminating of rain water flow over the surface as water is allowed to permeate through the pavement mix; and quick dissipation of surface water that reduces ice buildup. Paving of city streets is the right thing to do from a safety, budgeting and environmental perspective. With increasingly tighter governmental controls, unpaved streets are rapidly becoming a thing of the past. I look forward to receiving your husband's dialysis schedule soon. If I can be of any further assistance, please feel free to call at 488-5347. Sincerely, times R Olson UUUCity Surveyor / Project Manager cc: Paula Brown John Peterson Engineering Tel: 541148&5347 20 E. Main Street Fan: 541-14806000 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 8MI735-2900 w .ashlind.or.us - G:lpub-wrkslergWepl-adminlENGINEER\PROJECT@005105-08 IV to Mann re access issues 3 07.doc 445 Schofield Street Ashland, OR 97520 _ f re s hs pri n g (a)(im a i I. corn 482-4802 March 28, 2007 To Ashland Mayor John Morrison, Ashland City Council Members: I am a resident at 445 Schofield Street, along the proposed road improvement project. I am opposed to the proposed 'road and sidewalk improvements' for several significant reasons, ranging from aesthetic to environmental to fiscal prioritization: 1.) One of the things that makes this street so nice is the natural feel and appearance, due to the natural vegetation, the unpaved road, and the lack of sidewalks. 2.) We need to do whatever we can to foster and maintain the uniqueness and diversity of streets within Ashland and of Ashland as a whole. Do we really want to become another cookie-cutter community, and to force each neighborhood to conform to the average American model of manicured, paved-over, squared-off surfaces? Let's find another way to address our neighborhoods. 3.) The proposed pavement of roads and sidewalks would significantly increase the amount of black and paved surface along our street, which has several negative (and cumulative city-wide) environmental impacts. It would • significantly increase absorbed heat and ambient temperature in our neighborhood in the hot summer months; reduce ambient moisture; • add to use of power and water for cooling and gardening; and • increase the amount of runoff and reduce the local groundwater. To leave the road unpaved would help in maintaining a cooler and more moist environment, for humans, animals and plants alike, and in maintaining groundwater levels. The more natural our environment, the healthier, and the less we contribute to environmental degradation. 4.) Paving this steeply inclined road would add to the occurrence of frozen, icy surfaces on cold days and nights in winter, making the street more frequently undrivable - which greatly inconveniences the residents as well as service vehicles such as postal and delivery trucks, police and utility vehicles. I was told that this has been a major problem on Strawberry Lane which was paved in recent years, and other hilly streets. Similarly, paved sidewalks would pose an icy hazard. 5.) Paving could encourage more traffic and higher speeds on this residential hilly street with quite a few . young children residents. 6.) The proposed installation of sidewalks on our street is absurdly unnecessary. What little foot traffic there is now is from people walking leisurely in appreciation of the increasingly rare natural environment. 7.) Any problematic issues such as dust raised by traffic can be addressed in much less costly and much more environmentally friendly ways, such as applying natural substances to the road periodically, spreading wood chips or other organic matter. Some of these approaches have probably not been considered, some of them have been used successfully in limited ways in the past, some of them may be newly developed technologies, and all of these approaches can certainly be looked into and applied in a systematic way to fully address the problems. Once the pavement is put in, there's no taking it out. 8.) Finally, and very significantly, to spend the amount of money required for this project would be, believe, extremely irresponsible - given the context of current and recent cutbacks in services, and the urgent need for funds for far more important priorities - the library, schools, fire and police departments, etc. It is incumbent upon us to allot our financial resources - both public and private - to address those needs. In summary, the proposed changes to Schofield Street and Monte Vista Drive are loth unnecessary and fiscally and environmentally irresponsible; they would degrade the aesthetics of our uniquely natural and beautiful streets and subvert the priorities we need to uphold. Any possible problems the unpaved roads pose in terms of dust or driveability should be addressed in an alternative, comprehensive way rather than by making the proposed destructive, irreversible changes. Let us honor the values that Ashland represents to its residents and to the thousands of people who visit here every year, and find another solution - for our climate, for our connection with nature, for education, libraries and public safety. If we're to spend $387,000 as a community, let's put that money where it rightly belongs. Yours truly, Yehudil Platt, L.Ac. PETITION FOR STREET IMPROVEMENT LOCATION: MONTE VISTA & SCHOFIELD STREET RECEIVED BYTHE CITY ENGINEER: DATE: 5 /3nfl36 NOTICE TO PETITIONERS: Persons signing this petition must be legal owners of record, or purchasers in possession under a recorded land sale contract of real property abutting the proposed street improvement. If title to any parcel of property is in the name of two or more persons, all must sign. Petitioners should sign using their names as they appear on the records of ownership. TO THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND:. We, the undersigned owners of record of real property in the City of Ashland, Jackson County, Oregon, hereby petition that: All of the remaining unimproved sections of Monte Vista Street and Schofield Street to be-improved with curbs, gutters, paving, sidewalks and drainage control features in-.accordance with plans and specifications therefor as shall be adopted by the City of Ashland and the cost of such paving and improvements be assessed upon the real property benefited thereby and that we are the owners of the real property fronting (or benefiting) on said street. Name (Please Pact 11 Address Tax Lot ~r<n~F /ewi Lif~~e[ar7 {/arSlel"P / ~R" /b'G3 57 A( Inet in 'S b sc.l}t~ l S j 2 y fr) yy~ Aso i BA5He! 210 GAR&wrksle~adn4n1000ofield Monte V*ta Street Paving PehmAoc 1 _ support _V object the Schofield/Monte Vista LID as proposed. Date: z/. 7 , 2007 L nSignature A. L . T~,?~Prmted Name CrJGQ._TaxLot •-55Ej5Mc/- ( /}i`~LunJ) Fa.G;_5_5~2,fJC7 Second Pro? owner' 71161 Signature L7ri'a~ ~ct7 -,Printed Name 2.d ESLS BBi i4S t aaJnoS u?ew 441 e52tLI 40 L2 Jew '1/(3/o 7- I am a resident at 445 Schofield Street, project. I am opposed to the proposed 'road and sidewalk improvements' for several significant reasons, ranging from aesthetic to environmental to fiscal prioritization: 1) One of the things that makes this street so nice is the natural feel and appearance, due to the natural vegetation, the unpaved road, and the lack of sidewalks. 2) Do we realty want to become another cookie-cutter community, and to force each neighborhood to conform to the average American model of manicured, paved-over, squared-off surfaces? Let's find another way to address our neighborhoods, and maintain the uniqueness and diversity of streets within Ashland and of Ashland as a whole 3) The proposed pavement of roads and sidewalks would significantly increase the amount of black and paved surface along our street, which has several negative (and cumulative city-wide) environmental impacts. It would I. significantly increase absorbed heat and ambient temperature in our neighborhood in the hot summer 1. months; reduce ambient moisture; ii. add to use of power and water for cooling and gardening; and iii. increase the amount of runoff and reduce the local groundwater. _ 4) To leave the road unpaved would help in maintaining a cooler and more moist environment, for humans, animals and plants alike, and in maintaining groundwater levels. The more natural our environment, the healthier, and the less we contribute to environmental degradation. 5) Paving this steeply indined road would add to the occurrence of frozen, icy surfaces on cold days and nights in winter, making the street more frequently undrivable - which greatly inconveniences the residents as well as service vehicles such as postal and delivery trucks, police and utility vehicles. Apparently this has been a major problem on Strawberry Lane which was paved in recent years, and on other hilly streets. The postal delivery woman on our route has stated so, based on her daily travels over our neighborhood streets. Similarly, paved sidewalks would pose an icy hazard to people, especially older people, walking. 6) Paving could encourage more traffic and higher speeds on this residential hilly street with quite a few young children residents. 7) Sidewalks are absurdly unnecessary on our quiet side streets. What We foot traffic there is now is from people walking leisurely in appreciation of the Increasingly rare natural environment. 8) Any problematic issues such as dust raised by traffic, or possible runoff from the above development causing gravel deposits, can be addressed in much less costly and much more environmentally friendly ways, such as applying natural substances to the road periodically, or installing a surface water divener. There must be some of these approaches that have not been considered, some of them have been used successfully in limited ways in the past, and there surely must be some newly developed technologies that have not been researched. At the very least, all these approaches should be fully researched and applied in a systematic way, rather than in the limited, piecemeal or outdated way they're been used in the past. Once the pavement is put in, there's no taking it out. We owe it to our children and other future residents and visitors to Ashland to maintain as much as possible our rapidly- disappearing natural environment. 9) Finally, to spend the amount of money required forthis project would be extremely irresponsible - given the context of current and recent cutbacks in services, and the urgent need for funds forfar more important priorities the library, schools, fire and police departments, etc. It is incumbent upon us to allot our financial resources - both public and private -to address those needs. In summary, the proposed changes to Schofield Street and Monte Vista Drive are both unnecessary and fiscally and environmentally irresponsible; they would degrade the aesthetics of our uniquely natural and beautiful streets and subvert the priorities we need to uphold. Any possible problems the unpaved roads pose should be addressed in an alternative, comprehensive way rather than by making the proposed destructive and irreversible changes. Let us honor the values that Ashland represents to its residents and to the thousands of people who visit here every year, and find another solution -for our climate, for our connection with nature, for education, libraries and public safety. If we're to spend $387,000 as a community, let's put that money where it rightly belongs. Yours truly, Yehudit Platt, L.Ac- Scofield/ Monte Vista LID Quasi-Judicial Hearing, Tue 2007April3 art bullock Council is asked to reschedule this hearing to allow the parties to remedy extensive quasi-judicial errors occurring in last night's improper quasi-judicial discussion on Scofield) Monte Vista LID ("Scofield LID"). 1. Council improperly held a quasyudicial hearing on Mon, 2007Apr2 without public notice. The study session on LID policy scheduled for2007Ap2 became a discussion of Scofield LID issues, which was noticed and scheduled only for quasi-judicial hearing on 2007Apr3. Last night's discussion was improper and seriously prejudiced the parties' rights to a procedurally fair and impartial quasi-judicial process_ Its not possible on 2007Apr3 for the parties to review and rebut the 2007Apr2 hearing due to lack of opportunity to review the DVD and discuss its accuracy and misrepresentations. The only known remedy is for council to reschedule the 2007Apr3 hearing to allow parties to review and rebut the DVD showing many Scofield LID issues discussed improperly on 2007Ap2. 2. The 2007Apr2 hearing didn't disclose ex parte contact, conflicts of interest, or bias, or allow any party to dispute same. Scofield LID issues were extensive and embedded in councilors' views of LID policy, City's votes for the Scofield LID cemetery, calculation of supportfremonstrance percentages, who pays the cemetery LID assessment and effect on neighbors and taxpayers, boundaries involving those not attached to the LID, councilors' view of'pave-ali-streets' policy, formula for financial participation, role of developers, remonstrance process, LID divisiveness for neighborhoods, etc.. Instead of providing the legally required opportunity for procedural objection, the session generated more ex parte contact and bias, for which the parties haven't had opportunity to review or prepare a response. This major error also means the 2007Apr3 session should be rescheduled to allow the parties adequate time to discuss and present rebuttals to ex parte and bias occurring at the 2007Apr2 hearing. 3. It was not possible to timely acquire and submit the physical copy of the 2007Apr2 DVD for the 2007Apr3 hearing. Author wants to submit the physical copy of the DVD for Scofield LID and lacked adequate opportunity to acquire and submit it. Council is asked to add to the record the entire DVD for the 2007Apr2 session, or to provide opportunity for the parties to submit the DVD of that hearing as part of record evidence for Scofield LID, once the parties have opportunity to copy. 4. The improper 2007Apr2 hearing DVD video was produced by a property owner proponent in Scofield LID. In 2 separate cases, before different judges, author demonstrated in circuit court that RVTV video of council sessions is the controlling document to resolve factual disputes for council's quasi-judicial hearings. (1) In Nevada St LID, alleged minutes inaccuracies by city recorder Barbara Christensen led to a Court order for City to submit DVD videos of key council sessions. After the order, Christensen erased a critical video tape and lost another one. Court used available DVDs to resolve factual disputes. (2) In the Park St Apts LLC planning action case, Court, City, Relator, and Intervenors all agreed that the DVD video was the controlling document to resolve questions of fact for related quasi-judicial hearings. The Court then used the DVDs to resolve factual disputes. For Scofield LID, council's DVD video for 2007Apr2 was produced by RVTV Director Pete Belcastro, who solely operated cameras and microphones during council's session. Belcastro is a property owner in Scofield LID and a signed proponent FOR the LID. Scofield LID was not listed on the study session agenda, so ifs probable that Belcastro didn't know Scofield LID would be discussed. Given this DVD video is the controlling document to resolve factual disputes, of whim we have several, the parties are entitled to an impartial operator producing the video used to resolve the disputes. City recorders audiotape is inadequate because historically it has poor sound, has many unintelligible sections, has a long section missing when the tape is turned over, and is positioned next to a noisy computer with no microphone attachment to the audio system. The parties are entitled to an impartial record of the improperly held quasi judicial hearing, which at this point is not possible. Again, the only known remedy is for council to re-notice and reschedule the hearing, with the stipulation that no party involved in the LID case be involved in producing council's record, and provide the parties to opportunity to determine accuracy and completeness of the 2007Apr2 video and audio record. 5_ Allegation: Council has been improperly biased in its discussion of percentage support and opposing due to improper actions of Public Works Department A Public Works employee told at least 1 property owner that if they'don't support the LID, Public Works will use their discretion to require the property owner to pay the entire amount for street improvement when they want to subdivide their lot into 2 lots. This is improper manipulation of an LID vote by coercion and threat of massive financial damage. Public Works is forcing the properly owner(s) to improperly choose between paying $10,000+ through the LID lien (and encouraging others to do the same), or paying the entire amount (Scofield LID is about $380,000) to pave the street as a condition for approval to subdivide. Council and mayor, through one or more subordinates in Public Works Department; have now indirectly coerced a property owner to support Scofield LID based on improper threat of financial damage and an improper condition for subdividing a lot. This causes Ashland taxpayers to pay 75% of Scofield LID, while Public Works maintains that a planning application would require as a condition. This improperly shifts the bulk of the financial burden from those wishing to develop the property to neighbors and City taxpayers. This has led to a grossly unfair distribution of costs for this LID between those benefiting and City, thus taxpayers. Council has now been improperly biased by Paula Brown's incorrect representation of the support-opposition percentages as a result of this coercion and unethical threat The parties have a statutory right to an impartial quasi-judicial decision without threats and coercion, directly or indirectly. The remedy for this bias is (1) for Council to clarify on the record that: (a) No such condition exists for this or any other property owner in Scofield LID. (b) No one in Public Works has authority to make such a threat or claim, or to make deals or promises in exchange for LID support. (d) Every property owner is free to support or oppose this LID without City penalties or promises. (2) The remedy's second component is for Council to reschedule this public hearing for the property owners to independently decide without this threat and coercion whether to support or oppose the LID. Without this 2-lot vote supporting to avoid higher future costs, this LID would probably have a 213 remonstrance, 12-7 rather than 10-9. 6. Councilor David Chapman has actual bias and should be recused. At the 2007Ap2 hearing, Chapman claimed that LID property owners got it easy because he had to pay $8,000 for a sidewalk at his house because the developer hadn't done it and should have. He demonstrated an angry resentment to LID property owners, which he has also shown in the past. He compounded the bias by claiming City shouldn't be required to follow Citys Street Standards Handbook, which is governing law for this and other LIDS. He claimed that neither he nor his neighbors used the sidewalk, and instead walked in the street, so neighborhoods shouldn't have to follow street standards. Chapman showed actual bias in using his position in city government to work against neighborhood interests in Nevada St LID. He also has a personal bias and history of angry attacking outbursts in public against the author, who is one of the same parties involved in Scofield LID though not an LID property owner. All parties are entitled to impartial decision-makers, not someone who self-identifies on Citys web site as a 'contrarian' and who has a history of bias against those who opposed to LIDS. 7he Oregon Supreme Court has held bias exists when a decisionmaker is predisposed to interpret the law in a particular fashion' 1000 Friends Of Oregon v. Wasco County Court, LUBA No. 81-132, 1986. 7. Council is biased because it is ruling on its own LID property. The parties are entitled to an impartial decisionmaker, yet in this LID, City is judging itself, which isn't allowed under Oregon law. The small Scofield LID includes a cemetery that City decided gets 4 LID votes and assessments because the graves could be dug up and the cemetery subdivided into a 4-lot housing project. This was a significant change from the 1-lot claim 2 years ago. This situation has had a chilling effect on the LID it makes it difficult to impossible for the neighborhood to achieve the 213 remonstrate threshold with City voting for itself, creating a hopeless situation for those opposed. Because of the impact of City's position on this, it's not accurate to calculate the percentages with and without, because City's position that the cemetery has 4 votes has affected the LID process and people's reactions to it Remedy is thus NOT to calculate the percentages as if City had said otherwise, because that would be speculative. Rather, one remedy is to require City to declare the cemetery will pay 4 assessments in the LID and have NO votes in the LID, then allow the neighborhood to digest this new situation, and determine if their position has changed as a result of at last partial removal of quasi judicial bias of City adjudicating itself. 