HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-0318 Council Agenda PACKET
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Important: Any citizen may orally address the Council on non-agendaitems during the Public Forum. Any citizen may submit written
comments to theme Council on•any item on the Agenda, unless it is [he subject 0'a public hearing and Hre record is closed. Time permitting, the
Presiding Officer may allowrorallestimony. If you wish [ospeak,.please fill oubthe Speaker Aequest form located near the~enlrance to the le!
Chambers. Thechair wiltrecognize you and inform you•as to[heamounfof timeallotted [o you, i9any. The time granted will be dependent [o
some extent on'ihe natnre of the itemunder discussion, Ihe;numberrof peopleryho wish,[o speak, andthe lene hofi[heagenda. fi
AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL
March 18, 2014
Council Chambers
1175 E. Main Street
Note: Items on the Agenda not considered due to time constraints are automatically continued to the next
regularly scheduled Council meeting [AMC 2.04.030.E.]
7:00 p.m. Regular Meeting
1. CALL TO ORDER
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
III. ROLL CALL
IV. MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS
V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. Study Session of March 3, 2014
2. Executive Session of March 3, 2014
3. Business Meeting of March 4, 2014
4. Goal Setting of March 8, 2014
VI. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS
1. Annual presentation by the Tree Commission and announcement of 2013
Tree of the Year
VII. CONSENT AGENDA
1. Acceptance of Commission and Committee minutes
2. Request for endorsement of the AAUW Garden Tour to hang a banner across
East Main Street
3. HMEP Grant application request
4. Liquor license application for Elisa Boulton dba The Lunch Show
5. Prioritization of Future Planning Initiatives
6. City of Ashland risk management report for FY 2012-2013
7. Economic Development Strategy quarterly update
COUNCIL MEETINGS ARE BROADCAST LIVE ON CHANNEL 9. STARTING APRIL 15, 2014,
CHARTER CABLE WILL BROADCAST LIVE ON CHANNEL 180 OR 181.
VISIT THE CITY OF ASHLAND'S WEB SITE AT WWW.ASHLAND.OR.US
VIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Persons wishing to speak are to submit a "speaker request
form" prior to the commencement of the public hearing. All hearings must
conclude by 9:00 p.m., be continued to a subsequent meeting, or be extended to
9:30 p.m. by a two-thirds vote of council {AMC §2.04.050})
1. Public hearing and Council'direction to staff regarding an ordinance
prohibiting the unlawful carrying of loaded firearms in public places
IX. PUBLIC FORUM.Business from the audience not included on the agenda.
(Total time allowed for Public Forum is 15 minutes. The Mayor will set time limits
to enable all people wishing to speak to complete their testimony.) [15 minutes
maximum]
X. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
1. First reading by title only of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance modifying the
Verde Village Subdivision's Development Agreement to clarify project phasing
and make clear which improvements are required with each phase and allow .
either phase to occur first; to change the energy efficiency requirements for
the development so that all units will be constructed to at least Earth
Advantage Gold Standards and will be photovoltaic ready; and to change the
landscaping requirements associated with construction of the multi-use path"
XI. NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS
None
XII. ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS
1. Second reading by title only of a ordinance titled, "An ordinance amending
AMC Chapter 2: Rules of City Council; Uniform Policies and Operating
Procedures for Advisory Commissions and Boards; Recreation Commission;
Conservation Commission; and Certain Administrative and Operating
Departments"
XIII. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS/REPORTS FROM COUNCIL
LIAISONS
XIV. ADJOURNMENT OF BUSINESS MEETING
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting,
please contact the City Administrators office at (541) 488-6002 (TTY phone number 1-800-735-2900). Notification 72
hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the.
meeting (28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title I).
COUNCIL MEETINGS ARE BROADCAST LIVE ON CHANNEL 9. STARTING APRIL 15, 2014,
CHARTER CABLE WILL BROADCAST LIVE ON CHANNEL 180 OR 181.
VISIT THE CITY OF ASHLAND'S WEB SITE AT WW W.ASHLAND.OR.US
Minutes for the City Council Study Session
March 3, 2014
Page 1 of 2
MINUTES FOR THE STUDY SESSION
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL
Monday, March 3, 2014
Siskiyou Room, 51 Winburn Way
Council Chair Dennis Slattery called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. in the Siskiyou Room.
Councilor Voisin, Rosenthal, Morris, and Marsh were present. Mayor Stromberg and Councilor
Lemhouse were absent.
1. Look Ahead review
City Administrator Dave Kanner reviewed items on the Look Ahead. Council discussed using time
allocated for the Study Session March 17, 2014 for a site visit to the Normal Avenue neighborhood
instead.
2. Discussion of seismic structural improvements to existing buildings
Building Official Michael Grubbs proposed seismic upgrade requirements for new commercial buildings
and reconstruction on existing buildings. The Cities of Medford, Portland, and Seattle all had seismic
ordinances in place.
He shared an earthquake history timeline that indicated the last 9.0 regional earthquake occurred in the
early 1700s and described the impact from the Oregon coast inland. The Cascadia subduction zone was a
fault line that ran from Vancouver, BC to northern California and separated the Juan de Fuca and North
America plates. When the next large earthquake happened, it would affect all of Oregon and Washington.
In Portland, 20% of rebuilds had seismic upgrades and Medford had twelve buildings upgrade over the
past three years. The minimal upgrade requirement for buildings was the ability to exit the building
safely to a full upgrade where the building would incur some damage and restore to occupancy in a
shorter period. The proposed ordinance should meet the minimal upgrade requirement for buildings. Full
seismic upgrades should be the building owners' decision. The City of Portland mandated different
thresholds for different requirements. Staff suggested an incremental approach to upgrades and
eventually include residential.
Portland was looking into grants and loans to bring costs down and provide incentives for seismic
upgrades. Currently Portland had a phased plan over 7-10 years and reduced or waived permit fees
depending on the upgrade. Both Medford and Portland had historic clauses in their ordinances. Staff
would check with FEMA and California seismic laws for incentives in terms of zoning, non-confirming
elements of building, and density bonuses. Staff would also research a reduction in transfer tax when an
owner sold their home, a retrofit prioritization list, insurance information, and the possibility of revolving
loans to fund upgrades. Council and staff discussed fire damage from earthquakes and possibly requiring
a change from gas to electric for full retrofit upgrades.
Staff suggested using the City website, City Source, and email messaging for public outreach. Staff
would also develop an inventory of vulnerable commercial buildings in town.
3. Discussion of electric vehicle pilot program, home charging stations
Building Official Michael Grubbs explained the Oregon Building Codes Division (BCD) created an
Electric Vehicle Pilot Program that required new single residential and duplexes with garages or a major
remodel to a carport or garage add infrastructure for electric vehicle charging. The program would be in
place for three years and was part of Governor Kitzhaber's 10-year energy plan the prompted the
Minutes for the City Council Study Session
March 3, 2014
Page 2 of 2
formation of the Energize Oregon Coalition. Transportation accounted for more than a third of green
house emissions. The state had a target of reducing gases 30% by 2020 and doubling electric vehicle use.
One way to achieve that goal was a Pilot Residential Code Program called PEV (Plug-in Electric Vehicle
Readiness) for new construction. Jackson County was fourth in the state per capita for electric vehicles
and Ashland would be the third jurisdiction to adopt the program.
Council was not comfortable mandating the requirement and discussed using incentives instead. Staff
presented a non-mandated program initially to BCD and they encouraged the City to make it mandatory
for at least three years. Council was interested in the Conservation Commission's input regarding the
increase in electricity usage. Community Development Director Bill Molnar talked to Mark Holden the
director of Electric/IT who confirmed an increase in electric vehicles would get to Tier 2 power rates
quicker but the rates were blended.
Council directed staff to look into an incentive-based program and wanted the Conservation
Commission's input as well.
4. Review and discussion of agenda for March 8th Council goal-setting
City Administrator Dave Kanner and Council discussed meeting space, the agenda, and allowing public
input. Council supported allocating 15 minutes at the end of the session for public comment.
Meeting adjourned at 6:34 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Dana Smith
Assistant to the City Recorder
Regular City Council Meeting
March 4, 2014
Page I of 7
MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL
March 4, 2014
Council Chambers
1175 E. Main Street
CALL TO ORDER
Council Chair Dennis Slattery called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Civic Center Council
Chambers.
ROLL CALL
Councilor Voisin, Morris, Lemhouse, Rosenthal, and Marsh were present. Mayor Stromberg was absent.
MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS
Council Chair Slattery announced the City was accepting applications for annual appointments to the various
Commissions and Committees. The deadline for applications was March 21, 2014. In addition to annual
appointments, there was one vacancy on the Citizens' Budget Committee. The deadline for applications for
the Citizens' Budget Committee was March 14, 2014.
Council Chair Slattery moved agenda item 1. Approval of Medford Water Commission Talent, Ashland,
and Phoenix System Development Charge Payment and Water Delivery Agreements under NEW AND
MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS before the UNFINISHED BUSINESS agenda item with Council
consent.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes of the Business Meeting of February 18, 2014 and Study Session of February 18, 2014 were
approved as presented.
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS
The Mayor's proclamation of March 8, 2014 as International Women's Day was read aloud.
CONSENT AGENDA
1. Appointment of Victoria Sturtevant to the Firewise Commission
2. Request to donate fire pumper and rescue equipment to Guanajuato
3. Award of a professional services contract in excess of $75,000 for the Wastewater Treatment Plant
Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition Upgrade project
Councilor Voisin pulled Consent Agenda Item #3 for further discussion. Public Works Director Mike
Faught and Wastewater Treatment Plant Supervisor David Gies explained the Wastewater Treatment Plant
Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system had degraded faster than expected and staff had
to reprioritize the upgrade in the Wastewater Master Plan priority project list. SCADA was important
because the plant was only staffed two thirds of the time. It was critical the system was reliable. Staff would
make budget adjustments in order to cover the project.
Councilor Lemhouse/Morris m/s to approve Consent Agenda item #3.
DISCUSSION: Councilor Lemhouse noted that plans changed and it was important for staff to adjust
projects when needed. Councilor Voisin expressed concern the Wastewater Master Plan was two years old
and staff was unable to see the failure then. She thought staff should adhere to the Master Plan and would
not support the motion. Voice Vote: Councilor Morris, Lemhouse, Slattery, Rosenthal, and Marsh,
YES; Councilor Voisin, NO. Motion passed 5-1.
Councilor Rosenthal pulled Consent Agenda Item 42 and noted his appreciation for the donation of the fire
Regular City Council Meeting
March 4, 2014
Page 2 of 7
pumper and rescue equipment to Guanajuato, Mexico. Fire Chief John Karns added that the Guanajuato Fire
Department maintained their vehicles exceptionally well and planned to drive to Ashland with a trailer to
transport the fire pumper and rescue equipment back to Guanajuato.
Councilor Rosenthal/Voisin m/s to approve Consent Agenda items #1 and #2. Voice Vote: all AYES.
Motion passed.
PUBLIC HEARINGS - None
PUBLIC FORUM
Heather Stafford/100 E Main Street/Explained she was the Executive Director of the Sustainable Valley
Technology Group, distributed their annual report and shared accomplishments and upcoming projects.
David Sherr/Diane Street/Announced that 65% of citizens polled by the Sneak Preview disliked the Plaza
pavers including 500 petitioners. He explained that during the project "checks and balances" were
disregarded by staff and questioned why renderings depicting salmon colored pavement were shown to the
public and press the entire design process then gray pavers installed. He questioned why the City
Administrator was unaware of the choice, why the decision was kept out of the press and why Council would
not divulge when the decision was made. Showing salmon colored paving in an illustration for nine months
was the same as promising them. He wanted Council and staff to keep that promise, citing both had given
false impressions to the public and press.
NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS
1. Approval of Medford Water Commission Talent, Ashland, and Phoenix System Development
Charge Payment and Water Delivery Agreements
Public Works Director Mike Faught explained the 2012 Water Master Plan identified the need to construct
the emergency Talent Ashland Phoenix pipeline (TAP) in 2015. Staff began working with the Medford
Water Commission (MWC) on System Development Charges (SDC) October 2013. The plan was finish
negotiations, hire an engineering firm, and construct the pipeline in 2015. Severe low snowpack and winter
drought conditions caused staff to recommend moving the project up to 2014.
Staff recommended 3,000,000 million gallons a day (mgd) but could get by using 2.13 mgd along with 2
mgd from the Talent Irrigation District (TID) and 2 mgd from Ashland Creek. Construction would be on an
aggressive schedule to have it built by August 15, 2014 when typically Ashland needed additional water.
Currently Mt. Ashland had 17-20 inches of snow pack.
The TAP project would require 14,000 linear feet of line and a pump station. Staff had selected an
engineering firm, and the next step was formalizing an agreement with the MWC for water delivery. The
MWC would raise SDCs on April 1, 2014 making the SDC for 3 mgd $3,967,000 when it was currently
$3,690,000. Mr. Faught explained that staff arrived at 2.13 mgd by taking the 1,000 acre feet water right and
dividing it by five months. In addition to the SDC, MWC would charge .55 cents per 1,000 gallons to treat
and transfer the water to Ashland. The SDC was not included in the Water Master Plan because the City was
under the impression emergency water use did not incur those charges. However, when the City discussed
an agreement prior to 2008, MWC made capacity improvements in anticipation of connecting Ashland to
TAP. Ashland decided not to participate and now was responsible for paying MWC for those improvements
through SDCs regardless.
Senior Engineer Pieter Smeenk explained TID charged .39 cents per 1,000 gallons. In addition to the .55
cents per 1,000 gallons, MWC would charge pumping costs at. 10-.20 cents per 1,000 gallons for a possible
total cost of .65-.70 cents per 1,000 gallons depending on which pumper system Ashland chose.
Financial Analyst Ray Bartlett from Economic & Financial Analysis explained how the additional
Regular City Council Meeting
March 4, 2014
Page 3 of 7
$3,500,000 would fit into the Master Plan budget. The Water Master Plan forecast was conservative in
revenue and generous in operating expenses. After a year, the City would produce $300,000 more a year in
net revenue than was anticipated. The City obtained cheaper financing for approximately $12,000,000 of the
$34,000,000 the City was planning to spend over the next five years through an Oregon State Revolving fund
loan at 1-1.5% instead of the 5% anticipated in the Master Plan. This would save the City $340,000 a year
due to the interest rate adjustment. Building the TAP line would reduce construction costs for the Crowson
II Reservoir by $1,300,000. Depending on how much the City put down, which was $396,000 year one to
M WC, the City could pay off the balance over the next 20 years. The City had some options through
negotiations with M WC that allowed pre-paying the loan without penalty or otherwise pay off equal amounts
over a 20-year period.
The City faced $37,000,000 additional debt over the next 5-6 years and would tailor that second payment to
reduce the amount of new debt service to Medford and at the same time hold cash reserves for emergencies
that might come up. Mr. Bartlett ran the forecast assuming half the balance would be paid off by Fiscal Year
2016. At that point, the City would evaluate where it stood financially. There were unknowns and risks with
Capital Improvement projects where preliminary engineering estimates could come in below or above budget
project by project. There was also potential long-term drought that might affect water revenue. Then there
was the economy and where it would grow in Ashland to produce additional revenues. The forecast kept the
growth analysis at a conservative .5%. The City had managed its debt well and taken every opportunity to
reduce debt service and that helped.
Mr. Faught added the City could afford this if Council continued to raise rates as adopted in the current
Water Master Plan. Mr. Smeenk addressed the 1 % loan with the state and clarified the City could apply for
one loan each year. Subsequent loans depended on changing conditions and competition. Staff went on to
explain if the City did not hook into TAP, Ashland would have 4 mgd with a general demand of 6 mgd that
would result in curtailment. Additionally the City could incur a severe reduction in revenue.
Mr. Smeenk clarified the Crowson 11 Reservoir savings of $1,300,000 would occur because the City would
not need as much storage with TAP and could reduce the size by 500,000 gallons. Cost constraints
prevented the City from having both. The TAP pipeline would allow the City to refill Crowson II Reservoir
if needed in an emergency and the water was already treated. The contract stated the City's 1,000 acre feet
water right was during the summer months and Medford would meet that same demand with their water
during the winter months.
Staff asked the two engineering firms how they would meet the deadline and whether the budget was
realistic. The engineering firms response expressed concern the $2,300,000 was not enough to cover 3 mgd.
An analysis would provide a concrete figure by March 21, 2014. If Council chose 3 mgd and it cost more,
the City would have to raise rates.
Mr. Faught clarified Medford had a much larger watershed and could probably experience 2-3 years of
drought conditions before having issues. Medford would use an equal curtailment that applied to everyone.
TID had a similar curtailment policy as well. He confirmed the .70 cents per 1,000 gallons was included in
the current and anticipated rates.
If Council chose 2.13 mgd and Ashland exceeded that amount, the City would owe M WC the extra SDCs
immediately, M WC would not cut the water supply. The City's current pumping facility could handle 2.5
mgd and staff was researching a second pump for 3 mgd. Conservation and curtailment efforts helped but
would have a large impact on City revenue. The $337,000 in the Water Master Plan covered water from
Medford and was not an annual cost, only when needed. Mr. Bartlett clarified the latest analysis increased
that amount. They adjusted the forecast to account for changes that had occurred since the Water Master
Plan.
Regular City Council Meeting
March 4, 2014
Page 4 of 7
Ron Roth/6950 Old Hwy 99 S/Opposed the TAP project since it was initially proposed. TID was the
secondary water source. The WISE (Water for Irrigation, Streams, and Economy) group promoted piping
all the canals in the valley to save massive amounts of water. Approximately 25%-30% of water was lost to
evaporation and leakage. He estimated the TAP project would cost at least $6,000,000 if Council went with
3 mgd and cost $300 per capita for Ashland citizens. He spoke to the Medford Water Commission and asked
if they were short on water, what would happen, it was a board decision they had not made yet. There was
no guarantee. If the City waited until next year, it would cost $314 per capita. The curtailment in 2009 was
not necessary had there been more anticipation. The City did not use TID until Reeder Reservoir dropped
below 60%. He suggested filling Reeder Reservoir with TID as it lowered instead of waiting for the level to
drop below the 60% mark.
Councilor Voisin/Marsh m/s to approve granting authority to authorize the City Administrator to
complete negotiations and sign the MWC Water Delivery Contract and SDC payment agreement for
2.13 mgd of water. DISCUSSION: Councilor Voisin explained there were two reasons to have TAP. One
was redundancy and the other for emergencies like fire and flood. She also wanted to find ways to increase
and encourage conservation at the same time. Councilor Marsh added the City needed to develop alternative
water sources. She noted language in the MWC contract that stated the MWC was under no obligation to act
in the best interest of any customer outside the City of Medford. The City could pay additional SDCs later
for 3 mgd. The 2.13 mgd covered the bulk, and the remaining would not be as expensive. That also gave the
City time to sort out what was really happening with the drought, TID, and financing options. Ashland
definitely needed the 2.13 mgd as it moved into climate change and unpredictable conditions.
Councilor Lemhouse would have preferred 3 mgd instead of 2.13 mgd but would support the motion. The
option of not doing the project was not good. The first responsibility of Council was protecting the citizenry.
Councilor Rosenthal would have supported the 3 mgd option but this made sense. Choosing this option may
not increase rates and the 3 mgd would have. This was an insurance policy for community. Councilor
Morris also preferred the 3 mgd due to Ashland's storage and reservoir capacity issues but understood they
could go up to that amount another time if needed. Council Chair Slattery supported the motion.
Roll Call Vote: Councilor Voisin, Marsh, Lemhouse, Slattery, Rosenthal, and Morris, YES. Motion
passed.
City Administrator Dave Kanner addressed the possible $1,000,000 savings due to Council choosing 2.13
mgd instead of 3 mgd and explained staff did not know actual costs for the project at this time. This was an
emergency procurement and staff would not know actual costs until they had a completed engineering plan.
Reducing the size of Crowson 11 Reservoir would save the City $1,300,000 but it was unknown whether that
amount would be necessary for the TAP construction and pump installation or if there was a savings that
would go into the unappropriated fund balance in the Capital Improvement Fund.
BUSINESS
1. First Reading by title only of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance amending AMC Chapter 2: Rules
of City Council; Uniform Policies and Operating Procedures for Advisory Commissions and
Boards; Recreation Commission; Conservation Commission; and Certain Administrative and
Operating Departments"
City Attorney Dave Lohman explained the following changes:
2.04.010 Authority (E) allowed suspension of the rules in limited circumstances. Mr. Lohman would add a
list of circumstances.
2.04.010 Authority (F) clarified the City Attorney as parliamentarian and not the decision maker.
2.04.020 Meetings Study Sessions Councilor Voisin suggested allowing 15 minutes for Public Forum
during Study Sessions. Mr. Lohman would retain the current language and bring possible amendment
Regular City Council Meeting
March 4, 2014
Page 5 of 7
language for Second Reading.
2.04.020 Meetings (C) Study Sessions would change wording from Study Sessions occurring on the first
and third Mondays to the Monday that preceded Council meetings.
2.04.030 Agendas (A) Agenda Guidelines for Regular Meetings (3) would add the word "information,"
"All other items that the City Administrator, City Attorney or Mayor present to the Council for action
or information."
2.04.040 Conduct of Meetings (C) Council Deliberation (2) Discourse Rules add language to read:
"Council members, as well as members of the public speaking on Council agenda items, shall confine
their remarks to the question under deliberation, avoid redundancy, speak only for themselves, and
make no negative personal remarks or comments about the motives or personal traits of others."
2.04.040 Conduct of Meetings (C) Council Deliberation (3) Decorum Mr. Lohman would add language
regarding inappropriate gestures and signs or gestures of Councilors attempting to communicate with
audience members during the meeting as potential disruptive behavior. He clarified the section applied to
interchanges between Councilors and Councilors with the audience.
2.04.040 Conduct of Meetings (4) Motions and Permissible Intervening Actions (b) Permissible Actions
While a Speaker Has the Floor (2) Request for Information would clarify a second was not required. Mr.
Lohman would bring possible amendment language for Second Reading removing Request for Information
as an intervening action.
2.04.040 Conduct of Meetings (4) Motions and Permissible Intervening Actions (c) Main Motion would
clarify a second was not required when a Councilor withdrew a motion.
2.04.040 Conduct of Meetings (4) Motions and Permissible Intervening Actions (6) Voting would clarify
a Councilor or Mayor who did not vote for or against a motion unless excused would count as a negative
vote.
2.04.050 Order of Business at Regular Meetings Mr. Lohman would remove the date requirement for the
Mayor's State of the City presentation.
2.04.050 Order of Business at Regular Meetings (D) Public Forum (4) would move Public Forum before
the Consent Agenda unless changed by a suspension of the rules and would add back the following, "When
possible and feasible, preference will be given to individuals who reside within the Ashland city limits.
Persons who do not reside in the City may be placed at the end of the list of those wishing to speak at
public forum."
2.04.050 Order of Business at Regular Meetings (E) Consent Agenda would clarify that Council may
request that any item be removed from the Consent Agenda and voted on separately either during the
Consent Agenda portion or as part of the Regular Agenda under the appropriate section.
2.04.050 Order of Business at Regular Meetings (F) Public Hearings (1) changed the public hearing time
extension to 9:45 p.m.
2.04.100 Council Liaisons to City Advisory Boards and Commissions (A) Role and Responsibilities of
Council Liaisons (2) added "objectively and accurately" to read "...and are expected to represent the
full City Council objectively and accurately in interacting with such entities."
Regular City Council Meeting
March 4, 2014
Page 6 of 7
2.04.100 Council Liaisons to City Advisory Boards and Commissions (A) Role and Responsibilities of
Council Liaisons (3) would read, "City Councilors may attend meetings of the City's Regular, and ad
hoc advisory bodies as citizens of Ashland. When attending as a citizen, Council members must
identify their comments as personal views or opinions not a representation of City Council policy."
Mr. Lohman would provide provisions under Roberts Rules regarding censure, misrepresentation of Council
by a Councilor and the provision submitted by Councilor Rosenthal regarding 2.10.110 Lobbying and
Representing the City.
2.04.100 Council Liaisons to City Advisory Boards and Commissions (A) Role and Responsibilities of
Council Liaisons (B) Attendance would provide flexibility regarding attendance
2.04.100 Council Liaisons to City Advisory Boards and Commissions (C) Deliberations Mr. Lohman
would correct the reference to paragraph t to paragraph H.
2.04.110 Council Representatives to State, Regional, Community, and other External Organizations (3)
would read, "City Councilors are expected to represent the full City Council in their work as City
Representatives. If the Council has an approved position on a matter under discussion, the
Representative shall articulate and, if called upon, vote in favor of that position. If the City
Representative is asked to take an official position on an issue that affects the City of Ashland and the
City' s official position is unknown or unclear, the City Representative should request that the item be
placed on a City Council agenda in accordance with AMC 2.04.030 for full City Council action. If the
Council has not approved an official position and has not had the opportunity to confer with the City
Representative on a matter under deliberation in the subject external organization, the Representative
shall make a good-faith effort to reflect what the Representative believes the full Council's position
would be if the Council were to consider the matter, regardless of the Representative's personal views.
Conduct contrary to the guidelines in this subsection is grounds for removal under paragraph E." Mr.
Lohman would add language requesting a Councilor to report to Council about a decision made in the
Council's name.
2.10.020 Terms, Term Limits and Vacancies would have different term limits for the Audit Committee.
2.10.025 Meetings and Attendance (B) Mr. Lohman would remove verbiage regarding missing two
consecutive noticed meetings for Second Reading.
2.10.025 Meetings and Attendance (E) would read, "Each advisory body should review member and
report to the City Recorder approximately every six months. City Recorder will advise the Mayor on
the need for appointments or re-appointments, if necessary."
2.10.050 Election of Officers, Secretary, and Subcommittees would elect a chair and vice-chair following
the appointment or reappointment of members each year and limited that position to no more than three
consecutive annual terns.
2.10.060 Agendas and Minutes would require minutes posted to the website in a timely manner.
2.10.105 Reports (B) would clarify report expectation from an advisory body Chair to Council.
2.10.110 Lobbying and Representing the City Councilor Rosenthal proposed the following language
concerning external statements of advisory body members: "Members of City advisory bodies shall not
state the position of the City or of a City advisory body at meetings or in correspondence with federal,
Regular City Council Meeting
March 4, 2014
Page 7 of 7
state, regional, local or community organizations or elected bodies, unless specifically authorized to do
so at duly advertised meetings by the City Council and by the advisory body. An individual advisory
body member is free to express personal views on any issue in any forum as long as the individual
makes clear that the views expressed are personal and do not represent the position of the City or of
the City advisory body. Advisory body members are prohibited from engaging in political activity in
accordance with ORS 260.432." Mr. Lohman would bring the language to Second Reading as an
amendment.
2.11.015 Modified Terms and Qualifications (A) Terms City Recorder Barbara Christensen recommended
language concerning terms of certain Municipal Audit Commission Members: "Notwithstanding any other
provision of the Ashland Municipal Code, the terms of the Mayor or Councilor, City Recorder and
Liaison Budget Committee member shall be for one year, each expiring on December 31 each year.
All other terms shall be as provided in AMC 2.10.020." Mr. Lohman would add the language for Second
Reading.
Councilor Lemhouse addressed 2.04.040 Conduct of Meetings (C) Council Deliberation and asked
Council to consider adding language that defined deliberation. Mr. Lohman would add defining language
and clarify after a motion was made that was the time for deliberation and expressing opinions. He noted
2.04.040 Conduct of Meetings (2) Discourse Rules addressed issues of redundancy and confining remarks.
Jonny Boulton/165 East Main Street/Thought the purpose of parliamentary procedure in Council was to
debate, convince other Councilors to change their opinion, deliberate and vote. He read from Roberts Rules,
explained the rules were the backbone of the law of the land, and had been with people for thousands of
years. He questioned whether the changes being made would serve its purpose and expressed concern
regarding the actions of future Councils.
Councilor Slattery/Marsh m/s to approve First Reading by title only of an ordinance titled "An
ordinance amending AMC Chapter 2: Rules of City Council; Uniform Policies and Operating
Procedures for Advisory Commissions and Boards; Recreation Commission; Conservation
Commission; and Certain Administrative and Operating Departments" as amended and place on
agenda for second reading. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Voisin, Marsh, Lemhouse, Rosenthal, Morris,
and Slattery, YES. Motion passed.
ORDINANCES. RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS - None
OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS/REPORTS FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS
Councilor Voisin announced there were now 133 volunteers for the Help Center and shelters. Friday, March
18, 2014 free dog and cat vaccinations would happen in the parking lot at the United Methodist from 3:00
p.m. to 4:30 p.m.
Councilor Lemhouse announced the High School basketball team was in the play offs, a senior won the state
title for wrestling in his weight class and another senior came in second in state in his weight class and a third
student was the first female state champion in wrestling.
ADJOURNMENT
Meeting was adjourned at 9:31 p.m.
Barbara Christensen, City Recorder Dennis Slattery, Council Chair
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Council Communication
March 18, 2014, Business Meeting
2013 Tree of the Year
FROM:
Michael Pina, Assistant Planner, michael.pina@ashland.or.us
SUMMARY:
The City of Ashland Tree Commission announces the 2013 Tree of the Year winner - a Freemont
Cottonwood, located at 380 Clay Street.
BACKGROUND:
Estimated to be over 100 years old, this magnificent 75-inch Diameter at Breast Height Fremont
Cottonwood (Populus fremontii) tree graces a former farming property. This particular tree has a canopy
spread of 90 feet, and an approximate height of 75 feet. Uncommon in Southern Oregon, Fremont
Cottonwoods can live up to 200 years in ideal conditions. In mid-summer, its fruit splits open releasing
seeds with lofty, cottony hairs. Cottonwoods traditionally are not recommended in residential settings,
and are declining due to human activities.
With multiple nominations, this particular tree captured the hearts of many nearby residents that turned
out in numbers to voice support of retaining this tree. This year's winner received 95 out of 187 total
votes, and beat out the runner up (a multi-trunked Deodar Cedar located at 206 Alicia Street) by nearly
three-to-one.
This year marks Ashland's 26`h Tree of the Year contest. Throughout the year, nomination forms are
available on the City of Ashland's website, and the call for nominations is distributed in the City
Source newsletter. Ballots were published in the Locals Guide, posted on the City's web site, available
at City Hall and the Community Development Building. All of the nominated trees this year are
beautiful specimens, and special in some way to someone in the community. The Ashland Tree
Commission would like to thank Ashland residents who took the time to submit nominations and to
vote for Tree of the Year.
Previous Tree of the Year Winners:
2012 Oregon White Oak 1209 Iowa St.
2011 Coast Redwood 65 Granite
2010 Podless Caltalpa 200 Sherman
2009 Dogwood 634 Iowa St.
2008 Spanish Fir 122 Wimer
2007 Silver Maple 122 Helman
Page I of 2
CITY OF
ASHLAND
2006 Pacific Madrone Mountain View Cemetery
2005 Giant Sequoia 165 Almond
2004 Monterey Cypress 407 Scenic
2003 Pecan Tree 762 & 774 B Street
2002 Deodar Cedars 585 Siskiyou (Safeway)
2001 Blue Atlas Cedar 391 Liberty
2000 Ginkgo 410 Siskiyou (Formerly at the Ashland Public Library)
1999 Osage Orange Helman and Orange
1998 Coast Redwood 801 Ashland
1997 American Elm 6°i & B St.
1996 Colorado Spruce N. Main at Maple
1995 Black Oak 128 S. Laurel
1994 Sequoia SOU Library
1993 Walnut Glenwood Park
1992 California Black Oak 133 Nutley
1991 Interior Oak Beach and Ashland
1990 Monkey Puzzle Tree 1 Hillcrest
1989 Tree of Heaven Formerly at the entrance to Lithia Park on the Plaza
1988 Monterey Cypress 265 North Main (Briscoe School)
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
N/A
STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION:
Staff recommends the announcement of the 2013 Tree of the Year winner at March 18, 2014 City
Council meeting.
SUGGESTED MOTION:
N/A
ATTACHMENTS:
2013 Tree of the Year Ballot
Page 2 of 2
BALLOT for
The City of Ashland's
2013 TREE OF THE YEAR
The finalists for the 2013 Tree of the Year are:
❑ Fremont Cottonwood (Populus fremontir) - 380 Clay St.
Estimated to be over 100 years old, this magnificent 75-inch tree graces a former farming
property, and has a canopy spread of 90 feet, and a height of 75 feet. Uncommon in
Southern Oregon, Fremont Cottonwoods can live to 200-400 years in ideal conditions. In
mid-summer, its fruit splits open releasing seeds with lofty, cottony hairs. Fremont
cottonwoods are declining due to human activities.
❑ Incense Cedar (Calocedrus decurrens) - 206 Alicia St.
This unique tree has several stems arising from the very broad base inconspicuously placed
in the front yard of a residential home. Typically large trees, incense cedars have a wide
range across North America, and can reach a height of 120 feet or greater. The wood is
primarily used for wooden pencils, because it is soft and tends to sharpen easily without
forming splinters.
❑ Southern Magnolia (Magnolia grandii fora) - 153 Oak St.
Fairly common in southeastern portions of the US, this impressive specimen is one of the
oldest recorded magnolia trees in Jackson County. Planted by Mr. and Mrs. McCall in 1890,
this magnolia has large, strikingly dark green, leathery leaves, with large fragrant flowers
that appear on the tree in late spring, followed by rose-colored fruit.
❑ Sugar Maple (Acer saccharum) - 590 Siskiyon Blvd.
This large specimen has graced the corner of Sherman and Siskiyou Streets for many
years, and has grown to over 40 in height. There are approximately 128 species of Maples,
most of which are native to Asia, and constitutes one of the most diverse and important
groups of broadleaved trees in the world. Most are shade-tolerant when young, and many of
the root systems are typically dense and fibrous.
❑ Silver Maple (Acer saccharinum) - 445 Stadium St.
This stately 36-inch Silver Maple currently stands as the centerpiece between the two new
residence halls on SOU property north of Ashland Street. Identified as a strong anchor for the
courtyard, this tree stands approximately 50 feet tall and has a large canopy of approximately
75 feet wide. Being one of the most common Maples in North America, the eastern US native
is highly adaptable, and has higher sunlight requirements than other Maples.
BALLOTS MUST BE RECEIVED BY FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 30'", 2013
Mail or deliver to: Michael Pina, City of Ashland, 20 East Main Street, Ashland, OR 97520
SUPPORT THE TREES! VOTE TODAY!
City Council - Goal Setting
March 8, 2014
Page I of 10
MINUTES FOR THE GOAL SETTING SESSION
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL
Saturday, March 8, 2014
Siskiyou Room, 51 Winburn Way
Goal Setting began at 8:30 a.m. by Steve Bryant, Project Manager for Oregon Consensus Project.
Mayor Stromberg, Councilors Voisin, Morris, Lemhouse, Slattery, Rosenthal and Marsh were present.
Staff: City Administrator Dave Kanner and City Attorney Dave Lohman (left 12:30 p.m.) were present.
Outline of presentation began as the following:
What outcomes will make today worth investing 8 hours of your time?
• A longer term plan for moving forward
• Agreement on long term goals
• Financial strategic ideas that look beyond the current budget cycle
• Begin to develop more of a strategic plan
• View this as the beginning of the planning process
• Get it off to a good start!
• Try to get to both the long term goals and some steps for getting there.
• Nothing wrong with the current set of goals
• Recognize that future councils will have their own thoughts and priorities
• Leave with some vision for the future that we can pass on
• Have some follow-up strategic planning with departments, boards and commissions, etc.
• Look at big picture
• Build bridges to other boards and commissions
• Strengthen regional relationships
Councilors were asked to consider the following:
In 2025 Ashland will be renowned as a city that...
• Embraces sustainability
• Supports arts, conservation
• A downtown that others would die to have
• A city that is resilient-systems that are diverse, families thrive, diverse economy and
infrastructure that relies on a variety of sources
• Maintain what is already good!
• A more diverse economic portfolio
• Young families see themselves living here long into the future
• Capitalize on Oregon's reputation as an innovative place to do business
City Council - Goal Setting
March 8, 2014
Page 2 of 10
• Ashland becomes the new place in Oregon where new sustainable high tech ideas are incubated
• A city that is willing to be and is known for innovation
• A place where people want to live and want to raise their families here
• A community that creates opportunity out of challenge
• A community that is innovative in approaching issues that are common among communities and
is responsibly progressive.
• Is ahead of climate change in policy and infrastructure
• A community that is a cooperative city based on buying local and keeping wealth in our
community
• Is a city that is affordable for the working class and working poor
• Ashland has one of the most rigorous conservation plans in the state for energy and water
• We will have achieved incorporation of a variety of ideas and views for making sustainability
work
• Being in government is something that people are excited about and we draw the be best people
into government
• Increasing citizens recognize and appreciate the excellent exhibited by city government and as
such they see themselves as part of good governance--citizens are fully engaged
• We are known as a model for other cities because we are forward thinking in our infrastructure
management
• We are doing a good job in dealing with issues that previous councils didn't want to deal with
• We buy local
• We grow internally and have good succession plans in place
• We tackle tough problems and take care of them!
• We are professional in all that we do
• We set an example of other communities
Observations shared on interviews with Council and staff:
• You have really good city council and staff members who want basically the same things for
Ashland. In fact, the common themes were surprisingly similar and can provide the basis for
consensus agreement on the general areas of needed emphasis.
• Each of you has a deep commitment to the city of Ashland based on its unique attributes that keep
you engaged, and you are equally passionate about its future. That passion is commonly rooted in
wanting to protect all that is good about living here while also desiring a future that promises a
high quality of life for those who wish to call Ashland their home 20 years from now.
• You have similar interests in using this process as the beginning step of developing a more
comprehensive strategic plan for guiding the future of the city-influencing both short and long-
term decision making; however, the immediate focus of this process should be on longer-term
goals.
City Council - Goal Setting
March 8, 2014
Page 3 of 10
• To increase your effectiveness as a governing body in making progress toward the long-term
goals, you agree that some future work may be needed to improve both internal communication
dynamics and external communications with the public.
The following are typical elements of a good strategic plan for public organizations:
1. A focused effort to conduct a thorough SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats)
analysis.
a. Process should be integrated/iterative between council and staff
b. Council leads community SWOT analysis
c. Empower the staff the be honest with the council in the SWOT analysis
d. Avoid "us vs. them" mentality
e. Respect the roles of council and staff
2. A well crafted mission and organizational values statement that has a high level of ownership
short list of major goal topics.
a. Develop the mission statement after other elements of the strategic plan evolve.
b. Develop organizational values from the bottom up.
c. Council may need to articulate community values that guide development of long-term
goals.
d. Council may also need to articulate council values that guide group behaviors and actions
e. Needs to happen after SWOT and before finalizing goals
3. Agreement on a relatively short list of high-priority mid to long-term goals (2-6 years,
occasionally longer) and re-visit at least every two years.
4. Agreement on short-term (1-2 year) objectives necessary to make progress toward the mid to
long-term goals.
a. SWOT analysis annually
b. Review short-term objectives annually
5. Listing of specific and measurable organizational tactics and implementation measures necessary
to achieve the objectives and, ultimately, the goals.
a. Quarterly reports
b. Check in with City Council
6. A systematic plan for measuring progress and modifying, as necessary, the goals, objectives and
tactics.
a. Quarterly reports-put them on Council agendas
b. Citizen surveys
c. Administrative measures
d. Both council and staff may need to seek clarification on how progress should be
measured
e. Council needs to provide feedback mechanisms for ensuring that staff has clarification
f. Use boards and commissions as a primary information source for decision-making and
measurement
g. Develop both qualitative and quantitative measures
City Council - Goal Setting
March 8, 2014
Page 4 of 10
Frequently mentioned themes for Ashland's future:
1) Leader in innovation in land use, economic development, and resource management
2) Maintain a continuous focus on community sustainability actions
a) Seek energy independence/neutrality
b) Seek to become more self-reliant
c) Focus on measures to achieve a high level of self-reliance for goods and services
d) Seek to achieve carbon neutrality
e) Anticipate the effects of climate change and plan accordingly
f) Engage in sustainable forestry practices
g) Fully implement the Ashland Forest Resiliency Project
h) Examine "STAR" Community Sustainability Planning Framework
3) Maintaining and improving Ashland's high quality of life is paramount
a) Protect and enhance the natural, cultural and recreational resources that make Ashland unique
b) Build on Ashland's "sense of place" and small town feel
c) Strengthen partnerships and programs that enable all citizens to meet their basic needs
4) Promoting and achieving a "family friendly" community
a) Pursue affordable housing opportunities, especially workforce housing commensurate with local
employment opportunities
b) Seek pathways for SOU graduates to remain in the community
c) Address "aging in place" issues and needs
5) Overall excellence in "governance" becomes the recognized norm.
a) A sustained focus on leadership development-both internally and externally
b) Establishment of collaborative community and regional partnerships
c) Effective citizen communication and engagement
d) There is a high level of tolerance for all viewpoints
e) ' Governance that is transparent
f) Boards and commissions are fully engaged in supporting the strategic plan
g) Increase effectiveness in regional and state policy arenas
h) Become more regionally connected
i) Charter is updated based on "best practices"
j) Empower community partners to help achieve the goals
6) Achieve excellence in infrastructure management and modernization
a) Recognize the constraints of the watershed and plan accordingly
b) Complete the downtown transportation plan element
c) Replace City Hall with consolidated office space that is safe, welcoming, fosters improved
communications and serves the community long into the future
d) Work to keep utilities efficient and affordable
7) Creation of new economic opportunities and diversification while strengthening support of
Ashland's existing economic base
a) Examine and remove certain barriers to business start-up opportunities
b) Create predictable pathways for development of employment lands
City Council - Goal Setting
March 8, 2014
Page 5 of 10
c) Take advantage of new technologies for which Ashland is primed based on its fiber network,
workforce, and other assets
8) Efficient, innovative and affordable public services
9) Comprehensive review and common understanding of core services, service levels and financial
resources
a) The community is engaged in a conversation about core services, desired service levels and
alternative or more efficient funding mechanisms.
b) A sustainable model is developed for parks and recreation services that commensurate with the
prioritization, funding and administration of other core city services.
10) Provide for the immediate and long-term public safety needs of the community
Ashland SWOT (Strengths/Weaknesses/Opportunities/Threats) - EXERCISE
1) Strengths
a) Talented citizens
b) Purity of the water
c) Cultural opportunities
d) Full spectrum of education opportunities
e) People feel safe here
f) Innovative businesses
g) Lively downtown
h) Natural environment
i) Walkability
j) Climate
k) Abundance of world-class parks
1) Cultural assets
m) Know our neighborhoods-strong neighborhoods
n) Small town feel
o) The Shakespeare festival alone has over 100,000 visitors each year
p) City staff is experienced and excellent
q) Ashland is well-known
r) People come from everywhere to be here-both visitors and permanent residents
s) The same people have been coming to visit here for many years
t) Involved citizenry
u) The town is small enough that our problems are not intractable
v) We have a very charitable community
w) Our citizens are self-confident
x) We are at a size where it is still possible to do things face to face
y) The community holds their elected officials accountable
z) We are an easy one-day drive to Portland and S.F.
aa) We are forward thinking/progressive
bb) Unique political make-up
cc) High diversity of activities
City Council - Goal Setting
March 8, 2014
Page 6 of 10
i) Recreation
ii) Tourism
iii) Social activities
iv) Political activities
v) Faith-based
dd) High quality and diverse/alternative health care systems
ee) Proximity to increasingly strong and well-know wine industry
ff) Excellent culinary options
gg) Smithsonian Lemelson Center for American History Museum 2015 exhibit studying AFR and
other local creative invention and innovation ideas
hh) Building film industry
ii) International businesses
jj) City services not found in other places
kk) Local control over critical infrastructure
II) City amenities and services that many cities don't have
mm) Relatively low property taxes
nn) Unique chamber of commerce
oo) Large number of community activities and festivals
pp) Long history of socially responsible chamber of commerce
qq) Large number of service organizations that are focused on the community
rr) Healthy, active, highly educated senior population
ss) Compact urban form
tt) Excellent community facilities
no) High citizen retention rate
vv) Strong financial position compared with other jurisdictions
ww) Proximity to Medford
xx) City is visually attractive
2) Weaknesses
a) We lose families when they reach their 30s
b) We have a male-dominated senior staff
c) The community lacks racial diversity
d) Public discourse can get hurtful/disrespectful
e) Huge gap between town and gown
f) We lack economic diversity
g) We are not view as an easy place to develop
h) High cost of living/affordable housing/land/etc.
i) Lack of family wage jobs
j) Drug and alcohol addiction
k) Lack of available and appropriate mental health treatment options
1) 1-5 location attracts transients
m) We are perceived as "weird"
n) Lack of good transit system
City Council - Goal Setting
March 8, 2014
Page 7 of 10
o) Lack diverse resources to fund all our system needs
p) Lack of water security
q) Tourist economy is fragile
r) Rats and deer
s) Aging infrastructure
t) Future financial capacity will be challenging
u) Airshed can be problematic
v) Lack of retail diversity
w) Negative perception of our land use regulations
x) We tend to over-regulate in order to solve problems
y) Perception of arbitrary and capricious land use decision making
z) Downtown is at risk for fire and earthquakes
aa) Small vocal groups/individuals can make or break development projects
bb) We are sometimes too involved in process and not involved enough in results
cc) It's difficult logistically for families to live here
dd) School schedules are inconsistent
cc) Students lack local social opportunities
ff) SOU instability (especially funding model)
gg) Uncertainly around Mt. Ashland
hh) Lack of workforce housing
ii) NIMBY issues
J) Resistance to change
kk) Desire to change Ashland in the image of where others came from
II) Stalled conservation plan
min) Failure to integrate newcomers into the community
nn) Staff near retirement
cc) Thin on administrative staff
pp) Lack of council support staff
qq) Potential loss of institutional memory
rr) Lack of succession planning/funding
ss) High incidence of drug and alcohol abuse among young people
tt) Difficulty in providing competitive pay and benefits to employees
uu) Employees can't often afford to live here
vv) Lack of diverse stock of housing supply
ww) Lack of parking and multi-modal transportation plan
xx) Gaps in the health care system
3) Opportunities
a) To recognize SOU as a generator of business opportunities
b) SOU/city relationships
c) E-commerce overlay
d) Nurture tech industries and other start-ups
e) Nurture emerging markets
City Council - Goal Setting
March 8, 2014
Page 8 of 10
f) Market and further develop AFN. Improve penetration/increase related revenues. Retire the debt
in 2024.
g) Opportunity for energy aggregation
h) Engage an educated and resource heavy public in conservation measures
i) Make our airport more robust as an enterprise
j) Plan for climate change
k) To make the watershed safer and increase multi-use opportunities while also protecting its
integrity
1) To make better use of our Imperatrice property.
in) Croman property redevelopment
n) Film industry growth
o) City hall replacement
p) Clean-up the railroad district and re-use
q) Examine underperforming assets
r) Take advantage of local talent
s) Strengthen local non-profits
t) Develop food security locally and regionally (promote local farms, community gardens, friendly
ordinances, etc.)
u) Optimize the downtown-guide the reinvestment opportunities
v) In addition, reinvest and optimize opportunities in other commercial districts
w) Position ourselves as an incubator of high-tech
x) Leverage our high profile to have more influence in our county and state
y) Leverage existing regional relationships to a much greater degree
z) Use our relationship with the parks commission to develop a long-term collaborative plan for
moving forward
aa) To continue to build social equity assets/ideas (example: resource center) to help those in the
community at risk
bb) Leverage funding and building partnerships to explore new funding opportunities
cc) Use existing financial tools to support economic development (e.g. urban renewal, enterprise
zones, tax credits, etc.)
dd) Use existing experienced leadership to do train and mentor employees
cc) Opportunity to use dry seasons to get the community to adopt "water smart" habits
ff) Develop freight rail opportunities
gg) Review the charter
4) Threats
a) Natural disaster
b) PERS
c) Lack of meaningful home preparedness
d) Climate change
e) Instability of financial systems
f) Water supply insecurity
g) Changing economy
City Council - Goal Setting
March 8, 2014
Page 9 of 10
h) Technology-keeping pace
i) Neighboring counties--insecurity
j) Aging population
k) SOU insecurity/uncertainty
1) Drugs and alcohol culture among youth
m) Coin in unication-finding best ways to communicate with our population
n) Secure methods of protecting our technology infrastructure
o) Pending timber legislation
p) Mt. Ashland instability
q) Increasing utility rates
r) Changing tax base based on relative value of newly created housing
s) Future revenue streams don't match up with anticipated service levels
t) Future of library services
u) State legislation and/or constitutional amendments/initiatives that affect local revenue streams
and/or local control
v) Federal gridlock
w) We have a tendency to be destructive in our public discourse
x) Tourism industry disruptions
y) Aging tourists
z) Uncertainty with rail
aa) Lack of participation in government by younger adults
We value:
1. Meaningful engagement by Boards, Commissions and members of the public.
2. Ashland as a viable family community.
3. Our institutional, community and regional partnerships.
4. Innovation.
5. Our natural environment.
6. Excellence in governance.
7. Being prepared for climate change.
8. Economic opportunities that sustain a diversity of workers.
9. Excellent city services and infrastructure.
10. Diverse views
City Council - Goal Setting
March 8, 2014
Page 10 of 10
Goal Topics
Governance
Organization
Physical Infrastructure
Public Safety
Economy
Health and Human Service
Natural and built environment
Climate and energy
Ashland 2020 - To be completed by June 30, 2014
Next steps:
1) Organize opportunities by goal topic
2) Finalize goal topics
3) Filter opportunity subjects
4) Express surviving opportunities as potential goal statements
5) Choose preliminary goals by consensus or majority vote, if necessary [weed out items for which
there isn't agreement]
6) Identify specific objectives for each preliminary goal including measures, resources, and
timeline
a) Seek feedback from boards and commissions and public [at some point before finalizing]
b) Invite staff input
c) Make adjustments as appropriate
7) Tactics are developed by operational departments/entities and review by council
8) Finalize the values list in consideration of the selected goals
9) Consider crafting and adopting mission statement
10) Final adoption by 6/30/14
11) Compare final strategic plan with 2025 aspirations
Session ended 4:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Barbara Christensen, City Recorder
ASHLAND DOWNTOWN PARKING MANAGEMENT & CIRCULATION AD HOC ADVISORY COMMITTEE
MINUTES
February 5, 2014
'these minutes arc pending approval by the Committee
CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 3:30 p.m. in Pioneer Hall, 73 Winbum Way.
Regular members present: Lisa Beam, Michael Dawkins, Rich Kaplan, Dave Young, Craig Anderson, John
Williams, Emile Amarotico, Joe Collonge, Cynthia Rider, Marie Donovan
Regular members absent:, Pam Hammond, John Fields and Liz Murphy
Ex officio (non-voting) members present: Katharine Flanagan, Bill Molnar, Mike Faught, Lee Tuneberg, Rich
Rosenthal, Dave Kanner (arrived at 4:00 pm), Mike Gardiner
Ex officio (non-voting) members absent: Dennis Slattery and Sandra Slattery
University of Oregon members present: Bob Parker, Nicholas Meltzer and Amanda D'Souza, Andrew Dutterer,
Taylor Eidt, Nestor Guevara and Eli Tome (graduate student team)
City of Ashland Staff members present: Tami De Mille-Campos
INTRODUCTIONS
The committee & the University of Oregon members went around and introduced themselves.
CHAIR ELECTIONS
Kaplan/Williams m/s to nominate David Young as Chair.
All Ayes.
Kaplan m/s to nominate Michael Dawkins as Vice Chair.
All Ayes.
Chair Young read an email from Colin Swales into record (see attached).
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Minutes of December 5, 2013 were approved by unanimous consent.
PUBLIC FORUM
None
PROJECT STATUS UPDATE
Schedule of upcoming meetings:
February 51h- Short term strategies and examples will be presented. Discussion will include issues and opportunities
of implementing strategies in Ashland.
March 2nd- First phase survey results and accessibility improvements will be presented. Discussion will include
response to survey results in relation to short term strategies'.
April- Proposed mid-week monitoring.
May 7th- Second phase survey results and long term strategies will be presented. Discussion will include strategy
implementation and funding.
June 41^- Packages of policy/program options and community opinions will be presented. Discussion will include
additional project needs.
Additional- Evening monitoring, public open house, additional presentations
Survey:
*Decided a two-tiered survey would be best
*First tier gathers public perceptions regarding downtown use
*Second tier gathers opinions on policy options
*Allows for committee discussion and then public input
*Reviewed, proofed and tested in-house for expediency
Anderson stated he was wondering if visual cues could be added to the second survey to aid the person taking the
ASHLAND DOWNTOWN PARKING MANAGEMENT & CIRCULATION AD HOC ADVISORY COMMITTEE
February 5, 2014
Page 1 or3
survey.
MUNICIPAL PARKING PROGRAMS OVERVIEW
The historical background used includes:
*2001 Downtown Plan Phase II
*1988 Downtown Plan
*Ashland in Action 2000
*Ashland Downtown Parking Analysis 1999/2000
*Nelson/Nygaard Downtown Peer Review
*Phase II Study "Key Issues"
*Informed this study
Liz,Murphy asked if there are any long term City expectations that the committee should keep in mind.
Michael Dawkins would like the white papers to be made available to the committee. He feels that they have a lot of
really good information. Faught stated that we would do that.
Downtown Plan Recommendations:
*Divided downtown into different zones
*Zones have different "Guiding Principles"
*Revisit these at the next meeting
*Strategies include:
*Wayfinding
'Marketing & Communications
*Residential Permit Program
*Pricing/Structure Design Principles
Solutions:
*Increase Capacity through:
*Education
*Enforcement
*Regulation
*Supply
*Manage Demand through:
*Transportation Demand Management (TDM)
*Wayfinding
*Accessibility Improvements
Enforcement/Regulation solutions:
*Efficiently manage parking demand
*Regulation is a low cost alternative that utilizes existing supply
*Enforcement further dis-incentivizes undesired behaviors
Warious levels and combinations of enforcement and regulation
Transportation Demand Management solutions:
*Specifically talking about:
*Incentive programs, also known as Transportation Options programs
*Accessibility improvements
*Transportation demand management (TDM) programs work to reduce the need for single occupancy vehicles
*Accessibility improvements in the form of bicycle infrastructure
EducationlWayfinding solutions:
*Education and Outreach
*Educate users of the transportation system on both the availability and value of parking
*Aid in redistributing existing demand
ASHLAND DOWNTOWN PARKING MANAGEMENT & CIRCULATION AD HOC ADVISORY COMMITTEE
February 5, 2014
Page 2 o13
*Wayfinding
*Direct users where to park during times of high demand, and subsequently how to access areas of interest on
foot
*Lower cost option to redistribute demand and improve customer experience
Interactive Conversation
The committee broke up into five groups and moved throughout the five stations. The groups were asked to identify
issues/opportunities for Ashland in relation to programmatic options and offer any ideas. See the attached summary
pages for further information related to the interactive conversations.
CLOSINGINEXT STEPS
*Survey analysis
*Gathering more data
*OSF patrons
*Ticketers
*Employees
*Calculate demand
ADJOURNMENT
Meeting adjourned at 5:30 pm
Respectfully submitted,
Tami De Mille-Campos, Administrative Assistant
ASHLAND DOWNTOWN PARKING MANAGEMENT & CIRCULATIONAD HOC ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Febmary 5, 2014
Page 3 of 3
CITY OF
ASHLAND
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
January 14, 2014
CALL TO ORDER
Chair Melanie Mindlin called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street.
Commissioners Present: Staff Present:
Troy J. Brown, Jr. Bill Molnar, Community Development Director
Michael Dawkins Derek Severson, Associate Planner
Richard Kaplan April Lucas, Administrative Supervisor
Debbie Miller
Melanie Mindlin
Tracy Peddicord
Absent Members: Council Liaison:
None Mike Morris, absent
ANNOUCEMENTS
Community Development Director Bill Molnar brought attention to the Commission attendance report which was distributed at
the beginning of the meeting, and clarified the Commission chair elections will take place in May due to upcoming changes to
the Uniform Policies and Procedures ordinance. He also announced the January Study Session will be a joint meeting with the
City Council to discuss and prioritize future planning projects.
CONSENTAGENDA
A. Approval of Minutes.
1. November 26, 2013 Study Session.
2. December 10, 2013 Regular Meeting.
Commissioners Kaplan/Miller m/s to approve the Consent Agenda. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed.
(Commissioner Brown abstained from 11126113 minute approval,' Commissioner Peddicord abstained from 12110113 minute approval]
PUBLIC FORUM
No one came forward to speak.
TYPE II PUBLIC HEARING
A. PLANNING ACTION: #2013-01506
SUBJECT PROPERTY: North Mountain & Fair Oaks Avenues
OWNERS: Ayala Properties, L.L.C.IScott Lissberger Revocable Trust (Scott Lissberger, Trustee)
APPLICANT: Ayala Properties, L.L.C.
DESCRIPTION: A request for a Modification of Planning Action #2013-806, a Site Review Permit approved by the
Planning Commission in August, which allowed for the construction of a grouping of three-story mixed use
buildings consisting of four commercial spaces and ten parking spaces on the ground floor and ten residential
units on the second and third floors for the vacant parcel (Tax Lot #700) at the corner of North Mountain and Fair
Oaks Avenues. The August approval also included a Tree Removal Permit to remove seven Siberian Elm trees in
the adjacent alley, and a request for a Modification of the original Meadowbrook Park II Subdivision approval to
adjust the number of residential units allocated between the four subject parcels to allow a total of 40 dwelling
units, where only ten units had previously been proposed, based on the permitted densities within the NM-C
• Ashland Planning Commission
January 14, 2014
Page 1 of 6
district. The modifications requested here involve: 1) clarification of the proposal's density allocations, parking
management, and number of groundfloor commercial spaces between the subject properties; 2) an increase in the
number of upper floor residential units on Tax Lot #700 from ten to 14; and 3) modifications to the proposed
building design for Tax Lot #700. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: North Mountain, Neighborhood Central
Overlay; ZONING: NM-C; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 391 E 04AD TAX LOTS: 700, 800, 1400, 1500 and 5900.
Commissioner Mindlin read aloud the public hearing procedures for land use hearings.
Ex Parte Contact
Commissioners Dawkins and Mindlin declared site visits; Mindlin noted she observed the parking situation and stated during her
visit all of the parking in front of one of the Julian Square buildings was occupied. No ex parte contact was reported.
Staff Report
Associate Planner Derek Severson explained this is a continued hearing from the December 10, 2013 Planning Commission
meeting and stated the parking allocation and how Plum Ridge Court is used will likely be the key issue for discussion tonight.
He spoke to the 120-day requirement for final decision and stated because of this requirement the Commission will need to
adopt the Findings tonight. He also mentioned one of the items raised at the last hearing was the claim that proper notice was
not provided. He stated even though it is not a requirement, staff has rectified this concern by mailing a written notice of
tonight's hearing to all parties that provided testimony for Planning Action #2013-00806, in addition to properties owners within
200 ft. of the site.
Public Testimony
Vida Taylor/913 Plum Ridge/Shared her concerns regarding lack of parking for the proposed units, increased density, vehicle
lane obstruction from parked cars, increased traffic, incompatible building design, and the need for handicap spaces and
emergency vehicle access.
Rick Harris/190 Oak Street #1/Commented on the practice of shared parking and noted his building has five parking spaces
shared between two residential and two commercial units. He stated this type of shared use is common in Ashland and ensures
parking spaces are well utilized both day and night. Mr. Harris commented on density and clarified the proposed building will
have 14 units (not 40), and pointed out that the concept for this area since the early 2000's has been for a dense city center. He
added that in order for the commercial uses to be viable there must be adequate density to support it, and voiced his support for
the project as proposed.
Joanne Johns/979 Camelot/Stated she is opposed to the density and believes 14 units is too many, and shared her concerns
with parking and the potential for more cars parked on Camelot and Overlook. Ms. Johns expressed concern with the first floor
commercial spaces being temporarily used as residential and stated this proposal will not benefit the people who reside in the
area.
Applicant's Rebuttal
Alan Harper/130 A Street, Suite 6/Noted the concerns raised regarding parking and the coordination of Plum Ridge Court. He
stated they are supportive of their application as submitted, however if this is a major concern for the Planning Commission they
have prepared an alternate layout that adjusts the lot lines and consolidates the parking spaces on Plum Ridge Court onto the
other tax lots. He stated this removes the question of where residents will park and stated Plum Ridge Court would be dedicated
as a City right-of-way. Mr. Harper noted if the Commission selects option 13', Conditions 7 and 9 would need to be altered.
Mark Knox/45 West Nevada/Stated they believe their original proposal works well, but have offered this alternate in order to
address some of the comments made about parking. Mr. Knox clarified the land use code does not require parking to be on-site,
but rather just off-street, and stated the master plan has always envisioned this as a high density, mixed-use area.
Mr. Allen clarified under their alternate proposal Plum Ridge Court goes away as a separate lot; the parking spaces are shifted
onto the adjacent lots, and Plum Ridge Court becomes a travel way. Additionally, the parking spaces would be designated for
their buildings.
Ashland Planning Commission
January 14, 2014
Page 2 of 6
Staff noted their concern with plan 'B' and clarified it was not the intent of the master plan to have a pool of parking on private
lots.
Deliberations & Decision
Commissioners Dawkins/Brown m/s to approve Planning Action #2013-01506 (Plan A) with the conditions of approval
recommended by staff. DISCUSSION: Commissioner Dawkins voiced his support for the project. He stated this was always
envisioned as a dense area with a commercial core, and stated there needs to be a certain amount of density to bring
commercial use to this neighborhood. He added he is not concerned with the parking and does not believe plan 'B is
necessary. Commissioner Brown stated the proposal conforms to the master plan for this neighborhood and stated it was never
intended to have parking on-site for each unit. Commissioner Miller noted her concerns with density and lack of parking.
Commissioner Kaplan voiced his support for plan'B' which would provide dedicated spaces for the residential units.
Commissioner Peddicord voiced her support for the motion and stated the original option offers more flexibility. Commissioner
Brown stated the code is clear and requires one off-site parking space per unit. Roll Call Vote: Commissioners Dawkins,
Peddicord, Brown, and Mindlin, YES. Commissioners Miller and Kaplan, NO. Motion passed 4-2.
Approval of Findings
Suggestion was made to strike the sentence at the top of Page 9 that reads: "The Commission finds that the proposed parking
allocations and the stipulated limitations on Plum Ridge Court parking will provide similar assurances to those applicable under
the Parking Management Strategies found in AMC 18.92.050 which provide that off-street parking requirements may be
reduced up to 50% through the application of credits available for on-street parking, alternative vehicles, mixed or joint uses,
shared parking, transportation demand management plans or transit facilities." And to modify the following sentences to read:
"As proposed, the 41 allocated parking spaces on Plum Ridge Court would serve upper floor (permanent) residential units on
the private parking lots although these spaces would be unsigned and available like any on-street parking. The remaining Plum
Ridge Court spaces would be available to visitors or commercial customers..."
Commissioners MindlinlBrown mis to modify the Findings as described. Roll Call Vote: Commissioners Brown,
Peddicord, Miller, Dawkins, Kaplan and Mindlin, Yes. Motion passed 6-0.
Commissioners DawkinslPeddicord m/s to approved the modified Findings. Roll Call Vote: Commissioners Brown,
Dawkins, Kaplan, Miller, Peddicord, and Mindlin, YES. Motion passed 6.0.
DISCUSSION ITEMS
A. Short Term Rentals on Owner Occupied Properties in Single Family Zoning Districts - An Introduction of Potential
Issues.
Commissioner Mindlin left the meeting due to a potential public perception of conflict of interest.
Community Development Director Bill Molnar explained the City Council has already made changes to the requirements for
short-term rentals in the R-2 zone, and has asked staff and the Planning Commission to take public input on owner occupied
short-term rentals in single family zones, and if necessary recommend amendments. Additionally, the Commission has been
asked to evaluate the City requirement that limits traveler's accommodations to only those properties located within 200-ft. of a
boulevard, avenue, or neighborhood collector.
Public Testimony
Barbara Hetlandl985 East Main/Stated she is a realtor in Ashland and believes changing the R-1 zone to allow for traveler's
accommodations is a huge change and would jeopardize the livability of Ashland and impact property values. Ms. Hetland
stated there are very few people who are asking for this change, but doing so would impact everyone who lives and works here.
She commented that most people living in R-1 zones are unaware this discussion is happening and because this is such a
major change this should be placed before the entire town for a vote.
James Orr/407 Clinton/Read aloud his written statement. (See Exhibit 2074-07, attached)
Mr. Orr added his neighbors house is only 12 ft. from his, and slated from June to October 2011 they observed 43 different cars
parked in the driveway.
Ashland Planning Commission
January 14, 2014
Page 3 of 6
Lois Van Aken1140 Central/Cited the City's goal to support stable neighborhoods and stated this is accomplished through
zoning. Ms. Van Aken stated the R-1 zones were created for residential use and to foster a suburban and family atmosphere
where neighborhoods would flourish; not to house business such as short term tourist lodging. She stated allowing this change
would break the promises made to all the residents who purchased homes in the R-1 zone. She stated there is a small group of
individuals who have been operating illegally and want to continue to do so, and they want all of Ashland to change for their
financial benefit.
Ellen Campbell/120 Gresham/Questioned the thinking behind converting the remaining residential zones that have been solely
for Ashland residents in order to grow more tourism businesses. Ms. Campbell stated allowing more and unneeded lodging
businesses in the R-1 zone will undermine sustainability and livability in Ashland. She added the existing ordinances have been
in effect for many decades and have worked well, and recommended the Commission not allow short term rentals in single
family zones.
Tom DuBois/690 S Mountain/Stated he is representing the 70 members of Ashland HOSTS (Host Occupied Short Term
Stays). Mr. DuBois stated he has stopped operating his bedroom rental unit since being informed this was illegal, and stated
they want to change the City's requirements. He voiced support for the adoption of a reasonable, easy to understand ordinance
that will allow HOSTS to operate short term rentals in residential zones. He slated the City's Comprehensive Plan supports
economic activity if it is not incompatible to do so, and also speaks to the benefits of mixed use neighborhoods as long as they
do not disturb the main intent of the neighborhood. He stated HOSTS are in complete agreement with this and identified three
issues for the Commission's consideration: 1) maintaining neighborhood integrity, appearance, livability and quality of life; 2)
possible impact on long term rental stock; and 3) ease of ordinance compliance. He stated if the City approves this change they
would like the requirements to be as easy as possible for people to understand and would like the process for compliance to be
easy and inexpensive, with hefty fines for non-compliance.
Abby Hogge11700 Parker/Supports HOSTS and stated it is unjustified to assume there will be a large number of people who
will rush to convert their long term rentals to short term accommodations. Ms. Hogge stated the approval process for an
accessory residential unit (ARU) is already lengthy and expensive, and asked the Commission to consider the benefits of
allowing ARUs in R-1 zones as short term rentals. She requested the Commission treat the consideration of ARUs the same as
an attached bedroom, and suggested the City consider conducting a trial period.
Larry Chase/1271 Munson/Supports HOSTS and believes this falls into the same category as home occupations, which allows
residents to run a home-based business and have up to eight visitors per day. Mr. Chase stated the existing laws regarding
noise and signage provide sufficient protection from disruptive behavior, and noted short term rentals would have far fewer
vehicles trips than other home based businesses. He stated the impact is very minimal and none of his neighbors were even
aware he was operating a short term rental, and asked the Commission to permit this activity on all properties and not just those
within 200 ft. of an arterial or collector street.
Victoria Weiss/590 FernwoodlStated she is very concerned to hear there are 70 of these rentals operating in Ashland. Ms.
Weiss stated they did a lot of research when selecting their home and are concerned with security, traffic, noise, and community
impacts. Ms. Weiss asked the Commission to take into account what citizens expect when they purchase homes in the R-1
single family zone.
Philip Neujahr1590 FernwoodlStated they moved to Ashland because it is a nice place to live and urged the Commission to
not allow short term rentals in single family zones, which would give them alternating neighbors and lower property values.
Commission Discussion
Mr. Molnar clarified it would be helpful if the Commission could identify any questions or areas they would like staff to look into.
The commissioners shared their comments and questions on this issue. Commissioner Brown stated this comes down to trying
to fix a problem that does not exist, and stated R-1 districts are largely about quality of life. He stated there is only a very small
percentage of the population that wants this to change, and noted the expectations people have when they buy into a R-1
neighborhood. Commissioner Kaplan stated it is premature for him to have a position on this and stated there is a big difference
between owner occupied units versus no owners. He also noted the impacts long-term rentals can create. Commissioner
Ashland Planning Commission
January 14, 2014
Page 4 of 6
Peddicord stated she does not have strong feelings one way or the other, but agreed that any rental needs to be owner
occupied. Commissioner Miller questioned the actual need for these types of accommodations. Mr. Molnar noted the packet
materials contain information on occupancy rates, but noted there are other considerations including the ability to offer different
lodging types. Mr. Molnar also clarified the City has a Code Compliance Specialist and he has compiled a lengthy list of illegal
accommodations and there are well over 100.
Mr. Molnar thanked the Commission for their initial comments and announced this item will come back for further at an
upcoming meeting.
NEW BUSINESS
A. Select Planning Commission Representative to Beautification Committee.
Commissioner Dawkins volunteered to serve as the Planning Commission representative on the Beautification Committee.
B. Select Planning Commission Member to Serve on Building Appeals Board.
Commissioner Brown volunteered to serve on the Building Appeals Board.
ADJOURNMENT
Meeting adjourned at 10:10 p.m.
Ashland Planning Commission
January 14, 2014
Page 5 of 6
Exhibit #2014-01
To: Ashland Planning Commissioners
As Ashland residents who live in a community zoned R-1 for single families and who have had the unfortunate
experience of discovering shortly after we moved into our new home in 2010 that our next door neighbor was
illegally operating a vacation rental, both my wife and I are strongly opposed to allowing traveler's
accommodations in R-1 single family zones.
We purchased our home expecting that we would get to know our neighbors in a community with long-term
residents. We would not have purchased the home if we had known that large numbers of strangers would be
coming and going right next door for most of the year. With support from the City Planning Office and our
homeowner's association, our neighbor was persuaded to cease short-term rentals. Now we discover the City
Planning Commission is considering recommending a change to R-1 zoning that would allow our neighbor to
resume that activity.
We believe such a change would basically destroy the concept of single family residential areas in Ashland. The
Planning Commission and the City Council need to uphold the existing R-1 zoning laws that promote and
encourage a suitable environment for family life and maintain property values. The City of Ashland should not
break faith with those residents that paid the price to live in a neighborhood of single families.
Jim & Helen Orr
407 Clinton Street
Ashland
Ashland Planning Commission
January 14, 2014
Page 6 of 6
CITY OF
ASHLAND
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL & PLANNING COMMISSION
JOINT STUDY SESSION
MINUTES
January 28, 2014
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor John Stromberg called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street.
City Council Present: Planning Commissioners Present:
John Stromberg, Mayor Melanie Mindlin, Chair
Pam Marsh Troy J. Brown, Jr.
