Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-0506 Council Agenda PACKET CITY OF ASHLAND - Important: Any citizen may orally address the Council on non-agenda items during the Public Forum. Any citizen may submit written comments to the Council on any item on the Agenda, unless it is the subject of a public hearing and the record is closed. Time permitting, the Presiding Officer may allow oral testimony. If you wish to speak, please fill out the Speaker Request form located near the entrance to the Council Chambers. The chair will recognize you and inform you as to the amount of time allotted to you, if any. The time granted will be dependent to some extent on the nature of the item under discussion, the number of people who wish to speak, and the length of the agenda. AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL May 6, 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.] 6:30 p.m. Executive Session. City Council will hold an Executive Session for Labor Negotiations pursuant to ORS 192.660(2)(d) and Real Property Transaction pursuant to ORS 192.660(2)(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 April 14, 2014 2. Executive Session of April 15, 2014 3. Business Meeting of April 15, 2014 VI. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS 1. Presentation by the Airport Commission regarding Airport Day 2. Report to the Council on crime in Ashland and use of force by the Ashland Police Department 3. Proclamation of May 12-18 as Craft Brewers Week in Ashland 4. Proclamation of May 2014 as National Historic Preservation Month in Ashland VII. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Award of a professional services contract in excess of $75,000 for the Wastewater Treatment Plant Outfall Relocation Study 2. Liquor license application for Robert Harvey dba Harvey's Place 3. Intergovernmental agreement with Jackson County Community Justice 4. Declaration and authorization to dispose of surplus property in a sealed bid auction COUNCIL MEETINGS ARE BROADCAST LIVE ON CHANNEL 9. STARTING APRIL 15, 2014, CHARTER CABLE WILL BROADCAST LIVE ON CHANNEL 180. VISIT THE CITY OF ASHLAND'S WEB SITE AT W W W.ASHLAND.OR.US 5. Approval of a change order to a contract allowing structural repairs to be performed as part of the information booth reroofing project 6. Approval of a contract amendment with Cascade Research for testing of an archeological site at Ashland Creek Park 7. Special procurement for the purchase of two aerial lift bucket trucks 8. Approval of contract specific procurement for the construction phase inspections and project management of the Calle Guanajuato project 9. Request for approval of a special procurement for wildfire fuels reduction 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 first reading of two separate ordinances amending the City of Ashland Comprehensive Plan, Comprehensive Plan Maps, Transportation System Plan, and Street Standards to adopt the Normal Neighborhood Plan 2. Public Hearing and approval of five resolutions proposing utility rate increases and repealing prior resolutions 3. Public Hearing and approval of a resolution titled, "A resolution adopting a Miscellaneous Fees and Charges document and repealing prior fee resolution 2013- 17" 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. Second reading 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" XI. NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS None XII. ORDINANCES. RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS 1. Second reading by title only of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance adopting a prohibition on the distribution of single use plastic bags" 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 Administrator's office at (541) 488-6002 (TTY phone number 1-800-735-2900). Notification 72 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting (28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title 1). COUNCIL MEETINGS ARE BROADCAST LIVE ON CHANNEL 9. STARTING APRIL 15, 2014, CHARTER CABLE WILL BROADCAST LIVE ON C14ANNEL 180. VISIT THE CITY OF ASHLAND'S WEB SITE AT WWW.ASHLAND.OR.US Minutes for the City Council Study Session April 14, 2014 Page] of4 MINUTES FOR THE STUDY SESSION ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL Monday, April 14, 2014 Siskiyou Room, 51 Winburn Way Mayor Stromberg called the meeting to order at 5:36 p.m. in the Siskiyou Room. Councilor Morris, Voisin, Marsh, Lemhouse, Rosenthal, and Slattery were present. 1. Look Ahead review City Administrator Dave Kanner reviewed items on the Look Ahead. 2. Review and discussion of the draft Council goals Government Leverage our regional and state relationships to increase effectiveness in relevant policy arenas. Promote effective citizen communication and engagement • Engage boards and commissions in supporting the strategic plan • Engage community in conversation about core services, desired service levels and funding mechanisms • Develop leadership that sustains both commissions and council Support and empower our community partners • SOU • Mt. Ashland • Parks - develop a long term sustainable plan for P&R services Council discussed whether to add all of the City's partners, indicate the list was incomplete, or remove the three listed. Another suggestion wanted to focus on the groups Council paid dues. Council discussed adding Identify and support for City services under Government with a bullet for administrative actions. A possible action item was review the Charter. Organization Use our assets to strategically support city mission and goals. • Examine city hall replacement • Look at underperforming assets • Examine long-term use of Imperatrice property. Council added Cultivate external funding sources as a fourth bullet. Under Look at underperforming assets, Identify assets leased at a $1 per year as action item. Council discussed splitting assets into Staff, Infrastructure, and Facilities under Organization as three separate goals. Ensure that we have a trained staff adequate to support the organization's work. • Use existing leadership to train and mentor • Grow leadership within • Develop appropriate succession plans • Match staffing with work plans. Council and staff discussed succession planning and Council's direct role regarding the bullets. Council suggested adding Ensure Council provides the tools for staff to be successful leaders as a goal with Minutes for the City Council Study Session April 14, 2014 Page 2 of 4 succession planning as a bullet. Another suggestion would make succession planning a separate goal. Staff moved succession planning to the parking lot for further discussion with Council consent. People Seek opportunities to enable all citizens to meet basic needs. • Pursue affordable housing opportunities, especially workforce housing • Leverage partnerships to build social equity programming to help those at risk • Address gaps in mental health treatment options. Develop supports to enable citizens to age in place. Maintain and strengthen community's viability for young families. • Seek pathways for SOU students to remain in the community. Council changed the goal to Make Ashland even more family friendly as a community. Strengthen and support local nonprofits. Council added The City supports and promotes through policy programs that make the city affordable to live in and keeping our treasure in Ashland as a bullet. Environment Protect the integrity and safety of the watershed. • Implement and maintain the Ashland Forest Resiliency Project • Educate and engage the community in watershed stewardship. Enhance and expand natural and recreational resources. Protect the community, especially the downtown district, from risk of fire and earthquakes. Council changed goal to Prepare community and limit the effects of natural