8. Mayor, without council approval, just set; via a new speaker request form, an allegedly illegal process for showing bias. Oregon's required procedure for bias has been established by case law, including and not limited to a series of cases involving 1000 Friends Of Oregon v. Wasco County Court (62 Or.App. 663, 662 P.2d 813, 1983; 62 Or.App, 180, 659 P.2d 1006,1983; 295 Or. 259, 658 P.2d 381, 1983; 298 Or. 68,688 P.2d 845,1984; 14 Or LUBA 544,1986; 14 Or LUBA 315,1986; 80 Or.App. 525,723 P2d 1039,1986-- 80 Or-App. 532, 723 P.2d 1034, 1986; 302 Or. 299, 728 P.2d 531, 1986; 304 Or. 76, 742 P.2d 39, 1987). Oregon Supreme Court requires quasi-judicial proceedings to be procedurally fair and substantively correct in their decisions This series of cases showed that prejudgment bias is grounds for recusal and must be considered by the quasi-judicial body in making the recusal decision. 'The public interest in appearance of propriety over public interest inefficiency is so great in iugicial proceedings that readjudication is required regardless of whether decisions were fair when appearance of iinpropriety is present' 1000 Friends of Oregon v. Wasco County Court, 304 Or. 76, 742 P2d 39, 1987. 9. City is not property charging the cemetery costs. As with other property owners, the cemetery fund can't afford to pay the LID assessments. Council is improperly shifting the burden to pay for this assessment to other budget areas, when the correct and fair procedure would be for the person/group responsible for the cemetery fund to oppose the LID as unaffordable, not benefiting the property owner, and an improper use of City funds, which place an unreasonable cost burden on a few property owners to pay $380,000+ for street paving, when less expensive alternatives exist. Council is improperly using its discretion to simultaneously act as property owner and adjudicator by shifting funds from a property owner that can't afford this LID. EXHIBIT 5 ASHLAND 07T COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 3, 2007 PAGE I of 9 MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL Apri13, 2007 Civic Center Council Chambers 1175 E. Main Street CALL TO ORDER Mayor Morrison called die meeting to order at 7:00 p.m, in the Civic Center Council Chambers. ROLL CALL Councilor Hardesty, Navickas, Hartzell, Jackson, Silbiger and Chapman were present. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Councilor Hardesty clarified Mike Moms' comments captured on page three of the March 20, 2007 meeting minutes.were referring to the Tripartite Housing Committee, not the Housing Commission. The minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of March 20, 2007 and Continued Council Meeting of March 23, 2007 were approved as presented. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS Mayor's Proclamation of Arbor Week was read aloud. The Tree City USA award was presented to the City. A representative from the Tree Commission noted the qualifications for receiving the Tree City USA award and commented on a few of the upcoming activities of the Tree Commission. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Minutes of Boards, Commissions, and Committees. 2. Memo regarding Capital Improvement Financing. Councilor Hartzell requested Item #2 be removed for discussion. Councilor HartzelUChapman mis to approve Consent Agenda Item #I. Voice Vote: All AYES. Motion passed. Councilor Hartzell requested the memo regarding capital improvement financing be provided to the Budget Committee and clarified the CIP for FY07108 had been approved by the Council; however they may need to have additional discussion for the following years. Councilor Hartzell/Chapman m/s to approve Consent Agenda Item #2. All AYES. Motion passed. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. 2007 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Award. Housing Program Specialist Brandon Goldman presented the staff report to the Council and explained the City has received $212,735 in Community Development Block Grants for the year 2007. Mr. Goldman stated an application was received from the Rogue.-Valley Community Development Corporation (RVCDC) requesting $32,000 for their YouthBuild Program that is developing affordable housing on Siskiyou and Park Street. He added that if RVCDC's proposal is accepted, this would leave a remainder of $152,000 in CDBG funds that will need to be applied to eligible users. ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 3. 2007 PAGE 2 of 9 Staff recommended Council award $31,190 to RVCDC with the following conditions: I) that RVCDC develop and provide to the City a marketing plan to recruit YouthBuild participants from Ashland in that the majority of participants are Ashland residents, and 2) that RVCDC maintain a cost allocation plan for the YouthBuild program to ensure that Ashland CDBG funds are exclusively used in support of the YouthBuild Crew that is comprised of a. majority of Ashland residents. Mr. Goldman stated staff also recommends that the remainder of the funds be retained by the City with the intention of identifying a CDBG eligible project in support of affordable housing, and to expend these funds during the 2007 program year. He clarified the remainder of the funds could be coupled with the funds allocated during the last budget cycle for the acquisition of property for affordable housing. Floyd Pawlowski, President of RVCDC/Breanna Welburn, Resource Director for RVCDC/ Ms. Welborn provided an explanation ofthe YouthBuild Program and stated the program assists up to twenty low-income high school dropouts each year who are between the ages of 16-24. The YouthBuild Program provides construction education, life skills training, and job placement for these individuals. She noted RV CDC is responsible for providing the construction site and a crew leader and explained that this program meets the City's goal by providing job training and economic opportunity to low income, homeless and special needs persons. Ms. Welburn stated this project will create six affordable homes on Siskiyou and Park Street and noted they have already started to begin recruiting in Ashland. Public Hearing Open: 7:32 p.m. Public Hearing Closed: 7:32 p.m. Councilor Jackson/Silbiger m/s to approve the award of $31,190 to the RVCDC as outlined by staff with the noted two conditions. DISCUSSION: It was clarified the motion also includes staff's recommendation for the remainder of the CDBG funds to be retained by the City and expended on a eligible program in support of affordable housing during the 2007 program year. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. 2. Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing and Ordering the Formation of the Schofield/Monte Vista Loral Improvement District and Adoption of Findings. Mayor Morrison noted the Council had a Study Session on April 2, 2007 where Local Improvement Districts (LIDS) were discussed. Public Works Director Paula Brown presented the staff report and clarified it is the Council's decision whether to form an LID. She stated that depending on how they count the City's Hargadine Cemetery, there are 19 lots within the proposed district boundary, with ten lots opposed and nine lots in favor. She explained this LID has some unique issues and stated it has either 40% in favor, or up to 85% in favor, depending how they count the lots and whether they count the prior signed in favor agreements that the majority of the property owners had to sign as a result of the subdividing of their lots. Ms. Brown stated staff supports the formation of this LID because, I) it complies with Council's direction to pave all unpaved City streets, 2) it will address the safety issues cased by the steepness of the street and the entry onto N. Main Street, 3) it will address the water quality issues caused by the decomposed granite, and 4) it will provide better pedestrian and bicycle access. She acknowledged that this is not a clear-cut case as half of the neighborhood supports the LID and the other half opposes. She noted Council will need to consider the prior signed in favor agreements and assist staff is determining how the Cemetery lots should be divided. Ms. Brown clarified the City would pay 75% of the LID costs, regardless of how the cemetery is counted. ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 3, 2007 PAGE 3 of 9 City Engineer Jim Olson addressed some of the concerns raised regarding this LID. In response to the claim that sidewalks are not needed, he stated that pedestrian use must be provided for and stated that the City can no longer build streets that only accommodate cars. He disagreed with the claim that unpaved streets are safer in the winter, and stated the City is able to more effectively plow and apply de-icers to paved streets. He also noted that the City could also apply coarser asphalt or textured concrete when they pave the surface. Mr. Olson explained that installing curbs, gutters, and storm drains are essential in providing drainage control and disagreed with the claim that traffic would increase due to the paving of the street. Staff recommended Council move forward with the formation of the LID to improve Schofield and Monte Vista Streets, with the assessment of cemetery to be at the discretion of the Council. . . Mr. Olson clarified if the resolution before Council is approved, the next step is to design the project with the assistance of the neighborhood, submit it to bid, and construct it. Once the construction is completed, there will be a final assessment hearing and at that time assessment would be sent out to the property owners. Ms. Brown noted that if a lot has more than one assessed unit, the property owner would be charged for one unit at the time of assessment, but would not be required to pay for the rest of the units until either they subdivide or sell the property. City Recorder Barbara Christensen clarified that disclosure liens are required to be placed on the property at the time the LID is formed. She stated the City does not require that the assessment be paid until the project is completed, however if the property is sold prior to completion, lending institutions often require that the assessment be paid at that time. Ms. Christensen clarified the three payment options given to property owners at the time of final assessment. The first is to pay the assessment in full, the second is to sign an agreement with the City for the lion to be paid off over a ten-year period, with payments due every six months, and the third is a deferment program for eligible property owners. Assistant City Attorney clarified this is a preliminary process and disclosure.of ex parte contact is not required. Mayor Morrison stated that it would be a wise to request that any ex parte contact be disclosed at this time. Public Dearing Open: 8:09 p.m. Ex Parte Contact Councilor Hardesty stated she is a friend of Austin Brayfield, who is a resident on Monte Vista Street. She staled that they have talked about the LID, but not the assessment and does not feel that this has affected her opinion of the LID. She also disclosed that she owns a plot in the Hargadine Cemetery. Mr. Appicello clarified . that Councilor Hardesty would not be financially affected by the assessment and therefore does not believe this is an actual conflict of interest. Councilor Hartzell stated that she had spoken with Austin Brayfield only to inform her that she needed to consult with staff and determine the limits of the conversations she could have. She added that she is a friend of Vance Littleton, who lives within the assessment area. Mayor Morrison stated he has not had any contact and has only reviewed the letters and emails included in the packet. Councilor Jackson stated she has not had conversation with any of the residents, but did canvass this neighborhood last November when she was running for office. Councilor Chapman disclosed that he is friends with the Hendrickson's and an acquaintance of Pete Belcastm. Councilor Navickas disclosed that he has had a conversation with Austin Brayfield, but does not feel this will influence or bias his decision. ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 3, 2007 PAGE 4 of 9 Art Bullock/Claimed Council's discussion last night during the Study Session was an improper quasi-judicial authority and requested the Council postpone this hearing. Mr. Bullock stated the Council was bias on nine different grounds and submitted a document into the public records outlining his claim. He requested Council postpone and re-notice the hearing, and allow the parties an opportunity to review the ex parte contact and rebut it prior to any Council discussion. Mr. Appicello requested the Council incorporate into the record the discussion that occurred last night at the Study Session. He clarified the questions asked of staff during last night's open meeting is not ex parte contact. He noted it is not unusual for a City to own property within the assessment district and clarified that this is not a quasi-judicial hearing. Councilor Hartzell/Jackson m/s that the Study Session of April 2, 2007 be made part of the formal record for this action. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. The Councilors and Mayor indicated they had no bias and could make objective decisions. Pete Belcastro/447 Monte Vista StreetlCommented on how this issue has divided the neighborhood and voiced his support for the LID. He noted his neighbors suffering due to the drainage problems and stated the amount of debris is intolerable and unfair. He stated he was informed a rough surface would be applied to the bottom of the road and stated this is currently a very dangerous situation because of the slope. Mr. Belcastro stated more people use the street thatdo not live there than do, and voiced support for finding an alternative to LIDS. Isis and Robert Harrison/44 Schofield Street/Voiced their concerns with the dust problem and stated the dust blows right into their house and they cannot open their windows in the summer. They stated the school bus does not use their street and Mr. Harrison stated he had a difficult time getting home during the recent snowstorms. They voiced their support of the LID in order to improve the neighborhood. Mary Dutton/255 Avalon/Time was given to Austin Brayfield. Austin Brayfield/400 Monte Vista Street(Voiced concern with holding City Council meetings on holidays, and submitted a statement into the record from Yehudit Platt. Ms. Brayfield questioned why this LID is being done and stated she prefers the natural and humble character of the neighborhood. She requested the Council reconsider their blanket paving policy and to look seriously at alternative solutions. She requested that City staff provide the data that shows cars do not move faster on paved roads and questioned if the debris issue could be solved in other ways. Ms_ Brayfield requested the Council oppose the LID, consider if their constituents want to spend this much money to pave the roads, and consider individual creative solutions to address the 10 miles of unpaved roads in Ashland. Stuart Cotts/100 Schofield Street/Voiced support for the LID. He stated the street is dangerous and the dust is horrible. He commented that the dust abatement done every year by the neighborhood only lasts a few weeks and stated he is looking forward to having a paved street. Vance Littleton/465 Schofield Street/Stated his house is just below the recent development and stated he gets a lot of debris' 'Mr. Littleton stated there is a huge amount of drainage and they need,a solution to this problem. He stated the storm drain efforts by the City did not work and noted that dust and traffic has increased since the development went in. Mr. Littleton voiced his support for the LID and urged the Council to address these problems. ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 3, 2007 PAGE S of 9 Sandra Hendrickson/444 Monte Vista Street/Noted there is a huge ditch next to the cemetery that causes dirt to funnel into her driveway. She commented that the dust abatement done each year only works for a few weeks, and voiced her support for paving and the installation of storm drains, curbs, and gutters. Richard Hendrickson/444 Monte Vista Street/Stated that the flooding problem is acute and paving is the obvious solution. He stated that Monte Vista Street is a muddy mess in the winter and a dusty mess in the summer. Mr. Hendrickson commented on the safety issues, voiced his confidence in City staff's expertise, and urged the Council to move this LID forward. Judith Pentkowski/436 Monte Vista Streetrfime was given to Ed Pentkowski. Ed Pentkowski/436 Monte Vista Street/Stated he has lived in this neighborhood for over 50 years and voiced his opposition to the LID. He stated if the lower part of Schofield Street is paved it will become a "death trap" due to the steepness of the street and its relationship to N. Main Street. Mr. Pentkowski stated that traffic would increase if the street is paved and requested that all residents who live within this LID be considered. He stated that every citizen will pay the City's portion of the LID costs and commented on the taxes that citizens pay that go to the City. Mayor Morrison explained that Mr. Bullock had already been given three minutes to speak and would not be allowed to speak again on this issue. Councilors Navickas and Hartzell voiced their objections to not allowing Mr. Bullock to speak again. Public Hearing Closed: 9:03 p.m. Comment was made questioning if there are other ways to mitigate the drainage and debris problems aside from paving and installing curbs and gutters. Mr. Olson explained that staff has performed several activities to try to control this, including building 75 ft. of curb and gutter to try to channel the water. He stated the problem is that the streets are very steep and the water moves so fast it bypasses the catch basins and the curb and gutter in place. He stated that staff is confident that the full street improvement will solve these problems. Mr. Olson clarified the developer of the Blossom Hill subdivision paved Sheridan Street, installed curbs and gutters, and installed sidewalks on one side. He added that the City does not require a developer to pave all streets leading to their development, just one. Councilor Hardesty voiced her objection to the cemetery having any votes and requested that any calculation of percentages of those in favor and those opposed exclude the cemetery property. She also suggested that the Council wail until the LID Committee is formed before they move forward with this LID. Councilor Silbiger commented on the City policyto pave streets and the health and safetyreasons behind this. He noted the 85% of property owners who signed in favor of this LID and stated these individuals received a benefit and the City should take this into account. He also commented on the desire for bicyclists and pedestrians to be able to use these streets. Councilor Navickas indicated that he will be voting 'no', and stated that the City has failed to meet its procedural requirements to offer a fair and objective hearing. Comment was made noting that the Council is not obligated by law to allow public comment on their expressions of ex parte contact during the hearing. Mayor Morrison read aloud in the language listed on the Speaker Request Forms regarding a challenge of conflict of interest or bias. ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 3, 2007 PAGE6 of9 Councilor Jackson voiced her support for City policies. She noted the water quality obligations and stated a storm drain system is a necessary part to accomplish this. Councilor Jackson/Hartzell m/s to approve Resolution 42007-10 with Option #I. DISCUSSION: Comment was made questioning how they should treat the cemetery. Ms. Brown clarified the City will pay the same amount either way. She noted Council's options listed in the packet materials and noted that they could select Option 2 instead, which assesses the cemetery property as one unit. Support was voiced for accepting Option 2 and identifying where the money will come from. Motion withdrawn. Councilor Jackson/Hartzell m/s to approve Resolution #2007-10 with Option #2 adding that the City Street Fund, or other appropriate source, will reimburse the Cemetery Fund for the assessment. DISCUSSION: Councilor Hartzell clarified that the City is paying one way or another, this is reallyjust a matter ofwhich "pot" the money comes from. Councilor Hardesty indicated that she will be voting'no due to the expense on the taxpayers. She requested that in the future developers take full responsibility for messing up the driveways below and addressing the other problems that can occur with hillside developments. She also requested that they prioritize LIDS, especially with streets where children are walking to school. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Silbiger, Hartzell, Chapman, and Jackson, YES. Councilor Navickas and Hardesty, NO. Motion passed 4-2. Councilor Hartzell/Chapman m/s to approve Findings on Schofield/Monte Vista LID. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Navickas, Silbigeq Hartzell, Hardesty, Chapman and Jackson, YFS. Motion passed 6-0. PUBLIC FORUM Pam Vavra/2880 Dead Indian Memorial Road/Spoke regarding IIB 2761 and noted the support of Peter Buckley for this bill. She explained if the bill passes, it would expressly permit communities to adopt Instant Run-Off Voting and stated the purpose of the bill is to provide the counting rules. Ms. Vavra requested the . Council consider passing a resolution in support of this bill and provided copies of a proposed resolution to the Council. Councilor HartzelVNavickas m/s to place this item on tonight's agenda. Voice Vote: Councilor Navickas, Jackson, Silbiger, Hartzell and Hardesty, YES. Councilor Chapman, NO. Motion passed 5-1. Art Butlock/Voiced concern that the City voted on the Lm decision at 9:37 p.m. He also spoke regarding Measure 15-76 and stated the City Manager -Amendment is not supported by Senator Alan Bates, Representative Peter Buckley, County Commissioner Dave Gilmore, former Congressional Representative Les AuCoin, and former County Commissioner Jeff Golden. Mr. Bullock stated this amendment would remove accountability and transparency and does not believe this change would benefit Ashland. Steve Ryan/657 C Street/Spoke regarding the Rogue Valley Transportation District (RVTD) and noted he is the student representative for Southern Oregon University. Mr. Ryan commented on the need for the City to assist in keeping RVTD operating. Ambuja Rosen/Questioned whether the closure of the library is more important than that anti-tethering ordinance she has proposed. Ms. Rosen stated she will miss the library more than most, but feels that it is more important for dogs, cats, horses and other domesticated mammals to be able to walk. She stated the issue of animals needing to be freed from their chains is much more pressing than the City's need to keep open the library. Ms. Rosen's submitted her written testimony into the public record. Mark Heminger11362 Quincy Street/Spoke regarding the tethering ordinance and stated that the communityhas spoken on this issue through the petitions submitted by Ms. Rosen. Mr. Meninger commented ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 3, 2007 PAGE 7 of 9 on the benefits of animals in our society and urged the Council to adopt an anti-tethering ordinance. Councilor Hartzell/Chapman m/s to extend meeting until 10:30 p.m. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. Brady DeForest/900 E. Main Street, Medford/Announced that April is "Sexual Assault and Awareness Month" and commented on the awareness activities of the Sexual Assault Awareness Committee at Community Works and the resources available to those affected by sexual assault. ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRAC'T'S 1. Reading of a Resolution titled, "A Resolution Transferring Appropriations Within the 2006-2007 Budget." Administrative Services Director Lee Tuneberg presented the staff report and explained there are instances that require for appropriations to be moved around. He stated staff is recommending the following transfers of appropriations: 1) move $100,000 to the Cable Television fund from the Customer Relations/promotions Fund to cover the costs due to an extension of the working cable television, 2) move $34,200 from the Central Service Fund to the Legal Division to cover expenses for outside and contract legal services, and 3) transfer $75,000 from the HR Division to the Central Service Fund to cover expenses for recruitment, staffing, and outside legal counsel. Councilor Navickas/Jackson m/s to approve Resolution #2007-12. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Jackson, Hartzell, Navickas, Chapman, Hardesty and Silbiger, YES. Motion passed 6-0. 2. Second Reading by title only of an Ordinance Titled "An Ordinance Amending Sections 1030.005, 1030.020 A. and 1030.030 A. of the Ashland Municipal Code Addressing Outdoor Burning and Requirements for Permitted Fires." Fire Chief Keith Woodley noted that Division Chief Margueritte Hickman has prepared six options for Council consideration. Ms. Hickman noted a correction that needed to be made to the information contained in the packet materials; the document title AMC Chapter 10.30, Controls on Open Burning, Draft Ordinance, should read Option 5 at top of page, not Option 6. Ms. Hickman reviewed the six options outlined in the council communication and noted if Option 5 is chosen, staff would return at the next council meeting with an ordinance for first reading. Councilor Chapman voiced his support of Option I, but questioned the term "conducive" should be replaced with stronger language. Forest Resource Specialist Chris Chambers recommended that the proposed language be reserved in order to provide some level of interpretation to the staff issuing the bum permits. Suggestion was made to insert the wording where an owner can demonstrate hardship.", however Mr. Chamber's stated this would be difficult for staff to determine. Mr. Woodley clarified that the City does not charge for burning permits, per Council's previous direction. Councilor Silbiger noted a potential conflict of interest and disclosed that his parents own a home in the wildfire hazard zone. He voiced support for making it difficult for individuals to obtain bum permits, and suggested reinstituting a fee that can be used to support a chipper program and/or an education program. Councilor Chapman disclosed that he also lives in the wildfire zone. Mr. Chambers cited reasons for why weed burning would be allowed outside the wildfire hazard zone. He explained that there are areas outside of this zone where weeds are a problem and to the greatest extent possible, you do not want to transport weeds and their seeds off site if you can avoid it. ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 3, 200" PAGE 8 of 9 Councilor Hartzell/Silbiger m/s to approve Ordinance #2937 with Option 41. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Navickas, Silbiger, Iartzell, Chapman, Hardesty and Jackson, YES. Motion passed 6-0. Councilor Chapman/Hartzell m/s to authorize the Fire Department to investigate collecting fees for burning permits. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Chapman, Jackson, Silbiger, Hartzell and Hardesty, YES. Councilor Navickas, NO. Motion passed 5-1. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Emergency Shelter Policy. Management Analyst Ann Seltzer presented the resolution which sets forth the policies and conditions under which the City would open an emergency shelter due to extreme weather. She explained the policy would provide for anyone who needed emergency shelter. Ms. Seltzer stated the Congregational Church would provide the staffing for the shelter, however the City's insurance company has required that documentation be provided that indicates the staff has received training in the staffing of emergency shelters. Comment was made questioning the policy of locking the doors at 9 p.m. and suggestion was made for the Council to provide direction to Police Department that whenever they need to escort someone to the shelter, that they are acting as a "peace officer". Councilor HartzeWNavickas m/s to approve Resolution #2007-11. DISCUSSION: City Administrator Martha Bennett clarified that the nights the City would need to open the shelter are nights where events would typically be cancelled and does not believe this language will create a conflict. Suggestion was made to leave the opening of the shelter to the City Administrator's discretion instead of listing a specific temperature; however, support for voiced for retaining the temperature requirement in the resolution. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Silbiger, Hardesty, Hartzell, Jackson, Navickas and Chapman, YES. Motion passed 6-0. 2. A Resolution Supporting HB 2761. (Brought forward by Pam Vavra) Councilor HartzelUllardesty m/s to approve Resolution #2007-13. DISCUSSION: Councilor Silbiger voiced his preference to have had this item listed on the agenda and noticed so thatthe public could have been given an opportunity to comment. Comment was made that if the motion does not pass, thatthis resolution be placed on the next available agenda. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Navickas, Hardesty, Hartzell, YES. Councilor Silbiger, Jackson, and Chapman, NO. Mayor Morrison, YES. Motion passed 4-3. 2. Tripartite Housing Committee Report Delayed due to time constraints. 3. First Reading by title only of an Ordinance Titled "An Ordinance Amending AMC 3.08.020 To Apply Ethics Provisions to Employees, Appointed Officials and Elected Officials" Delayed due to time constraints. NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS 1. Community Development Planning Organizational Review Delayed due to time constraints. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS/REPORTS FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS 1. Revision of City Council Rules Delayed due to time constraints. ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 3, 2007 PACE 9 oJ9 ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 10:30 p.m. . Bfirbara Christensen, City Recorder John . Morrison, ayor V=- uy ~ EXHIBIT 6 RESOLUTION NO.2007- /0 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND ORDERING THE LOCAL IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF IMPROVEMENTS TO SCHOFIELD STREET AND MONTE VISTA STREET CONSISTING OF GRADING, PAVING AND CONSTRUCTION OF CURB AND GUTTERS, SIDEWALKS, STORM DRAINS AND RELATED APPURTENANCES AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY TO BORROW MONEY AND ISSUE AND SELL NOTES FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING INTERIM FINANCING FOR THE ACTUAL COST OF THE LOCAL IMPROVEMENT RECITALS: A. The Council has declared by resolution its intention to develop the improvements described in the above title and in the improvement resolution previously adopted and to assess upon each lot or part of lot benefited by the improvement its proportional share of the cost of the improvement; and B. Notice of such intention was duly given, a public hearing was held and it appears to the Council that such improvements are of benefit to the city and all property to be assessed will be benefited to the extent of the probable amount of the respective assessments to be levied for the costs. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES: SECTION 1. A local improvement district is created and shall consist of all the tax lots described in the attached Exhibit A. The district shall be called the Schofield/Monte Vista Local Improvement District, No. 87. SECTION 2. The council intends to make local improvements to provide the improvements described in the above title. Such improvements will be in accordance with costs estimated to be $387,000.00 of which $111,235.82 will be paid by special assessments on benefited properties. Costs will be allocated based on $5138.00 per equivalent dwelling unit or potential equivalent dwelling unit within the assessment area. Lots will be assessed as specified on the attached Exhibit A. SECTION 3. The City of Ashland is authorized to borrow money and issue and sell notes for the purpose of providing interim financing for the actual cost of the local improvement. The notes may be payable from the proceeds of any bonds, issuance of additional notes or from any other sources from which the bonds are payable.. This borrowing shall be issued according to the terms of ORS 223.235(7). SECTION 4. The City of Ashland expects to make expenditures from its available funds to pay for the costs of the improvement project. The City reasonably expects to issue PAGE 1-FORMATION RESOLUTION GVecordertCity Council PacketsWacket FIIes12006r200712007-0403\DONEViESO • Schofield Monte Vista LID-final approved.doc bonds or other obligations (the "Reimbursement Bonds') and to use the proceeds of the Reimbursement Bonds to reimburse the City for the expenditures it makes from its available funds for the improvement project. To permit interest on the Reimbursement Bonds to be excludable from gross income, the Internal Revenue Code of the United States requires that the City declare its intent to reimburse itself from Reimbursement Bond proceeds within 60 days after the expenditures are made. The City expects that the principal amount of the Reimbursement Bonds will not exceed $117,200.00. SECTION 5. The assessment imposed upon benefitted properties is characterized as an assessment for local improvement pursuant to ORS 305.583(4). SECTION 6. The city recorder is directed to prepare the estimated assessment of the respective lots within the local improvement district and file it in the lien.records of the city. SECTION 7. This resolution takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. This resolution was read by title only in accordance with Ashland Municipal Code §2.04.090 and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this ✓ day of. ' 2007. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of 2007. J{f4 PAGE 2-FORMATION RESOLUTION G:tremrdeACity Council PacketsWacket Files\2000-2007\2007-04030MEV2ESO- Schofield Monte Vista LID-final approved doc EXHIBITA OPTION NO. 2 PROPOSED SCHOFIELD I MONTE VISTA ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 87 Tax Lo Assess Assessment No. Map No. No. Description Owner Address Units Est Ass. Ral Amount 1 391E05BA 1 B02 2006-062572 McCants, Tema 445 Schofield Street Ashland, OR 97520 - 1 S 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 2 391F055A 1803 Pemal No.2 Partition P<7.199 11tieton, Vance C. & Theresa M. 465 Schofield Street Ashland OR 97520 1 $ 6.13&00 $ 5.138.00 3 391 E058A 2000 91-22856 Dutton, Brian M. & Ma A. 1001 N. Main Street Ashland, OR 97520 4 S 5,138.00 $ 20,552.D0 4 391E05BA 2100 97-01838 Krafl, Traci L & Douglas D. 925 Schofileld Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 S 5,138.00 S 5,138.00 5 391E059A 2101 05-011060 Harrison, Robert C. - 44 Scltofiefd Street Ashland. OR 975217 1 $ 5,138.00 S 5,138.00 6 391 E0580 100 89-27972 Pentkowski, Judith J., Trustee 436 Monte Vista Street Ashland. OR 97520 1 S 5.138.00 $ 5.138.00 7 391 E05BD 102 89-27972 Pemtkowski, Judith, J., Trustee 436 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5.138.00 8 391E05SD 103 Groseth Mark & Margaret 3302 Dallas Street Houston, TX 77019 1 $5.138.00 S 5,138.00 9 391E05813 201 88-15873 - Mann. Margaret 434 Monte Vista Shael Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138,00 10 391 E05BD 203 99-16910 Cons, Stuart M, 100 Schofield Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 I 1391 EOSBD 300 02-07580 Spence, Gary C., Trustee 430 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138,D0 S 5,138.00 12 391 E05BD 301 96-29873 Gall, Denise PO Box 624 Ashland, OR 97520 2 $ 5.138.00 $ 10.276.00 13 391EO58D 304 OD-22039 Bra geld, Francs, Trustee 400 Monte Vate Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 S 5138.00 $ 5,138.00 14 391E05BD 500 Parcel No. 1 Partition P-71-199 Hendrickson, Richard H., Trustee 444 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 15 391 E05DO 501 Parcel No. 2 Partition P-71.198 Belcasno. Pete J. & Christine 447 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 S 5,138.00 16 39IE05BD 600 Lot 10, WC . . Addifion C' of Ashland 20 E. Main Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $13,613.82 $ 13.613.82 Totals 20 S 111,235.82 City propedias pay full assessment, not minimums deened In the 99-09 resolution ENR April 1, 2008 ENR 7695.40 per resolution 99-09 this poses a $5136.06 cap per unit =Tnoo71np G:WMaV1PUb WM1x\Enp\aegMm'nLLIW5d9 CC 5cMfidE MOnk Vlsra f~4rA apt R.LLS i so006 Attachment No. 1 to ExhibitA CITY OF ASHLAND -ENGINEERING DIVISION SCHOFIELD / MONTE VISTA LID PROPOSED DISTRICT BOUNDARIES \ Legend 1900 ~1]00 ,600 10 iois d/n 391E 5 AB ® Proposed District Sf Boundary 2000~~ O Ta%1015 1902 1001 \ N 1803 M5 2100 W~6 465 391E 5 BA 925 \ s i 2101 nob One inch = 150 Feet nW Schofield St 44 906 Feet z3w i 0 75 150 300 ~11 1 361 \ \ 23 1~ 2310 47l 300 1w 100 AN 100 103 100 490 69 5) \ 461 5[ 460 9, 555 2 I 50 306 330 41 430 M13 102 101 535. 391E 5 BD 436 311 2316 \ 203 2314 402 3 500 305 515 4H 30) 303 629 319 201 - 40 \ 6W W4 fi I 280003 95 AM 501 Hargadine Cemetery 337 465 \ 44) (atY) 303 MI 1 252020 `p\\ J 325 309 N2-~ 1 bi 269 I 26) Sheridan St 39 E5A 220) 220.5 - )25 205 I TOl 7 0l 703 )02 F4800 4803 400 500 T00 901 600 f11~11 X11 t; 420 410 400 T]0 731 1 nll 401 300 296 266 262 266 264 262 ueE;~ BEFORE THE ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL JACKSON COUNTY, OREGON April 3, 2007 IN THE MATTER OF RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND ) ORDERING THE LOCAL IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE ) CONSTRUCTION OF IMPROVEMENTS TO SCHOFIELD ) STREET AND MONTE VISTA STREET CONSISTING OF ) FINDINGS GRADING, PAVING AND CONSTRUCTION OF CURB AND ) CONCLUSIONS GUTTERS, SIDEWALKS, STORM DRAINS AND RELATED ) AND ORDERS APPURTENANCES AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY TO ) BORROW MONEY AND ISSUE AND SELL NOTES FOR ) THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING INTERIM FINANCING FOR ) THE ACTUAL COST OF THE LOCAL IMPROVEMENT ) . APPLICANT: City of Ashland ) RECITALS: I) On February 20, 2007, Council approved Resolution No. 2007-03 setting a public hearing with intent to form a local improvement district (LID) for the construction of improvements to Schofield and Monte Vista Streets consisting of sidewalks, curbs and gutters, paving, drainage and associated improvements.. 2) The Council has declared by Resolution No. 2007-03 to assess upon each lot or part of lot benefited by the improvement its proportional share of the cost of the improvement; and it appears to the Council that such improvements are of benefit to the City. All property to be assessed will be benefited to the extent of the probable amount of the respective assessments to be levied for the costs. 3) The Council, following proper public notice, held a public hearing on April 3, 2007, at which time a staff presentation was made, citizen testimony received and exhibits presented. Council approved Resolution No. 2007- authorizing and ordering the local improvements for the construction of improvements to Schofield and Monte Vista Streets consisting of grading, paving and construction of curb and gutters, sidewalks, storm drains and related appurtenances. 4) On April 3, 2007, Council approved Resolution No. 2007-_ authorizing the City to borrow money and issue and sell notes for the purpose of providing interim financing for the actual cost of the local improvement. 5) The Schofield / Monte Vista LID No. 87 boundary was approved by Council as being all those lots with frontage on or taking sole access from Schofield Street between North Main Street and the east boundary of Blossom View Subdivision and Monte Vista Street between Sheridan Street and Schofield Street. Page I of4 Now, therefore, the City Council of the City of Ashland finds, concludes and recommends as follows: SECTION 1. EXHIBITS For the purposes of reference to these Findings, the following exhibits will be used: Exhibit I - Council Communication dated February 20, 2007 Exhibit 2 - Minutes of the February 20, 2007 Council meeting Exhibit 3 - Resolution No. 2007-03 setting a public hearing Exhibit 4 - Council Communication dated April 3, 2007 Exhibit 5 - Minutes of the April 3, 2007 Council meeting Exhibit 6 - Resolution No. 2007- authorizing and ordering the improvement of Schofield Street and Monte Vista Street under the Schofield / Monte Vista Street LID No. 87 SECTION 2: CONCLUSORY FINDINGS REGARDING NATURE OF IMPROVEMENTS 2.1 The City Council intends to improve Schofield Street from North Main to the easterly boundary of Blossom View Subdivision and Monte Vista Street between Sheridan Street and Schofield Street. The improvements are to consist of grading and paving, construction of curbs and gutters, sidewalks, storm drains and related appurtenances. 