Mike Morris Michael Dawkins
Rich Rosenthal Richard Kaplan
Dennis Slattery Debbie Miller
Tracy Peddicord
Staff Present: Absent Members:
Dave Kanner, City Administrator Greg Lemhouse
Dave Lohman, City Attorney Carol Voisin
Bill Molnar, Community Development Director
Maria Harris, Planning Manager
Brandon Goldman, Senior Planner
Derek Severson, Associate Planner
April Lucas, Administrative Supervisor
DISCUSSION ITEMS
A. Discussion and Prioritization of Future Planning Initiatives.
Mayor John Stromberg provided some background on this item. He explained on December 17, 2013, the City Council
discussed the draft list of future planning projects compiled by staff and recommended that a joint meeting with the Planning
Commission be scheduled so that the two bodies could prioritize the list of projects.
Community Development Director Bill Molnar provided a brief summary of each of the projects, which are:
• Review Zoning Around Downtown
• Winburn Way Corridor Analysis
• Vertical Housing Development Zones
• Housing Element Update
• Croman Mill District Plan
• Railroad Property Master Plan
• North Ashland Gateway Overlay
• Assessment of Approach to Master Planning
• Airport Plan
• Infill Strategies
Mayor Stromberg asked each Planning Commissioner to identify their top priority. Commissioner Miller and Commissioner
Brown selected assessment of approach to master planning; Commissioner Mindlin selected infill strategies; Commissioner
Peddicord selected vertical housing development zones and infill strategies; Commissioner Kaplan selected vertical housing
development zones; and Commissioner Dawkins selected the Railroad Property Master Plan.
Ashland City Council & Planning Commission
Joint Study Session
January 28, 2014
Page 1 of 2
City Administrator Dave Kanner called attention to the regional problem solving process and reminded the group that Ashland
declined to add any land to its urban growth boundary and did so with the promise that Ashland would adopt innovative infill
strategies to accommodate future growth. Mr. Molnar indicated staff has the resources to take on two significant projects within
the next 12-18 months, and this would leave some room to take on any minor projects that may arise.
Mayor Stromberg asked for the Planning Commissioners second choice. Commissioner Kaplan selected the Railroad Property
Master Plan; Commissioner Brown selected the review of zoning around downtown followed by vertical housing development
zones; Commissioner Miller selected the review of zoning around downtown; Commissioner Peddicord selected assessment of
master planning; Commissioner Dawkins selected infill strategies and vertical housing development zones; and Commissioner
Mindlin selected the Housing Element update.
Mr. Kanner updated the group on the status of the railroad property. He explained the owner of the properly came forward with
a plan to clean up the property; however they proposed cleaning it to DEC standards and not to the City's standards. He stated
cleaning to DEC standards would leave quite a bit of contamination on the site and the property owners decided to re-evaluate
their options and whether they want to clean the property to the City's standards, which would enable them to have a much
greater development potential.
The Planning Commission and City Council held general discussion on the potential projects. Councilor Marsh recommended
they pursue infill strategies, downtown planning and circulation, and the approach to master planning. She added the master
planning item is more of a discussion and evaluation than a long range project and believes all three can be addressed with the
given resources. Councilor Morris stated with the exception of a few, most of the projects are.inter-related and agreed that the
approach to master planning needs to be looked.
Councilor Rosenthal asked staff which project they would choose. Senior Planner Brandon Goldman stated vertical housing
development is a concrete project that could be completed within a short timeframe and provide outcomes; and it also relates to
the vision for the City to provide workforce housing and would fold in well with staff's workload. Planning Manager Maria Harris
stated infill strategies is a project that touches on almost all aspects of planning and hits on transportation, jobs, housing, and
also looks at fulfilling our regional obligation. Community Development Director Bill Molnar selected infill strategies and stated
this project moves beyond land use planning and will require an inter-department approach to the issue. Associate Planner
Derek Severson also selected infill strategies. He noted he was the staff member who represented the City of Ashland at the
regional problem solving meetings and advocated for this concept.
Mayor Stromberg asked for the group to provide any final feedback to staff. Comment was made that it is clear citywide infill
strategies has been identified as a priority. It was noted that Winburn Way Corridor Analysis, Review of Downtown Zoning, and
Downtown Parking Management and Circulation Study, which is already in progress, should be combined and made a top
priority. Additionally, it is clear that master planning should be looked at. The Mayor recommended that the Airport Plan also be
included on this list and requested Mr. Kanner put together a proposal to move these items forward. Mr. Kanner acknowledged
this request and stated he would meet with staff, determine what resources can be dedicated to these projects, and bring
forward a proposal.
ADJOURNMENT
Meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m.
Ashland City Council & Planning Commission
Joint Study Session
January 28, 2014
Page 2 of 2
C I T Y OF
ASHLAND
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
STUDY SESSION
MINUTES
January 28, 2014
CALL TO ORDER
Chair Melanie Mindlin called the Study Session to order at 7:40 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 East Main
Street.
Commissioners Present: Staff Present:
Melanie Mindlin, Chair Bill Molnar, Community Development Director
Troy J. Brown, Jr. Maria Harris, Planning Manager
Michael Dawkins April Lucas, Administrative Supervisor
Richard Kaplan
Debbie Miller
Tracy Peddicord
Absent Members: Council Liaison:
None Mike Morris, absent
PUBLIC FORUM
No one came forward to speak.
DISCUSSION ITEMS
A. Unified Land Use Ordinance: Section 18.4 Site Development and Design Standards.
Planning Manager Maria Harris noted this is a short section and stated most of the edits were reorganizing and reformatting.
She explained tonight the Commission will review Chapter 18-4.4 Landscaping, Recycling and Refuse, Outdoor Lighting,
Fences and Walls and Chapter 184.5 Tree Preservation and Protection. She noted the recommendations from the City's
Conservation Specialist as well as input from the landscape professionals focus group has been incorporated, and highlighted
the key changes as follows:
• Landscape Plans -Temporary and Permanent Erosion Control Measure: This language has been moved and
combined with the preliminary grading and drainage plan in the Site Review Plan Requirements.
• Landscaping Requirements - Minimum Tree and Shrub Sizes: The proposed language establishes a one-gallon
minimum container size for shrubs and includes a reference to the existing hedge screening standard.
• Landscape Requirements - Mechanical Equipment Screening: The proposed language establishes standards and
identifies clear methods for screening mechanical equipment
• Landscape Requirements - Water Conserving Landscaping Design Standards: Edits and additions include: 1) non-
drought tolerant species are required to be located in a separate irrigation zone; 2) plants in the same irrigation zones
are required to have similar water needs unless irrigated by drip irrigation with emitters sized for individual plant water
needs; and 3) amend soil by adding mature compost and work soil amendment to depth of four to six inches.
• Landscape Requirements - Irrigation System Design Standards for Water Conserving Landscaping: Edits and
additions include: 1) separate irrigation zones based on water needs of plantings and types of sprinklers being used, 2)
equip irrigation zones with pressure regulator valves, and 3) use controllers with a water budget feature or the
capability of accepting an external rain or soil moisture sensor.
• Landscape Requirements - Exception to Water Conserving Landscaping Design Standards: Proposed amendment
slates an alternate design may be proposed if the applicant demonstrates that water use will be equal to or less than
what would occur if the standards are applied and if the proposal meets the criteria for an exception to the Site Design
and Development Standards.
Ashland Planning Commission Study Session
January 28, 2014
Page 1 of 2
• Recycling and Refuse Disposal Areas: The proposed language adds a requirement for disposal areas be placed in an
area that allows truck access and not located in any required front yard or required landscaped area.
• Tree Preservation and Protection: The proposed amendment limits tree protection plans to those developments
requiring a planning action and eliminates the tree protection plan requirement from projects that simply require a
building permit.
Ms. Harris noted an additional item that will come back'to the Commission is the Fire Department's request to exempt owners
from having to go through the tree removal approval process when bringing their properties into compliance with FireWise
standards. Comment was made expressing concern that people may use this as an excuse to remove trees and recommending
the City retain standards and an approval process. Additional comment was made requesting additional information on the
FireWise program and which actions are advisory and which are regulatory.
Ms. Harris clarified the screening requirements for mechanical equipment and explained why equipment placed on alleys is
exempt. She stated alleys were developed to be utility and service corridors and this was an impossible standard for most
commercial businesses to meet. Suggestion was made for staff lo,consider revising this language for clarity.
ADJOURNMENT
Meeting adjourned at 8:10 p.m.
Ashland Planning Commission Study Session
January 28, 2014
Page 2 of 2
C I T Y OF
ASHLAND
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
February 11, 2014
CALL TO ORDER
Chair Melanie Mindlin called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 East Main
Street.
Commissioners Present: Staff Present:
Troy J. Brown, Jr. Bill Molnar, Community Development Director
Michael Dawkins Derek Severson, Associate Planner
Richard Kaplan Amy Gunter, Assistant Planner
Debbie Miller April Lucas, Administrative Supervisor
Melanie Mindlin
Tracy Peddicord
Lynn Thompson
Absent Members: Council Liaison:
None Mike Morris, absent
ANNOUCEMENTS
Commissioner Kaplan provided an update on the Downtown Parking and Multi-Modal Circulation meeting;
Commissioner Mindlin welcomed Lynn Thompson to the Planning Commission; and Community Development
Director Bill Molnar announced upcoming meeting agenda items will include the Unified Land Use Ordinance, Normal
Neighborhood Final Plan, and Short-Term Home Rentals in R-1 Districts.
CONSENT AGENDA
A. Approval of Minutes.
1. January 14, 2014 Regular Meeting.
2. January 28, 2014 Joint Study Session.
3. January 28, 2014 Regular Study Session.
The following corrections were made to the minutes:
1) January 14, 2014 Regular Meeting minutes, page 3: First sentence under Short Term Rentals item should
read, "Commissioner Mindlin left the meeting due to a potential public perception of conflict of interest."
2) January 28, 2014 Joint Study Session minutes: Replace all instances of "Railroad District Master Plan" with
"Railroad Pro a Master Plan".
Commissioners Dawkins/Peddicord m/s to approve the Consent Agenda. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion
passed 6-0. [Commissioner Thompson abstained]
PUBLIC FORUM
No one came forward to speak.
Ashland Planning Commission
February 11, 2014
Page Iota
TYPE I APPEAL PUBLIC HEARING
A. PLANNING ACTION 2013.01421
SUBJECT PROPERTY: 270 N First Street
APPLICANT: RNN Properties LLC
DESCRIPTION: A request for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) approval to exceed maximum permitted
floor area (MPFA) in the Railroad Historic District and variances to the required side-yard setbacks for
the construction of a new residence on the property at 270 N First Street. The request includes the
removal of the existing residence. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Low Density Multi-Family
Residential; ZONING: R-2; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 391 E 09BA TAX LOT: 1300.
Commissioner Mindlin read aloud the public hearing procedures for land use hearings.
Ex Pane Contact
Commissioners Dawkins, Miller, Kaplan, Brown and Peddicord declared site visits. Commissioner Dawkins shared an
observation from his site visit and stated the green colored house on the south alley does not conform to the
diagrams in the Historic District Design Standards and it seems very out of place.
Staff Report
Assistant Planner Amy Gunter reviewed the approval criteria for a single family home in the R-2 District. She
explained this is an outright permitted use; however this application requires a conditional use permit because it
exceeds the maximum permitted floor area by 252 square foot and also requires a variance to the side yard
setbacks. Ms. Gunter explained the site is located in the Railroad Historic District and the lot is legal/non-conforming,
it is smaller than the minimum required lot size. She stated there is an existing residence on the site, however it is in
very poor condition and the applicants have already received a demolition permit approval. She stated the applicant's
propose to construct a new two-story home in nearly the same footprint as the existing residence, and noted the
proposal would widen the side yard setback on the north side from 0 feet to 3 feet.
Ms. Gunter brought attention to the Historic Commission's review of this proposal and stated they recommended
approval of this application with the addition of the following minor conditions: 1) that there be more space between
the double hung windows, 2) removal of the transom window over the second story doors, and 3) for the second
story doors to be French doors instead of sliders. Ms. Gunter explained this application was administratively
approved November 20, 2013 and following staffs approval a reconsideration request was filed. The reconsideration
request was denied by the Community Development Director on November 27, 2013 and the appellant then filed
their formal appeal, which is why this action is now before the Planning Commission. In her appeal, the appellant has
raised issue with the size of the home, the choice of materials, not being cohesive with the other homes in the
Historic District, the front yard setback, trees, parking, and open space requirements.
Ms. Gunter provided an overview of the applicant's proposal and site plan and outlined the related criteria. She
commented on the trees on the site and the arborists report, and clarified the parking as proposed is outright
permitted and is consistent with City standards. Ms. Gunter commented on the maximum permitted floor area and
clarified the ordinance allows applicants to exceed this limitation by up to 25% if they obtain a conditional use permit.
She added this is a discretionary approval intended to provide a higher level of review for proposed structures in the
context of the conditional use permit criteria as well as the Historic District Development Standards. In regards to the
variance request for the side yard setback, Ms. Gunter explained the applicant's proposal identifies the unusual
circumstance as a narrow lot width and stated this proposal would keep the south setback the same and increase the
north setback to 3 feet. Ms. Gunter also commented on the building's design elements and clarified the Historic
District Development Standards advocate for design features for new construction that are more contemporary in
design in historic neighborhoods.
Ms. Gunter concluded her presentation and stated staff believes this application meets the criteria for approval of a
conditional use permit as well as the criteria for the setback variance.
Ashland Planning Commission
February 11, 2014
Page 2 of 8
Questions of Staff
Comment was made questioning the use of stucco. Ms. Gunter stated the applicant could address the material
selections during their testimony.
Staff was asked to clarify the lot coverage. Ms. Gunter clarified the R-2 zone allows up to 65% lot coverage and the
applicant's are proposing 55%, which includes the parking.
Comment was made questioning if there are other residential structures in the vicinity with metal roofs. Ms. Gunter
stated there is an outbuilding at 270 Second Street that has a metal roof and there are two or three more structures
with metal roofs off the alley to the east across Second Street. She added most of the commercial buildings in the
neighborhood have metal roofs as well.
Applicant's Presentation
Mark Knox, Nisha Jackson, and John Turman addressed the Commission. Ms. Jackson explained they purchased
this home 9 months ago and while they knew it was in bad condition they had hoped they would be able to remodel
it. However after the inspection was completed it was deemed unsafe. She stated some of the challenges they have
faced with designing a new home are the 25 ft. wide parcel and the existing trees. Ms. Jacksons stated they have
worked hard to put together a compact footprint that would allow for a second floor and a second bedroom. She
clarified a metal roof was selected because they would like this home to be LEED certified and a metal roof would
allow for rain collection. She noted the design has gone through several revisions to accommodate the suggestions
of the Historic Commission, and highlighted their decision to increase the setback to 3 ft. off the alley. Ms. Jackson
stated they have followed all of the recommendations and have met the codes, and hopes the Planning Commission
will approve this application, just as the Historic Commission and staff did.
Mr. Knox commented that the lot's depth is much less than that of a standard historic district lot, and stated the
current house has no sense of entry and is in very poor condition. He noted the appellant's house is adjacent to the
applicant's, and they themselves recently went through a major remodel and addition. He stated the appellant's
parking is located in the right-of-way and is a commercial use with ramps out front, and has changed the character of
the streetscape. Mr. Knox stated the applicant's proposal is for a residence and the design is very compatible, just as
the Historic Commission and staff has found. He added if the Commission has concerns with the metal roof, it may
still be possible to do a LEED structure with another option, but hopes the Commission will not ask for this.
Ms. Jackson clarified for the Commission that they intend to save the boxwood tree on the site. She stated the
arborist recommended its removal, but that was before he knew they would be doing a slab foundation. She also
clarified the collector for the rain water would be placed in the backyard. When asked about the stucco material
selection, John Thurman (building designer) explained varying materials were selected to break up the massing. He
added in order to obtain LEED certification the slab needs to be wrapped with foam, and stucco siding works well for
this. Mr. Thurman commented on the overall design of the structure and stated the proposed home is located in a
transitional area and is much more appealing than the existing structure. He added the design combines elements of
the more modern commercial structures while keeping some of the elements of the traditional historic homes.
Comment was made expressing concern with the two-story design and whether this is compatible with the
streetscape and the Historic District Design Standards. Mr. Knox noted the adjacent home has two-stories, but the
volume is setback, and commented on the importance of having a varying streetscape with undulation. He added
there are other houses along this stretch that have two stories as well.
Appellant's Presentation
Patricia Way/260 N First Street /Stated she owns the property next door and shared her concerns regarding bulk,
scale, coverage, and architectural compatibility. Ms. Way stated the proposed home would not contribute to the
character of the Railroad Historic District and would chip away at the integrity of the neighborhood. She commented
on tourism and the draw historic homes and neighborhoods have, and recommended the Commission preserve the
Railroad District character because it promotes tourism. Ms. Way stated the second story of the proposed home
should be stepped back in order to not dwarf the other homes in the neighborhood, and expressed her concern
Ashland Planning Commission
February 11, 2014
Page 3 of 8
regarding the contemporary design of the home. She stated it is not architecturally compatible with the impact area
and cited the Historic District Design Standards. She commented that the stucco siding, metal roof, sliding glass
doors, and steal cable balcony do not match the historic neighborhood, and claimed the applicant's misinformed and
misrepresented the basis for their conditional use permit. She elaborated that the applicant's materials included
pictures of homes they stated were within 200 ft. of their property and this is outright false information that the
Historic Commission used to base their opinion and recommendations on. She added the properties to the north,
east and south of this lot are all residential homes, and not commercial businesses as indicated in the applicant's
materials. Ms. Way submitted a petition signed 77 people who are against this proposal and asked the Commission
to deny the applicant's conditional use permit.
Comment was made questioning how the petition signatures were obtained and whether any of the individuals reside
on First Street. Ms. Way clarified the petition was placed at Ashland Street Printing for signatures and did not know if
any of the signees live on First Street.
Public Testimonv
Colin Swales1143 Eight Street/Stated this is a unique street and noted the curbside sidewalk that was recently
installed. Mr. Swales thanked the applicant for complying with the parking standards and stated all of the other
structures on First Street have placed their parking in the front yards. He stated contemporary houses can look very
complimentary to other designs and thinks the applicant's have done a magnificent job and encouraged the Planning
Commission's approval.
Bryan Mikotal147 N Laurel/Stated he loves to walk around Ashland and check out the historical buildings as well as
the new construction. He stated a lot of thought is being put into these new structures and they are improving the
liveliness of the area. Mr. Mikota staled a few of the building near the Co-Op need some work, and this is one of
them. He stated this will be a beautiful addition to the neighborhood and stated he would have the same opinion if he
were a visitor.
Questions of Staff
Staff was asked to comment on the appellant's statement that misleading information was given to the Historic
Commission. Ms. Gunter stated that the applicant had said there was an addition with a metal roof; it is not metal but
since the structure will be demolished, that information didn't influence the Historic Commission's decision. Ms.
Gunter also clarified the applicant's materials included photographs and it was indicated they were on the same
block. She stated there are different ways to define a block and does not believe this influenced the Historic
Commission's decision.
Staff was asked why two Historic commissioners voted to deny approval. Ms. Gunter stated one of the
commissioners felt the proposal did not meet the compatibility standards, and the other commissioner did not
vocalize her objections during the public hearing.
Applicant's Rebuttal
Mark Knox/Referenced the Historic District Standards and stated that design can be very subjective, but this is why
there is a seven member Historic Commission made up of architects and designers. Mr. Knox stated they have
followed the design standards and have followed the input from the Historic Commission.
Commissioner Mindlin closed the record and the hearing at 830 pm.
Deliberations & Decision
Commissioner Miller gave her opinion that the home should conform more to the historic residential character.
Commissioner Kaplan commented on the transitional character of this neighborhood and voiced his support for this
proposal. He added it is not his desire to redesign this structure and will leave that to the Historic Commission.
Commissioner Peddicord agreed with Kaplan. She stated a metal roof is needed for rainwater catchment and
ignoring the applicant's desire for LEED certification would be negligent on their part. She added a stepped back
second story would be detrimental, and stated the applicant has addressed criteria and issues. Commissioner
Ashland Planning Commission
February 11, 2014
Page 4 of 8
Thompson stated the criteria for the conditional use permit and the variance request have been met, and believes
this is a reasonable request. Commissioner Brown commented on standards for new construction versus
reconstruction and gave his opinion that this design misses the boat in terms of scale and massing. He agreed that
this is a transitional block but feels a stepped back second story would better fit the streetscape. Commissioner
Dawkins disagreed and stated the home does ft the streetscape, as well as all of the criteria. Commissioner Mindlin
stated she is comfortable with many of the elements, but voiced her agreement with Commissioner Brown in term of
mass and scaling. She added ultimately though, the Historic Commission is the appropriate body to address the
design and does not believe this is the time or place to take this up.
Commissioner DawkinslPeddicord mis to approve PA-2013-01421 with the conditions proposed by staff. Roll
Call Vote: Commissioners Dawkins, Kaplan, Thompson, Peddicord and Mindlin, YES. Commissioners Brown
and Miller, NO. Motion passed 5.2.
TYPE III PUBLIC HEARING
A. PLANNING ACTION 2014-00052
SUBJECT PROPERTY: 87 W. Nevada St. and 811 Heiman Street
APPLICANT: Wilma LLC
DESCRIPTION: A request to modify the Development Agreement for the Verde Village Subdivision for
the properties located at 87 W. Nevada Street and 811 Heiman Street. The proposed modifications
include: clarifications of the project phasing to make clear which improvements are required with each
phase and to allow either phase to occur first; changes to the energy efficiency requirements of the
development so that all units will be constructed to at least Earth Advantage Gold standards and will be
"Photovoltaic Ready"; and changes to the landscaping and maintenance requirements associated with
construction of the multi-use path. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Suburban Residential and
Single-Family Residential; ZONING: R-1-3.5, R-1-5, R-1-7.5; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 391E 04B TAX LOTS:
1100,1400.1418.
Ex Parte Contact
Commissioners Dawkins, Miller, Brown and Peddicord declared site visits; No ex parte contact was reported.
Staff Report
Associate Planner Derek Severson reviewed the site and provided an overview of the original land use application.
He explained the approved application was memorialized in a development agreement that was adopted by
ordinance by the City Council in December 2007, and encompassed the following elements:
• Annexation, Land Exchange with the City, and Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map changes.
• Outline Plan approval to develop the property as a 68-unit residential development.
• Site Review approval for multi-family development.
• Physical and Environmental Constraints Review Permit to locate a multi-use path in the Ashland Creek
Riparian Preservation Area.
• Exceptions to the Street Standards to install a curbside sidewalk on one side of a proposed street, to not
locate a street adjacent to natural features, and to not connect two of the proposed streets.
• Variances to reduce the on-street parking requirement to 38 spaces, to reduce the rear yard setback, and to
reduce the required distance between buildings for cottages.
• Administrative Variance to have the primary orientation of the buildings to the south in order to maximize
use of solar energy.
Mr. Severson explained the affordable housing development Rice Park was part of the first phase and has already
been completed, and the remainder of the first phase includes the development of a cottage community with a private
drive. The second phase of this development includes single family homes, completion of the Bear Creek Greenway
connection to Nevada Street, and sidewalk installation along Nevada to Oak Street. Mr. Severson explained the
applicant's are here tonight requesting three modifications to their original development agreement:
Ashland Planning Commission
February 11, 2014
Page 5 of 8
• Proiect Phasing: The applicants propose to make the project a true two phase project that would split the
infrastructure of the development in phases rather than front loading the majority of the infrastructure into
the first phase. Mr. Severson stated either phase could be built first, or they could be built simultaneously.
He noted the applicants have agreed to provide permanent facilities to serve Rice Park and the connection
to the dog park in Phase I; and the greenway connection and sidewalk on Nevada would be tied to the
Sanders Way improvements in Phase II.
• Energy Efficiency: The applicants are requesting to change the energy efficiency requirements to be more
compatible with technological changes and easier to administer by going with an established program with
third party verification. Mr. Severson stated the units would have to obtain a minimum of Earth Advantage
Gold/Photovoltaic Ready certification, and these would be 15% more energy efficient than the current code
requirements and 20%-30% better than the codes that were in place when the subdivision was approved.
• Multi-Use Path: The riparian corridor mitigation plantings would be reduced to install 10-foot buffer plantings
on the subdivision side plus the 10-foot path, 4 ft. of landscaping on either side of the path, and re-
vegetation of any additional areas of disturbance associated with the path installation. Mr. Severson
reviewed the cross-section illustrations for the riparian landscaping plan and clarified the applicants will be
responsible for maintaining the improvements they install for a three year period.
Mr. Severson concluded his presentation and stated staff supports a favorable recommendation to the City Council
with the recommendations outlined in the staff report.
Questions of Staff
Staff was asked about strengthening the language in the development agreement regarding the multi-use path
landscaping and riparian corridor restoration to make the expectation about working with the Parks Department
clearer.
Staff was asked if Sander Way would be installed if Phase II never happens. Mr. Severson clarified Sander Way
would only serve the units built along that road, so if Phase II never occurs and those homes are not built, the
installation of Sander Way would not be vital.
Staff was asked to clarify the distinction between "Phase 1" and "Phase 2" (uppercase) and "phase one" and "phase
two" (lowercase). Mr. Severson recommended the applicants speak to this during their presentation.
Comment was made that the timetable does not reflect all of the elements identified in the development agreement
and it was questioned if this should be a concern.
Staff was asked whether there is any financial surety for this development and Mr. Severson clarified the City has
trust deeds on several of the single family lots.
Commissioners Kaplan7Miller mis to extend meeting. Voice Vote: A#AYES. Motion passed 7-0.
Applicant's Presentation
Valri Williams and Greg Williams/Explained when the original development agreement was prepared they were
very new to development and the concept of a development agreement was new to the City of Ashland. Ms. Williams
stated six years have passed since the development agreement was prepared and they have realized there are
some issues that need to be addressed. Ms. Williams explained the detailed plan for the multi-use path and riparian
area is already in place, and they intend on using this plan but whiting out the areas beyond the fourfoot buffer. She
stated the Parks Department does not want trees installed in the middle of the blackberry bushes and are concerned
about the maintenance cost, and noted there are trees growing there now that weren't there at the time of the
development agreement. Ms. Williams stated their request is to evaluate the vegetation when they get ready to do
the multi-use path. Regarding the project phasing, Ms. Williams explained the use of "Phase" was used to identify the
physical location on the development, and "phase" was added to identify the first phase that is actually constructed.
She commented on the energy efficiency requirements and explained they realized during the construction of Rice
Park that the elements outlined in K-3 were very onerous. As an alternative, they would like to move to the Earth
Ashland Planning Commission
February 11, 2014
Page 6 of 8
Advantage program and require all homes to be a minimum of Earth Advantage Gold. It was noted that this is still
going to be one of the most energy efficient neighborhoods in the state.
Comment was made questioning if the applicants would be placing solar panels on some of the units. Mr. Williams
explained the units will be solar ready but they personally will not be building the homes, but rather will be selling the
lots and it will be the new owner's decision as to whether to install the PV panel. He added all of the homes will be
passively solar heated, which is a huge benefit in itself.
Ms. Williams spoke to the timeline and explained this document was intended to be a guideline as to when key things
should be done, but does not list every action. She added the timeline is not all inclusive and the development
agreement sets the precedent.
Comment was made recommending the City's legal department take a close look at the development agreement and
make sure the document fully reflects the applicant's commitments.
Comment was made questioning if the applicants have placed money in escrow for the riparian corridor
improvements. Ms. Williams clarified there is a bond with the City for the riparian area and they are not allowed any
vertical construction until the path is installed, which provides a strong incentive to make sure this gets done.
Public Testimony
Colin Swalesl143 Eighth Street/Stated this was a hugely ambitious project when it was approved and what they
saw is not ultimately what they will get. Mr. Swales stated the value of the land was greatly increased by the prior
approval, and yet there is no indication that this project will ever happen. He questioned what might happen if this
was not completed and asked if the area would be de-annexed and the land swap reversed. Mr. Swales stated the
City is in a bind but voiced his disagreement with extending the completion timeframe for this proposal. He
recommended the Commission look out for the City's best interest and asked that the development agreement be
looked at in detail. He added it is the developers job to comply with the terms they originally agreed to.
Commissioners Dawkins7Kaplan m7s to extend the meeting to 1030 pm. Voice Vote: All AYES. Motion passed 7-0.
Questions of Staff
Staff was asked to clarify what will be provided to the City Council. Mr. Severson answered the package of materials
will include a council communication, a revised ordinance, and the exhibits associated with the changes (which will
include the Planning Commission's recommendation.)
Staff was asked if they are comfortable with the proposed modification to the riparian area. Mr. Severson suggested
the Commission could consider strengthening this language by changing it to read, "planting of additional trees both
inside and outside the pathway corridor to be selected and placed a#feFSensakaf en based on recommendations from
the Parks Department staff."
Applicant's Rebuttal
Mr. Williams stated this property has been in his family for 100 years and it is beautiful land. He added the University
of Oregon deemed it as was one of the best places in Ashland's to have solar homes.
Deliberations and Decision
Comment was made that serious floods can occur every 10 years and it could be a waste to install a lot of plantings
along the creek. Statement was made expressing support for the applicants to work with the Parks Department and
enhancing the area to maintain a more natural look. Comment was made that their recommendation should be clear
that the applicants must conform to what the Parks Department says.
Mr. Severson recommended the following wording: "Thal the revised plan (replacing Sheet R-1 from December 1,
2008) to be provided prior to pathway installation shall illustrate the proposed pathway installation and the redefined
limits of the slope stabilization and associated revegetation and shall include the planting of additional trees both
Ashland Planning Commission
February 11, 2014
Page 7 of 6
inside and outside the pathway corridor to be selected and placed based on the recommendations of Parks
Department staff as to the number, type, and placement." The Planning Commission voiced support for this revision.
Commissioner Mindlin asked if the group had any concerns with the modification to the phasing and no issues were
raised.
Commissioner Mindlin asked if the group had any concerns with the modification to the energy efficiency standards
and no issues were raised.
Commissioners Miller/Thompson mis to recommend Council's approval of the project with the conditions
recommended by staff including the modified language to Condition #31, and recommend the documents be
reviewed by the Legal Department to ensure the applicants commitments are properly reflected. Roll Call
Vote: Commissioners Kaplan, Brown, Dawkins, Thompson, Miller, Peddicord, and Mindlin, YES. Motion
passed 7-0.
ADJOURNMENT
Meeting adjourned at 10:00 p.m.
Ashland Planning Commission
February 11, 2014
Page 8 of 8
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Council Communication
March 18, 2014, Business Meeting
Request for Endorsement of the AAUW Garden Tour to Hang a Banner Across
East Main Street
FROM:
Diana Shiplet, executive secretary, diana.shiplet@ashland.or.us
SUMMARY
The American Association of University Women (AAUW) annual Garden Tour occurs in May of this
year. They would like to hang a banner across East Main Street to advertise this event. In order to do
this they need to have endorsement from a city commission or committee with final approval of that
endorsement by the City Council. The Firewise Commission has already agreed to endorse this event
for the purpose of hanging a banner and AAUW are now requesting that Council give their final
approval of that endorsement.
BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
On February 19th, representatives from AAUW attended the Firewise Commission monthly meeting
requesting endorsement of their event. The Commission voted in favor of the endorsement and is now
forwarding their recommendation to the City Council for approval as is required by the Commission
and Committee Operations Guide adopted by the Council in February of 2012.
Endorsement, as defined in the Operations Guide, is a public expression of support for a program,
activity or event and requires there be a correlation between the event and Commission purpose.
The Commission supported the event and confirmed in their approved motion that the event meets the
criteria stated in the Operations Guide and that the event has a direct connection to the purpose of the
Firewise Commission, with the goal of building Firewise gardening practices. Firewise Community
Coordinator, Ali True, will inspect five of the tour gardens and a Firewise write-up will be included in
the event's program.
City endorsement of the AAUW event allows the AAUW to be an eligible applicant for a banner
permit over East Main Street. It does not include any financial assistance from either the commission
or the Council. The AAUW would be responsible for all costs incurred in printing the banner and for
the City permit costs associated with the banner hanging.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
N/A
STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION:
Staff recommends approval of this endorsement.
Page 1 of 2
~r,
CITY OF
ASHLAND
SUGGESTED MOTION:
I move to approve endorsement by the Firewise Commission of the AAUW Garden Tour for the
purposes of hanging a banner across East Main Street.
ATTACHMENTS:
AAUW request for endorsement
Draft Firewise Commission minutes
Page 2 of 2
BANNER APPLICATION
Please fill in the information requested below and submit this form to the City Administrator, 20
E. Main Street, Ashland, OR 97520. Upon approval of your application by the City
Administrator, the City of Ashland will obtain approval from ODOT, and then collect the $125
fee.
Please write below exactly what will be printed on the banner. All banners will be reviewed for
any offensive or inappropriate message content by the City of Ashland and ODOT. Please note:
No Advertising of any kind, No phone numbers, and No web or e-mail addresses are permitted
on the banner.
r
SPRING AshlandAAUWAnnua2nd SundaylnJun~ARDEN TOUR o~~NE
o ;and
NAME OF ORGANIZATION/: A4Ianc~ A(,V 56n 11(A 6')(i rde
CONTACT PERSON: M K1,
h U 1 n ~2' 1 PHONE:
ADDRESS OF ORGANIZATION/CONTACT: (G 0 l9le n Lf~OLY~ L, (i lI
4101,d 04. 975x0
01 ~l
WEEK REQUESTED FOR BANNER: JU A & I.l <C n if
(FOR CITY USE ONLY)
THIS APPLICATION IS:
APPROVED FOR A CITY OF ASHLAND SPONSORED OR ENDORSED EVENT.
NOT APPROVED.
DATE:
CITY ADMINISTRATOR
Date Fee Paid to City of Ashland:
(FOR ODOT USE ONLY)
THE ABOVE APPLICATION IS:
APPROVED
NOT APPROVED.
DATE:
ODOT
Revised 7121/12
MEETING OF THE ASHLAND FIREWISE COMMISSION
Wednesday, February 19"', 201411:00AM to 1:OOPM
Conference Room, Ashland Fire Station #1
455 Siskiyou Blvd
1. CALL TO ORDER 11:20 am
II. INTRODUCTIONS
Annette Herron, Pete Norvell, Matt Warshawsky, Eric Olson and Vicky Sturtevant.
Staff: Kimberley Summers, Chris Chambers, Ali True (call in). Absent: Council Liaison Greg Lemhouse.
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: November 20`h, 2013 meeting approved by Eric Olson, Annette Herron seconded
the motion.
IV. PUBLIC FORUM Mimi Pippel, AAUW Spring Garden Tour proposal- They are planning for their 19d' Annual
fundraiser event here in Ashland. They are seeking awareness with Firewise plants in the garden, hand out from last
year was provided. Would like the Firewise Commission to support and partner up with their efforts of the Spring
Garden Tour, a follow up e-mail will be sent by Mimi Pippel. Eric Olson will endorse the Spring Garden tour
AAU W with the goals of building Firewise garden practices and Matt Warshawsky 2"d the motion. The 2014
endorsement was given for the Firewise write up in the program and the 5 gardens will be inspected by Ali True. If
recommendations are needed to be Firewise it could have a sign posted and would be explained or marked as a work
in progress in the program. Annette Herron will be the contact person and work with Ali True on this project.
V. ADJUSTMENTS TO THE AGENDA: It was recommended that we stream line the communication and if we
could do a betterjob at keeping the commissioners up to date with issues and sending out the agenda 1 week before;
Any documents that need reviewed they would also like sent in a timely manner. Next meeting will discuss the chair
positions for the commission, (3) open vacancies.
VI. BUSINESS
A. Firewise Clean-Up Day Planning; May 4`h, volunteers needed- Valley View Transfer Station will be the drop
site this year, Ali True has a meeting scheduled at Recology Ashland office on 2/24 at 0900. Please send her
an email if you would like to attend.
B. Firewise program update: Ali True- Some background info was provided in an e-mail for us to view. See
attached.
C. Review commission charter changes- The changes were reviewed and presented by Chris Chambers. The
name "Wildfire Mitigation Commission", would like to get it approved and on the Council agenda in March.
Eric Olson has moved to have Chris Chambers present this to City Council. Annette Herron 2nd the motion.
D. Wildfire Hazard Zone- TBD
E. CWPP presentation by Victoria Sturtevant, SOU Professor (ret.) - Presentation was given to the group it was
discussed on how other communities created their CWPP.
F. Ashland CWPP review- TBD
G. CWPP Update Process- TBD
VII. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS
VIII. REVIEW AND SET COMMISSION CALENDAR / NEXT MEETING
A. Next meetings March 19`h, 2014 and April 16'h,2014
IX. ADJOURN: 1:10 PM
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please
contact the Public Works Office at 488-5587 (TTY phone number 1 800 735 2900). Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will
enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting (28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title 1).
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Council Communication
March 18, 2014, Business Meeting
Request for Council approval of HMEP grant application
FROM:
Marshall Rasor, Firefighter/Paramedic, Ashland Fire and Rescue, rasorm@ashland.or.us
SUMMARY:
The U.S. Department of Transportation conducted an open application period for first responders to
apply for Hazardous Materials Emergency Preparedness (HMEP) grants. During this open application
period, which is now closed, Ashland Fire & Rescue applied for two grants for hazardous materials
response training. The grant information was released to us on February 12`h with an application due
date of March 5, 2014. AF&R was unable to get vendor cost information in time for the first Council
meeting in March and the application was submitted on March 5. The department now seeks
retroactive approval of the application.
BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
The U.S. Department of Transportation and the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration provide monies for grants each year, which are administered by the Oregon State
Police and the Office of the Fire Marshal. This grant program gives departments an opportunity to
purchase equipment, resource, and provide training that they would otherwise not be able to fund.
Ashland Fire and Rescue has applied for the following grants
• $25,016.10 for in-house training to be provided by HazMatlQ. HazMatIQ is an 8 hour course
geared towards first responder offensive training. Program includes training on a patented 4-
step system that is used as a job aid to help first responders rapidly assess risks and make
proper decisions on how to best mitigate a hazardous materials/WMD incident.
• $13,826.89 for sending two personnel from Ashland Fire and Rescue to attend a 1 week class in
Pueblo, Colorado. Specific class requested to attend was Highway Emergency Response
Specialist (HERS). This course focuses on specific fundamentals and skills associated with an
emergency response to a highway incident involving HazMat/WMD.
Ashland Fire & Rescue desires to maintain a level of hazardous materials response capability due to
the number of commercial transports that transit through and near Ashland.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
All HMEP grants require a 25% match. If the grants are awarded, the match will be provided from the
AF&R training budget.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION:
Staff recommends the approval of the grant applications to the HMEP program from the U.S.
Department of Transportation. If the Council declines to approve, the grant application will be
withdrawn.
Page 1 of 2
IrM
CITY OF
ASHLAND
SUGGESTED MOTION:
I move to approve Ashland Fire & Rescue's grant application submittals for the HMEP program.
ATTACHMENTS:
None
Page 2 of 2
~r,
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Council Communication
March 18, 2014, Business Meeting
Liquor License Application for Elisa Boulton dba The Lunch Show
FROM:
Barbara Christensen, City Recorder, christeb@ashland.or.us
SUMMARY
Approval of a Liquor License Application from Elisa Boulton dba The Lunch Show at 165 East Main
Street.
BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
Application is for new license.
The City has determined that the license application review by the city is set forth in AMC Chapter
6.32 which requires that a determination be made to determine if the applicant complies with the city's
land use, business license and restaurant registration requirements (AMC Chapter 6.32).
In May 1999, the council decided it would make the above recommendations on all liquor license
applications.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
N/A
STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION:
Endorse the application with the following:
The city has determined that the location of this business complies with the city's land use
requirements and that the applicant has a business license and has registered as a restaurant, if
applicable. The city council recommends that the OLCC proceed with the processing of this
application.
SUGGESTED MOTION:
Under Consent agenda item, a motion to approve liquor license for Elisa Boulton dba The Lunch Show
ATTACHMENTS:
None
Page I of I
OFFr,
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Council Communication
March 18, 2014, Business Meeting
Prioritization of Future Planning Initiatives
FROM:
Maria Harris, Planning Manager, harrism@ashland.or.us
SUMMARY:
The City Council and Planning Commission identified three high priority long-range planning projects
at a joint study session on January 28, 2014. Staff requests the Council affirm the three high priority
long-range planning projects, including the review of downtown zoning, assessment of approach to
master planning, and infill strategies along transit corridors, identified at the January 28 joint study
session. Upon the Council's endorsement, staff will proceed with developing a timeline and work plans
for the high priority projects.
BACKGROUND:
The Council and Commission met on January 28, 2014 to discuss the list of future planning initiatives.
The following projects were identified as the highest priority from a list of eight potential long-range
planning projects.
• Review of Downtown Zoning (including Winburn Way corridor)
Analyze zoning in the downtown and areas adjacent to the downtown, and develop options for
potential changes to designations, permitted land uses, and code standards.
• Assessment of Approach to Master Planning
Evaluate advantages and drawbacks of specialized zoning designations and development
standards in neighborhood plans.
• Infill Strategies Along Transit Corridors
Create and analyze development scenarios accommodating varying levels of future
employment and housing growth for the transit corridors in the southeast portion of the city.
Identify strategies to encourage a concentration and mix of housing and jobs (i.e., transient-
oriented development) and increase the desirability of the corridors for residential living.
The Council initially reviewed the future planning initiatives at the December 17, 2013, meeting and
recommended a joint meeting with the Planning Commission to prioritize the projects. The Planning
Commission reviewed the future planning initiatives in September 2013.
Initially, staff compiled a draft list of potential projects based on if the projects address Council goals,
were included in the biennium budget, and provide incentives for accommodating future housing and
employment growth. Subsequently, the Council added two projects at the December 17 meeting. The
list was revised a second time by the Council and Commission at the January 28 joint study session.
The revised list of future planning initiatives is attached, and was used to help facilitate the discussion
at the joint study session.
Page 1 of 2
Ir,
CITY OF
ASHLAND
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
Existing resources will be used to develop timelines and work plans for high priority projects.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION:
Staff recommends the Council affirm the three high priority long-range planning projects identified at
the joint study session of the City Council and Planning Commission on January 28, 2014.
SUGGESTED MOTION:
I move to affirm the three high priority long-range planning projects, including the review of
downtown zoning, assessment of approach to master planning, and infill strategies along transit
corridors, identified at the joint study session of the City Council and Planning Commission on January
28, 2014.
ATTACHMENTS:
List of Future Planning Initiatives, prepared by staff for January 28, 2013, Joint Study Session
Minutes, January 28, 2014 Joint Study Session
Page 2 of 2
IFM
Future Planning Initiatives
Potential Projects
• Review Zoning Around Downtown (includes Winburn Way corridor)
• Housing Element Update
• Croman Mill District Plan
• Railroad Property Master Plan
• North Ashland Gateway Overlay
• Assessment of Master Planning Approach
• Airport Overlay
• Inf ill Strategies Along Transit Corridors (includes vertical housing development zones)
Projects in Progress
• Normal Neighborhood Plan
• Code Incentives for Affordable Workforce Housing (ULUO)
• Miscellaneous Code Amendments (e.g., short term rentals in R-1 zones, zoning for
marijuana dispensaries)
• Downtown Parking Management and Multi-Modal Circulation Study
• Historic Preservation review Process (non-structural exterior changes)
from 1/28/2014 joint study session
prepared by staff
CITY OF
ASHLAND
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL & PLANNING COMMISSION
JOINT STUDY SESSION
MINUTES
January 28, 2014
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor John Stromberg called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street.
City Council Present: Planning Commissioners Present:
John Stromberg, Mayor Melanie Mindlin, Chair
Pam Marsh Troy J. Brown, Jr.
Mike Morris Michael Dawkins
Rich Rosenthal Richard Kaplan
Dennis Slattery Debbie Miller
Tracy Peddicord
Staff Present: Absent Members:
Dave Kanner, City Administrator Greg Lemhouse
Dave Lohman, City Attorney Carol Voisin
Bill Molnar, Community Development Director
Maria Harris, Planning Manager
Brandon Goldman, Senior Planner
Derek Severson, Associate Planner
April Lucas, Administrative Supervisor
DISCUSSION ITEMS
A. Discussion and Prioritization of Future Planning Initiatives.
Mayor John Stromberg provided some background on this item. He explained on December 17, 2013, the City Council
discussed the draft list of future planning projects compiled by staff and recommended that a joint meeting with the Planning
Commission be scheduled so that the two bodies could prioritize the list of projects.
Community Development Director Bill Molnar provided a brief summary of each of the projects, which are:
• Review Zoning Around Downtown
• Winburn Way Corridor Analysis-
. Vertical Housing Development Zones
• Housing Element Update
• Croman Mill District Plan
• Railroad Property Master Plan
• North Ashland Gateway Overlay
• Assessment of Approach to Master Planning
• Airport Plan
• Infill Strategies
Mayor Stromberg asked each Planning Commissioner to identify their top priority. Commissioner Miller and Commissioner
Brown selected assessment of approach to master planning; Commissioner Mindlin selected infill strategies; Commissioner
Peddicord selected vertical housing development zones and infill strategies; Commissioner Kaplan selected vertical housing
development zones; and Commissioner Dawkins selected the Railroad Property Master Plan.
Ashland City Council & Planning Commission
Joint Study Session
January 28, 2014
Page 1 of 2
City Administrator Dave Kanner called attention to the regional problem solving process and reminded the group that Ashland
declined to add any land to its urban growth boundary and did so with the promise that Ashland would adopt innovative infill
strategies to accommodate future growth. Mr. Molnar indicated staff has the resources to take on two significant projects within
the next 12-18 months, and this would leave some room to take on any minor projects that may arise.
Mayor Stromberg asked for the Planning Commissioners second choice. Commissioner Kaplan selected the Railroad Property
Master Plan; Commissioner Brown selected the review of zoning around downtown followed by vertical housing development
zones; Commissioner Miller selected the review of zoning around downtown; Commissioner Peddicord selected assessment of
master planning; Commissioner Dawkins selected infill strategies and vertical housing development zones; and Commissioner
Mindlin selected the Housing Element update.
Mr. Kanner updated the group on the status of the railroad property. He explained the owner of the property came forward with
a plan to clean up the property; however they proposed cleaning it to DEQ standards and not to the City's standards. He stated
cleaning to DEQ standards would leave quite a bit of contamination on the site and the property owners decided to re-evaluate
their options and whether they want to clean the property to the City's standards, which would enable them to have a much
greater development potential.
The Planning Commission and City Council held general discussion on the potential projects. Councilor Marsh recommended
they pursue infill strategies, downtown planning and circulation, and the approach to master planning. She added the master
planning item is more of a discussion and evaluation than a long range project and believes all three can be addressed with the
given resources. Councilor Morris stated with the exception of a few, most of the projects are inter-related and agreed that the
approach to master planning needs to be looked.
Councilor Rosenthal asked staff which project they would choose. Senior Planner Brandon Goldman stated vertical housing
development is a concrete project that could be completed within a short timeframe and provide outcomes; and it also relates to
the vision for the City to provide workforce housing and would fold in well with staffs workload. Planning Manager Maria Harris
stated infill strategies is a project that touches on almost all aspects of planning and, hits on transportation, jobs, housing, and
also looks at fulfilling our regional obligation. Community Development Director Bill Molnar selected infill strategies and stated
this project moves beyond land use planning and will require an inter-department approach to the issue. Associate Planner
Derek Severson also selected infill strategies. He noted he was the staff member who represented the City of Ashland at the
regional problem solving meetings and advocated for this concept.
Mayor Stromberg asked for the group to provide any final feedback to staff. Comment was made that it is clear citywide infill
strategies has been identified as a priority. It was noted that Winbum Way Corridor Analysis, Review of Downtown Zoning, and
Downtown Parking Management and Circulation Study, which is already in progress, should be combined and made a top
priority. Additionally, it is clear that master planning should be looked at. The Mayor recommended that the Airport Plan also be
included on this list and requested Mr. Kanner put together a proposal to move these items forward. Mr. Kanner acknowledged
this request and stated he would meet with staff, determine what resources can be dedicated to these projects, and bring
forward a proposal.
ADJOURNMENT
Meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m.
Ashland City Council B Planning Commission
Joint Study Session
January 28, 2014
Page 2 of 2
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Council Communication
March 18, 2014, Business Meeting
City of Ashland Risk Management Report for FY 2012-2013
FROM:
Lee Tuneberg, Administrative Services/Finance Director/Risk Manager, tuneberl@ashland.or.us
SUMMARY
This is a report on the Risk Management Program of the City for FY 2012-2013. The last report was
presented to Council in February, 2013.
BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
The City has an active risk management program that is managed by supervisors from both the City
and Parks. The program also relies upon effective Safety Committee and adequate insurance coverage
to protect life and property. The information provided that the program is doing well because of the
efforts made by the Safety and Risk Management committees.
This report is intended to help the Mayor and Council to better understand the program and to provide
some history and back ground information of its complexities and risks inherent to the City's
operation. A short overview of FY 2012-2013 has been added early in the report to provide the reader
a quick understanding of recent changes.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
Accepting this report has no fiscal impact on the City.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION:
Staff requests acceptance of the report.
SUGGESTED MOTIONS:
I move to accept the Risk Management report.
ATTACHMENTS:
FY 2012-2013 Risk Management Report
Page I of I
City of Ashland
Risk Management Report
FY 2012-2013
March 18, 2014
Risk Management Team
Tina Gray, Human Resources Manager
Don Robertson, Ashland Parks & Recreation Director
Sharlene P. Stephens, Risk Management Specialist
Lee Tuneberg, Administrative Services/Finance Director/Risk Manager
Safety Committee at June 30, 2013
Michael Ainsworth, IT Manager, Chair Rick Hackstock, Building Inspector
Lori Ainsworth, Volunteer/Event Coord. Karl Johnson, Assistant Engineer
Greg Case, EMS Division Chief Mike Morrison, Public Works Superintendent
Linda Cowen, Police Clerk II Sharlene Stephens, Risk Mgmt Specialist
Warren DiNapoli, Electric Dist. System Mgr Stu Wilkie, Maintenance/Safety Supervisor
Tina Gray, Human Resources Manager
L~- 1
Index
Brief Overview for FY 2012-2013 .........................................3
Introduction, Purpose, Mission & Vision ................................5
Values & History ............................................................6
The Program, Program Operations ....................................7
Program Budget & Recent Impacts ....................................8
Components of Coverage ................................................9
Program Strengths/Weaknesses/Opportunities/Threats......... 10
Trends .........................................................................11
Goals, Steps& Action Steps ............................................12
Schedule of Major Insurance in Force ...............................14
Information on Claims, Funding & Costs 15-19
2
Brief Overview of 2012-2013
Risk Management efforts were successful in FY 2012-2013. Claims and costs were held to a
minimum even though premiums have increased over the last few years. The recent total
has just exceeded what was paid in FY 2008-2009 when purchased coverage was less. The
City County Insurance Services (CIS), which covers 98% of all public entities in Oregon,
recognized City of Ashland as a safety-progressive organization and this translates into lower
premiums or reduced increases. Renewal of coverage was straight forward and staff did not
encounter any significant problems with acquiring coverage through CIS, or from those who
provide specific insurance programs not handled by CIS. In part, this is in recognition that
Ashland's risk and safety programs are often used as a model for other agencies and staff's
good efforts are recognized both internally and externally.
Despite Ashland's progressive work, future costs for coverage are on the rise. In February
CIS forecast an average increase for FY 2014-2015 of 26% for most liability, and 10% for
property and casualty coverage. Ashland's increases may be less due to our positive
program but the increase for Ashland will not be known until this spring. CIS's justification for
the increases relate to the rise in the tort limit on liability and property for government
agencies and the rising trend in number and cost of employment claims. Again, Ashland has
been able to minimize such claims and costs.
Not ten years ago the liability limit was $300,000 for a single claim (larger for multiple
complainants) and ORS 30.272 has steadily raised the limit over time. The limit was
$600,000 in FY 2012-2013, is $633,300 in FY 2013-2014 and will be $666,700 for FY 2014-
2015.
The trend in claims and other information reported by CIS for all of the pool are as follows:
Comparison of Expected Claims in Rates
to Fiscal Year Claims Expense
z5,000,000
20,000,000
15,000,000 -
10,000,000 -Initial Estimate used for Funding
Audited Claims Expense at Fiscal Yearend
5,000,000
511 V 14Z aye y ti~ rya
tiero4tieroe ti°robtierob;V1
4 _lPIV If_PIV rod'1P4
3
All Claim Types
Police, 25% Storm and
Sanitary
Sewers,12%
Streets and %
'Roads, 6
Premises,
5%
Jails, 5%
Employment, Water, 4%
41%
All Other
Losses, 2%
Top 10 Employment Claim Types
uais,m]
31,510.k5 31.]I6,R9 31,RB.°1 31,612156
31,1650
]
$1SS,6M 59D.WI
y¢ P P o F
P p'da. 4`f V c ,lcF p~ `~?54 ~ ~ 5 `,5¢5
9 Q p~7~\ r~
O ¢ 3>r yl1¢
yi
Fast Facts
41 % General Liability claims that are
Employment
$37,000 Average cost of Non-Police
Employment Claim
$57,000 Average cost of Police
Employment Claim
$150,000 Average cost of Legal fees for a
litigated employment claim
Increases in premiums and claims costs will have a direct impact on internal charges to
departments and funds to ensure the Insurance Services Fund has the resources to maintain
this internal service program.
4
Introduction
The City of Ashland, Oregon (COA) and the Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission
(APRC) are responsible for managing all risk and safety actions of the City to protect life and
property from injury or loss, minimizing any impact through prevention, containment and
insurance.
This report is intended to provide information that will allow us to develop a better
understanding of the risks faced by the City and help to identify measures that can be taken
to mitigate those risks.
Information in this report will help guide decision making and the future of the risk
management program and insurance services fund.
Purpose
The City (COA and APRC) serves its community by providing a variety of services to its
taxpayers, citizens and visitors through the management and staff. Through an established
Risk Management Team that utilizes a strategic plan, we desire to focus our time, efforts and
resources to positively impact liability exposures and to reduce injury, accident and property
loss through effective policies, training and an adopted safety culture that is embraced by all
City employees.
The City's Risk Management Team is charged with planning, implementing and reviewing
safety and insurance programs that are:
• Specific to the City's needs
• Timely to meet the City's needs
• Measurable for success
Through this approach the Team can assist elected officials, appointed officials and
departments to make informed decisions about what programs are offered and how they are
managed, with the specific intent to minimize or avoid adverse impacts from risks within a
given program provided or under consideration.
Mission
To promote a safe and productive work environment for staff that focuses on early
identification of all risk exposures, prevention, training, and mitigation through progressive
risk management.
Vision
Ashland is:
o A productive, safe place to work.
o A work environment that promotes positive morale, creative problem solving, and
policy compliance.
o A work environment that promotes pride in the team.
o A work environment that promotes good communications, respects each team
member and authority of position.
5
We Value
o Our community, elected officials, staff and volunteers.
o The delivery of quality services to our community through a well trained staff with
adequate resources.
o Responsible actions by employees to promote a safe and risk-free work environment.
o An ongoing process to challenge and update policies and practices.
o Regular quality communication across all levels of the City.
History
Ashland has provided municipal services since before its formal incorporation in 1874. As
the population grew so did the services offered until the City provided more services than
most communities with a similar population. Providing multiple and advanced services
requires internal activities such as policy making, managing, financing, staffing and
supporting the frontline service providers like public safety, utilities, parks, planning, etc.
The City had an actuarial study done in 1992 that identified the benefits of being self-insured
for some parts of operations and coverage to support the services provided. At that time it
was determined the Hospital and Parks could also benefit greatly from a City-run program
that adequately identified risk and provided means to insure or mitigate costs, benefitting all
participants.
The study identified the means of accomplishing these goals and the requirement for enough
cash to meet foreseeable needs while generating savings over the conventional approach of
indemnifying against loss. The Hospital saw benefit in pursuing services and coverage
specific to them from other sources and eventually moved away from the program in 2003.
The City (including Parks) has done well over the recent past by generating enough "good"
years of savings to more than offset the "bad" years of more claims costs than average.
However, claims have not always been small nor have they always been covered by the fund
surplus. In 1993 a reserve of $250,000 was targeted by the Risk Financing Study (Janzen
Associates) for contingent liabilities and that need has grown beyond $750,000. Staff
believes a better minimum target is $1,000,000 to protect against the potential of several
large losses occurring simultaneously such as the amount paid to settle the Mt. Ashland
claim a few years ago that reduced the reserve by $300,000. That, combined with any other
large claim, could reduce the balance below what was set for 1993. The fund reserve at the
end of June 30, 2013, was $848,858 or $87,306 (11.5%) better than the prior year.
Even though some potential claims have moved away from the City as the city-owned
hospital became a separate entity and some volunteer programs have been eliminated or
reduced, the City remains active in many more industries than the average municipality.
A positive point is the City has been successful at minimizing related costs through a very
active and aggressive risk management program and that has helped to maintain what
reserves we have. In 1996 the City retained the retired Finance Director to work as Risk
Manager on a part time basis. That position was eliminated in 1998. At that time the Legal
6
Department formally oversaw and managed claims, coordinating with Finance and other
departments who did personnel related issues and annual renewals.
Currently, workers compensation claims are managed by the Human Resources Manager
and property, liability and subrogation claims are handled or coordinated by the Risk
Management Specialist in Administrative Services. The Specialist also takes the lead role in
the annual renewal of all policies, working closely with the incumbent risk management
advisor, under the guidance of the Administrative Services/Finance Director (Risk Manager).
The Finance Director/Risk Manager is responsible for the overall program, represents the
City in negotiations on claims and settlements, manages coverage and levels of coverage,
and budgets for the program. The Finance and Parks directors also assist with operational
perspectives and management oversight of the various programs and services covered.
The Program
Risk management and safety happens throughout the organization. The majority of the
benefit accrues to all funds with operations, staff and fixed assets but the primary place to
look for long-term performance is the Insurance Services Fund. The Insurance Services
Fund is where premiums, claim costs, direct staffing costs and support activities are
budgeted and where long-term trends can be garnered from an overview perspective.
The exceptions to the costing are the contributed efforts from all departments to staff both the
RM Team and the Safety Committee and some minor costs that are best absorbed within a
frontline department or fund budget. A key element of Ashland's success is the Safety
Committee and work done by delegated members who take the time from their daily tasks to
work on ensuring a safe and healthy environment for all employees. Even though the State
of Oregon has requirements for all entities to have a safety committee, it takes the interest
and dedication of appointed members to make ours so successful. Other communities and
professionals in the municipal risk and insurance industry point to Ashland's program as a
best practices program.
Program Operations
The study that was done in 1992 identified the need for a fund reserve large enough to
protect against potential losses or costs above what can be predicted in any budget year.
That need has grown due to legislative changes, increased activities and related costs in City
operations. The Insurance Fund maintains a target amount intended to guard against such
risks existing today and into the future. Out of the ordinary use of the reserve requires
replenishment in the subsequent budget period or as soon after as possible to protect the
City.
Due to a long history of certain activities being self-insured (no insurance or high deductible
insurance) the Team may use a Risk Management Advisor (RMA) to work on programs. No
Agent of Record is used at this time. Third-Party Administrators (TPAs) are used for
processing workers compensation claims but the Team maintains oversight responsibility.
Claims are managed in several ways through TPAs, the CIS trust and staff. HR has direct
oversight of the TPA managing WC claims and manages wellness programs in conjunction
with the health care benefit provided by the City. The most recent RMA was obtained
through an RFP process in 2008 and these services were extended by Council vote in
7
Property, casualty and liability claims are managed through internal staff (primarily the Risk
Management Specialist with input from the Finance Director) and the trust/pool coverage
purchased from City County Insurance Services (CIS). The RMA assists with evaluation and
renewal of coverage from the trust with limited coverage being obtained from other sources.
Without an insurance agent of record, aggressively bidding or pursuing coverage outside the
trust is not an option.
Workers compensation coverage, self insurance and catastrophic reinsurance are paid for
through payroll rates similar to the experience modification approach used for traditional
programs like SAIF and Liberty Northwest.
The state rates our experience, assigning a value (Experience Modification Rating or EMR).
The City's rating for FY 2012 was .96, considered a good rating. We have been notified it
changed to .95 for FY 2012-2013 and FY 2013-2014. A value less than 1.00 indicates a
beneficial program that saved the insured (the City) money by being better than the average
entity. A rating above 1.00 indicates an above average risk experience and results in the
insured paying a premium on coverage.
The City participates in the state-wide City County Insurance Services (CIS) pool for most
coverage other than Workers Compensation. The City obtains general liability, property and
casualty and other coverage via the pool with a limited amount of coverage being purchased
directly from other sources. Examples of these exceptions are municipal airport coverage,
flood and earthquake coverage for certain infrastructure, etc. The City is a long-term CIS
member and is grandfathered under a credit system for not using an Agent of Record. Only
four agencies in the state receive that credit and there is pressure from CIS for the City to go
to retroactive coverage. That change has a chance to save the City money if there are
catastrophic losses over several years but the City's historical approach has already
garnered average annual savings sufficient enough to remain unchanged. Even though a
large part of the good experience may be by chance, the City's positive approach to safety
contributes to the savings. This makes it hard to move away from the current plan of a high
deductible and managing our own claims costs to an indemnity plan with retroactive
coverage. The City will need to monitor this trend and consider changes in the future.
Program Budget & Recent Impacts
The Insurance Service Fund is an internal service fund whose primary revenue source is the
allocated costs charged to the benefitting operational departments and appropriates to pay
for primary expenses that include insurance premiums, direct claims costs, consultant
charges and staff or overhead charges. The City maintains a set of schedules that identifies
what costs can and should be charged to other funds and departments. This allocation plan
should be reviewed on an annual basis with formal updates as frequently as can be
accomplished.
The FY 2012-2013 budget included $769,705 in revenue and $759,630 in expenditures
(excluding $150,000 in Contingency) for an operational increase of $10,075. Actual results
were $87,306 increase in reserves to $848,858. Not having to use any Contingency for large
claims helped the fund but reserves are still low given the potential risks carried by the City
8
for all of the services provided. The 2013-2015 biennium budget anticipates a "slight
reduction in reserves even if Contingency is not tapped either year for claims.
Management of the risk program, claims and cost of coverage are intended to increase
reserves over time, protecting the City from financial impacts of a loss or losses. In prior
years the City was rewarded with significant discounts by CIS for managing its own program
(not using an insurance agent of record) and for performance. Performance included
developing the City program to meet best management practices, exceeding the average
benchmark of pool members. In the last two years the discounts have dwindled but the City's
cost of risk has been reduced by its own staff and their good efforts. The reduction in
discounts on premiums has made it more difficult to balance the fund.
Components of Coverage
Ashland's risk management and insurance program addresses all activities and exposures of
the City. Included in ongoing operations and coverage are workers compensation, general
liability, automobile liability, auto physical damage, property coverage, boiler & machinery,
excess crime, airport liability, flood coverage, volunteers accident and Underground Storage
Tanks (UST) insurances. General information and disclosures on claims, coverage, policy
limits and premiums can be found in the notes to the comprehensive annual financial report
(CAFR) and the statistical section.
An overview of coverage is as follows:
1. Workers compensation - Consistent with the 1992 Council directive the City is self-
insured, paying actual cost of claims up to $450,000 for most employees. (The cap is
$650,000 for Electric Department employees and $750,000 for Police and Fire).
2. Excess Workers compensation coverage - the City purchases reinsurance above the
$450,000 standard coverage to protect against catastrophic loss for most employees
and $650,000 for Electric Department employees and $750,000 for Police and Fire.
3. General liability - coverage protecting against general claims, commercial liability,
public official acts, employment practices and other claims arising from normal
municipal operations.
4. Automobile liability - coverage protecting the city from claims relating to the operation
of various vehicles and pieces equipment by the city's departments.
5. Auto physical damage - coverage against significant loss on city vehicles.
6. Property coverage - coverage protecting the city against loss on other properties
owned or held by the city.
7. Boiler & machinery - coverage against loss on equipment not specifically identified in
one of the other areas.
8. Excess crime - protection against losses rising out of normal business operations.
9. Airport liability - coverage protecting the city against claims made toward the existence
of the city's municipal airport.
10. Flood coverage - coverage providing protection against losses from the city's
ownership and operation of a reservoir, treatment plant and other buildings in or near
the watershed.
11. Volunteer accident coverage - secondary coverage for registered volunteers
participating in scheduled, supervised & sponsored volunteer activity of the City.
12. Underground storage tank - coverage for pollution liability.
13. Others ad hoc coverage as needed such as Builder Risk insurance relating to
construction of Fire Station #2.
9
Risk Management Program SWOT
Ashland has done well when balancing resources and requirements thus it is not just luck
that our premium and claims costs have remained in the acceptable range. Comparisons
with other agencies affirm this when comparisons are viewed knowing the difference in
services provided and the fact that Ashland is a college town and tourism destination.
Strengths: These remain in effect.
• Dedicated employees with a safety focus
• Progressive ideas, planning, vision for safety
• Cooperative, sharing, exchanging, collaboration
• Effective use of limited resources
Weaknesses:
• Budgetary constraints (limited staffing, training, and programs) - the City is unique
in that it dedicates staff to this program (some full time, many part time) and uses
an advisor. The total amount that is thought to be less than that for an insurance
agent of record. The City's activities are often used by CIS as a good example.
• Policy development and enforcement (i.e. drug testing, inspections, standards for
personal protection equipment, etc) - the City has made progress on policies
however work constraints on those who participate in the program on a part time
basis slows progress.
Opportunities:
• Best Practices may generate savings or grants to fund safety efforts - Ashland's
premium costs (excluding discounts) have remained relatively flat in the past but
are increasing as grant and discount funds become scarce.
• Advances in technical equipment have and will support better communication
during emergencies - reverse 911 and automated alerts are in place.
• Policy development provides training opportunities - gathering staff for consistent,
across-the-board training remains a challenge.
• Enhance positive reinforcement system through incentives - this is done on a
limited basis. There is the expectation that employees will always work safely,
incentives help to spot-light those that are exceptional and to generally remind all
employees.
10
Th reats:
• Increasing regulations and standards through mandates - a remaining potential
• Inadequate staff time and budgets to expand training and participation - improved
but a continuing balancing act.
Trends
The information in this report leads staff to believe the following:
Workers compensation
1. Safety works. The RM program appears to be having a positive influence.
2. Fewer claims but claims are more expensive due to higher medical costs.
Property/Casualty
1.. High level of claim incidents for a small town due to many services provided.
2. Tourism adds to the number of claims for things like trips and falls.
These perceived trends provide a positive perspective on City of Ashland's Risk Management
program however, due to the many services provided and the cost of claims, an adequate
reserve is necessary to guard against multiple claims occurring simultaneously.
Insurance Fund Ending Fund Balance by Fiscal Year
Actual to 1993 Recommended/Calculated Minimum
& Staff Recommended Minimum
$1,200,000
$1,000,000
Increase due Afewgood
ea
$800,000 oreviw rs...low
due to PERS claim
internal charge
B PEAS Savings MAA lawsuit
$600,000 - - Pa„o~ ,
$400,000
$200,000
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Actual EFB -®-Calculated EFB Minimum Staff Recommended EFB Minmum
Providing sufficient coverage and managing such claims will force higher budgets in all
departments as the related costs are allocated to all departments. The corresponding need
for a larger reserve to help the City weather high cost years is even more important with
these changes.
Il
Goals & Steps
1. Maintain safe work environment.
• Continue using trained, proactive Safety Committee & Risk Management Team.
• Continue using consultants and advisors where effective.
2. Manage risk/insurance program effectively.
• Continue using trained, proactive Safety Committee & Risk Management Team.
• Continue using consultants and advisors where effective.
3. Allocate premium and claims costs fairly.
• Periodically review claims and premium costs and necessary coverage.
• Update methodology for allocating internal charges.
• Revise methodology as needed but no less than every third year.
4. Restore reserves to target level.
• Annually allocate sufficient costs to funds & departments to cover projected cost.
• Assess funds and departments responsible for reducing EFB in subsequent year.
• Aggressively pursue restoration and subrogation to replace funds.
5. Develop/Document policies on risk management, claims accounting and budget.
• Personnel policies manual as it relates to risk management.
• General and specific policies that can be used for employee training.
• Account for insurance and claims costs and allocate fairly to funds/departments.
Action Steps
Monitor and report risk management activities on a monthly basis to ensure
continuous improvement and best practices by performing the following:
• Analyze perceived exposures/risk areas, legislative changes relating to risk as
identified and claims, accidents and near misses as they occur for cause and effect
and potential corrective action(s).
• Select and implement the appropriate risk management and safety processes that
will support and enhance City operations and the safe delivery of services.
• Identify city-wide and departmental scenarios which provide opportunities of growth
in safe work practices that encourage the desired environment.
• Document changes in coverage, costs, claims activity and industry standards that
measure safe environments such as Experience Modification Ratings, premiums
and reporting statistics from insurance providers.
At the same time, the City is "grandfathered" in the current plan with CIS in the current
property & liability plan. It credits the City 100% of the $50,000 dollar deductible. Ashland is
one of the few left in this program. CIS has indicated a desire to end this program but, at this
point, it will not make us change programs (such as to another funding approach) that may,
or may not, be better for Ashland given our good history.
The City does not employ an Insurance Agent of Record. Entities that do are charged a 10%
commission. Ashland receives a 10% credit against premiums through CIS' underwriting.
12
Some of this credit is used to pay for risk management advisors that provide much the same
service that an agent would. The team will continue to evaluate what is in the best interest of
the City over the long haul.
The table on the following page shows an increasing trend in overall premiums. Total
premiums are 27.7% more in FY 2013 than in FY 2012 but only 9.7% more than FY 2009.
During that time City/County Insurance Services refunded significant amounts in FY 2011
and FY 2012 to recognize the distribution on monies held in reserves for old claims closed at
that point. These reductions help restore Ashland reserves during those years. Without such
refunds the Insurance Fund will not be able to "grow" the reserve readily despite reduced
premium costs from good experience.