disasters with downtown seismic issues as a bullet. Empower Community Development Department to effectively develop and implement land use planning. • Complete land use revisions • Examine form-based planning approach. Cultivate Ashland's "sense of place" and small town feel. Develop and support land use and transportation policies to achieve sustainable development. Develop and support land use and transportation policies to achieve sustainable development. • Develop infill policies • Support alternative transportation choices • Create incentives for energy efficient buildings. Encourage and/or develop public spaces that build community and promote interaction. Economy Minutes for the City Council Study Session April 14, 2014 Page 3 of 4 Seek opportunities to diversify the economy. • Support film industry growth • Promote local talent • Partner with SOU to generate business opportunities • Strengthen local nonprofits • Examine and remove barriers to business start up opportunities Nurture emerging new technologies. • Position ourselves as a high tech incubator • Promote e-commerce zone. Market and further develop Ashland Fiber Network. • Complete and implement the 5-year plan. Diversify transportation options. • Strengthen airport as an enterprise • Develop freight rail opportunities Ensure that commercial and industrial areas are available for development. • Create predictable pathways for development of employment land • Examine Croman redevelopment plan • Re-use railroad district. • Optimize downtown and other commercial districts by guiding reinvestment opportunities • Use existing financial tools to support re-development. Focus on measures to achieve a high level of self-reliance for goods and services. • Develop food security local and regionally. Council added the following goals: • The City supports and promotes through policy programs that make the city affordable to live in • Support innovative organizations and enterprises • Continually examine, evaluate, and update the economic development strategy • Embrace and plan ahead for emerging social trends that might affect the economy and vitality of the community Energy and Infrastructure Seek excellence in infrastructure management and modernization. Re-examine and review master plans on regular basis • Complete downtown transportation plan element • Expand transit • Work to keep public services efficient, innovative, and affordable. Council changed goal to "Be proactive in using best practices in infrastructure management and modernization." Plan for climate change. • Seek energy independence/neutrality Minutes for the City Council Study Session April 14, 2014 Page 4 of 4 • Seek carbon neutrality • Develop rigorous conservation plans for energy and water • Complete internal and community-based sustainability plans • Recognize impact of climate change on the watershed. Council changed "Plan for climate change," to "Prepare for climate change." Public Safe tv The City Administrator, Councilor Marsh, Councilor Slattery, and the Mayor would work on the next session. Councilors could work on wording for the goals separately and bring suggestions back to Council. Meeting adjourned at 7:42 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Dana Smith Assistant to the City Recorder Regular City Council Meeting April 15, 2014 Page 1 of 8 MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL April 15, 2014 Council Chambers 1175 E. Main Street CALL TO ORDER Mayor Stromberg called the meeting to order at 7:15 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers. ROLL CALL Councilors Voisin, Morris, Lemhouse, Slattery, Rosenthal, and Marsh were present. MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS Mayor Stromberg explained there were still vacancies for various Commissions and Committees even though the annual appointments process was finished. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the Study Session of March 31, 2014 and Business Meeting of April 1, 2014 were approved as presented. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS Mayor Stromberg presented the Ragland Award in memoriam to Doug Gentry. The Mayor's proclamation of April as Fair Housing Month in Ashland was read aloud. Historic Commission member Keith Swink provided the annual report and shared upcoming events and activities. Mayor Stromberg moved 1. First Reading by title only of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance adopting a prohibition on the distribution of single use plastic bags," Public Forum, and 2. Second Reading of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance imposing a temporary moratorium on establishment of medical marijuana facilities in the City of Ashland, and declaring an emergency" after the Public Hearing with Council consent. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Acceptance of Commission and Committee minutes 2. Special procurement for the purchase of a Rower X closed circuit sewer inspection system 3. Special procurement for installation of a CERT antenna at Fire Station No. 1 4. 2014 annual appointments to boards and commissions 5. Extension of Firewise Grant through September 30, 2014 6. Ashland's Wildfire Hazard Zone boundary amendment Councilor Rosenthal pulled Consent Agenda item #4. Council agreed all Commissioners would sign off on the newly revised Uniform Policies for Commissions and Committees. Commission staff liaisons would obtain the signature sheet and forward them to the City Recorder for filing. Councilor Marsh pulled Consent Agenda item 96 for further discussion. Fire Chief John Kars clarified the Wildfire Hazard Zone boundary was a land use action before Council for approval that would go to the Planning Commission for review. Homeowners in the wildfire designation areas were subject to construction restrictions, primarily roof construction, and landscape restrictions. They will be eligible for Firewise grants and the boundary amendment will not affect homeowners insurance. Councilor Voisin pulled Consent Agenda item #3 for further discussion. Public Works Supervisor Mike Regular City Council Meeting April 15, 2014 Page 2 of 8 Morrison, Jr. clarified staff would purchase the Rovver X closed circuit inspection system from Owen Equipment Company in Portland through the Houston Galveston Area Council that provided nationwide service access to local government for volume purchasing and discounts. City Administrator Dave Kanner further clarified the City belonged to a statewide purchasing cooperative that bid out vehicles and equipment and offered a low price for those items to its members. The Oregon Cooperative entered into mutual aid agreements with other purchasing cooperatives all over the country. Under state law, the City could make purchases through other purchasing cooperatives depending on who had the lower price. Councilor Slattery/Morris m/s to approve Consent Agenda items. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Public Hearing on the 2014 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) award and CDBG action plan development Housing Program Specialist Linda Reid explained the City received a direct allocation of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Each year the City offered these funds competitively to area nonprofits and organizations to provide services to populations that benefited from the money. For the 2014-2015 program year, the City received three applications for the $136,000 allocation. Applicants included Maslow Project to continue the School-Based Services for Ashland Homeless Youth outreach program, the St. Vincent de Paul home visitation program, and Habitat for Humanity Rogue Valley for their A Brush with Kindness and Critical Home Repair program. Public Hearing Open: 7:37 p.m. Lacey Renae/330 Glenn Street/Program Manager and Mental Health Counselor for MASLOW/Noted support received from the City allowed Maslow Project to expand services into Ashland. They requested $10,000 in CDBG continued funding to help provide basic needs, resources, outreach, and case management services to homeless youth and families in Ashland. The funds would pay for a .65 full time equivalent case manager. She described services offered by the Maslow Project to homeless and at risk children from birth to 21 years old. The average child was I I years old, often homeless with their entire family. In 2013, they graduated 91% and served 82 unduplicated individuals. Rich Hansen/St. Vincent de Paul/Explained CDBG funds, St. Vincent de Paul volunteers and budget monies combined to prevent the growth of homelessness in Ashland. The 2011-2012 grant of $14,000 helped 42 Ashland residents or 19 households. Eleven of the 19 families were homeless. St. Vincent de Paul was able to house the families and keep the remaining families in their homes with grant money. Transitioning out of homelessness was extremely challenging and could take over a year to accomplish. He described the services they provided and how many people they assisted. Denise James/2233 S Pacific Hwy/Executive Director Habitat for Humanity Rogue Valley/Chair Mark Weir/Explained Habitat for Humanity built houses from the ground up for low income people willing to partner and help build the home. Habitat Humanity offered no interest loans. It was difficult getting into the Ashland market because the land was limited and the prices high. Their mission was limiting substandard housing to those in need. Habitat for Humanity established nationwide repair programs. A Brush with Kindness provided small repair, paint, landscaping, and fencing. The second program was Critical Home Repair for major needs. Both programs came with an interest free loan. Mark Weir, chair added Habitat for Humanity's store, Restore covered all administrative fees, and 100% of the CDBG funds would go into the repair programs. Ms. James confirmed the CDBG fund would be specific to Ashland only. Public Hearing Closed: 7:50 p.m. Ms. Reid explained the selection process and HUD's limitation on public service activities. Both the Maslow Project and St. Vincent de Paul were public service activities. CDBG had a 15% cap on the overall grant amount resulting in $25,500 for public service activities. Maslow Project asked for $10,000 and St. Vincent de Regular City Council Meeting April 15, 2014 Page 3 of 8 Paul asked for $24,000. Staff recommended a 70/30 split so both organizations receive more than half of the funding they requested. St. Vincent de Paul would receive $18,000 and Maslow Project would receive $7,500. Habitat for Humanity Rogue Valley was a capital project and staff recommended they receive $41,300 to fund their program fully. The remaining balance of $69,200 would carry over into the following program year. HUD allowed the City to carry over one and half times its grant allocation. Councilor Lemhouse/Marsh m/s to direct staff to draft 2014 Annual Action Plan for the use of Community Development Block Grant Funds (CDBG) reflecting the award of CDBG funding for 2014-15 program year as follows: $18,000 to St. Vincent De Paul-Home Visitation Program; $7,500 to Maslow Project; $41,300 to Habitat for Humanity Rogue Valley and carry forward $69,200 in unallocated funds to be awarded in the 2015 program year. DISCUSSION: Councilor Lemhouse noted all three applicants were well-established organizations with clear goals and plans to achieve them. Councilor Marsh added Ashland was fortunate to have these organizations working in the community. This also related to Council goals over the next six years. Councilor Voisin thanked the applicants for their services and for applying. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Voisin, Marsh, Lemhouse, Morris, Rosenthal and Slattery, YES. Motions passed. ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS 1. First Reading by title only of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance adopting a prohibition on the distribution of single use plastic bags" Management Analyst Adam Hanks provided the background on the plastic bag ban. The ordinance would prohibit single use plastic bags, required paper bags to be a minimum of 40% recycled content, and required businesses to charge a .25-cent fee for the use of paper bags if requested by a customer. The ordinance would exclude a variety of plastic bag types as well as a six-month delay for the ordinance to go into effect to allow businesses to exhaust their current inventory. Conservation Commission Chair Mark Weir added the bag ban represented information based on 70 communities that had implemented plastic bag bans in the United States and several countries worldwide. Research showed that disincentives helped people use reusable bags more than education did and charging .25 cents would drive down the need for paper bags that had a higher environmental impact. He shared statistics on plastic bag use in Ashland and the need not to rely on paper bags. The Commission was looking into the Chamber of Commerce possibly providing an inventory of bags that promoted Ashland. Mr. Hanks explained compliance would go through the Code Compliance officer and was part of the outreach plan. City Attorney Dave Lohman clarified companies distributing plastic bags after the ordinance went into effect would incur a citation with a daily fee assessment. Emily Fulmer (parent) and students from John Muir School/Explained the majority of trash in the ocean was made of plastic. Plastic did not biodegrade and broke down into dust that smaller fish consumed as food that was detrimental to their health. The ratio of this dust to phytoplankton was 36-1. There was also an island of trash twice the size of America that animals lived on and ate. It was not healthy and polluting. The plastic dust gave off chemicals that pollute the ocean. Most of the plastic entered the ocean from rivers and originated from towns far away from the sea. Jonny Boulton/165 E Main Street/Spoke against the ordinance. He was greatly concerned the effects that plastic bags had on the environment and the subsequent deaths of the whales that consumed them. However, using government to compel behavior was not a legitimate role. It robbed the initiative of the people and created dependency. Voluntary incentives that encourage shoppers to use alternative baggage was something the City could lead, coordinate, and facilitate. He encouraged Council not to pass the ban but assist the community to help the people it served. Cheryl Carlich/215 Nutley Street/Supported the plastic bag ban ordinance. She shared an experience of traveling outside of the country to an area completely covered in plastic bag trash and remarked on the litter she saw in the states. Regular City Council Meeting April 15, 2014 Page 4 of 8 Tobias Cains/105 Yd Street, Talent OR/Described his experience in Florida helping sea turtles during their nesting period. He was wearing 500 plastic bags, the amount the average person in the United States used annually. He supported the proposed ordinance. Rikki Seguin/2032 SE Tibbett Street, Portland OR/Explained she was a Conservation Advocate for Environment Oregon and spoke in favor of the ordinance. It would help protect rivers and waterways from the increasing problem of plastic pollution. She noted the overwhelming support of the ban in Ashland. The problem was enormous and the solution too simple to wait. Emma Barry/1659 Fordyce Street/Currently was a senior at Southern Oregon University and strongly supported the ordinance. Ashland had a strong vision of sustainability and removing single use plastic bags was a great step to take and embodied the ideals the community