2.2 The proposed LID is in the best interest of the City. Evidence presented indicated that the City will have an improved street for all modes of transportation with reduced maintenance costs; enhanced environmental effects due to improved air quality and better storm water controls; and a demonstrated improved safety with construction of curbs, sidewalks and an asphalt road surface. SECTION 3. CONCLUSORY FINDINGS REGARDING BOUNDARY DETERMINATION 3.1 The City Council finds that it has received all information necessary to make a ' decision based on the Council Communication dated February 20, 2007 and April 3, 2007, public hearing testimony and the exhibits received. 3.2 The proposed LID boundary includes all lots fronting on or taking sole access from r Schofield Street between North Main Street and the east boundary of Blossom View Subdivision or Monte Vista Street between Sheridan Street and Schofield Street as depicted on the map attached to Resolution No. 2007-03. This boundary was selected as these 16 properties would be directly benefited by the improvements to Schofield and Monte Vista Streets. The benefit to these lots is readily definable and is much more direct than those who might simply use the street as a throughway to access Page 2 of4 their property. Many of the surrounding lots outside the proposed district, have already participated in LIDS to improve lower Sheridan Street, Tucker Street and the north section of Walnut Street. The district boundary is proposed to encompass only 16 lots as shown on the attached maps. 3.3 The proposed Schofield Street Local Improvement District is consistent with the 2007-2012 Capital Improvement Plan and identified in the 2006-2007 budget adopted by Council in June, 2006. 3.4 The City Council did not receive a remonstrance sufficient to postpone authorizing and ordering the construction of the local improvement district. SECTION 4. NOTIFICATION OF PUBLIC HEARING 4.1 A notice of public hearing was sent to all listed property owners (determined from Jackson County Tax Assessment rolls) within the proposed assessment district. In addition a notice has been sent, for informational purposes, to all property owners within the affected area. The affected area is defined as those lots situated near Schofield Street and Monte Vista Street which could be reasonably expected to use Schofield Street and/or Monte Vista Street as a residential access route. The public hearing notice was also published in the Ashland Daily Tidings. SECTION S. ALLOCATION OF ASSESSMENT UNITS 5.1 Each of the 16 lots within the proposed assessment district has been allocated one assessment unit. In addition, several lots have been allocated additional units of assessment. Those lots with additional units are those lots that the Planning Department has determined can be further divided. The number of assessment units is equal to the number of current and future potential residential lots as defined in Resolution No. 99-09 and as shown on the attachments to Resolution No. 2007-03. SECTION 6. COST 6.1 The maximum assessable rate per unit is established by Resolution No. 99-09. The maximum rate established in 1999 was $4,000 per unit. This rate is adjusted each April in accordance with the Construction Cost Index established by the Engineering News Record Index (ENR record) for Seattle, Washington. The current rate to be charged for the Schofield I Monte Vista LID No. 87 is $5,138.00 which is the maximum rate as of Resolution No 2007-04 establishing the Public Hearing date. All costs over and above the assessment amount will be borne by the City. SECTION 7. DECISION 7.1 Based on evidence contained within the whole record on this matter, the City Council concludes that the establishment of the LID boundary is in the City's best interest, is Page 3 of 4 justified as presented by staff and is supported by evidence contained within the record. 7.2 Council finds that the public hearing was properly noticed. 7.3 Council further concludes that the allocation of assessment lots and associated cost complies with Resolution No. 99-09 and represents the benefit received by each affected property. 7.4 Therefore, based on our overall conclusions, the City Council authorizes and orders the construction of improvements for the Schofield / Monte Vista Local Improvement District No. 87. John Norrison, r at Page 4 of 4 EXHIBIT7 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Approval of a Contract to Construct the Schofield & Monte Vista LID Proicet Meeting Date: March 20, 2012 Primary Staff Contact: James H. Olson Department: Public Works/Engineering E-Mail: olsoni@ashland.or.us Secondary Dept.: Community Development Secondary Contact: Scott A. Fleury Approval: Dave Kanner Estimated Time: 15 minutes Question: Will the Council, acting as the Contract Review Board, approve a construction contract with Pilot Rock Excavation Inc., in the amount of $344,164.00 to construct the Schofield & Monte Vista Local Improvement District (LID)? Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends Council approve a construction contract with Pilot Rock Excavation Inc., in the amount of $344,164.00 to construct the Schofield & Monte Vista LID. Background: Executive Summary On March 8, 2012 the City received two valid bids for the construction of the Schofield & Monte Vista LID Project No. 2005-08. The low bid of $344,164.00 was submitted by Pilot Rock Excavation Inc. of Central Point, Oregon. The bid is $34,289 more than the 2011 engineer's estimate of $309,875.The proposed total of cost of the project is $367,764, including the engineering contract of $23,600. The total project cost is within the total project budget established in resolution 2007-10 of $387,000. Contractor Information The low bidder is a local contractor who has performed projects for the City including the A St. reconstruction project. Staff has received several good references from individuals and companies that have previously done work with Pilot Rock Excavation Inc. Previous Bid The Schofield & Monte Vista Improvement Project was advertised for bid in August of 2011. The City of Ashland received only one bid on the project. The bid was $111,000 over the engineers estimate and it was determined to be in the best interest of the City to reject the bid and re-bid in spring of 2012. Bidding Process The Schofield & Monte Vista Improvement Project was advertised for bid on February 16, 2012. It was advertised locally in the Mail Tribune, on the City's website and statewide in the Daily Journal of Commerce. A pre-bid meeting was held on February 28, 2012 with seven prospective bidders in attendance. Two bids were received and publically read on March 8, 2012 in accordance with the advertisement. All bids were received on time, complete and included the required signatures, acknowledgements and bid bond. The list of bidders is shown on the attached bid summary sheet. Proposed Schedule Page 1 of4 G:\Pub-w skng105-08 Schofield & MonteVista LID\A_Adn in\Cons Pre Contract\Council Info\D5-08 Schofield Monte Vista Construction Contract CC.doc CITY OF ASHLAND 'The contract is a 90 day contract and, if approved, staff will push for a rapid startup. LID Costs Per Resolution 2007-10 The Schofield & Monte Vista LID No. 87 was authorized by the Council on April 3, 2007 by Resolution No. 2007-10. That resolution established the estimated cost of construction and engineering at $387,000 of which $111,235.82 was to be paid by special assessments against the bencfitted properties. The assessment district was formed under previous LID ordinances and in particular under Resolution 99-09 which set specific rates of participation (credits) by the City. The resolution also established a maximum cap which the assessments could not exceed (adjusted annually based upon the CPI). The petition for the formation of the LID was received in May of 2006 and the cap was set at $5,138.00 per unit or potential unit, the computed cap for that year. The costs for development of the Schofield & Monte Vista LID were estimated as follows: ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT COSTS Total Construction Cost $ 353,000 Engineering & Administration Costs $ 34,000 Total Estimated Project Cost $ 387,000 Less City Participation per Resolution 99-09 75% of storm drain cost 0.75 X . $ 29;650.00 $ 22,237.50 20% of street surface cost 0.2 X $ 296,310.00 $ 59,262.00 50% of engineering cost 0.5 X $ 34,000.00 $ 17,000.00 60% of sidewalk cost. 0.6 X $ 27,040.00 $ 16,224.00 Sub Total $ 114,723.50 Assessable Cost $ 272,276.50 Number of Lots in proposed assessment district 20 Estimated per lot for Schofield & Monte Vista improvement $ 13,613.82 Current LID cap (maximum assessment amount as of April 2007) $ 5,138.00 Since Resolution 99-09 set a maximum amount that may be borne by the owners, any additional cost must be borne by the City. In addition, a single lot owned by the City also received an assessment which adds to the amount the City pays. Amount to be paid by owners $ 97,622.00 (25.2%) Amount to be paid by City a. Participation per Resolution 99-09 $ 114,723.50 b. Amount over the maximum cap $ 161,040.18 c. Assessment for City owned lot $ 13,613.82 7.50 (74.8°/nl $289.37 TOTAL $ 387,000.00 (100%) Page 2 of 4 G:\pub-w ks\dng\05-08 Schofield & MonteVista I-ID\A_Admin\Cons Pre Contract\Council Info\05-08 Schofield Monte Vista Construction Contract CC.doc CITY OF ASHLAND Anticipated Total Assessment Following is a summary of the anticipated assessment costs based upon the Pilot Rock Construction bid and the current Marquess engineering contract. The final assessment costs will not be precisely known until the project is completed and all actual costs can be computed. The final assessment will be established by resolution and will include a public hearing whereby property owners may express any objections to the costs. ASSESSMENT COSTS BASED UPON BID Total Construction Cost $ 344,164.00 Engineering & Administration Costs $ 23,600.00 Total Estimated Project Cost $ . 367,764.00 Less City Participation per Resolution 99-09 75% of storm drain cost 0.75 x $ 42,252.00 $ 31,689.00 20% of street surface cost 0.2 'x $ 272,772.00 $ 54,554.40 50% of engineering cost 0.5 x $ 23,600.00 $ 11,800.00 60% of sidewalk cost 0.6 x $ 29,140.00 $ 17,484.00 Total Credits by City $ 115,527.40 Assessable Cost Total Estimated Project Cost $ 367,764.00 Less Credits $ 115,527.40 Total Assessable Costs $ 252,236.60 Number of Lots in Assessment District 20 Computed Cost per Lot (Assessment Rate) ($252,236.60 / 20) $ 12,611.83 Maximum Assessment Rate per Resolution 1999-09 $ 5,138.00 Resolution No. 99-09 sets a maximum cap on the assessment rate to be borne by the owners within the LID. Any costs over the maximum rate must be born by the City. Costs to be borne by the property owners and the City are as follows: Amount to be paid by owners $111,235.82-. 111,235.82- -(30.2%) Amount to be paid by City . Credits per Resolution 99-09 $ 115,527.40 Amount over the maximum cap $ 141,000.78 Total City Cost $ 256,528.18 -(69.8%) * Includes one city-owned lot to be assessed at $13,613.82 Although the property owners' portion of the cost has remained constant, the amount to be funded by the City has been reduced by $32,849.32 based upon the current low bid. Therefore, staff is recommending approval of the construction contract with Pilot Rock Construction Co, Inc. Page 3 of 4 GApuh-wrkskng\05-08 Schofield & MonteVista LID41_Adnnin\Cons Pre Contract\Council Infn\05-08 Schofield Monte Vista Construction Contract CC.doc PWAM CITY OF ASHLAND Related City Policies: Resolution 99-09 and Resolution No. 07-10 set forth the requirements and regulations for the improvement of public facilities under a Local Improvement District. Council Options: • The Council may approve the construction contract with Pilot Rock Excavation Inc., in the amount of $344,164.00 for the improvement of Schofield & Monte Vista under Assessment District No. 87 • The Council may decline to approve a contract with Pilot Rock Construction by rejecting all bids received Potential Motions: • . Move to approve a contract with Pilot Rock Excavation Inc. , Inc. in the amount of $344,164.00 for the improvement of Schofield & Monte Vista under Assessment District No. 87 • Move to reject all bids received for the improvement of Schofield & Monte Vista Attachments: 1. Vicinity Map 2. Pilot Rock Excavation Inc. Bid Summary 3. Preliminary Findings, Conclusions and Orders April 3, 2007 Page 4 of 4 Wpub-ivd s\eng\05-08 Schofield & MonteVistn UD1A_Admin\Cons Pre ConhacACouncil Info\05-08 Schofield Monte Vesta Constaction Contact CC.dm yda u ~ ~4 r'3 " a 7 _ jfv' ~ 4 l_\ 5 L <5M ` tfC ~ 1""zc~ ~ ~ Y - RfX£Adi ~ i - _ ~ •.1 ~~v~2-a 'cam^(' ~ - sa 3 r if T b'~n~- TeJ ry+~ T 7 13A~~A I y^F S •-°v~ i. ~}^-H uL4'~ b R i INEZ Schofield / Monte Vista LID 1:1,800 Proposed District Proposed District 1 inch = 150 feet ® Boundary Boundaries 0 raxiots Mapping is schematic only and bears no warranty of accuracy. All features, structures, facilities, easement or roadway locations should be independently field verified for existence and/or location. CONTRACT & BID DOCUMENTS & TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR PUBLIC WORKS CONSTRUCTION rY; City Project Number: 2005-08 Project Name: Schofield and Monte Vista LID Project Location: Schofield Street (N. Main Street to Blossom View Subdivision) Monte Vista Street (Schofield Street to Sheridan Street) Project Type: Street Improvements Project Completion: 90 Calendar Days Pre-Bid Conference: 2:00 P.M., February 28, 2012 Proposals Due by: 2:00 P.M., March 8, 2012 Submit Questi ons & Bid Proposals to: James Olson, City of Ashland CITY OF -AS LAN D DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 20 EAST MAIN.STREET (mail) 51 WINBURN WAY (delivery) ASHLAND OR 97520 541/488-5587 (voice) 541/488-6006 (fax) . Page 2. This page left intentional) blank Page 3 T."L.E OF CONTENTS PAGE PART I --BID & CONTRACT DOCUMENTS 5-50 Advertisement for Bids 6-7 Proposal & Bid Schedule...................... 8-15 Bid Bond 16 Performance & Payment Bond 17-20 Public Improvement Contract 21-50 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS, PART 00100 50-60 SP 110 Organization, Conventions, Abbreviations, and Definitions 51 SP120 Bidding Requirements and Procedures 51-53 SP130 Award and Execution of Contract 53 SP 140 Scope of Work... 54 SP150 Control of Work & Valdez Principles 54-56 SP160 Source of Materials 56 SP165 Quality of Materials 56-57 SP 170 Legal Relations and Responsibilities 57-58 SP180 Prosecution and Progress 58 SP195 Payment 58-60 SP 196 Payment for Extra Work 60 SP 197 Payment for Force Account Work 60 SP199 Disagreements, Protests and Claims 60 PART H - TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS 61-76 TEMPORARY FEATURES AND APPURTENANCES 62-69 SP210 Mobilization SP220 Accommodations for Public Traffic SP225 Work Zone Traffic Control SP280 Erosion and Sediment Control SP290 Environmental Protection DRAINAGE. AND SEWERS 69-73 SP405 Trench Excavation, Bedding, & Backfrll SP440 Commercial Grade Concrete SP495 Trench Resurfacing WEARING SURFACES 73-75 SP730 Asphalt Tack Coat SP745 Hot Mixed 'Asphalt Concrete (HMAC) MATERIALS 75-76 SP2001 . Concrete PART M - PLANS - BOUND SEPARATELY Project Plans Page 4 FOREWORD The documents and forms which are attached, or for which provisions are made, must be used in submitting proposals for the Schofield and Monte Vista LID Project for the City of Ashland, Oregon, as covered by the "Oregon Standard Specifications for Construction. 2008 Oregon Department of Transportation and American Public Works Association, Oregon Chapter and other appurtenant specifications where indicated. These bid and contract documents, specifications, and plans, although bound separately, are made a part of the complete document with the same force and effect as though all parts and plans referred to were under one binding. Should addenda to the specifications become necessary and be issued prior to the date of receiving bids, they shall be deemed a part of the Special Provisions. This project is funded with City money. Page 5 PART I BID & CONTRACT DOCUMENTS Page 6 CITY OF ASHLAND DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ASHLAND, OREGON ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS Sealed proposals addressed to the City of Ashland, Oregon, and endorsed Schofield and Monte Vista LID Project Attn: James Olson, Engineering Services Manager, will be received at the Siskiyou Conference Room located at 51 Winburn Way (mailing address: 20 E. Main Street, Ashland, OR 97520), until 2:00 P.M., March 8, 2012, at which time proposals will be publicly, opened and read. If the total amount of the contract exceeds $100,000, the award of the contract must be approved by the Local Contract Review Board (Aslrland City Council). A contract for work will be awarded or bids may be rejected, separately or entirely, within thirty (3 0) days after opening. The project completion date is 90 calendar days. The work shall consist of supplying all labor, equipment, and materials necessary to construct improvements including but not limited to the following approximate quantities for major work items: • 12" Storm Drain Pipe (Max. 5' Depth) - 550 LF Concrete Curb and Gutter - 1,980 LF • Straight Concrete Curb - 665 LF Concrete Sidewalk-3,000 SF • Plain Concrete Pavement; 6 Inches Thick-1,690 SF • Level 2, '/z Inch Dense HMAC -485 TONS Plans, specifications and documents may be examined at: I . City Engineering Office 2. Medford Builders Exchange City of Ashland 701 East Jackson 51 Winburn. Way Medford OR 97504 20 E Main Street (mailing Address) 541/773-5327 . Ashland OR 97520 541/488-5347 3. Rogue Valley Builders Exchange 4. Klamath Builders Exchange 111 SE G Street 725 Main Street Room 214 Grants Pass OR 97526 Klamath Falls OR 97061 541/476-0298 541/882-9480 5. Daily Journal of Commerce Plan Center 2840 NW 35`t' Avenue Portland, OR 97296 503/274-0624 503/274-2616 FAX Page 7 A mandatory ® non-mandatory pre-bid conference will be held at the Community Development Building, Siskiyou Conference Room, 51 Winbum Way, Ashland, Oregon at 2:00 P.M., February 28, 2012- All bidders are encouraged to attend this meeting. Copies of the plans and specifications may be obtained at the City Engineering Office, 51 Winburn Way, Ashland Oregon. No bid shall be received or considered unless the bidder is registered with the Construction Contractor's Board. The "Oregon Standard Specifications for Construction, 2008" shall apply to work done under this contract. Copies of the Standard Specifications are available from: ODOT Contractor Plans Office Room 28 Transportation Building 355 Capitol Street NE Salem OR 97301-3871 Standard Specifications may also be downloaded from the ODOT Web Site: http://wvm, oregon.,gov/ODOT/HWY/SPECS/standard specifications.shtml Bidders sball pre-qualify as provided by ORS Chapter 279C.430 and in accordance with the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction, Oregon Chapter of APWA. Pre-qualification applications must be received by the City of Ashland at least five days prior to the opening of the bids. Contractor or Sub-Contractor do.not need to be licensed under ORS 468A.720 (No asbestos removal). Each bid must contain a statement as to whether the bidder is a resident bidder as defined in ORS 279A.120. All projects in excess of $50,000.00 requite the Contractor to pay prevailing wage rates. No bid shall be considered unless the bid contains a statement by the bidder as a part of the bid that the provisions of ORS 279C.800 through 279C.870 Prevailing Wage Rates will be complied with. All projects require the Contractor to provide a "Performance" bond and a "Payment" bond, each equal to the total amount of the contract. Contractor is required to read the ORS 279 subchapter A and ORS 279 subchapter C. Contractor is also required to read City of Ashland's Public Contracting rules as found in the Ashland Municipal Code, Chapter 2.50, .."Pubhe Contracts." The City reserves the right to reject any and all bids, waive formalities, or accept any bid which appears to serve the best interests of the City in accordance with ORS 279B.100. By Order of the City Council Ashland, Ore on James Olson Engineering Services Manager Page 8 PROPOSAL Mayor & City Council Ashland, Oregon The undersigned bidder declares that the bidder has received, read and understood all bid documents; received, read and understood all addenda; the bidder has taken no exceptions other than those clearly stated in this proposal; the bidder will be liable for. increased costs (and attorney fees) for retaining a replacement bidder if the undersigned bidder is awarded the contract but refuses to sign the contract; the bidder has examined the plans and specifications, has visited the site, and made such investigation as is necessary to determine the character of the materials and conditions to be encountered in the work and that if this Proposal is accepted, the bidder will contract with the City of Ashland, Oregon for the construction of the proposed improvement in. a form of contract contained in the bid documents, will provide the necessary equipment, materials, tools, apparatus, and labor, in accordance auth the plans and specifications on file at the City Engineering Office, Ashland, Oregon, under the following conditions: 1. It is understood that all the work will be performed under a lump sum or unit price basis and that for the lump sum or unit price all services, materials, labor, equipment, and all work necessary to complete the project in accordance with the plans and specifications shall be famished for the said lump sum or unit price named. It is understood that the quantities stated in connection with the price schedule for the contract are approximate only and payment shall be made at the unit prices named for the actual quantities incorporated in the completed work. If there shall be an increase in the amount of work covered by the lump sum price, it shall be computed on a basis of "extra work" for which an increase, in payment will have been earned and if there be should a decrease in the lump sum payment, it shall be made only as a result of negotiation between the undersigned and the Owner. Furthermore, it is understood that any estimate with respect to time, . materials, equipment, or service which may appear on the plans or in the specifications is for the sole purpose of assisting the undersigned in checking the undersigned's own independent calculations and that at no time shall the undersigned attempt to hold the Owner, the Engineer, of any other person, firm or corporation responsible for any errors or omissions that may appear in any estimate. 