13
CITY OF ASHLAND, OREGON
SCHEDULE OF MAJOR INSURANCE IN FORCE
Coverage I Annual Aggregate/Each FY200Y2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 FY2014
Occurrence Premium9 PFremium Premium Premium Premium Premium
General Liability $15,000,000/$5,000,000 $ 141,544 $ 125,858 $ 126,076 $ 113,727 $ 112,883 $ 144,253
Public Officials Liability $15,000,000/$5,000,000
Employment Practices $15,000,000/$5,000,000
Automobile Liability 37,522 31,090 29,376 27,937 29,512 31,333
Scheduled Autos None/$5,000,000
Hi red Autos/Non Owned None/$5,000,000
Uninsured Motorist None/$5,000,000
Auto Physical Damage 9,989 8,920 8,643 8,381 8,544 10,911
Scheduled Autos Per Filed Value
Rented or Leased Per Filed Value
Newly Acquired Autos Per Filed Value
Property 77,615 78,928 69,745 70,257 67,666 79,649
Buildings Per Filed Value
Mobile Equipment Per Filed Value
Replacement Cost of Included Included Included Included Included Included
Boiler and Machinery Machinery &Equipment
above above above above above above
not covered elsewhere
Excess Crime Per Loss/ $250,000 930 934 1,166 1,166 1,166 1,195
Airport Liability $4,000,000/$4,000,000 5,189 4,650 4,650 4,650 2,325 2,441
Flood Contents 2014is$59,700 848 848 931 977 1,073 1,217
Polution Liability $1,000,000/$1,000,000 None None 461 498 506 563
Workers Compensation 6,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 6,000 6,000
self-Insured Bond
Excess Workers $1,000,000/$1,000,000 25,960 25,483 20,813 23,221 31,005 55,906
Compensation
Volunteer Accident Ins Per Filed Value None 1,389 1,788 1,788 1,788 1,788
Total Premium $ 305,597 $ 284,100 $ 269,649 $ 258,602 $ 262,468 1 $ 335,256
Distribution Credits-CIS Refund $ $ (74,832) $ (84,006) $ - $ - I
Net cost $ 305,597 I $ 284,100 $ 194,817 1 $ 174,596 1 $ 262,468 $ 335,256
As of March, 2014, City County Insurance Services indicates a potential 26% increase in
premiums for all liability and 15% for Auto Physical Damage coverage in FY 2014-2015.
14
Information on Funding, Claims and Costs
$400,000 Annual Premiums
$350,000
$300,000
$250,000
$200,000
$150,000
$100,000
$50,000
FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 FY2014
Premium Premium Premium Premium Premium Premium
-Total Premium fNet Aker Discounts
Total claims activity over the last 10 years is shown below. It demonstrates improvement in
number of claims filed and related cost for liability and property claims. Workers
compensation claims are omitted. There were only four claims open from the last three fiscal
years at June 30, 2013, and all other claims from 2010 and prior are considered closed.
Number of Claims Filed Against the City and
Cost by Year
$180,000 45
$160,000 40 Ell $140,000 35
$120,000 30
$100,000 25
$80,000 20
$60,000 15
$40,000 10
$20,000 5
0
FY FY FY FY FY FY FY FY FY FY
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
-Cost (Number Filed
Note the trend of a good year, followed by a bad year, etc. in costs while number of claims is
on a downward trend
An outstanding (open) claim normally requires a reserve to be recognized as potential cost of
settling. When settled, actual costs are recognized and related reserves are released.
15
Projected cost of a claim and the required reserve varies greatly based upon type, severity
and potential expenses. This explains the deviations in the peaks and valleys of the line and
columns on the chart. Even so, the chart demonstrates a consistent improvement over the
last three years of claims and required reserves.
Number of Claims by Quarter
Compared to Designated Reserves
a $250,000 20
va,
~II1s
19
rn n
r
c r v, °`s
$200,000,.'IFy 16
ru.,
15
49
7
O Csr 13 U
w $150,000 12 c
11
10 9
Q M
d 9 ~
U
~ $100.000 v e
2
a
s
y $50,000 ! a Z
. I
u 1 I~~~~l
0
Ag A°j A9 A9 A°' .A -A N% NQ SN 1. S1 •NN try KIti -ti KIT- K~ kllb NIS A3
*0 ~.0c SPR a 01, SP SP OCF• 01 100 SPI, U°x40, YP SPIQ•Odl. IOV 1JC 10 O-q
oReserveBalances #ofclaims
The elevated reserves in March 2012 include the claim filed against the City for allowing gun
club operations (approximately 50% of the reserved amount) and a tourist claim filed when
they tripped and fell on the sidewalk (about 25% of the reserved amount). The continued
"high level of reserves" includes the $122,283 reserve from the gun club claim.
Claims happen in the course of providing services. The City's goal is to reduce frequency
and severity to protect life and property and to minimize the cost of coverage and operations.
Since negative trends in frequency and severity drive up the cost of coverage and can reduce
funds available for other goals, maintaining a safe community and work environment is good
stewardship.
The following chart shows summary information on major claims by category for the last 10
years (excluding 2013).. Employee injuries (workers compensation claims) are excluded.
The reader can see that the largest category in claims with 26 costing $243,503 is Sewer
16
Backups but averaging less than $10,000 per claim. The smallest category depicted is a
single claim for $25,000 relating to administrative action.
MOST EXPENSIVE CLAIMS BY TYPE OVER LAST 10 YEARS
Police Actions (3
Claims),$40,222 Vehicle Accidents
Ice-Rink Related (2 (51 Claims),$90,535
Claim s), $83,994
Tortuous
Interference
w/Person's
Economic Relations
(1 Claim) $25,000
Sidewalk/Trip 8 Falls Sewer Backups (26
IS Claims), $120,407 Claims), $243,503
The City tracks claims, frequency, cost and potential for loss for departments in an attempt to
fairly allocate the cost of risk management to the various operations. It makes sense to
recognize this cost in the various departments and programs to better budget and report the
cost of doing business. Allocations are not simple due to the complexities of operations, risk
and exposure to claims and costs.
2013 Internal Charges by Department
Fire is Rescue, for Liability& Property Coverage-$404,705
$28,720
Equipment, $20,000 police, $30,000
t
Adman, NR, LeBet,
Electric, 35,U00~ $3,200
;f
X N.
a Pazb & Roo $50,00 r Coco pev, $6,515
a '1"a 2 Other $22415
Sheet $53p00T~ ~ T S 00
E
a+"` ;Was[ewme rIS9300d
t~'St„'~$d'". Y Public Works Adman,
bp'yY °it ~ ( $20,000
t 4r l
Public Works - Other,
$20,300 ❑ubigty& property coverage
only, exdudes W/[ charges.
The Insurance Fund also accounts for injured worker claims and costs. Departments pay into
the fund based upon the amount of payroll for its employees and the type of work they do
using established industry experience ratings for occupational exposure. For example, the
17
rate for an administrative office worker is a fraction of the rating for an electric department
lineman.
Below is the annual total paid by departments into the Insurance Fund. The amount paid by
a department is the sum of the respective total pay for each employee multiplied by class of
employee (police officer, firefighter, clerk etc.) by the Experience Modification Rating for the
City. An example of the math is: $2,000 in wages TIMES $.75/$1000 hazard rating for type
of work TIMES .95 (EMR) _ $1.425 per month for an employee:
Workers Compensation Funding
Total Payments by Departments
$350,000 1,20
$340,000 1.10
$330,000 1.00
$320,000 0.90
$310,000
$300,000 0.80
$290,000 0.70
$280,000 0.60
A~ A9 10 NV
~ryoo1 ~ryAOe ~Jryoa9 ~ry6N ~ry01 ~15yv
tTotal Paid - Per Payroll & EMR
-FExperience Modification Rating (EMR)
Recent claims and costs are:
Number of Workers Compensation Claims by Fiscal Year
Comparedto Net Costs Incurred
$400,000 m
vA W:~?yR, irv~) I de as
6 ~ a ~ , , IMy1A w
5 $350,000
9
f300,000 ~ is E
m -
a $250,000
o n
= $200,000 w E
k u z
$150,000 n
m
$100,000 x
m
$N.000
$ 0
Ary ryA3 1~ 0 p0 ~ Be9 910 0,, 11ry rye''
~j
ION yry°° ~ya°° Fyrya°f 'ry ~ryoo 0ryau 0ryoo <4 f+ryry~ 0rya,-
Net Cast -#ofclaims
18
Number of Workers Compensation Claims
by Year & Type
90
80
70
60
50
40
11
30 1]
ao I< 11 1]
10
0
YAI'
49 AS ,SAa ,AS SA6
ty,sOO 4+' 4+'oO ty'OO ~M1OO t+M1OO`D Gl'oo 4+'oO G`'oo' v+~oY t+,lo~ t+'o~
ill LOSS Involved ■INedical Only
Payments on claims may occur in subsequent years so a table showing incurred verses
current expenses is helpful.
Workers Compensation Claims Costs
$aoopoo
$350,000
$300,000
$150,000
$300,000
$150,M
$100,000
$50,000
S "It4
~~Al ~lPS ~SA• e,S do0 p oT 11 00~~ ~pAS O~,P O,A~I P,S~l O,t~S
A' fyi G1~ f1~ fs~ f1~ fs~ i15 s+l f1~ fat G1~
■Ne[Inarted ■iald
The Risk Management team will continue to evaluate payments by departments and related
claims, whether they are employee injuries or liability/property claims. The City will address
changes needed in each budget process. Additional information is available upon request.
19
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Council Communication
March 18, 2014, Business Meeting
Economic Development Strategy
Quarterly Update
FROM:
Adam Hanks, Management Analyst, adam@ashland.or.us
SUMMARY
The Economic Development Strategy adopted in July of 2011 contained an implementation plan sorted
into three priority levels. With the completion of the bulk of the priority one implementation actions,
staff presented a review of the work completed as well as a proposed update to the implementation
plan at the Council meeting of March 19, 2013. The phase two implementation plan was approved by
Council in June of 2013 with an updated set of ten "Priority One" actions to focus on for FY 13-14.
BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
The following table lists the ten current priority one action items that were provided to Council in the
November Quarterly update. The table includes the description provided in November with a brief
summary project update immediately below.
7.1 Improve the Land Use Development Process - Incorporates actions 7.2 and 7.3
Led by the Community Development Staff, the Unified land use code project is nearing completion with a
final draft being presented to the Planning Commission in December of 2013 with Planning Commission
recommendations moving forward to Council for final review and approval in January or February of 2014'
Spring '14 Update - Most recent draft presented to Planning Commission at its February 25, 2014 study
session. http://ashland.or.us/SIB/files/ULUO 02-25-14.pdf. The Commission will be reviewing the
revised draft materials at its March study session.
2.1 Formalize relationships and roles for Ashland specific strategy implementation among major partners
The Mayor and staff attended a recent Jackson County Economic Advisory Council meeting to present the
updated Strategy actions and coordinate activities as appropriate with the regional efforts. Staff continues
to work with SOREDI and Business Oregon staff on regional efforts that include Ashland strategy
implementation, businesses or property.
Spring '14 Update -As of January, 2014, City staff (City Administrator/Management Analyst) are now the
City representatives on the SOREDI Board of Directors and attends meetings monthly. Additionally,
Management Analyst is a member of the SOREDI Business Recruitment and Retention Committee that
meets monthly for regional strategies and implementing actions relating to the retention and growth of
existing businesses and targeted recruitment of new businesses to the region.
Page 1 of4
CITY OF
ASHLAND
2.2 Create formal and routine communication with all regional economic development partners
Staff has recently been invited to participate with the Ashland Chamber on its Economic Response Team.
Staff is also coordinating a regular schedule of quarterly meetings with SOREDI, Business Oregon, Job
Council and the Governors Regional Solution Team Manager that should be beginning in January of
2014. Regular meetings with Chamber staff have remained consistent and valuable.
Spring'14 Update -City staff has met with all partner groups, but no formal, scheduled regular meeting
schedule has been developed to due timing constraints/conflicts and project prioritization among the
partners. City Staff is now also a member of the Chamber of Commerce Business Resource Portal
Development Team, a new, local business centric, website providing an array of resources, data, news,
training opportunities for Ashland businesses.
3.3 Create a coordinated economic development information and marketing plan to maximize Public
communication tools
City and Chamber staff have met several times this quarter to work on development of the Ashland
Business Resource website, which will form the foundation of the local economic development
communication and marketing tools and resource delivery to the Ashland business community. The
project is being led by the Chamber and will include partnership from the City as well as others, potential
private sponsor as well as other public agencies. The objective is to provide a common location for all
business resources at all stages of business development, from starting, growing, relocating and financing
a business. The site will contain relevant local business and community demographics similar, but
ultimately several layers deeper than data currently found in the Chamber's Living and Doing Business
Guide.
The content will be delivered both graphically and via video and will contain relevant business events and
trainings, current news releases by business category and will allow user to register and have customized
control of automated delivery of newly posted data.
A related sub-action is the development, release and updating of a local economic indicators dashboard to
assist in evaluating the local economic climate. City staff has developed a skeleton framework based on
other similar products in other regions in the state and will be working with other Departments and the
Chamber to obtain the data and develop a system for updating.
City and Chamber staff are continuing to work towards the drafting of a proposed partnership agreement
between the City and the Chamber to define roles, responsibilities and cost allocation which will be
presented to Council for approval within the next 60-90 days.
Spring '14 Update - The Ashland Business Resource Portal has progressed from concept, to outline to
phase I launch, culminating in its unveiling at the 2014 Ashland Innovators Conference (April 11, 2014) .
A variety of business and governmental partners have provided financial and staff/data support, including
the City of Ashland, Business Oregon, SOU, SOU/RCC Small Business Development Center, Oregon
Secretary of State, Small Business Administration, US Bank and others.
The City and the Chamber are working together on promotional and outreach efforts leading up to the
release of the site April 11 at the Innovators Conference and comprehensive metrics on the use of the
website will be available to guide further development and enhancements as the project matures and
becomes the core local business resource it is envisioned to be.
The local economic indicators dashboard tool is now designed to be a tool within the portal providing the
opportunity to leverage and connect more diverse data sets residing within the site as well as benefit from
the review, input and analysis of the entire portal development team.
Page 2 of 4
~r,
CITY OF
ASHLAND
6.4 Pursue the expansion of a State E-Commerce Zone for Ashland
The e-commerce overlay to the Jackson County Enterprise Zone was awarded in July of 2013. City and
Chamber staff recently met with SOREDI staff to develop Ashland specific information sheets to distribute
to all properties and businesses within the three Enterprise/E-commerce nodes within Ashland. City and
Chamber staff are also developing common procedures and FAQrralking points for key staff to use when
Enterprise/e-commerce questions arise to ensure that consistent and accurate eligibility and process
information is provided to interested businesses.
Working with a property owner on a building construction development that initially appears to qualify for
Enterprise zone benefits and possibly e-commerce benefits as well. Project will be going through the pre-
app process in the coming month.
Spring '14 Update - The project under discussion in November has now formally initiated the land use
approval process, has completed the pre-application conference and will be submitting a formal
application in the next 30 days.
Direct contact has been made with a variety of businesses within the three enterprise zone locations in
Ashland and a comprehensive mailing will be sent within the next 30 days to all businesses and property
owners within the three zone areas.
6.5 Evaluate land availability for business expansion on lands on or adjacent to existing businesses
City Admin, Community Development and Engineering staff have met and discussed process options,
template/format, and property/resource attributes to include in the evaluations. Outreach to interested
property owners may be leveraged by Enterprise/E-commerce zone outreach efforts.
Spring '14 Update - No new status update
1.5 Assist local businesses in energy, water, waste, supply chain reductions-and efficiencies
Staff recently obtained software contract information from ICLEI for the Green Business Challenge and
has also recently presented to concept to the Chambers Green Business committee to explore
outreach/marketing partner opportunities. Software procurement and backend setup is expected to take
60-90 days from date of contract signing. Expected launch date is March of 2014
Spring '14 Update - City Staff submitted a grant application for the complete implementation costs
associated with the Green Business Challenge (software, promotional funds, enhanced technical support,
etc) in early January, but was informed in mid-February that the City was not selected for the grant.
The software will be purchased in the next 30 days and back-end data work will begin upon contract
signing with launch occurring in August/September. City staff continues to work with Chamber staff on
promotional/outreach assistance and partnership.
4.2 Develop, promote, and expand job training programs to meet skill needs identified by local business
See action 4.1
1.4 Create/Expand a local business resource & mentoring program
See action 4.1
4.1 Develop/expand programs to connect local education partners with business community for experience
and exposure to entrepreneurship, business development & operations
These three actions rely heavily on partnership agreements with The Job Council. City and Job Council
staff presented a proposed scope of services agreement based on initial feedback from Council at the
Pagc 3 of 4
11FALLA
CITY OF
ASHLAND
October Study Session. Based on the feedback, City and Job Council staff have met again and are
developing a revised scope of service contract and will be presenting that back to Council in the neM 30-
60days for review and direction. The primary focus of the contract will be on addressing action 4.2.
Quarterly meetings as described in actions 2.1 and 2.2 will assist in addressing the longer term
achievement of actions 4.2 and 1.4
Spring'14 Update - The Job Council recently provided a letter to the City stating that they were not
currently in a position to present a proposal or contract fora custom set of services for the City of Ashland
due to staffing issues along with new program objectives and mandates for the region. City staff will be
presenting potential alternatives for providing the same or similar services to the Council in an upcoming
study session in May or June of 2014.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
N/A - Council Update
STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION:
N/A - Council Update
ATTACHMENTS:
FY 13-15 Strategy Implementation Plan Update
Adopted 2011 Economic Development Strategy - www.ashland.or.us/strategy
Page 4 of 4
~r,
CITY Of
-A5 H LAN D
Economic Development Strategy
Implementation Plan
Phase Two Implementation'
2014
With the results of the business retention and expansion survey in hand, four of the six priority one
actions complete and one well into its development and review phase, a more comprehensive review of
the Strategy document as a whole is needed to maintain focus and productivity towards the overall
strategy goals and objectives.
The original strategy broke the strategy down into three primary areas: The Task, The Questions, &
The Plan.
The Task
The task remains essentially unchanged, but for a few proposed additions to slightly enlarge the scope
of the composition and impact of the next group of recommended implementing actions.
Develop and implement a comprehensive economic development strategy for the purpose of:
• Diversifying and expanding the economic base of the community
• Supporting creation and growth of businesses and non-profit/public sector organizations that
use and provide local and regional products and services
• Increasing the number of family-wage jobs in the community
• Leveraging the strengths of Ashland's tourism and repeat visitors
Inclusion of non-profit and public sector organizations alongside the more common focus of "business"
is intended to recognize the ability of many non-profit and public sector groups to contribute as a traded
sector participant in the local economy, bringing "outside money in" by exporting their services to others
outside the region, importing wealth in the form of grant funds that benefit the local economy in a
number of ways and often paying wages at or above the regional median levels.
The innovative partnership between the City of Ashland, the US Forest Service, Lomakatsi Restoration
Project and the Nature Conservancy is a prime example of the impact of non-profit and public sector
organizations in the local economy.
The Questions
The strategy development committee went through significant effort to answer the following key
questions that helped shape the final plan:
• What is economic development?
• How is our economy different? (Advantages)
• What is working for us now? (Strengths)
• What is not working? (Weaknesses)
I
EConomiC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY
Enhancing economic strength in community
• What do we want? (Vision)
• How do we get there from here? (Strategy)
As various staff, local partners and Mayor and Council reviewed the results of the Business Retention
and Expansion (B,R & E) survey, much of the survey responses were consistent with the committee
answers to these questions.
The B,R & E survey was a critical first implementation step that resulted in detailed statistical analysis
of the current local economic climate and most importantly provided feedback and prioritization of
specific actions, activities, services or resources our local business community needs and values to
survive, thrive and grow.
While the first five questions are important, the key question of "How do we get there from here?" forms
the basis for the task of updating "The Plan" Before jumping into specific strategy objectives, four
focused target business types were identified along with a business profile. They include:
• Existing businesses in the community with a commitment to operating their business and living
in Ashland
• Businesses that rely on and earn a competitive advantage from innovation, creativity, design
and technology in their operations for new product development, creation or expansion of niche
markets, process improvements, etc
• Businesses that produce specialty and value added goods or services with a market beyond
our local economy
• Businesses that purchase from the local and regional economy for supply or provide goods or
services that reduce the need of the community to purchase goods or services from outside of
region.
To incorporate the traded sector value of local non-profit organizations, the term businesses should be
defined to reference the inclusion of non-profits or be added to each of the four targets as well. The
business profile seems to remain a good match to the types of businesses that the plan is intended to
focus its efforts and has no differentiation between business and non-profit.
The Plan
The final strategy document contained the following seven objectives:
• Assist local existing and emerging business stabilize and grow
• Improve long term coordination and collaboration with local and regional economic
development partners
• Increase availability of investment capital for local businesses
• Provide local educational & technical skills development to match local business workforce
needs
• Increase tourism in the fall, winter and spring and diversify the types of events and activities
promoted
• Provide appropriate land supplies for needed business growth/expansion with quality
infrastructure to all commercial and employment lands
2 `
EConorrtic DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY
Enhancing economic strength in community
• Manage the physical development process to ensure understandable requirements with timely
and predictable results while safeguarding and improving the quality of the environment and the
community
Implementing actions were built to accomplish each of the seven objectives. In reviewing the original
prioritized action list along with the results of the B,R&E and various meetings and discussions with
local business and economic development partners, the following updated priority list addresses the
concerns, requests and desires of most.
Each of the original actions contained a description providing additional details of tactics, tasks and
projects to successfully accomplish the action. With the benefit of the additional review and input,
the descriptions of the recommended new priority one items have been revised to assist with final
funding, timeline, City staff and partner involvement needs as well as to most closely match the
needs of the local economy.
Priority 1 Actions (10 items)
7.1 Improveihetand~flse:Development•Process- Incoryoratesactions Zr2 andiZg3.
2.7 Formalize-relationships.arid .rolesfor Ashland-specifcstrategyimplementation•among:major partners
2:2 Create.formal-and routihe:communicatiori:with-allregionaleconomictlevelopmenbpartners
3.3 Create.a.coordinated:economicdevelppmentinfonnauomand-marketing. plamtomaximize'publiacommunication tools
6.4 Pursue theexpansion of a8taie E'Commerce>Zone•focAShland
6.5 Evaluate;landavallabllity~forbuslnessexpansionomlands on:or adjacenFtoexisting:businesses
1.5 AssislJOCal:businesses:inenergy, watel;wiaste, supplychaimreductionslandefficiencies
4.2 Develop„promote, andexpantl joblrainingprograms~to:meebskillneeds identified:bylocalbusiness
1.4 Create/Expand alocal business resource"&-::mentoring;pro9ram
~
4.1 Develop/expand programsato connectilocal educati on partners with business community.for experience and exposure to
entrepreneurship, busmess.developmenl & operations
" Proposed to be directed to Council Goal concept of Jobs Commission/Jobs Advisory Board to review existing
resources and develop actions to maximize existing resources or develop new resources specifically for Ashland
employers and current/future potential employees.
3 `
ECOnomiC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY
Enhancing economic strength in community
Individual Action Detail
7.1 Improve the Land Use Development Process ~ City ■
This action is one of the original priority one actions and remains in progress towards meeting the
objective of improving the land use development process. As the Community Development Staff have
progressed through their participation in the B,R&E survey as well as surveys to their own customers,
many of the issues are being addressed through the Unified Land Use Code project. The Unified Code
project objectives are to make the code clear, consistent, concise, adaptable and user-friendly, while
also improving internal City department communication and coordination particularly on larger and more
complex development projects.
Phase II of the project is intended to address issues raised in action items 7.2 and 7.3, which state:
• 7.2 - Create incentives for development applications that meet certain pre-defined economic
development eligibility criteria
7.3 - Consider changes to Land Use Development Code that may be inhibiting redevelopment
or new construction
Benchmark/Performance Measure - Completion of Unified Land Use Code project
241 Formalize relationship and roles for Ashland specific 1 BizOR, Chamber,
strategy implementation among major partners (City of C-ity, JackC0,
Ashland, Chamber, Jackson County, SOREDI, Business Oregon, Job SOREDI, SOU, RCC,
Council, etc) SBDC, THRIVE
With the responsibilities for the coordination and on-going implementation of the Economic Development
Strategy and related activities resolved with its placement in the City Administrator's Office, this action
will be given more attention and will function in parallel and in conjunction with the proposed updated
priority one actions.
Benchmark/Performance Measure - Schedule to host and conduct four quarterly meetings with
representatives of economic development partner organizations in FY14
2.2~eate formal and routine communication with all regional 1 BizOR, Chamber,
economic development partners ft, Jackoo,
Max SOU, RCC,
SBDC, THRIVE
This action is closely associated with action 2.1 and could benefit from the creation of a local Jobs
Commission/Advisory Board, but will also rely and build on existing communication structures utilized by
local and regional economic development partners.
Benchmark/Performance Measure - Schedule to host and conduct four quarterly meetings with
representatives of economic development partner organizations in FY14
4
Econornic DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY
Enhancing economic strength in community
3.3 Create a coordinated economic development~information 1 BizOR, Chamber,
!N MIIWP~ i IWlll9~d i&w:i' va ,r~v
and marketing plan to maximize public communication City, SOREDI,
tools q" Ji~rii, V SOU/RCC
The community has a variety of public communication resources such as City, Chamber and other
economic development partner websites, social media outlets, direct mailing lists, e-newsletters,
community TV (RVrV), postings in community meeting spaces, City Commission & Committee packets,
etc. A coordinated information and marketing plan would provide consistent and complete local and
regional economic development information and services for the region. The system would integrate
partner agency content to automate distribution across partner communication platforms for maximum
efficiency and reach to the business community and the public.
The B,R&E contained many references to the need/desire for increased marketing and communication
efforts for business education and training, including Ashland specific data sets across a variety of often
inter-related business segments such as real estate market analysis, detailed demographic analysis,
etc. Additionally, resources such as current development related information, fees, licenses, services
available, etc was also suggested to be pulled together into one resource location and kept current.
3.3.1 - A suggested concept to achieve this goal is a local business resource web portal which could
house all of the information described above as a one-stop shop for market/demographic data,
contacts, educational and business services resources across the various business segments.
The portal would be organized to provide information, resources and guidance specific to the needs of
the user:
Starting a business - Business assistance/training, business/strategic planning resources, legal
structures, licensing/permitting, site selection, sector specific customer demographics, local vendor
supply chain opportunities
Growing a business - Staffing/workforce training resources, expansion markets/exporting assistance,
site evaluation, real estate occupancy/vacancy/BLI information
Relocating a business - Site evaluation/land use codes, infrastructure assessment/constraints,
incentive programs (enterprise/e-commerce zones), occupancy/vacancy/BLI information
Financing a business - Local, State and Federal financing programs, grant opportunities, seed/angel
fund programs, infrastructure deferral/loan programs, incentive programs
3.3.2 - Develop, maintain and publish through the business portal an economic indicators dashboard
tool to assist Council, businesses and the community in gauging the local economic climate. Indicators
could include totals, percentage annual change and comparisons to other communities in the following:
• Business license registration by major category
• Total employees by major category
• Residential and commercial construction permits and valuation
• Home occupation permits
• Transient Occupancy Tax collections
5 `
ECOnOMiC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY
Enhancing economic strength in community
• Occupancy rate
• Visitor/tourist population
• Ashland School District enrollment by grade
• Commercial electric and water utility consumption
• New commercial electric and water utility meter connections
• Annual average home monthly rent
• Median home sales
• Population by age group
• Attainment of Economic Development Strategy action targets
Other regional indicators could be included and tracked to connect Ashland specific trends with regional
indicators such as median household income, wage growth, etc that are not available at the Ashland
community level.
3.3.3 - To further expand and provide exposure to the variety of core business segments, information
could also be provided in the form of short videos for key local segments such as: Digital Technology ,
vitaculture/sustainable ag/organic farming, Performing Arts, Visual art and design, film and video
production, culinary, government innovation/partnerships and connected to the business resource
portal and other marketing partners and outlets.
Benchmark/Performance Measure - Completion and quarterly reporting to Council and the
community using an economic indicators dashboard with FY13 benchmarks and performance targets
and measures where appropriate.
6.4 Develop and implement a communication/outreach plan for the 1 Im
With considerable support and assistance from Jackson County and SOREDI, an e-commerce
designation was secured for the entire Jackson County enterprise zone which much of the employment
lands in Ashland are now a part of. To maximize the benefits of this new resource, City staff will work
with Jackson County and SOREDI to ensure that property owners, businesses and interested parties
are aware of the program, its benefits and opportunities.
Benchmark/Performance Measure - Contact all property owners and businesses within the three e-
commerce nodes in Ashland, schedule and conduct informational meetings at each node location,
follow up on interest from individual property owners or business owners by January 2014.
One approved e-commerce business in FY14.
6 `
ECOnomiC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY
Enhancing economic strength in community
6.5 Evaluate land availability for business exp! nsion on lands ~ BizOR, C-hamber,
on or adjacent to existing, businesses ~ i~V,~ p C•it , S®REDI
As most job growth comes from the expansion of existing businesses, it is critical to evaluate lands
where business expansion is likely or desired to understand and anticipate obstacles and barriers of the
adjacent lands for expansion while also looking forward using expected market growth need estimates
over the next 10-20 years. Using the Urban Renewal District feasibility study, the EOA, the updated
Bi the B, R & E results and other related data, an initial analysis would be prepared.
City staff or a designated task force could review and evaluate existing business expansion
opportunities (adjacent lands), new business land needs consistent with identified target areas
(profile/attributes action 1.1) and land needs and opportunities within the existing Urban Growth
Boundary (UGB). The evaluation will include elements such as, infrastructure needs for the identified
lands, existing and proposed zoning regulations and identification of potential conflicts with expansion
forecasts/needs, etc.
The results may indicate the desire and benefit for proactive adjustments to the zoning regulations, the
inclusion of specific public projects in the City Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) and/or other policy
modifications. The results will also provide those businesses contemplating expansion with upfront
analysis of the practical and policy implications of a proposed expansion, removing much of the
unpredictability of that process.
Participating proactively with the business community on business expansion needs and obstacles was
identified in the B,R&E survey as a significant business need and resource. City and Chamber staff
had follow up conversations with many of the survey respondents and found a variety of issues where
further site evaluation and identification of expansion needs would benefit both short and long term
decision making for business expansion and could be the biggest assistance in retaining existing
businesses in Ashland.
Benchmark/Performance Measure
Conduct a minimum of 10 site expansion evaluations in FY14
umu ~,,u~ j ~IVWI
1.5 Assist local businesses in energy, water waste, supply 1 C>ity, Recology, Parks
chain reductions and efficiencies 4 & Rec, DEQ, Avista
i~Dis'° q
The City of Ashland created an Ashland Green Business Program four years ago, managed and staffed
through the City's Conservation Division, as a coordinated multi-agency team (city-water, city-Eiearic,
Recology-waste, Avista-Nat gas, DEC) to help businesses wanting to increase the efficiency and sustainability
efforts of their business operations. The program conducted audits in all major consumption categories
and works with businesses to develop plans and strategies to reduce initial consumption, reduce waste
and eliminate toxic materials. In addition to reducing operating costs for local businesses and
preserving community resources, successful implementation of audit findings result in job creation for
the local construction/trades sector.
7 `
Economic DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY
Enhancing economic strength in community
With turnover in staffing and a significant increase in program workload each year (new businesses are
added with existing businesses going through annual evaluations), the Green Business Program has
been placed on hold pending a review of program objectives and potential tools available to more
efficiently deliver the level of service expected and desired of the program.
Staff proposes providing businesses with a set of online tools developed by ICLEI (Local Governments
for Sustainability) called the Green Business Challenge. The product allows locals businesses to
complete a baseline survey of their resource usage, select a goal level to achieve in each category, use
the software to track data over the period of the goal, connect with City and other partner resources to
help meet the selected goal and compare their progress with other local businesses and businesses of
their type across the nation. This program format allows staff to serve interested businesses regardless
of the volume of interest and participation.
Benchmark/Performance Measure - Participation by 30 local businesses by end of FY14
4.2 Develop, promote, and expand job training programs t0 1 Chamber, NO, Job
meet skill needs identified by local business Council, SOREDI
YVIVU9~~ gYYWYy t 9!IfRVBYt"
1.4 Create/Expands local busmess~resource & mentonng 1 Chamber, City,,
program SOU/RCC-SBDC
4.1 Develop/expand programs to connect local education 1 ASD, SOU/RCC,
ba rt ners with business community for expeiece anposure to entrepreneurship, business development & Council, SOREDI,
operations City
Each of these actions were mentioned consistently throughout the B,R&E as programs and services
that would benefit local businesses. All three actions identified and supported in the B,R&E are
occurring at some level within the region. The reoccurring theme throughout the survey response and
from other discussions with business leaders and partner organizations is that there is a need for
Ashland specific resources and programs in these areas.
As part of Council's goalsetting for 2013-14, an objective was identified under the community quality of
life goal to establish a permanent jobs commission. A group like a Jobs Commission or Jobs Advisory
Board could be developed and charged with developing a prioritized plan to leverage existing services
and augment those services when necessary to ensure that work being done in the region is available,
accessible and tailored to Ashland employer and employee needs.
Staff level discussions with the listed partners indicate that a variety of programs currently in place in
the region would benefit from additional participation from Ashland businesses, institutions, schools and
non-profit and government partners.
8 `
ECOnorr& DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY
Enhancing economic strength in community
Priority 2 Items (7 items)
1.6 Determine feasibility/demand for n BizOR, Chamber, City, Chamber/SOU TBD
L
local business assistance and support SOREDI, SBDC, RCC,
office SOU
3.2 Create opportunities for increased ❑ City. Chamber. SOREDI Chamber Econ Dev budget
local access to funds
(staff time)
5.1 Maximize City funded marketing ❑ Chamber. City Chamber Econ Dev Grant or
efforts targeted for "year-round" contract
tourism
5.2 Determine market feasibility for a Chamber, City. OSF. City Econ Dev budget
convention/community center SOU (Staff time + contract)
5.3 Develop a capital improvement ❑ City City City budget
plan and maintenance strategy for the
Plaza and downtown (Staff time + contract)
6.3 Complete transportation and utility city city CIP budget
service connections to all commercial
and industrial lands in the City limits (Stall time + Contract)
and UGB
6.7 Complete and maintain real-time Chamber, City, SOREDI, City/Chamber Econ Dev Grant or
commercial occupancy data Private contract
(availability, price, contacts, etc.)
Possible data set to be incorporated into proposed action 3.3.1 - Business Resource Portal
Priority 3 Items (8 items)
Increase opportunities for local Chamber, City, SOU, Econ Dev Grant or
[P1.3
import substitution and local to local THRIVE contract
urchasing
6.2 Complete antl maintain publicly 3x City City PW budget
accessible real-time online buildable
lands inventory (Staff time)
6.6 Determine feasibility and
Econ Dev/Admin
cost/benefit for public purchase of key bud et
industrial lands to make "shovel ready" 3 City City 9
for re-sale for business development (Staff time)
7.4 Update the Economy Element of 3 City City Comm Dev/Econ Dev
the Comprehensive Plan budget (Staff time)
9
ECononiiC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY
Enhancing economic strength in community
7.5 Provide publ i access to BEE1 City PW budget
development related data sets GIS Mapping) (Staff time)
fe existing susta City City Comm Dev budget
d 7.6 egm
evelopment concepts & practices into ® (staff time)
development standards
7.7 Create ~~d~fine quantifiable BE EN
community "Quality of Life" indicators
to measure economic development
strategy success, both monetary, and
non-monetary
7.8 Develop and Implement a Fayade , y Ci ty Econ Dev/Admin
Improvement Program ® budget (Staff time)
` Possible data set to be incorporated into proposed action 3.3.1 - Business Resource Portal
10 `
ECOnOr[l1C DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY
Enhancing economic strength in community
1
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Council Communication
March 18, 2014, Business Meeting
First reading of an ordinance modifying the
Verde Village Subdivision Development Agreement
FROM:
Derek Severson, Associate Planner, Community Development, derek.severson@ashland.or.us
SUMMARY
The ordinance being presented to the City Council for first reading would modify the Verde Village
Subdivision's Development Agreement to: 1) clarify the project phasing; 2) change the energy
efficiency requirements so that all units would be built to Earth Advantage/Photovoltaic Ready
standards; and 3) change the landscaping requirements associated with construction of the multi-use
path. The proposed changes have been reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission and the
Parks Commission.
BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
The Verde Village Subdivision was approved by the City Council in December of 2007, and involved
an 11.64 acre site comprising five parcels on the site of the old Ashland Greenhouses at 87 West
Nevada and 811 Helman Streets. The subdivision included a land exchange between the applicants and
the city, an Annexation, Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Changes, and a number of land use
approvals which were included in a development agreement between the City and the applicants and
adopted by Ordinance #2945 in December of 2007.
Subsequent to the 2007 approval, the applicants dedicated property to develop 15 affordable units to
satisfy the affordability requirements of the annexation. Utilities and infrastructure, including a partial
extension of Almeda Drive, were completed to serve these units, which are now built and occupied as
"Rice Park at Verde Village." The applicants obtained Site Review approval for the remainder of the
first phase, the multi-family cottage housing portion of the subdivision, in 2009. Prior to the
installation of infrastructure or commencement of the remainder of the first phase of the development,
the economy suffered a major downturn which made it difficult to obtain financing. The City has
subsequently granted three extensions of the approval, including Ordinance #3082 adopted in 2013
granting a seven-year extension of all dates contained within the Verde Village Subdivision
Development Agreement timetable to provide the maximum 15 year duration for a development
agreement allowed by statute.
The applicants are now requesting to modify the Verde Village Subdivision's Development Agreement
to: 1) clarify the project phasing; 2) change the energy efficiency requirements so that all units would
be built to Earth Advantage/Photovoltaic Ready standards; and 3) change the landscaping requirements
Page 1 of 3
~r,
CITY OF
ASHLAND
associated with construction of the multi-use path with the hope that these modifications will enable
the development to happen, and to happen more quickly.
While the request requires adoption by ordinance because it involves a development agreement, the
proposal is a land use action and the required land use hearing was held before Council on February
18, 2014. During the hearing, one of the key questions raised had to do with the adequacy of the
existing $180,000 trust deed which secures completion of the required multi-use path improvements
and the installation and maintenance of the planting materials. Staff would note here that this amount
was determined to be sufficient to secure the required improvements in 2009. It is difficult to
accurately forecast potential labor and materials cost increases over the fifteen year horizon of the
development agreement, however regardless of any such increases the applicants would remain fully
responsible for completion of the required improvements and installation and maintenance of the plant
materials.
Prior to the close of the public hearing, Colin Swales requested that the record remain open for the
submittal of new evidence as provided in ORS 197.763.6. The applicants requested an additional seven
days for the submittal of written arguments. The Council granted these requests, leaving the record
open through February 26'h and allowing the applicants to provide written arguments through March
5"h. While the record was open, new materials were submitted by staff, Eric Navickas and Colin
Swales, and the applicants' timely submitted written arguments. These materials are included here as
Attachment 11. The public hearing and record are now closed, and the Council may proceed with
deliberations to a decision on the land use application and first reading of the proposed ordinance.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
The Parks Department has indicated that if the landscaped area required to mitigate the impacts of the
multi-use path were reduced, it would proportionally reduce the long-term maintenance costs when
Parks takes over maintenance this parcel, as further detailed in the attached Attachment 7.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION:
The Verde Village Subdivision envisioned a unique mix of housing types and energy conserving
housing that Ashland had not seen before in a single development, and included connectivity
improvements to better serve 15 now occupied Rice Park affordable housing units, the Dog Park, the
Bear Creek Greenway and the surrounding community. Staff believes the economic downturn has
unavoidably precluded realization of the applicant's original vision for the development; however staff
also believes that most of the originally-envisioned benefits to the City from this development can still
be achieved through a few modifications.
For staff, the key concern with any changes in phasing is completion of the extension of Almeda Drive
to provide permanent resident and emergency vehicle access to the already occupied Rice Park
affordable housing and construction of Perozzi Street to provide permanent access to the Dog Park.
The applicants proposed changes would complete both prior to any home construction for either phase.
While the homes would no longer be built to the "net zero energy" standard originally envisioned, the
level of energy efficiency proposed can still be found to support the original up-zoning approval in
meeting the Comprehensive Plan's identified public need for energy and water conservation in new
homes. If the project had not originally been up-zoned, the combined energy efficiency and
Page 2 of 3
Ima,
CITY OF
ASHLAND
affordability proposed here would have allowed the current density through density bonuses. The
change to a third-party rating system would simplify plan review and inspections for the city while
providing a program with which designers, contractors, realtors, future homebuyers, lenders and
investors would have a greater degree of comfort and familiarity.
Given the Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission's general support for the requested changes and
its desire to reduce Parks' long-term maintenance costs, staff believes that the landscaping and riparian
mitigation to off-set impacts of the multi-use path installation can be reduced as requested without
adversely impacting the Ashland Creek corridor.
Staff recommends that the Council approve the requested modifications, with the two added conditions
recommended by the Planning Commission, and first reading of the ordinance as amended and move it
to second reading.
SUGGESTED MOTION:
Move to approve first reading by title only of the ordinance titled, "An Ordinance Modifying the Verde
Village Subdivision Development Agreement," with the two amendments recommended by the
Planning Commission and move it on to second reading.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Proposed Ordinance.
2. Ordinance Exhibit A - Fourth Amendment to Verde Village Development Agreement
3. Ordinance Exhibit B - Revised Exhibit E. Verde Village Special Conditions
4. Ordinance Exhibit C - Revised Exhibit F. Timetable of Development
5. Ordinance Exhibit D - Original Verde Village Council Findings
6. Verde Village Conceptual Site Plan & Riparian Mitigation Plan
7. Parks Commission Recommendation and Supporting Minutes
8. Conservation Recommendation & Earth Advantage Hand-Out
9. Planning Commission Recommendation and Staff Report
10. Applicants' Submittal Materials
11. Materials Submitted While Record Was Open (including new items from staff, Eric Navickas,
Colin Swales and Valri Williams)
Page 3 of 3
~r,
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE MODIFYING THE VERDE VILLAGE SUBDIVISION'S
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT TO CLARIFY PROJECT PHASING AND
MAKE CLEAR WHICH IMPROVEMENTS ARE REQUIRED WITH
EACH PHASE AND TO ALLOW EITHER PHASE TO OCCUR FIRST; TO
CHANGE THE ENERGY EFFICIENCY REQUIREMENTS FOR THE
DEVELOPMENT SO THAT ALL UNITS WILL BE CONSTRUCTED TO
AT LEAST EARTH ADVANTAGE GOLD STANDARDS AND WILL BE
PHOTOVOLTAIC READY; AND TO CHANGE THE LANDSCAPING
REQUIREMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH CONSTRUCTION OF THE
MULTI-USE PATH.
Annotated to show deletions and additions to the code sections being modified. Deletions are
bold lined through and additions are bold underlined.
WHEREAS, Article 2. Section 1 of the Ashland City Charter provides:
Powers of the City The City shall have all powers which the constitutions, statutes, and
common law of the United States and of this State expressly or impliedly grant or allow
municipalities, as fully as though this Charter specifically enumerated each of those
powers, as well as all powers not inconsistent with the foregoing; and, in addition thereto,
shall possess all powers hereinafter specifically granted. All the authority thereof shall
have perpetual succession.
WHEREAS, the above referenced grant of power has been interpreted as affording all
legislative powers home rule constitutional provisions reserved to Oregon Cities. City of
Beaverton v. International Ass'n of Firefighters. Local 1660. Beaverton Shop 20 Or. App. 293;
531 P 2d 730, 734 (1975); and
WHEREAS, the Verde Village Subdivision proposed in 2006 involved the development of
11.64 acres on the site of the old Ashland Greenhouses and included: an Annexation,
Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map changes from Jackson County Rural Residential (RR-5) to
City of Ashland Single-Family Residential (R-1) and Suburban Residential (R-1-3.5); Outline
Plan approval to develop the property as a 68-unit residential development; Site Review approval
for a multi-family development; a Physical and Environmental Constraints Review Permit to
locate a multi-use path in the Ashland Creek Riparian Preservation Area; a Tree Removal
Permit; Exceptions to the Street Standards to install a curbside sidewalk on one side of a
proposed street, to not locate a street adjacent to natural features and to not connect two of the
proposed streets; Variances to reduce the on-street parking requirement from 78 to 38 spaces, to
reduce the rear yard setback requirement for six of the townhomes in the northwestern corner of
the site from 20 feet to 12, 14 and 16 feet, and to reduce the required distance between buildings
Ordinance No. Page 1 of 4
for the 27 cottages in the southwestern corner of the site; an Administrative Variance to the Site
Design and Use Standards to have the primary orientation of the buildings to the south, rather
than to the street, in order to maximize the use of solar energy; a land exchange with the City of
Ashland dedicating 2.57 acres adjacent to Ashland Creek to the city for parks purposes in
exchange for approximately 1.30 acres of the Dog Park in the area of the access and to the south
of the existing parking area; and a Development Agreement with the City of Ashland which
governed the development of the subdivision, and included unique, project-specific net-zero
energy performance standards applicable to each home to be built, requirements for construction
of a multi-use path within the riparian preservation corridor and for restoration, enhancement and
maintenance of the riparian corridor, and a detailed timetable for completion of the project.
WHEREAS, on December 18, 2007 the Ashland City Council approved and adopted Ordinance
No. 2945 after consideration of the staff report, the recommendation of the Planning
Commission, and the comments and evidence presented during the public hearings on the Verde
Village Development Agreement between the City of Ashland, Oregon and Ashland Flower
Shop and Greenhouses, Inc., and found and determined that the Verde Village Development
Agreement was in the best interest of the public health, safety and welfare of the City of
Ashland; met a public need and provided a public benefit; and was consistent with all applicable
City of Ashland laws and ordinances; and
WHEREAS, on January 5, 2009 the subject properties were sold by Ashland Flower Shop and
Greenhouses, Inc. to WILMA LLC, the company owned by the original applicants, Greg and
Valri Williams, to carry out the development of the properties.
WHEREAS, on July 17, 2009 the Planning Director approved and executed the First
Amendment to the Verde Village Development Agreement, approving a 12 month administrative
timetable extension as contemplated in Exhibit F of the original Development Agreement; and
WHEREAS, on March 2, 2010, the Ashland City Council adopted Ordinance No. 3007, the
Recession Extension Ordinance, which ordinance created a ministerial process for the Planning
Director to grant current planning actions a 12 month timetable extension in recognition of the
difficult financial market; and
WHEREAS, on April 9, 2010 WILMA LLC requested an extension for the entire project in
accordance with the Recession Extension Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, on June 6, 2010 the requested Amendment to the Development Agreement to
extend the timetable was approved administratively by the Director in accordance with the
Recession Extension Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, on June 4, 2013 the Ashland City Council approved and adopted Ordinance No.
3082 to grant a seven-year extension.of all dates contained within the Verde Village
Subdivision's Development Agreement timetable to provide the maximum 15 year duration for
the Development Agreement allowed under the Oregon Revised Statutes. After consideration of
the staff report, the recommendation of the Planning Commission, and the comments and
evidence presented during the public hearings, the Council found and determined that the
Ordinance No. _ Page 2 of 4
extension of the Verde Village Subdivision's Development Agreement timeline was in the best
interest of the public health, safety and welfare of the City of Ashland; met a public need and
provided a public benefit; and was consistent with all applicable City of Ashland laws and
ordinances; and
WHEREAS, on January 10, 2014 WILMA LLC requested modifications of the Development
Agreement for the Verde Village Subdivision for the properties located at 87 W. Nevada Street
and 811 Helman Street. The requested modifications include: clarifications of the project
phasing to make clear which improvements are required with each phase and to allow either
phase to occur first; changes to the energy efficiency requirements of the development so that all
units will be constructed to at least Earth Advantage Gold standards and will be Photovoltaic
Ready; and changes to the landscaping requirements associated with construction of the multi-
use path.
WHEREAS, on February 11, 2014 the City of Ashland Planning Commission considered the
above-referenced request for modifications to the Verde Village Subdivision Development
Agreement and recommended that the City Council approve the requested modifications with the
addition of two conditions to the Development Agreement's Exhibit E "Verde Village Special
Conditions"; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Ashland conducted a duly advertised public hearing
on the above-referenced request for modifications to the Development Agreement on February
18, 2014; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Ashland, following the close of the public hearing
and record, deliberated and conducted first and second readings approving adoption of the
Ordinance in accordance with Article 10 of the Ashland City Charter; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Ashland has found and determined that the
requested modifications of the Verde Village Subdivision's Development Agreement are in the
best interest of the public health, safety and welfare of the City of Ashland; meet a public need
and provide a public benefit; and are consistent with all applicable City of Ashland laws and
ordinances.
THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The above recitations are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this
reference.
SECTION 2. The City of Ashland declares the approval and adoption of the requested
modifications to the original Verde Village Development Agreement, said modifications being
attached to this Ordinance as Exhibit A, Fourth Amendment to the Verde Village Development
Agreement to Reflect Council-Approved Modifications to the Agreement and Timetable;
Exhibit B, Revised Exhibit E, Verde Village Special Conditions; and Exhibit C, Revised
Exhibit F, Timetable of Development - Outline Plan, Physical Commencement and Completion.
These exhibits are made a part hereof by this reference. In'addition, the Council's Findings of
Ordinance No. Page 3 of 4
Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006-01663 adopted December 18, 2007 in
conjunction with the approval of the Verde Village Development Agreement attached as Exhibit
D are hereby modified by the removal of council conditions #26, 427 and 444 which conflict
with the modifications requested.
SECTION 3. The adoption of this Ordinance declaring approval of the proposed modifications
to the Verde Village Subdivision Development Agreement and associated amendments to the
timetable are fully supported by evidence contained in the whole record, which is incorporated
herein by this reference.
SECTION 4. The Ordinance shall be effective after execution of the Fourth Amendment to
Verde Village Development Agreement to Reflect Council-Approved Modifications to the
Agreement in Attachment 1 by both the City and WILMA LLC, but not earlier than thirty (30)
days after the second reading of this Ordinance and signature by the Mayor.
SECTION 5. Severability. The sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses of this ordinance
are severable. The invalidity of one section, subsection, paragraph, or clause shall not affect the
validity of the remaining sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses.
The foregoing ordinance was first read by title only in accordance with Article X,
Section 2(C) of the City Charter on the day of 2014, and duly PASSED
and ADOPTED this day of '12014.
Barbara M. Christensen, City Recorder
SIGNED and APPROVED this _ day of 2014.
John Stromberg, Mayor
Reviewed as to form:
David Lohman, City Attorney
Ordinance No. Page 4 of 4
Exhibit A
FOURTH AMENDMENT TO VERDE VILLAGE DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT TO REFLECT COUNCIL-APPROVED MODIFICATIONS
TO THE AGREEMENT AND TIMETABLE
THIS FOURTH AMENDMENT is made and entered into this day of
2014, by and between the City of Ashland, a municipal corporation of the State of Oregon,
(hereinafter referred to as "City"), and WILMA, LLC, an Oregon Limited Liability Company,
(hereinafter referred to as "WILMA").
Whereas, on December 18, 2007, the City of Ashland approved Ordinance 2945 granting
approval to the Verde Village Development Agreement, a land use decision; and
Whereas, on July 17, 2009 Planning Director Bill Molnar approved and executed the
First Amendment to the Verde Village Development Agreement, approving a 12 month
administrative timetable extension as contemplated in Exhibit F of the original Development
Agreement; and
Whereas, on March 2, 2010, the Ashland City Council adopted Ordinance No. 3007, the'
Recession Extension Ordinance, which ordinance created a ministerial process for the Planning
Director to grant current planning actions a 12 month timetable extension in recognition of the
difficult financial market.
Whereas, on April 9, 2010, WILMA LLC requested an extension for the entire project in
accordance with the Recession Extension ordinance.
Whereas, on June 6, 2010, the requested Amendment to the Development Agreement to
extend the timetable was approved administratively by the Director in accordance with the
Recession Extension Ordinance;
Whereas, on April 2, 2013, WILMA LLC requested an extension for the entire project in
accordance with the allowances of the original development agreement and the Oregon Revised
Statutes.
Whereas, on June 4, 2013, the Ashland City Council adopted Ordinance No. #3082
which amended the timetable for the entire project.
Whereas, on January 10, 2014, WILMA LLC requested modifications of the
development agreement and timetable to clarify project phasing, alter the energy efficiency
requirements for the development and make changes to the landscaping and maintenance
requirements associated with the construction of a multi-use path in the riparian corridor.
Whereas, on March 4, 2014, the Ashland City Council adopted Ordinance No. #
which amended the development agreement and timetable for the entire project.
Page 1 of 3
Exhibit A
NOW THEREFORE, the Verde Village Development Agreement is hereby amended as
follows:
1. The above recitations are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this
reference; and
2. The Development Agreement is hereby amended to reflect modifications of the
development agreement and timetable to clarify project phasing, alter the energy
efficiency requirements for the development and make changes to the landscaping
and maintenance requirements associated with the construction of a multi-use path in
the riparian corridor as follows:
a. Exhibit E, Verde Village Special Conditions, is hereby replaced in its entirety by
a Revised Exhibit E, attached hereto and made a part hereof by this reference.
b. Exhibit F, Timetable of Development, is hereby replaced in its entirety by a
Revised Exhibit F, attached hereto and made a part hereof by this reference.
c. The Council's Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006-01663
adopted December 18, 2007 in conjunction with the approval of the Development
Agreement are hereby modified by the removal of council condition #26, #27 and
#44.
3. All other provision of the Verde Village Development Agreement, not inconsistent
with the above changes remain in full force and effect.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed these presents on the dates indicated
below. The date of this Amendment shall be the date on which this Agreement was executed by
all parties.
WILMA LLC CITY OF ASHLAND
By: By:
Gregory D. Williams, Managing Member John Stromberg, Mayor
Date: Date:
Approved as to Form: Approved as to Form:
John Blackhurst, David Lohman,
Attorney for OWNER/DEVELOPER City Attorney
STATE OF OREGON )
Page 2 of 3
Exhibit A
County of Jackson )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _ day of 2014,
by Gregory D. Williams, as Managing Member and authorized agent of Wilma, LLC.
Notary Public for Oregon
My Commission Expires:
STATE OF OREGON )
County of Jackson )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 2014,
by John Stromberg, as Mayor and authorized agent for the City of Ashland pursuant to
Ordinance #
Notary Public for Oregon
My Commission Expires:
Page 3 of 3
Exhibit B TIM TAW—
.TNT
REVISED EXHIBIT E §
VERDE VILLAGE
Special Conditions
I
1) Affordable Housing Requirements. A deed restriction shall be recorded for
the town home portion of the development specifying the land is required
to be developed as affordable units in accordance with AMC
18.06.030.G(5) and in conformance with the approval of PA 2006-01663.
The deed restriction shall require the affordable units to remain affordable
per Resolution 2006-13 for a 60 year period from initial occupancy. The
town home area shall be serviced with all needed public facilities.
The deed restricted land shall be dedicated to a non-profit (IRC 501(3)(x))
affordable housing developer or comparable Development Corporation
with proof of the dedication and deed restriction being presented to the
City of Ashland Housing Program Specialist prior to issuance of a building
permit for the development of the first market rate residential unit.
The deed for the land conveyed for affordable housing purposes shall
include a reverter to the Owner or deed restriction requiring conveyance
of the property to the City of Ashland if the affordable housing ' j
development is not fully developed in accordance with the approval of PA
2006-01663 within five years of this approval, unless administratively
extended pursuant to Exhibit F. In the event the property reverts to the
Owner the Owner shall thereafter convey the property, without
encumbrances, to the City of Ashland, for affordable housing purposes.
City may accept or reject the offer, but the owner shall not be relieved of
the obligation to convey the property to another approved provider of
W, -5s" i i
affordable housing. All the affordable housing units shall be Net Zero
-:2F LE,
Energy Ready as provided in Condition 12 below.
r. TIT_
Lt M1.
2) Annexation Sequence. The sequence is set forth in Section 16 of this
Agreement. Property comprising Phase I shall be annexed first. The land
dedicated to the City for parks purposes adjacent to Ashland Creek shall
be annexed second. Following such Park annexation, Phase II of the
project (single-family development) may be annexed.
3) Aoolicanfs Progosalsi The applicant agrees that Project shall be I
constructed to the standards as proposed in the application, and as finally
approved by the Council, including supporting documentation as entered
into the record. All proposals of the applicant are conditions of approval
for purposes of enforcement.
4) Archaeological Artifacts: In the event of discovery of archaeological artifacts
Ordinance No. Attachment 2 Page 1 of 9
Exhibit B
during project construction, the Owner shall stop construction in that area
and notify the City and the State of Oregon. Proper protection and/or
relocation of artifacts, to the satisfaction of State and Local approval
authorities shall be provided by the Owner, prior to recommencement of
construction.
g'q
5) Ashland Creek Riparian Corridor Enhancement and Mitigation. The Owner
shall be solely responsible for the restoration and enhancement of the
area of the Riparian Corridor that is disturbed in the construction of the
multi-use path and four (4) feet on either side of the multi-use path. to be
conveyed to the City as part of the land exchange. A mitigation plan i
prepared by a riparian biologist or a natural resource professional with
P. 1;
training and experience in biology, ecology or related fields for the impact
of the construction of the multi-use path in the riparian corridor and to
address the 10-foot wide riparian corridor buffer. The riparian corridor
buffer is the setback between the new eastern property line adjacent to
the Ashland Creek riparian corridor and the single family homes and yards
for units 68, and 25 -39, and is delineated as common area in the
application materials. Disturbed areas from the multi-use path
construction shall be re-vegetated and an additional area restored and
enhanced with local source native plant material including ground cover,
shrubs and trees at a 1:1.5 ratio, erosion control material shall be applied
(e.g. mulch, hay, jute-netting, or comparable) and temporary irrigation
facilities installed. The mitigation plan shall include but not be limited to a
statement of objectives, measurable standards of mitigation, an
assessment of riparian corridor functions and values, a statement and
detail plan of the location, elevation and hydrology of the mitigation area,
a planting plan and schedule, a monitoring and maintenance plan, a
contingency plan and performance guarantees. The applicants shall install
the mitigation measures in the approved mitigation plan in conjunction
with the multi-use path installation. The Final Plan application shall include
a mitigation plan (see contract required plant materials),- The Contract
for Installation of Plant Materials with Security acceptable to the City
Attorney and Planning Director shall be submitted for restoration and
enhancement consistent on or before the commencement of construction
as specified in the Timetable of Development.
6) Boundary Description. A final boundary description and map shall be
prepared in accordance with ORS 308.225. A registered land surveyor
shall prepare the description and map. The boundaries shall be surveyed
and monuments established as required by statute subsequent to Council
approval of the proposed annexation.
i
7) Covenants Conditions and Restrictions. A draft copy of the CC&R's for the
Ordinance No. Attachment 2 Page 2 of 9'
Lxhibit B -
homeowners association(s) shall be provided at the time of Final Plan
application. Lots 65 - 68 shall be included in a homeowners association
and subject to all subdivision requirements. CC&R's shall describe
responsibility for the maintenance of all common area and open space
improvements, parkrows and street trees. CC&R's shall provide reciprocal
easements for residents of the various homeowners associations (i.e. -
cottages, town homes and single-family residential) to access and use all
of the project open spaces. CC&R's shall note that any deviation from
the Tree Protection Plan must receive written approval from the City of
Ashland Planning Department. That the CC&R's identify the units are
which are subject to the City's Affordable Housing requirements and terms
of affordability. The CCRs shall include reference to the administrative
enforcement provisions of this agreement and the ability of the City to
enforce and assess the association for the maintenance of common areas,
including the association's responsibilities for maintenance of the storm
water areas offsite.
The Final Plan submittal shall address the usability, including Verde Village
community access, of the iv open spaces. Usability shall be
specifically addressed for the two small open spaces in the town home
area (550 sf and 700 sf), one small open space in the cottage area (1,300
sf) and the one small open space adjacent to the alley 1,310 sf). Layout
and landscaping of the open spaces as well as any improvements such as
play equipment shall be detailed in the Final Plan submittals.
8) Curb-Cut Compliance The Final Plan application shall include revised
and corrected driveway curb-cuts for units 45 and 46 - spaced at least 24-
feet apart as measured between the outside edges of the apron wings of
the driveway approaches in accordance with the Ashland Street
Standards.
9) Easements: Buildings or permanent structures shall not be located over
easements, including but not limited to the sanitary sewer pressure line
easement.
10) Endangered Species: In the event that it is determined that any , -
representative of a protected plant or animal species pursuant to the
federal, state, regional or local law, is resident on or otherwise is
significantly dependent upon the Verde Village property, the
Owner shall cease all activities which might negatively affect that individual
or population and immediately notify the City of Ashland, State of Oregon
and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Construction may resume when
proper protection, to the satisfaction of all agencies, including the City, is ,
provided by the Owner.
Ordinance No. Attachment 2 Page 3 of 9 -
Exhibit B
units shall qualify in the Gity e~ Ashland Eafth Advantage
res
:he Ashland Gemefyatien
:s..
11) Energy Conservation: Earth Advantage Program. A minimum of 53 = Fa matt : Font Mid, Ur erlim
of the residential units shall qualify in the City of Ashland Earth Advantage
program with at least a Gold rating. That a minimum of 53 of the
residential units be constructed as Photovoltaic Ready,
}2) EnerEIY Gaaser:atem Piet ZeraEneraV53 residential units, 3m
subdiYisiaig, inelud ng the eettage5~ duplexes and single faFnily units, shall
, Beek H! Plarfative revised i-I
k ;
Betebef 2q, 2907. The Final Plan appileatien shall inelude qystemq4ef i~ ih il,,--i N.i
Fneasufing and manitefing eemplianee of the development with the
Performance Standard that administeFed by the applicants aFId YeFified Nii
lay-the-Eity.
n... a..,.a n..u:..,.m.,
Beek M 7 shall be
be censistent with the fellewing.
That all dishwasheF aRd washing fflaehines shall
encompassed the applieant~s Exhibit K shall-be
pFey
ava
the size of the PV system.
That the hofnes W" meet a FnFnFFnuFn requirement
R q9 attic insu'ation for flat ceilings.
That the passive S8laF hemes shall meet the State e
Ordinance No. Attachment 2 Page 4 of 9
Exhibit B
none -tax Eicvic
12)-That the 15 affordable residential units in the subdivision (i.e. town
homes) shall meet the application "Net Zero Energy" Performance
Standard as outlined in Exhibit K-3 of the Revised Outline Plan, Book III -
Narrative revised October 24, 2007, except that the photovoltaic (PV)
system is not required to be installed in the affordable units. The
affordable unit shall be constructed with the appropriate infrastructure
wiring, conduit, roof structure) so that a photovoltaic (PV) s'I°`Is6
(e.g. 9, ) system
can be installed at a later date. I
4:T, MTN
13) Intersection Design: Applicant shall design the pedestrian crossing at the
new intersection of Heiman St., Almeda Dr. and Nevada St. Pedestrian
safety and refugee shall be addressed in the intersection design. Design
must be submitted with the Final Plan application.
is'ss 199
Eff; ,
14) LID Non-remonstrance: Prior to Final Plan Approval, the applicant shall 95 ~E 3 : =i
execute a document as consistent with ALUO 18.68.150 agreeing to TNT', Tim
participate in their fair share costs associated with a future Local
Tip,
Improvement District for improvements to Heiman Street and to not
remonstrate against such District prior to signature of the final subdivision
survey plat. Executed documents shall be submitted with the application
for Final Plan. Nothing in this condition is intended to prohibit an
owner/developer, their successors or assigns from exercising their rights
to freedom of speech and expression by orally objecting or participating in
the LID hearing or to take advantage of any protection afforded any party
by city ordinances and resolutions in effect at the time
15) Lot Coverage Com lip ance. The Final Plan application shall include revised
and corrected lot coverage calculations in square footage and percentage
for each development area (i.e. cottages, town homes and single-
family/duplex areas). Any area other than landscaping such as structures;
driveways, patios and pervious paving that does not allow normal water
infiltration shall be included as lot coverage.
z!iT'T ITT,
Tim Tti7-U7;; 1.
16) Measure 49 Waiver. The applicant expressly agrees to construct the
project in accordance with the approved plan and City ordinances and
waives the right to file a claim under Oregon Statewide Measure 49. The ;
signed waiver shall be submitted to the City of Ashland Legal Department
for review and approval prior to signature of the survey plat or adoption 31,
of a resolution or ordinance formally annexing the property, whichever is
first.
Ordinance No. Attachment 2 Page 5 of 9
Exhibit e
41 ix
17) Multi-Use Path Improvements. As specified in the approved Timetable
of Development, all the multi-use paths shall be constructed according to
City Code standards, specifically, paths shall be paved with concrete,
asphalt or a comparable all-weather surfacing. Two to four foot wide
gravel or planted strips are required on both sides of the multi-use paths
in accordance with the Ashland Street Standards. Fencing or retaining -
walls shall be located two to four feet from the improved edges of the
path to provide clear distance on both sides of the path for safe operation.
The clear distance areas shall be graded to the same slope as the
improved path to allow recovery room for pedestrians and bicyclists. The
clear distance areas shall be limited to gravel or landscape materials, and
vegetation in excess of six inches in height shall not be placed in the clear
distance areas. The transition from Almeda Dr. to the multi-use path,
from Canine Way to the multi-use path and from Nevada St. to the multi-
use path shall be addressed. Specifically, the preliminary engineering
shall address bicycle access from the street grade and provide sufficient
turning radius for bicycle navigation. The preliminary engineering plans
submitted with the Final Plan application shall include details for the multi-
use path improvements and this design. All multi-use path public
easements shall be clearly identified on the final survey plat, conveyed,
and identified in the project, (with appropriate markings or compliant
signage). Easements are required for paths between units 64-65 and
adjacent to 39. The project CC&R's shall expressly note that the
pathways are for public use and shall not be obstructed or through access
restricted unless authorized by the City of Ashland and Ashland Parks
Department.
18) Multi-Use Path Revisions: The adjustments to the width and location of
the multi-use path in and adjacent to the Ashland Creek riparian corridor
shall not affect the width or location of the 10-foot wide setback to
buildings and structures or riparian corridor buffer between the new
eastern property line adjacent to the Ashland Creek riparian corridor and
the single family homes and yards for units 68, and 25-39 that is
delineated as common area in the application materials. The 10-foot wide
setback to buildings or structures or riparian corridor shall be located and
sized as shown on plans S-1 dated June 8, 2007, S-4 dated June 8, 2007
and P-2 dated July 17 from the application.
19) Open Space Usability. [Planning Commission Condition]. The Final Plan
submittal shall address the usability, including community access, of the
open spaces. Usability shall be specifically addressed for the two small '
open spaces in the town home area (550 sf and 700 st), one small open
space in the cottage area (1,300 sf) and the one small open space
adjacent to the alley 1,310 sf). Layout and landscaping of the open
Ordinance No. Attachment 2 Page 6 of 9 ,
Exhibit B
spaces as well as any improvements such as play equipment shall be
detailed in the Final Plan submittals.
20) Parking Compliance: The Final Plan application shall include revised and
corrected on-street parking placement so that parking spaces are not
counted that are within 20 feet measured along the curb of any corner or
intersection of an alley or street in accordance with 18.92.025.D.
21) Sidewalk Construction. A sidewalk meeting the requirements of the
Ashland Street Standards shall be installed on the north side of Nevada St.
from the eastern project boundary to the intersection of Nevada S. to Oak
St. Sidewalk design shall be at the discretion of the Staff Advisor in order
to address site constraints such as grade and right-of-way width. These
sidewalk improvements shall be included in the preliminary street
improvement plan included with the Final Plan application.
22) Solar Ordinance Compliance. The Final Plan application shall demonstrate
all new structures comply with the Solar Setback A, or that each home
shall receive an equivalent certification by the project architects and
mechanical engineers that the shadow height on southern facing
exposures will not exceed that allowed under Solar Setback A in
accordance with Chapter 18.70 of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance.
Alternatively, the Final Plan application may seek a Variance to solar
setback requirements, if applicants can submit architectural and
engineering analysis supporting a variance.
23) Storm water Continuing Maintenance Obligation: The Owner, and
thereafter, the Association, (or the owners of units in the project in the
event the Association is dissolved), shall be responsible for permanent
maintenance of both on-site and off site storm water bio-engineered
swales and wetland systems. Specifically, the created wetland area and
storm water Swale system to be constructed with the project and to be
located on property exchanged with the City shall remain the maintenance
obligation of the Owner, Association, its successors and assigns.
Maintenance shall be coordinated and approved by the City Public Works
Department and Building Division and shall be performed in accordance
with approved plans by licensed contractors, hired by the Association and
authorized by City Public Works to enter property for maintenance
purposes.
24) Sworn Statement. Prior to any land clearing, alteration, or physical '
construction (other than survey work or environmental testing) on a site
the property owner and developer, if any, shall execute a sworn
Ordinance No. Attachment 2 Page 7 of 9
Exhibit B
statement under penalty of perjury and false swearing, that
owner/developer has obtained all required Federal, State, and local
authorizations, permits and approvals for the proposed development,
including any proposed use, or alteration of the site, including also any
off-site improvements.
25) Tree Protection Compliance. The Final Plan application shall address
mitigation for the removal of the 25-inch dbh Oak tree (tree 39 on Tree
Survey and Protection Plan, T-1, June 8, 2007). Mitigation shall meet the
requirements of Ashland Land Use Ordinance 18.61.084. A Verification
Permit in accordance with 18.61.042.B shall be applied for and approved
by the Ashland Planning Division prior to removal of the approved Oak
tree(tree 39 on Tree Survey and Protection Plan, T-1, June 8, 2007) and
prior to site work, storage of materials and/or the issuance of an
excavation or building permit. The Verification Permit is to inspect the
tree to be removed and the installation of the tree protection fencing.
The tree protection for the trees to be preserved shall be installed
according to the approved Tree Protection Plan prior to site work or
storage of materials. Tree protection fencing shall be chain link fencing a
minimum of six feet tall and installed in accordance with 18.61.200.8.
26) Vision Clearance Compliance. The Final Plan application shall include
revised and corrected delineation of vision clearance areas at the
intersections of streets and alleys throughout the project in accordance
with 18.92.070.D. Structures, signs and vegetation in excess of two and
one-half feet in height shall not be placed in the vision clearance areas.
Building envelopes shall be modified accordingly on the Final Plan
submittals.
27) No Waiver. The failure of this Agreement to address a particular permit,
condition, term or restriction shall not relieve the Owner of the necessity
of complying with the law governing said permitting requirements,
conditions, terms or restrictions. Any matter or thing required to be done
pursuant to the requirements of the ordinances of the City of Ashland
shall not be amended, modified or waived unless such modification,
amendment or waiver is expressly provided for in this Agreement with
specific reference to the provisions so modified waived or amended.
28) Wetland Setbacks. A minimum of five feet shall be maintained between
the northern pavement edge of the multi-use path and the wetland. The s
Final Plan application shall address the full width of the path improvement
including the base materials and methods to protect the wetland during
construction (i.e. sediment fencing).
Ordinance No. Attachment 2 Page 8 of 9
Exhibit B
29) Zoning Compliance. The Final Plan application shall include demonstration
that the buildings in the R-1-3.5 zoning district (cottages and town
homes) meet the required front yard for the R-1-3.5 zoning district.
30) Phasing. That Phase I and Phase II refer to specific portions of the
development. and the apolicants shall have the ability to construct Phase II
prior to Phase I. or to construct both phases at the same time. If the proiect
is built in a single phase. 24 lots (50 percent of the total number of lots in
Phase I and Phase II) would need to meet the timetable for Phase I. If the
proiect is built in phases, whichever phase is constructed first shall include:
the construction of Almeda Drive from its current terminus out to Heiman
Street, and the construction of Perozzi Street (formerly 'Canine Way) from
Almeda Drive to the Dog Park. Both sheets shall be completed according to
the approved plans (including paving. curbs gutters, sidewalks and parkro
w ,
planting strips with street trees on both sides). inspected and aporoved prior
to the construction of any homes for either phase.