stood for daily. Randall Fitzpatrick/548 Iowa Street/Supported the proposed ordinance and noted plastic bag use in Ashland was recent. Plastic bags were not necessary and an unnecessary waste. Kindler Stout/130 Orange Avenue/Commented on the task of eliminating plastic and thought the ordinance was a great way for the City to participate. He was concerned plastic would end up in the ocean as much already did. Councilor Voisin/Rosenthal m/s to approve First Reading by title only of an ordinance adopting a prohibition on the distribution of single use plastic bags and place on agenda for second reading and direct staff to begin appropriate education and outreach efforts to both the business community and residents. DISCUSSION: Councilor Voisin explained the community supported the ban and would serve Ashland as a sustainable community and was the responsible thing to do. Councilor Rosenthal thanked the Conservation Commission for researching the ban. This was an opportunity to make a difference and keep plastic out of the waste stream and ocean. Councilor Lemhouse thought the ordinance would make a difference but not prevent people from bringing plastic bags into town. Councilor Slattery thought the ordinance was forward thinking and fit within community values and concepts. Councilor Marsh supported the ordinance and had a concern regarding the paper bag fee. Councilor Morris supported the ordinance and was interested in eventually adding single use plastic water bottles. Mayor Stromberg shared his experience eliminating plastic produce bags. Councilor RosenthalNoisin m/s to amend the motion that the City of Ashland to retain .10 cents of the.25 cent per bag cost pass-through for the purpose of refunding the City for administrative costs and provide funding for conservation education efforts pertaining to the ordinance. DISCUSSION: Councilor Rosenthal explained the funds would make staff costs revenue neutral and contribute to cloth bags. Councilor Voisin agreed. City Administrator Dave Kanner understood the intent of the amendment but would need time to address how the money would be tracked, reported, and remitted to the City. City Attorney Dave Lohman clarified the amendment did not negate the original motion. Councilor Slattery added that over time the fee would get smaller and eventually cease and expressed concern the collection system might outweigh the cost of whatever the City received. Councilor Lemhouse would support the amendment, did not think taxing paper bags was a good idea but thought the City should at least get some form of revenue stream from the fee. Councilor Morris agreed with Councilor Slattery. Councilor Marsh would not support the amendment and thought it fundamentally changed the intent by creating a ban that also profited the City.' The fee reimbursed the merchant and encouraged people to bring their own bags. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Rosenthal, Lemhouse, and Voisin, YES; Councilor Slattery, Marsh and Morris, NO. Mayor Stromberg broke the tie with a NO vote. Motion failed 3-4. Councilor Lemhouse/Morris m/s to amend the motion and remove section 9.21.030 pertaining to a tax on paper sacks. DISCUSSION: Councilor Lemhouse explained this was the section that he thought had unintended consequences on lower income households. Councilor Morris was not sure he could support the Regular City Council Meeting April 15, 2014 Page 5 of 8 amendment. The .25 cents fee was too high and zero would not produce the same affect. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Lemhouse, YES; Councilor Rosenthal, Slattery, Marsh, Morris, and Voisin, NO. Motion failed 1-5. Councilor Marsh/Lemhouse m/s to amend the motion and change the fee on paper bags from .25 cents to .10 cents. DISCUSSION: Councilor Marsh thought charging .25 cents as a beginning level was high. Similar ordinances in other communities set paper bag fees at .10 cents. She suggested charging .10 cents for a year, set goals and at the end see how successfully the community responded to the challenge. Councilor Lemhouse supported lessoning the impact on lower income households. Councilor Slattery thought the .25 cent fee had a purpose and the success of the program somewhat depended on the higher fee. Councilor Voisin agreed the .25 cents was an incentive and the Conservation Commission proved that incentives worked through their research. There were alternative ways to deal with low-income families through education and outreach and she would not support the amendment. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Lemhouse, Marsh, and Morris, YES; Councilor Rosenthal, Slattery, and Voisin, NO. Mayor Stromberg broke the tie with a YES vote. Motion passed 4-3. Roll Call Vote on main amended motion: Councilor Rosenthal, Slattery, Marsh, Morris, and Voisin, YES; Councilor Lemhouse, NO. Motion passed 5-1. PUBLIC FORUM Amy Haptonstall/341 Beach Street/In response to the proposed gun ordinance, a group of citizens worked with Council to propose a campaign regarding Child Safety Education particularly relating to gun safety. The next meeting was April 22, 2014 at 5:00 p.m. in the lower level of the library. ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS-continued 2. Second Reading of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance imposing a temporary moratorium on establishment of medical marijuana facilities in the City of Ashland, and declaring an emergency" City Attorney Dave Lohman explained the ordinance would impose a temporary limited moratorium on medical marijuana facilities in the C-I-D zone, and lots in the E-1 zone within 100-feet of residential lots. The ordinance would exempt dispensaries in the E-1 zones along boulevards. The moratorium would last until May 1, 2015 and Council could rescind it at any time prior to that date. During the moratorium, the Planning Commission would look into possible land use restrictions on the dispensaries. Council could also approve time, place, and manner restrictions that were not considered land use restrictions. Linda Stickle/492 Rogue Place/Expressed concern regarding the impact a medical marijuana dispensary would have in her neighborhood. She supported dispensaries but thought they should be on arterial streets designed for heavy traffic flow. Williamson Way was a narrow street and increased traffic could present issues. She asked Council to retain the moratorium for a year. Carol Kim/422 Rogue Place/Supported the moratorium and the time the City would take to determine how to regulate dispensaries. Last week the Planning Commission suggested dispensaries belonged on major arterial streets that could handle lots of traffic. She asked Council to allow dispensaries in central commercial locations with ample parking six to seven days a week. For those needing medical marijuana now, the current operating dispensary was in the ideal location. Of the six known applications in Ashland, one was 400 Williamson Way with two others within 1,000 feet of that location. She encouraged Council to strengthen the moratorium, require dispensaries on arterial streets, and eliminate the loopholes that currently exist prior to final approval. Christina Freedman/390 Robleda Drive, Central Point OR/Explained she was currently a medical marijuana patient and how marijuana enabled her to play a functioning role in society. She shared her experience with discrimination on the job once employers discovered she uses medical marijuana. People had put time and money into the dispensary on 400 Williamson Way. Patients should have options regarding dispensaries. Medical marijuana was medicine. Any other business could create heavy traffic in that area. Regular City Council Meeting April 15, 2014 Page 6 of 8 William Clary/470 Williamson Way/Expressed concern regarding