2. The undersigned will furnish the bonds required by the specifications and comply with all the laws of the Federal Government, State of Oregon, and the City of Ashland which are pertinent to construction contracts of this nature even though such laws or municipal ordinances may not have been quoted or referred to in these specifications. 3. All items for the contract for which forms are provided in the bid documents have been completed in full by the showing of a lump sum price or prices for each and every item and by the showing of other information indicated by the proposal form.. The undersigned submits the unit prices set forth as those at which the bidder will perform the work involved. The extensions in the column headed "Total" are made up for the sole purpose of facilitating comparison of bids and if there are any discrepancies between the unit prices and the totals shown, the unit prices shall govern. 4. The undersigned agrees that the "Time of Completion" shall be as defined in the specifications and that the bidder will complete the work within the number of consecutive calendar days stated for each schedule after "Notice to Proceed" has been issued by the Owner. Page 9 Bidder furthermore agrees to pay as liquidated damages, for each calendar day thereafter, the amounts shown in Subsection 00180.50 of the Special Provisions, for each day the project remains incomplete. 5. The undersigned, as bidder, acknowledges that addenda(s) numbered K VA through have been received by the bidder and have been examined as part of the contract documents. 6. If the proposed bid price will exceed $50,000.00 the undersigned, as bidder, acknowledges that provisions of ORS 279C.800 - 279C.870 relating to workers on public works to be paid not less than prevailing rate of wage shall be included in the contract, or in the alternative, if the project is to be funded with federal funds and is subject to the Davis-Bacon Act (40 U.S.C. §276a) bidder agrees to comply with the Davis-Bacon Act requirements. "Prevailing Wage Rates for Public Works Contracts in Oregon," which are incorporated herein by reference, and can be accessed at: littp://www.oregon.gov/BOLI/WED/PWR/pwr-book.slittnl. 7_ Instructions for First-Tier Subcontractors Disclosure. Bidders are required to disclose information about certain first-tier subcontractors (those subcontractors contracting directly with the bidder) when the contract price exceeds $75,000 (see ORS 279C370). Specifically, when the contract amount of a fast-tier subcontractor is greater than or equal to: (i) 5% of the project bid, but at least $15,000, or (ii) $350,000 regardless of the percentage, you roust disclose the following information about that subcontract within two working hours of bid closing: 7.1 The subcontractor's name and address; 7.2 The subcontractor's Construction Contractor Board registration number, if one is required, and; 7.3 The subcontract dollar value. If you will not be using any subcontractors that are subject to the above disclosure requirements, you are required to indicate "NONE" on the form. THE CITY MAY REJECT A BID IF THE BIDDER FAILS TO SUBMIT THE DISCLOSURE FORM WITH THIS INFORMATION WI'T'HIN TWO HOURS OF BID CLOSING. To determine disclosure requirements, the City recommends that you disclose subcontract information for any subcontractor as follows: 1) Determine the lowest possible contract price. That price will be the base bid amount less all alternate deductive bid amounts (exclusive of any options that can only be exercised after contract award). 2) Provide the required disclosure information for any first-tier subcontractor whose potential contract services (i.e., subcontractor's base bid amount plus all alternate additive bid amounts, exclusive of any options,that can only be exercised after contract award) are greater than or equal to: (i) 5% of the lowest contract price, but at least $15,000, or (ii) $350,000 regardless of the percentage. Total all possible work for each subcontractor in making this determination (e.g., if a subcontractor will provide $15,000 worth of services on the base bid and $40,000 on an additive alternate, then the potential amount of subcontractor's services is $55,000. Assuming that $55,000 exceeds 5% of the lowest contract price, provide the disclosure for both the $15,000 services and the ($40,000 services). The disclosure should be submitted on the following form: Page. 10 City Di Ashland. TII2ST-TIER SUBCONTRACTOR:DISCLOSURG FORM. ()Ss;Rq.uired by ORS274C.370 and.OAR 137=049360) SCROFIELD AND MONTt VISTA LID PROJECT.2005-08 Bid Closing Date: March 8, 1012,:2:00 P.M. AIF1E OF SUBCONTRACTOR CATEGORV OF WORK DOLLAR VALUE 1. _ r 'IcL,L o~zti; tr ~o:se :l?t: ~sx t ~i2D VC)o z. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. .4: 10, ?:AttachaMdonal pages ifnee&& . Page 11 sclio-FIELD AND:MONTE VISTA LID PROJECT N0.2005-08 CITY OF ASHLAND, OREGON . . NO DESCIiiI'TION: QCY: UNFr WUNIT IGURE3)' AMOUNT 00210 - Mobilization Mobilization Dollars i~ 1 ---1.. 1 Ls U X600:. ~ 3U,t3tyJ ~ _ 00225 Work Zone Traffic Control. P 6 ~ f r-1%it-'t fficlContr 'r 1+~2I?v~ Dollars.. $ $ - 00280 --Erosion Sediment Control Erosion & Sediment Control 3 for T06 Dollars 1 Ls .$:2000 $ ~ dGZ3:' 00310 -Removal of Stimetures & Obstructions Removal of Asphalt Paving. q for'.. _n Pi e Dollars 55- . sr Removal of Concrete Curb 5 for Dollars 25. LF $ 3 $ : Removal of Concrete Cab and Gutter 6 for. Dollars W Le $ $ t~- Removal of oncrete Curb Inlet ~7 for ' 41, P~ Dollars 1 $ S LA - l.St7 t Removal of Concrete Catch Sasm - g forptlC i~va~2eo-dt~ F Dollars EA Removal of IT' Storm Drain Pipe g for. ru $ Dollars. 35 LF Removal of Concrete Sidewalk. 10 for... Dollars: 85- Se / $ Removal ofE.: 11 forUnleou~=.csa~Er Dollars 4. CA. $}('OuD-:^ . . forRemoval D~ t.tK=r A Strect6;~ht i% '12 Dollars: 1 13A 400.7 Remmval of Asphalt Dram e llump on Schofield' 13 for G T%f Dollars. 1 EA $ - Retnoval of E ing Mailbox Stracture 14 for i IAIF ~.....S a2 r~ Dollars; 1 EA [ ~ 6.. (L U . . 00320 - Clearing and Grubbing Clearing and Grubbing 15 for U..tS~ejQ' Dollars-. 00330- Earthwork; Page 12 NO DESCRIPTION I QTY.. UNIT WUPRICE AMOUNT (FIGURES) GeneraiExc vaion 16 for Dollar's' 1,600. Cy. A ~s $ Z6 ?3?%~ Evibaid.menttIIn Place r 17 for 1 ~r t- q Dollars 400. CY $ ! Z $ a 00350 - Geosynthetic Installation Subgrade Geotextile , p 18 for f✓ - J Lrus Dollars' 3;350. 5Y 4 - I~ -.J 00445- Sanitary, Storm, Culvert, Siphon & Irrigation.Pipe I7-' -Storm Drain Less than 51 Depth: ' 19 for~•'~ixss~ ~ v-c Dollars 550. LF 4" Storm Drain Less than S Depth Zp for: va.1_"rBe, Dollars 1.4. 12"x4" Wye 21 for`'ei.r~l;is.lEr3.l,=ii:iDollars 1' EA Sanitary Sewer Service Lafatal $ 22 for Dollars 79 I,F Z-Z- 00470- Manholes, Catch Basins & Inlets W' Concrete Storm Drain Manhole (per city of Ashland Sid.Dwg. CD336) $ $ _ 23 for a : .;jc:: ~ Dollars _ 4 EA 4`. Concrete Inlet with 4' Galler~ 24 for o~cs" ld a .1~9,sf Dollars 4 FA $ Gf b~> : $ U 4' Concrete Inlet .ivith 4' Galteg and Modified Base 7,5 foi✓„~.s't~t:°rtwk-1.:~,~a2-cD Dollars 1 EA $r-"9t~cl $ _ - 2.5' Concrete Curti Inlet with Modified Base 26 for:t's=.~_~_r..r k~.u^ir~iti Dollars ODOT.CG-2 Inlet 27 for Si,c'1'eea lka..>J-n12XJ' ' Dollars .5 - EA $ f'. 60E:3: $ ~s~U 00490= Work.o.n Existing Sewers & .Structures Connect Existin~-:8" SD to CG-2 Inlet 28 'Tlnl tr i~' Nil'©R-✓~' O 'Dollars 1 EA foi CotinectFxistir~A' SD tdNew4 LSD' $ $ 29 for__QJJ 1•-t'ttwl ~2i1t7 Agllars 1', EA 160 - Connect New 47 S2nttary Sewer Service to Existing fn. rnitary -wer am 30 tA J0RZ.- Lia ~ Dollars _ 2 L-A $.~:~,a~.. , AdjiutExis - g Water Valve Box 31 Dollars S EA Adjust. Existing StQrin Drain :M anliole . 32 for_'9c.g-Vl Ck..~pp+? Dollars 2 EA $ $ 400' Adjust.Extsting S1. itary SewerManhoie 33 for - 77u~ 1'# u o 7~e Dollars 66o. Ad* tExisti Water Meter Box : Dollars 2 EA f ~C} i4 for fJ:6c q¢ao t--tE- r *7 Page 13 '!T E. ?Jh(FIGURPRIC NO DSCRWT10N QTY: UNIT ESfMQ[JNT_ 00596 - Retaining Walls Retainin Nall, convennonalsegemental ' 3g. for I Dollars I00 SF $ zo $ i :E= JC3 00641- Aggregate Subbase, Base, and Shoulders. Aggregatel3ase-(includes 'base material under sidewa11:5 anddrive~}•aysl 36 for. t iZ _ Dollars 7 2G0; cy 0 CEO 00744 -IN inor Hot Mixed Asphalt Concrete (ARJAMC) Level 2,M Inch`Deuse.MWAACMix . 37 for _d+,1L #CtN -g,Dollars: 4S5 ION $f(}t`~ - $ :-^00756:-Plain Concrete Pavement Plain Concrete Pavement, 6'Inches Tllic.k- with 7.5lbsiCY ofNovomesh 950 $ _ 38: for 4:>Q-1= .t•.*,5otZ-A~ r? Dollars- 3651^ se :I00 00759 - Miscellaneous Portland Cement Concrete Structures ` Concrete Curb and,Gutter' 39 for Dollars 1,980 LF StraigIn-Con S.•rete u 6 40 for 1 F~ Dollars- 665 LF $ ~L $ ~j• Z~~-~ Concrete S' ewalk $ - 41 foh:. l.~It! Dollars 3,000. SF~ Concrete Driveway $ ' Tt 42 for Dollars. 1,690- SF 1 Concrete Valley.Guft r - 43 for tit-t~yt.~,-1 Dollars .4T5 SF Concrete Pedestri Ramp - - 44 for Cdr 7 Z n ~ Dollars 4 EA (~Oa $ QQ - 6" Extruded Curb for Dnvewayat 465 Schofield - - 45 for i6 . Dollars- 30. LF $ $ :60970 -,Highway Elimination V Install (2) Streetlight per CD60a (Includes junction - boxes and conduit ins allafon to power: source) ::0 L. 46 for -i try , l ~yl -Dollars 1 L is 01070 -,,Mailbox Supports Multip~eyaillm Supports 47 for ?'i ~i ct~ Dollars. ; 2 EA ~l.~'r 1 Off: 00940 - Signs Relocate Exrsttng'Stop sign - - 48 for v3j}-, k od'3 i' : Dollarc• 1.. FA $2017 01170:-.Potable Water Senice Conn. ectiops, 2Inch and Smaller Insfall ,~TJater eivice O;xcava4ion and Barl fiU Only) - 49 fort? ` i# - Dollars 2 En $ - $ ~c~:.~ Page 14 BU) SUMMARY - - SCHOFIELD'AND MONTE VISTA. LID PROJECT NO.2005. $ 1. -08 GRAND TOTAL. s. p, Page 15 The City reserves the right to reject any and all bids, waive formalities, or accept any bid which appears to serve the best interests of the City in accordance with ORS 27913.100. The foregoing prices shall include all labor, materials, equipment, overhead, profit, insurance, and all other incidental expenses to cover the finished work of the several kinds called for. Unit prices are to be shown in both words and figures. In case of discrepancy, the amounts shown in words will govern. Upon receipt of written notice of the acceptance of this bid, Bidder shall execute the formal contract attached within ten days, deliver surety bond or bonds as required, and deliver required proof of insurance. The bid security attached in the sum of five percent of the total price for the bid.or combination of bids is to become the property of the Owner in the event the contract and bond are not executed within the time above set forth as liquidated damages for the delay and additional expense to the Owner caused thereby. The Bidder is _'k_ or is not a resident Bidder as defined in ORS 279A.120. Pilot Rock Excavation, Inc. 41turcof Fi nn Name of Bidder Bidder y rA-uD ~C I.J ~t Printed Name of Bidder F42'-c'- ID a=uT Official Title State of Incorporation CCB Number Dated this day of 2012. Name of Bidder Pilot Rock Excavation, Inc. Address t'vSr-> t✓ Pihf t= 'S-T7 ~-Tt f 0 13s 6&" Tr214-LLj?ir t'Te Telephone No. 5~ I E}Zf?~j BEFORE THE ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL JACKSON COUNTY, OREGON April 3, 2007 IN THE MATTER OF RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND } ORDERING THE LOCAL IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE ) CONSTRUCTION OF IMPROVEMENTS TO SCHOFIELD ) STREET AND MONTE VISTA STREET CONSISTING OF ) FINDINGS GRADING, PAVING AND CONSTRUCTION OF CURB AND ) CONCLUSIONS GUTTERS, SIDEWALKS, STORM DRAINS AND RELATED } AND ORDERS APPURTENANCES AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY TO ) BORROW MONEY AND ISSUE AND SELL NOTES FOR ) THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING INTERIM FINANCING FOR ) THE ACTUAL COST OF THE LOCAL IMPROVEMENT ) APPLICANT: City of Ashland ) RECITALS: 1) On February 20, 2007, Council approved Resolution No. 2007-03 setting a public hearing with intent to form a local improvement district (LID) for the construction of improvements to Schofield and Monte Vista Streets consisting of sidewalks, curbs and gutters, paving, drainage and associated improvements.. 2) The Council has declared by Resolution No. 2007-03 to assess upon each lot or part of lot benefited by the improvement its proportional share of the cost of the improvement; and it appears to the Council that such improvements are of benefit to the City. All property to be assessed will be benefited to the extent of the probable amount of the respective assessments to be levied for the costs. 3) The Council, following proper public notice, held a public hearing on April 3, 2007, at which time a staff presentation was made, citizen testimony received and exhibits presented. Council approved Resolution No_ 2007-_ authorizing and ordering the local improvements for the construction of improvements to Schofield and Monte Vista Streets consisting of grading, paving and construction of curb and gutters, sidewalks, storm drains and related appurtenances. 4) On April 3, 2007, Council approved Resolution No. 2007-_ authorizing the City to borrow money and issue and sell notes for the purpose of providing interim financing for the actual cost of the local improvement. 5) The Schofield / Monte Vista LID No. 87 boundary was approved by Council as being all those lots with frontage on or taking sole access from Schofield Street between North Main Street and the east boundary of Blossom View Subdivision and Monte Vista Street between Sheridan Street and Schofield Street. Page I of 4 Now, therefore, the City Council of the City of Ashland finds, concludes and recommends as follows: SECTION 1. EXHIBITS For the purposes of reference to these Findings, the following exhibits will be used: Exhibit I - Council Communication dated February 20, 2007 Exhibit 2 - Minutes of the February 20, 2007 Council meeting Exhibit 3 -Resolution No. 2007-03 setting a public hearing Exhibit 4 - Council Communication dated April 3, 2007 Exhibit 5 - Minutes of the April 3, 2007 Council meeting Exhibit 6 - Resolution No. 2007- authorizing and ordering the improvement of Schofield Street and Monte Vista Street under the Schofield / Monte Vista Street LID No. 87 SECTION 2: CONCLUSORY FINDINGS REGARDING NATURE OF IMPROVEMENTS 2.1 The City Council intends to improve Schofield Street from North Main to the easterly boundary of Blossom View Subdivision and Monte Vista Street between Sheridan Street and Schofield Street. The improvements are to consist of grading and paving, construction of curbs and gutters, sidewalks, storm drains and related appurtenances. 2.2 The proposed LID is in the best interest of the City. Evidence presented indicated that the City will have an improved street for all modes of transportation with reduced maintenance costs; enhanced environmental effects due to improved air quality and better storm water controls; and a demonstrated improved safety with construction of curbs, sidewalks and an asphalt road surface. SECTION 3. CONCLUSORY FINDINGS REGARDING BOUNDARY DETERMINATION 3.1 The City Council finds that it has received all information necessary to make a ' decision based on the Council Communication dated February 20, 2007 and April 3, 2007, public hearing testimony and the exhibits received. 3.2 The proposed LID boundary includes all lots fronting on or taking sole access from Schofield Street between North Main Street and the east boundary of Blossom View . Subdivision or Monte Vista Street between Sheridan Street and Schofield Street as depicted on the map attached to Resolution No. 2007-03. This boundary was selected as these 16 properties would be directly benefited by the improvements to Schofield and Monte Vista Streets. The benefit to these lots is readily definable and is much more direct than those who might simply use the street as a throughway to access Page 2 of 4 their property. Many of the surrounding lots outside the proposed district, have already participated in LIDS to improve lower Sheridan Street, Tucker Street and the north section of Walnut Street. The district boundary is proposed to encompass only 16 lots as shown on the attached maps. 3.3 The proposed Schofield Street Local Improvement District is consistent with the 2007-2012 Capital Improvement Plan and identified in the 2006-2007 budget adopted by Council in June, 2006. 3.4 The City Council did not receive a remonstrance sufficient to postpone authorizing and ordering the construction of the local improvement district. SECTION 4. NOTIFICATION OF PUBLIC HEARING 4.1 A notice of public hearing was sent to all listed property owners (determined from Jackson County Tax Assessment rolls) within the proposed assessment district. In addition a notice has been sent, for informational purposes, to all property owners within the affected area. The affected area is defined as those lots situated near Schofield Street and Monte Vista Street which could be reasonably expected to use Schofield Street and/or Monte Vista Street as a residential access route. The public hearing notice was also published in the Ashland Daily Tidings. SECTION 5. ALLOCATION OF ASSESSMENT UNITS 5.1 Each of the 16 lots within the proposed assessment district has been allocated one assessment unit. In addition, several lots have been allocated additional units of assessment. Those lots with additional units are those lots that the Planning Department has determined can be further divided. The number of assessment units is equal to the number of current and future potential residential lots as defined in Resolution No. 99-09 and as shown on the attachments to Resolution No. 2007-03. SECTION 6. COST 6.1 The maximum assessable rate per unit is established by Resolution No. 99-09. The maximum rate established in 1999 was $4,000 per unit. This rate is adjusted each April in accordance with the Construction Cost Index established by the Engineering News Record Index (ENR record) for Seattle, Washington. The current rate to be charged for the Schofield / Monte Vista LID No. 87 is $5,138.00 which is the maximum rate as of Resolution No 2007-04 establishing the Public Hearing date. All costs over and above the assessment amount will be borne by the City. SECTION 7. RECISION 7.1 Based on evidence contained within the whole record on this matter, the City Council concludes that the establishment of the LID boundary is in the City's best interest, is Page 3 of4 justified as presented by staff and is supported by evidence contained within the record. 