31) Multi-Use Path & Nevada Street Sidewalk Timing. That the multi-use
oath and the sidewalk on Nevada Street, from Heiman Street to Oak Street.
shall be tied to the construction of Sander Way as part of Phase II, rather _
than as a part of Phase I. A revised plan (replacing Sheet R-1 from
December 1. 2008) shall be provided prior to pathway installation illustrating
the proposed oathwav installation and the redefined limits of the slope
stabilization and associated revecietation and shall include the planting of
additional trees both inside and outside the oathwav corridor to be selected
based on recommendations of Parks Department staff as to the number. Noe
and placement. The multi-use pathway improvements shall be installed with
Phase II of the development, but no later than five Years following
completion of the first phase."
i
Ordinance No. Attachment 2 Page 9 of 9
Exhibit C
REVISED EXHIBIT F
TIMETABLE OF DEVELOPMENT - OUTLINE PLAN
PHYSICAL COMMENCEMENT AND COMPLETION
[ORS 94.504(4)]
This development will be constructed in phases as shown on Exhibit D to this Agreement. Phase I
includes the R-1-3.5 portion of the project, twenty four cottage units, along with one single family
lot. Phase Il includes all other lots, the multi-use path, the sidewalk on the north side of Nevada, the
Riparian Corridor and Wetland area. Phase I and Phase II may be constructed in any order or at the
same time. If the project is constructed in two phases the completion of Almeda will be included in
the first phase. Each phase to be constructed, and the date which Final Plan and Site Review and
final plat approval of each phase must be obtained, are as follows:
Physical commencement of construction of any phase of development shall occur on or before
January 17, 2010. t
([Physical Commencement of Rice Park affordable housing project, a portion of Phase 1,
commenced on June 1, 2009.
Completion of all infrastructure and vertical construction, except for single family units on
individual platted lots, [4 total exempt from vertical construction deadline] shall occur no later than
January 17, 2023.
Phase Final Plan and Site Infrastructure Final Plat and Completion
Review Approval Completion of Vertical Construction
I July 17, 2009* July 17, 2020 January 17, 2022
*/Final Plan Approval was obtained on 01-06-09 for Rice Park, a portion of Phase
1]
*/Final Plan Approval was obtained on 01-25-09 for the remainder of Phase 1]
July 25, 2018$ Final Civil Plan Approval (construction
authorization) and any associated construction permits must be
obtained and Contract for Installation and Maintenance of Plant
Materials with Security submitted and executed, and construction
commenced with respect to the first hase 1--elements no later than
specified.
$[Final Civil Plan Approval (construction authorization] for Rice
Park, a portion of Phase 1, was obtained on May 5, 2009.]
July 17, 2020. Complete extension of Almeda to
Nevada Street, completion of construction of "Canine
Way" access to Dog Park, including installation of
water, sanitary sewer, storm drainage power, gas,
Ordinance No. _ Attachment 3 Page 1 of 4
Exhibit C
telephone and all utilities.
itily 17, 2jgQ: Complete sidewalk en the nef4h side
of Aie.,...1.. Street ffam the eastern ....,jeet beii .'!aFy t)
My 1:7, ?2a. Complete and
T ate .J..e Cee..r:t, alld D.eser e A fee Management
Plan.
°Ff e1,,,ate lend Lxehange and e ept. nee of tendered
July 17, 2020. Complete construction of subdivision
infrastructure to the affordable housing site and
complete extension of all needed public facilities to
the affordable housing site. (to service 15 townhome
units).
July 17, 2020. Complete construction of
"subdivision' Infrastructure for the first hase_ 1-(R-
1 fef ane (1) single family let, and fi4r
tom ent. few (24) eettage .,..:t..
July 17, 2020. Phase 1. Deadline for final survey to
be signed after completion of subdivision
infrastructure and before start of vertical
construction for the first phase.
July 17, 2011. Ij Deadline to transfer property
title to Affordable Housing Tract to Rogue Valley
Community Development Corporation (RVCDC) or
other approved non-profit affordable housing
developer. Transfer shall occur prior to vertical
construction on any Phase of the project.
f f The Affordable Housing Tract was transferred to
RVCDC on December 09, 2008, upon approval of the
early conveyance by the City Council on October 07,
2009.
Ordinance No. Attachment 3 Page 2 of 4
Exhibit C
January 17, 2022. Vertical construction deadline for
all of the first phase or 24 units (50 percent of the
units in this prroiectl.
Phase Final Plan and Site Infrastructure Final Plat and Completion
Review Approval Completion of Vertical Construction
11 July 17, 2020 July 17, 2022 January 17, 2023
January 17, 2022.$$ Final Civil Plan Approval (construction
authorization) and any associated construction permits must be
obtained and Contract for Installation and Maintenance of Plant
Materials with Security submitted and executed, and construction
commenced with respect to the second pRbase 11 elements within 18
months of Final Plan Approval, no later than specified.
July 17, 2022. Complete construction of
"subdivision" Infrastructure for the second phase.
in fi .sure'..' f r three n) single r milt' lets
Nevada StFeet, and- fie-f P-A,enly five (25)
single fwnily lots, ineluding Sander Way par4EFE)w.
July 17, 2022. Phase fl Deadline for final survey to
be signed after completion of subdivision
infrastructure and before start of vertical
construction for the second phase.
January 17, 2023. Vertical
construction deadline for the
remainder of the units.
Pwenty five (25) single famil5
t..ly 17, ems Gempletion ^f Maintenance ^..a
and Wetland AFeas PuFstlant to
r'^^«^^^« ^e D1nst runterials c,.,.....:«.,
and PFesem,eAFea MaRagement Plan fieni Phase 1.
Failure to strictly comply with this timetable of development requires an amendment to this
Agreement and subjects the Owner to then current laws, including but not limited to engineering
Ordinance No. Attachment 3 Page 3 of 4
Exhibit C
construction standards, contrary to the ordinary protection of ORS 92.040. The title transfer,
physical commencement and the 2023 completion deadline shall not be administratively extended.
After the construction termination date, no further development as authorized herein (except for
building permits for single family units on individual platted lots) shall be allowed on the subject
property unless such development is in compliance with applicable development regulations in
effect at the time. Any amendment to the extent of the Amendment shall comply with the laws in
effect at the time the amendment is sought.
Failure of the timetable of development to list an element of the Project does not relieve or
excuse the Owner from the requirement to complete that element.
Ordinance No. Attachment 3 Page 4 of 4
Exhibit D
BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF ASHLAND, JACKSON COUNTY, OREGON
December 18, 2007
IN THE MATTER OF AN ORDINANCE DECLARING THE APPROVAL OF THE )
VERDE VILLAGE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, INCLUDING A REAL )
PROPERTY EXCHANGE AND APPROVAL OF PLANNING ACTION #2006-01663, )
INCLUDING A REQUEST FOR ANNEXATION OF A TOTAL OF 11.64-ACRE SITE )
(IN THREE PARTS) LOCATED AT 87 W. NEVADA ST AND 811 HELMAN STREET )
REQUEST FOR A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP AND ZONING MAP CHANGE )
JACKSON COUNTY ZONING RR-5 (RURAL RESIDENTIAL) TO R-I (SINGLE- )
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) AND R-I-3.5 (SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL). )
THE PROPOSAL INCLUDES A REQUEST FOR OUTLINE PLAN APPROVAL )
UNDER THE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OPTIONS CHAPTER 18.88 TO )
DEVELOP THE PROPERTY AS A 68-UNIT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. )FINDINGS OF FACT,
EXCEPTIONS TO THE STREET STANDARDS ARE REQUESTED FOR )CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
NOT LOCATING A STREET ADJACENT TO NATURAL FEATURES AND )AND ORDER
TO USE A PRIVATE DRIVE TO ACCESS THE COTTAGES RATHER THAN )
THE REQUIRED PUBLIC STREET. A PHYSICAL CONSTRAINTS REVIEW )
PERMIT IS REQUESTED TO LOCATE A MULTI-USE PATH IN THE ASHLAND )
CREEK RIPARIAN PRESERVATION AREA. A TREE REMOVAL PERMIT IS )
REQUESTED TO REMOVE A 25-INCH DIAMETER AT BREAST HEIGHT OAK )
TREE. APPLICANT: Greg and Valri Williams )
1. NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS
This matter comes before the City Council for the City of Ashland for a de novo hearing on a request for
an Ordinance declaring the approval of a Development Agreement, land exchange and associated
planning actions as identified in PA #2006-01663.
Now, Therefore, the City Council of the City of Ashland makes the following Findings of Fact,
Conclusions of Law and Order.
11. FINDINGS OF FACT:
1) Tax lots 700, 800 and 900 of 39 lE 04BB and tax lots 800 and 1100 of 39 lE 04B are located at 87
W. Nevada St. and 811 Hehnan St. Tax lot 200 of 39 lE 04BB is City of Ashland property and is
commonly referred to as the Dog Park. Tax lots 700 and 800 of 39 lE 04BB are located outside of the
Ashland city limits and are Jackson County zoning Rural Residential (RR-5). Tax lots 800 and 1100 of 39
lE 04B and tax lot 900 of 39 lE 04BB are partially located in the Ashland city limits. The portions of 39
lE 04B 800 and 1100 and tax lot 900 of 39 lE 04BB in the Ashland city limits are zoned Single Family
Residential (R-1-5) and the portions of the same tax lots outside the Ashland city limits is Jackson County
zoning Rural Residential (RR-5).
Ordinance Attachment 2: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006-01663 Page 1
Exhibit D
2) The applicant is requesting an Annexation for an 11.64 acre site located at 87 W. Nevada St. and 811
Heiman St. The application includes a request for a Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning Map change
from Jackson County zoning RR-5 (Rural Residential) to City of Ashland zoning R-1-3.5 (Suburban
Residential) and R-1 (Single-Family Residential). The application includes a request for Outline Plan
approval for a 68-unit residential development under the Performance Standards Options Chapter 18.88.
The application includes two requests for Exceptions to the Street Standards for not locating a street
adjacent to natural features and to use a private drive to access the cottages rather than the required public
street. A Physical Constraints Review Permit is requested to locate a multi-use path in the Ashland
Creek Riparian Preservation Area. A Tree Removal Permit is requested to remove a 25-inch diameter at
breast height Oak tree. The application includes a request for a land exchange with the City of Ashland.
Site improvements are outlined on the plans on file at the Department of Community Development.
3) The criteria for an Annexation are described in 18.106.030 as follows:
A. The land is within the City's Urban Growth Boundary.
B. The proposed zoning for the annexed area is in conformance with the designation
indicated on the Comprehensive Plan Map, and the project, if proposed concurrently with
the annexation, is an allowed use within the proposed zoning.
C. The land is currently contiguous with the present City limits.
D. Adequate City facilities for the provision of water to the site as determined by the Public
Works Department; the transport of sewage from the site to the waste water treatment
plant as determined by the Public Works Department; the provision of electricity to the
site as determined by the Electric Department; urban storm drainage as determined by the
Public Works Department can and will be provided to and through the subject property.
Unless the City has declared a moratorium based upon a shortage of water, sewer, or
electricity, it is recognized that adequate capacity exists system-wide for these facilities.
E. Adequate transportation can and will be provided to and through the subject property. For
the purposes of this section "adequate transportation" for annexations consists of
vehicular, bicycle, pedestrian and transit transportation meeting the following standards:
1. For vehicular transportation a 20' wide paved access exists, or can and will be
constructed, along the full frontage of the project site to the nearest fully improved
collector or arterial street. All streets adjacent to the annexed area shall be
improved, at a minimum, to a half-street standard with a minimum 20' driving
surface. The City may, after assessing the impact of the development, require the
full improvement of streets adjacent to the annexed area. All streets located within
annexed areas shall be fully improved to city standards. Where future street
dedications are indicated on the City's Street Dedication Map or required by the
City, provisions shall be made for the dedication and improvement of these streets
and included with the application for annexation.
Ordinance Attachment 2: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006-01663 Page 2
Exhibit D
2. For bicycle transportation safe and accessible bicycle facilities exist, or can and
will be constructed. Should the annexation be adjacent to an arterial street, bike
lanes shall be provided on or adjacent to the arterial street. Likely bicycle
destinations from the project site shall be determined and safe and accessible
bicycle facilities serving those destinations shall be indicated.
3. For pedestrian transportation safe and accessible pedestrian facilities exist, or can
and will be constructed. Full sidewalk improvements shall be provided on one
side adjacent to the annexation for all streets adjacent to the proposed annexed
area. Sidewalks shall be provided as required by ordinance on all streets within
the annexed area. Where the project site is within a quarter of a mile of an existing
sidewalk system, the sidewalks from the project site shall be constructed to extend
and connect to the existing system. Likely pedestrian destinations from the project
site shall be determined and the safe and accessible pedestrian facilities serving
those destinations shall be indicated.
4. For transit transportation, should transit service be available to the site, or be
likely to be extended to the site in the future based on information from the local
public transit provider, provisions shall be made for the construction of adequate
transit facilities, such as bus shelters and bus tum-out lanes. All required
transportation improvements shall be constructed and installed prior to the
issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any new structures on the annexed
property.
F. For all residential annexations, a plan shall be provided demonstrating that the
development of the entire property will ultimately occur at a minimum density of 90% of
the base density for the zone, unless reductions in the total number of units is necessary to
accommodate significant natural features, topography, access limitations, or similar
physical constraints. The owner or owners of the property shall sign an agreement, to be
recorded with the county clerk after approval of the annexation, ensuring that future
development will occur in accord with the minimum density indicated in the development
plan. For purposes of computing maximum density, portions of the annexed area
containing undevelopable areas such as wetlands, floodplain corridor lands, or slopes
greater than 35%, shall not be included.
G. For all annexations with a density or potential density of four residential units or greater
and involving residential zoned lands, or commercial, employment or industrial lands
with a Residential Overlay (R-Overlay):
1. 35% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below
120% of median income; or
2. 25% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below
100% of median income; or
3. 20% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below
80% of median income; or
Ordinance Attachment 2: Findings of Fad, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006-01663 Page 3
Exhibit D
4. 15% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below
60% of median income; or
5. Title to a sufficient amount of buildable land for development is transferred to a
non-profit (IRC 501(3)(c)) affordable housing developer or comparable
Development Corporation for the purpose of complying with subsection 2 above.
The land shall be located within the project and all needed public facilities shall
be extended to the area or areas proposed for transfer. Ownership of the land shall
be transferred to the affordable housing developer or Development Corporation
prior to commencement of the project.
The total number of affordable units described in this section G shall be determined by rounding
down fractional answers to the nearest whole unit. A deed restriction, or similar legal instrument,
shall be used to guarantee compliance with affordable criteria for a period of not less than 60
years. Properties providing affordable units as part of the annexation process shall qualify for a
maximum density bonus of 25 percent.
H. One or more of the following standards are met:
1. The proposed area for annexation is to be residentially zoned, and there is less
than a five-year supply of vacant and redevelopable land in the proposed land use
classification within the current city limits. "Redevelopable land" means land
zoned for residential use on which development has already occurred but on
which, due to present or expected market forces, there exists the likelihood that
existing development will be converted to more intensive residential uses during
the planning period. The five- year supply shall be determined from vacant and
redevelopable land inventories and by the methodology for land need projections
from the Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan; or
2. The proposed lot or lots will be zoned E-1 or C-l under the Comprehensive Plan,
and that the applicant will obtain Site Review approval for an outright permitted
use, or special permitted use concurrent with the annexation request; or
3. A current or probable public health hazard exists due to lack of full City sanitary
sewer or water services; or
4. Existing development in the proposed annexation has inadequate water or sanitary
sewer service; or the service will become inadequate within one year; or
5. The area proposed for annexation has existing City of Ashland water or sanitary
sewer service extended, connected, and in use, and a signed "consent to
annexation" agreement has been filed and accepted by the City of Ashland; or
6. The lot or lots proposed for annexation are an "island" completely surrounded by
lands within the city limits.
4) The criteria for a Comprehensive Plan Map Change and Zone Change are described in
18.108.060.13 as follows:
1. Zone changes, zoning map amendments and comprehensive plan map changes subject to
the Type III procedure as described in subsection A of this section may be approved if in
compliance with the comprehensive plan and the application demonstrates that:
Ordinance Attachment 2: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006.01663 Page 4
Exhibit D
a. The change implements a public need, other than the provision of affordable
housing, supported by the Comprehensive Plan; or
b. A substantial change in circumstances has occurred since the existing zoning or
Plan designation was proposed, necessitating the need to adjust to the changed
circumstances; or
c. Circumstances relating to the general public welfare exist that require such an
action; or
d. Proposed increases in residential zoning density resulting from a change from one
zoning district to another zoning district, will provide one of the following:
1. 35% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or
below 120% of median income; or
2. 25% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or
below 100% of median income; or
3. 20% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or
below 80% of median income; or
4. 15% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or
below 60% of median income; or
5. Title to a sufficient amount of buildable land for development is
transferred to a non-profit (IRC 501(3)(c)) affordable housing developer or
comparable Development Corporation for the purpose of complying with
subsection 2 above. The land shall be located within the project and all needed
public facilities shall be extended to the area or areas proposed for transfer.
Ownership of the land shall be transferred to the affordable housing developer
or Development Corporation prior to commencement of the project; or
e. Increases in residential zoning density of four units or greater on commercial,
employment or industrial zoned lands (i.e. Residential Overlay), will not negatively
impact the City of Ashland's commercial and industrial land supply as required in the
Comprehensive Plan, and will provide one of the following:
1. 35% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or
below 120% of median income; or
2. 25% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or
below 100% of median income; or
3. 20% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or
below 80% of median income; or
4. 15% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or
below 60% of median income; or
5. Title to a sufficient amount of buildable land for development is
transferred to a non-profit (IRC 501(3)(c)) affordable housing developer or
comparable Development Corporation for the purpose of complying with
Ordinance Attachment 2: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006-01663 Page 5
Exhibit D
subsection 2 above. The land shall be located within the project and all needed
public facilities shall be extended to the area or areas proposed for dedication.
Ownership of the land and/or air space shall be transferred to the affordable
housing developer or Development Corporation prior to commencement of the
project.
The total number of affordable units described in sections D or E shall be
determined by rounding down fractional answers to the nearest whole unit. A
deed restriction, or similar legal instrument, shall be used to guarantee
compliance with affordable criteria for a period of not less than 60 years.
Sections D and E do not apply to council initiated actions.
5) The criteria for Outline Plan approval are described in 18.88.030.A.4 as follows:
The Planning Commission shall approve the outline plan when it finds the following criteria
have been met:
a. That the development meets all applicable ordinance requirements of the City of Ashland.
b. That adequate key City facilities can be provided including water, sewer, paved access to
and through the development, electricity, urban storm drainage, police and fire protection
and adequate transportation; and that the development will not cause a City facility to
operate beyond capacity.
c. That the existing and natural features of the land; such as wetlands, floodplain corridors,
ponds, large trees, rock outcroppings, etc., have been identified in the plan of the
development and significant features have been included in the open space, common
areas, and unbuildable areas.
d. That the development of the land will not prevent adjacent land from being developed for
the uses shown in the Comprehensive Plan.
e. That there are adequate provisions for the maintenance of open space and common areas,
if required or provided, and that if developments are done in phases that the early phases
have the same or higher ratio of amenities as proposed in the entire project.
f.' That the proposed density meets the base and bonus density standards established under
this Chapter.
g. The development complies with the Street Standards.
6) The criteria for an Exception to the Street Standards are described in 18.88.050.F as follows:
Ordinance Attachment 2: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006-01663 Page 6
Exhibit D
An exception to the Street Standards is not subject to the Variance requirements of section
18.100 and may be granted with respect to the Street Standards in 18.88.050 if all of the
following circumstances are found to exist:
A. There is demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements of this chapter due
to a unique or unusual aspect of the site or proposed use of the site.
B. The variance will result in equal or superior transportation facilities and connectivity;
C. The variance is the minimum necessary to alleviate the difficulty; and
D. The variance is consistent with the stated Purpose and Intent of the Performance
Standards Options Chapter.
7) The criteria for a Physical Constraints Review Permit are described in 18.62.040.1 as follows:
1. Through the application of the development standards of this chapter, the potential
impacts to the property and nearby areas have been considered, and adverse impacts have
been minimized.
2. That the applicant has considered the potential hazards that the development may create
and implemented measures to mitigate the potential hazards caused by the development.
3. That the applicant has taken all reasonable steps to reduce the adverse impact on the
environment. Irreversible actions shall be considered more seriously than reversible actions.
The Staff Advisor or Planning Commission shall consider the existing development of the
surrounding area, and the maximum permitted development permitted by the Land Use
Ordinance.
8) The criteria for a Tree Removal Permit are described in 18.61.080 as follows:
An applicant for a Tree Removal-Staff Permit shall demonstrate that the following criteria are
satisfied. The Staff Advisor may require an arborist's report to substantiate the criteria for a
permit.
A. Hazard Tree: The Staff Advisor shall issue a tree removal permit for a hazard tree if the
applicant demonstrates that a tree is a hazard and warrants removal.
I. A hazard tree is a tree that is physically damaged to the degree that it is clear that it is likely
to fall and injure persons or property. A hazard tree may also include a tree that is located within
public rights of way and is causing damage to existing public or private facilities or services and
such facilities or services cannot be relocated or the damage alleviated. The applicant must
demonstrate that the condition or location of the tree presents a clear public safety hazard or a
foreseeable danger of property damage to an existing structure and such hazard or danger cannot
reasonably be alleviated by treatment or pruning.
Ordinance Attachment 2: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006-01663 Page 7
Exhibit D
2. The City may require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each hazard tree pursuant
to AMC 18.61.084. Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit.
B. Tree that is Not a Hazard: The City shall issue a tree removal permit for a tree that is not a
hazard if the applicant demonstrates all of the following:
1. The tree is proposed for removal in order to permit the application to be consistent with
other applicable Ashland Land Use Ordinance requirements and standards. (e.g. other applicable
Site Design and Use Standards). The Staff Advisor may require the building footprint of the
development to be staked to allow for accurate verification of the permit application; and
2. . Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on erosion, soil stability,
flow of surface waters, protection of adjacent trees, or existing windbreaks; and
3. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on the tree densities, sizes,
canopies, and species diversity within 200 feet of the subject property.
The City shall grant an exception to this criterion when alternatives to the tree removal have been
considered and no reasonable alternative exists to allow the property to be used as permitted in
the zone. Nothing in this section shall require that the residential density be reduced below the
permitted density allowed by the zone. In making this determination, the City may consider
alternative site plans or placement of structures or alternate landscaping designs that would
lessen the impact on trees, so long as the alternatives continue to comply with other provisions of
the Ashland Land Use Ordinance.
4. The City shall require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each tree granted approval
pursuant to AMC 18.61.084. Such mitigation requirements shall be.a condition of approval of the
permit.
9) The City Council, following proper public notice, held public hearings on November 6, 2007 and
November 20, 2007 at which time testimony was received and exhibits were presented. The City Council
approved the application subject to conditions pertaining to the appropriate development of the site.
Now, Therefore, the City Council of the City of Ashland makes the following Findings of Fact,
Conclusions of Law and Order.
III. FINDINGS APPLYING APPLICABLE CODE CRITERIA AND MINIMUM STANDARDS
FOR ELIGIBILITY FOR ANNEXATION
3.1 The City Council finds that it has received all information necessary to make a decision
based on the Staff Report, public hearing testimony and the exhibits received.
3.2 The City Council finds that the proposal to annex an 11.64 acre site located at 87 W.
Nevada St. and 811 Helman St. meets all applicable criteria for an Annexation. The City Council
Ordinance Attachment 2: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006-01663 Page 8
Exhibit D
I
I
finds that the proposal to change the Ashland Comprehensive Plan Map from a Single-Family
Residential designation to a Suburban Residential designation for the cottage and town home
portion of the development meets all applicable criteria for a Comprehensive Plan change. The
City Council finds the proposal to develop a 68-unit single-family residential subdivision meets all
applicable criteria for an Outline Plan approval described in the Performance Standards Options
Chapter 18.88. The City Council finds and that the proposed location the multi-use path adjacent to
the natural feature rather than a public street, and the proposed use of a private drive to access the
cottages rather than the required public street meet all applicable criteria for Exceptions to the Street
Standards. The City Council finds the request to locate a multi-use path in the Ashland Creek
Riparian Preservation Area meets all applicable criteria for a Physical Constraints Review
Permit. The City Council finds the request to remove a 25-inch diameter at breast height Oak
tree meets all applicable criteria for a Tree Removal Permit.
3.3 The City Council finds that the proposal to annex 11.64 acres meets all applicable criteria for
an Annexation.
The site is comprised of five parcels and all of the parcels are located in the Ashland Urban Growth
Boundary. In addition, the land is currently contiguous with the present city limits. The west part
of the development is contiguous to the city limits on all sides. The east part of the development is
contiguous to the city limits on the west and south.
The Annexation approval criteria require the proposed zoning for the annexed area to be in
conformance with the designation indicated on the Comprehensive Plan Map. The entire site is
designated as Single-Family Residential on the Ashland Comprehensive Plan Map. The proposal
includes a Comprehensive Plan Map Change for approximately 42 percent of the site, for the
cottage and town home portion of the development, to modify the Single-Family Residential (R-
1) designation in the Ashland Comprehensive Plan Map to the Suburban Residential (R-1-3.5)
designation. The request for the Comprehensive Plan Map Change is discussed in the following
section. Therefore, the ability of the cottage and town home portion of the development to meet
this criterion is dependent on the approval of the Comprehensive Plan Map Change. The
remainder of the site, the single-family portion of the development, would remain in the Single-
Family designation. Therefore, the single-family portion of the development is in conformance
with the Comprehensive Plan Map, and satisfies this Annexation criterion.
The proposed uses included in the Annexation are required to be allowed uses in the zoning
districts. Phase I, or the R-1-3.5 portion of the project to the west of Almeda Dr. and Canine
Way includes single-family and multi-family dwellings. Single-family and multi-family
dwellings are permitted uses in the R-1.3.5 zoning district. Phase II, or the R-1-5 portion of the
project to the east of Almeda Dr. and Canine Way includes single-family dwellings and duplexes.
Single-family dwellings, and duplexes on comer lots are permitted uses in the R-1 zoning
district.
Adequate city facilities to provide water to the site, to transport sewage from the site, to carry storm
drainage to and through the site and to provide electricity to the'site are included in the preliminary
utility plan and utility power plan. Eight-inch water lines will be installed to serve the development
Ordinance Attachment 2: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006-01663 Page 9
Exhibit D
f
with connections to the existing system in Nevada and Almeda streets. Two existing 12-inch and
18-inch sanitary sewer lines nun through the property and are retained in Almeda Dr. Eight-inch
lines will be installed in Sander Way, Canine Way and the cottage driveway to serve the
development with connections to the existing lines. Storm drainage is directed to two locations.
The southwesterly area of the project is directed to the City's existing demonstration wetlands
located north of the project using standard underground pipes. The northeasterly are of the project
is directed and treated through a combination of a pipe system and a newly built system of swales
and sediment ponds to Ashland Creek. Electric utilities will run through the site from the existing
system across Nevada St. The utility power plan delineates the location of new lines, equipment
and street lights.
Adequate transportation can and will be provided to and through the subject property. A Traffic
Impact Study was prepared for the project and has been included with the application. The study
projects that the intersection of Heiman, Nevada and Ahneda, and the intersection of Oak and
Nevada will continue to operate at acceptable levels with build out of the proposed project.
Outside of the Exceptions to the Street Standards requested in the application, the proposed streets
meet the requirements of the Street Standards. The new streets are connected to Nevada Street
which is a Neighborhood Collector. The Nevada St. frontage of the site will be improved with a
parkrow and sidewalk. Sidewalks will be installed on all of the new streets running through the
site. The new intersection of Heiman St., Almeda Dr. and Nevada St. will be an important
pedestrian crossing point for residents of the development and for visitors of the Dog Park and Bear
Creek Greenway. Bicycle lanes are not required because none of the adjacent or new streets are
classified arterials. The application findings state that transit service is not planned to the site.
The Annexation approval criteria require that where the project site is within a quarter of a mile of
an existing sidewalk system, the sidewalks from the project site shall be constructed to extend and
connect to the existing system. The Oak St. sidewalk system is approximately 450 feet away or less
than 1/10 of a mile away from the project boundary. Sidewalks are in place on Oak St. from Nevada
St. to the downtown. As also required by the Annexation approval criteria, the proposal includes
the installation of a city standard parkrow and sidewalk on the Nevada St. frontage of the site. This
will result in a gap in the sidewalk network on the north side of Nevada St. from the project site to
Oak St. The City Council finds installation of the sidewalk on the north side of Nevada St. from
the site to Oak St. is required to meet the Annexation approval criteria.
The "Revisions to Area and Density Tables" submittal dated July 20, 2007 included in the
application includes a table demonstrating that the 90% density is achieved in each housing type
and for the project as a whole.
The application satisfies the annexation affordable housing requirement by providing title to a
sufficient amount of buildable land to a non-profit to develop 25% of the base density to buyers or
renters at or below 1000/a of median income (base density of 58 units ' .25 = 14.5 units). The
application includes 15 affordable housing units in a town home format in the northwest portion of
the site. The project description states that the land will be donated to Rogue Valley Community
Development Corporation (RVCDC) to develop as 15 affordable units for the range of 80 to 100
Ordinance Attachment 2: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Ordei PA #2006-01663 Page 10
Exhibit D
percent of median income.
The western portion of the project is an island surrounded by lands within the city limits, and
therefore satisfies Section 18.106.030.H.6 of the Annexation approval standards. This part of the
annexation shall occur first and shall be reflected in an Ordinance approving the annexation and
withdrawal from the Fire District.
4 The eastern portion of the project must also meet one of the six standards in Section 18.106.030.H.
I Currently, the eastern portion of the project is adjacent to and in the city limits on two sides, to the
south and west. The application states that Phase I of the project will be development of the
western portion of the project and the dedication of the property adjacent to Ashland Creek to the
city for parks purposes. The second part of the annexation is an annexation of the dedicated City
property pursuant to ALUO 18.106.040, including annexation to the boundaries of Ashland Creek
as permitted by ORS 222. This annexation shall also be reflected in an Ordinance. Finally, as a
result of the land dedication and annexation of the approximately 2.78 acres of new City property
contiguous to the dog park and located along Ashland Creek in Phase I, the eastern portion of the
property will be an island completely surrounded by lands within the city limits, and therefore
"through the imposition of conditions", authorized by ALUO 18.106.030 (concerning timing) also
complies with ALUO 18.106.030.H.6. This part of the annexation shall occur third and shall be
reflected in an Ordinance approving the annexation and withdrawal from the Fire District.
3.4 The City Council finds that the request for an Ashland Comprehensive Plan Map change
from a Single-Family Residential designation to .a Suburban Residential designation for the cottage
and town home portion of the development meets all applicable criteria for a Comprehensive Plan
Map change.
The application includes a request for a Comprehensive Plan Map Change for approximately
4.35 acres or 42 percent of the site to modify the Single-Family Residential (R-1) designation in
the Ashland Comprehensive Plan Map to the Suburban Residential (R-1-3.5) designation. The
location of the Comprehensive Plan Map Change is for Phase 1, or the cottage and town home
portion of the project to the west of Almeda Dr. and Canine Way. The remainder of the site
would remain in the Single-Family designation.
The approval criteria for a Comprehensive Plan Map Change require that the proposed change
meet one of five factors and be in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. The City Council
finds that the change to the Suburban Residential Family designation for Phase I of the project
(i.e. cottages and town homes) enables a minimum of 53 of the 68 units in the development to be
constructed at an energy and water conserving performance standard. Additionally, the
Suburban-Residential designation and subsequent R-1-3.5 zoning allows flexibility with the
housing types and site design that is well-suited for the cottage and town home areas of the
development. The cottage and town homes include attached dwellings that are grouped in
clusters around open space. The flexibility in building placement and site design allows all of the
proposed buildings to be located on an east-west axis for a true South building orientation so that
the optimum solar efficiency is gained for both solar collection devices and for passive solar
gain. Finally, the total number of units in the proposed development is comparable to the site
Ordinance Attachment 2: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006-01663 Page 11
Exhibit D
being developed as a Single-Family Residential development with R-1-5 zoning and the density
bonuses permitted in Chapter 18.88 Performance Standard Options. For example, a project could
be developed under the R-1-5 zoning and used a density bonus for conservation housing and
affordable housing. In this case, the base density of the subject properties developed at a R-1-5
density is 46.67 units (10.37 Ac * 4.5 du/ac = 46.67 units). A 40% density bonus with a 15%
density bonus for conservation housing and a 25% bonus for affordable housing would allow 65
units (46.67 units * 1.40 = 65.34 units). In comparison, the proposed number of units in the
development is 68 units.
The energy and water conservation housing provided by the development will address a public
need for energy and water conservation in new homes that is supported by the Ashland
Comprehensive Plan. The Ashland Comprehensive Plan includes the following goals and
policies concerning energy and water conservation in Chapter XI: Energy.
The City shall strive, in every appropriate way, to reduce energy consumption within the
community. Water conservation and air quality enhancement should also be promoted.
Programs should emphasize greater efficiency in end use, rather than sacrifices in living
standards. In general, policies that effect change through a combination of economic
incentives and public education shall be considered more appropriate than policies
involving strict legal requirements or mandates. The City shall give due attention to
energy and resource conservation and air quality enhancement in all planning actions
and all city activities.
Policy 3) New Housing
C) New homes and apartments are being built which do not utilize the latest
technological advances in water consuming devices. The City shall use any legal means
to insure that only water conserving equipment be installed in new construction This
should be done to accommodate growth with lesser incremental water demand and also
to eliminate the need to return to these homes later to retrofit them with water conserving
devices.
D) Passive solar design and sun tempering are very cost effective in new home
construction. They shall be encourage in new housing development and individual
houses.
E) The City shall address overall energy usage of new developments instead of just
looking at houses on an individual bases. Areas to be considered could be transportation
energy, recycling, composting, communal gardens, water usage and solar access
protection.
G) Appliance efficiency shall be encouraged in new housing. This could be done
through existing programs (i. e. Super Good Cents), by codes, by education or by
incentive programs (i. e. density bonuses). Also of these options shall be considered in
trying to achieve this goal.
Ordinance Attachment 2: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006-01663 Page 12
Exhibit D
Policy 8) Future Considerations
B) The future will be quite dynamic and volatile in the energy arena. The City needs to
actively keep abreast of new advances in technology and embrace and encourage ones
which can benefit water conservation, air quality, energy conservation or production.
The City Council finds that the energy and water conservation performance standard as outline in
Exhibit K-3 of Book III: Narrative, July 8, 2007, states that the units in the development will be
designed to use 50% less energy than a typical code compliant home. Energy efficiency features
included in the project performance standard are solar orientation, roofs designed for solar hot
water collection systems, passive solar heating, integrated thermal mass, high efficiency heat
source, improved thermal envelope (insulation), heat recovery ventilation, fluorescent or compact
fluorescent lighting, energy efficient appliances, photovoltaic electric systems and night flush
cooling. In addition, the goal of the development is to use approximately 50% less potable water
than a typical code compliant development. Water efficiency features included in the project
performance standard are water efficient toilets, showerheads and faucets, rainwater capture,
water and energy efficient washers, drought resistant plantings and water efficient irrigation.
In regards to transportation facilities and amendments to an acknowledged comprehensive plan,
Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) 660-012-00060 requires local governments to address
amendments that would "significantly affect an existing or planned transportation facility." The
original proposal was reviewed by the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) in
November 2006 and they commented that "ODOT Development Review is generally satisfied no
adverse impacts to state facilities will occur as a result of the proposed land use amendments"
(see page 494 of the record). The revised proposal was reviewed by ODOT in October 2007 and
they had no comment (see page 17 of the record).
The City Council finds the proposed Ashland Comprehensive Plan Map change from a Single-
Family Residential designation to a Suburban Residential designation for the cottage and town
home portion of the development will not significantly affect an existing or planned transportation
facility as defined in OAR 660-12-0060(1). As stated earlier, the total number of units in the
proposed development is comparable to the site being developed under the current
Comprehensive Plan designation of Single-Family Residential. Chapter 18.88 Performance
Standards Options permits density bonuses for conservation housing, common open space, major
recreational facilities and affordable housing. Using the density bonus provision, the subject
property could be developed at a density close to the proposed 68 units under the current Single-
Family Residential designation. In this case, the base density of the subject properties developed
at a R-1-5 density is 46.67 units (10.37 Ac * 4.5 du/ac = 46.67 units). A 40% density bonus with
a 15% density bonus for conservation housing and a 25% bonus for affordable housing would
allow 65 units (46.67 units * 1.40 = 65.34 units). As a result, three additional units result from
the Comprehensive Plan Map change from the current Single-Family Residential designation to
the proposed Suburban Residential Designation. Three units generate an average of thirty motor
vehicle trips per day according to the ITE, Trip Generation Model, 7a' addition. Thirty additional
trips will not significantly affect the surrounding street network including Nevada St., Helman St.
Ordinance Attachment 2: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006-01663 Page 13
Exhibit D
and Oak St.
The following discussion addresses the requirements of OAR 660-12-0060(1) and the OAR text is
in italics.
(1) Where an amendment to a functional plan, an acknowledged comprehensive plan, or a land
use regulation would significantly affect an existing or planned transportation facility, the local
government shall put in place measures as provided in section (2) of this rule to assure that
allowed land uses are consistent with the ident f ed function, capacity, and performance
standards (e.g. level of service, volume to capacity ratio, etc.) of the facility. A plan or land use
regulation amendment significantly affects a transportation facility if it would:
(a) Change the functional classification ofan existing or planned transportation facility
(exclusive of correction of map errors in an adopted plan);
According to the Traffic Impact Study submitted with the application, the proposed development
will generate 730 trips per day. While the Comprehensive Plan Map change results in a few
more residential units as compared to development of the subject site under the current
Comprehensive Plan Map designation, even considering the total traffic impact from the
proposed development does not change the functional classification of the street network in the
vicinity including Nevada St., Heiman St. and Oak St.
The streets most likely to be impacted by motor vehicle traffic generated by the development are
Nevada St., Heiman St., and Oak St. Nevada St is identified in a Neighborhood Collector, and
Heiman St. and Oak St. are identified as Avenues in the Ashland Transportation System Plan.
The Transportation Element of the Ashland Comprehensive Plan, the Ashland Transportation
System Plan and the Ashland Street Standards provide street classification guidelines. The
function of a Neighborhood Collector such as Nevada St. is to distribute traffic from Boulevards
or Avenues to neighborhood streets and vice versa, and the average traffic volumes of a
Neighborhood Collector is 1,500 to 5,000 motor vehicle trips per day. The function of an
Avenue such as Heiman St. and Oak St. is to provide concentrated pedestrian, bicycle and motor
vehicle access from Boulevards to neighborhoods and neighborhood activity centers and vice
versa, and the average traffic volumes of an Avenue is 3,000 to 10,000 motor vehicle trips per
day.
Traffic counts for Nevada St. are approximately 1,400 trips per day (2002), Heiman St. are
approximately 1,450 trips per day (2004) and for Oak St. are approximately 3,500 trips per day
(2004). The Traffic Impact Study included in the application projects that approximately 47% of
the peak PM hour traffic will use Heiman St., 38% will go west on Nevada towards Oak St. and
15% of the traffic will go east on Nevada. All of the trips generated by the proposed by the
development could be added to Nevada St., Heiman St. or Oak St., and all of the streets would be
well within the range of average traffic volumes identified in the Ashland street classification
guidelines. Additionally, Nevada St. will continue to function as a Neighborhood Collector
distributing traffic from the adjacent neighborhoods to the larger Avenue streets in the
neighborhood including Heiman St. and Oak St. Heiman St. and Oak St. will continue to operate
Ordinance Attachment 2: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006-01663 Page 14
Exhibit D
as Avenue streets taking traffic to the Boulevards in the city limits such as N. Main St., Lithia
Way and E. Main St.
(b) Change standards implementing a functional classification system; or
The proposed Comprehensive Plan Map change does not include a modification of the Ashland
street classification guidelines.
(c) As measured at the end of the planning period identified in the adopted transportation system
plan:
(A) Allow land uses or levels of development that would result in types or levels of travel or
access that are inconsistent with the functional classification of an existing or planned
transportation facility;
The Comprehensive Plan Map change results in the addition of a few more residential units as
compared to development of the subject site under the current Comprehensive Plan Map
designation. The approximately 30 additional motor vehicle trips resulting from three additional
units allowed by the Comprehensive Plan Map change will be the type of travel and level of
travel that is consistent with the functional classification of the surrounding street network
including Nevada St., Heiman St. and Oak St.
(B) Reduce the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility below the minimum
acceptable performance standard identified in the TSP or comprehensive plan; or
The Ashland Transportation System Plan identifies the minimum acceptable performance
standard for intersections as a LOS D. The Traffic Impact-Study included in the application
projects of LOS B for the intersections of Heiman St./Almeda Dr./Nevada St. and of Nevada St.
and Oak St. in 2010 with build out of the project and incorporating an annual average traffic
growth rate.
(C) Worsen the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility that is otherwise
projected to perform below the minimum acceptable performance standard identified in the TSP
or comprehensive plan.
The Ashland Transportation System Plan does not identify existing or planned transportation
facilities in the vicinity that will have insufficient capacity at the end of the 20-year planning
period of 2017.
3.5 The City Council finds the proposal to develop a 68-unit single-family residential
subdivision meets all applicable criteria for an Outline Plan approval described in the Performance
Standards Options Chapter 18.88.
The site is the located at a northernmost section of the Ashland Urban Growth Boundary and
there are no other undeveloped parcels located in the immediate vicinity. Therefore, the
development of the subject site will not prevent adjacent land from being developed for the uses
in the Comprehensive Plan.
Ordinance Attachment 2: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006-01663 Page 15
Exhibit D
I
Adequate key city facilities and utilities are available and can be provided, and were discussed
previously under the Annexation section. Outside of the Exceptions to the Street Standards
requested in the application, the proposed streets meet the requirements of the Street Standards.
A multi-use path for pedestrians and bicyclists is proposed in the Ashland Creek riparian corridor
connecting Nevada St. to the north end of Canine Way. The proposed multi-use path weaves
above and below the biologically determined riparian zone and the top of the uppermost slope
grade break. A second multi-use path is proposed between units 64 and 65 in the northwest
comer of the project. The path would connect Almeda Dr. directly to the Bear Creek Greenway
path connection. The subject section of Ashland Creek Corridor is identified for open space in
the Long Term Plan on the Parks, Trails and Open Space Program fro 2002-2012. Additionally,
the connection from Almeda Dr. to the Bear Creek Greenway path is also identified as a
proposed greenway connection on the Parks, Trail and Open Space Program for 2002-2012.
A total of 127 off-street parking spaces and 68 on-street parking spaces are required for the
proposed development of 68 units. The proposal meets the parking requirements. There are 114
off-street parking spaces proposed in a combination of garages and surface parking areas. The
remaining required 13 off-street parking spaces are satisfied by 17 on-street spaces which is the
equivalent to 13 off-street parking credits. There are 85 on-street spaces available which results in
the 17 on-street spaces that can be used towards the off-street parking credits.
The proposed density of 68 units meets the base and bonus density standards of the Performance
Standards Options Chapter 18.88. The base density of the property is 58.15 units. The project
qualifies for a density bonus of 22% for the 15 affordable housing units that are provided (15
affordable units/68 units =.22). Therefore the permitted density with the affordable housing
density bonus is 70 units (58.15 units' 1.22 = 70.94 units).
With one exception, the proposed building setbacks meet the requirements of the Performance
Standards Options Chapter 18.88. The front yards of the R-1-5 portion of the development
meet the required 15 feet to the building and 20 feet to garages, and the setbacks along the
perimeter of the development meet the required side and rear yards. The front yards of the R-1-
3.5 portion of the development (cottages and town homes) do not meet the front yard
requirements along Almeda Dr. and Canine Way. Fifteen feet is shown and 20 feet is required
for front yards in the R-1-3.5 zoning district. As a result, a condition has been added that the
buildings delineated in the Final Plan meet the required front yard for the R-1-3.5 zoning district.
The heights of the proposed buildings and minimum width between buildings appear to be met,
and will be verified at the Final Plan and building permit submittals. It is not clear the
application if the proposed units meet the Solar Setback requirements of Chapter 18.68 as is
required in the Performance Standards Options Chapter 18.88.070.E. A condition has been
added requiring the Final Plan application address the Solar Setback requirements.
The entire subdivision is required to provide a minimum of five percent of the lot area in open
space for Outline Plan approval under the Performance Standards Options. A total of 21,688
square feet is required in open space, and the proposal includes 25, 230 square feet identified as
common open space areas. With the exception of the four standard single-family lots in the
Ordinance Attachment 2: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006-01663 Page 16
Exhibit D
f
subdivision, the units also have a private yard space identified for each unit. Since the common
open space provides an additional 3,542 square feet in open space beyond the requirements, the
application meets the open space acreage requirements.
The Outline Plan approval criteria require that there are adequate provisions for the maintenance of
open space and common areas, and that if the development is done in phases that the early phases
have the same or higher ratio of amenities as proposed in the entire project. The application
findings state that the development will be done as three separate entities for the cottages, town
homes and single-family/duplex groups. The proposal is to have a Planned Unit Development for
each of the three groups and provide CC&R's detailing specific maintenance responsibilities for
each community. Phase I will include the development of the cottages and town homes.
Approximately 55% of the open space is included in Phase 1. Therefore, the same or higher ratio
of common open space would occur in the first phase of the project than in Phase II, and the
approval criterion is satisfied.
The City Council finds the significant natural features of the site are the wetland in the norther
portion of the site, two trees located outside of the riparian corridor, the Ashland Creek floodplain
corridor and Ashland Creek riparian corridor. Three of the significant natural features - the
wetland, floodplain corridor and riparian corridor - are located in a separate parcel that is proposed
to be dedicated to the city for parks purposes as part of the land exchange. As a result, the City
Council finds the wetland, floodplain corridor and riparian corridor are included in open space that
is an unbuildable area. The two significant trees are a 19-inch diameter at breast height (dbh)
Oregon Ash (tree 20 on the Tree Survey and Protection Plan, T-1, June 8, 2007) and a 39-inch dbh
California Black Oak (tree 21 on T-1). The two significant trees are located near units 28 and 31.
The City Council finds the trees are included in the common area of the subdivision, and the
common are is unbuildable.
3.6 The City Council finds and that the proposed location of the multi-use path adjacent to the
natural feature rather than a public street, and the proposed use of a private drive to access the
cottages rather than the required public street meet all applicable criteria for an Exception to the
Street Standards.
An Exception to the Street Standards is requested to locate a multi-use path in the Ashland Creek
riparian corridor rather than locating a street adjacent to natural features as is required. The
proposed multi-use path weaves above and below the biologically determined riparian zone and the
uppermost top of the slope grade break.
The Preserving Natural Features of the Street Standards is as follows.
"Streets shall be located in a manner which preserves natural features to the greatest extent
feasible. Whenever possible, street alignments shall follow natural contours and features so
that visual and physical access to the natural feature is possible. Streets shall be situated
between natural features, such as creeks, mature trees, drainages, open spaces and individual
parcels in order to appropriately incorporate such significant neighborhood features."
Ordinance Attachment 2: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006-01663 Page 17
Exhibit D
The City Council finds there are several unusual aspects of the site that make it difficult to locate
a street adjacent to Ashland Creek. First, there are two existing main sanitary sewer lines that
bisect the site (see Exhibit E-E, Preliminary Utility Plan). The application includes a
Geotechnical Investigation (see Appendix D, Geotechnical Investigation) which identifies
"relatively hard bedrock" comprised of sedimentary rock including siltstone, sandstone and
conglomerate at shallow depths throughout the site. As a result, the application identifies the
relocation of the main sanitary sewer lines as impractical. The new main street into the
development from Nevada St., Almeda Dr., is located over the existing main sanitary sewer lines
so the lines can be accessed and do not have to be moved. The second unusual aspect of the site
is the location of Ashland Creek is approximately 200 feet east of the existing intersection of
Helman St. and.Nevada St. The project traffic engineer recommended that the main access to the
site be located opposite of the Helman St. and Nevada St. intersection. Locating a secondary
street access to the development from Nevada St. and adjacent to Ashland Creek poses safety
issues in terms of the close proximity to the Helman St., Nevada St. and Almeda Dr. intersection.
The final unusual aspect of the site is the relatively narrow area from the new Almeda Dr. to
Ashland Creek. The City Council agrees the existing sanitary sewer lines, the need to align the
new street with the existing intersection of Nevada and Helman streets and the narrowness of the
area from the new Almeda Dr. to Ashland Creek are significant constraints in the development of
the new street network that create a demonstrable difficulty in meeting the Street Standard on
Preserving Natural Features.
The City Council finds that the multi-use path achieves a similar buffering effect as a street to the
Ashland Creek riparian corridor. The multi-use path will provide visual and physical access to
the riparian corridor. Although the multi-use path is largely located in the riparian corridor, it is
situated at the western edge of the corridor, and will be located between the individual parcels
and the riparian zone. The City Council finds that the multi-use path is an equally valuable
transportation facility as compared to a city street because it provides a connection to the existing
Bear Creek Greenway, thereby increasing the reach of this pedestrian and bicycle off-road
transportation system. The City Council finds that by providing a transportation facility in the
form of a multi-use path that the proposed exception is the minimum variance necessary to
address the site constraints. The City Council finds that Exception to the Street Standards to use
the proposed multi-use path rather than a public street to protect and provide access to the
Ashland Creek riparian corridor uses the natural features of the landscape to the greatest
advantage and will improve the quality of life of the residents of the development as outlined in
the Purpose and Intent of Chapter 18.88 Performance Standards Options.
An Exception to the Street Standards is requested to use a private drive to access the 24 cottages
rather than the required public street. The proposed private drive is a looped system that is
approximately 300 feet in length and is connected at both ends to Almeda Dr. The proposed private
drive is 20 feet in width, includes 26 head-in parking spaces and has a sidewalk system adjacent to
the curb. In contrast, a public street would be required to be 22 feet in width with parkrows and
sidewalks on both sides. Additionally, a 22-feet wide public street would allow parallel parking on
one side of the street.
The City Council finds there is demonstrable difficulty in providing a public street and the
Ordinance Attachment 2: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006-01663 Page 18
Exhibit D
i
required off-street parking given the geographic layout of the corner of the property that is
proposed for the cottages. A public street does not allow head-in parking adjacent to the street,
j and the proposal is to allow 26 head-in parking spaces adjacent to the private drive. In addition,
by consolidating most of the cottage parking adjacent to the private drive, it allows more of the
land area to be used as open space for the cottages rather than to be used for surface parking. In
addition, fewer parallel parking spaces would fit on one side of the public street of the length
proposed compared to the number of spaces that can be achieved with head-in parking.
Residents and visitors will have no reason to travel on this short drive other than to visit the
cottage development. As a result, motor vehicles, bicyclists and pedestrians traveling through the
development will use Almeda Dr. In terms of sidewalks, pedestrians will have little reason to
travel on the cottage drive unless visiting one of the cottages because Almeda Dr. provides a
more direct route for moving through the neighborhood. The City Council concurs that a private
street is a better fit for the cottage development than a public street because the cottages will
function as a multi-family development with a shared surface parking area that is accessed by a
driveway.
The City Council finds that Exception to the Street Standards to use a private drive to access
the 24 cottages rather than the required public street will provide for more efficient land use as
outlined in the Purpose and Intent of Chapter 18.88 Performance Standards Options.
3.7 The City Council finds the request to locate a multi-use path in the Ashland Creek Riparian
Preservation Area meets all applicable criteria for a Physical Constraints Review Permit with the
attached conditions of approval. The applicants propose to construct a multi-use path located in the
Ashland Creek riparian corridor that would connect Nevada St. to the Bear Creek Greenway
connection located in the Dog Park. The proposed multi-use path weaves above and below the
biologically determined riparian zone and the uppermost top of the slope grade break. The multi-
use path itself and the disturbance created by the construction is located largely inside of the
biologically determined riparian zone.
The City Council finds that the multi-use path in the Ashland Creek riparian corridor itself is a
benefit to the general community and that there should be a balance of the environmental resource
protection issues and the parks and open space issues.
The City Council finds that the multi-use path is located along the upper edge of the riparian
corridor in an effort to minimize adverse impacts to Ashland Creek and in an effort to retain the
general topography of the riparian corridor. The proposed multi-use path, is except for the first
50 feet, is located outside of the 100-year flood plain for AsIdand Creek. The section of path in
the flood plain is at grade and will not create a potential flooding hazard.
I
The City Council finds the applicant has not addressed the reasonable steps necessary to reduce
the adverse impact on the Ashland Creek riparian corridor including the irreversible actions
caused by the construction of the multi-use path in the riparian corridor. A mitigation plan is
required as a condition of approval at the Final Plan application. The mitigation plan requires an
assessment of the Ashland Creek riparian corridor functions, an assessment of the impact of the
Ordinance Attachment 2: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006-01663 Page 19
Exhibit D
path construction on the resource functions and mitigation measures to offset those adverse
impacts.
i 3.8 The City Council finds the request to remove a 25-inch diameter at breast height Oak tree
meets all applicable criteria for a Tree Removal Permit.
One of the eight trees identified for removal requires a Tree Removal Permit due to the size of
the tree being 18 inches diameter at breast height or greater. A Tree Removal Permit is requested
to remove a 25-inch diameter at breast height Oak tree (tree 39, Tree Survey and Protection Plan,
T-1, June 8, 2007). The tree is an Oregon White Oak and located between.proposed units 33 and
34.
The Oregon White Oak identified for removal is described as stressed because of heavy
infestation of mistletoe and as having numerous dead limbs through the crown. Additionally, the
arborist predicts that the disruption to the root system due to nearby structures would cause
further decline in the tree. The Tree Commission reviewed the proposed tree removal in
November 2006, and recommended approval of the plan.
3.9 The proposal includes a real property exchange with the City of Ashland. The proposal is
to exchange approximately 2.78 acres adjacent to Ashland Creek to the City for parks purposes in
exchange for approximately 1.54 acres of the City Dog Park in the area of the access and to the
south of the existing parking area. The Land Exchange is addressed in separate findings
attached to the Ordinance approving the Development Agreement.
IV. ORDER
In sum, the City Council concludes that the requested Ordinance declaring the approval of a Development
Agreement, and all associated planning actions contained in Planning Action 2006-01663, including the
Development Agreement, Annexation, (in three parts), Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning Map change from
Jackson County zoning RR-5 (Rural Residential) to City of Ashland zoning R-1-3.5 (Suburban Residential) and R-
1 (Single-Family Residential), request for Outline Plan approval for a 68-unit residential development under the
Performance Standards Options Chapter 18.88, requests for Exception to the Street Standards for not locating a
street adjacent to natural features and to use a private drive to access the cottages rather than the required public
street, request for a Physical Constraints Review Permit to locate a multi-use path in the Ashland Creek Riparian
Preservation Area, and request for a Tree Removal Permit to remove a 25-inch diameter at breast height Oak
tree are consistent with or comply with applicable criterion and minimum standards in the City's comprehensive
Plan and applicable land development code, including minimum requirements for annexation eligibility, and are
supported by evidence contained within the whole record
Accordingly, based on the above Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, and based upon the evidence in the
whole record, the City Council hereby declares approval of the Development Agreement and APPROVES
Planning Action 42006-01663 subject to strict compliance with the conditions of approval, set forth herein as
well as those requirements conditions and restrictions set forth in the accompanying Verde Village Development
Agreement and Land Exchange Order. Further, if any one or more of the conditions below are found to be
invalid, for any reason whatsoever, then Planning Action #2006-01663 is denied. The following are the conditions
Ordinance Attachment 2: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006-01663 Page 20
Exhibit D
and they are attached to the approval:
1) That all proposals of the applicant are conditions of approval unless otherwise modified here.
2) That Site Review approval shall be obtained for the cottages, town homes and duplexes prior to
any site work, issuance of an excavation permit or issuance of a building permit.
3) That the applicants shall execute a document as consistent with ALUO 18.68.150 agreeing to
participate in their fair share costs associated with a future Local Improvement District for
improvements to Helman Street and to not remonstrate against such District prior to signature of
the final subdivision survey plat. Nothing in this condition is intended to prohibit an
owner/developer, their successors or assigns from exercising their rights to freedom of speech
and expression by orally objecting or participating in the LID hearing or to take advantage of any
protection afforded any party by city ordinances and resolutions.
4) That all easement for sewer, water, electric and streets shall be indicated on the Final Plan
application as required by the City of Ashland.
5) The Final Plan application shall identify the sanitary sewer pressure line easement, and buildings
shall not be located in the easement.
6) That the preliminary engineering for utility improvements shall be submitted with the Final Plan
application. The utility plan shall include the location of connections to all public facilities in
and adjacent to the development, including the locations of water lines and meter sizes, fire
hydrants, sewer mains and services, manholes and clean-outs, storm drainage pipes and catch
basins. Any required private or public utility easements shall be delineated on the utility plan.
7) That the preliminary engineering for storm drainage collection and treatment shall be submitted
with the Final Plan application. The permanent maintenance of on and off site storm water bio-
engineered swales and wetland systems must be addressed through the obligations of the
homeowners' association and approved by the Public Works Department and Building Division.
8) That the applicants shall submit an electric distribution plan with the Final Plan application
including load calculations and locations of all primary and secondary services including
transformers, cabinets, meters and all other necessary equipment This plan shall be reviewed
and approved by the Electric Department prior to submission of the Final Plan application.
Transformers and cabinets shall be located in areas least visible from streets, while considering
the access needs of the Electric Department.
9) That the required pedestrian-scaled streetlight shall consist of the City of Ashland's residential
streetlight standard, and shall be included in the utility plan and engineered construction
drawings for the street improvements.
10) The preliminary engineering for proposed street improvements shall be provided at Final Plan
Ordinance Attachment 2: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006-01663 Page 21
Exhibit D
application. Street improvements shall be consistent with City of Ashland Street Standards. The
sidewalk improvement on Nevada St. shall be a minimum of six feet in width in accordance with
the Ashland Street Standards.
11) The preliminary engineering for the Final Plan application shall address the treatment of the
pedestrian crossing at the new intersection of Helman St., Almeda Dr. and Nevada St. Pedestrian
safety and refugee shall be addressed in the intersection design.
12) The Final Plan application shall include revised on-street parking placement so that parking spaces
are not counted that are within 20 feet measured along the curb of any comer or intersection of an
alley or street in accordance with 18.92.025.D.
13) The preliminary engineering shall include details for the multi-use path improvements. The
multi-use paths shall be paved with concrete, asphalt or a comparable all-weather surfacing.
Two to four foot wide gravel or planted strips are required on both sides of the multi-use paths in
accordance with the Ashland Street Standards. Fencing or retaining walls shall be located two to
four feet from the improved edges of the path to provide clear distance on both sides of the path
for safe operation. The clear distance areas shall be graded to the same slope as the improved
path to allow recovery room for pedestrians and bicyclists. The clear distance areas shall be
limited to gravel or landscape materials, and vegetation in excess of six inches in height shall not
be placed in the clear distance areas.
14) The preliminary engineering shall address the transition from Almeda Dr. to the multi-use path,
from Canine Way to the multi-use path and from Nevada St. to the multi-use path. Specifically,
the preliminary engineering shall address bicycle access from the street grade and provide
sufficient turning radius for bicycle navigation.
15) The Final Plan application shall include a mitigation plan prepared by a riparian biologist or a
natural resource professional with training and experience in biology, ecology or related fields for
the impact of the construction of the multi-use path in the riparian condor and to address the 10-
foot wide riparian corridor buffer. The riparian corridor buffer is the setback between the new
eastern property line adjacent to the Ashland Creek riparian condor and the single family homes
and yards for units 68, and 25 -39, and is delineated as common area in the application materials.
Disturbed areas from the multi-use path construction shall be re-vegetated and an additional area
restored and enhanced with local source native plant material including ground cover, shrubs and
trees at a 1:1.5 ratio, erosion control material shall be applied (e.g. mulch, hay, jute-netting, or
comparable) and temporary irrigation facilities installed. The mitigation plan shall include but not
be limited to a statement of objectives, measurable standards of mitigation, an assessment of
riparian corridor functions and values, a statement and detail plan of the location, elevation and
hydrology of the mitigation area, a planting plan and schedule, a monitoring and maintenance plan,
a contingency plan and performance guarantees. The applicants shall install the mitigation
measures in the approved mitigation plan in conjunction with the multi-use path installation.
16) That the multi-use paths shall be constructed by the applicants as part of the required subdivision
improvements.
Ordinance Attachment 2: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006-01663 Page 22
Exhibit D
i
17) That the Final Plan application shall demonstrate that the driveway curb cuts for units 45 and 46
are spaced at least 24-feet apart as measured between the outside edges of the apron wings of the
driveway approaches in accordance with the Ashland Street Standards.
18) That the Final Plan application shall delineate vision clearance areas at the intersections of streets
and alleys throughout the project in accordance with 18.92.070.D. Structures, signs and
vegetation in excess of two and one-half feet in height.shall not be placed in the vision clearance
areas. Building envelopes shall be modified accordingly on the Final Plan submittals.
19) That the street names shall be reviewed and approved by Ashland Engineering for compliance
with the City's resolution for street naming prior to submission of the Final Plan application.
20) That a size and species specific landscaping plan for the parkrows, common areas and open
spaces shall be provided at the time of the Final Plan application.
21) That a draft copy of the CC&R's for the homeowners association(s) shall be provided at the time
of Final Plan application. Lots 65 - 68 shall be included in a homeowners association and subject
to all subdivision requirements. CC&R's shall describe responsibility for the maintenance of all
common area and open space improvements, parkrows and street trees. CC&R's shall provide
reciprocal easements for residents of the various homeowners associations (i.e. cottages, town
homes and single-family residential) to access and use all of the project open spaces. CC&R's
shall note that any deviation from the Tree Protection Plan must receive written approval from
the City of Ashland Planning Department. That the CC&R's identify the units are which are
subject to the City's Affordable Housing requirements and terms of affordability.
22) That the Final Plan application shall include lot coverage calculations in square footage and
percentage for each development area (i.e. cottages, town homes and single-family/duplex areas).
Any area other than landscaping such as structures, driveways, patios and pervious paving that does
not allow normal water infiltration shall be included as lot coverage.
23) The buildings in the R-1-3.5 zoning district (cottages and town homes) shall meet the required
front yard for the R-1-3.5 zoning district in the Final Plan application.
24) The width between buildings requirement of 18.88.070.D shall be met and identified in the Final
Plan application.
25) That the Final Plan application shall demonstrate all new structures comply with the Solar
Setback A, or that each home shall receive an equivalent certification by the project architects
and mechanical engineers that the shadow height on southern facing exposures will not exceed
that allowed under Solar Setback A in accordance with Chapter 18.70 of the Ashland Land Use
Ordinance.
26) That 53 residential units in the subdivision, including the cottages, duplexes and single-family
units, shall meet the application "Net Zero Energy" Performance Standard as outlined in Exhibit
Ordinance Attachment 2: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006-01663 Page 23
Exhibit D
K-3 of the Revised Outline Plan, Book III - Narrative revised October 24, 2007. The Final Plan
application shall include systems for measuring and monitoring compliance of the development
with the Performance Standard that is administered by the applicants and verified by the city.
27) That a minimum of 53 of the residential units shall qualify in the City of Ashland Earth
Advantage program. The applicants shall meet with the Ashland Conservation Division
regarding eligible site activities prior to issuance of an excavation permit. The required Earth
Advantage documentation shall be submitted with each building permit application.
28) That the hydrant placement and fire apparatus access requirements shall be met and addressed in
the Final Plan application.
29) That the Final Plan application shall address mitigation for the removal of the 25-inch dbh Oak
tree (tree 39 on Tree Survey and Protection Plan, T-1, June 8, 2007). Mitigation shall meet the
requirements of Ashland Land Use Ordinance 18.61.084.
30) That a Verification Permit in accordance with 18.61.042.B shall be applied for and approved by
the Ashland Planning Division prior to removal of the approved Oak tree(tree 39 on Tree Survey
and Protection Plan, T-1, June 8, 2007) and prior to site work, storage of materials and/or the
issuance of an excavation or building permit. The Verification Permit is to inspect the tree to be
removed and the installation of the tree protection fencing. The tree protection for the trees to be
preserved shall be installed according to the approved Tree Protection Plan prior to site work or
storage of materials. Tree protection fencing shall be chain link fencing a minimum of six feet
tall and installed in accordance with 18.61.200.B.
31) That a grading plan addressing preliminary finished grade (i.e. existing contours and proposed
contours) and areas of cut and fill shall be submitted with the Final Plan application.
32) That public easements shall be identified on the final survey plat for all multi-use pathways. The
project CC&R's shall note that the pathways are for public use and shall not be obstructed or
through access restricted unless authorized by the City of Ashland and Ashland Parks
Department.
33) That a deed restriction shall be recorded for the town home portion of the development
specifying the land is required to be developed as affordable units in accordance with
18.06.030.G(5) and in conformance with the approval of PA 2006-01663. The deed restriction
shall require the affordable units to remain affordable per Resolution 2006-13 for it 60 year
period from initial occupancy. The town home area shall be serviced with all needed public
facilities. The deed restricted land shall be dedicated to a non-profit (IRC 501(3)(c)) affordable
housing developer or comparable Development Corporation with proof of the dedication and
deed restriction being presented to the City of Ashland Housing Program Specialist prior to
issuance of a building permit for the development of the first market rate residential unit.
34) That the applicant agrees to construct the project in accordance with the approved plan and City
ordinances and waives the right to file a claim under Oregon Statewide Measure 37. The signed
Ordinance Attachment 2: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006-01663 Page 24
Exhibit D
waiver shall be submitted to the City of Ashland Legal Department for review and approval prior
to signature of the survey plat or adoption of a resolution or ordinance formally annexing the
property, whichever is first.
35) That a final boundary description and map shall be prepared in accordance with ORS 308.225. A
registered land surveyor shall prepare the description and map. The boundaries shall be surveyed
and monuments established as required by statute subsequent to Council approval of the
proposed annexation.
36) That the land dedicated to the city for parks purposes adjacent to Ashland Creek shall be annexed
prior to the annexation of the Phase Il area of the project (single-family development).
37) That the Sander Way sidewalks shall provide public access either by being included in the street
right-0f--way or having a public pedestrian easement as required by the Ashland Engineering
Division. The Final Plan submittals shall be modified accordingly.
38) That a minimum of five feet shall be maintained between the northern pavement edge of the
multi-use path and the wetland. The Final Plan application shall address the full width of the path
improvement including the base materials and methods to protect the wetland during
construction (i.e. sediment fencing).
39) That a sidewalk meeting the requirements of the Ashland Street Standards shall be installed on
the north side of Nevada St. from the eastern project boundary to the intersection of Nevada S. to
Oak St. Sidewalk design shall be at the discretion of the Staff Advisor in order to address site
constraints such as grade and right-of-way width. These sidewalk improvements shall be
included in the preliminary street improvement plan included with the Final Plan application.
40) That the Final Plan submittal shall address the usability, including Verde Village community
access, of the private open spaces. Usability shall be specifically addressed for the two small
open spaces in the town home area (550 sf and 700 sf), one small open space in the cottage area
(1,300 st) and the one small open space adjacent to the alley 1,310 sf). Layout and landscaping
of the open spaces as well as any improvements such as play equipment shall be detailed in the
Final Plan submittals.
41) That adjustments to the width and location of the multi-use path in and adjacent to the Ashland
Creek riparian condor shall not affect the width or location of the 10-foot wide setback or
riparian corridor buffer between the new eastern property line adjacent to the Ashland Creek
riparian corridor and the single family homes and yards for units 68, and 25-39 that is delineated
as common area in the application materials. The 10-foot wide setback or riparian condor shall
be located and sized as shown on plans S-1 dated June 8, 2007, S-4 dated June 8, 2007 and P-2
dated July 17 from the application.
42) That the land being dedicated for affordable housing shall be dedicated to the City of Ashland if
it is not fully developed as affordable housing in accordance with the approval of PA 2006-01663
within five years of this approval.
Ordinance Attachment 2: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006-01663 Page 26
Exhibit D
t
i
43) That the 15 affordable residential units in the subdivision (i.e. town homes) shall meet the
application "Net Zero Energy" Performance Standard as outlined in Exhibit K-3 of the Revised
Outline Plan, Book III - Narrative revised October 24, 2007, except that the photovoltaic (PV)
system is not required to be installed in the affordable units. The affordable unit shall be
constructed with the appropriate infrastructure (e.g. wiring, conduit, roof structure) so that a
photovoltaic (PV) system can be installed at a later date.
44) That "Net Zero Energy" Performance Standard as outlined in Exhibit K-3 of the Revised Outline
Plan, Book III-Narrative revised October 24, 2007 shall be revised as follows.
• That all dishwasher and washing machines shall qualify for the State of Oregon
tax credit and be selected from the list of qualified machines maintained by the
Oregon Department of Energy.
• That each home that would be built to the standards encompassed in the
applicant's Exhibit K shall be provided with a Photovoltaic (PV) system that is
either 3kW's in size or produces 1.5 Kwh's/Sq. Ft./Yr. whichever is less, and also
be provided with enough available south facing unshaded roof space to double the
size of the PV system.
• That the homes will meet a minimum requirement of R-49 attic insulation for flat
ceilings.
• That the passive solar homes shall meet the State of Oregon's minimum
requirements for the passive solar home tax credit.
Ashland City Council Approval
Ma 'r John W. M rnson
Date
Signature authorized and approved by the full Council this [T day of /.C~~/IIf1LS~ , 20_7
Ap roved as to fo ~ -
Date:
A an City In erim ' tomey
Ordinance Attachment 2: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order PA #2006-01663 Page 26
''Jul%3 Wpn1 5568-9L6(1b9) -+d A56-LSS([65) :+ed do ana
Z196-299 (179) XVA r 860/-6L6(t65) c/al ££9L88b(100:lal ;uaUl Q
adaaspuel 9ZSL6 WO 'axed 14-9 OM6 uo8a10 •pue/gxy 8 N
'7612-997 (179) 'Hd je1Iueplsab ajgeuie;sng y =
laa'/S d Sb5
Qp /-US .9 NEE,
OZ9L6 NO93aO 'ONd~HSd IaDEJ 8wuue/datgpue7gNmnwwo9 g 339V-1-11A 34213/
4' 31U1$ '133x1$ V, 979 I U.IIeDQ2x rvawdo/ana0 guaua0 a/geu/wmp
asssauxo3 ~ x~issxxo3
v
J
ED w
U
as
a
w w~
N rn w
0 ~
as
as
W❑
rzg zz
J W J J
q- IL - w=Y -
QOOQ FU) w
LL W Z W Z Q W }
~65U) L) wQ UOU w Jnw.a
~aa w><W
z~O L) J>Q LL, U J ~ Z Z<<
O ZO Ua~ 'c m
am 7 Y o
21
m ' >
LL m
♦ ~ LL
a) S
IL U) co
I ~ ~ N Ob
.,t
I r ."4v ~e•
\ u j
77 671-21 F
^y..~ P x rr+t fit i• •X)y`~ •I \ N ~ O y ~
/ itS, 1~/y4'tF F N }
Z I m t„ } L 3., xr•x i V~ _ t
f
v \ rp;t~aW4 i.T.._.._..T.. NVWl3H
Z t~-
o •YIX ,L.c`,~, Imo""t~
A 1 ps t I
Y w ru.:..i/ J~ E ❑ w
o 16~~ \ jy
C
Oyu
LU U)
z Q 2r a i h S'.1h 1bJ \v/ ~~OP / Q
I= a z vn?r p~ / N N >
7•i` i 3-u z
y . J V
LU L EL (L
i i> sg `"}Ltd ~E r Q W z ug
w h ~JP f l ~g>Q
g ! i o / PR y i O: rn w
OQw i iQ b 1' Y1 N y Jt4. l U<
Z~w IL
IL < 2 3:
0 IL
H
F µ4y117 Y.
ww~ I I ,yf ao
2 CL IL
000 Z> Q W I r c
~.Y' fin' r+.~ •i•5 t; m n6
u) LU
o (no
LLa->.m H> Q~ z> - -
. m ' Q W W C 7_ O d }
LL 'c O Z F- Q E Z W ~ Z
C aO Q~ O~ Q¢ zw
inD m UOInQ O~
9 U O
m U U
-1.33a1s slaon
laumwwl min nl=i¢eanm ~iaenm
swrsx I xxavn wee ^~'en•••a>• nlwaerx avavwwn ;n t. alv,~J, 4 NOJ3ilO'ONVIHSV
39'v-111A SYWIIILM JHWA ONVJ310
UJI °30vrnn 3aaan
1 1 1 a NV9d NOLLVOLLIW NV'dfVdrd
v
_
j L e O
IAI
j aaas i i! r+
/ ~ I I T it ii ~ ~ F ~ a!!!"! j ; !i •tl fi ~ fi! j~~ 1 :i 1
r
, I/ ~ ~~}~~lj~jsi ij 1 'a!..!a ~~ff i iliij~i !';i'j! ~i I!ii~
d {
41-------
_ ~ a ..I • I 1 e. I c } it j ! i j 1
oava(: Ij 3S3SS8 ! ;e 0,111 tl if~la=1i
C
• ~ad.51F i
.r
isl ~ 1183_`'
!33115 f $ , F5615!}t` i ~
}51117 _ a. .r' ~ • .
: n' • e , s ~ ~ ~r ld.FHi}! ttd5la d ~ ,
l51 !1!
Fl53 e. a .Vr' ls!!5i 715!3 li` ♦ 515 r ,_._~jw;,,
l!5!e slf a5 V ~ Yiifdi~~'A
lH3, 1t~`! t `thiih;75 5l, lH16p !Hlsjita SHii!
l li Ilglu _ a
-1 ~ ^ 11
~ l - .,J = s.^ax. aszs.es aaa:!a¢!:b oaaa¢ !•HI
:1556] ,ss j ll, al
4 gg 1 ¢ i !!ia lalllHji d71~j.
- s r!
-
=I ` a S}65117th! S1aa11 . 8s
1 Q~ 1 . S.S
I 1 p 1, ~ 7,JJ ;p
e 1 .1 1
-~r = J{! jl!ii ~fil I!ii ill 'I
®
ASHLAND PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
340 SO. PIONEER STREET ASHLAND, OREGON 97520
COMMISSIONERS: Don Robertson
Mike Gardiner Director
Rick Landt
Jim Lewis TEL: (541) 488-5340
Stelani Sefiinger FAX: (541) 488-5314
Vanston Shaw j
MEMORANDUM
TO Derek Severson, Associate Planner
FROM Don Robertson, Ashland Parks and Recreation Director
DATE January 29, 2014
SUBJECT Verde Village Agreement
On December 23, 2013, the Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission heard a presentation
from the Williams family, developers of Verde Village. The Williams' notified the commission
about their intention to request modifications to their development agreement with the City. The
modifications specific to Parks dealt with the timing of improvements to extend the Bear Creek
Greenway to Nevada Street, the design for the improvements, and the length of maintenance for
the developers. By motion, the commission made three recommendations that evening.
Recommendation #1
With regard to the timing for improvements; the commission made a motion to "recommend to
council allowing Verde village developers to wait for the second phase of development to install
the path if the first phase was not along the path; however if the first phase was implemented and
the developers did not put in the second phase along the pathway, after five years they would
need to build the path." This motion was unanimously approved.
Explanation
Currently the agreement indicates that the development would need to be built as a single phase
and the path would be installed concurrently with the development. The commission recognized
that it may need to be developed in two phases and the recommended modification would tie the
path, located adjacent to the actual trail, to the "second phase." The commission used the term
"second phase" as an indicator for the location but recognized that it may proceed before the
"first phase." The trail would need to be built regardless of which phase actually proceeded first.
Further, the five-year certain timeline was meant to hold the developer accountable to the
original timeline for construction.
Home of Famous Lithla Park
Recommendation 42
The next action taken by the commission was to recommend to council that "the proposed
vegetation in the development plan be reduced to an 18-foot-wide corridor along and including
the bike path, including any affected or disturbed areas within that corridor which would be re-
vegetated, as opposed to how the plan is shown."
Explanation
The concern of the commission was that they would receive a very large re-vegetated piece of
property that would be impossible to maintain at a reasonable cost with a reasonable chance of
success. The proposed modifications would accomplish the need for replacing vegetation on
disturbed areas and begin the process for the elimination of noxious and invasive weeds but not
saddle the department with a project that could not adequately succeed.
Recommendation #3
The third action taken by the commission was to recommend that council "allow Parks'
professional staff the flexibility to work with the developer to identify any additional trees to
plant outside or inside the identified 18-foot corridor."
Explanation
Again, this action was intended to create a project with a higher survivability and success rate
that would accomplish the goals of removal of noxious or invasive weeds while replacing them
with native or native-like species to help sustain the project. While the commission did not
specify the types or numbers of trees, the intention was to allow professional staff to make
positive impacts on the reductions of non-natives and noxious weeds on the property that was .
previously exchanged.
No Recommendation
The commission discussed but did not take action on the request for eliminating the agreement
provision requiring the developer to provide three years of ongoing maintenance for the trail or
the landscaped area associated with the trail. The feeling among the commission was that it was
an appropriate timeframe.
Explanation
They felt the actions outlined above would reduce the needed scope of maintenance to a level
that was reasonable for the developer and ultimately reasonable for Ashland Park and Recreation
while also providing a higher likelihood of success.
City of Ashland
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
December 23, 2013
ATTENDANCE
Present: Commissioners Gardiner, Landt, Lewis, Seffinger, Shaw; Director Robertson; Superintendent Dickens
Absent: City Council Liaison Voisin; Superintendent Dials
CALL TO ORDER
Seffinger called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in Council Chambers, 1175 E. Main Street.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Study Session - November 18, 2013
MOTION Landt moved to approve the minutes as presented. Shaw seconded the motion.
The vote was: All yes
Regular Meeting - November 25, 2013
Under "Garfield Park RFP Motion Rescindment," at the end of discussion and before the vote, Landt said there
was a reference to Robertson stating that he "could contact local architectural firms." Landt said a review of the
discussion leading up to the vote would show the word "could" was actually "would." He asked for that
amendment to the minutes.
MOTION Landt moved to approve the minutes as amended. Shaw seconded the motion.
The vote was: All yes
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
None
ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS TO THE AGENDA
Landt asked for the removal of the item relating to "Signs, Plaques, and Memorials Subcommittee
Recommendations." After speaking to staff liaison Dickens earlier that evening, he realized certain details
required further refinement before the topic could be discussed by the commission. Since there was no urgency,
he asked for a delay until after the next subcommittee meeting.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
None
NEW BUSINESS
VERDE VILLAGE AGREEMENT AMENDMENT REQUEST
At the December 16 study session, Robertson said Valri Williams, co-developer of Verde Village, outlined
possible changes to the development agreement for the land located near the Ashland Dog Park. The property
had been owned by the Williams family for over 100 years and in 2007 they entered into an agreement with the
City of Ashland to develop it into high efficiency, energy-neutral homes. Some of the requirements proved
onerous and the developers requested amendments that would allow the project to move forward. The
commission asked them to attend the regular meeting so they could gather additional information. Robertson
welcomed Valri and Greg Williams and invited them to speak to the commission.
Valri Williams, 744 Heiman Street, said the development plan was established in 2007 but much had changed
since then, including technology and the economy. The items under discussion related to Parks. She suggested a
win-win outcome for Parks, the City, and the developers. Requested changes: 1) Create a two-phased project,
with infrastructure phased, including the multi-use trail, which would be tied to the Phase 11 portion of the project;
2) Reduce the amount of vegetation planted in the riparian area and wetlands. Plant vegetation four feet on either
side of the multi-use path and repair disturbed soil as needed. 3) Once planted vegetation was established, turn
over the maintenance to Parks.
Page 2 of 4
Regular Meeting Minutes - December 23, 2013
Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission
NEW BUSINESS
VERDE VILLAGE AGREEMENT AMENDMENT REQUEST, contd.
Williams said the developers were asking for the path to be tied to the development of lots on the southeast side
for the sake of cost effectiveness. She also stated that one advantage of reduced plantings in the riparian area
would be reduced maintenance, a cost savings.
Dickens said the maintenance estimate prepared for the packet memo was not accurate. Instead of $30,000, the
three-acre maintenance project per six-month season would be $39,000, including irrigation staff time. Volunteer
labor could help with hand weeding as pesticides would not be used. Shaw asked what labor would cost for four
feet of plantings on each side of the pathway and Dickens said it might be one quarter of the $39,000 estimate.
Dickens said the estimate of $1.50 per square foot for maintenance, as stated in the memo, would actually be
more in the range of sixty cents per square foot.
Discussion Among Commissioners
Seffinger asked about the downside of leaving natural vegetation in place. She said blackberries helped birds in
terms of nesting and also provided a food source and assisted with erosion control. Landt said it was not that
simplistic. Restoring the area to a prehistoric environment would be much more useful and rich for wildlife. A
pretty plan was in place but establishing it would not be without difficulty. Trees would be easy to plant in the
riparian area but the shrub and herbaceous layers required by City ordinance posed challenges. Developers
would plant and maintain the area for three years and then Parks would take over but the chance of a
landscaping failure was high. On a larger scale, Lewis said the commission needed to look at Parks policies in
terms of the properties they acquired over the years, including Riverwalk and the Nevada Street development
along the creek. He suggested discussing how the commission could manage the many properties and acres in a
uniform way. With regard to the four feet of vegetation along the pathway, Landt said the commission needed to
consider whether they had the resources to do everything or if they wanted to handle more with a little less. He
said sometimes work was implemented to a higher standard than was rational for Parks resources.
Kerry KenCairn, 147 Central Avenue, said the plan was a response to City of Ashland ordinance and Oregon
Department of Fish and Wildlife requirements for restoration practices. She was not necessarily supportive of it,
though some parts were worthwhile. Since completion of the plan, some changes occurred in the area. There
was value in planting large trees into the blackberries and maintaining them in eight-foot diameter circles,
allowing the trees to gain dominance over the blackberries. City of Ashland and ODFRW were trying to create
habitat and shade for the creek. Blackberries provided habitat and some food sources. Maintaining four feet of
pathway on either side of the path was somewhat disturbing and it would be better to provide a maintenance
corridor on either side, anywhere from 20 feet to two feet, rather than a four-foot boundary.
Gardiner asked for clarification about the Williams' request: they wanted the commission to make a
recommendation to council? Robertson said the developers were looking for Parks' opinion before the matter was
taken to council. He said the parties that weighed in during the original process were allowed to weigh in again,
but council had the final say. Landt said the water resources ordinance directed this matter and was cumbersome
and challenging and held unrealistic expectations. He said he tried to modify it when it was in process. He
expressed disappointment that it was the City's riparian ordinance and said developers lived under it but it
needed to be reviewed for modifications. KenCairn said it was even stronger and more restrictive now than when
the Williams' plan was drawn up. She said their plan was held to the standard of the future ordinance before it
was even approved.
Greg Williams, 744 Helman Street, said the plan would not disturb much land, just the area where the path was
located. The development agreement was created because developers anticipated the ordinance restrictions. He
said they were looking for a recommendation from the commission to council to amend the ordinance. This
development agreement was the first agreement in the City with such a high level of complexity.
Page 3 of 4
Regular Meeting Minutes- December 23, 2013
Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission
NEW BUSINESS
VERDE VILLAGE AGREEMENT AMENDMENT REQUEST, contd.
Shaw suggested separate motions for each recommendation. Landt agreed and suggested leaving the three-year
maintenance plan in place for the developers. He said Parks had an opportunity for win-wins on the other two
items. Lewis said he hoped a motion would reflect reduced maintenance costs. Shaw expressed agreement with
KenCairn's suggestion to maintain the pathway out to its width rather than at a pre-determined four feet on either
side.
Landt said the first request was simply for phasing the project: a rational notion. The second concerned reducing
the vegetation and this could provide dramatic cost reductions for Ashland taxpayers. In terms of the phasing
request, he said the first phase might not include the path and that could be problematic if there were a delay in
building the path. Williams said the development agreement required the path be built within seven years. Landt
suggested a certain time period for the creation of the path.
MOTION: Landt moved to recommend to council allowing the Verde Village developers to wait for the second
phase of development to install the path if the first phase was not along the path; however, if the first phase was
implemented and the developers did not put in the second phase along the pathway, after five years they would
need to build the path. Shaw seconded the motion.
Vote: All yes
MOTION: Landt moved to recommended to council that the proposed vegetation in the development plan be
reduced to an 18-foot-wide corridor along and including the bike path, including any affected or disturbed areas
within that corridor which would be re-vegetated, as opposed to how the plan was shown. Lewis seconded the
motion.
Vote: All yes
Landt said he would consider another motion relating to maintenance and the planting of trees but suggested
basing it on a staff review. Robertson said he visited the area recently and observed other trees in the vicinity. On
average there was fifty feet between the corridor and the creek. Carving out niches for the trees, as proposed by
KenCairn, was a great opportunity and would maximize dollars. Robertson suggested delegating staff to work
with the developer on the number of trees to plant.
MOTION: Landt moved to recommend to council allowing Parks' professional staff the flexibility to work with the
developer to identify any additional trees to plant outside / inside the identified corridor. Shaw seconded the
motion.
Vote: All yes
Seffinger said trees along the creek served the purpose of lowering creek temperatures, which was important to
wildlife. Robertson said it was difficult to keep up with blackberry growth along the Bear Creek Greenway but
volunteers helped to manage it.
The commission agreed to not make a motion regarding maintenance in the area.
PRESENTATION OF COMPONENT UNIT FINANCIAL REPORT
Robertson provided an overview of the Parks CUFR and said the crux of the document appeared on page ix at
the front of the book, a letter signed by all members of the Ashland Municipal Audit Committee. He said it was
recommended that the commission accept the CUFR along with recommendations from the auditors. On page
three, Robertson said a management discussion and analysis by the auditors referred to the auditors' review of
Parks Commission financials and their condition at the end of the year. It referred to their practices, which the
auditors found in line with generally accepted accounting practices and principles. He said the net position of the
commission - liabilities and assets - showed the commission's funds appreciated by over $11 M in the year and
the commission did a good job of managing its finances. On the last two pages, under "2013 Auditors' Comments
and Disclosures," Robertson reported speaking with the auditor about proposed improvement projects, with four
out of 23 linked to the Parks budget. Auditors suggested a modified internal control structure to correct a
"significant deficiency" identified in the audit concerning roles and responsibilities of the City and Parks staff. He
Page 4 of 4
Regular Meeting Minutes - December 23, 2013
Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission
NEW BUSINESS
PRESENTATION OF COMPONENT ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT, contd.
said cash handling proved to be difficult when staffing levels were low. The City and Parks were working on a
Memorandum of Understanding to address the identified deficiency along with a divination of duties. The MOU
would be available for review and approval in March.
Landt questioned a point on page iii under "Relevant Financial Policies" that he felt was not accurate, as Parks
vigorously opposed the transfer of ending fund balance monies to the City operations account. The commission
was working hard to create a positive relationship between itself and council and the phrasing of that paragraph
was misleading.
MOTION: Shaw moved to accept the CUFR of the Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission as presented.
Gardiner seconded the motion.
Vote: All yes
2014 MEETING SCHEDULE
Seffinger said the proposed 2014 meeting schedule was before the commission. Robertson said most
commission meetings were tentatively scheduled for the third and fourth Mondays of each month, with the
possible exceptions of January, February and May due to Monday holidays. He said the schedule could be
changed following approval but advance notice helped staff organize their work plans.
The commission concurred with the proposed schedule with one exception: the February study session was
switched to Wednesday, February 26, 2014.
SUBCOMMITTEE and STAFF REPORTS
None
ITEMS FROM COMMISSIONERS
None
UPCOMING MEETING DATES & PROPOSED AGENDA ITEMS
■ Study session on January 13 at 7:00 p.m., Parks office, 340 S. Pioneer Street
o Little League signage exemption request
• Regular meeting on January 27 at 7:00 p.m., Council Chambers, 1175 E. Main Street
ADJOURNMENT- By consensus, with no further business, Seffinger adjourned the meeting at 8:15 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Susan Dyssegard
Ashland Parks and Recreation
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Memo
DATE: 2/12/2014
TO: Derek Severson, Associate Planner
FROM: Adam Hanks, Administration/Conservation
RE: Verde Village Approval Modification Request
The Conservation Division has been involved with both the applicants, Greg and Val Williams, and
Planning Staff as the applicants researched and prepared materials for their request to the Planning
Commission to modify several of the conditions of approval associated with the original Verde Village
subdivision approval from 2006.
The Conservation Division focused its conversations and evaluation on the suggested modifications to
the energy efficiency measures approved via exhibit K3 of the approval findings. The K3 exhibit
outlined very specific and customized energy efficiency measures to be implemented with the objective
of achieving 50% savings in both energy and water compared to standard "code built" homes.
Additionally, the installation of photovoltaic solar systems were proposed to reach "net zero" for each of
the homes built within the subdivision.
The Conservation Division staff met with the applicants, reviewed exhibit K3, and offered the applicant
a variety of potential pathways to achieve energy and water savings beyond current code. The
applicants have proposed to replace the requirements listed in exhibit K3 with a more standardized,
measurable and verifiable way to achieve a higher level of energy and water efficiency than the "code
built" baseline home, which is the Earth Advantage/Energy Star program that the Conservation Staff has
had in use and available since 2002.
The applicant's request for Earth Advantage Gold would result in home construction that is at least 15%
more energy efficient than a code home built today and 20-30% more energy efficient than a code home
from 2006. Additionally, in contrast to the very customized and project specific energy efficiency
measures detailed in the original exhibit K3, the Earth Advantage program offers a reliable, successful
and verifiable program that ensures the stated efficiency measures are achieved. Additionally, the Earth
Advantage program also incorporates and measures enhancements in healthy indoor air quality, resource
efficiency, environmental responsibility and water conservation, which was not a part of the original K3
measures.
CONSERVATION DEPARTMENT Tel: 541-488-2063
20 E. Main Street Fax: 541-488-6006
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900
w .ashland.or.us
The Conservation Staff is excited at the prospect of an entire subdivision committing to the Earth
Advantage program and supports the concept of utilizing a tested third party system to help the builder,
City staff and ultimately the homeowner, ensure that the home functions as designed, approved and
built.
While the applicant is requesting relief from the photovoltaic solar installation in attempts to reach "net
zero", the Conservation Division's solar incentive programs are still available to individual builders and
homeowners who may be interested in striving to meet the net zero standard. As noted in the
application materials, the orientation of the homes is not proposed to be altered which means that it is
highly likely that all of the homes built will have more than adequate solar exposure to take advantage of
the sun as a power source in the future, either at the time of home construction or as a retro-5t at some
point in the future.
CONSERVATION DEPARTMENT Tel: 541-088-2063
20 E. Main Street Fax: 541-488-6006
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900
v .ashland.or.us
earthadvantage® INSPECTED FOR QUALITY
NEW HOME CERTIFICATION
About Earth Advantage
New Home Certification
New homes certified as Earth Advantage meet strict green building and energy standards.
They have been verified through third-party inspections and performance testing.
An Earth Advantage-certified house incorporates design elements, systems and
materials that create superior indoor air quality, use natural resources responsibly,
protect land, and lower water usage. Combining these benefits with energy
r, r efficiency standards ensures that this home exhibits superior performance and
l l environmental responsibility compared to a traditionally built home.
THIRD-PARTY CERTIFICATION
a • Third-party certification offers many benefits to a homeowner. Most important is
that a third-party verifier such as Earth Advantage has assisted the builderand
verified that systems and materials are properly installed. Third-party testing
has confirmed that this home is performing to its highest potential.
The Five Pillars of Certification
Energy Health Water Materials Land
By using high performance Indoor air quality plays This home was built using New home construction Practices used during the
equipment, increased a major role in overall water-wise technologies and upkeep depend construction of this home
insulation, and air sealing health and lifestyle. This that help lower utility heavily on natural diminish land degradation
techniques this home's home contains earth bills and reduce the total resources. The use of and deforestation,
monthly energy bills can friendly building materials amount of water needed locally manufactured promote healthy
be significantly lower than that off-gas fewer harmful to maintain a comfortable products is encouraged landscapes, reduce waste,
those of a traditionally chemicals than traditional lifestyle. Water shortages because they are and prevent potential
built home, saving you materials. It also are a primary concern in environmentally erosion associated with
money from the day you incorporates a mechanical the 21st century, and this responsible. Durable lot development during
move in. Other benefits ventilation system home addresses water material choices are the construction process.
include increased that reduces airborne conservation needs. also incorporated. This
comfort and even heating contaminants, diminishing helps the environment
throughout the home. the chances of allergies, by reducing the amount
asthma, and other more of materials needed to
serious health risks. maintain the home.
Contact a Green Building Consultant to learn more. earthadvantage.org/hordes
EANHC About EANHC FxtShM 130514
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Memo
DATE: Feburary 12, 2014
TO: Ashland City Council
FROM: Ashland Planning Commission
RE: Verde Village Approval Modification Request
At the February 11, 2014 regular meeting, the Ashland Planning Commission conducted a public
hearing to consider the requested modifications to the Verde Village Subdivision's Development
Agreement. Following public testimony, the Planning Commission moved to recommend that
the Council approve the requested modifications with the addition of the following two
conditions to the Development Agreement's Exhibit E "Verde Village Special Conditions":
30) Phasing. That Phase I and Phase II refer to specific portions of the
development, and the applicants shall have the ability to construct Phase II
prior to Phase 1, or to construct both phases at the same time. If the project
is built in a single phase, 24 lots (50 percent of the total number of lots in
Phase I and Phase II) would need to meet the timetable for Phase I. If the
project is built in phases, whichever phase is constructed first shall include:
the construction of Almeda Drive from its current terminus out to Hellman
Street, and the construction of Perozzi Street (formerly 'Canine Ways from
Almeda Drive to the Dog Park. Both streets shall be completed according to
the approved plans (including paving, curbs, gutters, sidewalks and parkrow
planting strips with street trees on both sides), inspected and approved prior
to the construction of any homes for either phase.
31) Multi-Use Path & Nevada Street Sidewalk Timing. That the multi-use
path and the sidewalk on Nevada Street, from Helman Street to Oak Street,
shall be tied to the construction of Sander Way as part of Phase II, rather
than as a part of Phase I. A revised plan (replacing Sheet R-1 from
December 1, 2008) shall be provided prior to pathway installation illustrating
the proposed pathway installation and the redefined limits of the slope
stabilization and associated revegetation and shall include the planting of
additional trees both inside and outside the pathway corridor to be selected
based on recommendations of Parks Department staff as to the number, type
and placement. The multi-use pathway improvements shall be installed with
Phase II of the development, but no later than five years following
completion of the first phase."
The Planning Commission also asked that Legal and Planning staff: 1) look into what assurances
are provided in the Development Agreement, and what security instruments may have been
provided subsequently, to insure that the extension of the Bear Creek Greenway path will happen
PLANNING COMMISSION Tel: 541488-5305
51 Winbum Way Fax: 541-552-2050
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900
~ .ashland.or.us
if Phase Ii of the subdvision is never completed; and 2) verify that, with the deletion of several
items from the timetable, all obligations of the applicants are adequately addressed in the
modified timetable document and other exhibits. The Commission asked that Planning staff be
prepared to discuss these two items at next Tuesday's Council meeting.
PLANNING COMMISSION Tel: 541-088-5305
51 Wnbum Way Fax: 541-552-2050
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 pWA
w .ashland.or.us
ASHLAND PLANNING DEPARTMENT
STAFF REPORT
February 11, 2014
PLANNING ACTION: 2014-00052
OWNERS/APPLICANTS: Wilma, LLC
LOCATION: 87 West Nevada Street
811 Helman Street
(Map 39 1 E 04B, Tax Lots: 1100, 1400-1418)
ZONE DESIGNATION: R-1-3.5, R-1-5, R-1-7.5
COMP. PLAN DESIGNATION: Suburban Residential and Single-Family Residential
ORDINANCE REFERENCE: 18.20 R-1 Single-Family Residential District
18.22 R-1-3.5 Suburban Residential District
18.61 Tree Preservation and Protection
18.62 Physical and Environmental Constraints
18.88 Performance Standards Options
18.108 Procedures
APPLICATION DEEMED COMPLETE ON: February 3, 2014
REQUEST: A request to modify the Development Agreement for the Verde Village
Subdivision for the properties located at 87 W. Nevada Street and 811 Helman Street.
The proposed modifications include: clarifications of the project phasing to make clear
which improvements are required with each phase and to allow either phase to occur
first; changes to the energy efficiency requirements of the development so that all units
will be constructed to at least Earth Advantage Gold standards and will be "Photovoltaic
Ready"; and changes to the landscaping requirements associated with construction of the
multi-use path.
1. Relevant Facts
1) Background - History of Application
Approved in December of 2007, the Verde Village Subdivision of an 11.64 acre
site comprising five parcels on the site of the old Ashland Greenhouses at 87
West Nevada and 811 Helman Streets included a number of approvals by the City
of Ashland:
Planning Action 2014-00052 Ashland Planning Department - Staff Report / dds
Applicant: WILMA LLC Page 1 of 13
o An Annexation, Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map changes from Jackson County
Rural Residential (RR-5) to City of Ashland Low-Density Multi-Family Residential (R-
2) and Suburban Residential (R-1-3.5)
o Outline Plan approval to develop the property as a 68-unit residential development
o Site Review approval for multi family development
o Physical and Environmental Constraints Review Permit to locate a multi-use path in
the Ashland Creek Riparian Preservation Area.
o Tree Removal Permit
o Exceptions to the Street Standards to install a curbside sidewalk on one side of a
proposed street to not locate a street adjacent to natural features and to not
connect two of the proposed streets.
o Variances to reduce the on-street parking requirement from 78 to 38 spaces, to
reduce therear yard setback requirement forsix of the townhomes in the
northwestern corner of the site from 20 feet to 12, 14 and 16 feet and to reduce the
required distance between buildings for the 27 cottages in the southwestern corner
of the site.
o An Administrative Variance to the Site Design and Use Standards to have the
primary orientation of the buildings to the south, rather than to the street, in order
to maximize the use of solar energy.
o A land exchange with the City of Ashland dedicating 2.78 acres adjacent to Ashland
Creek to the city for parks purposes in exchange for approximately 1.54 acres of the
Dog Park in the area of the access and to the south of the existing parking area.
o A Development Agreement with the City of Ashland which governed the
requirements for development of the subdivision to completion, including a detailed
timeline. This development agreement was adopted by Ordinance #2945 on
December 19, 2007.
Subsequent to the 2007 approval, the applicants dedicated property to the Rogue
Valley Community Development Corporation to develop 15 affordable units as
part of the first phase of Verde Village to satisfy the affordability requirements of
the annexation. Utilities and infrastructure, including the partial extension of
Almeria Street, were completed to serve these units, which are now built and
occupied as "Rice Park at Verde Village."
The applicants obtained Site Review approval for the remainder of the first phase,
the multi-family cottage housing portion of the subdivision, in 2009. Prior to the
installation of infrastructure or commencement of the remainder of the first phase
of the development, the national economy suffered a major downturn which made
it difficult for projects with approvals in place to obtain financing. To date, the
city has approved three timetable extensions in response to diffiiculties associated
with the current state of the economy and availability of financing.
A Detailed Description of the Site and Proposal
Site Description
The parent pacels to the original subdivision are located on the north side of
Nevada Street, west of the Ashland Creek corridor, near the terminus of Helman
Street at Nevada Street. A driveway and multi-use path accessway serving the
Dog Park and the Bear Creek Greenway north of the property bisects the
Planning Action 2014-00052 Ashland Planning Department- Staff Report / dds
Applicant: WILMA LLC Page 2 of 13
subdivision. To the west, Almeda Drive abuts the western boundary of the site,
with a short extension into the property providing access to the Rice Park
affordable housing units.
Ashland Creek, which runs along the eastern and northeaster boundary of the site,
is identified as a Riparian Corridor in the adopted Water Resources map, and is
considered a Riparian Preservation Creek in the Physical and Environmental
Constraints Chapter (AMC 18.62) Flood Plain Corridor Lands map. The site also
contains two wetlands which were identified in the original subdivision
application. The site includes a variety of slopes including relatively flat portions
and steeper slopes adjacent to Ashland Creek. Generally, the site slopes downhill
to the north and northeast.
The adjacent properties to the south, west and north are in the Ashland city limits.
The properties to the south of the site, between the site boundary and Nevada St.,
are zoned Single-Family Residential (R-1-5). The properties to the west and
north of the site are zoned Single-Family Residential (R-1-7.5). Most of the
property to the east of Ashland Creek is outside the Ashland city limits and
Ashland UGB, and is zoned Jackson County EFU (Exclusive Farm Use).
Current Proposal
The current proposal requests to modify the original land use approval and the
association Development Agreement for the Verde Village Subdivision as
follows:
1. Project Phasing: The applicants request to make the projecct a true
two phase project, noting that as written, the current development
agreement requires the completion of the bulk of the infrastructure
with the first phase, and they request modifications to require
infrastructure installation more in keeping with the proposed
phasing as well as clear flexibility in terms of the order in which the
phases are constructed (i.e. either phase could be built first, or both
simultaneously).
2. Energy Efficiency Performance Standards: As presently
approved, all units within the development are subject to a unique,
project-specific "net-zero energy performance standard" that was
developed by the applicants' team for the original application
submittal from 2006. The applicants are now requesting to change
the energy efficiency requirements to be more compatible with
technological changes since 2006, and easier to administer from
both the city's and the developer's perspectives by 'removing the
previous "net-zero energy performance standard" and replacing it
with a minimum requirement to meet at least an Earth Advantage
"Gold" certification and to be "Photovoltaic Ready."
Planning Action 2014-00052 Ashland Planning Department - Staff Report / dds
Applicant: WILMA LLC Page 3 of 13
3. Multi-Use Path/Riparian Corridor Restoration &
Enhancement. The applicants propose "to change the landscaping
requirements of the multi-use path to a level that is more in keeping.
with what is reasonable to maintain by the City and takes into
account what has been learned in the creek side restorations since
the development agreement was written. These changes still serve
to protect the valuable creek."
IL Proiect Impact
Procedurally speaking, the Development Agreement requires in 21.2 that, "Amendment...
of this agreement shall be made by adoption of an Ordinance.... The procedures and
requirements for amendment... are the same as for approval of a Development
Agreement, currently notice and hearing before the Council with a recommendation from
the Planning Commission." The current request is before the Planning Commission for a
recommendation to Council. The Council will conduct a hearing to consider the first
reading of the Ordinance at their regular meeting on February 18.
Proposed Modifications - Project Phasing
The applicants request to make the projecct a true two phase project, noting that as
written, the current development agreement requires the completion of the bulk of the
infrastructure with the first phase, and they request modifications to require infrastructure
installation more in keeping with the proposed phasing as well as clear flexibility in
terms of the order in which the phases are constructed (i.e. either phase could be built
first). Specific modifications proposed include:
• That the multi-use path and the sidewalk on Nevada Street, from Heiman Street to
Oak Street, be tied to the construction of Sander Way as part of Phase II rather than
as a part of Phase 1.
• That Planning staff have the ability to allow Phase II to be constructed prior to Phase
I if the developer requests.
• That if the project is built in phases, the first phase that is built will include:
o The construction ofAlmeda Street to Heiman Street.
o The construction of Perozzi Street.
o The construction of curbs, gutters, sidewalks and parkrow planting strips on
both sides of Almeda Street and Perozzi Street prior to any home construction
for either phase.
• That if the project is built in a single phase, 24 lots (50 percent of the combined lots
in Phase I and Phase II) would need to meet the time line requirements of Phase I in
the current timeline.
The applicants assert that these changes do not adversely affect the final development,
and would still yield the improved Dog Park access as the first item to be completed
before any lots could be developed. They note that these changes would minimize the
Planning Action 2014-00052 Ashland Planning Department-Staff Reporl/dds
Applicant: WILMA LLC Page 4 of 13
land disturbance where lots are not ready to be built upon, and that these changes do not
alter the final completion date. They suggest that the only items which might be delayed
with the proposed changes are the construction of the Greenway multi-use path and the
sidewalk along Nevada Street to Oak Street which would be completed prior to the
development of any lots in Phase II. The application materials include a revised
timetable which would replace the adopted timetable as `Exhibit F' of the Development
Agreement.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Project Phasing - Rice Park, the affordable housing
portion of the Verde Village subdivision, was completed with only a partial extension of
Almeda Drive and with temporary facilities installed to provide the required fire
apparatus access and fire truck turn-around. For staff, the key concerns with any
alteration in subdivision phasing are ensuring that whichever portion of the development
occurs first includes completion of the extension of Almeda Drive to provide permanent
access to the already completed and occupied units in Rice Park for both residents and
emergency vehicles, and that Perozzi Street is extended to provide permanent access to
the existing, heavily-used Dog Park. The applicants' proposed modifications clearly
address these concerns, and staff is therefore supportive of the requested modifications to
the project's phasing.
Proposed Modifications - Energy Efficiency Performance Standards
As originally approved, all of the units in the development are subject to a unique,
project-specific "net-zero energy performance standard" that was developed by the
applicants' team for the original application submittal from 2006. The stated goal
underlying these standards was to provide "the most energy efficient homes constructed
in Oregon," and this was to be accommplished through a combination of proper solar
orientation, improved thermal envelopes, solar heating, night flush cooling, high
efficiency HVAC systems, heat recovery ventilation, and efficient appliances, all of were
to achieve 50 percent better performance, and 50 percent less potable water use, than a
typical code compliant home at the time. In addition, through the installation of a
photovoltaic system, the homes were to be capable of generating as much energy as they
used on an annual basis, making them "net zero energy." Specific energy efficiency
measures were required, and these ranged from specific requirements for the lighting and
water fixtures (only fluorescent or compact fluorescent lighting were allowed, only either
dual flush 1.1/1.5 gpf or single 1.1 gpf toilets were allowed, and all showerheads and
faucets were to provide 1.5 gpm fixture controls) to requirements that the homes be
designed for "night flush cooling" through the use of mass (concrete floors), improved
thermal envelopes and operable windows so that they could be cooled at night to a degree
that would elminate the need for air conditioning.
The original application included a Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment to upzone the
property. Comprehensive Plan Map Amendments require that the proposed change meet
one of five factors detailed in Chapter 18.108.060.13 and be in compliance with the
Comprehensive Plan. Both the Planning Commission and Council's support of the
original Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment's approval were based on the energy and
water conservation measures proposed addressing an identified public need for energy
Planning Action 2014-00052 Ashland Planning Depadment - Staff Repod I dds
Applicant: WILMA LLC Page 5 of 13
and water conservation in new homes as supported in the Ashland Comprehensive Plan
(Chapter X1, Policy #3-C, -D, -E and -G, and Policy #8-B). The Council further
found that the energy efficiency measures proposed supported the requested up-zoning as
they equated favorably to development under the prior Comprehensive Plan designation
with density bonuses for affordability and energy efficiency.
As part of the original approval, building permits were required to include a summary of
how each unit complied with the energy efficiency performance standard to facilitate
plan review. The affordable homes at Rice Park were constructed according to these
performance standards and staff believes this posed substantial complications to the plan
review, construction and inspection processes because of the uniqueness, specificity and
complexity of the standards which leave little room for variation and which differ
drastically from what most contractors are used to building under either standard codes or
the common third-party "green building" accreditation programs like LEED or Earth
Advantage.
The applicants are asking to replace these unique, project-specific energy efficiency
performance standards with a requirement that each home obtain at least an Earth
Advantage "Gold" certification and be "Photovoltaic Ready." They explain that this
would benefit the city both through the ease of administration and through the ability to
automatically change with technological developments, and suggest that with the
modifications proposed they will still satisfy the standards initially approved. The
applicants note that that the Earth Advantage Gold with Photovoltaic Ready option
produces homes that are at least 15 percent more energy efficient than current codes, that
the solar orientation of the homes is not proposed to change, and that the proposed
modifications continue to address the Comprehensive Plan's identified public need for
energy and water conservation in new homes.
Earth Advantage certification considers materials and methods to reduce energy and
water usage and improve indoor air quality; development practices which diminish land
degradation and deforestation, promote healthy landscapes, reduce waste, and prevent
potential erosion associated with development; and the encouragement of local,
environmentally responsible, durable materials. Builders complete a points worksheet
detailing the proposed approach to the development, and an independent third-party
verifier visits the site to verify compliance. Earth Advantage has various levels of
certification including silver, gold, platinum, net zero ready and net zero. The City of
Ashland is the local Earth Advantage license-holder, with certified inspectors on staff and
additional third-party inspectors in the community operating under the city license. The
Earth Advantage program is currently the program used in granting density bonuses for
Conservation Housing, and city staff and the local development community have a
general familiarity with the requirements of the program.
The Conservation Department is reviewing the proposed modifications, and staff
anticipates that they will provide an assessment and recommendation relative to the
proposed changes prior to the Planning Commission's hearing.
Planning Action 2014-00052 Ashland Planning Department - Staff Report / dds
Applicant: WILMA LLC Page 6 of 13
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Energy Efficiency Performance Standards - While
homes certified as Earth Advantage Gold/Photovoltaic Ready would not be the "net zero
energy" homes originally envisioned for the development, staff believes that the level of
energy efficiency proposed would continue to support the original up-zoning approval
findings that the project meets an identified public need for energy and water
conservation in new homes, and that the energy efficiency measures and affordability
would equate favorably to development under the previous Comprehensive Plan
designation with density bonuses for affordability and energy efficiency. In addition,
staff believes that the change to an established, standardized rating system with
independent third party verification of compliance would simplify the plan review and
inspection processes on the city side. For the applicants, it would likely have the added
advantage of being a program with which designers, contractors, lenders, realtors and
homebuyers have a greater degree of familiarity and would thus be more willing to
invest. As such, staff is supportive of the proposed modifications to the project's energy
efficiency requirements.
Proposed Modifications - Multi-Use Path Landscaping and Riparian Restoration &
Enhancement
The original Verde Village application included a land exchange between the developers
and the city. Because the city lands involved were originally purchased with federal
funds as park land, there were requirements to ensure that the land received in exchange
was of equal or greater value for public use and that the exchange would further the
public interest. As originally approved, the exchange was for 1.54 acres of the city's ten-
acre "Dog Park" parcel, including the access drive and entry lawn area, for 2.78 acres of
land from the developers which had previously been identified by the city for acquisition
in the adopted "Parks, Trails and Open Space Master Plan" map.
In addition to the real property exchanged, as part of the Development Agreement, the
City was also to receive a new city standard public street entrance to the Dog Park and an
additional 1,300 lineal feet of multi-use pathway to extend the regional Bear Creek
Greenway Trail. The value of these improvements was specifically noted as not being
considered in the valuation for the land exchange. The original findings in support of the
land exchange noted, "City finds that the difference in value between the Iwo parcels
being exchanged is $150,000 in favor of City, based on the analysis and conclusions
contained in the Appraisal Reports commissioned by City, contained in the record and
incorporated herein by this reference. AFSG agrees to "gift" the $150,000 difference in
value to City." These findings also noted, "The approximately 2.78 acres of property
received by the City will be used for public open space and passive recreation, including
the greemvay trail. The reasons stated for City Council consideration for the exchange
include but are not limited to the added value to the City's Parks and Trails system....
Acquisition by City of the [parcel]... provides City with the opportunity to extend City's
multi-use path, which is part of the regional Bear Creek Greenway. The real property
exchange also provides the public with additional scenic frontage along Ashland Creek.
Further, acquisition of the Williams Property provides City with an opportunity to benefit
the community by preserving and enhancing the riparian area along Ashland Creek."
Planning Action 2014-00052 Ashland Planning Department - Staff Report I dds
Applicant: WILMA LLG Page 7 of 13
As approved, the multi-use path will weave above and below the riparian zone and the
top of the slope of the creek corridor. The path will cross slopes of 40 to 50 percent in
some areas and will include retaining wall construction to retain the necessarily steep
cuts. The riparian corridor is regulated both by the requirement to preserve significant
natural features in the Outline Plan approval criteria, and by AMC Chapter 18.62,
Physical and Environmental Constraints, which requires a Physical Constraints Review
Permit for construction of the path on Riparian Preservation lands. The multi-use path
will also be within five feet of the edge of one of the site's wetlands for a distance of
approximately 40 feet. To ensure that the path installation was adequately buffered and
would not negatively impact the functions of the riparian area or wetland and satisfied the
Physical Constraints Review Permit approval criterion requiring demonstration that all
reasonable steps to reduce adverse impacts on the environment would be taken with the
path installation, the applicants were required to provide a:
mitigation plan prepared by a riparian biologist or a natural resource
professional with training and experience in biology, ecology or related
fields for the impact of the construction of the multi-use path in the
riparian corridor and to address the 10 foot wide riparian corridor buffer.
The riparian corridor buffer is the setback between the new eastern
property line adjacent to the Ashland Creek riparian corridor and the
single family homes and yards for units 68, and 25 -39, and is delineated
as common area in the application materials. Disturbed areas front the
multi-use path construction shall be re-vegetated and an additional area
restored and enhanced with local source native plant material including
ground cover, shrubs and trees at a 1:1.5 ratio, erosion control material
shall be applied (e.g. mulch, hay, jute-netting, or comparable) and
temporary irrigation facilities installed. The mitigation plan shall include
but not be limited to a statement of objectives, measurable standards of
mitigation, an assessment of riparian corridor functions and values, a
statement and detail plan of the location, elevation and hydrology of the
mitigation area, a planting plan and schedule, a monitoring and
maintenance plan, a contingency plan and performance guarantees. The
applicants shall install the mitigation measures in the approved mitigation
plan in conjunction with the multi-use path installation.
The applicants provided the required mitigation plan along with plans for the multi-use
path installation as part of the Final Plan application for Phase I of the development
(Planning Action 42008-01853). This plan proposed the mitigation of approximately
46,005 square feet of the riparian setback area (i.e. the full riparian corridor area between
the proposed path and the creek) to mitigate habitat impacts and provided an additional
approximately 9,382 square feet of non-invasive ornamental plantings selected for their
habitat and screening value outside of the riparian setback area. As required in the
Development Agreement, there was also a maintenance period where the applicants were
responsible for the maintenance and replacement of any plantings which failed to survive
three years after the path's completion.
Planning Action 2014-00052 Ashland Planning Department - Staff Report / dds
Applicant: WILMA LLC Page 8 of 13
With the current request, the applicants propose "to change the landscaping requirements
of the multi-use path to a level that is more in keeping with what is reasonable to
maintain by the City and takes into account what has been learned in the creekside
restorations since the development agreement was written. These changes still serve to
protect the valuable creek." With the request, they would reduce the plantings associated
with mitigating the path installation to the areas within four-feet of the path itself and any
additional lands disturbed through construction of the path. They would also plant the
ten-foot buffer along the eastern property lines of units 25-39 and 68 on the subdivision
property as required in the original approval. The application materials provided
emphasize that the restoration and enhancement of the creek corridor were not
considerations for the land exchange - only the lands' location, size and the multi-use
path itself were considered, and these are not proposed to change in terms either of the
value of the exchange or in furthering the public interest with the requested
modifications.
The materials provided suggest that the currently approved mitigation plan requirements
are not appropriate in light of recent experiences with creekside restoration, and that the
blackberries and other non-native plants that are currently on the property serve to protect
the stream. They go on to suggest that by removing these plants and replacing them with
natives, it would adversely impact the stream in the short term by removing the shade
which currently cools the water, and that by planting all of the new plantings at once
there would be higher plant mortality rates because of the sudden change to the growing
conditions. They note that the Parks Department has estimated that it would cost roughly
$49,000 per year to maintain the new plantings as all maintenance would need to be done
by hand, rather than through chemical application, because of the proximity to the creek.
The applicants conclude that this is a high cost with little benefit, and that the changes
proposed would reduce costs by 60 to 75 percent. [The Parks Department has
subsequently revised their estimate and indicated that maintenance of the All three-acre
maintenance project would run $39,000 per six-month season, including irrigation and
staff time, and that with the reduced planting area proposed by the applicants here, costs
might be reduced to one quarter of that amount.]
The Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission considered the proposed modifications to
the pathway installation and associated riparian landscaping and made a number of
recommendations. The meeting minutes of their discussion, and a memorandum from
Parks Director Don Robertson detailing and explaining their recommendations, have
been included in the Planning Commission's packets. The Parks Commission's
recommendations were as follows:
1. With regard to the time for improvements, the Commission made a motion to
"recommend to Council allowing Verde Village developmers to wait for the second
phase of development to install the path if the first phase was not along the path;
however if the first phase was implemented and the developers did not put in the
.second phase along the pathway, after five years they would need to build the path."
This recommendation was unanimously approved.
2. With regard to the pathway landscaping, the Commission recommended that, "the
proposed vegetation in the development plan be reduced to an 18 foot wide corridor
Planning Action 2014-00052 Ashland Planning Department - Staff Report i dds
Applicant: WILMA LLC Page 9 of 13
along and including the bike path, including any affected or disturbed areas within
that corridor which would be revegetated, as opposed to how the plan is shown." In
explaining this recommendation, Parks staff noted that the concern of the
Commission was that they would receive a large re-vegetated piece of property that
would be impossible to maintain at a reasonable cost with a reasonable chance of
success. They suggested that the proposed modifications would accomplish the need
for replacing vegetation on disturbed areas and begin the process of eliminating
noxious and invasive weeds but would not saddle the department with a project that
was too large, and thus too costly, to be adequately maintained.
3. Also with regard to the pathway landscaping, the Commission asked that Council,
"allow Parks' professional staff the flexibility to work with the developer to identify
any additional trees to plant outside or inside the identified 18 foot corridor. " Based
on the minutes, it appears the intention was that some additional trees could be
strategically planted and maintained further into the riparian corridor to establish
themselves and gain dominance over the blackberries leading to a higher survivability
and success rate.
4. The Parks Commission made no recommendation with regard to the possibility of
reducing the maintenance period associated with the revegetation from three-years
down to one-year. Parks staff have noted that the feeling among Commissioners was
that the existing maintenance period was appropriate, and that with the changes they
were supporting the scope of maintenance necessary would ultimately be reduced to a
level that was reasonable for the developer to maintain, and would provide a higher
likelihood of success for the plantings when ultimately turned over to the Parks
Department.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Multi-Use Path Landscaping/Riparian Corridor
Restoration & Enhancement - While staff strongly disagrees with the applicants'
assertions that the short term disruption associated with riparian restoration and
enhancement somehow outweighs the long-term benefits of restoring native plantings to
support the restoration of healthy riparian corridor function, we recognize that the scope
of the previously approved mitigation plan went well beyond what was necessary to
mitigate the disturbance associated with the path installation. Particularly in light of the
Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission's general support of the request, staff would
recommend that the Planning Commission forward a recommendation to Council in
support of the requested modifications to the multi-use path landscaping and riparian
corridor restoration requirements with the following (hopefully minor) modification to
the applicants' request:
• That the revised plan (replacing Sheet R-I from December 1, 2008) to be
provided prior to pathway installation shall illustrate the proposed
pathway installation and the redefined limits of the slope stabilization and
associated revegetation and shall include the planting of additional trees
both inside and outside the pathway corridor to be selected and placed
after consultation with Parks Department staff.
HL Procedural - Required Burden of Proof
Planning Action 2014-00052 Ashland Planning Department- Staff Report I dds
Applicant: WILMA LLC Page 10 of 13
The criteria for Outline Plan subdivision approval or modification from the Performance
Standards Options Chapter are detailed in AMC 18.88.030.A.4 as follows:
a. That the development meets all applicable ordinance requirements of the City of Ashland.
b. That adequate key Cityfacilities can be provided including water, sewer, paved access to and
through the development, electricity, urban storm drainage, police and fire protection and
adequate transportation; and that the development will not cause a City facility to operate
beyond capacity.
C. That the existing and natural features of the land; such as wetlands, foodplain corridors,
ponds, large trees, rock outcroppings, etc., have been identified in the plan of the development
and significant features have been included in the open space, common areas, and unbuildable
areas.
d. That the development of the land will not prevent adjacent land from being developed
for the uses shown in the Comprehensive Plan.
e. That there are adequate provisions for the maintenance of open space and common areas, if
required or provided, and that if developments are done in phases that the early phases have the
some or higher ratio of amenities as proposed in the entire project.
f. That the proposed density meets the base and bonus density standards established under this
Chapter.
g. The development complies with the Street Standards.
The criteria for approval or modification of a Physical & Environmental Constraints Review
Permit to allow construction of a multi-use path in the Ashland Creek riparian preservation
area are detailed in AMC 18.62.040.1 as follows:
1. Through the application of the development standards of this chapter, the potential
impacts to the property and nearby areas have been considered, and adverse impacts
have been minimized.
2. That the applicant has considered the potential hazards that the development may
create and implemented measures to mitigate the potential hazards caused by the
development.
3. That the applicant has taken all reasonable steps to reduce the adverse impact on the
environment. Irreversible actions shall be considered more seriously than reversible
actions. The Staff Advisor or Planning Commission shall consider the existing
development of the surrounding area, and the maximum permitted development
permitted by the Land Use Ordinance.
IV. Conclusions and Recommendations
The Verde Village project envisioned a unique mix of housing types and energy
conserving housing that Ashland has not seen before in a subdivision, and included
connectivity improvements to better serve the now constructed affordable housing in
Rice Park, the Dog Park, the Bear Creek Greenway and the surrounding community. In
staffs view, the merits of the project remain years following its approval and it is
unfortuneate that the economic downturn of the "Great Recession" has jeopardized
realization of the applicants' original vision for the development.
Planning Action 2014-00052 Ashland Planning Department- Staff Report I dds
Applicant: WILMA LLC Page l l of 13
Staff have previously expressed support for modifications of the approved timetable of
development to give the applicants as much opportunity as allowed under city and state
regulations to make the project happen, and staff are generally supportive of the
modifications requested here. Specifically:
• Project Phasing - Rice Park, the affordable component of the Verde Village
subdivision, was completed with only a partial extension of Almeda Drive, with
temporary facilities to provide required fire apparatus access and turn-around.
For staff, any alteration in phasing needs to include completion of the extension
of Almeda Drive to provide permanent access to the already completed and
occupied units in Rice Park for both residents and emergency vehicles, and of
Perozzi Street to provide permanent access to the Dog Park. The proposed
modifications clearly address these concerns as required regardless of which
phase is built first.
• Energy Efficiency - While homes certified as Earth Advantage
Gold/Photovoltaic Ready would not be the "net zero energy" homes originally
envisioned for the development, staff believes that the level of energy efficiency
proposed can still be found to support the original up-zoning approval findings
that the project meets an identified public need for energy and water conservation
in new homes, and that the energy efficiency measures and affordability proposed
would have allowed for density bonuses comparable to the original up-zoning. In
addition, the change to a third-party rating system would simplify plan review and
inspections for the city while providing the applicants a program with which
designers, contractors, realtors, future homebuyers, lenders and investers have a
greater degree of familiarity and comfort.
• Path & Riparian Corridor - While staff believes that the long-term benefits of
restoring native plantings to support healthy riparian function outweigh the
impacts of any short term disruption, we also recognize that the scope of the
previously approved mitigation plan went beyond what was necessary to mitigate
the disturbance of the path installation. In light of the Ashland Parks and
Recreation Commission's general support, and concerns over their ultimate
maintenance cost for a larger project, staff recommends that the Planning
Commission forward a favorable recommendation to Council with the following
modification requested by the Parks Commission, "That the revised plan
(replacing Sheet R-I from December I, 2008) to be provided prior to pathway
installation shall illustrate the proposed pathway installation and the redefined
limits of the slope stabilization and associated revegetation and shall include the
planting of additional trees both inside and outside the pathway corridor to be
selected and placed after consultation with Parks Department staff Pathway
improvements shall be installed with the second phase of development, but no
later than five years following completion of the first phase. "
Should the Planning Commission concur with staff and choose to forward favorable
recommendations to Council for the requested modifications, staff would recommend that the
following conditions be added to the Development Agreement's "Revised Revised Exhibit E,
Verde Village Special Conditions" to reflect the proposals of the applicants in the current request :
Planning Action 2014-00052 Ashland Planning Department - Staff Report Idds
Applicant: WILMA LLC Page 12 of 13
30) Phasing. That Phase I and Phase II refer to specific portions of the
development, and the applicants shall have the ability to construct Phase
II prior to Phase I, or to construct both phases at the same time. If the
project is built in a single phase, 24 lots (50 percent of the total number
of lots in Phase I and Phase II) would need to meet the timetable for
Phase I. If the project is built in phases, whichever phase is constructed
first shall include: the construction of Almeda Drive from its current
terminus out to Helman Street, and the construction of Perozzi Street
(formerly 'Canine Way') from Almeda Drive to the Dog Park. Both streets
shall be completed according to the approved plans (including paving,
curbs, gutters, sidewalks and parkrow planting strips with street trees on
both sides), inspected and approved prior to the construction of any
homes for either phase.
31) Multi-Use Path & Nevada Street Sidewalk Timing. That the multi-
use path and the sidewalk on Nevada Street, from Helman Street to Oak
Street, shall be tied to the construction of Sander Way as part of Phase II,
rather than as a part of Phase I. A revised plan (replacing Sheet R-1 from
December 1, 2008) shall be provided prior to pathway installation
illustrating the proposed pathway installation and the redefined limits of
the slope stabilization and associated revegetation and shall include the
planting of additional trees both inside and outside the pathway corridor
to be selected and placed after consultation with Parks Department staff.
The multi-use pathway improvements shall be installed with Phase II of
the development, but no later than five years following completion of the
first phase."
Planning Action 2014-00052 Ashland Planning Department - Staff Report /dds
Applicant: WILMA LLC Page 13 of 13
Proposed Modification
of the JAN 1 0 2014
'Verde Village. Development Agreement
1. Introduction
Since the approval of the Development Agreement in January of 2009, we have
moved ahead with the development of Verde Village by finishing the land exchange, the
donation of land to Rogue Valley Community Development and the building of the
affordable housing which is now fully occupied. Due to the 'Great Recession' we have
been in a holding pattern since funds have dried up. Now that the economy is starting
to improve we are looking at the -project with 2014 eyes. There are items in the
Development Agreement that:are not in the best interest of the City or the development.
It is to the City of Ashland's advantage for this project to move forward. The road
to the Dog Park needs to be improved and the multi-use path, included in this project,
will be an asset to the City. Then there is the advantage of the tax and fee revenue
generated from the homes. We believe that the modifications we are proposing will help
to cause this project to.be completed sooner.
We are requesting the following changes..
1. To make the project a 2 phase project- Throughout the development agreement
there is reference to Phase I and Phase 11. The reality is that the way the time
linewas written it is a one phase project because all of the improvements need to
be made first even if they are not associated with Phase I. So we will be
requesting that requirements in the physical area of Phase II be moved in the
time line to the place in the time line that refers to Phase II. We are also asking
for flexibility in the order:the phases are built:
2. To change the energy efficiency requirements so they are more compatible with
the new technology, easier to administer from both the City's prospective and the
developers. This will be done by removing the K3 document and replacing it with
a minimum requirement to,meet Earth Advantage Gold and be "Photovoltaic
ready".
3. To change the landscaping requirements of the multi-use path to a level that is
more in keeping with what is reasonable to maintain by the City and takes into
account what has been learned in the creek side restorations since the
development agreement was written. These changes still serves to protect the
valuable creek.
It is our belief that with these changes the project will be a better project by
incorporating what has been learned in the 6 years since it was written.
Page 1 of 7
JAN .1 0 2014
11. Proposed; Modifications to the Revised` Exhibit F Timetable of. Development,
a. 'That the multi-use path and the sidewalk on Nevada to Oak Street be tied
to the construction of Sander Way, Phase 11 construction not the Phase I
construction.
b. That staff have the ability to allow Phase 11 to be constructed prior to
Phase I if the developer requests.
c. If the project is built in phases the first phase that is build will include;
L The construction of Almeda Street to Heiman Street
ii. The construction of Perozzi Street
iii. Curbs, sidewalks and park rows will be completed on both sides of
Almeda Street and Perozzi Street prior to any home construction in
Phase I or Phase II
d. If the project is built all at once 24 lots (50% of the lots in Phase' I and
Phase 11) need to meet the time line requirements of Phase I in the current
timeline.
These changes do not adversely affect the final development,. It still has the
improved access to the Dog Parkas the first item to be completed prior to any new lots
being developed. It minimizes the disturbance of land in areas where lots are not ready
to be built on. The final completion date is not changed.
The only items that may be delayed are the multi-use path and sidewalk to Oak
Street. This delay would only happen if Phase 11 was developed after Phase 1. In any
case multi-use path and "sidewalk to Oak Street would have to be installed before the
development of the any of the lots in Phase II.
A proposed revised Exhibit F Timetable of Development - Outline Plan Physical
Commencement and Completion is attached to this document. This revised document
clearly shows the changes that need,to be made in the timeline.
III. Proposed Modifications to Energy Performance Standards Outlined" in
Exhibit K-3 of the.approved Outline Plan's Book III narrative
1) We are requesting the removal the following and their requirements:
a). Exhibit K-3 of the Revised Outline Plan Book III revised October 24, 2011
b) Exhibit E of the Development items
i) # 11- Energy Conservations Earth Advantage Program. A minimum of 53 of the residential
units shall qualify in the City of Ashland Earth Advantage program. The applicants shall
meet with the Ashland Conservation Division regarding eligible site activities prior to
issuance of an excavation permit. The required Earth Advantage documentation shall be
submitted with each building permit application.
ii) # 12 Energy Conservation: Net Zero Energy. 53 residential units, in the subdivision,
including the cottages, duplexes and single family units, shall meet the application "Net Zero
Energy" Performance Standard as outlined in Exhibit K-3 of the Revised Outline Plan, Book,lll
Page 2 of 7
Narrative revised October 24, 2007. The Final Plan application shall include systems for
measuring and monitoring compliance.of the development with the Performance standard
that is administered by the applicants and verified by the city.
iii) "Net Zero Energy" Performance Standard as outlined in Exhibit k-3 of the Revised Outline
Plan, Book III-Narrative revised October 24, 2007 shall be consistent with the following.
(1) That all dishwasher and washing machines shall qualify for the State of Oregon tax
credit and be selected from the list of qualified machines maintained by'the Oregon
Department of Energy.
(2) That each home that would be built to the standards encompassed in the applicant's
Exhibit K shall be provided with a Photovoltaic (PV) system that is either 3kW's in size or
produces 1.5 Kwh's/Sq. Ft./Yr. whichever is less, and also be provided with enough
available' south facing unshaded roof space to double the size of the PV system.
(3) That the homes will meet a minimum requirement of R-49 attic insulation for flat
ceilings.
(4) That the passive solar homes shall meet the State of Oregon's minimum requirements
for the passive solar home tax credit.
c) Council Conditions from the development agreement.
i) #26 That 53 residential units in the subdivision, including the cottages, duplexes and single-
family units, shall meet the application "Net Zero Energy" Performance Standard as outlined
in Exhibit K-3 of the Revised Outline Plan, Book III - Narrative revised October 24, 2007. The
Final Plan application shall include systems for measuring and monitoring compliance of the
development with the Performance Standard that is administered by the applicants and
verified by the city.
ii) #27 That a minimum of 53 of the residential units shall qualify in the City of Ashland Earth
Advantage program. The applicants shall meet with the Ashland Conservation Division
regarding eligible site activities prior to issuance of an excavation permit. The required
Earth Advantage documentation shall be. submitted with each building permit application.
iii) #44 That "Net Zero Energy" Performance Standard as outlined in Exhibit K-3 of the Revised
Outline Plan, Book III-Narrative, revised October 24, 2007 shall be revised as follows.
(1) That all dishwasher and washing machines shall qualify for the State of Oregon tax
credit and be selected from the list.of qualified machines maintained by the Oregon
Department of Energy.
(2) That each home that would be built to the standards encompassed in the applicant's
Exhibit K shall tie provided with a Photovoltaic (PV) system that is either 3kW's in size or
produces 1.5 Kwh's/Sq. Ft./Yr. whichever is less, and also be provided with enough,
available south facing unshaded roof space to double the size of the PV system.
(3) That the homes will meet a minimum requirement of R-49 attic insulation for flat
ceilings,
(4) That the passive solar homes shall meet the State of Oregon's minimum requirements
for the passive solar home tax credit. J
2) To replace these with the following
JAN 1'0 2014
Page 3 of. 7
Energy Conservation: Earth Advantage Program. A minimum of 53 of the residential
units shall qualify in the City of Ashland Earth Advantage program with at least a Gold
rating. That a minimum of 53 of the residential units be constructed as Photovoltaic
ready.
Earth Advantage Gold is a third party accreditation that changes as technology and our
understanding of the environment changes. Photovoltaic ready means that the homes
need to have wiring and/or chases to connect the potential photovoltaic units on the roof
to the potential unites to run the photovoltaic system. It also means that the roof needs
to be designed to house the photovoltaic system.. These changes have many benefits to
the City of Ashland.
1. Ease of administration- Earth Advantage is designed to keep up with current
technology, there is less of a chance of conflicting requirements and a better
chance of the builder, developer and City staff to have a common understanding
of the requirements.
2. Ability to automatically change. as technology changes- There would not be the
issue of having to request approval from the Planning Commission and City
Council when there is a new more efficient technology. As an example the type
of light bulb required now is fluorescent or compact fluorescent lamps: LED lights
are not allowed.
3. The Development Agreement as modified by this change will still satisfy the
standards initially approved. The Earth Advantage Gold with the Photovoltaic
ready option produces homes that are at least 15%o more energy efficient than
current code. There are no changes being requested that would change the
east-west axis for a true South building orientation so that the optimum solar
efficiency is gained. With the proposed modifications this project still meets
the identified public need for energy and water.conservation in new homes
as supported in the Ashland comprehensive Plan.
IV. Proposed Modifications to the Multi-Use Path Installation
The City of Ashland's Compressive plan shows"the Multi-Use path in the same
area as shown on the Development agreement. Getting it there was a challenge, first
we had to get an exception to street standards. The Planning Commission and the City
Council both agreed with applicant that having a Multi-Use path near a stream was
better environmentally than having a street, We are not requesting any changes that
affect this decision.
Then there was the land swap. The land that is now the dog park.and the road to
the dog park was purchased with Federal parks money, With that money came strings!
The swap could only take place if the land the city received was of greater value than
the land they gave up and "furthered public interest". The changes we are requesting
still give the city added value and further public interest. _D
JAN 10 2014
Page 4of 7
Added value- The restoration and enhancement-of the vegetation was not part
of the land swap application. The lands location, size and multi-use path were. There
are no changes to these items being requested.
Furthered public interest- The location of the land along a creek satisfies this
requirement. The protection of the stream and the improved multi-use path are a bonus.
The requirement to provide for the restoration and enhancement of the Park
Corridor Riparian areas are not appropriate in light of recent experiences with creek
side restorations. The black berry and other non-native plants that are currently on the
property are protecting the stream. The removal of these plants and replacement with
new plants in the-short term would adversely affect the stream by not providing shade to
keep the•stream cool. In nature not all plants start at the.same time. One type of plant
starts which provides an environment for another plant. When all types of plants are
planted at once in this type of setting the success rate of the plants Js low because
growing conditions are changing so fast. The cost to maintain the.entire area is
estimated by the Parks Department at about $49,000 a year. Because the currents
plants are very invasive and hard to remove and because chemical application is not
appropriate due to the close proximity to the creek all maintains would have to,be; by:
hand. This is a high price with little benefit. The changes being proposed would reduce
this cost by about 60% to 75%0.
JAN 1 0 2014
We propose to restore and enhance;
The area within 4 feet of the multi- use path,
• Any land that is disturbed in the construction of the multi-use path,
The 10 foot riparian corridor buffer in Phase 11 eastern property line units 68 and
25-39
AMC 18.62 requires the following
1. Through the application of the development standards of this chapter, the potential
impacts to the property and nearby areas have been considered, and adverse impacts
have been minimized.
The mitigation plan has been submitted and approved. We will adhere to that plan in the
construction of the path and any areas that are disturbed by the construction of the
Multi-use path. Where the disturbance is less than 4 feet on either side of the path we
will follow plan in that 4 foot buffer.
2. That the applicant has considered the potential hazards that the development may create
andimpiemented measures to mitigate the potential' hazards caused.by the development.
This has been addressed with City Council Condition #15 below. The plan has been
approved and we are not asking to change the 1.0 foot riparian corridor. The area
between the path and the development will remain as designed. The path will remain as
designed and then there will be at least 4 feet to the east and north of the path that will
Page 5' of 7
remain as.designed. That is a minimum of 24 feet of riparian corridor and path between
the development and the stream.
#15 The Final Plan application shall include a mitigation plan prepared by a riparian biologist or a natural
resource professional with training and experience in biology, ecology or related fields for the
impact of the construction' of the multi-use path in the riparian corridor and to address the 10-foot
wide riparian corridor buffer. The riparian corridor buffer is the setback between the new eastern
property line adjacent to the Ashland Creek riparian corridor and the single family homes and yards
for units 68, and 25 -39, and is delineated as common area in the application materials. Disturbed
areas from the multi-use path construction shall be re-vegetated and an additional area restored
and enhanced with local source native plant material including ground cover, shrubs and trees at a
1:1.5 ratio, erosion control material shall be applied (e.g. mulch, hay, jute-netting, or comparable)
and ternporary,irrigation facilities installed. The mitigation plan shall include but not be limited to a
statement, of objectives, measurable standards of mitigation, an assessment of riparian corridor
functions and values, a statement and detail plan of the location, elevation and hydrology of the
mitigation:area, a planting plan and schedule, a monitoring and maintenance plan, a contingency
plan and performance guarantees. The applicants shall install the mitigation measures in the
approved mitigation plan in conjunction with the multi-use path installation.
3. That the applicant has taken all reasonable steps to reduce the adverse impact on the
environment. Irreversible actions shall be considered more seriously than reversible
actions. The Staff Advisor or Planning Commission shall consider the existing development
of the surrounding area,.and the maximum permitted development permitted by the Land
Use ordinance.
In addition to the steps listed in item 2 above. We will follow the approved plan in any
areas that are disturbed by the .construction of the Multi-use path. The design and
mitigation measures have already been approved. We are only asking that we not
impact that riparian area any more than is necessary to build the Multi-use path in a
responsible manner.
A revised plan which clearly delineates the proposed pathway installation and the limits
of the slope stabilization and revegetation proposed will be submitted to the City for
approval prior to the construction. of the multi-use path. This would be a modification of
sheet #R-1 from December 1, 2008 which was approved in conjunction with the Final
Plan approval for the cottages.
The only modification we are proposing is that the first sentence of the Development
Agreement Exhibit E,5 be changed from
The Owner shall be solely responsible for the restoration and enhancement of
the Riparian Corridor to be conveyed to the Cityas part of the land exchange.
TO
The Owner shall be solely responsible for the restoration and enhancement of
JAN 10 ;2014
Page 6 ,of 7
the area of the Riparian Corridor that is disturbed in the construction of the
multi-use path and 4 feet on either side of the Multi-use path, to be conveyed to
the City as part of the land exchange.
V. Miscellaneous additions
a. To the extent anything in this approval and conditions conflict, it is
the intent of the Council that the provisions adopted in this
document be the governing requirements superseding all other
references which may be in conflict with it.
b. Upon approval this document, will be recorded on the property.
VI.. Conclusion
We respectfully request that you help to make Verde Village, a reality by accept
the changes we have requested. We have already provided the City of Ashland with 15
affordable homes and the land to extend the Multi-use path as planned for in the
Compressive plan. The roads and phase I engineering plans have been approved by
the City of Ashland and are ready to be built. What we need now is some common
sense changes to make this project a reality.
The change in .timing which, allows for a 2 phase 'project, will not change the
finished development, to the contrary it may cause it to finish sooner.
The changes in the.energy efficacy requirement still leave Ashland with a project
it can be proud of and the potential that the final home owner will carry those
efficiencies even further.
The reduction of the plantings in the riparian area does not adversely affect the
stream health and makes economic sense to both the development and the City of.
Ashland.
We have shown that the changes still meet all the requirements of the City of
Ashland.
Let's make this project a realityl
JAN 10 2014
Page 7 of 7
Ordinance #3082 Attachment 1
THIRD AMENDMENT TO VERDE VILLAGE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT TO REFLECT
COUNCIL-APPROVED TIMETABLE EXTENSION
THIS THIRD AMENDMENT is made and entered into this 4th day of Tune 2013, by
and between the City of Ashland, a municipal corporation of the State of Oregon,
(hereinafter referred to as "City), and WILMA, LLC, an Oregon Limited Liability Company,
(hereinafter referred to as "WILMA").
Whereas, on December 18, 2007, the City of Ashland approved Ordinance 2945
granting approval to the Verde Village Development Agreement, -a land use decision; and
Whereas, on July 17, 2009 Planning Director Bill Molnar approved and executed
the First Amendment to the Verde Village Development Agreement, approving a 12 month
administrative timetable extension as contemplated in Exhibit F of the original
Development Agreement; and
Whereas; on March 2, 2010, the Ashland City Council adopted Ordinance No. 3007,
the Recession Extension Ordinance, which ordinance created a ministerial process for the
Planning Director to grant current planning actions a 12 month timetable extension in
recognition of the difficult financial market.
Whereas, on April 9, 2010 WILMA LLC requested an extension for the entire project
in accordance with the Recession Extension ordinance.
Whereas, on June 6, 2010 the requested Amendment to the Development
Agreement to extend the timetable was approved administratively by the Director in
accordance with the Recession Extension Ordinance;
Whereas, on April 2, 2013 WILMA!LLC requested an extension for the entire project
in accordance with the allowances of the original development agreement, and the Oregon
Revised Statutes.