72 Council finds that the public hearing was properly noticed. 7.3 Council further concludes that the allocation of assessment lots and associated cost complies with Resolution No. 99-09 and represents the benefit received by each affected property. 7.4 Therefore, based on our overall conclusions, the City Council authorizes and orders the construction of improvements for the Schofield / Monte Vista Local Improvement District No. 87. John Rorrison, Ma r at Page 4 of 4 n ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING EXHIBIT March 20, 2012 Page I of3 MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL March 20, 2012 Council Chambers 1175 E. Main Street CALL TO ORDER Mayor Stromberg called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers. ROLL CALL, Councilor Voisin, Mortis, Lemhouse., Slattery, Silbiger, and Chapman were present. MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS Mayor Stromberg requested on behalf of Housing Commission Chair Regina Ayars to add the appointment of Evan Lasley to the Housing Commission to the agenda. Council and staff discussed the need to advertise an item like a commission appointment to allow enough time for citizen input and did not add the item to the agenda" Mayor Stromberg went on to announce the City was accepting applications for the annual appointments to Commissions and Committees. The deadline for submitting applications is March 30, 2012. Councilor Voisin noted that April was Sexual Assault Awareness Month (SAAM) and that Dawn Schiller, the author of The Road Through Wonderland: Surviving John Holmes was speaking April 5, 2012, from 6:30- 8:30 in the Southern Oregon University (SOU) Recital Hall. SHOULD TIE COUNCIL APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THESE MEETINGS? The minutes of the Study Session of March 5, 2012, Executive Session of March 6, 2012 and Regular Meeting of March 6, 2012 were approved as presented. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS (None) CONSENT AGENDA 1. Will Council approve the minutes of the Boards, Commissions, and Committees? 2. Will Council approve a recommendation from the Public Art Commission to endorse Southern Oregon Arts and Research (SOAR) which will occur on the SOU campus in May? 3. Will Council, acting as the local contract review board, approve the request for approval of a Contract Specific Special Procurement to seek an exemption from the competitive bid process to directly award a contract to Elstor Sales for the repair and maintenance of City-owned transformers until June 30, 2016? 4. Will Council, acting as the local contract review board, approve the request for approval of a Class Special Procurement to seek an exemption from the competitive bid process to directly award public contracts to contractors to perform repairs, maintenance, and service as needed and required on City owned vehicles and equipment until June 30,2016? 5. Will Council, acting as the local contract review board, approve the request for approval of a Class Special Procurement to seek an exemption from the competitive bid process to directly award public contracts to contractors to perform repairs, maintenance and service as needed and required to HVAC (Heating, Air & Ventilation) Systems in City-owned buildings until June 30,2016? 6. Will Council approve the renewal of a Memo of Understanding with the Parks Commission regarding certain services provided between the two organizations and the agreed upon costs? Councilor Cbapman/Silbiger rats to approve the Consent Agenda. Voice Vote: All AYES. Motion passed. ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING March 10, 2011 Page 2 oj3 PUBLIC HEARINGS . 1. Will Council, acting as the local contract review board, hold a public hearing, declare the fire hose as surplus, and award a public contract at no cost for the fire hose to the Sixes Fire Department in Sixes, Oregon? Fire Chief John Kams explained the Ashland Fire Department acquired a complete compliment of fire hose due to a FEMA Grant they received the year before. The surplus fire hose would help the Sixes Fire Department who was currently struggling with their budget. Although the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) and federal guidelines often became policy for many fire departments, it did not bind them. Public Hearing Opened: 7:09 p.m. Public Hearing Closed: 7:09 p.m. Councilor Lemhouse/Voisin m/s that the fire hose be declared a surplus and approve the contract award. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. PUBLIC FORUM - Julie Norman/596 Helman Street/Provided an update on the Mt. Ashland Ski Expansion discussion- The US Forest Service recently filed a motion to lift the 2007 Injunction that had stopped the expansion. The Plaintiffs filed a response. She attended the Mt. Ashland Association's (MAA) Board meeting the night before and distributed information regarding climate changes and precipitation. She noted the MAA Treasurer report stated MAA had more debt than assets to pay them and the board agreed to a special Study Session. She asked Council to add an agenda item to a future meeting to discuss the City's role now, to strengthen the Memo of Understanding (MOU), and write a letter to the US Forest Service pertaining to City involvement if implementation went forward. Councilor Slattery spoke as the Council Liaison to both the MAA Board and the US Forest Service, acknowledged there were tumors to the contrary, but MAA and the US Forest Service would follow all the legal processes. He was meeting with the US Forest Service the following week. Chris Hardy/774 B Street/Provided background on Village Farm and its organic certification through the USDA National Organic Program and expressed concern that Syngenta was growing genetically modified organisms (GMO) sugar beets just outside city limits. This prompted the formation of GMO-Free Jackson County who were currently working on an initiative for the November ballot to ban GMO crop production in Jackson County, He explained organic farms do not use the same mode of operation as GMO farms and requested Council to have a Study Session regarding GMO's to discuss the issue further. Liza Maltzberger/1257 Siskiyou Boulevard/Addressed the 1929 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) regarding the City's right to comment on the health of the watershed and the US Forest Service's obligation to listen. It was important for the City to remind the US Forest Service that they would be in contempt of court if logging occurred prior to the injunction being lifted. Eric Navickas/711 Faith Street/Expressed concern Mt. Ashland would log preemptively. Ile agreed there were many rumors but attributed it to a lack of transparency from the US Forest Service and the Mt. Ashland Association (MAA) that they intended to exhaust full judicial process before implementing the project. lie felt that it was imperative the City send a letter to the US Forest Service and add it to a future Council meeting for discussion to ensure they allow full judicial process to be exhausted Once the judge lifted the injunction, the project could go forward. Council was in a strong position with the US Forest Service under the 1929 agreement and by not having the lease. Councilor Slattery agreed with Mr. Navickas' testimony and added there were three stakeholders trying to ensure they were working within the law and currently were identifying the process and benchmarks. Once that was established, they would make it public but it would take time. ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING March 10, 2012 Page 3 of 3 Councilor Voisin/Slattery m/s the Council add to the agenda this evening consideration for a Study Session on Mt. Ashland and the US Forest Service after Councilor Slattery as the Liaison has the opportunity to discuss and deal with both entities. DISCUSSION: Councilor Voisin agreed on transparency, thought it was good Councilor Slattery was the Liaison to MAA and the US Forest Service and that a Study Session would help determine the City's future role. Councilor Chapman thought it was premature to discuss the role but agreed a discussion was needed at some point. Councilor Slattery thought in addition to a Study Session, a community dialogue needed to occur as well. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Voisin and Slattery, YES; Councilor Silbiger, Chapman, I.emhouse, and Morris, NO. Motion failed 2-4. UNFINISHED BUSINESS (None) NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS 1. Will Council, acting as the local contracts review board, approve a construction contract with Pilot Rock Excavation, Inc., in the amount of $344,164 to construct the Schofield and Monte Vista Local Improvement District (LID)? . Engineering Services Manager Jim Olson explained the.project started in 2007 and described the delays that prevented the project from going forward until now. The project was recently re-bid and of the two bids the City received, Pilot Rock Excavation came in with the lowest bid. Staff recommended proceeding with the project as quickly as possible and urged Council to approve the contract. The LID contained 20 units with three lots that had potential for extra units reflected in the cost. The City would pay $13,613.82 because the cemetery was included in the LID and was sizable. Stuart Cotts/100 Schofield/Expressed his appreciation to Council and City staff regarding the project. Councilor Voisin/Chapman m/s to approve a contract with Pilot Rock Excavation Inc., in the amount of $344,164.00 for the improvement of Schofield & Monte Vista under Assessment District No. 87. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. ORDINANCES RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS 1. Should Council approve the First Reading of an Ordinance titled, "An Ordinance Amending Chapter 2.10.090 Council as Final Decision Maker and Chapter 2.10.100 Budget, Compensation and Expenses on the Ashland Municipal Code" and move the ordinance on to Second Reading? Councilor Morris/Slattery tn/s to approve First Reading and set the matter for a Second Reading. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Chapman, Voisin, Slattery, Silbiger, Morris and Lemhouse, YES. Motion passed. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS/REPORTS FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS ADJOURNMENT Meeting ad'oumed at 7:41 p.m. i Barbara Christensen, City Recorder J n Iromberg, Mayor EXHIBIT 9 RESOLUTION NO. 2013- A RESOLUTION SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR ASSESSMENTS TO BE CHARGED AGAINST LOTS WITHIN THE SCHOFIELD AND MONTE VISTA LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 87. THE CITV OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The City of Ashland having received proposed assessments to be charged against each lot within the Schofield and Monte Vista Local Improvement District, orders that a public hearing be held to consider written or oral arguments to these assessments at 7:00 p.m., October 15, 2013, in the City of Ashland Council Chambers at 1175 E. Main St. The City Recorder is directed to mail the attached notices of the proposed assessments to the owners of the lots to be assessed. SECTION 2. This resolution takes effect upon signature by the Mayor. This resolution was duty PASSED and ADOPTED this day o`~ 2013, takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day o 2013. Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: avid H. Lo an, City Attorney Page 1 of 1 Exhibit A NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING The City Council of the City of Ashland will meet on October 15, 2013, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street, to hold a public hearing to consider oral and written objectives to the final assessment for the Schofield and Monte Vista Local Improvement District No. 87. NATURE OF THE IMPROVEMENT: Sidewalks, curbs, gutters, paving, drainage, and associated improvements to Liberty Street. BENEFITED: Those lots fronting on or having access solely from Schofield and Monte Vista as depicted on the attached map referred to as Attachment No. L FINAL COST: The final cost for the improvement of Schofield and Monte Vista is $359,558.60 of which, $111,235.82 will be paid by special assessments on the benefitted properties at arate of $5,138.00 per assessment unit. The estimated cost of the Schofield and Monte Vista improvement, per Resolution 2007-03 was $387,000.00. The assessment rate of $5,138.00 is unchanged from the resolution. Additional information regarding the improvement or method of assessment may be obtained at the Engineering Division, 51 Winbum Way, Ashland OR, phone number 541-488-5347, weekdays during the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. All affected property owners may appear at the hearing or submit written comments prior to or at the hearing, as to why the beneftted properties should not be assessed in the manner proposed. I EXHIBIT 10 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication September 3, 2013 Regular Business Meeting Adoption of a Resolution Setting a Public Hearing for the Final Assessment of the Schofield and Monte Vista Local Improvement District No. 87 FRONT: Scott A. Fleury, Engineering Services Manager, Public Works/Engineering, fleurys@ashland.or.us SUMMARY To conclude the Schofield and Monte Vista Street's Local Improvement District (LID) process, the , following actions are being requested for council's consideration and adoption: A. Public Hearing - In accordance with AMC Section 13.02, a public hearing shall be held to consider any objections to the proposed assessments. B. Adoption of Resolution - Adoption of the attached resolution, following the public hearing, will establish the final amount to be assessed. C. Adoption of Findings - Adoption of the attached findings will document the City's actions and decisions regarding the formation of the assessment district and allocation of assessments. D. Consideration of Written Objections - As of this date, no letters of objection have been received, however, one e-mail was received with comments regarding the allocation of assessment units. This e-mail and any letters received subsequent to the date of this communication will be attached, along with staff s response, for the council's consideration. Staff is requesting Council approve a resolution setting the date for a public hearing to consider written and oral testimony regarding the final assessment for the Schofield and Monte Vista Local Improvement District (LID).No. 87. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: Summary The Schofield & Monte Vista LID No. 87 was authorized by the Council on April 3, 2007 by Resolution No. 2007-10. In accordance with AMC section 13.20 the project was then designed, bid and constructed and the final costs calculated. Following is a summary and comparison of the original estimated costs and final costs. Estimated Project Cost Final Proiect Cost Construction,.,.$353,000.00 $335,958.60 Engineering $ 34,000.00 $ 23.600.00 $387,000.00 $359,558.60 The increase of $27,441.40 represents a 7 percent decrease over the original estimated cost but will not affect the final assessment rate of $5,138.00 per unit which is fixed in accordance with resolution 99- 09. ~I Page 1 of4 CITY OF ASHLAND The Schofield/Monte Vista LID is likely the last of the LID's that were approved under resolution 99- 09 and which set maximum caps on the assessment rate. Resolution 99-09 has since been rescinded. With the final costs computed and assessment amounts known we may now proceed to conclude this LID by holding the final public hearing where affected property owners may present arguments regarding the established rate and total assessment amount. Project Description The Schofield and Monte Vista St. LID project improved 1,310 linear feet of the street right-of-way. .The project included street grading and paving, construction of curbs and gutters, concrete sidewalk, concrete driveway aprons, segmented block retaining wall, storm drain inlets, subsurface storm drain pipes, and installation of street lights. The lower portion of Schofield St. was paved with concrete and heavily scored. This was done to increase vehicular traction for winter traffic. Reference attached photos of final project. Approval of Proicet hindines: The findings, conclusions, and orders are a record of all major activities regarding the project, including all Council motions and determinations. The findings for this project will be presented at the public hearing for final approval. A copy of the incomplete findings is attached for an advanced review. The findings cannot be completed until the final actions of the Council are complete. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: LID Costs per Resolution 2007-10 That resolution established the estimated cost of construction and engineering at $387,000 of which $111,235.82 was to be paid by special assessments against the benefitted properties. The assessment district was formed under previous LID ordinances and in particular under Resolution 99-09 which set specific rates of participation (credits) by the City, The resolution also established a maximum cap which the assessments could not exceed (adjusted annually based upon the CPI). The petition for the formation of the LID was received in May of 2006 and the cap was set at $5,138.00 per unit or potential unit, the computed cap for that year. The costs for development of the Schofield & Monte Vista LID were estimated as follows: ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT COSTS Total Construction Cost $ 353,000 Engineering & Administration Costs $ 34,000 Total Estimated Project Cost $ 387,000 Less City Participation per Resolution 99-09 75% of storm drain cost 0.75 X $ 29,650.00 $ 22,237.50 20% of street surface cost 0.2 X $ 296,310.00 $ 59,262.00 50% of engineering cost 0.5 X $ 34,000.00 $ 17,000.00 60% of sidewalk cost 0.6 X $ 27,040.00 $ 16,224.00 Sub Total $ 114,723.50 Page 2 of 4 CITY OF ASHLAND Assessable Cost $ 272,276.50 Number of Lots in proposed assessment district 20 Estimated per lot for Schofield & Monte Vista improvement $ 13,613.82 Current LID cap (maximum assessment amount as of April 2007) $ 5,138.00 Since Resolution 99-09 set a maximum amount that may be borne by the owners, any additional cost must be borne by the City. In addition, a single lot owned by the City also received an assessment which adds to the amount the City pays. Amount to be paid by owners $ 97,622.00 (25.2%) Amount to be paid by City a. Participation per Resolution 99-09 $ 114,723.50 b. Amount over the maximum cap $ 161,040.18 c. Assessment for City owned lot $ 11613.82 $ 2. 377.50 (74.8%1 TOTAL $ 387,000.00 (100%) FINAL ASSESSMENT COSTS Total Construction Cost $ 335,958.60 Engineering & Administration Costs $ 23,600.00 Total Project Cost $ 359,558.60 Less City Participation per Resolution 99-09 75% of storm drain cost 0.75 x $ 42,252.00 $ 31,689.00 20% of street surface cost 0.2 x $ 272,772.00 $ 54,554.40 50% of engineering cost 0.5 x $ 23,600.00 $ 11,800.00 60% of sidewalk cost 0.6 x $ 29,140.00 $ 17,484.00 Total Credits by City $ 115,527.40 Assessable Cost Total Project Cost $ 359,558.60 Less Credits $ 115,527.40 Total Assessable Costs $ 244,031.20 Number of Lots in Assessment District 20 Computed Cost per Lot (Assessment Rate) ($244,031.20 / 20) $ 12,201.56 Maximum Assessment Rate per Resolution 11999-09 $ 5,138.00 Resolution No. 99-09 sets a maximum cap on the assessment rate to be borne by the owners within the LID. Any costs over the maximum rate must be borne by the City. Costs to be home by the property owners and the City are as follows: Page 3 of 4 CITY OF ASHLAND Amount to be paid by owners $ 111,235.82* Amount to be paid by City Credits per Resolution 99-09 $ 115,527.40 Amount over the maximum Cap $ 132,795.38 Assessment for City owned lot $ 13,613.82 Total City Cost $ 261,936.60 * Includes one city-owned lot to be assessed at $13,613.82 STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends approving attached resolution setting a date for a public hearing to establish assessments for the Schofield and Monte Vista Streets LID No. 87 SUGGESTED MOTION: Move to approve a resolution setting a date for a public hearing to establish the final assessments for the Schofield and Monte Vista Streets LID No. 87 ATTACHMENTS: Resolution w/Exhibit A Resolution No. 99-09 Draft Findings with Exhibits Page 4 of 4 Regular City Council Meeting EXHIBIT 11 September 3, 2013 Page I of 7 MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL September 3, 2013 Council Chambers 1175 E. Main Street CALL TO ORDER Mayor Strombeig called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers. ROLL CALL Councilor Voisin, Morris, Lemhouse, Slattery, Rosenthal, and Marsh were present" MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS Mayor Stromberg announced vacancies on Commissions and Committees. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the Study Session of August 19, 2013 and Business Meeting of August 20,-2013 were approved as presented. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS -None CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approval of commission minutes 2. Intergovernmental Agreement with Southern Oregon University Research Center for a Road Diet survey 3. Approval of an MOU with Ashland School District and the Ashland Police Department for a School Resource Officer 4. Adoption of a resolution titled, "A resolution setting a public hearing for assessments to he charged against lots within the Schofield and Monte Vista Local Improvement District No. 87" 5. Liquor License Application for Jason Penner dba Stop N Shop Market Councilor Slattery pulled Consent Agenda item #2 and declared a potential conflict of interest regarding the Intergovernmental Agreement with Southern Oregon University Research Center since he worked for the university. - Councilor Rosenthal and Marsh pulled Consent Agenda Item #3 for further discussion. Police Chief Terry flolderness addressed funding for the School Resource Officer (SRO) and explained there was a 7- day notice to terminate the agreement in case funding issues or other problems occurred. The SRO would work differently depending on the school. It there was no history of violence in the school the SRO . would focus on counseling, traffic problems, and education. The officer would work in partnership with the school district to define duties and interaction in the Middle School and High School. The school district would assign a liaison from each school to work with the officer on program improvements. They would base evaluation of the program on accomplishments and education the officer made with the students regarding civil obedience and rights. Currently Ashland School District was the only community without an SRO. Councilor Rosenthal/Marsh m/s to amend the SRO MOU Section 2 to reflect an end date of June 30, 2015. DISCUSSION: Councilor Rosenthal explained funding might not be available in two years and providing an end date would help in the budget process. Councilor Slattery thought retaining the four-year end date conveyed commitment and support for the program. Councilor Lenihouse voiced concern that it could be a problem if presented as a "add package" in the budget process and noted the ' Regular City Council Meeting September 3, 2013 Page 2 of 7 importance of the program. Councilor Rosenthal reiterated the possibility that funding might not be available for the full four years. Councilor Slattery did not think having a four-year end date guaranteed funding. Councilor Marsh supported the two-year end date, it would prompt an evaluation of the program. Councilor. Voisin expressed support for the date change. Councilor Slattery commented an evaluation would take place annually regardless of the end date. Mayor Stromberg noted the SRO was originally part of staff cut from the budget due to financial problems and the recession. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Rosenthal, Voisin, Lemhouse, and Marsh, YES; Councilor Morris and Slattery, NO. Motion passed 4-2. Councilor Voisin/Slattery m/s to approve Consent Agenda items as amended. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. PUBLIC HEARINGS -None PUBLIC FORUM - None UNFINISHED BUSINESS = None NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS 1. A report on the Mt. Ashland Association's Summer Work Plan and expansion-related activities Engineering Services Manager Scott Fleury explained Engineering Technician Rob'Morris had monitored Mi. Ashland Association's (MAA) ski run widening and tree removal. The US Forest Service approved . MAA to begin work on the parking lot expansion but not re-contouring the Sonnet ski run. City hired consultants David Evans & Associates reviewed engineered plans from MAA and forwarded their review to the US Forest Service and MAA. The review focused on work regarding the ski slope and did not involve the parking lot because it did not drain into the watershed. The US Forest Service requested MAA incorporate David Evans & Associates' comments into their construction activities to minimize potential of landslide activity, slope destabilization and erosion control issues. The City would have a representative onsite during construction to ensure best management practices. were in place for erosion control activities. Ongoing inspections for turbidity in the water due to run off would trigger calling the US Forest Service. Best management practices for erosion control measures adapted to meet the needs of the site. The Water Treatment Plant conducted visual inspections of the dam and forks daily. The engineer for the design plans was professionally liable for incidents. 2. Designation of voting delegate to LOC annual meeting Councilor Lemhouse/Marsh m/s to designate Mayor Stromberg as the voting delegate at the Leaguc of Oregon Cities Conference. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. 3. Council discussion and direction regarding anonymity on Open City Hall City Administrator Dave Kanner explained the new Open City I[all had a default feature that allowed _ individuals to post anonymous comments. All information posted on Open City Hall was public record and archived. Community Development Bill Molnar added the Planning Department had not used Open City Hall for quasi-judicial action but ,in the case of a legislative action, comments would be included in v the overall record. City Attorney David Lohman agreed it could be part of the record but the question of name and address being part of the record had come up as well. Oregon law did not have a precedent that addressed a public records request for an address from an anonymous comment. City Recorder Barbara Christensen further explained Open City Hall comments were stored differently Regular City Council Meeting _ September 3, 2013 Page 3 of 7 than entails from the comments to the Council. Mr. Kanner added all comments were public record. Open City Hall was a tool for citizens to provide input to Council regarding specific topics and not a poll. Peak Democracy had some safeguards in place but individuals could use multiple pseudonyms. Councilor Slattery/Morris mfs to direct staff to disable the anonymity feature of Open City Hall on the City of Ashland website. DISCUSSION: Councilor Slattery did not support anonymous comments and thought individuals should identify themselves. Councilor'Morris and Marsh supported identifying individuals. Councilor Lemhouse thought people uncomfortable disclosing their names on Open City Hall. could email Council individually. Councilor Voisin supported allowing anonymous comments and suggested wailing and removing the anonymous message feature if abuse occurred. The system retained information on anonymous comments: Councilor Rosenthalthought anonymous comments could encourage candid feedback although requiring identification did build credibility. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Morris, Ixmhouse, Slattery, Rosenthal and Marsh, YES; Councilor Voisin, NO. Motion passed 5-1. ' Mr. Kanner noted when a topic closed on Open City Hall staff would summarize and collate the input for Council review. Mayor Stromberg explained the genesis for Open City Hall came from comments he received on the difficulty citizens had turning onto North Main due to one lane of traffic. The feedback did not match actual statistics the Traffic Engineer collected and the Mayor wanted to determine whether the problem was perceptual or related to actual traffic engineering. ORDINANCES RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS 1. Approval of a resolution titled, "A resolution authorizing the City of Ashland to provide a city building for a winter shelter one night per week through April, 2014, and repealing Resolution No. 2013-28" City Administrator Dave Kanner explained the proposed resolution would allow dogs in the shelter. The language was similar to the dog provision used in the Emergency Shelter Resolution 2013-04 with one change shown in Section 4. (C) Service dogs are not required to remain in crates but must be leashed while in the shelter. Staff talked to volunteer representatives from Temple Emek Shalom who would provide crates. Mr. Kanner added staff had reserved Pioneer Hall every Thursday night from November 2013 through April 2014 for the shelter. Councilor Voisin clarified the United Presbyterian Church typically hosted the emergency shelter. City Attorney Dave Lohman explained there was potential liability allowing dogs in the shelter as well as liability not allowing service animals per 2010 ADA regulations. Insurance would cover a lawsuit over the deductible. Only two questions were allowed to determine if a dog was a service animal or not. One was whether the individual required an animal due to a disability. The second was what work or task was the animal trained to perform. The federal definition of a service animal was a dog individually trained to do work or perform tasks for a person with a disability. Nothing in the definition required a certification card and per regulations, a person could not ask for certification if the dog had specific training. If a guest stated their dog was a service animal, the volunteer could ask the two questions and nothing more. Oregon law referenced an assistant animal as a dog. Councilor Voisin/Marsh mis to approve Resolution #2013-30. DISCUSSION: Councilor;.Voisin explained the other shelters in Ashland allowed dogs and had experienced no problems. Volunteers and guests at the City sponsored shelter signed a non-responsibility and non-liability statement. The Grove allowed dog training weekly without identification and many were troubled dogs. Insurance would cover the City if an incident occurred. Regular City Council Meeting September 3, 2013 Page 4 of 7 Councilor Marsh noted the City now had four months of experience with the shelter and the volunteers had hosted the shelter without incident. Councilor Marsh/Votsin to amend the Resolution and delete Section 4(b) and amend Section 4(c) to read as the following: "Dogs in general must be leashed and under the control of the owner at all times while in the shelter." DISCUSSION: Councilor Marsh noted the volunteers running the shelter had proved themselves, were responsible, and provided adequate supervision: Council had heard the. other shelters testify repeatedly they allowed dogs without incident. She did not want to create a quagmire for volunteers by delineating service dogs and imposing other requirements on the dog population. Volunteers would have to make an assessment whether a dog was a service animal, bring crates to (lie shelter, and take them away afterwards. If the rules in place were adequate for service dogs, they should be strong enough for the population as a whole. Councilor Voisin agreed and supported the . amendment. Councilor Lemhouse would not support the amendment. He agreed the City needed to allow service animals but did not believe it was prudent to put the City intentionally in a position of liability by - allowing all dogs. The City shelter was a public entity. He was comfortable prioritizing risk in an emergency weather situation, but not for the weekly shelter. He strongly supported the shelter but was fearful one bad incident would stop the program and did not want to take that risk. Councilor Slattery was not in favor of eliminating dog crates. Volunteers could sign statements claiming they would not sue but that would not prevent them from suing. As a public entity, the City had different standards than the churches and allowing dogs put the program at risk. Roll Call Vote on amendment: Councilor Voisin, Rosenthal, Marsh, and Morris, YES; Councilor Slattery and Lemhouse, NO. Motion passed 4-2. Councilor Lemhouse/Marsh m/s to amend the main motion by removing Section 4 pertaining to dogs and consider it separately so Council could vote on the remaining Resolution. DISCUSSION: Councilor Lemhouse clarified he wanted to pass the winter shelter and have the opportunity to oppose allowing dogs. Councilor Marsh thought it was important to move forward together. Mr. Kanner noted Council had adopted Resolution 2013-28 that contained everything in the resolution before Council except the verbiage allowing dogs. Roll Call Vote on amendment: Councilor Rosenthal, Marsh, Morris, Slattery, and Lemhouse, YES; Councilor Voisin, NO. Motion passed 5-1. Council and staff discussed the how procedurally passing the proposed resolution and repealing Resolution 2013-28 replaced one version with the same since the section on allowing dogs was removed. Councilor Marsh/Slattery m/s to call for the question. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Rosenthal, Marsh, Morris, Slattery, and Lemhouse, YES; Councilor Voisin, NO. Motion passed 5-1. Roll Call Vote to approve Resolution 2013-30 as amended: Councilor Rosenthal, Marsh, Morris, Slattery and Lemhouse, YES; Councilor Voisin, NO. Motion passed 54. Councilor Voisin/Rosenthal m/s to add to the above approved Resolution the "Section 4 Dogs" as proposed by staff and delete Section 4(b) and change Section 4(c) to read as follows: "Dogs must be leashed and under control of the owner at all times while in the shelter." DISCUSSION: Councilor Voisin thought since Council already voted on the amendment they should vote on it now and finish the process. Councilor Rosenthal agreed. Councilor Marsh clarified the motion was a separate vote adding Section 4 of the original resolution with caveat she had made earlier regarding leashes. Councilor Slattery did not support the motion but agreed Council should vote on it. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Voisin, Rosenthal, Marsh, YES; Councilor Morris, Slattery, and Lemhouse, NO. Mayor Stromberg broke the tie with a YES vote. Motion passed 4-3. Regular City Council Meeting September 3, 2013 Page 5 of 7 2. Second reading by title only of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance amending the City of Ashland Comprehensive Plan to adopt the Housing Needs Analysis as a supporting document to the City of Ashland Comprehensive Plan" . Councilor Morris/Voisin m/s to approve Ordinance N3085. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Slattery, Marsh, Lemhouse, Rosenthal, Voisin, and Morris, YES. Motion passed. 3. First reading by title only of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance amending Section 2.19 of the Ashland MunicipalCode dissolving the. Housing Commission and creating the Housing and Human Services Commission" Housing Program Specialist Linda Reid noted Resolution 2013-08 created a new Housing and Human Services Commission by merging the Housing and ad hoc Homelessness Steering Committee (IISC). The Committee and Commission met and reviewed mission statements, powers, and duties. They formed a sub-committee with two members from both the Housing Commission and HSC to create a mission statement, recommend powers, duties, and membership composition for the draft ordinance. The proposed ordinance incorporated the recommendations from the Housing Commission and HSC. Both groups recommended nine members. However, staff was proposing seven. Housing Commission Chair and HSC member Regina Ayars supported combining the groups and thought the new commission should have nine members. HSC Co-Chair Rich Rhode also supported the new commission having nine members. Councilor RosenthaVVoisin m/s to approve First Reading by title only of an Ordinance titled "An Ordinance Amending Section 2.19 of the Ashland Municipal Code Dissolving the Housing Commission and creating the Housing and Human Services Commission consisting of nine appointed members and place on agenda for Second Reading. DISCUSSION: Councilor Rosenthal explained after reviewing what similar commissions did he supported nine members. Councilor Voisin thought staff wrote the proposed ordinance well and supported the motion. Councilor Lemhouse supported the concept but did not think the ordinance covered human services issues enough. Councilor Lemhouse/Slattery m/s to remove Section 2.19.030(C). DISCUSSION: Councilor Lemhouse explained reviewing and making recommendations regarding social service grant allocations was a function of the Budget Committee and sub-committee. Because it went into the main budget, he thought it should remain with that group. Councilor Slattery agreed and was interested in the Commission making recommendations to the Council and Budget Committee. City Attorney Dave Lohman clarified the proposed ordinance would allow the Housing and Human Services Commission to make recommendations only to Council. Ms. Reid further clarified Section 2.19.030(C) did not intend to take the process from the Budget Committee only make recommendations similar to the CDBG (Community Development Block Grant) and social services grants process. Councilor Slattery wanted the. Housing and Human Services Commission to make recommendations for social services grants at the right time to the Social Service Grant Budget Sub-cdmmittee. Ms. Reid confirmed grantees could not apply for social service grants outside of Housing and Human Serv ices. Councilor Marsh thought Council needed to change the human service funding process. These were big decisions allocated to whoever volunteered from the Budget Committee and thought the Housing and Human Services Commission was better equipped for the task. She did not want to create a situation where the Housing and Human Services Commission was making recommendations while still going Regular City Council Meeting September 3, 2013 Page 6 of 7 through the budget process. The question was too big to resolve in context of the resolution and suggested discussing it with the Budget Committee during the interim budget to determine the best process for allocating that money. Councilor Voisin/Lemhouse m/s to amend the amendment by adding that the Council will address this particular duty within the year 2013. DISCUSSION: Councilor Voisin wanted to ensure the topic came back to Council for discussion. Councilor Lembouse supported the amendment and possibly involving the Housing and Human Services Commission. Councilor Morris would not support the amendment citing there was not enough time. Councilor Voisin clarified her intention was allocating a Study Session or adding it to a regular meeting to discuss the parameters before going to the Budget Committee. Councilor Slattery agreed with Councilor Morris. Councilor Marsh noted the September 30, 2013 Budget Committee Budget Debrief and thought they could add the item to that agenda. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Lembouse, Voisin, Rosenthal, Morris, Marsh, and Slattery, YES. Motion passed. Roll Call Vote on amended amendment: Councilor Lemhouse, Voisin, Rosenthal, Morris, Marsh, and Slattery, YES. Councilor Marsh/Lemhouse m/s to amend the Ordinance under 2.19.010 Purpose and Mission as the follows: "The Housing and Human Services Commission is charged with assessing and addressing the continuum of housing and human service needs in the community for the purpose of enhancing community health and well being." DISCUSSION: Councilor Marsh did not think the words "poverty-driven" gave full range to the concems Council expressed in the past. Using "enhancing community health and well being," provided context on why the City had this community. Councilor Lemhouse agreed with Councilor Marsh and added the original purpose did not highlight the human services element as much he liked. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Lembouse, Rosenthal, Morris, Marsh, and Slattery, YES; Councilor Voisin, NO. Motion passed 5-1. Councilor Lemhouse/Marsh m/s to add to Section 2.19.030 Powers and Duties the following: "To promote programs that assist seniors, children and children/families in need in regards to utility, medical, transportation, and food assistance." DISCUSSION: Councilor Lemhouse wanted to ensure the Commission took on these issues. Councilor Marsh supported the amendment. Councilor Lembouse deferred to staff if they thought the amendment should replace 2.19.030(G) To foster public knowledge and support of official city housing and human service programs. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Lemhouse, Rosenthal, Morris, Voisin, Marsh, and Slattery, YES. Motion passed. Councilor Lemhouse/Marsh m/s to add to Section 2.19.030 Powers and Duties the following: "To monitor issues and report to Council regarding complaints or compliance of equal housing laws." DISCUSSION: Councilor Lemhouse noted an incident of racial discrimination against renters that occurred in the past. Council did not receive notification of die situation and he wanted to ensure staff notified Council in the future and included incidents in an annual report. Councilor Marsh agreed it fell in the purview of the Housing Commission and now the new commission. Councilor Voisin wanted to use the words "fair housing" instead of "equal housing." Fair Housing included race and 7-8 other protected populations. Councilor Lembouse responded the verbiage came from the federal equal housing laws under HUD (Department of Housing and Urban Development). He was open to changing it if staff determined it was necessary. Councilor Rosenthal thought the wording suggested a watchdog mentality and might imply investigative powers that could take on a life of its own_ Councilor Lemhouse did not intend the Commission to have Regular City Council Meeting September 3, 2013 Page 7 of 7 investigative powers but provide contact information for people that experienced discrimination or issues relating to equal housing. City Administrator Dave Kanner commented monitoring and reporting was significantly different from investigate and enforce. Staff would direct inquiries to the appropriate authorities and report back to Council on the complaints received and action taken. Councilor Rosenthal thought the amendment was too vague and with the absence of procedure and methodology would not support the amendment. Ms. Reid explained the City received CDBG funds and was required to further affirm fair housing and have a fair housing piece. The City had a' fair housing ordinance that did not require compliance regarding discriminatory issues but staff recommended and referred people to agencies for complaints like HUD, BOLI (Bureau of Labor and Industries), and the Fair Housing Council of Oregon. The Housing Commission helped craft the fair housing ordinance and reviewed all reports staff submitted to HUD regarding fair housing activities the City conducted that included fair housing trainings, outreach, education, and any activities where staff engaged the Fair Housing Council of Oregon. Ms. Reid received complaints and forwarded them to the proper agencies. In general, staff and the Housing Commission did not report complaints to Council. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Lemhouse, Morris, and Marsh, YES; Councilor Rosenthal, Voisin, and Slattery, NO. Mayor Stromberg broke the tie with a YES vote. Motion passed 4-3. Councilor Marsh/Lemhouse m/s to amend the motion and move Section 2.19.030 Powers and Duties (I) to position (A) under this section. DISCUSSION: Councilor Marsh explained the Commission's first responsibility was update and inform Council, make recommendations, and provide feedback regarding their work. Councilor Lemhouse agreed. Roll Call Vote on amendment: Councilor Lemhouse, Rosenthal, Voisin, Slattery, Morris, and Marsh, YES. Motion passed. Roll Call Vote on amended main motion: Councilor Lemhouse, Morris, Marsh, Rosenthal, Voisin, and Slattery, YES. Motion passed. - OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERSIREPORTS FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS Councilor Voisin announced the AIR (Ashland is Ready) event sponsored by the Fire Department Saturday September 7, 2013, the Women's Self Defense Seminar September 20-21 at the Ashland Karate Academy and a presentation September 26 from 6:00-8:00 p.m. by Police Chief Terry Holderness on The Police and Homeless in Ashland at the United Methodist Church. ADJOURNMENT Meetin adjourned at 9:42 p.m. arbara Christensen, City Recorder AeSITo;ici-g, Mayor I EXHIBIT 12 RESOLUTION NO. 2013 - A RESOLUTION LEVYING SPECIAL BENEFIT ASSESSMENTS IN THE AMOUNT OF $144,974.44 FOR THE SCHOFIELD AND MONTE VISTA STREETS LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO LIBERTY STREET CONSISTING OF GRADING, PAVING, AND CONSTRUCTION OF SIDEWALKS, CURB, DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS, AND OTHER ASSOCIATED IMPROVEMENTS. THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: RECITALS: A. The City of Ashland has constructed paving, sidewalks, curbs, storm drains, and other improvements as a result of the Schofield and Monte Vista Streets Local Improvement District (LID). B. The total cost for these improvements is in the amount of $359,558.60, OF WHICH $144,974.44 shall be paid by property owners within the Liberty Street Local Improvement District at a rate of $5,138.00 per assessment unit. C. The total assessments in this district are reasonable assessments and the assessments charged against each lot are according to the special and peculiar benefits accruing to it from the improvements. The council finds that the evidence presented by Engineering Staff, in the Council Communication of October 15, 2013, is convincing and accepts such evidence as the basis to . support the conclusions recited above. D. Special benefit assessments should now be levied against properties benefited to defray the expense thereof. THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The amount of the assessment to be charged against each lot within the local improvement district according to the special and peculiar benefits accruing to each lot for these improvements are set forth in the attached Exhibit A. SECTION 2. Any owner of property assessed for $100.00 or more may request the payment be extended in the manner and under the provisions of the Bancroft Bonding Act, if the request is made within thirty days after notice of the assessment is received. SECTION 3. All assessments using the Bancroft Bonding Act are required to pay in 20 semi-annual (twice a year) installments together with interest. The initial interest to be charged is 10 percent. At the time that these assessments are bonded, the interest rate to be charged will be the actual bond sale rate plus 1.5 percent with a maximum of 10 percent. SECTION 4. Classification of the assessment. The assessments specified in section 1 of this resolution are classified as not subject to the limits of Section 11b of Article XI of the Oregon Constitution. SECTIONS. This Resolution takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. Page i of 2 G:\pub-wrks\eng\depr-admin\LID\LID Resolution Project No. 0421 Liberty LID.doc RESOLUTION NO. 2013 - A RESOLUTION LEVYING SPECIAL BENEFIT ASSESSMENTS IN THE AMOUNT OF $111,235.82 FOR THE SCHOFIELD AND MONTE VISTA STREETS LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO LIBERTY STREET CONSISTING OF GRADING, PAVING, AND CONSTRUCTION OF SIDEWALKS, CURB, DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS, AND OTHER ASSOCIATED IMPROVEMENTS. THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: RECITALS: A. The City of Ashland has constructed paving, sidewalks, curbs, storm drains, and other improvements as a result of the Schofield and Monte Vista Streets Local Improvement District (LID). B. The total cost for these improvements is in the amount of $359,558.60, OF WHICH $111,235.82 shall be paid by property owners within the Liberty Street Local Improvement District at a rate of $5,138.00 per assessment unit. C. The total assessments in this district are reasonable assessments and the assessments charged against each lot are according to the special and peculiar benefits accruing to it from the improvements. The council finds that the evidence presented by Engineering Staff, in the Council Communication of October 15, 2013, is convincing and accepts such evidence as the basis to support the conclusions recited above. D. Special benefit assessments should now be levied against properties benefited to defray the expense thereof. THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The amount of the assessment to be charged against each lot within the local improvement district according to the special and peculiar benefits accruing to each lot for these improvements are set forth in the attached Exhibit A. SECTION 2. Any owner of property assessed for $100.00 or more may request the payment be extended in the manner and under the provisions of the Bancroft Bonding Act, if the request is made within thirty days after notice of the assessment is received. SECTION 3. All assessments using the Bancroft Bonding Act are required to pay in 20 semi-annual (twice a year) installments together with interest. The initial interest to be charged is 10 percent. At the time that these assessments are bonded, the interest rate to be charged will be the actual bond sale rate plus 1.5 percent with a maximum of 10 percent. SECTION 4. Classification of the assessment. The assessments specified in section 1 of this resolution are classified as not subject to the limits of Section 11b of Article XI of the Oregon Constitution. SECTION 5. This Resolution takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. Page 1 of 2 G:\pub-wrksleng\dept-adminalDWD Resolution Project No. 04-21 Liberty LID.doc This resolution was read by title only in accordance with Ashland Municipal Code 2.04.090 duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of 2013. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of 2013. John Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: David Lohman, City Attorney Page 2 of 2 G:\pub-wrksleng\dept-admin\LID\LID Resolution Project No. 04-21 Liberty LID.doc EXHIBIT A OPTION NO. 2 PROPOSED SCHOFIELD / MONTE VISTA ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 87 Tas La Assess Aasessmen: No. Map No. No. Description Owner Address Units EsL Ass. Rate Amcunl t 391 EOSBA 1802 2006-062572 McCants, Teresa 445 Schofield Street Ashland, OR 97520 - 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 2 391E05BA 18D3 Parent Na. 2 PartBron P<7-199 Otueton. Vance C. & Theresa M. 465 SdwBeld Street Ashland. OR 9]520 1 $ 5,138.00 S 5.138.00 3 391E05BA 20D0 91-22856 Dutton, Bdan M. & Ma A 1001 N. Main Street Ashland, OR 97520 4 $ 5,138.00 S 20,552.00 4 391 E05BA 21 DO 27-01228 Wit, Track L & Douglas D. 925 Shcofileld Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 IS 5.138.00 5 391E05BA 2101 05-071060 Hardison. Robert G 44 Schofield Street Ashland, OR 87520 7 S 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 6 391E05BD 100 89-27972 Pentkowski. Judith J., Trustee 436 Monte Visa Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,13&00 7 391 E05BD 102189-27972 Penikowski, Judith, J., Trustee 436 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5.138.00 8 391EOSBD 103 Growth, Mark & Margaret 3302 Dallas Streef Houston. TX 77019 1 $5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 9 39IE05BD 201 88-15873 Mann, Ma ai-0 434 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 S 5,138.001S 5,138.00 10 39IE05BD 203 99-16910 Colts, Stuart M. 100 Schofield Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,130.00 $ 5,138.00 11 391E05BD 300 02-07580 Spence, Ga C.. Trustee 430 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5138.00 12 39IE05BD 301 96-29873 Gall. Denise PO Box 624 Ashland, OR 97520 2 $ 5,138.DD $ 10,276.00 13 391E05BD 304 OD-22039 B field Francs, Trustee 400 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 14 391E05BD 500 Parcel No. I Partition P-71-199 Hendrickson, Richard H_ Trustee 444 Monte Visa Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 $ 5,138.00 $ 5,138.00 15 391E0580 501 Parcel No. 2 Partition P-71-199 Bel=tio. Pete J. & Christine 447 Monte Vista Street Ashland, OR 97520 1 S 5,138.00 $ 5,1311,00 16 391E058D 600 Lot 10, WC layers Addition City of Ashland 20 E. Main Street Ashland OR 97520 1 $13.513.82 $ 13.613.82 Totals 20 S 111,235.82 ' City properties pay full assessment, not minimums defined in the 99-09 resolution ENR April 1, 2006 ENR @ 7695.40 par msdution'99-09 Otis poses a $5138.00 cap per unit w7R0¢71hn G.CanppW,L WelulErgl0.gAemNlllDY.s09 Ce 5NnelOMmG VUY F1,A Og2tls 1 eofi0e Attachment No. 1.to ExhibitA CITY OF ASHLAND - ENGINEERING DIVISION \ SCHOFIELD 7 MONTE VISTA LID \ PROPOSED DISTRICT BOUNDARIES Legend 1500 ,t 1700 1800 f0 7l! ;04 391E 5 AB ® Proposed District Sf Boundary 2000 Taxlots 1001 N 1803 / 61802 A (1 5 sn \ \ W YE 66 391E 5 BA 925 S 2260 One inch = 150 Feet Schofield St 2401 905 Feet 2300 501 i i 0 75 150 300 sot 2311 3M 2x3 \ 470 400 100\ 2310 100 103 490 85] 5) / . 7 301 2312 460 \ 9 555 3W wt \ 3D6 434 430 102 101 855 2313 _ 391E 5 BD 435 311 535 2316 / \ • 503 1 2314 402 \ 500 305 1-- 515 aaa I 307 330103 829 ` 40 319 425 600 2315 4M 50f Hargadine Cemetery 1]47 O z322 ass 465 17 \ (City) 1300 300 325 309 302 3m 500 23 \ J 289 267 Sheridan St 3r4 5 A nm 725 2265 00 50D ]00 1801 MD ~11g111 111: ]]5 701 7M ]0.3 702 4600 4903 22C)f;\ 420 410 d00 7]0 ]31 a0t 300 286 288 282 266 264 262 EXHIBIT 13 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication October 15, 2013 Regular Business Meeting Public Hearing and Adoption of a Resolution Levying Special Benefit Assessments for the Schofield and Monte Vista Local Improvement District No. 87 and Adoption of Findings FROM: Scott A. Fleury, Engineering Services Manager, Public Works/Engineering, fleirrys@ashland.or.us SUMMARY To conclude the Schofield and Monte Vista Street's Local Improvement District (LID) process, the following actions are being requested for council's consideration and adoption: A. Public Hearing - In accordance with AMC Section 13.02, a public hearing shall be held to consider any objections to the proposed assessments. B. Adoption of Resolution - Adoption of a resolution, following the public hearing, will establish the final amount to be assessed. C. Adoption of Findings -Adoption of findings, conclusions and orders will document the City's actions and decisions regarding the formation of the assessment district and allocation of assessments. D. Consideration of Written Objections. As of this date, not letters of objection have been received. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: LID Summary The Schofield & Monte Vista LID No. 87 was authorized by the Council on April' 3, 2007 by Resolution No. 2007-10. In accordance with AMC section 13.20 the project was then designed, bid and constructed and the final costs calculated. Following is a summary and comparison of the original estimated costs and final costs. Estimated Project Cost Final Project Cost Construction $353,000.00 $335,958.60 Engineering $ 34,000.00 $ 23.600.00 $387,000.00 $359,558.60 The difference of $27,441.40 represents a 7 percent decrease over the original estimated cost but will not affect the final assessment rate of $5,138.00 per unit which is fixed in accordance with resolution 99-09. The Schofield/Monte Vista LID is the last of the LID's that were approved under resolution 99-09 and which set maximum caps on the assessment rate. Resolution 99-09 has since been rescinded. Page 1 of4 P ,7 LVI CITY OF ASI LAND With the final costs computed and assessment amounts known we may now proceed to conclude this LID by holding the final public hearing where affected property owners may present arguments regarding the established rate and total assessment amount. Project Description The Schofield and Monte Vista St. LID project improved 1,310 linear feet of the street right-of-way. The project included street grading and paving, construction of curbs and gutters, concrete sidewalk, concrete driveway aprons, segmented block retaining wall, storm drain inlets, subsurface storm drain pipes, and installation of street lights. The lower portion of Schofield St. was paved with concrete and heavily scored. This was done to increase vehicular traction for winter traffic. Reference attached photos of final project. Approval of Project Findings: The findings, conclusions, and orders are a record of all major activities regarding the project, including all Council motions and determinations. The findings for this project will be presented at the public hearing for final approval. A copy of the incomplete findings is attached for an advanced review. The findings cannot be completed until the final actions of the Council are complete. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: LID Costs per Resolution 2007-10 That resolution established the estimated cost of construction and engineering at $387,000 of which $111,235.82 was to be paid by special assessments against the benefitted properties. The assessment district was formed under previous LID ordinances and in particular under Resolution 99-09 which set specific rates of participation (credits) by the City. The resolution also established a maximum cap which the assessments could not exceed (adjusted annually based upon the CPI). The petition for the formation of the LID was received in May of 2006 and the cap was set at $5,138.00 per unit or potential unit, the computed cap for that year. The costs for development of the Schofield & Monte Vista LID were estimated as follows: ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT COSTS Total Construction Cost $ 353,000 Engineering & Administration Costs $ 34,000 Total Estimated Project Cost $ 387,000 Less City Participation per Resolution 99-09 75% of storm dram cost 0.75 X $ 29,650.00 $ 22,237.50 .20% of street surface cost 0.2 X $ 296,310.00 $ 59,262.00 50% of engineering cost 0.5 X $ 34,000.00 $ 17,000.00 60% of sidewalk cost 0.6 X $ 27,040.00 $ 16,224.00 Sub Total $ 114,723.50 Assessable Cost S 272,276.50 Page 2 of 4 CITY OF ASHLAND Number of Lots in proposed assessment district 20 Estimated per lot for Schofield & Monte Vista improvement $ 13,613.82 Current LID cap (maximum assessment amount as of April 2007) $ 5,138.00 Since Resolution 99-09 set a maximum amount that may be home by the owners, any additional cost must be borne by the City. In addition, a single lot owned by the City also received an assessment which adds to the amount the City pays. Amount to be paid by owners $ 97,622.00 (25.2%) Amount to be paid by City a. Participation per Resolution 99-09 $ 114,723.50 b. Amount over the maximum cap $ 161,040.18 c. Assessment for City owned lot $ 13,613.82 $89.377.50 f7 .8%1 TOTAL $ 387,000.00 (100%) FINAL ASSESSMENT COSTS Total Construction Cost $ 335,958.60 Engineering & Administration Costs $ 23,600.00 Total Project Cost $ 359,558.60 Less City Participation per Resolution 99-09 75% of storm drain cost 0.75 x $ 42,252.00 $ 31,689.00 20% of street surface cost 0.2 x $ 272,772.00 $ 54,554.40 50% of engineering cost 0.5 x $ 23,600.00 $ 11,800.00 60% of sidewalk cost 0.6 x $ 29,140.00 $ 17,484.00 Total Credits by City $ 115,527.40 Assessable Cost Total Project Cost $ 359,558.60 Less Credits $ 115,527.40 Total Assessable Costs $ 244,031.20 Number of Lots in Assessment District 20 Computed Cost per Lot (Assessment Rate) ($244,031.20 / 20) $ 12,201.56 Maximum Assessment Rate per Resolution 1999-09 $ 5,138.00 Resolution No. 99-09 sets a maximum cap on the assessment rate to be borne by the owners within the LID. Any costs over the maximum rate must be borne by the City. Costs to be borne by the property owners and the City are as follows: Page 3 of 4 CITY OF ASHLAND Amount to be paid by owners $ 111,235.82* Amount to be paid by City Credits per Resolution 99-09 $ 115,527.40 Amount over the maximum Cap $ 132,795.38 Assessment for City owned lot $ 13,613.82 Total City Cost $ 261,936.60 * Includes one city-owned lot to be assessed at $13,61.3.82 STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends adopting the final assessment resolution and associated findings. "A Resolution Levying Special Benefit Assessments in the Amount of $111,235.82 for the Schofield and Monte Vista Streets Local Improvement District for Improvements to Schofield St. and Monte Vista St. Consisting of Grading, Paving, and Construction of Sidewalks, Curbs, Drainage Improvements, and Other Associated Improvements and Associated Findings. SUGGESTED MOTION: (1) Move to adopt the resolution titled "A Resolution Levying Special Benefit Assessments in the Amount of $111,235.82 for the Schofield and Monte Vista Streets Local Improvement District for Improvements to Schofield St. and Monte Vista St. Consisting of Grading, Paving, and Construction of Sidewalks, Curbs, Drainage Improvements, and Other Associated Improvements. (2) Move to adopt Associated Findings. ATTACHMENTS: Assessment Resolution Findings, Conclusions and Orders Page 4 of 4