Whereas, on lone 4.2013 the Ashland City Council adopted Ordinance. No. #3082
which amended the timetable for the entire project,
NOW THEREFORE, the Verde Village Development Agreement is hereby amended as,
follows:
1. The above recitations are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this
reference; and
2. Exhibit F, Timetable of Development, is hereby amended to reflect a seven (7)
year extension of time for all eligible timetables, said extension being reflected
in a'Revised Exhibit F, attached hereto and made a part hereof by this reference.
3. All other provision of the Verde Village Development Agreement, not
inconsistent with the above changes remain in,full force and effect: _J
JAN 10 2014
Ordinance #3082 Attachment 1
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed these presents on the
dates indicated below. The date of this Amendment shall be the date on which this
Agreement was executed by all parties.
WILMA LLC CITY OF ASHLAND
By: By:
Gregory D. Williams, Managing Member John Stromberg, Mayor
Date: Date:
Approved as to Form:
John Blackhurst,
Attorney for OWNER/DEVELOPER
STATE OF OREGON )
County of Jackson
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _ day of 2013,
by Gregory D. Williams, as Managing Member and authorized agent of Wilma, LLC.
Notary Public for Oregon
My Commission Expires:
STATE OF OREGON )
County of Jackson )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _ day of 2013,
by John Stromberg, as Mayor and authorized agent of City of Ashland pursuant to Ordinance
Notary Public for Oregon
My Commission Expires:
Approved as to Form:
David Lohman
City Attorney
-JAN 10 2014
r
Ordinance #3082 Attachment 1
REVISED EXHIBIT F
TIMETABLE OF DEVELOPMENT - OOTLINE PLAN
PHYSICAL COMMENCEMENTAND COMPLETION
[ORS 94.504(4)]
This development will be constructed in phases as shown on Exhibit 6 to this Agreement
Phase 1 includes the R-1-3 S nortion of the project twenty four cottage units along with 1
single fami lot- Phase 11 includes all other lots the multi-use oath the sidewalk on the north
,side of Nevada. the Riparian Corridor and Wetland area Phase, I and Phase If may. be
constructed in any order or at•the same time If the project is constructed in two phases the
comnletion of, lmeda.will be included'in.the first hase Each phase to be constructed, and the
date which Final Plan and Site Review :and-final plat approval of each phase must be obtained,
are as follows:
Physical commencement of construction of any phase of development shall occur on or
before January 17, 2010: t
t[Physical CommencementofRice Park affordable housing project, a portion. ofPhose 1, commenced on June 1, 2009.
Completion of all infrastructure and vertical construction, except for single family units on
individual platted lots, [4 total exempt from vertical construction deadline] shall occur no later
than January 17 2023.
Phase Final Plan and Site Infrastructure Final Plat and Completion
Review Approval Completion of Vertical Construction
I July 17, 2009' July 17, 2020 January l7, tl ~
'[Final Plan Approval was obtained on 01-06-09 for Rice Park a portion of Phase 1J
"[Final Plan Approval was obtained on 01-25-09 for the remainder of Phase 1[
July 25, 2p1B* Final Civil 'Plan Approval (construction
authorization) and any associated construction permits must
be obtained and Contract.for Installation. and Maintenance of
Plant Materials with Security submitted and executed, and
construction commenced with .respect. to thethe frst 12hase .1
elements no later than specified.
*[Final Civil. Plan Approval (construction authorization] for Rice Parka portion
ofPhose 1, was obtained on May 5, 2009.]
July 17, 2020• Complete extension of Almeda to
Nevada Street completion of construction of
"Canine Way" access to Dog Park, including
installation of water, sanitary sewer, storm
drainage power, gas, telephone and all utilities.
:July! , 90011 Complete sid alwlk an the-neFth
JAN 1 0 2014 _ 6f voila a.na
n::i: c..,..;.
va,avcrccr.
Ordinance.#3082 Attachment 1
-afid
Wetland A.S.A.. to -AMT-A^# fe
AF Dl....t 14-at-e--Fia-ls, security an'
O"Sepve Area Mana>.a:.:" n. Dl....
7.1.: 17,2affi Gq P.cicioi••.••••••~rvcrucc.vnA-).AF..«...IH_
use path and t..A....F.....,1AA.i AF A^1`1^Ad M
July 17, 2020. Complete construction of
subdivision infrastructure to the affordable
housing site and complete extension of all
needed public ;facilities to the affordable
housing site. (to service 15 townhome units).
July 17, 2020. Complete construction of
"subdivision' Infrastructure for 'the- first
pPhase 1--(R 13.5 pe. ti-) of
inelasive infi;astruetare far ele
(24)
July 17, & Phase-l-Deadline for final
survey to be signed after completion of
"subdivision infrastructure and before start of
vertical construction for the first phase.
July 17, 2011.ttDeadline to transfer property
title to Affordable Housing Tract to Rogue
Valley Community Development Corporation
(RVCDC) or other approved non-profit
affordable housing developer. Transfer shall
occur prior to vertical construction on any
Phase of the project.
t1' The Affordable Housing Tract was transferred to RVCDC
on December 09, 2004 upon approval of the early
conveyance by the City Council on October 07, 2009.
January 17, 2022. Vertical construction
deadline for all of the first phase units or 24
units (H% of the units in this proiect V*eaty-
ll FA6. L9 Al A:ata..:: Wigs 'P.. ertie6l ..ct#..etien
(15) multi family upks'fe
JAN 10 20K .
c'
Ordinance #3082 Attachment 1
Phase Final Plan and Site Infrastructure Final Plat and Completion
Review Approval Completion of Vertical Construction
II July 17, 2020 July 17, Z= January 17, 2023
January 17, 2022:## Final Civil Plan Approval (construction
authorization) and any associated construction permits must
be obtained and Contract for Installation and Maintenance of
Plant Materials with Security submitted and executed, and
construction commenced with respect to the second
In lase]24, fir elements within 18 months of Final Plan
Approval, no later than specified.
July 17, 2022: Complete construction of
"subdivision" Infrastructure for the second
Ir ro c..~::«:,.ni e[•.w,; ,.;.t
12hase
family lets eii Nevada
and infi~astructure
for twenty five (25) single family ,
lots,
ineluding
SafiderWaypaelwdW.
July 17, 2022. ° ase 1;-Deadline for final
survey to be signed after completion of
subdivision infrastructure and before "start of
vertical construction for the econd phase.
January 17, 2023.
Vertical construction
deadline for-th
remainder of the units
twerity five ~(29) single
fafflily h9ffl~S Of which
19 are det3elled-a4d-H
°hed
July 17, 2&hJZ. Completion of Maintename an
dAN 10 2014 Secarity~Period -fer ReSt9flatBrand
8n11011eetxent of Ripar4an r,.....,1,.. and
as pursuant" te.
r..... . r„l 6fit Plan "M Phase 1
Failure tostrictly comply with this timetable of development requires an amendment to this
Agreement and subjects the owner to then current laws, 'including but not limited to
engineering construction standards, contrary to the ordinary protection.of ORS 92.040. The
title transfer, physical commencement and the 2023 completion deadline shall not be
administratively extended.
After the construction termination date, no further development as authorized herein (except
for building permits for single family units on individual platted lots) shall be allowed on the
Ordinance #3082 Attachment 1
subject property unless such development is in compliance with applicable development
regulations in effect at the time. Any amendment to the extent of the Amendment shall comply
with the laws in effect atthe time the amendment is sought
Failure of the timetable. of development to list an element of the Project does not relieve or
excuse the Owner from the.requirement to complete that element.
JAM 10 2014
Ashland Community Development
The response to the written submittals from Colin Swales and Eric Navickas
RE Modifications to the Verde Village Development Agreement
March 3, 2014
The claim by Mr. Swales and Mr. Navickas that the property values used in the land
exchange are not accurate is incorrect. Since, the property owned by the City was
purchased using federal parks monies the appraisal had to meet an extremely high level
requiring an appraiser that had prior approval to do such appraisals and the appraiser
had been approved by the federal parks. Both the State of Oregon Parks Department
and the federal parks department accepted the appraisal, as well as Jackson County
and the City of Ashland.
The land that the City owned since it was purchased using,federal parks monies could
only be used for parks unless an exchange of land that was equal or greater value
needed to take place, which is exactly what happened. To claim that the 1.54 acres
was developable does not make any sense, because of the fore mentioned restriction
and by the very nature of the long slender shape of the land made it even less
developable. Further to claim that creek frontage land has little value is just plain
untrue. Ask most any real estate broker and they will tell you that creek frontage carries
a premium.
There are no modifications being requested that have an effect on the variance to the
street standards that were approved with the original development agreement; as Mr.
Navickas suggests.
The multi-use path will be built, but it will be built when the phase 11 construction takes
place since the path is connected to the phase II land. The only way that phase 11 can
take.place is if the path is installed prior to any home construction in that phase.
The claim that we are reneging on our-agreement to maintain the riparian migration is
also untrue, we have not requested any change to the current agreement.
Valri Williams { +
RECENtu
MAR 0 4 ,2014
,,&5 12 >a 105
vtty of Wan(
Derek Severson
From: Colin [eolinswales@gmail, com]
Sent Wednesday, February 26, 2014 1:10 PM
To: Bill Molnar Ctty'of Ashland
Cc: Derek.Severson;-April Lucas Planning,Ex""habit
Subject: Written submittal on Verde Village Ordinance Change ExaiaiT
' PA# JOt4-0005)
DATE 2 1E AJ$TAFF
Bill,
(cc Derek, April)
Herewith additional written testimony on the " Verde Village": viz:
Public Hearing and first reading of and ordinance titled, "An ordinance modifying the Verde
Village Subdivision's Development Agreement to clarify project phasing and make clear which
improvements are required with each phase and allow either phase to occur first, to. change
the energy efficiency requirements for the development so that all units will be constructed to
at least Earth Advantage Gold Standards and will.be photovoltaic ready; and to change the
landscaping requirements associated with construction of the multi-use path"
The erstwhile City Attorney's Council Communication [Appicello -11/6/07
hftps://www.ashiand.or.us/Files/CC PH Ashland Greenhouses.0d ] stated in part:
The t Development] Agreement presents certainty about what the developer is expected to do and
when. Exhibit F presents the Timetable of Development for this phased project. The Council should
examine the timetable and note that public "infrastructure, recreationatimprovements and affordable
housing are, scheduled earlyin'the timetable.... The Federal, State and County approvals are
prerequisites to the land exchange, .as is construction of the multi-use path in'the riparian area.
That all of the residential units in the subdivision shall meet the
application "Net Zero Energy" Performance Standard as outlined in
Exhibit K-3 of the application Book 111 dated June 8, 2007. The Final
Plan application shall include systems for measuring and monitoring
compliance of the development with the Performance Standard that is
administered.by the applicants and vented by the city.
[emphasis added]
The Developers have enjoyed unlimited Staff time from both our Legal Department, Planning
Department and Parks Department, as well as Parks Commission, Planning Commission and
Council who have all bent over backwards to make this scheme-work. -As Commissioner Dotterrer
said during' the hearing "The City
getsa free path .
But unfortunately the Parks Department now realize 12/23/13 that the free path come"s with a
Significant cost to the taxpayers:" the three-acre maintenance project per six-month season would be
$39, 000, including irrigation staff time.
hftp://www.ashland.dr:us/Agendas.asp?Display=Minutes&AMID=5536 ]
The developers also want to renege on their agreement to maintain the riparian mitigation planting for
three years until it is fully established.
It would seem that the Developers have done little to advance this project other than to market it for
sale, since early 2010, at a price only made possible (originally $2.9 million) by all the work; the City
t
have done. on their behalf: Now they want to further lower the bar on their responsibility in, order to.
make it more attractive for sale [ see: http://www.zill6w.6om/homed6tails/87-W-Nevada-St=Ashland-
OM7520/2133015690 zbid/. ]
'Developers state that "Verde'Village.gave the city over $500,000 in land for the project:
They may have forgiven the perceived difference in the Land Swap values 'AFSG agrees to "gift"
the $259, 000 difference to City" (Parks Study Session 12/16/13) - but I feel the appraiser had wrongly valued
the William's unbuildable floodplain in the County, as being more valuable.per sq. ft, than the City's swapped
residentially-zoned flat land that at the time divided the Developer's,property. That appraisal was deeply flawed,,
as `I detailed at the time. [ http://www.ashland.or.us/files/Verde.ndf ]
The Developer refers to the security that that the City holds as a "bond".. All I can find is a trust deed that I
mentioned in my prior oral testimony. Ifthis'was reduced in 2009 to a lower value-.how does this amount
compare to the current costs involved to build and "maintain for three years the multi-use path? Has an updated
estimate been obtained?
The trust deed seem to be a lien against 2 parcels owner by Wilma LLC: Does this the R-1 lot fronting Nevada
Street currently being used once again as it commercial nursery by Carols Colors [
hftp //wwW.carolsoregohlandscaping.coih/contact-carols-colors-15nd§cabine/] ?
Until all the infrastructure is installed by the. developer, the individual lots are unable to be sold = so the lien
only seems to be enforceable against the whole parcel.'If this is built in "Phases" or "phases" how can this lien
be enforceable when the original parcels would then no longer be, in existence; and a portion dedicated for city
Right-of-Way?
Could I also requestahat the Planning, Commission minutes.form their-last meeting 2/11/14 be made available to
Council and included in the Record as Commissioner Thomson had some grave concerns about the wording of
the Development Agreement that did not seem to make it into the last Council Packet.
The city offers "PV solar rebates" of up to $7,500 per unit. (Federal and State tax credits also available) What is
the expected total cost to the city if the development it built as planned?
Finally I would request that the Council make sure that the City and its taxpayers are well-protected and not
look to the increase the viability of.the project or ease the financial well-being of the developers.
Submitted by email 2/26/14 1:10 p.m.
Please confirm receipt:
Colin Swales
2
Derek Severson
From: Eric Navickas [navickasdesign@gmail,coml
Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2014 1'13 PM
To: derek severson@ashladd,or.us;.molnarb@ashland.or.us; John Stromberg; Carol Voisin;
greg@council.ashland.or.us; Dennis Slattery; Pam Marsh;rich@council.ashland.or.us;
mike@council.ashland.or.us
Subject: Verde Village written comments
Attachments: Verde Village.docx
Thank you for including my attached comments into the Record on the proposed Verde Village Development
Agreement Amendment.
Eric Navickas
City of Ashland
Planning Exhibit
Emaw
PA# 20/1 •a00 2$
DATE 1 / STAFF Ah$
t
City of As8land
Eric Navickas :Planning Exhibit
2060 Mill.Creek Drive EXNi°"
PA# 201V=00052
Prospect OR, 97536 oaTE s,n.E,
n_avi ckasdesi gn(o)gma i Isom
February 26, 2014
Comments on Ordinance Modifying the Verde Village Development Agreement
Standing:
I was a seated Councilor on the Ashland City Council'when the original Development
Agreement was approved. I opposed the original Development Agreement stating
violations of legal criteria, thereby establishing myself as an "aggrieved party"
I also use Ashland Parks on a regular basis with a specific interest in health of
Ashland Creek. My ability to access the affected section of Ashland Creek,
established as a public park, will be "adversely affected with further delay of the
proposed improvements.
Concerns:
An understanding of this project must begin by looking 'to what was
originally approved and the exceptional benefits the property owners have received
through this process.
The subject property was divided into two parcels by 1.54 acres that the City
owned. The1.54 acres was unencumbered property with value as land that could
have been developed.The property owners traded their property that was within
the riparian area and encumbered with development restrictions, for this 1.54 acres.
The property owner then submitted a site plan with residential houses
backing up against the riparian area. Backyards abutted the creek. This required a
variance to the Street Standards requiring that natural features like Ashland Creek
are adjacent to a street thereby allowing public access. The desire of the Standard
was to avoid a situation similar to that along Helman St where private property
abuts the creels and the public is excluded.
In essence, the city gave up 1.54 acres of developable land for a marginal
park that is squeezed between private backyards and Ashland Creek. Had the law
been applied appropriately, the City could have had a usable park with street access
along its entire length. Arguably, the land exchange didn't even need to take place as
the Street Standards would have restricted private property along the creek and the
riparian area would be protected from development. A usable riparian area would
have been available to the public.
The City gave up 1.54 acres for a situation that created a less usable riparian
area than the law provided for while placing the long-term cost of maintenance onto
the Parks Department.
ORS 94.508 does not allow Development Agreements to be approved unless
they comply with local regulation. Therefore, the burden to show demonstrable
difficulty to allow a variance still applies. There was no reason the Street Standard
should have not applied to this development.
In the context of the exceptional benefits this property owner has received
through this Development Agreement, I urge the Council to require the property
owner to meet its obligations that were originally agreed upon.
There is no reason that the multi-use path cannot be completed before any
occupancy permits are issued by the Building Department.The claims of difficulty in
restoration outside of a 4' corridor lack substance. This clain, at the least, requires "a
riparian biologist or a natural resource professional with training and experience in
biology, ecology or related fields" to substantiate.
I also believe that many on the Council approved the Development
Agreement based on the lure of "Zero Net Energy" development. The attitude of the
Council was to overlook application of the law in the interest of elements of the
project they desired. I believe we would have seen a more rigorous application of
the law had this bait not existed.
1 encourage the Council to allow removal of the Zero Net Energy
requirements only on the condition that the entire application is resubmitted. The
Council originally approved a package conditioned on benefits to the City. As the
property owners remove those benefits, the entire package becomes more and more
questionable.
Thank you for your full consideration,
Eric Navickas
I
CITY OFASHLAND
of Ashland
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION planning > xhibit
REGULAR MEETING Exxisir
February 11, 2014 pgtl ;iq nno5t.
Dare T"FF
EXCERPT FROM DRAFT MINUTES
TYPE III PUBLIC HEARING
A. PLANNING ACTION,#t 2014-00052
SUBJECT PROPERTY: 87 W. Nevada St. and 811 Heiman Street
APPLICANT: Wilma LLC
DESCRIPTION: A request to modify the-Development Agreement for the Verde Village Subdivision for the
properties located at 87 W. Nevada Street and 811 Heiman Street. The proposed modifications include:
clarifications of the project phasing to make clear which improvements are required with each phase and to allow
either phase to occur first; changes to the energy efficiency requirements of the development so that all units will
be constructed to at least Earth Advantage Gold standards and will be 'Photovoltaic' Ready'; and changes to the
landscaping and maintenance requirements'associated with construction of the multiuse path.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Suburban Residential and Single-Family Residential; ZONING: R-1.3.5, R-
1.5, R-1-7.5; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 391E 04B TAX LOTS: 1100, 1400.1418.
Ex Parte Contact
Commissioners Dawkins, Miller, Brown and Peddic'ord declared site visits; No ex parts contact was reported.
Staff Report
Associate Planner Derek Severson reviewed the site and provided an overview of the original land use application. He
explained the approved application was memorialized in a development agreement that was adopted by ordinance by the City
Council in December 2007, and encompassed the following elements:
• Annexation, Land Exchange with the City, and Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map changes.
• Outline Plan approval to develop the property as a 68-unit residential development.
• Site Review approval for multi-family development.
Physical and Environmental Constraints Review Permit to locate a multi-use path in the Ashland Creek Riparian
Preservation Area.
• Exceptions to the Street Standards to install a curbside sidewalk on one side of a proposed street, to not locate a street
adjacent to natural features, and to not connect two of the proposed streets.
• Variances to reduce the. on-street parking requirement to 38 spaces, to reduce the rear yard setback, and to reduce the.
required distance between buildings for cottages.
• Administrative Variance to have the primary orientation of the buildings to the south in order to maximize use of solar
energy.
Mr. Severson explained the affordable housing development Rice Park was,part of the.first phase and has already been
completed, and the remainder of the first phase ircludes the development of a cottage community with a private drive. The
second phase of this development includes single family homes, completion of the Bear Creek Greenway connection to Nevada
Street, and sidewalk installation along Nevada to Oak Street. Mr. Severson explained the applicarifs.are here tonight,requesting
three modificationsto their original development agreements
ProiectPhasiug The applicants propose to make the project a true two phase project that would split the infrastructure
of the development in phases rather than front loading the majority of the infrastructure into the first phase. Mr:
Severson stated either phase could be built first, or they could be built simultaneously. He noted the applicants have
Ashland Planning Commission
Febwary 11, 2014
Page 1 of 4
agreed to provide permanent facilities to serve Rice Park and the connection to the dog park in Phase I; and the
greenway connection and sidewalk on Nevada would be tied to the Sanders Way improvements in Phase II.
• Energy Efficiency: The applicants are requesting to change the energy efficiency requirements to be more compatible
with technological changes and easier to administer by going with an established program with third party verification.
Mr. Severson stated the units would have to obtain a minimum of Earth Advantage Gold/Photovoltaic Ready
certification, and these would be 15% more energy efficient than the current code requirements and 20%-30% better
than the codes that were in place when the subdivision was approved.
• Multi-Use Path: The riparian corridor mitigation plantings would be reduced to install 10-foot buffer plantings on the
subdivision side plus the 10-foot path, 4 ft. of landscaping on either side of the path, and re-vegetation of any additional
areas of disturbance associated with the path installation. Mr. Severson reviewed the cross-section illustrations for the
riparian landscaping plan and clarified the applicants will be responsible for maintaining the improvements they install
for a three year period.
Mr. Severson concluded his presentation and stated staff supports a favorable recommendation to the City Council with the
recommendations outlined in the staff report.
Questions of Staff
Staff was asked about strengthening the language in the development agreement regarding the multi-use path landscaping and
riparian corridor restoration to make the expectation about working with the Parks Department clearer.
Staff was asked if Sander Way would be installed if Phase II never happens. Mr. Severson clarified Sander Way would only
serve the units built along that road, so if Phase II never occurs and those homes are not built, the installation of Sander Way
would not be vital.
Staff was asked to clarify the distinction between "Phase 1" and "Phase 2" (uppercase) and "phase one" and "phase two"
(lowercase). Mr. Severson recommended the applicants speak to this during their presentation.
Comment was made that the timetable does not reflect all of the elements identified in the development agreement and it was
questioned if this should be a concern.
Staff was asked whether there is any financial surety for this development and Mr. Severson clarified the City has trust deeds on
several of the single family lots.
Commissioners Kaplan/Miller m/s to extend meeting. Voice Vote: All AYES. Motion passed 770.
Applicant's Presentation
Valri Williams and Greg Williams/Explained when the original development agreement was prepared they were very new to
development and the concept of a development agreement was new to the City of Ashland. Ms. Williams stated six years have
passed since the development agreement was prepared and they have realized there are some issues that need to be
addressed. Ms. Williams explained the detailed plan for the multi-use path and riparian area is already in place, and they intend
on using this plan but whiting out the areas beyond the four foot buffer. She stated the Parks Department does not want trees
installed in the middle of the blackberry bushes and are concerned about the maintenance cost, and noted there are trees
growing there now that weren't there at the time of the development agreement. Ms. Williams stated their request is to evaluate
the vegetation when they get ready to do the multi-use path. Regarding the project phasing, Ms. Williams explained the use of
"Phase" was used to identify the physical location on the development, and "phase" was added to identify the first phase that is
actually constructed. She commented on the energy efficiency requirements and explained they realized during the construction
of Rice Park that the elements outlined in K-3 were very onerous. As an alternative, they would like to move to the Earth
Advantage program and require all homes to be a minimum of Earth Advantage Gold. It was noted that this is still going to be
one of the most energy efficient neighborhoods in the state.
Comment was made questioning if the applicants would be placing solar panels on some of the units. Mr. Williams explained
the units will be solar ready but they personally will not be building the homes, but rather will be selling the lots and it will be the
Ashland Planning Commission
February 11, 2014
Page 2 of 4
new owner's decision as to whether to install the PV panel. He added all of the homes will be passively solar heated, which is a
huge benefit in itself.
Ms. Williams spoke to the timeline and explained this document was intended to be a guideline as to when key things should be
done, but does not list every action. She added the timeline is not all inclusive and the development agreement sets the
precedent.
Comment was made recommending the City's legal department take a close look at the development agreement and make sure
the document fully reflects the applicant's commitments.
Comment was made questioning if the applicants have placed money in escrow for the riparian corridor improvements. Ms.
Williams clarified there is a bond with the City for the riparian area and they are not allowed any vertical construction until the
path is installed, which provides a strong incentive to make sure this gets done.
Public Testimony
Colin Swalesl143 Eighth Street/Stated this was a hugely ambitious project when it was approved and what they saw is not
ultimately what they will get. Mr. Swales stated the value of the land was greatly increased by the prior approval, and yet there is
no indication that this project will ever happen. He questioned what might happen if this was not completed and asked if the
area would be de-annexed and the land swap reversed. Mr. Swales stated the City is in a bind but voiced his disagreement with
extending the completion timeframe for this proposal. He recommended the Commission look out for the City's best interest and
asked that the development agreement be looked at in detail. He added it is the developer's job to comply with the terms they
originally agreed to.
Commissioners Dawkiris/Kaplan m/s to extend the meeting to 10:30 pm. Voice Vote: All AYES. Motion passed 7-0.
Questions of Staff
Staff was asked to clarify what will be provided to the City Council. Mr. Severson answered the package of materials will include
a council communication, a revised ordinance, and the exhibits associated with the changes (which will include the Planning
Commission's recommendation.)
Staff was asked if they are comfortable with the proposed modification to the riparian area. Mr. Severson suggested the
Commission could consider strengthening this language by changing it to read, "planting of additional trees both inside and
outside the pathway corridor to be selected and placed atteFsensaltatien based on recommendations from the Parks
Department staff."
Applicant's Rebuttal
Mr. Williams stated this property has been in his family for 100 years and it is beautiful land. He added the University of Oregon
deemed it as was one of the best places in Ashland's to have solar homes.
Deliberations and Decision
Comment was made that serious floods can occur every 10 years and it could be a waste to install a lot of plantings along the
creek. Statement was made expressing support for the applicants to work with the Parks Department and enhancing the area to
maintain a more natural look. Comment was made that their recommendation should be clear that the applicants must conform
to what the Parks Department says.
Mr. Severson recommended the following wording; "That the revised plan (replacing Sheet R-1 from December 1, 2008) to be
provided prior to pathway installation shall illustrate the proposed pathway installation and the redefined limits of the slope
stabilization and associated revegetation and shall include the planting of additional trees both inside and outside the pathway
corridor to be selected and placed based on the recommendations of Parking Department staff as to the number, type, and
placement." The Planning Commission voiced support for this revision.
Ashland Planning Commission
February 11, 2014
Page 3 of 4
Commissioner Mindlin asked if the group had any concems with the modification to the phasing and no issues were raised.
Commissioner Mindlin asked if the group had any concerns with the modification to the energy efficiency standards and no
issues were raised.
Commissioners MilledThompson m/s to recommend Council's approval of the project with the conditions
recommended by staff including the modified language to Condition #31, and recommend the documents be reviewed
by the Legal Department to ensure the applicants commitments are properly reflected. Roil Call Vote: Commissioners
Kaplan, Brown, Dawkins, Thompson, Miller, Peddicord, and Mindlin, YES. Motion passed 7-0.
i
{
Ashland Planning Commission
Febmary 11. 2014
Page 4 of4
1
Planning Department; 51 Winburn Way, Ashland, Oregon 97520 C't T Y OF
541-488-5305 Fax:541.552-2050 www.ashland.or.us TTY:1.800-735-2900 ASHLAND
City of Ashland
PLANNING ACTION: PA-2014-00052 Planning-Exhibit
SUBJECT PROPERTY: 87 W Nevada St. EVIsIT
OWNERIAPPLICANT: Wilma LLC PA# Zpl4-DOU52
DATE 1 Z 1 $iAFF
DESCRIPTION: A request to modify the Development Agreemen or t e erd0 Village
Subdivision for the properties located at 87 W. Nevada Street and 811 Heiman Street The proposed
modifications include: clarifications of the project phasing to make clear which improvements are required
with each phase and to allow either phase to occur first; changes to the energy efficiency requirements of
the development so that all units will be constructed to at least Earth Advantage Gold standards and will be
`.'Photovoltaic Ready'; and changes to the landscaping and maintenance requirements associated with
construction of the multi-use, path.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION; Suburban Residential and Single-Family Residential; ZONING: R-
1-3.5, R-1.5, R-1-7.5 ASSESSOR'S MAP: 391E 04B TAX LOT: 1100, 1400-1418
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: 'February 11, 2014 at 7:00 PM, Ashland Civic Center
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING: February, l8, 2014 at 7:00 PM, Ashland Civic Center
ASHLAND
t DOO PARK - -
°.#2014;00052
87 W. NEVADA ST. & 817 HELMAN ST.
SUBJECT' PROPERTIES
-RICE P I.I.
rrn
VERDE VILLAGE
I~ SUBDIVISION
9Q
O ,
~l .
Ili
I -
,W/NE VADA~ST"..._ ,.:.v. F-_. •v,~_..:_i 'NEV D c5 _
03].fi J6-1W F.n '
Notice is hereby given that PUBLIC HEARINGS on the above request with respect to the ASHLAND LAND USE ORDINANCE will be held before, the
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION and ASHLAND`CITY. COUNCIL on the meeting dates shown atiove. The meetings. will be at the ASHLANb-CIvIC
CENTER, 1175 East Main Street, Ashtantl; Oregon..
'The ordlnanoecriteria~applicable to this application, are attached to.this notice. Oregon' law states thitfanufe to raise an objection concerning this application;
either in person or by letter; or failure to provide.... sufficientspecificity to afford the decision maker an opportunity to respond to the issue,; precludes your right of
appeal to the Land Use Board 'of Appeals (LUBA) on that issue. Failure to specify which ordinance criterion the objection is based on also precludes your.right
of appeal WLUBA on that criterion. Failure of the applicant to raise constitutional or other issues relating fq proposed. conditions of approval with sufficient
specificity to,allow this Commissionad..re'spon l to the'.issue precludes.an action fordamagesin circuit court.
A copy cf4he:application; alldocuments and evidence relied upon by the.applicant and applicable criteria are available for inspection at no cost and will be
'provided aPreasonable cost, if requested. A copy of the Staff Report will be. available'for inspection seven days prior to.the hearing and Will be provided at
'reasonable cost if requested: All materials are available at the Ashland Planning Ddopimerit Commuolly ,Development and Engineering Services, 51
Winburn Way, AShlaod,Oregon 97520. - -
'Dunng fhe Public Hearings; ttie Chair'saatl allow testimony,from the applicant and those In attendance concerning this request.. The Chair shall have 'the'right
to limit the length of testimony and require thahcomments be, restricted to the applicable.. criteria. Unless there4s a continuance, if a participant so requests
before the conclusion of the hearing, the. record shall remain open for at least seven days•aher the, hearing.
In compliance with tha'American'withOisabillhes Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please cohtact the City Administreto?s office. 11 at 541-488-6002
(TTY phone number "00-735-2900). Notification 72hours prior to.the meetingwill enable the Cay to make reasonable arrangements to
"
ensure accessibility to the meeting. (26 CFR 35:102: 35.104 AOA Tidii 1). - - -
If you .have questions or comments concenfng this. request, please feel free'to contact the Ashland Planning Division, 541-486-5305.
G:komm~deJplanningNhnniny AnionsWariciny FoIdMMaileE Nakv fi Siand]0141PA.3aN.00051 dx
Criteria from Chapter 18.88.030.A.4 for modification of the original subdivision's Outline Plan approval:
a. That the development meets all applicable ordinance requirements of the City of Ashland.
b. That adequate key City facilities can be provided including water, sewer, paved access to and through the
development, electricity, urban storm drainage, police and fire protection and adequate transportation; and
that the development will not cause a City facility to operate beyond capacity.
c. That the existing and natural features of the land; such as wetlands, floodploin corridors, ponds, large trees,
rock outcroppings, etc., have been identified in the plan of the development and significant features have
been included in the open space, common areas, and unbulldoble areas.
d. That the development of the land will not prevent adjacent land from being developed for the uses shown in
the Comprehensive Plan.
e. That there are adequate provisions for the maintenance of open space and common areas, if required or
provided, and that if developments are done in phases that the early phases have the some or higher ratio of
amenities as proposed in the entire project.
f. That the proposed density meets the base and bonus density standards established under this Chapter.
g. The development complies with the Street Standards.(Ord 2836, S21999)
Criteria from Chapter 18.62.040.1 for modifications of the Physical & Environmental Constraints Review
Permit which allowed construction of a multi-use path in the Ashland Creek riparian preservation area:
1. Through the application of the development standards of this chapter, the potential impacts to the property and
nearby areas have been considered, and adverse impacts have been minimized.
2. That the applicant has considered the potential hazards that the development may create and implemented
measures to mitigate the potential hazards caused by the development.
3. That the applicant has taken all reasonable steps to reduce the adverse impact on the environment. Irreversible
actions shall be considered more seriously than reversible actions. The Staff Advisor or Planning Commission shall
consider the existing development of the surrounding area, and the maximum permitted development permitted
by the Land Use Ordinance.
4 kanm-devHlonningW6Ming AnianetNmicing FoldtMimiled Ndim & SiSns120 WWA-20144W52.da
U.z
t' VAIN, 3
.j ff,
V) I -Jill
0 ~f I Ih i I 1
_ z!•~ i! -gll
I
w5
F, rp,
N
aj I
it
bJ ~ 1
u4. NRt.yy~~lr..+' 1 M ♦..t 0
w s ll e, 1
; FAD 1111 AmJ i
mm"
D
LRaIN
0
U V)
i
1 ~i I I
~ I~ffi
f
i
, II
1~ t
r a i: M1 ~tia f 4'" s . ~
I ' ~
O / _ . h Ia ~
ti
~ x+ by ~ P
/q ~
G1
13
O ca
Y
m rn
(1) (a 0 c
• C W L C. .L a
C: a)
N _C ca C L Cl) O p 0 U
4--
~ O p (6 C
Q_ Q O U o C N
O a) 4' U a) N N
LA wi N I O ~ p 7 a) cc O
O1 O 7 U c N 0 O U t
• C LL' 1 O L L L
a) -1-+ O Q
>1 75 r_ O 0 ~ a) .C -D
c ca E c m C E.C
m o m o CU cQ a'-° wc`o n 'o cc
g U o o Y N co- ':3 Q a o 0
W E (n ca Cc ~ uci O C
U O C: C
U 3 C o 0
w p ~ ao L ❑ a
c') c c
p N c p a)
o o o Q o
O c. oo E a c o O o o
.2 LO t (0 Cl) ~ o ~ ~ c ca > C.
Im C: 0 a) a) C: a) tm
Q Co a)
E a) C: M C:
W A C..> (a a" S O U V*
N
cy) 0 C U a) CO LO Q)
• Q o ° aa) E i to c m C a) E cn rn? snot
0--a C 0 --Z CD
c (D cu :3 a) ca
dS L_ 4-: O co .a). Qua) N U E co NU^c
C Q E fa N +E -p X N O M
O caLO o c ca as ooa) ap
m n o U o. > :co o
>r; a>i~~ ;ate ~~~E
' W w c a a o M. o 00 C.
o a o o x
' a aciao~ oU~oaciw
o
13 CL Lo o o CL U)'o 0 :t:!
s -0 to a C N a> 3 c a~ a
Q C C C O L+
~ad )
o C_ C_ W. Y a) o M a~ x p Q c
cu a)
' p U Lo c a) > ) o p Y > o c~ o ..o
o
W c ca m O v> C c-C
oL cn -ca cu
• O 0- 1 a N O N Q U can C X. a a -a C: (n 0 (D Fn x c 0 A Q o o c ion o o CO
0 a)
77D 9L =3 (U M
Q Q.UO(/) 0_< W C_O> >+Q LJ C coo a
o aaa ao o a o 0
l&Z
T ~wO
40'~4B"4~¢ WNY Y((
• .Wi yy~UW6 U µOfU `jj s
VN LLQ6 ; LL.nO
N QE
LL ~LLW
'r, R +tj1 Itf ~ N 6 N b
x
- Mi)i
'RX
W!
L xai KI Rht. ~yob `~~~p°~' i~ ~i.. ❑
Ix.
z
I)1 tea. n pP Ire. ~zS° ug
PPNptE R)II k~
)aa~ LLul raj Q.°-a~ c~ )cr
Wog I a
goo
ET
tflllurl1'1 a ~ L T l ,r.
p W 6
! EE ~2 ~ Q20°
~W M1~ ~N ~1+ Q
CL N ~I
133aLL5 SIHO~
•
/ !
!
i
,
,
t
~~a)m U Da)-0 a)
c w .Q 4= L co t {
-r -0 0 4L- 6- cL
(D E .2
L Q 0 Q. CN C o .a)
Q c a) C) o °
a) V ~t UO U cn
to a3 . a) N p O . C
co L ..C a) O Y L Q) C Y
Q) .
..C to 'Q.. cc L C a) U a)
CU a) >
° C Z a) :C Q
O~ C C E E N N Y
N 0 C U O ,E U O p L m (a 4- Y 'Q 7 Y 3 a '5 U p O O 10 F a) cc CL 0- a
-0 0 CO
0 ca
Y C a) O i ° cu
U. c U 70
O O O C a)
r_ 0
Co CL
• N Q O. (B Q •o U •O M a) ch :4
CO CU a) ) (n a) M ~ Q O ~ 3
0 a) 3 E a
IL =5 a) ° co ( ~ CD 'O o -C -
10 _ .C C O ° . 4- O
L Q- 0 u)
a)" ( Yo 0
Y C (a ~ C c-0 c:
a. A a) -a T
Zoaoi~~-^ o- o.C:(a Co
Lu~Q c a) m c c m c
Q o
• V ° (D m .c c ° °-r- o c ao
s caY.
L E -0
~
LL cL ° L5 c a) U n~ ca ao-0
p o n o U w - o
0 co > -r- U) CL 0
_ Y
• ~ c? -0 uNi ~s ~ ~ m •o ~ v
CL 00° -o o:c °oa)
r- CU r n ° 3 ~ a °
a) o I o Q c
o.a>i .c c a>i Y > o
_ v c 3 aCUi d a U i
• • - cv -
a) n m N ai Y C C
U) 11)
• d x a) cri W O T•N > °
4) CL 4-
p co 5 a) a E cc
d c~c°ic°>3 ujJ o)E 5o=3 D
(j))m:S
'D O O
~a~ ~ Wok a
O W
o~ .r'iaN II
~ 60
` com
com
:
$ ♦ i
■
tea . ' 6\ s
~
z ~ u { Pss 1 v / 111. ~ .sew 1~ ~~~i , - Il l ~ ~
oq> i ~ Pi! / IRk ~ ~ ~li u
t
App
g g~a LI]
• C ym
133N15 NNW
U Cl) Lo -r-
,Z c a) ,0)
• < U S~ a) L
O
~ N
Q
(n Q
Q
U L 0
M O
. N O
OL O O C CV L-
• ¢ a) O U Q
E -0 -E
Q
OU Y (B
ty -C _
E U N
C :L
a) c:
U co 0
U 06 U
N
• Q O.
'a -0 .O
Cl) O O
a) - C (n U
L O O C N
Q L E N i
L 0 CL L ►j
O C
• m 0 U a)
U
G (II
(B
-0 4-- cu
c O N r O 6
M (0 L CY) U
M cu
U q
1 > U
X 06
Q cn E a)
A
W L O) ~ -a E
U L
0 0 6 W O C. 0
4-0 +Q N c co L
a) N Q-
0) O N O O
N E L
to O C
• m e m E U .u
L
• O U U N (0
a) 'N N N N
L r Q 3 U L N
0 c 7o ~ Q E ca
> cl
a o
1k
k1ti_ o I
l A
-
FYI,
i
- <1
ttt
Lo_~ k _
~e
-~T_i
`a
Lm 2 S'
s
.}{~~y Lam, -=~T f
I ~ # x._41 t-<p r
` -
all
P
/Y T
r ilk -
--Jj~ i ~z
Y. u
_ T g -
- ~
l A I C "n° I
111
.r w
N
} a
CL
• a Y
• w
m
U~1 U '
o o
X L
III a ~ L O
m
• L~ii~~.Ill l,, '
In to - ~ ii - I
~ ul ll~l ~ ~ Inuid '
111 <k'n!` ' i
• • I \Lf)
lI~ i . 0,911 11!11 111 11 f ! 111111
2
1111 ll 111111 I. I ~ ~ 4v , t
~ 1 1~ ~ q,ill llH 114 Ill 111111 I111❑ Il ! 9 '
Lt P r ( nnlfll,
c ,.I '7 n„la , l it ji U
1 1 ISigkf 1 I ! Iry 1 II III 1 I ll91f r ~L7
1g j r), ~I!!9 ~ 1~ fI ~ I,{~ Iljtl ! 1 96 'fill vwu P
IIII ;1 ~ 1 n
Aft-
9
1--.
- ~ IP. 811191111 will
5is
•
tt R
Q1 § b:m ayy 3'
} L'
•
.
i
j a t,
i
A i pp
A
~ _
f VV _
B F f - I q~ C - _ 'c.
m 4) -0
0 a) (4
O > o L
.Ln ~ p ~CL N N cu O O a O N 4; E -:3 E
Q Q C N
O p) cC O _E
O N 4.1 N O
E Ec~ OJ
C Cam O p O O .a
CO OEm
N U ~ CO ~
a) CD 00
+ (o V O > .ri N c c
z (D Cl) N -r N O E V d E
P Q} )O NN -O C 0+7
M 3: r
N CU O O
Q -a 3:
V d d (D .O ,r
W
CD o [if
N > g O L N t 3
W M p Oct cn . d
• Z r Q~ w !0.~ F+'a
N Co C
Q 3 !E
C N to _0
p O C
U (6 O O O_ O d~ M
• J N~-0 ~O N QO N i V-
c > U > = 0 d
m O N O Q p U G
t
V - 0 Q V U p 75
N U G1 C O
• J C ca s Qw O Q E
FL 4) - r_
• E O cA C •a r- C X p
a) a) co 0 4? a)
a) to G E p
. -Fu -0 Q
O O N N (D ti d
Qc0
VO M N++ NOS
L. En 0 • d.'Q a O O O m L N O CL 0 U) .0 cu co E
C
CL 0 (D > (D CU r
O C cn c C: a O= 'c
a
> Q U 45 E U (A d V E Y V
> 0 tot
C O d
0- V 2 cQ rte. a s,.+
o
0
o
• o L c
ono CO o 0 0
o 0 ~n
a) CD M
c ° >'~-0
0 o o E .Q 0
co ~ co cn
c rnca II 0 E', c c
ca a) x. 0
c0i 'E ~ C) -0 c
L c a) cn
• o f o a ca ~ a
c Y 0 N~ e-0 c
Arn rn o c.a.
p a) a~ o ca co
4-- r ~ t0)
iota «~E>_E
fn c U 4 - ~ > 4~ 4 4--
N a) O c 0 to 0 to
- a~~ ~O QLLONr`
O .O t2 O 00 00
O 3 O C) c 6 O c M c'M
Q~ M Q~ L w
L r-
• - N
x
O
o;
a
~ ~ Q
Y D
~ ~ w N
N
CJ U
0 o
x
~ r o
m
a CL a
- I
u 11i
~ n 111I'1' ~ ~ i I
N q nw~ L 1
• • 1 1 11.1 f
/III ' f ❑ Upi iiln~ l 1
~ 1 .1 ) . , 11111 111 7u 1 e i i1 I
III: r 11!1' II 1 ' ( ,~il ~i ` ~11.
,I ! IIPI i ~1.~ 1, L
~ li~ Ilinaa. uu ryl lnljlu uliw t _ ~ ~
° 3 3 t t- 111111,
SS 1~, u I i
~ Ip Iif i l i~ ' 1 1 I 111 7 l 1 1111 i it Iii n1 i ~tlh'u ljlii~l
~ u; ` t,li j f''ilY~l?J iifl~~{~l~~lll~ftl Il~li t _ I"~
,t `zf~a, ~ ii II It I Z , 11 I ' a I , p1 ~ ~ I i
- !III;1l;l l ;l,i;ll~jiJ~~ll~l~lll~l~l''1
'~~lE_ ........:..:....IIUUN,fin,usli9
i O O) 6 C a) a) N" o O N N O
O a) c a) a) O C cn a) «4
• C N _ (a a) a) E0 ~ O O N
"O m (a Q N O_ O W N L 0 L N a)
• • a) -0 Q C O m N N>-.a -C E
a) E co -C
W c O C O: -0 c 7 co a3 O
• O
_r_ Co U 0 O m O c a) ?i c
a) -0
CL a) c U) E (On- c:
-0 a) (a c: 0 CL M
.N U N N O U (1) O N O
C (Q 0 O N N cF N C C C
0= N 0 U CU Ci 3 a) U c 0
• O s E 0 N a) U L o (p 0
O C) N O o U a) aC) :U Q L
:3 cn
O N N_ L 0 O cA (Q U 4 Lco
a ~.S o° n.~ L cn 0~ 0 0 o o
a) oc a) o a) L
o - c o ° co
C) I AN (D
-0 5 -c- cu _Q 4_ CU 0 N U)
O 0- O CL a) O Y Q
O L
"Fu
O a) C ;Q a) a) L O
E IL a) >
o Q) 4) N E E a) a) co O N O N
L - C 1w, -0
a) a) o
cu CO -0 CL cu " 0 0
-0 -0 Inc aQiO -C 'a
• , aci a m~ a) m o L y m
-0 cn a) -,e co a)
a> m N C c
`3 CO 0 " -0
ca -r-
O~ (Q N L-0 U N (a, C U ~6 L U,
LL a)
0- CU
U N C o Q (0 ~O _ ;U a) U
C O. as o N c a) N t C
0 CL
Q3 CL M m _0 -0 0
O
~~o(L),o0N n (cab~o5 U)
m Cl) c ~n CU O (u L a) 0 a) c
a) t
ca a) a) m 7 a) O C7 a) c a) =3 O N
CO 0 E 0.
•
O "O U 4- W O O E N 0
L
• r+ "tlS (h -0 .L a) N . E a) N co N
ca a) >
co ~0-E4-
4- ~a)0Za)CA E(a~_
2 Q a)
a F- - o to 3 o W-LF-
(0
O Q O 0 O -0 0 m
CU C
0 CL E cm cu a) :;t
• N co Q p Q O O
C
7 Q cu a). cu _C C O p
7 . cu 4- -0 CU - (B
N O 0
cu CL a) a) cu
.(6 L m -0 "O U U) .C
co r- r- 4) CU CU
co cti Q -C.
O co r- U) p ca 0(1) ;(U
4z a O m C
O 0 w p 'O
:L O (0 -0 -0 -
F- a) 0
~C fU -q N U7 m p E
(U
C U p 7
• 3 L (U:° CU
O p F-
O a C6 CU L N a)
N 'N N N N
t Q .0. CU Q
2 d aUi 0 a>i n O
L 4- Q a) L I-- N
60 E 0 U) -a C: >
4
O 'a Q 0 'U fA C '(U
JD- 4a M ' d N 0 7 a
r '70 L O 4-
N Z(n >'In O
• .ca a) N cn
a) ► Y O aj
L L .,f0 is N L (n (A
OV CL N N Cl) C N Q(D CU cu
- j-- t
0 ~Z 0)7 O C~0 Q
t/7 (n
C'V'~ NL.C
0 4- (U
U) (L) cu
`Z 3 c cu o
a) t5 a) ' ' co
: (n c:
co co U) U L C -0 M N CO 0_a N
CL 0) a) oj
co E
N> D 4- 6 L O
0
,as
co
a
o
` tP 7:3 ~ I
f 1~
1:D I
1 f ~
v
0 ~
p ® r
j _W%
l
C-
0 ~
-AIR - + a ,
i
wz
a
o'
o_
21 ~i
v
p ! t
4
N
r 06
r i
LM 31
c `
3.. a
LJL I-1 o r
A--I
> i `
D-D
a) L co tB
C
U a)
•
m L L a
C: a)
a) C 00 O O U
O a) a) U m a) a)
N i c
7 C cu
C > U c a) U O a) O O
:1 a) ~O L L C) _O ~
a) 0
~ 7 c a o o (n _ m
a
c c -0
m O c N c m c
m O O. O cu a) ~-o L` OU
C
U a) a) _Y a) N 'O 5 Q d O
W (B (6 7 O -0 a)
O a) • U
Cf) U U) Q a) O c
U p
c
a) 0 cu 0
Lu L O O co: C _r_ C. a)
« co Cl) in
Z a) Z U) C 0 p -Fu 0 a) ~0 U a) a) a L
• O C co E 'o c: O O a)
cu .55 m a) a)
U N a E a) cn a) "a
0 a) U U p)
' N ;Q N a) a
co fd 'E L O (a c c
W Q > - a) or- p O (n CO "
U 0) a) O a) U 40 ti In a)
• Z C Q N of ([S O r > O
a) rn 0)
Q N O
• c O a) N L C C im a)
Z p Q 'Oa .C: Q (o Y a) u) N N
0 N N C N 7 Q (0 :A-- a)
.f . :o
t Na) a a)Nm a)
Uc
a) =0 , -m E
E CO Co co 4m C: 0) C- a) a- -
U a~i a ns C > 'x -a ° Y
"L' Co cu CL
.r
> a) CU cu -0 E a Uo o5OoU 'a 'J--
' w w
-0 a) (D LLJ
G. c E: a) o a) L c a) -r- a)
CU - C: E
• D aLO O> OL Q E O U ~ L C a) :
a
-W E
06 O~ Q CL a) -0 -0 z a) X 0 Q c
U (B a) N O N(n L Y> p, c) a) (n C N
> °c~i~ > E ~--aaa o a° m u'uu)i E
• O a ~maa)0a)a(D xa)cu aE -z,
v
IL c ai -C U 0 t c" 0> m
Q c a ~ U) x° v- (1) N< (a a. U a)
QUOcna-Q►-w a o> Q L- a(a~-o
0 oaa o0 0 0 0 0
0
W NAlil,
, i~ _ \ rb ~ ~I ~ I ka_.._ .
hai
~ e
~'S ~ y ik' Pnc 1 R'1, p,\ I II m E~
t €ag 1 cDa, f p ~ 1'~,Ss ~ a
lal I G y I J
o ~ll I ~ ~ f er it !_J
F
t ~ r
2P 'IL11 133!115 Slipp
W
I~
'1 ~ ~ jlli; i~x ~ cXa I •
.3i a \~'I~ijY~~{•~••J~ 1 r - Y
i~~t7. II :i. n r•
E/~~
V/ Y~~I [ Y 2 l •3
_ d f r~ Y
i.t•-ems.'"
~ L I l I'~~~I I} ' t
I, •i 1f ~1• aEfl 1 6•
t* I .
q/~ 1 p~9
t \ ~
0 IPA
u
o
t
1 '
1~
voice
(Q
• a) c6 cv U O N C O cu
O C a a) E O a s
co
,CL C6 .
Q. 7 Q O' M a) U N O L
In (D CD
(q 3 (B -t- a) N p O C -
CU (D (D F -C
C a) U
1 Q fl- ,a
(U a) a U -
O C Z U) C: CU U)
a) Q O a)
c E E
4~ 4- a) M
0 0 a) -a
Y •Q. a 8 O •o O U
co -0 O ca a) O Q 0 f~
U
Ut,C O U a) a 0) O
a) (t) M p P Q
co) Q O cu -0 U •a a m'2) V
Q
-W E co :3
O a)cr w o-oa c~: CmC
d L C " a) _0 _c -
O t f0 fn C) O 4 a
Y C.. 0 C Q0) OC9 O"."
_ y
• a (0 a) ca ~ ~ a) E C O ~ •E O O
0 N E C: ~U aaa) co)E`~
O o a) a) -c N O r u) c0 0 o co
> ca o
~ N
~nsa3 a)~ma)~ •Eo-c~
o' a) ns a Co c
V a) r a) ~ i M M~ o c a o
cu~o.~
Quo a,O S~UULU
E c O m ca
(5 L)
cu 0
-N4- 3E O
.2 zm a)
- .C: a) o
o ° o - o:.-. 0
o :Q w -Q Q `C f!) C: C -r- U
Q a) Q E o n G) U. H co 0
-a a
Cr (D
L ^
CL C: Co A`
C: CM
Lm 0 IL U) fA
' W` O
x ^
(o
(D C: Ep 0) D d)
L IL N ..V Q a)
p .r co s (D p E a) --Qa -o
CL :co cp coi co) 3 w m
° E c~i vai c~a .E
> CI
a 13
0
~m
} l ~5 ti ~ 1 ~ °3!
A ~ N
at'S t at in~ls ' a ~
h~ 3 tM1
_'r ran
4 . \ ra a , sa
at i
a ' ®a• ° v` i °n` iii, l In g
! u
ems .1~ 199W.S 1NOA
U cn LO c
rn - c rn
a) a) ~Lo
a.~
ja C)
U V) Lu C) " C) 0 0 70
- >
Q O U N O
C)
Q
EN >,Q
(p C
aY M
70 (B ~o
(0 OU ~ C
O
cl) 06 C U U)
'a -0 O
L 'C O O ..Q
• 3 U > U O
a) - c F fA . U
Q N ) C
L
• >
U
(D C (6
N O Q
Y !n a) ca cc
~-a) 'Ca C C
a)
ca
X °6 Q N a)
E
W
• - p - V- p
o N Lr a)
C LU a> U
C
0 a) a) -o
O ~ O a)
CL N co E 'V In
• 'O U
' N
• N N U Q
L I Q
c O Q E m
1 Y
• , F4 44
111 ___5
h if
.i, I I I i
• I I r~a 1~~~ in ~ . I
i
I
_ c
' I.
I ~ 1. ~ IJ ff y
p,. Y
~ i
C N w N.
UM U
O o
X L
L O
(p.
CL n _ a
lr i"'_ \ I
III, iY ~ lllplp~-. _ I
I , - .u iI I
• • 1 ~ a !'~fiiil
+III anal nun. ,
• 1 31 r II L1 If 11 11, p I n 11
~ 'In' ~+311111AI Ipl 111 Ishii l Il,li ❑ I I
I~:: J(~~I t-R-f 1t , lhlrn ~ ~
x ~
1 I 9 I I +3 u.4 it ;i h I I
~ Iln ~ la ,i ,I 11 f, Ilu r i ,IIL,I'iu•i
;il 1 .11111. all Il;itlt Idll II I i~ ' j
- ~ $ ~ ;4llll,tfl ~ I„=lll,u,+lui11 a+l,l . x ~ I
i..:.... lhillitill kin ia.
O
N b m @s m 3
9
•
•
1
P 4~
bl,--
' t ° I JJJ»,
djJ
gJ g e e i 11 I ~Sl ~ I 1 G 'R F E E T
~ I I l f 1 I 1 L
! I-. 11 i a- Ir I I ~
oa~a~ cu~
oM
a rn CO aa) aa)) ttz
+ o r Cl) _r_ m
. o~ co 3 0 0 ~ w
a) Q) o 0 o L
as
> m o M -0 CL'= cu
d) -0 a) o C) moo'
a)
N ~
o i,
-0 0 C) > Q) Q
a)
M N O (D m a cu 0
O U N
N o~ n ca o m
ate.
a~w O rn a
m ~ m ro~
o a c
• d o ca. Cu c
Q ~ c M 'o -0 Q)
c a'o o a
o o o o° N;
M > Y a) ~
N X + L
~E ca C PO a) L N
cu 0-
a) O
c N -0
O
0 (D -0
+ V (D a) > C . v. c0
c (D 4) C. -ao = . acs
1 0 °.~-a>io:3 mA~
o ~5 ~ v)
r CL (1) C:
3
> -C cu
L 'L Cl) fl'a) "a O CO) _L
cu cu
• V > O O ~
-0 03 0 cn (1)
CD 0 C)
-0 L)
•H
u06 (a Cu Q~
N-- ~ 14--~ > co) Q O' (Q "L a ca" + Y o O 1- L Q
O Yr C
cu Q) cu
U) C:
Ici -r,
cu 0--o 0 t--
0. C:
>`-ins} c°~33~a o?c"o
U) 0 cu Cu U) _r cu 2,
ca o-a a) cn ° a oa
cu L
a N co
•
0 (1) V c a) 0) oo(1) ca
~
o a ca o~ o c° o m
M7 -C E co aJ a)
(01 C: o
m 2 c c rn
a) co rn a) co o
E ) c .a a? o o ca v
• )
o U) m a) aa)
u (D ca > L
cu co
m a) N o
0 a) . Y
cu M
cn im Lc) a) a)
O O
O E O a5 E a)
L
Cl) O c N. O
• a) `o a) 0 0 0 O O
0- O U N E
a) a) >1 cu
U a) a)
C = a) Q
L
f0 CU C f0 O
a3
• p U E ~ C a) .N c:3 0 2) m L a)
O " ca E C N
O. O ~ O ~ O -0
o ca
0 -a (n
Q Q a) L O C O N as
a M > O (U C
a) 7 O 0) V O O ca N -
cn Q a) Q m
E >1
U O 7 -0 O
+a) i O 0 cn -0 Q)
E a) a) a) N a)
O X Cl) N O> N C
0 Q a) CO) n. co 0 c3) =3 co
• O L
Q N N ` O O
c M a) •f6 U V N p fl
C QO aN~0 0
• c' O C M O ca L a) O-
m cu • O U N o. a3 CO y Q
Q .N c0
- u0) t (j) a) m M
O O )
O = E a) a) .
U U w t N ui N
~ ~ L N O Rf ~ Q)
cu SZ 06
Rf O C ~
O
O. d U
4 r Q *.a Q)
E co
S _
0
• ~ i O' _ ~ a+~ O U
N Q
Q d a.
Cl)
c
a c m F > a ,a~
m -
s Q~ m o o
• _ V o2 o m O.e
(1) m c ~ Q3 E co
CL 0) E U a~ -
m4-;N Q L Q.x Qc
O _ o s M ~ •co
a) v~
ca N a) =O ,0 N C N= O.
a) 0
i w ,a O 0
Fn -0 '0 a)
Y) i N 4+ F 2 3 O r O V
X _0
0, m
!CL 4a
C) (10
• t+ ' ' (Cl
O m Q
4
N
L
H
a) (D 0 a) cn
Ir 0 .0 U)
a) cu
• o O p Q) U) L;
a) N Q C pC
O C
U) W
m in U) N Q> N C +L
,C co U C a O O
C: in a) N C
• n o m o
' O 4° c cn m N
o , o a~ ~a cu o ° a-
a) o a)
a c a)
zz J) >1
C C
C: a) 3: o
a) cn C 7 U) cn ` a) = -a L .C
OU E. C fl- U) Q O
O c6 ca o O a -p L a) O
0-2 Uw~ Q.~ E U tea) Ca N4-.
C i .a) O a) O SZ V!
°m m: o
E'L.C a)~~ +L'aL+ M QC L) m
_ Q N c a) Co " m 0 N "a a) E T
cu 0- z -C Z (a to
-0 CL 0 -0 (1)
Cc C) a) >
W 1~ • y m
L Co
ao E a)L a0)> oCo
o Q r °a= W L CL
LO (D a)
T- O p , w O p O Q) f' m in a s E`
w cc = C. ~ O Y L > N a) L N N w n O O N 0) ai N(n a) % O v c6
• r N- 't U a) -p to 3 U O Q O
a)N O 3 cu 4) (L)
L m-0
' O Cl) d ch~ O .N N h~ Cf) cu ca
m N a) Y
C L" a m U OL a -C co fn C CL O_ c
O a. a) E S Q. N co a)
a . O a C L E
T Q
0)
aaca a) ) m a) ai o E .c u -cc .r ° c""o ,s °
C a _ U CO 'O C O a) a)
L N' E N
N O v E > Q ca = (1)
a°'i a) Q p d m a n a
o co L = E -0 L Z co ~ ° (a ° m a~
- - is ` - O T 06 m ` s
4-0 C_ " M (n cLn o r i -52 m t c n o o
m m
a) (D cu
o a) °~a N cn ° a ~L m
• 2 y m L) v h ? o~ owe
m m° m = O c
M (U -C co (b U)
c -
(n a) 0
0 U) (D
0- r (D -0 E
(J) (D 0 M
m E c~a: t'~C`m~io Mo_ NcC
s o. w 'a E a ccna 0) o. w z OD U)
M k n m c L m 0Z3 x C m o° -o m a) L
Q wmN(a CL n W 0 0.N'a)m 0- -0 n
cn cn c Y c a QI ca a) 'a o
c ca o (1)
u) 75
+O cn > C C
• . c ca ca ca
c o ca s C)L -0
0 ' N r
c a) M O a
.a; -a
>,mrn oQE_mN
- a) o a) C:
Co L- oE0oo'i~c
'
a n m
cn Eaoi ~m:c6m° a; 0 U)
U) o 0 U)
a) N
CL 0 A) -0 4) a)
in C
0 to o N a~ o a)
a m
W LDw a,ai-a ns
a) c m 5
o ~ c
•o>ci o ox~o~
• W crj cn Q C) (n ~ F 3 a) E
N = (6 C
LL (o
0 Z:
M o o- a)
a) C L C
U) cn U E
O v c0 t w
U O c CU
c - cc
C Co u)
a anI coa)E Yca;~
a E o,~ D- L)
o a)
L cn o E C)-
(D N
E 0 (n
a=iQ-=o, oom" en
LM 0 E m~ i 0 u' o Q aoi ~~'co E
• a~i
a) 0)
a) C: cL)
Q U i + E U u) a) V Y V
O L a) L o 0
_0 cu Q m-aci ~2 m `toga ~ i0o
-7- 7
gga ~~t m
- _'~u7u f m ~.L_ j~
dal' m C~/'~' $ .
f
TI
f
F
I~ ;II
~~11 II ff ~U. °eE ti 9 a !
a
a lie 1~1~} a ,
14.
sea
4-
O
c a~ L 0
•.LO n
c) e
o~° o ° O-
c O C-) "U _
U V) a) > io L- O M c
a) c~
-0 p o "a- c~ U)
c 0m) is O E ~ c :c
• U 'a_ N 0-0 i c
C
C: O E ~ O Q (0 O
,r Q - O
N O
O
m C ,Q C
_N
a) a) mn 0
o to 4 T- 20) C m
x (3) CC
O O H O X O O O
~ ~ O. O ~
O C OL) O v= > l- 4 4-
2 c6 c6 (6
• t` LO O QLr) N ti
N
0 0 Q O oO co
O OO OOM(")
(a 0)
Q (0 M M Q - O LO a~
s✓ r- r
• ~ X
O
CL
a
• o
U 0
• o. o
X
~ L'O L
CO n d "
11
i. 'Jill
~ al III-~(I I~ u
nrl I y a
! II I
• • 1 t ; I~Liil j
• 1311 f P.IIII II II111 I O' t 11 tl fry
11~ s i ~II11 . b Iyl IIIIII I 111:1 tl -
j~-' y Y}~Sd t I p ( IUVtlppl i ~ '
• II II \ b~ I~ 11 { Il it l,.l t li! lR Ill'1
IIII w f n ;11>~{ S (f[~(~ I~1, 1) 0 I t.1!1 11I I 1 1 1
~.r. _it)) { 1,,Itti,d.1 n111~1 ~b11~loll I ~II t. I I
I
a Y $E...... ((1111 u111111311 {lR
wo
,as p§W
md,N
~s G? ag~a
!T
1 a \ t~ 1
I b 6 I:LSu. I .S$....
- 9. I r
PE 8
~ AM JE~
-
~ } ,fit, ~ > ~ i oa 3~,y'~\ ' o°'a~ i ~ ' ; w ❑
w~ I•T ~f~ .r 1 //spM ~ > z
7 Itl•s ~ .SNP A ~ii''gI ~I~, k"a
1s
18•
~ a !aY 1 '
I A l ~$t f,. ~+D' 1PP
r`
4-0 H9
g & E2
Q
133iLL8 SItlDA
a
1
a
4 tit
owl -
^ s
4)
l ,
l & f
az
CE
t =
FC9
°E A p
ti m C~
n t
_or I
Exhibit K-3
"Net Zero Energy"
' Performance Standard.
Verde Village _ December 5 2006
Energy, Efficient and High Performing Housing .(Rev ,02) Jfy of Ashland Page 1 of r •
Planning Exhibit
EXHIBIT
PA#
E W2O
Energy Efficiency DAT
sTair tpS
q The stated goal of the Verde Village project is to provide the most energy efficient homes
constructed in Oregon. By combining proper solar orientation, an improved thermal envelope solar
heating, night flush cooling, high efficiency HVAC systems, heat recovery utilization, and efficient
appliances, all Verde Village homes will be designed to perform 50%q better than a typical code
compliant building. In addition, through the installation of a photovoltaicsystem,.the homes will be
capable of generating as much energy as they use on an annual basis, making them "Net Zero
Energy. The design of high performing homes starts with proper solar orientation and the best
thermal envelope: Insulation.levels Will approach double the code minimum. Good construction
materials. and techniques will reduce infiltration. Windows will be high performing and also better
than code requirements. These are solar homes and Winter heating systems will be augmented by
the sun. The windows will be designed to provide good"daylighting" of all the spaces, reducing the
use of electric- lights. Lights that are constructed.in'the homes will be compact fluorescent. The
homes will be night flush cooled'in the summer months to minimize the use of air conditioning (AC)
and, therefore, further reduce the electrical loads. Appliances' will be energy efficient and will
include extracting washers. These washers will save on both electricity and water use.
Specific Energy Efficiency Features
Solar Orientation:' Homes are designed such that the long elevation is no more than 15,
degrees from due south.
Solar Hot Water: Roofs are designed to provide sufficient area to support a solar hot water
collection system. Installation of (1) 4 x 8 panel for the cottages and (2) 4 x 8 panels for the
single family homes will be provided.
• Solar Space Heating: Homes will be provided with South facing glass of not less than 7
percent of the building floor area.
• Integrated Thermal Mass: The buildings will have slab on grade foundations with radiant
heating.
• High. Efficiency Heat Source: The homes will utilize either ground coupled heat pumps or
high efficiency gas heaters to provide heat.
• Improved Thermal Envelope: The homes will be'designed with walls that have an effective
R- value of 25 and roofs with an effective R-value of 40. The best practices techniques will
be used for envelope construction. The homes will meet or exceed Earth Advantage
requirements.
• Heat Recovery Ventilation: A heat recovery ventilation system will be installed.
• Lighting: All lighting will,use either fluorescent or compact fluorescent lamps
• Energy Efficient, Appliances-. Energy efficient appliances will be incorporated into the project.
This includes ecient dishwashers and front loading; water extracting clothes washing
machines.
~J Photovoltaic (PV) Electric Systems: Each unit will be provided with a PV system that is
either 3 kilowatts in size or will provide at least 50% of the(electiic us4f the unit, whichever
is less. All units will have the infrastructure to provideenough PV balance such that the
panels provide enough electricity 'to balance, the homes energy use on an annual basis (Net
Zero.Energy).
• Night Flush Cooling: The homes will be designed such that they can be cooled at night to
eliminate the need for air conditioning through the use of mass (concrete floor), improved
thermal envelope and operable windows.
i
K tJ ittitnES wk~L Fre-azvlo(a &"t-ST 0 zmi fa u W" ai c . 'rev xs
SOLA,R,C Architecture and Engineering, inc.
i
j Verde Village December 4, 2006
E Energy Efficient and High Performing Housing Page 2 of 2
i Water Efficiency
Ashland has limited potable water resources and every new development has an impact on this
valuable resource. Verde Village will reduce its impact on the existing system by developing the
project with a goal to use approximately 50% less potable water than a typical code compliant
development.
Water Efficiency Features
Water efficient toilets: Provide either dual flush with minimum 1.111.5 gpf or 1.1 gpf toilets.
Water efficient showerheads and faucets: Provide 1.5 gpm fixture controls.
Rainwater capture: Provide rainwater capture for toilets and some irrigation. A cistern will
be incorporated into the project that will provide the ability to capture rainwater for domestic
_ use.
. Water and energy efficient washers: Provide water efficient dishwashers and front loading,
k extracting clothes washing machines as standard appliances.
. Highly water efficient landscaping and irrigation. Use drought resistant plantings and
incorporate drip irrigation systems with a goal of using 50% less water for irrigation than a
baseline project.
z
SOLARC Architecture and Engineering, Inc.
' xhibit
I~Itt, hland
00052
TAFf
BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF ASHLA ND, JACKSON COUNTY, OREGON
December 18, 2007
IN THE MATTER OF A REAL PROPERTY EXCHANGE )
SUPPORTIVE OF PLANNING ACTION # 2006-01663, A ) FINDINGS OF FACT
EXCHANGE OF APPROXIMATELY 1.54 ACRES OF CITY ) CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
PROPERTY FOR 2.78 ACRES OF PRIVATE PROPERTY ) AND ORDER
PURSUANT TO ORS 271.310- 271.350 AND P.UBLIC,HEARING
PROCEDURES IN ORS 221.725 )
APPLICANT: Greg and Valri Williams )
1. NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS
This matter comes before the City Council for the City of Ashland for a public hearing concerning a real
property exchange pursuant to statutory notice and hearing requirements of ORS 221.725.
On November 6, 2007 and November 20, 2007, the Ashland City Council, at the City Council Chambers at
1175 East Main Street conducted an advertised public hearing on aproposed real property exchange pursuant to
ORS 271.310 - ORS 271.350.
The public hearing was conducted together with public hearing on an Ordinance declaring the approval of a
proposed Verde Village Development Agreement, and several associated land use actions necessary for the
development of the Verde Village project.
The nature of the land exchange, including appraisal and other evidence of market value were fully disclosed in
the staff report and supporting documents entered into the record at the public hearing.
At such Public Ilearing'the City Council received written and oral testimony from interested parties on the
question of the land exchange.
Based upon the evidence in the record, the City Council for the City of Ashland makes, the following findings of
fact and conclusions of law:
11. FINDINGS OF FACT
I) The,Nature of Proceedings set forth Above are true and correct and aie incorporated herein by this
reference.
2) The City property. subject to the real property exchange consists of approximately 1.54 acres of the `10
acre City-owned parcel known as the Ashland Dog Park (T1,200 39 1E 04BB). The specificrarea of exchange
Ordinance Attachment 3- Rea/Property Exchange F/ndings
Page 1
is the entrance road and lawn area associated with the entrance to the dog park. The exchange does not impact
the parking lot or actual dog park itself. The exchanged City property will be incorporated into the Verde
Village residential development, located generally at 87 W. Nevada St. and 811 Ilelman St. (Ashland
Greenhouses). The legal description and drawings of the City property is more fully set forth in the record of
this proceeding and incorporated herein by this reference.
3) The private property subject to the real property exchange consists of approximately 2.78 acres of
property contiguous to the dog park and located along Ashland Creek. The owner of the property is Ashland
Flower Shop and Greenhouses, Inc. (AFSG) (Greg and Valri Williams). This property appears on City's Parks,
Trails and Open Space Master Plan Map (a part of City's Comprehensive Plan) as Long-Term Acquisition Area
"1011. The legal description and drawings of the AFSG property (aWa/ Williams Property) is more fully set
forth in the record of this proceeding and incorporated herein by this reference. In addition to this real property,
the City will receive as part of a Development Agreement for Verde Village, a new city standard public street
entrance to the dog park and an additional 1300 lineal feet of Bear Creek Greenway Trail. These improvements
are not included in the valuation of this exchange.
4) The approximately 2.78 acres of property received by the City will be used for public open space and
passive recreation, including the greenway trail. The reasons stated for City Council consideration for the
exchange include but are not limited to the added value to the City's Parks and Trails system.
5) The acreage for the land exchange as revised and updated based on an October 2007 survey is set forth
in the revised Verde Village application materials in the record, (Exhibits N-1 and N-2 in Book III-Narrative,
dated stamped October 30, 2007). (2.78 acres, up from 2.57 acres) (1.54 acres, up from 1.37 acres)
\ }BIy
.LGEND ; 39R O~rlr tiim
m n-mw I ~
_ eaewe rr ne,lcr m tc
IRµS(E.r M con
ff' n-rsu. I
vruuvr ern
~i av~vuanl G i
e- m-rlcw. rs[cmx.. m g I von,w
cmxrv, msmd ~ 5 ( ° p 'q~ ~„1
c tcex ¢saVrru• [I
pa rover or ¢oowo&
V pope
NW No ✓ 91 IE ere I
rt 9% xos•rta9v new
_ _ _ 1 I OP 69-%105 leeb• to %-%1% I /
I I NWANS9 I ru¢uxrn / 1
1 I 1 1 »Irwe
5 n ,M
I I I
vM1
a9 ¢ ono 1 1 J' rrlwA f
(VALU MS) I 1 W.. ee.
I I a9awn~ / /
19 1E On61 I 1 Nntiuw't>
6 /
» ICI! / /
(✓111 µS)~•~- b Y I M V. Iwo
1 ~ V" ~ I 1._-Tv¢Iku7 _a~ r ~ Natwri) I
1 I 9f ll 01Y ~ L._... I
N Ahf~) _3[ 1 D I R IIW I I CZ 1
I i r _ u
e
I TERR
r AOA stncsr irons
lr
U NCVAM.STIrr M U-10895 NP91'0 bange Findings
Page 2
III. FINDINGS APPLYING APPLICABLE STATUTORY CRITERIA
1) The Council finds and determines that the relevant statutory criteria to find property eligible for a real
property exchange involving City property are found in or referenced in ORS 271.310-ORS 271-350 as well as
ORS 221.725.
2) The Council finds that it has received all information necessary to make a decision based on the Staff
Report, public hearing testimony and the exhibits and evidence received.
3) The Council finds and determines that this proposal to exchange real property meets all applicable statutory
minimum criteria for eligibility to exchange real property, as more fully set forth herein. Further the City Council
finds and determines that the. proposed disposition of real property in the real property exchange is deemed
"necessary or convenient" to the City, and furthers the public interest as incorporated into and made part of the
negotiated Development Agreement for Verde Village, approved by City Ordinance declaring adoption of the
Development Agreement. This finding is supported by competent substantial evidence in the whole record as
well as the detailed findings set forth herein, the detailed findings of the Ashland Planning Commission, as well as
those submitted by the Applicant, and incorporated herein by this reference.
Minimum Criterion for Eligibility for Real Property Exchange
4) [ORS 271.310], [ORS 271.340] & [ORS 271.3501
ORS 271.310. Transfer or lease of real property owned or controlled by political subdivision;
procedure in case of qualified title.
(1) Except as provided in subsection (2) of this section, whenever any political subdivision
possesses or controls real property not needed for public use, or whenever the public interest may
be furthered, a political subdivision may sell, exchange, convey or lease for any period not
exceeding 99 years all or any part of their interest in the property to a governmental body or '
private individual or corporation. The consideration for the transfer or lease may be cash or real
property, or both.
(3) Unless the governing body of a political subdivision determines under subsection (1) of this
section that the public interest may be furthered, real property needed for public use by any
political subdivision owning or controlling the properly shall not be sold, exchanged, leased or
conveyed under the authority of ORS 271.300 to 271.360, except that it may be exchanged for
property which is of equal or superior useful value for public use. Any such property not
immediately needed for public use may be leased if, in the discretion of the governing body having
control of the property, it will not be needed for public use within the period of the [case.
ORS 271.340. Property valuation in exchange to be equal.
Ordinance Attachment 3- Rea/Property Exchange Findings
Page 3
When property is exchanged under the authority of ORS 271.310 to 271.330, the value of the real
property accepted by the political subdivision in exchange for any of its property plus cash, if any,
shall not be less than the value of the property relinquished.
ORS 271.350. Determining valuation of property in exchanges.
The value of the respective properties proposed to be exchanged shall be determined by the
governing body of the political subdivision. The governing body shall cause it to be appraised by
one or more competent and experienced appraisers. The compensation, if any, of the appraisers
shall be borne equally by the respective owners of the property. In case the valuation shall not be
mutually satisfactory to the respective owners it shall not be binding upon them.
The statutory requirements are summarized herein:
In order to sell, convey or exchange real property, ORS 271.310(1) (3) requires that the Council find either that
the property is "not needed for public use" or "that the public interest maybe furthered." ORS 271.310(3) also
requires that unless there is a finding the public interest may be furthered, if the property is needed for public
use, that property may only be exchanged if the property received is of equal or superior useful value for public
use. (also a requirement of Land and Water Conservation). ORS 271.340 clearly established that the monetary
value of real property accepted by the City must not have a monetary value less than the value of the property
relinquished. The valuation must be established by the City pursuant to ORS 271.350 based on appraisal.
Other approvals required:
County, State and Federal approval of the real property exchange is required. Because the City Property was
acquired using Land and Water Conservation Funds, State and Federal Park agencies must approve the
exchange. Because the County's deed to the City reserved to the County a reversionary interest, it must be
released by Resolution of the Board of Commissioners under ORS 271.335. Specifically, City's deed to City's
Parcel (recorded as Doc # 77-13325) reflects that the original conveyance of the City's Property from Jackson
County to City is subject to City's continued utilization of City Property "for public park and recreation
purposes or [its maintenance] for the benefit of the public as a scenic and open space area. When said
property is no longer so used, the interest of the grantee [City], or its assigns, shall automatically terminate and
the property shall revert to the grantor (Jackson County)."Accordingly, as a condition of the real property
exchange, the Jackson County's Board of County Commissioners must release (by resolution) the reversionary i
interest. City can provide County with an identical or similar reversionary interest in the deed to the Williams
Property being provided to City by AFSG pursuant to the exchange and Development Agreement. City and
AFSG have agreed to cooperate in good faith to secure approval from Jackson County for said exchange of
Jackson County's reversionary interest, such that the same reversionary interest in favor of Jackson County will
similarly burden the Williams Property upon transfer of the Williams Property to City pursuant to the real
property exchange; and will no longer burden the City Property being transferred to AFSG pursuant to the real
property exchange. Jackson County's approval of the reversionary interest release or exchange concurrent with
the actual real property transfer is a material term of this approval and Development Agreement. The Federal,
State and County approvals must be addressed as conditions of approval, because the applications cannot be
Ordinance Attachment 3-Real Property Exchange Findings
Page 4 I
filly processed until the City approves the exchange under ORS 271.310.
Pursuant to ORS 271.310, the City Council finds and determines that the public interest will be furthered by
the exchange of the City Property previously and currently utilized as access to City's Dog Park in exchange for
the Williams Property owned by AFSG. Verde Village Application Materials Exhibit 1, Sub-Exhibit N-1
(Uap). The Williams Property appears on City's Parks, Trails and Open Space Master Plan Map (a part of
City's Comprehensive Plan) as Long-Term Acquisition Area "10". The real property exchange allows City to
acquire a parcel of property (Williams Property) identified on City's Parks, Trails, and Open Space Master
Plan's long term acquisition list since 2002. Acquisition by City of the Williams Parcel also provides City with
the opportunity to extend City's multi-use path, which is part of the regional Bear Creek Greenway. The real
property exchange also provides the public with additional scenic frontage along Ashland Creek. Further,
acquisition of the Williams Property provides City with an opportunity to benefit the community by preserving
and enhancing the riparian area along Ashland Creek. In contrast, the City Parcel to be exchanged herein
currently serves as a sub-standard access for vehicles, pedestrians, and cyclists from West Nevada Street to
City's Dog Park and the Bear Creek Greenway multi-use "bike path". When the Verde Village Project is
completed under the Verde Village Development Agreement, access to City's Dog Park will be enhanced via
fully improved public streets, approved and constructed to serve the Verde Village Project, while also serving as
a safer and more efficient access to the City's Dog Park and the Bear Creek Greenway "bike path". The Bear
Creek Greenway "bike path" connects the City of Ashland with the City of Central Point, and promotes the goal
of "modal equity", in a time when the financial and environmental costs associated with petroleum resource
dependence are under enhanced scrutiny. The real property exchange is also described in Exhibit" I "[Outline
Plan Narrative] (at page 6) and Sub-Exhibits M and N-1 appended thereto, incorporated herein by this reference.
Because the City Property to be exchanged currently includes access to the City Dog Park, the City cannot find
that the property is not necessary for public use.
Concerning the monetary value of the exchange, the City Council finds and determines that consistent with ORS
271.350, on January 2, 2007, the City's Council aftrer considering public comment, authorized AFSG to
proceed with its land use application including City's Property, and concurrently directed its Staff to
commission the necessary appraisal reports, without reviewing or considering the merits of the Verde Village
Project application, in compliance with law. Thereafter, City commissioned appraisals reports to determine the
fair market value of the respective real property proposed for exchange from a qualified licensed appraiser with
experience in similar real estate appraisals under the strenuous "Yellow Book" guidelines required by the
National Parks Service. After considering a number of licensed appraisers, City engaged Candence E.
Robinson, State Certified Appraiser h 0000582, Vesta Real Estate Services, Inc., Salem, Oregon. Exhibit 2-44
and Exhibit 3-44.
In June 2007, the City of Ashland received Appraisal Reports reflecting the respective value of the Williams
Property and City's Dog Park Property. See Verde Village application materials Exhibit 2 and Exhibit 3 as
revised. These Appraisal Reports were commissioned by City, with the appraisal cost borne equally by City and
AGES. Corrections to the appraisals were made after input from interested citizens were taken into account.
The Council finds and determines that appraiser was competent and experienced. The respective Appraisal
Reports, as revised, for the Williams Property and the City Property are included in the record and incorporated
herein by reference. The Appraisal Reports and supporting documents were made available to the public prior
to the public hearings before both the Planning Commission and City Council
Ordinance Attachment 3-Rea/Property Exchange Findings
Page 5
The City Council is charged with the determination of the value of the exchanged properties pursuant to ORS
271.350. Based upon the revised appraisal documents, the City Council finds and determines that the City
Property to be conveyed to AFSG in connection with the real property exchange authorized by the Verde
Village Development Agreement is less than the monetary value of the Williams Property to be conveyed to the
City in connection with said real property exchange, as reflected in attached Exhibit 2 and Exhibit 3 in the
record, incorporated herein by reference. Pursuant to ORS 271.310, ORS 271.340, and ORS 271.350, City
finds that the value of the Williams Properly to be exchanged is $284,000. City further finds that the value of
the City Property to be exchanged is $ 134,000. City finds that the difference in value between the two parcels
being exchanged is $150,000 in favor of City, based on the analysis and conclusions contained in the Appraisal
Reports commissioned by City, contained in the record and incorporated herein by this reference. AFSG agrees
to "gift" the $150,000 difference in value to City. The proposed use of the property received by the City shall be
parkland, recreation, open space, or similar uses consistent with Jackson County deed restrictions.
Concerning the requirement that the property received have equal or superior useful value for public use (in
terms of FLWCF equal or superior public recreational value), the City's Parks and Recreation Commission
unanimously endorsed the real properly exchange, conceptually, on October 24, 2006 following review of the
materials and documents presented. The record of the Parks Commission action is included in the record of this
proceeding and incorporated herein by this reference. See. E.g. Verde Village Application Materials Exhibit 1,
Sub-Exhibit M, (Park Commission Endorsement). Subsequently, on June 25, 2007, City's Parks and Recreation
Commission again unanimously confirmed their support of the real property exchange, after reviewing revised
materials. See Verde Village Materials Exhibit 1, Sub-Exhibit N-1; Exhibit 2; Exhibit 3, and related submittals.
IV. ORDER
In sum, the City Council finds and determines that the real property exchange is necessary or convenient, that
the exchange furthers the public interest, that the exchange will be for properly that is of equal or superior useful
value for public use, including recreational use, and that the monetary value of the real property accepted is not
less that the monetary value of the property relinquished.
Accordingly, based on the above Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, and based upon the evidence in the
whole record, the City Council hereby APPROVES as part of the negotiated Verde Village Development
Agreement approved by Ordinance, the real property exchange described herein and in the record of Planning
Action #2006-1663, subject to compliance with the conditions of approval, set forth herein. The following are
the conditions and they are attached to the approval:
• The real property exchange is subject to County, State and Federal approval of the. real property
exchange. Receipt of written evidence of such approvals in appropriate legal fomr triggers the exchange
under the terms and conditions of the Development Agreement. City shall record a document restricting
use of the exchange parcel for recreational use in accordance with County approval of release on the City
property.
e
• The real property exchange is subject to all applicable conditions and requirements of the Development
Agreement and aessociated land use approvals for the Verde Village project.
Ordinance Attachment 3- Real Property Exchange Findings
Page 6
Ashland City Council Approval
r
May r John W. Morriso
Signature authorized and approved by the full Council this day of , 200
Approved as to f 9~
Date: .lz l V r
Interim ity Alto -ne
Ordinance Attachment 3-Rea/Property Exchange Findings
Page 7
b=
~x Oy
ee
o = I_
~ F N
U a m ~ N
i Pr ~ Q w
wno
°aumasw zlue'~,.lanv ~rc °s.m ln+ .
tyros nsswin 1 u~ tiu W.'zw . Iwlw.wx zmumwav u 3 NOE)M10 'CMgHSV
rowmxvaaawl nnrvs iw.~n:.v~..i'a ~,nx.xx,,, i,^.,e'a,xe,.,m •1
OdIB,~00,~ 3~~1[n ~ ~F' Jd°< ~ ~ b SWtlI'1lIM IaItlA ONV O3NO $ r
% 'xMNHNMN3 ~6si a 3911771A .9021.9A
NO1NW1~ awln~+nax.awmemxxwx 1 ®'3a~3n :y ~cf` !
NV9d NOLLVOLLIW NVH]Vdl!! e
\ x U
-
El
~ I
a I
_
1 Iii
, t°„ad M mg I \ CSn.}
j/ I t ; ~ { ! t !p eJ 1 ! j 1 ! 77 57= t[ 1 d~ ~%i ~l ~ El 'I i i~.
ggl ! 9dl•.r 6 1 ,f I II IJ
~I~d"1l~Jil
f
d eotjII 4SSS6a t { 1~ ]9t1.]
i ~ illtJ~ :lI 1[J : I.1.1J1i I h'----------- '
rn. P
. ~3 °r9 SF
iiF 4i'i \ 7tE1 ~
i=sip, _ ~ _ 7sd3?ia``, . ~ I
x I,
!dl a dlii ~ dpi ddi~lli id!!3 4! I
it r I ~ .~I
] ii @ jjJi-- v _rt
° - . f x.a.- ._-_.a,. usa°4pxgs?.7 :aaea ~9 !•di E ,
C ~ 2173dj \ ! iil ' dd ~Sd rd iia! !p !td
qq ,
tl I~ ~ ~$d e ~ y}[~ { ~ ~ d1gp $ ! 1 i 'l571i !idltp(plddiaditjdlill,
a ]r1~~~8f~~ 33& fed ~~ld a]$ 8d p~~ \ 1 II1' it
t 1
E
__~JI--S E; ~ 9p ~ ~i93 d]*+ ~9l9 4 h` i
a p2 r
e12
g
\ - i
A l
W3~
/1" tag
a :v
a if 1
t.
s '~a \\j, ~t~l[ III J[l 1~{ G'PI,'`! `.T'?'~ it I____ - _ -i
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Council Communication
March 18, 2014, Business Meeting
Public hearing and Council direction to staff regarding an ordinance prohibiting
the unlawful carrying of loaded firearms in public places
FROM:
Dave Lohman, city attorney, lohmand@ashland.or.us
Dave Kanner, city administrator, dave.kanner@ashland.or.us
SUMMARY
This is a public hearing on an ordinance prepared by the city attorney, at Council direction, that would
prohibit carrying loaded firearms in public places, subject to certain statutorily mandated exceptions.
The Council reviewed this ordinance at its February 18, 2014, meeting but took no action other than to
direct staff to schedule it for a public hearing. No action on the ordinance is scheduled following this
public hearing other than direction to staff as to how to proceed with scheduling future Council action.
Council has also agreed to take public testimony on a list of options for Council action prepared by the
City attorney. That list includes adopting or referring the ordinance, doing nothing and adopting a
resolution (a statement of intent) rather than an ordinance.
BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
A group called Citizens for a Safe Ashland drafted two gun-related ordinances for Council
consideration. The Council considered the benefits and risks of these ordinances at its February 3,
2014, study session. One ordinance would make it a class A misdemeanor to endanger a child by
failing to prevent access to a loaded or unloaded firearm by a minor without the permission of the
person, a parent or guardian, when the person knew or reasonably should have known that a minor
could gain access to the firearm. The other ordinance would, under certain conditions and with some
exceptions,'make it a class A misdemeanor to knowingly possess or carry a firearm, in or upon a public
place, including while in a vehicle in a public place, or recklessly having failed to remove all the
ammunition from the firearm or from that firearm's clip or magazine.
The open carry ordinance is similar to ordinances adopted by Beaverton, Portland, Salem, Oregon
City, Newport, Astoria and others. The other ordinance is modeled on an ordinance adopted by the
City of Portland in 2010. After considerable discussion, the Council requested the opportunity to
consider a version of these proposed ordinances that would, in the opinion of the City Attorney, be
highly likely to withstand judicial scrutiny. The Council also raised the possibility of referring an
ordinance to the voters, or referring an advisory measure to the voters.
At its February 18, 2014, study session, the Council considered the requested ordinance, which is a
significantly scaled-back version of the Citizens for Safe Ashland proposal, containing only the
language from the City of Portland open-carry ordinance that has been upheld by the Oregon Supreme
Court. The Council also considered a list of the potential actions it might take. These actions include:
adoption of an ordinance or ordinances; adoption of a resolution, either encouraging legislative action
Page 1 of 2
1r,
CITY OF
-ASHLAND
or simply stating Ashland's position on carrying guns in public places; referring an ordinance, advisory
measure or resolution to the voters; or taking no action. The proposed ordinance and the list of
"Realistic Options for Council Action on Firearms Restrictions" are attached.
At the end of the February 18 study session, Council directed that the ordinance and list be scheduled
for a public hearing on March 18. In addition, staff created an Open City Hall topic on potential
firearms restrictions on the City web site. Comments received as of March 12 are attached to this
Council communication.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
None.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION:
This item is scheduled for public hearing and potentially for direction to staff only. Staff seeks
direction on what, if anything, to bring back to the Council for action, however a discussion of
direction to staff is not time-sensitive and could be scheduled for a future meeting. It is too late to
refer this matter to the May ballot. The deadline for referral to the November ballot, if that is the
course of action the Council wishes to pursue, is in early September, which would require Council
approval of a ballot title at its August 19 meeting at the latest.
SUGGESTED MOTION
N/A
ATTACHMENTS:
• Draft "Ordinance No. , An Ordinance Restricting Openly Carrying Loaded Firearms in Public
Places."
• Realistic Options for Council Action on Firearms Restrictions
• Open City Hall comments on topic: "Carrying Loaded Firearms in Public Places"
Page 2 of 2
Pr,
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE RESTRICTING OPENLY CARRYING
LOADED FIREARMS IN PUBLIC PLACES
Annotated to show deletions-and additions to the code sections being modified. Deletions are
bold lined through and additions are bold underlined.
WHEREAS, Article 2. Section 1 of the Ashland City Charter provides:
Powers of the City. The City shall have all powers which the constitutions, statutes, and
common law of the United States and of this. State expressly or impliedly grant or allow
municipalities, as fully as though this Charter specifically enumerated each of those
powers, as well as all powers not inconsistent with the foregoing; and, in addition thereto,
shall possess all powers hereinafter specifically granted. All the authority thereof shall
have perpetual succession.
WHEREAS, ORS 166.173 expressly authorizes Oregon local jurisdictions to enact ordinances
to regulate, restrict or prohibit persons from possessing loaded firearms in public places, except
for persons expressly exempted by statute;
WHEREAS, the City has determined, on the basis of past and recent instances of firearms-
related violence in the City, the State, and the Nation, that public safety is compromised by
persons without firearms permits carrying loaded firearms in public places;
WHEREAS, the Oregon Supreme Court recently has held that Article I, Section 27 of the
Oregon Constitution does not preclude enactment of a provision regulating "the manner,
possession, and the use of constitutionally protected arms," and permits "wide legislative
latitude" to enact specific regulations restricting the possession and use of weapons to the extent
such regulation of arms is necessary to promoting the public safety and does not unduly frustrate
the individual right to bear arms for the purpose of self-defense;
WHEREAS, the United States Supreme Court recently opined that the Second Amendment of
the U.S. Constitution does not preclude laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive
public places;
WHEREAS, the Oregon Supreme Court recently has upheld a City of Portland ordinance
provision restricting possession of loaded firearms in public places against the claim that the
provision violated Article I, Section 27 of the Oregon Constitution and the Second Amendment
of the U.S. Constitution; and
i
WHEREAS, in order to promote public safety the City wishes to enact a municipal code
provision which restricts the carrying of loaded firearms in public places under certain conditions
i
Ordinance No. _ Page 1 of 3
and which is identical to the City of Portland restriction already upheld by the Oregon Supreme
Court.
i
THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Definitions.
The following definitions govern the construction this Chapter:
A. "Firearm" means a weapon, by whatever name known, which is designed to expel a
projectile by the action of powder.
B. "Public place" means a place to which the general public has access and includes,
but is not limited to, hallways, lobbies and other parts of apartment houses and
hotels not constituting rooms or apartments designed for actual residence, and
highways, streets, schools, places of amusement, parks, playgrounds, and premises
used in connection with public passenger transportation.
SECTION 2. Possession of a Loaded Firearm in a Public Place.
It is unlawful for any person to knowingly possess or carry a firearm, in or upon a public
place, including while in a vehicle in a public place, recklessly having failed to remove all
ammunition from the firearm.
SECTION 3. Exceptions.
Section 2 does not apply to or affect the following persons,
A. A law enforcement officer in the performance of official duty.
B. A member of the military in performance of official duty.
C. A person licensed to carry a concealed handgun.
D. A person authorized to possess a loaded firearm while in or upon a public building
or court facility under ORS 166.370.
E. An employee of the United States Department of Agriculture, acting within the
scope of employment, who possesses a loaded firearm in the course of a lawful
taking wildlife.
F. A government employee authorized or required by his or her employment or office
to carry firearms.
G.' A person conducting an athletic contest to fires blank ammunition in a plug
firearm toward the sky.
H. A person authorized by permit of the chief of police to discharge blank ammunition
or a weapon for a lawful purpose.
1. A person traveling to and from and discharging a firearm or weapon on a licensed
public or private shooting range, shooting gallery or other approved area designed
or built for the purpose of target shooting, when such person is a member or guest
of said range or area.
SECTION 4. Penalties.
Violation of this Chapter is a Class A misdemeanor.
i
Ordinance No. _ Page 2 of 3
SECTION 5. Severability. The sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses of this ordinance
are severable. The invalidity of one section, subsection, paragraph, or clause shall not affect the
validity of the remaining sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses.
SECTION 6. Codification. Provisions of this Ordinance shall be incorporated in the City Code,
and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "code", "article", "section", or another word, and
the sections of this Ordinance may be renumbered or re-lettered, provided however, that any
Whereas clauses and boilerplate provisions (i. e., Sections Nos. 5-6) need not be codified, and the
City Recorder is authorized to correct any cross-references and any typographical errors.
The foregoing ordinance was first read by title only in accordance with Article X, Section 2(C)
of the City Charter on the day of 2014, and duly PASSED and
ADOPTED this day of 2014.
Barbara M: Christensen, City Recorder
SIGNED and APPROVED this _ day of 2014.
John Stromberg, Mayor
Reviewed as to form:
David H. Lohman, City Attorney
G>Vegal\COUNCIL AGENDAITEMS _Dr&fts\2014 Coujcil Items\February 18 2014\021814 Proposed OperttGzrzy Ord docx
Ordinance No. _ Page 3 of 3
REALISTIC OPTIONS FOR COUNCIL ACTION ON FIREARMS RESTRICTIONS
ACTIONAP.TIONS ` QUESTIONS
A. Ordinances
1. Ban loaded, open carry, with exceptions • Effective?
2. Restrict minors' access • Effective?
• Preemption/litigation/costs?
B. Resolutions
1. Admonition to Legislature on re-writing preemption re • Effective?
ammo and minors' access to clearly allow local ordinances • Prolonged?
2. Declaration that Ashland does not welcome persons • Effective?
carrying weapons in public places
C. Referrals
1. Refer ordinance banning loaded open carry • Effective?
• Dispassionate?
2. Refer ordinance on minors' access • Effective?
• Dispassionate?
• Preemption/litigation/costs?
3. Refer advisory question on banning loaded open carry • Dispassionate?
• Prolonged?
4. Refer advisory question on minors' access • Dispassionate?
• Preemption/litigation/costs?
• Prolonged?
5. Refer admonition to Legislature on re-writing preemption • Effective?
re ammo and/or minors' access • Dispassionate?
• Prolonged?
6. Refer declaration that Ashland does not welcome persons • Effective?
carrying weapons in public places • Dispassionate?
D. No Action
1. Object to consideration of the matter (not debatable; 2/3 • Responsive?
vote)
2. Move to postpone indefinitely (debatable; majority vote) Responsive?
3. Vote against motion to approve ordinance, resolution, or. • Responsive?
referral
Carrying Loaded Firearms in Public Places
How does the Ashland community feel about a proposal that prohibits carrying loaded firearms in public
places?
All On Forum Statements sorted chronologically
As of March 12, 2014, 1:43 PM
I~
As with any public comment process, participation in Open City Hall is voluntary. The statements in this record are not necessarily
representative of the whole population, nor do they reflect the opinions of any government agency or elected officials.
All On Forum Statements sorted chronologically
As of March 12, 2016, 1:63 PM htlp:IIpeakdemocracy.mmIl736
Carrying Loaded Firearms in Public Places
How does the Ashland community feel about a proposal that prohibits carrying loaded firearms in public
places?
Introduction
The City Council requested the City Attorney draft what he believes to be a legally defensible ordinance
prohibiting person from carrying a loaded firearm in public places. The ordinance would, under certain
conditions, make it a class A misdemeanor to knowingly carry a firearm, in or upon a public place, including
while in a vehicle in a public place, or recklessly having failed to remove all the ammunition from the firearm or
from that firearm's clip or magazine.
The open carry ordinance is similar to ordinances adopted by Beaverton, Portland, Salem, Oregon City,
Newport, Astoria and others. The draft ordinance contains language that has been upheld by the Oregon
Supreme Court.
In addition, Legal staff prepared two other documents for Council consideration. One is a list of practical
considerations both for and against adopting such an ordinance(s). It is not intended to advocate for one
position or another, but to provide a single, non-judgmental list of options. The other is a list of action the
Council might take. These actions include: the adoption of an ordinance(s), adoption of a resolution
encouraging Oregon legislative action or simply stating Ashland's position on carrying guns in public places;
referring an ordinance, advisory measure or resolution to the voters; or taking no action.
All On Forum Statements sorted chronologically
As of March 12, 2014, 1.43 PM Intg-0gaakdamocrao, oam/1736 Page 2 of 19
Carrying Loaded Firearms in Public Places
How does the Ashland community feel about a proposal that prohibits carrying loaded firearms in public
places?
As of March 12, 2014, 1:43 PM, this forum had:
Attendees: 323
On Forum Statements: 58
All Statements: 103
Hours of Public Comment: 5.2
All On Forum Statements sorted chronologically
As of March 12, 2014, 1:43 PM hilp:11peakdemocracy.mM1136 Page 3 of 19
Carrying Loaded Firearms in Public Places
How does the Ashland community feel about a proposal that prohibits carrying loaded firearms in public places?
L K Casteel inside Ashland March 12, 2014, 5:43 AM
Irrational: not using ration, contrary to logical thinking. Therefore, an "Irrational Fear" is a fear of something that
has no real foundation, a fear that goes against logic, or a fear founded on falsehood: fear of dogs, man's best
friend, a pet most of us grew up with or around without any negative consequence; fear of heights by people
who have never fallen from a distance greater than the thickness of their shoes' heels; fear of the dark, the time
that brings most people peace and rest, or a time of watching an awe inspiring sky; fear of religion, a belief that
gives people hope of a better present and future, that brings peace and joy into people lives and heals hurt and
anger in their hearts; And fear of guns. Every year in this country we hear little or nothing of the thousands of
ordinary people who use guns to protect themselves, their businesses, their families, and even strangers.
Thousands more people use guns, often just the sight of their gun, to ward off violent and bad intentioned
people from committing crimes. Then there are millions of folks who use guns to put food on the table for their
families and the families of others. Last, there are millions of men, women, and children who use their guns for
simple shooting pleasure. And the percentage of people who are hurt in all of these activities is miniscule. Yet
there is an irrational fear of guns by some people. Why?
The answer, I believe, is quite simply is a greedy press. Yes, there is a power hungry, politically motivated
group of politicians who love to promote any controversy in order to get their name before the peoples, but it is
the press who stirs that controversy and puts that name out there. It doesn't matter whether it is the written,
visual, or audible press, the goal is the same; money. These heartless people prey on the bleeding hearts,
tender hearts, and even the broken hearted in order to line their pockets. But, before we condemn them, let's
remember that the press only does this because it sells. It is the buyers, us, the general public who buy their
product.
When a really bad, evil person goes on a killing spree, the press is all over it for several days or weeks. If a
mentally unstable and often known to be dangerous person illegally obtains a firearm and goes on a shooting
rampage, we hear about it for weeks or months. We hear from the politically motivated, the ignorant, the
greedy, and the publicity seekers hour after hour about how bad guns are, and sometimes it is mentioned in
passing that the gun was obtained illegally, that the person was known to be mentally unstable and dangerous
by family, friends, social services, law enforcement, and often educational and other public agencies, all,of
whom did nothing to prevent the killings. The gun is no more to blame for its misuse than the tennis racket or
golf club or machete that is misused for the same purpose. It seems that people are more interested in blaming
that (those) which (who) is (are) least capable of defending itself (themselves) rather than dealing with the truth,
which may be more difficult. After all, blame guns and take them away; its much easier than blaming ourselves
for not taking care of the mentally ill and unstable who committed these horrendous acts. Every major shooting
in the last several years has been committed under the conditions mentioned above. The many laws on the
books, which could help, are often ignored and unenforced, so politicians, who want people to think they can
solve all of their problems, propose more laws instead of proposing that we more effectively enforce the laws we
have. Some politicians go so far as to create imaginary problems that need to be solved, or maybe just
capitalize on the irrational fears of a few in order to get their name before the voters.
Portland, Oregon has a small gun problem. The people there have taken steps to deal with their problem.
(Sadly, they are trying all of the things other cities have proven to be ineffective.) Ashland has not had a gun
problem. What Ashland has is a few people with an irrational fear of firearms, a fear which might be better dealt
with through education and counseling, just like those who fear dogs, the dark, heights, and other similar things.
Focusing on factual reality instead of sensationalized press coverings would help a lot of folks live more
peaceably. The proposed ordinance restricts honest people from being able to safely defend themselves and
All On Forum Statements sorted chronologically
As of March 12, 2014, 1:43 PM httpapeakdemocracy.coml1736 Page 4 of 19
Carrying Loaded Firearms in Public Places
How does the Ashland community feel about a proposal that prohibits carrying loaded firearms in public places?
others and does nothing to create a safer town or safer people, and it deals with a nonexistent problem.
A note:
In 2010, the Murder rate by firearm per 100,000 in Oregon was .9 people
In 2010, the Murder rate by firearm per 100,000 in Portland was 2.5 people
In 2010, the Murder rate by firearm per 100,000 in Oregon was 0 people
These numbers include suicide by firearm.
Amy Haptonstall inside Ashland March 11, 2014, 5:46 PM
Overlooked portions of the gun proposal that need to be addressed: One, they take away 2A rights to a portion
of our population that deserve their freedom more than anyone-our soldiers. A person can not get a CWP until
they are 21, our soldiers are probably the most trained and won't have the freedom to protect themselves in
Ashland as they may wish to. Two, public places are not just the downtown Ashland area, this includes your
front porch, walkway, driveway, and your car, and I assume Greenway bike path-one of the most dangerous
areas, and other public trails where I myself feel the most vulnerable due to strangers and at times bears and
cougars. Yes, sipping wine on your porch is illegal according to the definition of public place. Three, we still
have a brutal unsolved murder in our town and we have a high rate of sexual assault. Whether people want to
protect themselves from these people is their business, but don't take away the right for those of us who wish to.
Four, only way it is to be a preventable measure is our 4A rights are greatly infringed by searching without
cause, including our own homes.
Again, these are only portions I feel are being overlooked there are many more obvious reason this is a bad
idea, such as cost of enforcement and lawsuits. Liberty definition: the state of being free within society from
oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one's way of life, behavior, or political views. Don't chisel away
our liberty.
Richard Baize inside Ashland March 11, 2014, 2:35 PM
This is clearly a poorly thought out solution to a problem that does not exist. If any person intends to do harm to
another with a firearm, does anyone really think an "Ordinance" will prevent it? What WILL prevent it is the very
real possibility that some of the intended "Victims" might be legally armed, trained civilians. I've had a
Concealed Handgun License for a quarter of a century, and when you've seen me in public during that time, I've
been armed. Having said that, some might think I don't have a dog in this hunt, but the fact is that I do; we all
do. In my opinion, persons who go legally armed in a society are Citizens, while those who do not are Subjects.
I belong to several gun rights organizations, including Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership. One of
the mottos I've heard there is "Never Again." I will never allow anyone to take away any of my rights as a citizen.
Never.
James Dykstra inside Ashland March 10, 2014, 7:34 PM
All On Forum Statements sorted chronologically
As of Match 12, 2014, 1:43 PM htlp:1/peakCemocacymm/1736 Page 5 at 19
Carrying Loaded Firearms in Public Places
How does the Ashland community feel about a proposal that prohibits carrying loaded firearms in public places?
I am against both proposals. If the city council believes this is a big issue, put it to a vote of the people.
Not that it matters we have been supporting and living in Ashland since 1989.
Sandra Holstein inside Ashland March 6, 2014, 9:40 PM
Since the two objections to this ordinance are that it is a constitutional "right" and that it will incur expensive
lawsuits, it would seem that the courts' rulings upholding this law in Astoria, Newport, Portland, Beaverton,
Tigard, Oregon City, Salem, Independence, and Multnomah County would preclude both arguments by setting
a legal precedent..
What about the rights of people not to feel menaced or to fear accidents when approached by people carrying
loaded guns? Some years ago, a professor at SOU was harassed by a stalker with loaded guns. I have seen
angry people around Ashland; I do not want to worry that they are carrying guns.
One of the most frightening things I heard in Ashland was when I moved here from Asia and my five-year-old
told me that his friends at school played with their fathers' guns. We know the percentage of accidental
shootings by children in this country, and we know the domestic abuse rates.. Why do we allow some people's
"rights" to take precedence over others'?
Olivia Doty inside Ashland March 5, 2014, 3:03 PM
I don't like the sound of this at all!
Erin Muck inside Ashland March 3, 2014, 9:18 PM
I am in favor of both ordinances.
My primary concern is the safety of our children. I understand the arguments about our constitutional rights,
and how heated this topic is. But for me, bottom line, anything we can do to make our town safer for our kids,
whether they are walking in downtown Ashland, or in our wonderful schools, then I support it.
Dave Helmich inside Ashland March 3, 2014, 3:35 PM
I am very much in favor of both ordinances.
There is no reason to have guns in town in the first place and certainly not in view. To many it would be a
menacing and threatening view. If a citizen is chronically afraid, moving is an option. If there are not enough
cops, vote for more.
Cowards need guns. Well balanced individuals have enough self-confidence without them. The more cowards
that leave town, the better.
All On Forum Statements sorted chronologically
A of March 12, 2014, 1:43 PM http:1/,.kOemoorac,chml1736 Page 6 of 19
Carrying Loaded Firearms in Public Places
How does the Ashland community feel about a proposal that prohibits carrying loaded firearms in public places?
I've heard there is an argument that Ashland would have to defend this in court. If Ashland does and it may,
then many other cities in the state will as well. The shared cost of a legal defense would be trivial for the added
safety.
Vote for the ordinances! Vote for civility and safety!
loren deffenbaugh inside Ashland March 2, 2014, 11:55 AM
I have worked for the city as a police officer for 15 years. During those years I could count on one hand the
number of times I saw someone open carry a firearm in Ashland. I look at this and wonder "why"? It is often
said we are a community of "diversity" and "tolerance". However persons with a special interest seem to able
to believe that those are one way streets. People who live within the law are punished because someone is
offend by someone carrying a gun. I am offended that we can not sing Christmas songs that mention God in
Schools. That we cannot have a Christmas tree at a government building (has to be called Holiday).
There is no basis for enacting such a law other than ignorance. Why would anyone wish deny the rights given
by the Constitution of the United States? I would think all the elected councilors took an oath to uphold that
document, how sorry if you didn't.
If you seek to create a utopian society, good luck, if 15 years of police work taught me anything it is there will
always be those who take advantage of others. There will always be violence, bombs, knives, hammers, bats,
the list goes on.
If you vote this through thinking it will help your wrong. All you do is create a false sense of safety. Someone
mentioned in a opinion that open carry was about bolstering ones manhood. Perhaps it is more about personal
safety should one need it.
Open carry is legal under the Constitution, it is a personal choice. Let's leave it that way and deal with real
issues.
The storage of firearms reaches into the Fourth Admendment. It could only be enforced after the fact of a
terrible accident, unless you feel the Fourth Admendment needs to be tossed aside as well. There are laws in
place that deal with such acts of carelessness. It would be like enacting a law to require non-slip bath mats to
prevent falls in tubs. Are you going to allow the police/city officials to come knock and check if you have a bath
mat?
Thank You
Steve Eadie inside Ashland March 2, 2014, 9:12 AM
My wife and I have lived in Ashland for 16 years. We are raising our 8yo twins here by choice. We are the
definition of concerned and caring parents. In all of the time we have lived here we have never witnessed or
heard of any violent act by a person legally carrying a firearm.
If there is ever a person who commits a violent felony around our children it is our true hope that someone
legally carrying a firearm is there to stop them. I can absolutely guaranty a police officer will not be there when
the act is committed.
All On Forum Statements sorted chronologically
As 0 Memh 12, 2014, 1:43 PM http:11peakdemmmc mmll736 Paga 7 of 19
Carrying Loaded Firearms in Public Places
How does the Ashland community feel about a proposal that prohibits carrying loaded firearms in public places?
If this proposed regulation goes into effect you are choosing to eliminate the one chance my family may have
against a violent felon, an honest concerned citizen.
Larry Graves inside Ashland February 27, 2014, 11:18 PM
I have read all the related documents, and all the written statements made on this issue, and have attended the
public meetings. I've seen the young man carrying multiple weapons into the "study session" on banning guns
and I've seen hundreds of instances of open carry in the town of Ashland in all my years living here. Every time
I've ever seen a police officer in Ashland, I've seen open carry. Never gave it another thought. Why is it that
when bad people do bad things, we call the good guys with their guns to save us? When seconds count, the
police are only minutes away. I want everyone to think about this: WHO OWNS YOU? The answer must always
be, YOU DO. Only you. No one else. Your thoughts, your personality, your love and your life energy they are
yours, and yours alone. They are God-given and they are unique. They are inherent characteristics of who you
are, and so is the right to protect yourself and your life from those who might one day try to take it for
themselves. No one can ever predict when a bad person will attempt to steal your life or your liberty from you,
but I know that none of us has the right to keep you from protecting yourself from evil. Your right to self-defense
is an inherent characteristic of who you are, and it does not come from outside of you it does not come from a
Constitution or a code of revised statutes or a city ordinance or a Presidential Executive Order it is an
inextricable part of who you are. We have nothing to fear from law abiding people no matter how many weapons
they might carry. We have only to fear the lawless individuals who WILL carry firearms, whether it is legal or
illegal, lawful or unlawful. We can call out to the police in black with their big, scary, open-carry guns for help
that will arrive too late, or we can immediately protect ourselves as is our inherent right. This Ordinance is a bad
proposal. It solves NO problem. It is based in irrationality and fear. Even if you disagree with the philosophically
correct argument above, think about this: the City of Ashland will ultimately be forced to spend hundreds of
thousands of YOUR dollars in a losing legal battle to defend an indefensible position, just as has already
happened with the $400,000 Mt Ashland Ski Resort verdict. Carol Voisin says Ashland has never shied away
from a legal fight just because the City Council adopts a losing cause. That's very easy for her to say, since she
will be paying the bill with YOUR money, not hers.
-Larry Graves
Donald Stone inside Ashland February 27, 2014, 4:14 PM
Ashland has little history of the massive threats and violence that would justify carrying around loaded firearms
to "protect life and property" or "Mom, apple pie and the American way. Those that seem to feel justified in
"displaying their manhood" by packing heat, loaded or unloaded, would seem to have little confidence in their
"manhood" or they wouldn't have the need to display it. They all need to grow up. The only thing that needs
shooting in Ashland are the deer.
April Rosenthal inside Ashland February 26, 2014, 5:45 PM
In a civilized society it's hard to understand why the idea of allowing loaded firearms in public places is even
All On Forum Statements sorted chronologically
As of March 12, 2014, 1:43 PM http://peakdemocmcycem/1736 Page 8 of 19
Carrying Loaded Firearms in Public Places
How does the Ashland community feel about a proposal that prohibits carrying loaded firearms in public places?
discussed. I live in Ashland for many reasons but mainly because of it's philosophy of peace and harmony, it's
non-violent demonstrations, it's intellectual approaches to solving issues. I see no place for firearms in our
community except in the hands of law enforcement. The public display of loaded (or unloaded weapons) in the
Ashland community should not be tolerated as it is not tolerated in so many other communities in Oregon. We
must protect our community and not be afraid to stand up to organizations such as the NRA whose purpose is
to increase profits of gun makers by playing on the public's fears for safety. I do not want to worry when I go to
an Ashland theatre that someone carrying a loaded firearm could kill another. I think the City of Ashland should
consider that the proposal to prohibit carrying loaded firearms in public places would also encourage tourism
here by promoting public safety. This should be considered especially in light of the recent incidents of gun
violence against innocent citizens throughout our nation.
Larry Rogers inside Ashland February 25, 2014, 9:07 AM
We do not need more gun control laws. We need to better inforce the laws we already have, better back ground
checks etc.
The city needs to focus its time and energy in areas where there are real problems like the homeless issue,
property taxes, infastructure, etc.
Anne Batzer outside Ashland February 24, 2014, 1:25 PM
As I look over the list of those who have signed the petition for gun safety measures in Ashland, I see others
who, like me, have had a close family member murdered by a stranger. In my case, it was right here in the
Rogue Valley. There have been at least three incidents where there was illegal gun use, or threatened illegal
guy use, in Ashland since your first study session. This issue is not an abstraction. We watch in frustration as
our federal government does nothing. Cities are limited in what we can do---but does that mean we do
nothing? The committee---mostly parents of young children---who has brought these ordinances forward has
kept their means congruent with their goal. They have not belittled or berated. They have not threatened or
resorted to psychological violence. Rather they have modeled what they hope to achieve: a culture that is a little
safer, a little more respectful and a little more civilized. It's right that you researched the legal liabilities of these
ordinances. Your research reveals that the chances of lawsuits against these ordinances are slim. (No
legislation is 100 percent free from the threat of litigation.) You have the opportunity to nudge our culture toward
the direction of a more thoughtful maturity. Please pass both of these ordinances.
Noel Chatroux inside Ashland February 23, 2014, 9:43 PM
I guess I have an unusual perspective because I am French and go back to visit my family of origin at least
yearly. They shake their head in disbelief when I tell them of our laws protecting the possession of firearms and
the reasons for these laws. To them it's clear that more firearms in homes doesn't make society safer, and that
the reasons for violence, armed and otherwise lie elsewhere than in the lack of guns in the hands of regular
people. Guns are dangerous and should be left to law enforcement people to use in their line of duty. The
further in that direction we can go without exposing our city to ruinous law suits, the better.
All On Forum Statements sorted chronologically
As of March 12, 2014, 1:43 PM htlp://peekd.m..r../1]36 Page 9 of 19
Carrying Loaded Firearms in Public Places
How does the Ashland community feel about a proposal that prohibits carrying loaded firearms in public places?
I also work with children and families as a mental health therapist. Seeing an adult carrying an assault weapon
in a public place is shocking and potentially traumatizing. These sights belong on the battle field, not in our
streets or stores.
Thank you for your effort to legislate civility into this antiquated american notion that we must be allowed to arm
ourselves so that we can protect our families and assets.
cat gould inside Ashland February 23, 2014, 1:23 PM
http://youtu.be/8R8UOjMy-5k
Sarah DeLong inside Ashland February 22, 2014, 6:23 PM
We're entering our 3rd year as Ashland residents. We love living and raising our kids here. This community is
so focused on taking care of, and supporting each other in myriad ways. This very modest, common-sense gun
regulation proposal seems like an extension of that characteristic. It's not trying to take anything away from
anyone, it's merely trying to care for the community by keeping us safer. I definitely support both proposed
ordinances.
Bruce Borgerson inside Ashland February 22, 2014, 6:18 PM
I strongly support this ordinance. I think all Ashland councilors need to be fully aware that opposition to any
ordinance essentially similar to ordinances in Portland and other Oregon communities that have withstood court
challenge will have one certain result:
That councilor will not be returned to the council following his or her next election day.
I'm an Ashland resident and voter.
ANNE ROBISON inside Ashland February 22, 2014, 5:49 PM
This is an excellent proposal to promote Ashland as a safe and civilized place to live, do business, raise kids,
and visit. Do we need to feel bullied by a small handful of folks with questionable judgment who attend city
council meetings with automatic weapons? This is a reasonable, common sense law well within our rights as a
city to pass. For those that say "Ashland doesn't have a problem" - great, let's keep it that way. Or would we
rather wait until a tragedy occurs? If this law prevents even one accidental or intentional death in this city in the
next fifty years, it is worth it. It seems so easy. And where else can we begin but locally? Can we not provide
example for other small towns, cities, and states? The data is so clear. Reduce guns, reduce deaths by gun.
That would not have happened otherwise. Period. (Harvard School of Public Health Study:
http://www. hsph. harvard. edu/h icrc/fi rearms-research/g uns-and-death )
All On Forum Statements sorted chronologically
As of March 12, 2014, 1:43 PM htlp://peakdemocmcy.wm/1 736 Page 10 of 19
Carrying Loaded Firearms in Public Places
How does the Ashland community feel about a proposal that prohibits carrying loaded firearms in public places?
I think it is only reasonable to assume that fewer loaded guns will be statistically similar, though to a lesser
degree. And anyway, folks with a concealed weapons permit get to keep their gun loaded.
But I must say, I firmly reject this notion of "Good Guys with guns." Guns are dangerous and can kill hundreds
of people in just a few minutes. No matter the intention. Let's hedge our bets and ask people to keep them
unloaded in public places.
Andrew Kubik inside Ashland February 22, 2014, 11:58 AM
I would support the 'open carry' provision because it makes sense and based on Portland's experience, would
pass legal muster. No developed nation, except for the USA, allows this sort of nonsense. I would actually
support a complete open carry ban nationwide. I understand the 'home storage' provision, but I feel it does not
have legal viability and would likely nix the entire effort. Besides, parents of minors are liable when said minors
commit crimes, cause car wrecks, etc. There should be ample provision in existing statute to cover this form of
parental negligence. If not, then it needs to be legislated statewide.
Erik Larsen inside Ashland February 22, 2014, 4:42 AM
This seems like it could be a legal minefield for the city, and it's not clear that safety would be improved. If a
person intends to do harm, I don't think this ordinance will stop them. Though I've never seen anyone with an
open carry for its own sake here in Ashland, perhaps this is more about getting guns out of open view as an
aesthetic? If so, I couldn't agree that the regulation is appropriate, because then where is the line drawn?
Thank you.
jonathan seidler inside Ashland February 21, 2014, 1:01 PM
Update on March 7:
1 feel a need to respond again today. First it has been said that the precedent for this ordinance has been set in
other Oregon localities and this is not true. This proposal is of a different slant and language. Thus a court case
would view it from a origin standpoint.
Second, A comment that cowards fits the description of anyone carrying or using a firearm and that all cowards
should leave Ashland. I suggest that the author of that statement put forth a petition for a ordinance addendum
to rule that all cowards be banned from Ashland, stipulating conditions for the removal of said persons with a
time frame in place and a rule on jail time and fines pertaining for the culprit guilty of breaking the rule of said
ordinance.
I,myself, am currently wording a document proposal for a petition to cite and ban persons using wireless
devises while driving in Ashland. The evidence is overwhelming how the Ashland general public completely
ignores the laws pertaining to cellphone use and the dangers associated with the activity while driving. An
exclusion of these digital junkies from our local society will create a safer locality in general and will provide a
huge boost for tourism and local economy.
All On Forum Statements sorted chronologically
A & March 12, 2014, 1:43 PM http://peakdemo ..mM17M Page 11 o119
Carrying Loaded Firearms in Public Places
How does the Ashland community feel about a proposal that prohibits carrying loaded firearms in public places?
Original statement posted Feb 21:
Gun ownership is a right that is availed by the constitution. It is a rare commodity that is taken for granted by all.
It is rare in that most other first and third world nations regulate, by criminal law, the ownership of arms.
However if you are swayed by modern arguments on this "issue" and how strongly you feel about it, you still
have to accept what is the "rule" of our land and it is a rule made by the people for the people. It has stood the
test of time and resolve. It represents an acknowledgment of corruption in government from the beginning of
this country and throughout history till today. Dictatorships were partially founded on arms confiscation and
enforcement of those laws. Nazi Germany is a perfect example and there are living people today who can attest
to the function of those gun control laws in Nazi Germany. Yes, some young people feel very strongly about
parading their right to open carry and it does make some people nervous and rightly so. You always have the
right to call police who will always investigate that occurrence. If you would talk to people who open carry they
usually are very happy to discuss why they do with you. Ashland is part of Oregon and part of the USA.
Ordinances like this petition proposal are not an answer to any problem here that is a council related
issue.Surely if one feels that living in Ashland is dangerous then they can decide to move but where will you
go? The States are united by the constitution and the right to bear arms is uniform. Move to NYC,or L.A. or
Chicago where gun ownership is most regulated per ordinances and will you then be safer? Ashland WILL face
a lawsuit because of a petition signed by 175 people out of a population of 20,000. How about real consensus
and put it to a vote? For me,it is sad how people want Ashland to be groovier for the fact of how regulated it is,
be it by ordinances or taxes. For your own information ask a Ashland Police Officer what they think of the
proposal for gun control in Ashland. You might be surprised.
Greg Jost inside Ashland February 21, 2014, 11:50 AM
I agree with the intent of the ordinance, but provisions should be made for individuals that may have acute need
of a concealed carry permit that would be annually approved my a sitting judge.
Also, I feel that the "state" should require gun owners to maintain required liability insurance, punccased in the
open market, to provide liability coverage for all rifles, pistols, and weapons that is comparable to automobile
liability insurance. This mechanism would allow the market place and courts to economically regulate
irresponsible gun owners, who do not safely monitor their weapons, improperly utilize them in public situations,
or participate in illegal criminal activities.
LINDA ADAMS inside Ashland February 21, 2014, 10:14 AM
I agree with limiting gun toting in public. I wish there was a legal possiblility to limit gun ownership entirely.
Portland has a no carry law, Ashland should, too.
k latham inside Ashland February 21, 2014, 10:01 AM
All On Forum Statements sorted chronologically
As of March 12, 2014, 1:43 PM htlpalpeakdemocracy mm11136 Page 12 of 19
Carrying Loaded Firearms in Public Places
How does the Ashland community feel about a proposal that prohibits carrying loaded firearms in public places?
Stop trying to take away our rights as legal gun owners, out of fear and misinformation. Here in Ashland, more
young people have died or been harmed by skateboard and bicycle use and heroin/drug overdoses in the past
few years than any problems with guns.
We don't need people moving here, then attempting to change Ashland into wherever they came from. Move to
Portland if you want to live in a "safer" community with this "law".
I live in Ashland, was born and raised here. My family has lived here for over 100 years.
Diane Paulson inside Ashland February 21, 2014, 9:23 AM
I agree with this effort to prohibit people from carrying loaded firearms in public places such as a school, city
offices, SOU campus. The young man who shows up with several loaded firearms at the City Council meetings
and at the Plaza in Ashland and in downtown Medford is a menacing and aggressive person as shown by his
actions. I do not understand why he was allowed to come into a City Council meeting with such armament
even though he has permits?! It is very aggressive and confrontative, intimidating and threatening behavior
which can cause extreme fear in others. Why was he allowed access when his behavior is so very hostile and
potentially dangerous???
Tom Burnham inside Ashland February 20, 2014, 10:31 PM
NO GUNS PERIOD
Michael Clark inside Ashland February 20, 2014, 9:05 PM
Are we having a problem with people carrying guns in town? Keep this "feel good" proposal going and we
will just so gun rights advocates can make a point that they have the right. They do have the right. I'm as
appalled as anyone by the gun violence we so often hear about. Will banning the carrying of loaded guns in our
public places prevent that? That's a rhetorical question.
Lee Fox inside Ashland February 20, 2014, 6:45 PM
I see absolutely no need for this regulation. Will someone please articulate the problem statement? The
supporters "forgot" this since there is none. Do they really believe that government can protect us from all evil
and that only government employees should be armed?? Its a dream to believe that felons will be dissuaded by
a potential misdemeanor charge. Please focus on the criminals not the law abiding citizens!
J, D. inside Ashland February 20, 2014, 6:22 PM
I have lived in Ashland for 6 years and I have never seen anyone carrying a handgun in the open. I have never
seen it as a problem. I am against any measure that would impede on my rights. I agree that people shouldn't
All On Forum Statements sorted chronologically
As of March 12, 2014, 1:43 PM hltpl/peakdemocracy.mm/1736 Page 13 o119
Carrying Loaded Firearms in Public Places
How does the Ashland community feel about a proposal that prohibits carrying loaded firearms in public places?
parade around town with a rifle slung across their back but what it all boils down to is common sense. People
shouldn't worry that because someone is carrying a gun they are a potential criminal. Someone made a
comment something to the effect that carrying a gun may cause criminal activity so guns should not be allowed
in pubic on the streets of Ashland. Let's carry that same thought pattern over to alcohol and drunk driving.
Should they prohibit any place to sell alcohol because someone that is drinking could get drunk and go on a
rampage in their car and injure or kill people? That is making assumptions about things that might happen.
Prohibiting open carry will only stop law abiding citizens from carrying. The criminals will still carry guns. Proof
of that is that murder is illegal and there are all kinds of laws stating that it is illegal but people are still murdered
everyday.
Larry Pearson inside Ashland February 20, 2014, 5:32 PM
I prefer that people do not carry loaded firearms in public places; however, I have not seen anyone doing so in
Ashland [with the exception of those with concealed weapon permits], so I don't see the need for the Council to
spend time on the issue. Except for the non-productive use of time, I am not opposed to the proposed
prohibition of carrying loaded firearms in public places.
Sally McKirgan inside Ashland February 20, 2014, 5:14 PM
People need to be allowed to own guns but please let's not walk down the street with them slung over our
shoulders. Guns are alarming things to see. Violence is abhorrent and so is seeing an AK47 or Rifle walking
down the street or standing on the corner.
Sally & Carl McKirgan
Shawn Kampmann inside Ashland February 20, 2014, 4:53 PM
If there ever comes a time where armed militias are roaming the streets of Ashland menacing the public, then
maybe I would be more in favor of restrictions if state and federal law permitted it. But since I first moved to
Ashland in 1973, 1 have not seen anyone with a firearm threatening people. In this current proposal about
prohibiting loaded firearms in public, I am guessing that it is only going to encourage the pro-NRA lunatic fringe
to take up parading around town brandishing iron to make a statement. It will end up being a "call to arms" for
gun fanatics to take a stand and will only end up creating discontent and conflict where there is none now.
C'mon folks, calm down and quit making "much ado about nothing!" The biggest reason to drop this misguided
effort is that as taxpayers, we are all tired of the City wasting money on non-issues such as this, especially
when it is likely to involve a very expensive legal defense if challenged (as has been already threatened by
some NRA types). Ashland has little likelihood of winning this battle and we have so many other actual current
financial needs (AFN, sewer treatment plant, parks, citizen services, etc.). If you don't want to see people with
guns parading around town, then don't threaten to ban them and call them out because you are not likely see it
otherwise. A ban would be unenforceable according to APD and "bad guys" aren't going to obey the law
anyway so whats the real point here? As my parents used to say, "learn to pick your battles...."
Ronna Smith-Hileman inside Ashland February 20, 2014, 4:50 PM
All On Forum Statements sorted chronologically
As of March 12, 2014, 1:43 PM h"p:Opsakdemw ,w"1736 Page 14 of 19
Carrying Loaded Firearms in Public Places
How does the Ashland community feel about a proposal that prohibits carrying loaded firearms in public places?
Private citizens have no need and no business to carry loaded firearms in the city of Ashland.
Corren Hileman inside Ashland February 20, 2014, 4:41 PM
There is no reason for a private citizen to carry a loaded firearm of any kind in the city of Ashland.
Diana Trygg inside Ashland February 20, 2014, 4:41 PM
I strongly support this prohibition. We need to take a more rational approach to firearms based on our current
history rather than the distant past.
cynda howell inside Ashland February 20, 2014, 4:21 PM
agree with the requested ban on loaded guns in public. Also, whenever any gun is observed, police should
verify that it is properly licensed and not loaded. Guns should be confiscated if either condition is not met. The
right to public safety can never be over ridden by the right to bare arms. Responsible gun own owners are in
favor of background checks and licensing. Only a nut case would carry a loaded gun around in their homes
while mowing the lawn, watching TV, or making lunch.. So, why would they carry a gun attending a play, a walk
in the park, or in the grocery check out line? Guns should be used for activities such as hunting or target
practice by those who are licensed and have received proper training.
Don Paul inside Ashland February 20, 2014, 4:03 PM
I personally have a carry permit. No one knows because I do not display my pistol or tell folks. I feel this is
just another attempt by liberals to disarm law abiding citizens. We all know that those from the criminal
element will not follow the law. This puts the rest of us at a disadvantage by not having someone with a firearm
available to defend the innocent in a crime situation. I do not support any change in the law at this time.
Thanks.
Becky Snow inside Ashland February 20, 2014, 3:42 PM
I am persuaded by the experience of other communities, states and countries where sensible gun restrictions
reduce accidental and intentional deaths by gunshot. Prohibiting loaded weapons on Ashland streets may be
the only step this community can take by itself, without statewide legislation, but it should at least take this step.
STEPHANIE BARTLETT inside Ashland February 20, 2014, 3:35 PM
All On Forum Statements sorted chronologically
Ps of March 12, 2014, 1:43 PM http://peakdemmracy.mmll 736 Page 15 of 19
Carrying Loaded Firearms in Public Places
How does the Ashland community feel about a proposal that prohibits carrying loaded firearms in public places?
Just because we haven't had a gunfire rampage in Ashland doesn't mean it couldn't happen. Why make it
easier/more possible? I'm in favor of prohibiting the carrying of loaded firearms in public places in the city of
Ashland. As for our second amendment rights, why is it that people opposed to gun control always leave out the
prepositional phrase, "in a well-ordered militia?"
Scott Calamar inside Ashland February 20, 2014, 3:34 PM
I personally believe in controlling arms. HOWEVER, once again the city is wasting time and resources on a
non-issue-philosophical meanderings repeatedly supersede the practical workings of council and staff. For
instance, the TAP water thing has been going on for how long and you've once again managed to sidestep
putting something out for *bids*. So I am AGAINST a proposal that does not address an active issue in this
town.
Penny Naumoff inside Ashland February 20, 2014, 3:20 PM
totally support this proposal. Seems like common sense to me.
Daisy Hering inside Ashland February 20, 2014, 3:18 PM
I am surprised this issue is being treated as controversial when even the NRA recommends keeping guns
unloaded until just before use. Ashland is not immune from illegal gun use. According to the city and the
newspaper, in just the last month, the police received a tip that a student was threatening to bring a gun to the
high school, a man with a gun menaced a woman in the parking lot of an Ashland shopping center, and a gas
station was robbed by a man with, a gun. Guns are everywhere in this country and Ashland is not an exception.
Common sense and scientific studies show that the greater the presence of loaded guns, the greater the risk of
accidents and criminal gun use. Let's keep Ashland sensible and keep loaded, openly-carried guns out of
public places.
mark kelly inside Ashland February 20, 2014, 3:09 PM
Ban loaded weapons. Simple.
Ron Parenteau outside Ashland February 20, 2014, 3:02 PM
Thought there was laws to that issue already
Jerry Spears inside Ashland February 20, 2014, 2:52 PM
All On Forum Statements sorted chronologically
M of March 12, 2014, 1:43 PM httaXpeakdemocrec ornn11]36 Page 16 of 19
Carrying Loaded Firearms in Public Places
How does the Ashland community feel about a proposal that prohibits carrying loaded firearms in public places?
All laws are a lessening of freedom, some are worth the price, but why would anyone lessen freedom with no
benefit?
How many people have been killed or injured with a gun downtown in Ashland in the last 50 years? Now how
much trouble, property damage and violence have "homeless" people caused in Ashland in that same time
period?
We have many problems in Ashland... this is not one of them. It distracts people from actually doing anything.
People need food, homes, mental health help, etc. Will this do anything to help solve these problems? If you
want to help go buy someone a sandwich, but don't try and slowly take our freedoms away!
Do we really want to move onto the slippery slope of new unnecessary laws?
Anyone remember the 2%"temporary" food tax to help pay for the flood damage. Almost instantly it was raised
to 5% and now it is permanent and has nothing to do with the flood.....
I have always believed that in a democracy laws were for the greater good of all not just for a few people did not
like something?
I remember in the 70's being pulled over by a police officer (somewhere in this valley) and being told that the
"boy"(30 year old black man) driving the car I was riding in needed to get off the road and go back home if he
didn't want any trouble. Seemed there was a sundowner law because some people did not like black people out
after dark. Thankfully most of those laws are gone because what some people did not like was not worth the
freedom it took from others.
Deborah Gordon outside Ashland February 20, 2014, 2:14 PM
As an Ashland business person (not a resident), I think safety lies on the side of prohibiting loaded firearms in
public places. As a health professional, I am well aware of the incredible history and opportunity for mishaps
when loaded guns are around. Please prohibit loaded firearms in public places.
Samantha Hammel] inside Ashland February 20, 2014, 2:12 PM
Ashland bans nudity in public places. Have we really come to the point where a nude woman on a bicycle is
more of a threat to public safety and health than a loaded gun? Let's keep Ashland a reasonable place to live--
a place with laws that are the result of rationality. Loaded guns carry inherent danger and those who own guns
need to respect the rights of those around them when they are out in public by unloading their weapons.
Clothes mandatory, but loaded guns optional? C'mon, let's have some mature thinking and avoid this absurd
result!
Bruce Hanson outside Ashland February 20, 2014, 2:04 PM
All On Forum Statements sorted chronologically
As of March 12, 2014, 1:43 PM htlpa/peakd emocacymm/1]36 Page 17 of 19
Carrying Loaded Firearms in Public Places
How does the Ashland community feel about a proposal that prohibits carrying loaded firearms in public places?
Carrying firearms in public is a really BAD IDEA.
This isn't the wild West.
John Williams inside Ashland February 20, 2014, 1:46 PM
Research and data are indisputably clear on this question: the more guns in public places, the more accidental
and intentional gun injuries and deaths occur. Despite the facts, many gun lovers will inexplicably say virtually
anything to justify their disdain for any gun controls. The facts say having more guns does not reduce crime, but
does increase gun accidents, gun suicides, and gun crime. There is absolutely no downside to prohibiting the
carrying of loaded firearms in public places... only benefits.
John Johnson inside Ashland February 20, 2014, 1:44 PM
I agree that we're discussing a non-problem here in Ashland. I do believe that gun violence is a serious
problem in our country. I wish people would stop making excuses for guns.
David Runkel inside Ashland February 20, 2014, 1:32 PM
This is a no-brainer. Of course, such a prohibition should be in place.
David and Deedie Ruknkel
Matt Warshawsky inside Ashland February 20, 2014, 1:17 PM
I agree with Mark Decker's comment. It addresses a problem that doesn't really exist, and is derived largely
from fear. It is more likely to divide our community than of bring us together. The council has enough work
already and should be focusing on our real problems.
Mark Decker inside Ashland February 20, 2014, 10:37 AM
Since the ordinance only applies to open carry of *loaded` firearms (open carry of unloaded guns, and
concealed carry of loaded guns with CHL are OK), it seems like a reasonable safety measure to help prevent
accidental shootings, and does not significantly impair gun rights. However, it solves a problem that doesn't
seem to exist, and would be hard to enforce. If we want to make a political statement to express the views of
the community, an actual ordinance is overkill. A resolution that open carry is unwelcome in Ashland would be
sufficient. Responsible gun owners should voluntarily respect the resolution for safety reasons and out of
consideration for their neighbors' concerns. A real ordinance might backfire by angering strong supporters of
gun rights to the point where they start parading around with unloaded weapons just to make a statement,
needlessly scaring children and tourists. Let Ashland be a stage for real theater, not political theater.
Derrell Boldt inside Ashland February 20, 2014, 9:04 AM
All n Forum Statements sorted chronologically
As of March 12, 2014, 1:43 PM hdPUlpeskdemo cy com/1 ]38 Page 18 of 19
Carrying Loaded Firearms in Public Places
How does the Ashland community feel about a proposal that prohibits carrying loaded firearms in public places?
I think that carrying loaded firearms in public places should be banned unless the carrier has a concealed
weapons permit.
Darrell Boldt
rob raby inside Ashland February 19, 2014, 9:57 PM
This isn't portland and'we don't have there problems.Why are
some folk's trying to make Ashland a copy of a problem city.
Is there some crime wave I'm not aware of that is being used to justify the trampling of our civil rights.
Donald Politis inside Ashland February 19, 2014, 6:49 PM
While I don't advocate open carry it is our right and just as the little kids might see an open carry person so will
they see a police gun when the Mother is stopped for a driving offense ...same scary gun I expect.
Don't spend your time on solutions to problems that don't exist
All On Foram Statements sorted chronologically
As of Mach 12. 2014. 1:43 PM httaXpeakdemocrdcy.com/l 736 Page 19 of 19
PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS
(as distinguished from philosophical and legal arguments)
FOR AND AGAINST ADOPTING NEW ORDINANCES
CONCERNING OPEN CARRY OF LOADED FIRARMS
AND MINORS' ACCESS TO FIREARMS
1. EFFECTIVE? Might (a) enhance safety in public places by reducing the likelihood of
unintentional gun-related violence OR (b) reduce safety by suggesting that criminal activity
in Ashland public places will not likely be met by citizens' armed resistance.
2. EFFECTIVE? Might have no discernible impact on public safety given that gun-related
crimes and accidents in Ashland are rare. (That is, in light of the rarity of gun-related crime
and accidents in Ashland public places, any benefit from restricting open carry of loaded
guns AND any benefit from the possibility of having armed citizens in public places at
opportune times to deter or defend against serious crimes might both be negligible.)
3. EFFECTIVE? Might (a) have no real impact on open carry of loaded guns given that
inspection to determine loaded or unloaded status of openly carried gun may not be possible,
thereby limiting enforcement OR (b) enhance safety in public places and homes as a result of
voluntary compliance, even if actual enforcement occurs rarely.
4. EFFECTIVE? Might (a) decrease the likelihood of minors in Ashland getting possession of
guns without permission OR (b) have no discernible impact because the incidence of minors
in Ashland getting unpermitted access to guns is rare even without a special prohibition.
5. EFFECTIVE? Might (a) be effective, regardless of enforceability, as an expression of the
views of a majority of Ashland citizens on an issue under legislative consideration in the
State Legislature and Congress OR (b) be regarded as merely unenforceable political
statements, which might, in turn, cause other ordinances to be taken less seriously.
6. LITIGATION? Might (a) result in lengthy legal battles so costly as to have an appreciable
impact on City budgets and services OR (b) result in no lawsuits, as has been the case in 10
of the I 1 Oregon jurisdictions that currently ban loaded weapons in public places.
7. FAIR? Might (a) alienate law-abiding citizens who are unlikely to misuse firearms even -
without the new ordinances OR (b) cause law-abiding gun owners to be more aware of many
citizens' apprehensions about guns in public places.
8. VISITOR IMPACT? Might (a) result in fewer visitors to Ashland OR (b) attract new visitors
to Ashland.
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Council Communication
March 18, 2014, Business Meeting
Second Reading of Ordinance Amending AMC Chapter 2: Rules of City Council;
Uniform Policies and Operating Procedures for Advisory Commissions and
Boards; Recreation Commission; Conservation Commission; and Certain
Administrative and Operating Departments
FROM:
David H. Lohman, City Attorney, lohmand@ashland.or.us
SUMMARY
The City Council, at its business meeting on March 4, 2014, approved the first reading of an ordinance
intended to capture Council discussions at study sessions on December 2, 2013 and January 7, 2014,
and requested some additional amendments. At the March 4 meeting, Council discussed and
informally agreed to a number of changes to the version of the ordinance presented for first reading but
did not formally amend that version. The revised version of the ordinance presented for second
reading does incorporate those changes, and each of them that is substantive must be read aloud prior
to seeking approval of the revised version on second reading. Differences between the two versions of
the ordinance are indicated by highlighting in the version attached hereto for second reading.
BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
At several meetings over the past year, Council has discussed various conceptual changes to the
procedural rules for Council meetings and to the policies and operating procedures for advisory bodies.
The proposed ordinance update shows proposed ordinance revisions intended to reflect the sense of the
Council during those discussions.
Some of the proposed changes are simple housekeeping revisions: non-substantive updates,
corrections, clarifications or re-orderings. Other proposed changes that are substantive or that may not
have unanimous Council support or that could cause controversy are briefly described below, opposite
their proposed new Code sites. If the subject of a provision is already addressed in the current Code
and has been moved to a new site, the current Code site is shown in brackets.
• 2.04.010E Specifies when a motion to suspend the rules is permissible
• 2.04.01 OF Clarifies role of parliamentarian and presiding officer in responding to
questions about meeting procedures and rulings of the presiding officer [see
current 2.04.020L]
• 2.04.02013 Requires notice of Special meetings 72 hours in advance, instead of 36.
• 2.04.020C Specifies actions Council may take at study sessions
Page I of 4
~r,
CITY OF
ASHLAND
• 2.04.020131 Clarifies process for objecting to consideration of a matter in executive
session
• 2.04.020F Requires notice for all meetings except emergency meetings at least 72 hours
in advance, instead of 36 hours [see current 2.04.020*]
• 2.04.030B&C Clarifies procedure for a Councilor to add any item to a future meeting's
agenda
• 2.04.030E3 Clarifies disposition of scheduled agenda item not concluded
• 2.04.04013 Allows for possibility that a Councilor may attend a meeting by electronic
means upon suspension of rules.
• 2.04.040C2 Adds certain limitations on Council deliberations [see current 2.04.020K]
• 2.04.040C3 Requires Councilors to refrain from addressing remarks to the audience, adds
examples of disruptive behavior, and clarifies possible responses to
disruptive conduct in Council meetings [see current 2.04.040A]
• 2.04.040C4a-1 Provides streamlined procedures for managing meetings and making
motions; replaces Roberts Rules except for situations not addressed in the
proposed new rules
• 2.04.040C4b Clarifies when a speaker may be interrupted and the process for dealing with
overuse of such interruptions.
• 2.04.040C6a Allows Councilor to be excused from voting upon approval by majority vote.
Makes a Council member's refusal to vote count as a negative vote [see
current 2.04.0201]
• 2.04.040C6b Requires an affirmative vote of at least four Councilors to pass measures
required to be decided by a two thirds vote [see current 2.04.0201]
• 2.04.040C7 Clarifies when reconsideration can occur [see current 2.04.020J]
• 2.04.050 Allows State of the City address to be presented at any regular meeting in
January of each year. Changes order of business so that Public Forum takes
place before consideration of the Consent Agenda unless altered by the
presiding officer or suspension of rules
• 2.04.050D2 Clarifies that a Councilor may request that any matter discussed in Public
Forum be placed on a future Council agenda [see current 2.04.070]
• 2.04.050134 Establishes preference for Ashland residents during Public Forum
• 2.04.050171 Allows Council by two-thirds vote to extend public hearings to as late as 9:45
PM
• 2.04.050G Allows clarifying staff or public testimony to be taken on a consent agenda
item without formally pulling the item from the consent agenda
• 2.04.090A Clarifies distinctions between appointed and non-appointed commissions and
between regular and ad hoc advisory bodies
• 2.04.090C Requires considering possible appointment of replacement member of regular
advisory body before reappointing existing member to more than two full
terms
Page 2 of 4
CITY OF
ASHLAND
• 2.04. 10013 Relaxes attendance requirements for Council Liaisons to advisory bodies
• 2.04.110A3&4 Provides guidance to Council members serving as City Representatives to
external organizations when called upon to vote on matters potentially
impacting the City
• 2.04.110A5 Clarifies ethical obligations of Council member serving as City
Representatives to external organizations
• 2.10.020 Sets terms of service for most advisory body members
• 2.10.02513 Clarifies meeting attendance requirements for members of advisory bodies
• 2.10.025C Establishes advance notice requirements when advisory body member will
not attend scheduled meeting
• 2.10.025D Disallows alternates for members of the advisory bodies, except appointed by
outside entity
• 2.10.025E Requires advisory body attendance reports
• 2.10.040 Clarifies what should occur when a quorum of an advisory body is not in
attendance at a duly noticed meeting
• 2.10.050 Specifies when advisory bodies should elect officers and limits tenure of
chair and vice chair to no more than three consecutive annual terms
• 2.10.060 Requires timely preparation and posting of advisory body agendas and
minutes
• 2.10.105 Clarifies expectations for reports to Council about advisory body activities
• 2.10.110 Clarifies circumstances under which advisory board members may speak for
the City or the advisory board in external forums.
• 2.11.015 Modifies termination date of terms of certain Municipal Audit Commission
members
Attachment 1 presents draft language intended to articulate three additional concepts which individual
Councilors suggested at the March 4 meeting and for which support of a majority of Councilors was
not then evident. In the body of the draft ordinance, asterisks in brackets corresponding to the
bracketed asterisks in Attachment 1 indicate where those provisions might be inserted.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
N/A
STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION:
The Council approved the first reading of the ordinance updates at its regular meeting on March 4,
2014, and suggested changes for inclusion in the second reading. Staff recommends Council approve
second reading of the ordinance updates as amended to incorporate those changes and any other
amendments approved by Council.
Page 3 of 4
CITY OF
ASHLAND
SUGGESTED MOTION:
I move to approve the second reading of an ordinance titled, "An Ordinance amending AMC Chapter
2: Rules of City Council, Uniform Policies and Operating Procedures for Advisory Commissions and
Boards, Recreation Commission; Conservation Commission, and certain Administrative and Operating
Departments" as amended and adopt the ordinance.
ATTACHMENTS:
• Proposed Ordinance Amending AMC Chapter 2
• Attachment 1: Councilor-Suggested Additions
Page 4 of 4
~r,
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING AMC CHAPTER 2: RULES OF CITY
COUNCIL, UNIFORM POLICIES AND OPERATING PROCEDURES FOR
ADVISORY COMMISSIONS AND BOARDS, RECREATION
COMMISSION; CONSERVATION COMMISSION; AND CERTAIN
ADMINISTRATIVE AND OPERATING DEPARTMENTS
Annotated to show ~'e'n~sand additions to the code sections being modified. Deletions are
bold lined through and additions are bold underlined.
WHEREAS, Article 2. Section 1 of the Ashland City Charter provides:
Powers of the City. The City shall have all powers which the constitutions, statutes, and
common law of the United States and of this State expressly or impliedly grant or allow
municipalities, as fully as though this Charter specifically enumerated each of those
powers, as well as all powers not inconsistent with the foregoing; and, in addition thereto,
shall possess all powers hereinafter specifically granted. All the authority thereof shall
have perpetual succession.
WHEREAS, revisions to some of the Council meeting procedures currently in effect can reduce
procedural uncertainties and facilitate efficient conduct of Council meetings;
WHEREAS, permitting certain types of decisions to be made at Council Study Sessions will
make Study Sessions more productive;
WHEREAS, various members of City Council and of City boards and commissions have
requested clarifications of the Uniform Policies and Operating Procedures for Advisory boards
and commissions;
WHEREAS, the staff liaison to the Conservation Commission is no longer the Electric Utility
Director; and
WHEREAS, the existing City code provisions concerning the functions of certain administrative
and operating'departments need to be updated to reflect current practices.
THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Ashland Municipal Code Chapter 2 is hereby amended as follows:
Section 2.04.010 Authority.
A. Oregon Revised Statutes, Tthe unieipaj Charter of the Ci. , Ashland City Charter,
♦ i4iele AlM Seet:,._ and the Ashland Municipal Code as well as the Oregon Revised
Statutes governs many the meeting requirements and actions of the Council.
Ordinance No. Page 1 of 28
B. These operating policies and procedures are established and adopted under the authority
granted in the Ashland City Charter, Article VIII, Section 3.
C. Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised shall be the authority for deciding any
questions on meeting requirements and actions not covered by the rules in AMC 2.04 or
Oregon Revised Statutes.
D. Failure to strictly follow the rules in AMC 2.04 or Robert's Rules of Order Newly
Revised shall not be cause to void or otherwise disturb a decision or action of the Council.
E. Charter provisions may be suspended or repealed only by a vote of the people. The
rules on meeting procedures in Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised and in the Ashland
Municipal Code provisions listed below may be suspended temporarily upon a motion that
is seconded and passed by a two-thirds vote in favor. Such a motion is not debatable or
amendable.
1. AMC 2.04.020A (Regular Meeting days and times)
2. AMC 2.04.020C (Study Session days, times, and content)
3. AMC 2.04.040B (Attendance by electronic communication)
4. AMC 2.04.040C.4 (Parliamentary procedure)
5. AMC 2.04.050D.1 (Placement of Public Forum in agenda)
6. AMC 2.04.050G.1 (Opportunity for public comment on agenda items)
7. AMC 2.04.050J.1 (Submittal of ordinances 14 days in advance of meeting)
F. The City Attorney is designated as parliamentarian for the Council. Council members'
requests for information and on meeting requirements or possible Council actions may be
referred to the City Attorney through the presiding officer for interpretation. After taking
into account any opinion of the City Attorney, the presiding officer must rule on questions
about meeting requirements or possible Council actions. A ruling of the presiding officer
may be challenged by a point of order as set forth in AMC 2.04.040C4.b.(1).
Section 2.04.020 Meetings.
A. Regular Meetings.
The regular sessions of the Council are on the first and third Tuesday of each month unless
otherwise arranged, beginning at 7:00 p.m. Meetings are required to end no later than 10:30
p.m.
B. Special Meetings.
A Special Meeting may be called either by the Mayor or two members of the Council.
Notice of the time and place of such Special Meeting and the subjects to be acted upon shall
be delivered to all members of the Council at least 36 72 hours in advance of the time of the
meeting, except in the case of an emergency, and the Council may consider and act only
upon such matters as contained in the notice.
C. Study Sessions.
Ordinance No. Page 2 of 28
The Mayor- o- t-..o members of the Coune'l may Ball a stu` y session at an), time with 36
hour notiee for- the purpose of informing members of the Couneil as to City affair-s.
Study sessions are held- sa that Cnuineil Pon enm&r with qtAff 0"d ather experts on items
under eensiderstion that may eventually require o f`~eial aetiens. Couneil may not
defiber-ate towar-F-Is a deeisiom but ean give staff direetion to prepare materials for a
regular Couneil meeting-.
Study sessions are for Council members to receive background information and
recommendations from staff or invitees with expertise on City business; to ask
questions, discuss options, express their individual views on matters that may be voted
on in subsequent Regular or Special Meetings; and to provide guidance to staff. The
Council may vote in Study Sessions on guidance to staff concerning matters to be
presented to Council for decision at subsequent meetings. By consensus, the Council
also may direct staff to take action on other matters that do not require Council
decision by ordinance or resolution. No particular cases involving quasi-judicial
decisions may be discussed at Study Sessions.
Study sessions shall begin at 5:30 p.m. on the first and third Monday of each month
unless otherwise arranged, but shall not be held on national holidays. The Mayor or
two Councilors may call a Study Session at any time with 72-hours advance notice.
D. Executive Sessions.
_All meetings of the City Council shall be held in open sessions, except meetings that may
be closed for those purposes specified in the Oregon Public Meetings Law (ORS 192.610 to
192.690). These purposes include, but are not limited to, the employment and dismissal of
public employees, the performance evaluation of the City Administrator and City Attorney,
labor negotiations, real property transaction negotiations, and consulting with legal counsel
on pending or threatened litigation. if any Couneflors &A do not &A that an otp'm qhm-ld
be in a eutoye session they should state s on the a eutiye session At any time during
an executive session, a Councilor who feels a matter under consideration should be
addressed exclusively in open session may state a point of order, which shall be ruled
upon in the executive session as set forth in AMC 2.04.040C.4.b.(1).
2. Notice of executive sessions shall be given as required by State law and such notice must
state the specific provision of law authorizing the session. The Mayor and City Councilors
will act in accordance with State law regarding confidentiality of information discussed in
Executive Sessions.
3. At the commencement of each executive session, the presiding officer must state on the
record that executive session information is confidential and may not be reported. if it does
not so speei€y, tThe proceedings may be reported if no such statement is made.
E. Emergency Meetings.
Ordinance No. Page 3 of 28
The City Administrator is responsible for implementation of the Emergency
Management Plan. When the City Administrator determines that a state of emergency
exists, the administrator will make a declaration to that effect and request the Mayor to
call an emergency meeting of the Council in order to ratify the declaration of
emergency. The emergency meeting of the Council will occur as soon as possible after
the declaration of emergency. A quorum of the Council may not be possible due to
emergency circumstances and is not required for this emergency meeting.
Notwithstanding the advance notice requirements in Section 2.04.020B, D and F, notice
of the emergency meeting can be made in the most expedient manner determined by the
Mayor and need not be 72 hours in advance, but notice of the emergency Special
Meeting must be given at least 24-hour in advance if feasible. In any case, minutes of
any emergency meeting must meet the requirements of ORS 192.640(3) and 192.650.
EF. Notice of Meetings.
Advance notice of at least 3672 hours shall be provided for all meetings, except for
emergency meetings. Notice shall be sent to a newspaper with general local circulation and
posted prominently on the City's Web site website. In the case of an emergency or when a
state of emergency has been declared, public notice appropriate to the circumstances shall be
provided and reasons justifying the lack of 3672-hour notice shall be included in the minutes
of such meeting.
Quorum
As provided in Ai4iele AW!, Seetion 4 of the City Char-ter-, the Mayor and not less than
thr-pe ) or- four ) eonstitute a quorum. A simple Majority of the
or-
resolution. On estions requiring a two thirds vote of N... C-.....,..:1) as provided in t
City Char-ter-, there shall be required an affirmative vote of at lenst four- Cauneflers to
exer-eise any sueh speeial powers. if the roll eall shows no quorum present, ns defined
direet the Chief of Poliee to notify the absent members, exeept those known to be
unnvoidab'y detained, that their -ed to enable the Couneil to proeeed
with business. Should an), then fail seen to appear, the members present shall adjour-n
to a date fixed by them and all agenda items will be eentinued to the nemt Regular
Meeting.
G. Emergeney Meeting Proeedures and Quorum.
The City AdminiqtFnmr- *S r-tqponsible for implementation of the Emergeney
Management Plan; When the City Administrator determines that a state of efflergeney
exists, the administrator- will make a deelaration to that effeet and request the Mayor- to
The speeial meeting of the Gouneilwill oeeur- as soon as possible nfter- the deelftration of
emergency. nom of the Counell-may not-h possible duetvznic^ig2v
eireumstanees and is not required for the speeial meeting. Notiee of the speeial meeting
ean be made in the most expedient manner deter-mined by the Mayor and need not
36 hours in advanee.
Ordinance No. Page 4 of 28
during its sessions, when not in eonfliet with the City Charter- and these eode rules.
Failure to strietly follow Robert' s Rules of Order- shall not be eallse to void or-
Atheni,ke d4qt--Fh a deeiqiAn Fir- option of the Couneil. The Cmuned will strive to be clear
in its preeeedings.
1. Voting.
When a question or motion is put to a vote by the ehair-, eaeh member present shall vet-e
for- or against the motion unless the Couneil exeuses that fnember- from so doing. if
thereafter- the Mayor or an), member ealls for a roll call vote, then eaeh member must
.
vote. The Mayor ean on!), vate in the ease of a tie, and then is required j. Reeensider-ing a Vote.
A to Feeonsider a vote eon be made only onee and at the session at which the-
or matter- was adopted, or at the next regular- meeting of the Council, provided
that no vote t.... sider- shall be made after- the °"ainaneeresolution, or- net has been
offleially reeer-ded, filed or transmitted or othei-A,ise gone out of the possession of the
C
K. Council Deloberaflon.
it is the duty of the Mayor- or presiding offieer- to ensure that eaeh Couneil member- ha
the-oppo unity to speak Councilors should ask the Aii..yor to be recognized. No
member shall speak more than onee until eve", member ehoosing to speak shall hav-e
spoken or waived their right to do so. No member shall speak twiee on a motion on th
itan -wi4hmit 1..aye of the Mayor o siding o ffieer
r01.^^:1 m mher-° speak °°L, a^.. th....Behr,.. and- shall be open, dir-eet and ..ndd They
work to keep dise$ssien nom:i: and on" &r- a "praeess eheek" if the diseussiAn
beeemes begged down. Time limits may be set on topies by the Mayor, by the presiding or by a eensensus of the Couneil.
f
i City Attorney as Parliamentarian.
The Cify Attorney is designated as parliamentarian for the Couneill. Questions of
parliamentary rules may be referred to the City Attorney through the presiding offieer
for interpretation. The final ruling rests with the presiding officer.
Section 2.04.030 Agendas.
The City Administrator is responsible for the preparation of the Council agenda.
A. Agenda Guidelines for Regular Meetings. Topics will be added to a Council agenda based
on timeliness of the topic and with consideration of the number of items already scheduled
for the Council. Matters to be considered by the Council shall be placed on an agenda to be
prepared by the City Administrator from the following:
Ordinance No. Page 5 of 28
1. All items considered by the Council during Study Sessions, which require a subsequent
eial aefion from th Council vote.
2. All items which are required by law or policy to be presented to the Council.
3. All other items that the City Administrator, City Attorney or Mayor present to the
Council for action or information.
4. Items placed on the agenda in accordance with paragraphs B and C of this Section.
5. Requests of City Boards, Commissions, and Committees.
B. Agenda Additions by Councilors.
1. AVA Councilor may request that place an item prior to initial Gotmeil diseussion
placed on the Council's agenda that does not involve staff peliey reseal°' of a~°f'ing of
efdinanee provided-that preparing the matter for Council consideration would not
require more than two hours of staff time, including policy research and document
drafting. The Councilor shall notify the City Administrator of such an addition to the
agenda no later than noon of the Wednesday prior to the Council meeting. The City
Administrator shall determine the order of business of the item. The City Administrator may
request that the matter be deferred until a later meeting if the agenda of a particular meeting
is already lengthy. Council members will endeavor to have subjects and any materials they
wish considered submitted prior to finalization of the Council packet.
Q 2. A Councilor who
wants to add to the Council's agenda an item requiring more than two hours of
preparation by staff, including policy research and document drafting, should first raise
the issue propose the addition at a Regular Meeting under Other Business from Council
members or at a Study Session. m.- two hours of an), staff time being s
The Council should
consider iten3s such additions to the Council agenda in light of City priorities, including
adopted City Council Goals, and workload. The Council must agree to proceed with an issue
or ordinance before staff time is spent preparing the matter for Council action. The
Councilor may present information or a position paper or ask for a department report or
committee recommendation. Councilors who agree that staff time can be spent on a
particular item are not bound to support the issue when it comes before the Council for a
vote.
DC. During a meeting. Any topic may be added to an the agenda by a majority vote of the
Councilors present. Generally these items should be limited to items of timeliness or
emergencies. Advance notice of executive sessions, however, must be given as required
by State law.
ED. Postponing Agenda Items Before Consideration.
1. If a Councilor will be absent from an upcoming Regular Meeting, the Councilor may
request during a Regular Meeting that consideration of an agenda item be postponed to a
future Regular Meeting. The request will be honored if the majority of the Council votes
in favor of postponement and the matter is not time-sensitive.
Ordinance No. Page 6 of 28
2. If the request to postpone is made outside a regular Council meeting the Councilor
requesting the postponement shall submit a request to the Mayor or City Administrator in
writing or by email as early as possible. The request to postpone will be honored unless
the majority of the Council at the public meeting votes not to postpone the item or if the
matter is time-sensitive.
3. If time expires before the City Council can consider an item on the agenda including an
advertised item, the unaddressed item shall automatically be continued to the next
regularly sehed led meeting of the G-s-uneil scheduled Regular Meeting or Study
Session; re-advertisement shall not be required for such continued items. A note shall be
placed on the Agenda referencing this continuance rule: "Items on the Agenda not
considered due to time constraints are automatically continued to the next regularly
scheduled Gouneil meeting scheduled Regular Meeting or Study Session of the
Council. AMC 20.40.030.E."
FE. Council Packets.
Written materials, from Councilors, staff and citizens, which are related to agenda items to be
included in the Council packet, must be submitted to the City Administrator' s office no later
than 12:00 noon six days in advance of the Council meeting for which it is intended.
Materials submitted must include author's name and address.
GF. Study Session Agenda Preparation.
The City Administrator prepares the agenda for the Study Sessions from:
1. Items requested by the Mayor and members of the Council to be listed on the agenda.
2. Items deemed appropriate by the City Administrator.
3. Business from the Council pertaining to committee reports and other business.
4. Items requested by City Commissions, Committees or Boards.
G. Time Limits.
Items appearing on the Council Study Session agenda shall be assigned a time limit and the
Mayor shall hold discussion to within the time frame, unless the consensus of the Council is
to extend the time limit until an issue or item is discussed and resolved.
Section 2.04.040 Conduct of Meetings.
A. Quorum.
As provided in Article VIII, Section 4 of the City Charter, four Councilors, or the
Mayor and not less than three Councilors, constitute a quorum. If the Council
members present do not constitute a quorum, the members present may adjourn or a
majority of the members in attendance may direct staff to notify the absent members,
except those known to be unavoidably detained, that their presence is required to
enable the Council to proceed with business.
B. Attendance by Electronic Communication.
Except in the event of a suspension of rules pursuant to AMC 2.04.010E, members of
the City Council may not attend or vote at public meetings by means of telephone or
other electronic communication. The rules on meeting procedures and Council actions
Ordinance No. Page 7 of 28
shall otherwise remain in effect notwithstanding any such suspension of rules to allow
for attendance by electronic communication.
AC. Council Deliberation.
1. Presiding Officer. The Mayor, or in the Mayor's absence, the Chair of the Council, shall
{reside be the presiding officer at the meetings of the City Council. In the absence of these
officers at any meeting, the Councilors present shall appoint a Chair Pro-Tem to serve
temporarily as presiding officer and proceed with the meeting. The Chair, eNeept the
Mayor, may vote on all motions other than presiding officer may not vote on appeals
from decisions made while acting as presiding officer. The Chair of the Council or Chair
Pro-Tem may vote on all other motions, but the Mayor may vote only as provided in
City Charter Article 4, Section 3.
The presiding offieer shall be responsible for ensuring order and deeorum is
maintained. Comments and disagreements should be ad-d-r-essed to the topie at hand
and avoid negatiVe personal r-emar-lis. Attendees and spealker-s are required to striefly
abide by the direetions of the presiding offieer. Behavior or ftetions that nr--e
aunreasonably loud or disruptive ..hall be a e for removal from Coup dl meetings
Failure to abide by the presiding e "disruption of a
lawful assembly" as provided in ORS 166.025(i)(e). Disruptive behavior ineludes-making loud or disruptive noise or using loud
e
or disruptive language, and refusing to obey an order- of the presiding offieer. Signs are
not permitted and will he eonsi er-e 1 disc-u .tiye
The presiding offieer may set time limits on agenda items.
2. Deliberation Rules. The presiding officer shall ensure that each Council member has
the opportunity to speak on each issue before the Council. Councilors must ask the
presiding officer to be recognized. Unless otherwise permitted by the presiding officer,
no member may speak more than once on an issue and may do so only after every other
member has spoken on or declined to address the issue. Time limits may be set on
topics by the presiding officer or by a consensus of the Council. Council members, as
well as members of the public speaking on Council agenda items, shall confine their
remarks to the Question under deliberation, avoid redundancy, speak only for
themselves, and make no negative personal remarks or comments about the motives or
Ipersonal traits of others.
l*"J
3. Decorum. The presiding officer shall be responsible for ensuring order and decorum
is maintained. Except by permission of the presiding officer, a Councilor shall address
any remarks to the Council, and not to the audience. Any person's failure to abide by
the presiding officer's instructions constitutes "disruption of a lawful assembly" as
provided in ORS 166.025(l)(c) and may be cause for the presiding officer, or a majority
of the Councilors, to direct a city official to remove the person from a Council meeting.
Disruptive behavior includes engaging in violent, intimidating or distracting actions or
gestures, making loud or disruptive noise, using loud or disruptive profane language,
Ordinance No. Page 8 of 28
making negative personal remarks or comments about the motives or personal traits of
others, and refusing to obey an order of the presiding officer. Signs are not permitted
and will be considered disruptive. A direction or order of the presiding officer may be
challenged by a point of order as set forth in AMC 2.04.040C.4.b.(1).
4. Motions and Permissible Intervening Actions.
a. Councilor Actions During Debate. No motion or intervening action shall be
received or recognized by the presiding officer when a question is under debate,
except for the ten secondary motions and intervening actions listed below. The
disposition of any motion or action listed below must occur before consideration of
any other action lower on the list.
(1) Point of order, request for information, or objection to consideration of a
matter
(2) Motion to adjourn
(3) Withdrawal of a motion
(4) Motion to lay the matter on the table
(5) Motion to divide a motion under debate
(6) Motion to refer
(7) Motion to call for the previous question
(8) Motion to postpone to a certain time
(9) Motion to postpone indefinitely
(10) Motion to amend
b. Permissible Intervening Actions While a Speaker Has the Floor.
(1) Point of Order. Any member may interrupt a speaker who has the floor
to raise a point of order if meeting protocol appears to have been broken.
The point of order must be addressed to the presiding officer and may not be
addressed directly to the speaker. The speaker must immediately cease
speaking, and the issue identified in the point of order must be resolved
before business continues. No second is required, and no debate is allowed
on the point of order. The presiding officer may seek clarification on the
point of order from its maker, from the speaker who had the floor when it
was made, or from the Parliamentarian. Before proceeding further, the
presiding officer must sustain or overrule the point of order or submit it to
Council decision bV majority vote with no debate. A member who disagrees
with the presiding officer's decision to sustain or overrule a point of order
may move immediately following a ruling by the presiding officer to overturn
it. The motion to overturn a ruling on a point of order may not be debated,
and the presiding officer may not vote on it. Approval of the motion requires
a maiority of affirmative votes; the motion fails in the event of a tie vote.
(2) Request for Information. Any member may interrupt a speaker who has
the floor to seek permission to make a request for information from the
speaker or from staff or invitees with expertise on the subiect under
discussion. The request must be addressed to the presiding officer and may
not be addressed directly to the speaker. The speaker must discontinue
Ordinance No. Page 9 of 28
speaking until the request for information has been denied or satisfied. ;No
second is required, and no colloquy is allowed on the request for information,
except to the extent specifically set forth herein. The information sought
must concern either the subject under discussion or meeting procedure rules.
The presiding officer may ask the requestor for a statement of the nature of
the information sought. Neither a request for information nor a statement of
the nature of the information sought may contain statements of fact unless
they are necessary to make the request intelligible and must not contain
arguments. Upon inquiry from the presiding officer, the person who had the
floor when the request for information was made has sole discretion whether
to temporarily relinquish the floor to allow the requested information to be
provided. An objection to apparently superfluous requests for information
may be made through a point of order.
(3) Objection to Consideration of a Matter. A member who contends a
matter about to be discussed is irrelevant or for any other reason not
advisable to consider, may object to consideration of the matter. The
objection may be made before or after another member has been assigned
the floor, but only if debate has not vet begun and none of the motions in
AMC 2.04.040C.4.a. has been made. An objection to consideration of a
matter does not require a second and is not debatable or amendable.
Immediately after the objection is made, a vote on sustaining the obiection
must be taken. The objection fails unless at least two-thirds of the
Councilors present vote to sustain it.
c. Main Motion. A main motion is a proposed action that brings business before
the Council when no other motion is pending. The actions listed in AMC
2.04.040C.4.a. may be undertaken while the main motion is pending, and, if passed,
may affect the Council's consideration of the main motion. A main motion requires
a second, is amendable and debatable, and passes upon a majority vote in favor.
d. Adjourn. A successful motion to adiourn terminates a meeting and transfers the
remaining unfinished business to the agenda of the next Regular Meeting or Study
Session. It requires a second, is not debatable or amendable, and passes upon a
majority vote in favor.
e. Withdrawal. A motion may be withdrawn by the mover at any time before an
amendment is made to it or, if no amendment is made, before a vote is taken on it.
Withdrawal of a motion does not require a second, and debate of a proffered
withdrawal is not allowed.
f. Motion to Lay a Matter on the Table. A motion to lay a matter on the table is a
proposal to suspend consideration of a main motion and all pending related motions
until later in the same meeting in order to deal with another matter that has come
up unexpectedly and which must be dealt with before the pending motion can be
properly addressed. A motion to lay a matter on the table requires a second, is not
Ordinance No. _ Page 10 of 28
amendable or debatable, and passes upon a majority vote. Before the meeting
adjourns, a subsequent non-amendable, non-debatable motion may take the matter
from the table if seconded and passed by a majority vote in favor. If the meeting
adjourns without considering the tabled item, it will be continued to the next
Regular Meeting or Study Session in accordance with AMC 20.04.030E.
g. Division of a Motion. Any member may move to split a motion under
consideration into two or more independent motions that are taken up in sequence.
Each new motion is debated, possibly subjected to secondary motions, and voted
upon before taking up the next part. The mover may designate in the motion the
order in which the parts are considered. The motion requires a second, is
amendable, is not debatable, and passes upon a majority vote in favor.
h. Referral. A motion to refer is a proposal to refer a matter to a subcommittee or
another body for further study and possible recommendations to the Council. The
motion requires a second, is debatable and amendable, and passes upon a majority
vote in favor. Any proposed amendments to a main motion on the referred matter
that are pending at the time are also referred.
i. Previous Question. A motion to call the previous question is a proposal to end
debate on a pending motion. It precludes all amendments and debate on the
pending motion until it is decided. The motion to call the previous question is not
debatable or amendable and requires a second and a two-thirds vote in favor.
i. Postpone to a Certain Time. This motion is a proposal to postpone a matter to a
particular future meeting, requires a second, is debatable and amendable, and
passes upon a maiority vote in favor. One function of this motion can be to continue
consideration of an agenda item at a designated subsequent meeting.
k. Postpone indefinitely. A successful motion to postpone a matter indefinitely
prevents action on the matter for the rest of the meeting. It must be seconded, may
be debated, may not be amended, and passes upon a majority vote in favor. The
debate may address the substance of the main motion. A successful motion to
postpone a matter indefinitely does not preclude consideration of the matter at a
subsequent meeting if it is properly added to the respective agenda.
1. Amendment. Any main motion and any amendment to a main motion may be
amended to add or omit words. A proposed amendment must be germane, must be
seconded, and is debatable if the motion to be amended is debatable. The
amendment passes upon a majority vote in favor. Other amendments may also be
proposed, provided that they do not nullify the amendments already passed or
attempt to amend a motion to amend a motion to amend.
5. Restatement of Motion. Before a vote is taken on a motion, it must be restated by
the presiding officer or the City Recorder.
Ordinance No. Page 11 of 28
6. Voting.
a. When a question or motion is put to a vote by the presiding officer, each
Councilor present must vote for or against the motion unless a maiority of the
Council excuses that Councilor from so doing. Unless excused from voting, a
Councilor who is present and does not vote for or against the motion shall be
counted as having cast a negative vote. The Mayor can only vote in the case of a tie,
and then is required to vote unless excused from voting by a majority of the
Councilors present. If the Mayor fails to vote when required to do, the Mayor shall
be counted as having cast a vote against the motion.
b. A simple maiority of the quorum present determines the action on ordinance, or
resolution and on most motions. On questions required by City Charter, City
Ordinances, or applicable provisions of Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised to
be decided by a two-thirds vote of the Council, approval requires an affirmative
vote of at least four Councilors.
7.. Reconsideration. A member who voted in favor of any Council action may move for
reconsideration before adiournment of the meeting at which the action was approved or
at the next Regular Meeting, unless the item already has been approved or vetoed by
the Mayor pursuant to City Charter Article 4, Section 3. The motion must be seconded,
is debatable if the action under reconsideration is debatable, is not amendable, and
passes upon a majority vote in favor. Any member may second a motion for
reconsideration. A motion to reconsider a Council action may be made only once. A
vetoed item may not be the subject of a motion for reconsideration.
Section 2.04.050 Order of Business at Regular Meetings.
The Mayor's State of the City address shall occur at a Regular Meeting in January of each year.
The Mayor or presiding officer may change the order of business on the agenda. The required
order- of business has been established by o-dinanee as follows-, The usual order of business
will be as follows:
A. Roll Call.
B. Approval of minutes of the previous meeting. If there are no corrections or objections to the
minutes, they shall be considered approved; otherwise, to be approved by vote. The minutes
as approved shall be signed by the Mayor and City Recorder.
C. Special presentations, proclamations and awards. This item on the agenda is used to
acknowledge special recognition and awards given to the City or for the Mayor to announce
proclamations, which serve to encourage and educate the community. Proclamations shall be
made and placed on the agenda at the discretion of the Mayor. Requests for recognition
under this agenda item should be submitted in writing to the Mayor.
D. Public Forum.
Ordinance No. Page 12 of 28
1. Public forum is to precede the consent agenda unless public forum is moved to later
in the agenda of a particular meeting by decision of the Mayor or presiding officer
or by temporary suspension of the rules pursuant to Section 2.040.010E.
2. Members of the public may speak during public forum about any topic not on the
agenda for the same meeting. The agenda for public forum is 15 minutes, unless a
maiority of the Council votes to extend the time. On behalf of the City, any
Councilor may request that any matter discussed during public forum be placed on
a future Council agenda.
3. Public forum is not to be used to provide or gather additional testimony or
information on a quasi-judicial matter. Public testimony will not be accepted on a
matter subject to a public hearing where the record has been closed if the matter is
still pending.
4. Persons wishing to speak during public forum are to submit a "speaker request
form" prior to the commencement of the public forum and deliver the form to the
City Recorder. The Mayor or presiding officer is to inform the audience on
requirements for submission of the form. When possible and feasible, preference
will be given the individuals who reside within the city limits of Ashland.' Persons
who do not reside in the City may be placed at the end of the list of those wishing to
speak at public forum.
BE. Consent agenda. Routine business items may be listed by the City Administrator under this
item, which shall be acted upon in its entirety, except that the Mayor or any member of the
Council may request that any item be moved to the regular agenda under the appropriate
section of business.
EF.Public Hearings
1. Public hearings shall conclude at 9:00 p.m. and be continued to a future date to be set by
the Council, unless the Council, by a two-thirds vote of those present, extends the hearing(s)
for one half hour until 9:30 p.m up to 9:45 p.m., at which time the Council shall set a date
for continuance and shall proceed with the balance of the agenda.
2. Not more than two land-use appeal hearings shall be scheduled for any Regular Meeting
of the Council. The City Administrator may, in the administrator's discretion, schedule
additional legislative hearings depending on the anticipated length of the Council
meeting.
3. Persons wishing to speak at public hearings are to submit a "speaker request form" prior
to the commencement of the hearing and deliver the form to the City Recorder. The
Mayor or presiding officer is to inform the audience of this requirement to submit the
form prior to the commencement of the hearing. No testimony will be accepted on public
hearings that have been closed.
R. Ptiblie L'' rdm
F. -mai-visan
Ordinance No. Page 13 of 28
ineluded on the agenda. The agenda for publie forum is 15 minutes, unless a majority
°f th° ^,.....,.:1 votes to extend the time Per-sons • ishing to speak ° to °..1....:t a
44speikker- request form" prior- to the eemmeneement of the forum and- dA01"pr- thp, for-M
to the Cit3, Reeer-der. The Mayer or presiding effieer is to inform the audienee on
requirements for- submission of the form.
Members of the publie may speak about on), topic during the publie forum, unless the
a....... v... a v. urv I,u va... u
tepie indeed on the a nda for the same eet:.... if a member of the pUblie Wishes to
speak on an agenda item or- publie hear-ing item they may do so at the time set aside
these topies.
P--hi*p for-mm *-q not to be used to provide or gather additional testimony or infor-mation
9n~R-quasi -jildle}al-RHkttei' .ivric-se°1siitvrr,y-will r-'itvr-oc aeccpse
when thp. rp.P.Ar-d has been elased if the matter- is still pending.
The Mayor will set time limits for people who ask to speak during publie forum. in
general the time limits should be set to enable all people who wish to eomplete their
testimony. Time limits shall not be so short as to not allow speakers to address their
...1'.. .
the Ashland eity limits. Per-sons who do not reside in the Cits, mav be pineed tit the en
of the 14st of those wishine to spealk at vublie forum.
G. Public Testimony on Agenda Items.
1. Members of the public who wish to speak on an agenda item that is not the subject
of a public hearing at the same meeting (See Section F. above regarding public
hearing testimony) may do so at the time set aside for that agenda item. If a
member of the public or a Council member has requested time to speak on a
consent agenda item, the presiding officer shall make time for a brief presentation
by the requestor prior to the Council's vote on the consent agenda.
2. Persons wishing to speak on an agenda item are to submit a "speaker request form"
prior to Council consideration of the agenda item and deliver the form to the City
Recorder. The Mayor or presiding officer is to inform the audience on requirements
for submission of the form.
3. The presiding officer will set time limits for people who ask to speak on agenda
items._ In general the time limits should be set to enable all people who wish to
present testimony. Time limits shall not be so short as to not allow speakers to
address their topics.
GH. Unfinished business.
HI. New business.
M. Ordinances, resolutions and contracts.
Ordinance No. Page 14 of 28
al. Every ordinance is to be enacted in accordance with Article X of the City Charter.
Copies of the ordinance shall be e-mailed to Council members and the Mayor at least
fourteen days prior to the meeting. Council members may review the ordinance and
forward suggestions for changes to the City Attorney for consideration. Minor changes
may be incorporated, substantive changes will be considered at the time of first reading.
Any substantive changes to the ordinance must be verbally noted at first reading.
Council members must submit comments to the City Attorney no later than 12:00 noon
on the Wednesday prior to Council meeting.
Titles of lengthy ordinances wil ° Lengthy ordinances may be read by title only at
Council meetings if the Ordinance title has been published in the local paper at least
seven days in advance of the Council meeting thus allowing the ordinanee to be .-ead
b2. Resolutions may be placed on the consent agenda and voted upon. Resolutions do not
require a roll-call vote.
e3. The voting on all ordinances may be by roll-call vote and recorded in the minutes
showing those numbers voting for and those voting against.
dK. Other business from Council members.
Section 2.04.060 Identification of Fiscal Impact of Policy Decisions.
A. When the City Council adopts a program or policy, it shall indicate how it expects that
program or policy will be funded; e.g., which existing taxes or fees the Council expects to
increase' and by'how much, or which current City programs or department expenditures the
Council expects to reduce to fund the new program or policy. However, if the Council
cannot reasonably identify a potential funding source, it shall so indicate.
B. As used in this Section the tern "program or policy with significant revenue implications"
includes an ordinance or a resolution in which implementation may entail expenditures in
any budget year in excess of one and one-half percent (1.5%) of the City's annual General
Fund budget, and which may require an increase to existing taxes or fees or an imposition of
new taxes or fees.
C. The provisions of this Section shall not apply to extraordinary expenditures in situations of,
or necessitated by, public emergencies.
Seetion 2.04.070 Rights of Citizens
Citizens . speak on any item not an two agenda during ..ublie f ^ffi Any eitizen has the right
to pfesent , ;tee to the r;t y Goune:' ,1...;.,g publ:^ c On behalf of the r;t,. r ;l r
Ordinance No. Page 15 of 28
Section 2.04.080 Conduct with City Employees.
The City Council will work with City staff in a spirit of teamwork and mutual cooperation.
A. Councilors may make inquiries of staff to increase their understanding of an issue or action.
Councilors should limit requests for information from staff to questions that may be
answered with minimal research. Requests that require significant staff time or resources
(two hours or more) should be directed to the City Administrator and must be approved by
the Mayor, City Administrator, City Attorney or by a majority vote of the City Council.
B. Written information given by the Mayor, Councilors, City Administrator, City Attorney, or
City Staff, including materials requested by individual Councilors and the Mayor, generally
will be distributed to all Councilors with a notation indicating who has requested that the
information be provided.
C. Individual Councilors should respect the separation between policy-making and
administration. They Councilors shall not pressure or direct City employees in a way that
could contravene the will of the Council as a whole or limits the options of the council. ,hey
Councilors must not interfere with work performance, undermine the authority of
supervisors, or prevent the full eCouncil from having access to relevant information.
Notwithstanding this paragraph, nothing shall hamper the Council's ability to evaluate the
performance of the City Administrator or the City Attorney.
D. The Mayor and council members should strive not to criticize any person in a public meeting
or in public electronic mail messages. The same expectation applies to City staff in the
exercise of their official duties. Discussions and disagreements should focus on the content
of the topic at hand. Nothing should limit a Councilor or staff person' s right to report
wrongdoing.
E. Councilors with a concern about the performance of a particular staff person should express
that concern to the Mayor, City Administrator, City Attorney.
Section 2.04.090 Commissions and Boards.
A. Establishing Commissions and Boards.
Commissions and boards originate from different sources, including Oregon State Statute, City
Charter and Municipal Code; others are established by direction of the Mayor or the City
Council. Establishment and description of the Recreation Commission, which is not an
appointed commission, is described in City Charter Article XXII and in AMC 2.16.
Advisory Commissions and Boards Appointed advisory commissions and boards and other
advisory bodies which are permanent {Regular} shall be eedified described in other sections
of AMC Chapter 2 and designated as "Regular" boards, commissions, or advisory bodies. These
shall ineludi: g butnot include but not be limited to Forest Lands Commission, Planning
Commission, Transportation Commission, Planning Hearings Board, Publie Recreatoof
Commission, Public Arts Commission, Conservation Commission, Ashland Airport
Commission, Housing and Human Services Commission, Historic Commission, Tree
Commission, and the Municipal Audit Commission. AMC 2.10 contains code eemmen
Ordinance No. Page 16 of 28
applicable to all Appointed Commissions and Boa Regular and ad hoc commissions,
boards, task forces and other advisory bodies.
B. Ad-hoc Committees and Tasli Forees.
The Mayor shall have the authority, with the consent of the Council, to form ad-hoc committees
or task forces to deal with specific tasks within specific time frames. Such ad hoc committees or
t°°'r fo ees shall abide by uniform rules and procedures set forth in AMC 2.10 and such other
,z.~
rules as prescribed by the order establishing such ad hoc entities. Committees or :..s1k forees
shall make recommendations by way of a formal report to the City Council. The Mayor or City
Administrator may refer matters to the appropriate ad hoc committee or task ree. The Mayor
with the consent of the Council shall appoint the membership of such committees o-~ t.sli yes.
Members of Regular Boards and Commissions may be appointed to ad hoc committees and flask
€erees. The City Administrator shall by order establish the ad hoc body's scope of the work and
rules of procedure, if necessary. The Council has the authority to follow the recommendations,
change the recommendations, take no action, remand the matter back to the ad hoc body or take
any other action it sees fit. The Council by majority vote may remove a member of an ad hoc
committee or `a ee at any time, with or without cause. The City Council by majority vote
may amend or dissolve an ad hoc committee or- task foree.
C. Regular Commission and Board Membership Appointments.
Except for the Municipal Audit Commission (AMC 2.11) all Regular advisory committees and
boards not required by state law to be appointed by the City Council shall be appointed by the
Mayor with the consent of the Council. The Mayor may request assistance or recommendations
from Councilors in making appointments. In the Mayor's absence, any necessary appointment
may be made by the presiding officer with the consent of the Council. When necessary, the
Mayor shall stagger the initial expiration of terms of appointees, such as in the case of a new
commission or board. The Mayor shall not appoint, nor shall the Council consent to the
appointment of a person to more than two (2) regular board or commission positions at a time.
This rule shall not apply to the Planning Hearing Board. Because broad citizen participation is
encouraged, the Mayor and Council shall give due consideration to appointment of new qualified
members before re-appointing a person to more than three (3) two (2) full terms on any single
regular board or commission.
D. Mayor Membership on Ashland Budget Committee.
For the purpose of local budget law, the Mayor is a member of the governing body of the City of
Ashland. and shall be a voting member of the budget committee.
E. Student Membership on Regular Commissions. and Boards.
The Mayor with the consent of the City Council may add to the membership of any city
commission or board up to two positions for student liaisons. The student liaisons shall be non-
voting ex officio members of their respective commissions or boards. Once the liaison positions
have been added, the liaison from the high school shall be a high school student chosen by the
Ashland High School Leadership class and the liaison from the university shall be a university
student chosen by the Associated Students of Southern Oregon University Student Senate.
Student Liaisons need not be appointed to every advisory commission or board.
F. Regular Membership Removal Process.
Ordinance No. Page 17 of 28
The City Council, with or without cause, may by majority vote of the City Council at a Regular
Meeting, remove any regular commission or board member prior to the expiration of the term of
the appointment. Written notice of removal to the affected member shall be provided. Removal
shall be handled with respect and courtesy. If a member resigns or is removed, the Mayor shall
appoint a replacement for the remainder of the term in accordance with paragraph C. above.
Notwithstanding the above procedure, removal of a Planning Commissioner shall be governed
by the procedures in ORS 227.030 and removal of any member of the Recreation
Commission or the Planning Commission is not subject to this section. Hearings under ORS
227.030 are hereby delegated by the governing body to the City Administrator or Hearings
Officer in accordance with the AMC 2.30, the Uniform Administrative Appeals Ordinance.
G. Changing or Dissolving a Regular Commission, Committee or Board.
After the any Regular commission, eo.: mittee o; board or other advisory body has been
formed and codified, any change or dissolution requires an ordinance amending the Municipal
Code.
Section 2.04.100 Council Liaisons to City Advisory Boards and Commissions.
A. Role and Responsibilities of Council Liaisons.
1. The primary role of a Council lLiaison is to facilitate communication between the City
advisory body and the Council. A Council Liaison is an ex officio non-voting member of
the advisory body, not a regular voting member and shall not serve as Chair, unless the
Ashland Municipal Code specifically requires the Liaison to serve as Chair or in a voting
capacity. Notwithstanding the above, the Council Liaison to the Planning Commission
shall be considered a non-member Liaison and not an ex-officio member as regards
quasi-judicial matters.
2. City Councilors serve as liaisons to City eommissions and boards, as well as ad hoe
committees and task for-ees the City's Regular and ad hoc advisory bodies and are
expected to represent the full City Council objectively and accurately in interacting with
the such entities.
3. City Councilors may attend meetings of City Advisory Beards and Co--missions and-
other
the City's Regular and ad hoe advisory bodies as citizens of
Ashland. When attending as a citizen, Council members must identify their comments as
personal views or opinions not a representation of City Council policy.
B. Attendance.
Liaisons should attend all rRegular meetings of the Commissions and BoaFds, OF Ad hoe
Committees or Task Forces Regular and ad hoc advisory bodies to which they have been
assigned as time permits and should make special efforts to attend meetings in response
to specific requests to participate in discussions on topics the Council may need to be
aware of or provide input on. attending, in the event a liaison has diffieulty
the liaison
should find an alternate to attend or review the video or- other reeord of the proeeeding.
In- the e.ruu• of on evu uu uunr., oeuev uuug eonfliet, the Liaison should ask the Mayor to be
reassigned. Liaisons shall not attend quasi-judicial proceedings when the final appeal or
final decision is or could come before the City Council.
C. Deliberations.
The City Council values diversity of opinion. A significant role of an advisory body is to
Ordinance No. _ Page 18 of 28
represent many points of view in the community and to provide the Council with advice
based on a full spectrum of concerns and perspectives. Accordingly, Council liaisons to City
advisory bodies should not attempt to direct debate, lobby, or otherwise influence the
direction or decisions of any advisory body bodies to which he or she has they have been
assigned. Council liaisons are encouraged to field and answer questions as appropriate for an
ex-officio member of the advisory body. Undue influence over the decisions of any City
advisory body shall be grounds for removal of a Liaison assignment under paragraph H
below.
D. Respect for Presiding Officer.
City Councilors attending advisory body meetings as liaisons shall accord the same respect
toward the Chair and other members as they do towards the Mayor, Presiding officer or each
other.
E. Council Information.
City Councilors will inform the advisory bodies to which they have been appointed liaison of
about Council agenda items and Council decisions that may be of interest to the advisory
body. Liaisons shall also encourage advisory board members to attend Council meetings to
keep abreast of Council action, policy matters and the activities of the eity Cam. To
fae lituate the above, and uv and notwithstanding a othe.. provision of the Cod.., the Chair of
aua.uuaa. the uvar. a.
body, an adviso", body shall per-iodienfly pinee on the Agenda for- the advisor),
an item
labeled "Report of Couneil LinisoWL.
F. Rele of Liaison as Rega ds Advice on Filling Vacancies.
The Council ILiaison for each advisory body, together with the advisory body chair and
assigned staff liaison will make recommendations to the Mayor for appointment of citizens to
fill vacancies on their respective advisory bodies.
G. RenortinE to the Couneil.
important aetlWties-of eaeh advi1S91~ nedFio whie hi ey have been as trcd rt
advisoiw bodv should be invited to eive a short annual twesentation t
Couneiel. Liaiso-s mov seek nssis-tonee from the re'evant staff liaison
14G. Liaison Appointment Process and Term.
The Mayor will appoint a Councilors to act as a Council 1Liaisons to each and every
Regular advisory commission or board. Councilors interested in a particular subject area
should inform the Mayor of their interest and the Mayor should take the expression of
interest and/or a Councilor's preference into account when making appointment decisions.
Liaison appointments shall be for a term of one year unless otherwise expressly stated.
Appointments are generally made on an annual basis in January and the Mayor shall make an
effort to rotate liaison assignments if there is more than one Councilor expressing a
preference for an specific appointment.
1H.Removal from a Liaison Assignment.
The Mayor or a Councilor may be removed for any reason from a specific liaison position or
assignment upon two-thirds vote of the entire Council.
Ordinance No. Page 19 of 28
Section 2.04.110 Council Representatives to State, Regional, Community and other
External Organizations.
A. Role and Responsibilities of Council Representatives.
1. City Councilors may be appointed, either by the City or by another entity, to serve as the
City of Ashland's representative Representative to State, Regional, and Community
organizations. In all cases, the City's representative Representatives will follow the
bylaws and guidelines for service of the organization to which they have been appointed.
2. The purposes of serving as an official Representative to State, Regional, Community, and
other external organizations are to ensure effective working relationships with other
agencies and organizations, ensure that Ashland uses all possible avenues to achieve
community goals; achieve City Council goals both within the community and in the
Rogue Valley; protect the home rule authority of the City of Ashland to make decisions
that are best for the community; ensure that key City revenue streams are protected; and
secure federal and state funds for projects that benefit the City of Ashland and other
community institutions.
3. City Getinselefs afe expeeted te fepfesent the full Gity Ceuneil in their work a-s
Representatives. In their work as City Representatives, City Councilors are expected
to represent the full City Council accurately and obiectively and to depict the
position of other Councilors accurately and obiectively. If the Council has an
approved position on a matter under discussion, the Representative shall articulate
and, if called upon, vote in favor of that position. If the City Representative is asked
to take an official position on an issue that affects the City of Ashland and the City'
s official position is unknown or unclear, the City Representative should request
that the item be placed on a City Council agenda in accordance with AMC 2.04.030
for full City Council action. If the Council has not approved an official position and
has not had the opportunity to confer with the City Representative on a matter
under deliberation in the subject external organization, the Representative shall
make a_ good-faith effort to reflect what the Representative believes the full
Council's position would be if the Council were to consider the matter, regardless of
the Representative's personal views, and shall report to the Council on the matter
discussed in the external organization at the next feasible opportunity thereafter.
Representing a position other than the o ffieial position of the City of Ashland
Conduct contrary to the guidelines in this subsection is grounds for removal under
paragraph E.
4. City Representatives serving as voting members on another organization's Board of
Directors (such as the Rogue Valley Council of Governments) should work in the best
interest of that organization when not in eonfli with unless such action would not be
in the best interest of the City of Ashland. When presented with a eenflief th ~ effiber
5.
on an issue that affeets the City of Ashland and the City' s efli
uukua,„u a,. uua.rv the a.aaJ Councilor- should request that the item 1.....1..eed
Ordinance No. Page 20 of 28
City Council agenda in accordance with AMC 2 - 04.030 for- full City Couneil fletion.
If the City Representative has an actual or potential personal conflict of interest, as
defined in Oregon Ethics Law, the Representative must fully comply with the
applicable requirements of Oregon Ethics Law and City ethics ordinances.
6. City Council members may attend meetings of state, regional, and community
organizations as citizens of Ashland. When attending as a citizen, Council members must
identify their comments as personal views or opinions not a representation of City
Council policy.
B. Attendance.
Representatives should attend all regular meetings of the organizations to which they have
assigned. In the event a Councilor has difficulty attending, the Representative should find an
alternate to attend on the City's behalf. In the event of a continuing scheduling conflict, the
City Representative should ask the Mayor to be reassigned.
C. Reporting to the Council.
Council Representatives shall periodically report to the entire Council on significant and
important decisions activities of each state, regional, and community organizations to which
they have been assigned. Council members may also request that representatives of these
organizations may be invited to give a short annual presentation to the Council.
D. City Representative Appointment Process and Term.
1. The Mayor will appoint a Councilor to represent the City to state, regional, and
community organizations to which the City is entitled to an official delegate. The City
Council shall confirm these appointments.
2. The Mayor and City Councilors may also be invited by external organizations to
represent either the City of Ashland or "Cities" in general. In these cases, the Mayor or
Councilor that has been asked to serve will inform the City Council in a Regular Meeting
of the assignment and request that the City Council confirm the appointment.
3. Councilors interested in a particular subject area should inform the Mayor of their interest
and the Mayor should take the expression of interest and/or a Councilor's preference into
account when making appointment decisions. City Representative appointments shall be
for a term of one year unless otherwise expressly stated. Appointments are generally
made on an annual basis in January and the Mayor shall make an effort to rotate liaison
assignments if there is more than one Councilor expressing a preference for an specific
appointment.
E. Removal from a Representative Assignment.
The Mayor or a Councilor may be removed for any reason from a specific representative
position or assignment upon two-thirds vote of the entire Council.
Section 2.04.120 Councilor Expenses.
Ordinance No. Page 21 of 28
A-. The City will reimburse a Councilor or the Mayor for expenses that are directly related to
City business in accordance with the City's reimbursement policy. Councilors are required to
submit all statements as required by ORS 244.
Section 2.10.005 Purpose.
Advisory commissions and boards (advisory bodies) require uniform rules, policies and
operating procedures to assure maximum productivity and fairness for members and the public.
Except where otherwise provided in this Code, the following policies and procedures govern all
the City's commissions and boards, as well as ad hoe entities. Nothing herein removes the
requirement for compliance with more specific regulations and guidelines set forth by state
statute, administrative rule, ordinance, or resolution specific to the advisory body. These rules
do not apply to the elected Parks and Recreation Commission.
Section 2.10.020 Terms, Term Limits and Vacancies.
All successors to original members of an advisory commission 'or board, shall have a three (3)
year term, except as otherwise provided in the appointment order and except for certain
members of the Municipal Audit Commission, as provided in AMC 2.11.015.
Notwithstanding the three year limitation, Planning Commissioners shall serve serve for terms
of four (4) years with terms expiring on April 30 of the fourth year, and Budget Committee
members not on City Council shall serve for terms of four (4) years terms, with terms
expiring on June 30 the fourth year. All other regular terms shall commence with
appointment and shall expire on April 30 of the third year, unless otherwise provided in the
appointment order. The appointing authority may stagger terms in the original appointment
order as necessary. Members may serve three (3) two 2 terms on any single commission or
board, after which time the Mayor and Council will give due consideration to other qualified
candidates before making a reappointment. Any vacancy shall be filled by appointment by the
Mayor, with confirmation by the City Council, for any unexpired portion of the term as provided
in AMC 2.04.090C.
Section 2.10.025 Meetings and Attendance.
A. Unless otherwise provided by law, the number of meetings related to business needs of an
advisory commission, or boards may be set by the advisory body.
B. All members are expected to attend all Fegular-ly seheduled meetings, stud), sessions and
special meetings, when applienble If a membeff ivill be absent from a meeting, the
member must notif~, the ehnir- or- the staff liaison at least tWo hours prior- to the Meeting.
Any member who has two or more unexeused absenees in a six month period ji.e.
vneant. Further- any member not attending a minimum of two thirds (2/3) of all
seheduled meetings (inelusive of study sessions and speeial meetings) shall
seonsider-ed aetive and the position vaeant.The Planning Commission and Budget
Committee shall set their own meeting attendance requirements. All members of other
Regular or ad hoc advisory bodies ar-e expeeted- to must attend all at least seventy-five
percent (75%) of the full advisory body's reguhir-ly scheduled noticed meetings, study
sessions and special meetings in each full year of their tenure. A person removed from
the advisory body for non-compliance with attendance requirements subsequently may
Ordinance No. Page 22 of 28
be appointed to fill the vacancy on the advisory body by means of the normal
appointment process of that advisory body.
C. A member should provide at least 48-hour notice to both the chair of the advisory body
and the staff liaison regarding any planned absence from a scheduled meeting of the
advisory body. In the event an unexpected emergency will cause a member to be absent
from the meeting, the member must, if possible, notify the chair or the staff liaison
within a reasonable time in advance of the meeting.
D. Generally, advisory bodies may not allow alternates to represent or stand in for a
member at a meeting. Notwithstanding the foregoing preclusion of alternates, on
Regular and ad hoc advisory bodies with some members who are appointed by an
entity other than the Mayor and City Council and who serve as a representative of the
appointing entity, an alternate may participate and vote for the named member by
proxy at any meeting of the advisory body. Such participation by the alternate will be
deemed to be attendance by the named member. Individuals directly appointed by the
Mayor and approved by the Council may not be represented by alternates.
E. Each advisory body should review member Aattendance shall be reviewed by the
j'o'ined meetings j, and ul with
eommission er- board during the regularly a report sent to and report to the City Recorder approximately every six months. Cijy
Recorder will advise the Mayor and City Council advising of on the need for appointments
or re-appointments, if necessary.
Section 2.10.040 Quorum and Effect of Lack Thereof
Unless otherwise or-dainedi A meeting quorum shall consist of more than one-half of the total
number of authorized members of the body, including any vacant positions. Non-voting ex
officio members, staff and liaisons do not count toward the quorum. " ma ori4- of the quorum
is neeessary to adopt an), motion. Members need not be physically present at a meeting if
another means of attendance (e.g. telephonic, internet etc.) has been established by the
membership and public meetings law requirements are met. At least a majority of the quorum
is necessary to adopt any motion; some motions require the affirmative vote of at least two-
thirds of the members present. If the members in attendance do not constitute a quorum,
staff or invitees may make informational presentations provided (1) Notes describing the
presentations and discussions are made and posted on the City website; (2) no motion,
debate or vote or any other official business other than adjournment takes place; and M all
{natters topjcs advertised shall are automatically he eentinued-te added to the agenda for the
next regularly scheduled meeting.
Section 2.10.050 Election of Officers, Secretary, and Subcommittees.
At its first meeting following the appointment or reappointment of members each year, of
the year the advisory commission or board shall elect a chair and a vice-chair who shall hold
office at the pleasure of the advisory body. Neither the chair nor vice-chair shall serve as an
officer for more than two three consecutive annual terms. Without the need for an
appointment, the head of the City Department staffing the commission, committee or board shall
be the Secretary and shall be responsible for keeping an accurate record of all proceedings. The
Ordinance No. Page 23 of 28
Department head may delegate such tasks to a staff liaison. Subcommittees may be formed for
the purpose of gathering information and forming a recommendation to be brought forward to
the full advisory body. provided however, °Only the full body can make recommendations to
the City Council. Subcommittees must comply fully with the requirements of Oregon Public
Meetings law.
Section 2.10.060 Agendas and Minutes.
The chair or staff liaison will be responsible for timely preparation and posting in advance the
agendas of all meetings of advisory commissions and boards on the City's website. A member
or staff liaison will be responsible for taking minutes and getting them be posted on the eCity's
website, generally within a few days after the meetings. Members are encouraged to access
those documents from the web site. Staff will email or mail documents to members upon
request. If the advisory body has a current Council Liaison, the Liaison shall periodically
should be given the opportunity to report to the commission or board periodically.
Section 2.10.065.- Goals.
Advisory commissions and boards are encouraged to establish annual goals and action items that
reflect the body's charge as stated in the specific commission ordinance. Advisory bodies are
expected to suggest, support and advance Council goals and are encouraged to look for ways
within their own unique responsibilities to do so.
Section 2.10.070 Rules and Regulations.
The advisory commission or board may make such rules and regulations as are necessary for its
governance, including the conduct of meetings, when not inconsistent with Ashland City
Charter, Ashland Municipal Code or Oregon law. These rules may be less formal than the
meeting procedure rules in AMC 2.04.40 Roberts Rules of Orde . In the event of conflicts
that cannot be resolved less formally, Roberts Rules of Or-de AMC 2.04.040 shall be used as
the standard for meeting rules and procedures. Failure to strictly fellow comply with Roberts
Rules of Order the rules on meeting procedure in AMC 2.04.040 shall not be cause to void or
otherwise disturb a decision or action. The body will strive to be clear in its proceedings.
Seeflon 2 .10.085 Deliberations.
It is the duty of the chair or presiding o ffi"^_ to ensure that eneh member has th
opportunity tospeak. A.i.....1 ere speak ,...1., for- 41..........1....s and shall be open, direet and
eandid. Members shall strive to deliberate to a deeision and shall rely upon the chair- to
keep the diseussion moving. No member shall speak more than onee until eve", member
right to dos Nomember- ..hall speak
...rvvoaus to ol.euk m.uu have ol.vueu m ,r ua,ev .ueaa
more than tA,iee on the same inotionwithout leai,e of the presiding offieer.
Section 2.10.105 Reports.
A. Each 4advisory eommissions and boards body shall submit copies of its meeting minutes
to the City Recorder for presentation to the eCity eCouncil . and shnil prepare and
Ordinance No. Page 24 of 28
submit sueh reports as from tinte to time may be requested by the Mayor and City
Conned.
B. The chair of each advisory body is expected to give at least one report to the City
Council each year on the advisory body's accomplishments, work in progress, and
planned activities. In addition, the Mayor or City Council may from time to time ask
chairs for information and recommendations on matters within the scope of their
advisory bodies. Chairs' reports to the Council are to be objective and representative
of the majority views of the memberships of their advisory bodies.
C. Council Liaisons may report to the entire Council on significant and important
activities of any advisory body to which they have been assigned.
D. Staff Liaisons to the advisory bodies may assist in preparing such reports.
E. Unless otherwise expressly provided in the Ashland Municipal Code or State Law, all reports
or recommendations of City advisory bodies committee shall be considered advisory in
nature and shall not be binding on the mMayor or eCity eCouncil.
Section 2.10.110 Lobbying and Representing the City
authorized by the full membership at a duly advertised meeting. Unless speeifieall), direeted-107-
the Gity Council to state the eity's official position on federal, state or e0unty legislative matters,
advisei%y eemmissions and boards. An individual member is free to voice a positien on an), issue
as leng as it is made eleaf tha4 !he spe&ef is net speaking as a fepfeselitati ffieffiber of an adA
Members of City advisory bodies shall]not5state
the position of the City or of a City advisory body at meetings or in correspondence with
federal, state, regional, local or community organizations or elected bodies unless
specifically authorized to do so by the City Council and by the advisory body at:diily
advertised meetings. An individual advisory body member is free to express oerso alviews
owany issue in any forum as long as the individual makes clear that he or she is not
speaking as a member of the advisory body and that the views expressed are personal-and
do not represent the position of the City or of the City advisory body. Advisory body
members are prohibited from engaging in political activity in accordance with ORS 260.432.
Section 2.11.015 Modified Terms and Qualifications [Municipal Audit Commission]
A. Terms. Notwithstanding any other provision of the Ashland Municipal Code, the terms of
the Mayor or Council or, City Recorder and Liaison Budget Committee member shall be for
one year, each expiring on April 30 December 31, each-of-year. All other terms shall be as
provided in AMC 2.10.020.
Section 2.16.010 Puublie Recreation Commission - Purpose of Chapter.
The purpose of this chapter is to implement Article XXII of the Ashland City Charter which
provides for a Recreation Commission.
Ordinance No. Page 25 of 28
Section 2.16.020 Publie Recreation Commission - Organization.
The Recreation Commission shall meet and organize itself by selecting one or more of its
members as Chair and such other officers as they deem necessary. The Commission has power
to adopt By-Laws, rules and regulations for the proper conduct of public recreation in the City.
Section 2.16.030 Publie Recreation Commission - Duties.
The Public Recreation Commission shall coordinate, as far as possible, the recreational facilities
now within the City, or hereafter to be constructed or created, with the object and purpose of
promulgating a central plan in which all public boards and agencies, as well as private
organizations, may participate. The Commission shall have the power to conduct any form of
recreation or cultural activity will employ the leisure time of the people of Ashland and vicinity
in a constructive and wholesome manner.
Section 2.16.040 Public Recreation Commission -Recreation Director.
The Public Recreation Commission has the power to appoint or designate some individual to act
as recreation director who is trained and properly qualified for the work and such other personnel
as the Commission deems proper. The Public Recreation Commission shall, at the proper time
annually, submit a budget estimate to the Mayor and City Council for their approval. The
Commission may also solicit or receive any gifts or bequests money or other personal property,
or any donation to be applied, principal or income, for either temporary or permanent use for
playgrounds or other recreational purposes.
Section 2.16.060 Public Recreation Commission -Reports.
The Publie Recreation Commission shall make full and complete monthly and annual reports to
the Mayor and City Council and such other reports as from time to time may be requested of
them by the Mayor and City Council.
Section 2.18.10 Established Membership (Conservation Commission).
The Conservation Commission is established and shall consist of nine (9) voting members
including one representative of the solid waste franchisee for the city; and one representative
from Southern Oregon University; and one representative from the Ashland School District and
six (6) other voting members. At least five (5) of the other members shall reside within the city.
The commission shall also consist of certain non-voting ex officio members, including the mayor
or one council member serving as council liaison, the Department of Community Development
Director and the Electric Utility Director, the Director of Public Works, the Building Official and
City Administrator. The Eleet ie Utility Director- shall sen,e as the prifflan, staff Liaison a
Seer,......., of the Commission. The primary staff liaison shall be appointed by the City
Administrator and shall serve as Secretary of the Commission. Voting members shall be
appointed by the Mayor with confirmation by the City Council.
Section 2.28.100 Electric Utilities Department - Functions.
The functions of the Electric Utilities Department are the construction, operation, and
maintenance of the electric distribution system; the installation of all new lines, services and
meters; the maintenance of the hydro-generation plant; the preparation and submission of
proposed work programs including estimates of cost; and the installation, maintenance and
operation of all electrical equipment and facilities of the City, and the implementation e
Ordinance No. _ Page 26 of 28
programs for energy eonservation required by state or- federal law, or as approved by t
City Couneil.
Section 2.28.130 Finance Department - Functions.
The functions of the Finance Department are the administration and collection of various City
taxes, licenses, and permits and the administration of ordinances and state laws applicable
thereto; the receipt and safekeeping of all City money; preparation and control of the City
budget; procurement of materials, supplies, equipment and services for all departments, except
the Parks and Recreation Commission; receipt, storage and issuance of supplies, materials and
equipment; the disposal of surplus property; fiscal and property accounting for all departments
exeept the Ashland Parks and Recreation Commiss ; data processing; financial estimating,
planning and programming; billing and collecting; investment of temporarily idle funds in
cooperation with the City Recorder; dispatching of utility connect and disconnect orders; risk
management and insurance administration; ° ration of the s itehbonrd; . er-dination of the
cleaning, maintenanee and repair- of all publie buildings belonging to the City used
general administrative purposes; establishing and operating a centralized ,
general administration And nt..,d of the Cemete .,,...,.......ent; the performance of all
duties prescribed by the City Charter and ordinances and the laws of the State for those officers
and officials included in the Finance Department; and the performance of such other functions as
may be assigned by the City Administrator or prescribed by the City Council.
Section 2.28.340 Public Works Department - Functions.
The functions of the Public Works Department are the construction and maintenance of all
streets, alleys, sidewalks, paths, bike paths, rights-of-way, and courts now open or which
hereafter may be opened; the cleaning of streets; the construction, maintenance, and operation of
the sewer and storm drain systems; the maintenance and operation of the sewage disposal plant;
the construction, maintenance and operation of the water distribution systems, the maintenance
and operation of the water filtration plant; the supervision of all work done on streets, alleys, or
other public ways, land, buildings, or other structures by anyone other than the City; supervision
of the repair and maintenance of all motor equipment of the City, exeept equipment of the
PArliq And- Reeffeation Commission; the performance of traffic engineering; the planning,
improvement and maintenance of the Ashland Municipal Airport; the performance of all phases
of engineering work required in connection with all the functions of said Department; the
keeping of'records of all surveys and measurements made, which records shall be open for public
inspection.
Section 2.28.354 Community Development Department - Functions.
The functions of the Community Development Department are the preparation and maintenance
of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan of the City as required by State Law; the preparation of
ordinances, policies, maps and studies implementing said plan; the processing of applications for
planning actions set forth in Title 18 of this Code; with the assistance of the Police Department,
the enforcement of all laws, ordinances and regulations governing the erection and occupancy of
buildings and structures, and the alteration of or additions to buildings and structures as required
in Title 15 of this code; any with the assistance of the Police Department, the enforcement of all
laws and ordinances governing zoning and land-use as set forth in Title 18 of this code, and th
Ordinance No. _ Page 27 of 28
developn~ent and implementation of energy eonsen,ation pr-ograms as may be appr-oved+y
the City Administrator- o.. City !`'.......:1
SECTION 2. Severability. The sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses of this ordinance
are severable. The invalidity of one section, subsection, paragraph, or clause shall not affect the
validity of the remaining sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses.
SECTION 3. Codification. Provisions of this Ordinance shall be incorporated in the City Code,
and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "code", "article", "section", or another word, and
the sections of this Ordinance may be renumbered or re-lettered, provided however, that any
Whereas clauses and boilerplate provisions (i.e., Sections [Nos. 2-3] need not be codified, and
the City Recorder is authorized to correct any cross-references and any typographical errors.
The foregoing ordinance was first read by title only in accordance with Article X,
Section 2(C) of the City Charter on the day of 2014,
and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of 2014.
Barbara M. Christensen, City Recorder
SIGNED and APPROVED this _ day of 2014.
John Stromberg, Mayor
Reviewed as to form:
David H. Lohman, City Attorney
Ordinance No. Page 28 of 28
Attachment 1
COUNCILOR-SUGGESTED ADDITIONS
(Page 3 of 28)
Section 2.04.020 Meetings
C. Study Sessions (Page 3 of 27) [Addition suggested by Councilor Voisin]
Each study session shall include up to a total of 15 minutes for public forum, in which
persons may speak about any topic on the agenda for that study session. Persons wishing
to speak during public forum are to submit a "speaker request form" to the City Recorder.
W (Page 8 of 28)
Section 2.04.040 Conduct of Meetings
C. Council Deliberation
2. Deliberation Rules (Page 8 of 27) [Addition suggested by Councilor Lemhouse]
i
Council deliberation shall be characterized either as "general discussion" or as "debate."
"General discussion" as used herein means the presentation and clarification of facts
about a matter under consideration or the statement of preliminary positions concerning
such a matter without engaging in argumentation for or against one's position and prior
to seeking a specific decision on the matter by means of a motion or by means of informal
expressions of acquiescence from a maiority of Council members. "Debate" as used
herein means argumentation for or against a specific decision which has been proposed
formally by means of a motion or informally by a request for acquiescence from a
maiority of Council members. The term "deliberation towards a decision" as used herein
(Page 21 of 28)
Section 2.04.115 Councilor Conduct in Other Forums
A Council member is free to express personal views on any issue in any forum as long as
any statements he or she makes about the positions of the full City Council and the
positions of other individual Council members are accurate and objective. Upon two-
thirds vote of the entire Council, a Council member may be censured for noncompliance
with this requirement.
1