traffic impact to his neighborhood due to the dispensary. He asked Council to apply the 100-foot buffer to any lot in the E-1 zone that did not border a main boulevard. He shared traffic statistics that indicated the Williamson Way dispensary could have 400-500 trips per day if they are in full operation. Putting it on a boulevard would provide easy access for patients, alleviate safety concerns, and retain the integrity of his neighborhood. Morgan O. Heller/876 B Street/Opposed the moratorium there was no way of proving how much traffic the dispensary would create. A yoga studio, a clothing store, or an herbal apothecary could generate just as much traffic. She supported dispensaries as long as they were not within 1,000 feet of schools, and were legal. She had planned on working at the 400 Williamson Way dispensary as a massage therapist and due to the moratorium now could not. Cheyanne Davis/400 Williamson Way/Represented the dispensary, noted the amount of time and money invested in the business and shared how upsetting it was to know their hard work could be for nothing. They had wanted the support of the City and the neighborhood and had abided all of the City and state guidelines for medical marijuana dispensaries. They were willing to look for a new location but had already signed a 5-year lease at 400 Williamson Way that would cost them $300,000. They felt purposely singled out. Phil Studenberg, attorney/230 Main Street, Klamath Falls OWRepresented the business owners at 400 Williamson Way. He was previously involved with the Klamath Falls City Council who decided not to pass a medical marijuana moratorium. They decided to use this instead to engage in a social experiment that honored the spirit of the Oregon Medical Marijuana Act and the people in need of medical marijuana. They would regulate the dispensary but were looking towards the possible legalization vote in the fall and saw it as a great social experiment. He thought there were issues regarding the legality of the partial moratorium, with equal protection, and questioned whether the distinctions were rational and justifiable. He asked Council to discern them since the business owners had invested a lot of money and signed a lease. He encouraged Council to work with the business owners and not declare a moratorium. Mr. Lohman clarified boulevard and arterial streets were the same. City Administrator Dave Kanner was not aware of specific limitations on what could go in on certain types of streets. He agreed that high traffic businesses should be zoned on high traffic streets. In the E-I zone, certain types of businesses with higher traffic uses had to be at least 200 feet away from residentially zoned parcels. Alternately, a conventional pharmacy could legally locate at 400 Williamson Way. Mr. Lohman read aloud changes to the ordinance. He clarified the ordinance drafted did not nullify any contracts that anyone might have. The lease with the business at 400 Williamson Way was a separate transaction between the proprietor and lessee and did not pertain to the moratorium ordinance. The business in question did not have a permit as of March 1, 2014 and did not qualify for a grandfather clause. Removing "or any other provision of Oregon Law" from the sentence in Section 1, "Dispenses marijuana pursuant to ORS 475.314 or any other provision of Oregon Law," would focus only on medical marijuana dispensaries. The time to address recreational marijuana was when the land use ordinance came back from the Planning Commission. The land use ordinance could apply to all marijuana dispensaries. Senate Bill 1531 applied only to medical marijuana dispensaries and gave cities the authority to impose moratoriums on medical marijuana dispensaries. Community Development Director Bill Molnar explained the Planning Commission was drafting code that would limit the location of dispensaries to commercial zones, C-1, E-1, and M-1 only on properties along major boulevards. Those boulevards were North Main, East Main, Lithia Way, Siskiyou, Ashland Street, and portions of Tolman Creek Road. It would prohibit dispensaries in the entire downtown commercial zone. City Administrator Dave Kanner added the Planning Commission would hold a public hearing regarding the ordinance May 13, 2014 with the ordinance going before Council for First Reading and potentially Second Reading May 20, 2014. Regular City Council Meeting April 15, 2014 Page 7 of 8 Councilor Marsh/Rosenthal m/s to approve Ordinance #3093 as amended, declaring an emergency, and eliminate the words from Section 1 "or any other provision of Oregon law." DISCUSSION: Councilor Marsh noted a pharmacy could locate at 400 Williamson Way and generate the same amount of traffic that a medical marijuana dispensary could as indicated by one of the speakers. However, this was new territory and the moratorium would allow enough time to research where dispensary locations were most appropriate. The change removing "or any other provision of Oregon law," limited the discussion to medical marijuana facilities only. Councilor Rosenthal commented Council needed to be cautious with respect to those hoping to get into the business. Residents had valid points. He hoped the Planning Commission would proceed thoughtfully.and expeditiously on this topic. Councilor Lemhouse/Slattery m/s to suspend Council rules in order for the Mayor to ask question of staff. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. Mr. Lohman clarified Council could enact time, place, and manner restrictions but it might not be clear. Time restrictions would be clear but zone restrictions could reflect on land use. Councilor Lemhouse/Slattery m/s to reinstate Council rules. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. Councilor Morris noted land use was supposed to be concise. The description for the E-1 was designed to provide a variety of uses and noted restaurants, bakeries, plumbing shops, auto repair, some were permitted, and some were special permitted. He had issues restricting dispensaries to certain areas in E-1 based on what was already allowed in E-1. He would vote against the moratorium. The existing uses currently in E-I zones could have a much higher impact than a dispensary. Councilor Voisin added conditional use permits required criteria and the Planning Commission would have to determine what that was. She did not want to go towards conditional use permits. Councilor Voisin/Lemhouse m/s to amend the motion to remove language in Section 1 "which has any boundary line one hundred (100) feet or less from a boundary line of a lot zoned for residential use." DISCUSSION: Councilor Voisin thought Council needed to protect residential areas, take the time to research impact, and send a clear message to potential business owners regarding zone restrictions. Councilor Lemhouse agreed. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Slattery, Rosenthal, Voisin, and Lemhouse, YES; Councilor Marsh and Morris, NO. Motion passed 4-2. Councilor Slattery emphasized with the business owners of 400 Williamson Way and understood the neighbors had valid concerns. He would support the moratorium because it was the best negotiated settlement of a complex issue. Councilor Lemhouse motioned that the proposed ordinance regarding the moratorium apply to the entire city of Ashland. Mayor Stromberg ruled the motion would need to wait until Council voted on the current motion. Councilor Lemhouse motioned to appeal the Mayor's decision. Motion died for lack of a second. Councilor Lemhouse/Voisin m/s to amend the motion by changing the language in Section 1 Moratorium Declared, first paragraph, end of first sentence "D" Downtown Overlay District to state "Downtown Design Standards zone." DISCUSSION: Councilor Lemhouse considered Lithia Way downtown and wanted the moratorium to include that area. Council Voisin agreed. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Voisin and Lemhouse, YES; Councilor Marsh, Morris, Slattery, and Rosenthal, NO. Motion failed 2-4. Councilor Slattery/Rosenthal m/s to call for question. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Marsh, Morris, Slattery, Rosenthal, Voisin, and Lemhouse, YES. Motion passed. City Recorder Barbara Christensen restated the amended main motion, An ordinance imposing a temporary moratorium on medical marijuana facilities in designated areas of the City of Ashland, and Declaring an Emergency with any amendments as noted by the City Attorney, eliminating words in Section 1 "or any other provision of Oregon Law," and eliminating language in Section 1, "which has any boundary line Regular City Council Meeting April 15, 2014 Page 8 of 8 one hundred (100) feet or less from a boundary line of a lot zoned for residential use." Roll Call Vote on the amended main motion: Councilor Marsh, Slattery, Rosenthal, Voisin, and Lemhouse, YES; Councilor Morris, NO. Motion passed 5-1. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 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" Item delayed due to time constraints. NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS 1. Appointment to Audit Committee - Mayor/Council liaison Councilor Slattery/Rosenthal m/s to reappoint Councilor Voisin as the liaison to the Audit Commission. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. 2. Discussion of Proposed Utility Rate increases a. Proposed Electric Utility rate increase b. Proposed Water, Wastewater, Transportation, and Storm Drain Utility rate increases Item delayed due to time constraints. 3. Talent Ashland Phoenix Pipeline Intertie Project update Item moved to a special meeting April 22, 2014 Tuesday at 7:00 p.m. in Council Chambers. 4. Solid waste franchise, a presentation of financial incentive options for waste reduction Item delayed due to time constraints. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS/REPORTS FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 10:27 p.m. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder John Stromberg, Mayor CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication May 6, 2014, Business Meeting Report to the Council on Crime in Ashland and use of force by the Ashland Police Department FROM: Tighe O'Meara, Deputy Chief of Police, tiehe.omearagashland.or.us 541-552-2142 SUMMARY In 2008 the Council directed the Police Chief to make an annual report to the Council on crime in the City of Ashland and use of force by the police department. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: During 2013 the Police Department used force 28 times. This represents a 30% drop from 2012. Overall, 57% of these incidents did not rise above the level of a subject either being forced to the ground, or forced against a fixed object. Thirty five point seven percent involved a control hold being applied. There were a total of six deployments of the Taser. Four of these were display-only, and two were probe (dart) deployments. There were 13 incidents in which arrestees reported injuries. All of these reported injuries were minor scrapes, cuts and bruises. Sixty-eight percent of the use of force incidents involve drug or alcohol use. A total of eight officers received minor injuries during these incidents, but only two of those officers required medical treatment. A single person, who routinely resists arrest and has assaulted officers, alone was responsible for ten incidents of use of force, making up 35% of the department's use of force incidents. During 2013 Ashland officers received an average of 26 hours of use of force training. Crime rate is based on the number of part one crimes occurring in a jurisdiction. Part one crimes are those that are reported annually to the FBI for inclusion into the Uniform Crime Report. They are Homicide, Rape, Robbery, Aggravated Assault, Burglary, Auto Theft and Larceny. In 2013 the Police Department took 697 reports of part one crimes occurring in the City of Ashland. This is a 7.8% rise in part one crime from 2012, but still down slightly from 2011 (714). Violent crime is defined as Homicide, Rape, Robbery and Aggravated Assault. There were 25 violent crimes reported in Ashland in 2013 and 35 violent crimes reported in 2012, a 29% decrease. In 2013 the Police Department cleared 40% of all part one cases, and 80% of violent crime. The Enhanced Law Enforcement Area ordinance has been in effect since August of 2012. A year-by- year comparison is not possible yet because the ELEA was not in effect for all of 2012. However a look at the first 8 months of the ELEA (August 2012-March 2013) compared to the same time over 2013-2014 shows a drop incidents of drugs and disorderly crimes from 191 to 154, a 19% decrease. Next year we will be able to have direct year-by-year comparisons. In 2013 16 people qualified to be expelled from the downtown. Eleven of those people moved out of the area before they could be served and to the best of our knowledge have not returned. Five of those people have been served and have been restricted from the downtown. In 2013 there were a total of 17 arrests for violating the Page 1 of 2 ~r, CITY OF ASHLAND ELEA. Three people make up the majority of that 17 arrest (16 of the 17). Officers still believe that the ELEA has had a positive effect. The fact that 16 people each merited the expulsion, and 11 of those 16 have left the area directly speaks to the effectiveness of this ordinance. Calls for service in the downtown area for disorderly-type crimes are from 311 in 2012 to 264 in 2013, a 16% decrease. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: N/A. STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: The Council can accept the report as presented or request the Police Chief provide additional information. SUGGESTED MOTION: N/A ATTACHMENTS: None Page 2 of 2 ~na1101 Q\ P§ 6'~7~ v (Gn~'P9 . 2q~~D (Gh~7P}j (~~P~ , 00 hN, P - yNC `A PROCLAMATION • American Craft Beer Week is annually celebrated in breweries, restaurants, and beer stores by craft brewers and home brewers nationwide; C • Our local breweries continue to grow their businesses in the city of Ashland and the greater State of Jefferson; • 2,700-plus American craft brewers employ over 110,000 full- and part- C ,o time workers and annually generate more than $3,000,000,000 in wages and benefits; • American craft brewers support American agriculture by purchasing barley, malt, and hops grown, processed, and distributed in the United States; C • And our local breweries are actively involved in the Ashland community through philanthropy and sponsorship of community events; NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council and Mayor, on behalf of the citizens of Ashland, herby proclaim May 12 - 18, 2014 as "American Craft Beer Week" And encourage all citizens to support the goals and ideals of American Craft Beer ° 1 Week, as founded by the Brewers Association, to recognize the significant contributions of our local breweries to the city of Ashland's economy and to celebrate and appreciate the accomplishments of all craft brewers through events .o at our local breweries. Dated this 6th day of May, 2014 d .1 - - John Stromberg, Mayor 100 Barbara Christensen, City Recorder o. 4• xK o> ~a~ 6q'7Fa dq~~ dqV~ _ ffNya% ~6g~VVy~ ~y`7,oa 6q~v~ ~ ~ 6a'Vay~ ¢~V~ , , !e d ,r4~\SS7_ b t d b ode d b W e 'lfiyk Kr1~ PROCLAMATION Historic preservation is an effective tool for managing growth, revitalizing neighborhoods,.fostering local pride and maintaining community character while enhancing livability. • The historic houses and buildings of Ashland help make our City unique and provide links with aspirations and attainment of the City's pioneers and their descendants. • These fine examples of Nineteenth and Twentieth century buildings contribute to an appreciation of our heritage. • Historic preservation is relevant for communities across the nation, both urban and rural, and for Americans of all ages, all walks of life and all ethnic backgrounds. • It is important to celebrate the role of history in our lives and the contributions made by dedicated individuals in helping to preserve the tangible aspects of the heritage that has shaped us as a people. • "Embark Inspire, Engage" is the theme for National Historic Preservation Month 2014. Ashland has selected May 19 - 23, as Historic Preservation Week. Ashland's celebrations are co-sponsored by the City of Ashland's Historic Commission and the National Trust for Historic Preservation. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council and Mayor, on behalf of the citizens of Ashland, do proclaim May, 2014 as "National Historic Preservation Month" and call upon the people of the City of Ashland to join their fellow citizens across the United States in recognizing and participating in this special observance. Dated this 6th day of May, 2014 John Stromberg, Mayor Barbara Christensen, City Recorder 9 9 A { 6sp~ ° Csp~9 e%ae9ed,A~.9 O Tda9~,a~ 6sde9 a Gds esp~,9 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication May 6, 2014, Business Meeting Award of a Professional Services Contract in Excess of $75,000 for the Wastewater Treatment Plant Outfall Relocation Study FROM: Scott A. Fleury, Engineering Services Manager, Public Works/Engineering, fleurys@ashland.or.us SUMMARY Staff is seeking Council approval of a professional services contract in excess of $75,000 for the Wastewater Treatment Plant Outfall Relocation Study. As part of the Wastewater Master Plan update completed in 2012 a new capital improvement project list was developed for wastewater projects. This list includes relocating the current effluent outfall from Ashland Creek to Bear Creek in order to meet permit limits, specific to temperature, that will be included in the updated National Pollution Discharge Elimination System permit (NPDES) developed by the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). To that end staff developed and completed a consultant selection process to perform the necessary study and related design work, and recommends awarding a contract to CH2MHi11 in the amount of $171,388. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: The NPDES permit to be written by DEQ will impose new requirements with respect to temperature along with other changes. In order to meet regulatory temperature limits, two projects were identified as part of the master plan process. The first project is relocation of the current effluent outfall from Ashland Creek to Bear Creek. The second project is water quality trading or "shading." Temperature limits for the new permit will be based on "near field" and "far field" criteria. Near field is the area directly associated with creek at the outfall location. Far field is the area within the Bear Creek Watershed that is affected by the temperature of the effluent. Relocating the outfall will allow Ashland to meet "near field" permit requirements with respect to temperature, while "shading" will allow Ashland to meet "far field" temperature requirements. The current outfall into Ashland Creek has been identified as creating fish migration blockage, spawning and thermal shock issues. Through the master plan process several capital projects were identified that have the potential to meet new proposed permit limits. These projects included construction of mechanical cooling towers and chillers, recycling water on the Imperatrice property, discharging to the Talent Irrigation Canal and shallow ground water mixing (hyporheic). Through the vetting process with the technical advisory committee, staff and the consultants, the outfall relocation project was chosen to meet near field temperature requirements. The new NPDES permit is scheduled to be drafted by DEQ and adopted in 2015. In order to meet permit deadlines and develop information necessary as part of the outfall relocation study staff has broken the project into two phases. Phase one will be a mixing zone study along with wetland Page] of 3 CITY OF ASHLAND modeling to determine necessary area required to meet cooling needs. Phase 2 of the project will include the actual wetland design and construction administration of the project. Staff expects DEQ to establish permit milestones with respect to construction of the outfall relocation project. These milestones will have to be met within the five year permit window. A component of this project is public outreach that includes working directly with the Parks Department and area stakeholders in order to develop an appropriate wetland design to meet near field temperature requirements for the new outfall. The Parks Department was engaged early in the master plan process with respect to the outfall relocation as this project would require use of Park-managed land. It is the intent of staff to create a wetland park environment in the area adjacent to the wastewater treatment plant as part of the outfall relocation project. Request for Proposal On January 30, 2014 a Qualifications Based Selection Proposal for professional services for an effluent outfall relocation study was advertised statewide, in the Mail Tribune, and on the City's website. Proposals were due on February 27, 2014, at which time one qualified consultant submitted a proposal. An evaluation team consisting of myself, W WTP Supervisor David Gies, Senior Treatment Plant Operator Greg Whittenburg, and Associate Engineer Karl Johnson individually graded the proposals according to the given criteria: Criteria Maximum Score Responsiveness 15 Related Project Experience 25 Project Understanding and Approach 30 Project Team and Resources 30 =R TOTAL'loWwr, yntsj Scoring was completed on March 10, 2014, and the scores were combined to determine the top rankings. The final results were as follows: r i seessIMT a TOT'A'L } CONSULTANT ' ,1;.,.. SCORE CH2M Hill 375 1 The consultant team that CH2M Hill has put together for this project includes: 1. The Freshwater Trust-Public outreach and permitting 2. Keller Associates- Wastewater treatment flow conveyance 3. Reeves Sherwood-Fish biology CH2M Hill was the only respondent to the proposal and staff feels their previous experience and expertise in this area of work will be a benefit with respect to the outfall project. They have completed similar projects for the City of Albany, City of Woodburn and the City of Roseburg. Page 2 of 3 I41, CITY OF ASHLAND FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: The proposed fee by CH2M Hill for the appropriate scope of services is $171,388. The City Council approved a State Revolving Fund loan for $4,549,691 at the May 21, 2013 meeting for funding of the outfall relocation, water quality trading (shading) and lifecycle replacement of membrane filters. http://ashland.or.us/Apendas.asp?Display=Minutes&AMID=5315 STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends the Council approve a professional services contract with CH2M Hill for phase one of the Outfall Relocation Study. SUGGESTED MOTION: Move to approve a professional services contract with C112M Hill in the amount of $171,388 for the Outfall Relocation Study. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Qualifications Based Selection Proposal-CH2M Hill 2. CH2M Hill Scope and Fee documents-outfall relocation aPage 3 of 3 PROPOSAL: G3~Ooc~~oo~ p~oDc~c~~ OFA 91 4't S b aR G~ VU s ~ f . CaQO~1 .iii:, a. ~ - •n . ~ A R1,4' ~ l wse '~i' a~ ~'A 4 gp t f l~ 2 0 CH2MHILL. COVER SHEET CH2M HILL ENGINEERS, INC. REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS BASED PROPOSALS City of Ashland, OR Legal Name of Firm CH2M HILL Engineers, Inc. ' 0 Corporation ❑ Professional Corporation ❑ Partnership ❑ Limited Partnership ❑ Limited Liability ❑ Limited Liability Partnership ❑ Sole Proprietorship ❑ Other Mailing Address 2020 SW Fourth Ave. Ste 300, Portland, OR 97201-4973 Contact Person Jason Smesrud Telephone 503.736.4372 Fax 503.736.2071 Email Address jason.smesrud@ch2m.com CH2M HILL Engineers, Inc. accepts all the terms and conditions contained in the City of Ashland Wastewater Treatment Plant Effluent Outfall Relocation Project (#2013-21), Request for Qualifications Based Proposal. February 25, 2014 G-Bignatur auf orized representative Date Richard Attanasio, Designated Manager 32-0100027 Name of authorized representative Firm's Federal Tax ID Jason Smesrud, Project Manager Names of person(s) authorized to negotiate contract Richard Attanasio, Designated Manager Names of person(s) authorized to sign contract Ashland Wastewater Treatment Plant Effluent Outfall Relocation Project 1. Project Understanding & Approach meet spawning temperature restrictions at the new outfall site. C112M HILL will work with the City of Ashland to deliver a cost-effective integrated thermal solution to meet For Ashland's outfall project, an implementable solution temperature compliance requirements for the will need to achieve the following benefits: permit wastewater treatment plant (WWTP). CH2M HILL and its compliance on the stipulated schedule; low capital and team understand the public context associated with O&M costs; minimal disturbance to adjacent open space important public space and waterways around the resources; and support by the community and WWTP and will develop an approach that will facilitate regulatory agencies. Our team's understanding of key streamlined permitting and community support. resources and community issues around the WWTP (Figure 1-1) will help Ashland achieve these project Project Understanding benefits. The current National Pollution Discharge Elimination CH2M HILL project teams have a long history delivering System (NPDES) permit for the Ashland WWTP expired implementable solutions with excellent results in the in 2008 and the Oregon Department of Environmental Pacific Northwest. Our previous successes with outfall, Quality (DEQ) is planning to initiate the NPDES permit effluent temperature, and constructed wetland projects renew process in fall 2014. The renewed NPDES permit across Oregon demonstrate our track record. We will will include requirements for effluent thermal load and exceed Ashland's expectations for its outfall project copper limits at the point of discharge, considering using our team's knowledge and experience gained from mixing zone dilution. Compliance with the new limits will similar projects. Our team, including Keller Associates be required within five years of permit issuance. and The Freshwater Trust, will manage all phases of the The new requirements create several challenges for the project from planning through permitting, design, Ashland Creek outfall, which has limited dilution during construction, and operation. Our site-specific knowledge low flow periods. Relocating the outfall from Ashland of the Ashland W WTP, Ashland and Bear Creeks, and Creek to the higher-flow Bear Creek would eliminate the surrounding resources, as well as our relationships with current temperature impacts to Ashland Creek, while local agencies and community leaders, will help us reducing the need for effluent cooling to address navigate towards a cost-effective solution that agencies migration blockage, thermal shock, and spawning readily approve and the community embraces. impairments. A Bear Creek outfall location would also Project Approach provide greater dilution and a better mixing zone This section includes key factors to help achieve project environment to meet restrictions on copper and other success through Phase 1 of the outfall project. effluent constituents. However, even with an outfall relocation to Bear Creek, effluent cooling (by up 1.5 to Integrated Thermal Solution: Our approach will include 2 degrees Celsius in September) would be required to project alternatives that address both near- and far-field avoid a migration blockage condition. In addition, during thermal load and temperature mitigation requirements. low flow portions of the spawning period (October 15 We will begin by developing solutions that meet the through May 15), effluent cooling may be necessary to near-field temperature limitations (i.e. migration FIGURE I-1. Key r j i • Considerations Natural resource and -t; ! ~wp r r community constraints and rE • ' opportunities around the y • WWTP will be clearly r• identified to develop project Y solutions and to navigate d r:. towards a streamlined permitting approach. Our trr..f :f. K O ' II~" rc ~ -r involvement with other projects such as the Bear Creek BiOp will also be id . , valuable in building on III JIIII r' 'r runderstanding of future flow K. r. regimes and dilution. r. r .r tr r Y elt, 1tlNS tn~fiv`Jnd~ ,":.:d WBG021414202951PDX 1 Ashland Wastewater Treatment Plant Effluent Outfall Relocation Project blockage). In parallel, we will quantify the temperature Task 1.2. Preliminary Flow, Temperature, and Dilution benefits that can be applied to reducing far-field thermal Analysis: Flow and temperature data from Bear and load obligations. Our approach will ensure that the far- Ashland Creeks and Ashland W WTP will be analyzed. field temperature mitigation (planned through riparian Heat Source Wetlands (HSW) models of Glendower restoration) accounts for benefits already delivered from Pond (open water pond) and densely vegetated the outfall relocation and wetland cooling projects. constructed wetlands will be developed using Ashland Streamlined Permitting: Our team will approach key climatic data. Temperature results will be used to guide permitting agencies early in the project, to streamline initial sizing of pond/wetland areas needed to meet the process of creating implementable solutions. Early temperature standards. The DEQ analysis of dilutions to engagement will provide a short list of project avoid migration blockage and spawning impairment will alternatives that the agencies are more likely to support, be updated. that will avoid significant permitting challenges or Task 1.3. Project Alternatives Definition: Using the mitigation requirements, and will decrease project information from Task 1.2, a range of options will be compliance costs and schedule risk. Challenges such as identified that can technically meet the water quality construction disturbance and mitigation for impacts to criteria for near field temperature impacts. jurisdictional wetlands or waterways, floodplain impacts, Task 1 Deliverable: Technical memorandum summarizing and opportunities for developing artificial wetlands and modeling and list of identified alternatives. ponds that are exempt from the requirements, will be addressed early in the project definition phase. This Task 2. Natural Resources and NPIDES Permitting approach was applied successfully for the Albany, RUSH, and Woodburn projects described in Section 3. Task 2.1. Preliminary Environmental and Permitting Supported by the Community: Our team joined the Analysis: Using the results of Task 1.3, a preliminary community in preliminary discussions on outfall environmental permitting analysis will be conducted to relocation options, where we gained a keen identify potential environmental constraints and understanding of the community's sentiments and approvals/permits needed from local, state, and federal values for certain open space assets. We recognize that agencies (DEQ, Jackson County, USACE, USFWS, NMFS, Ashland's success through this project depends on DSL, SHPO) during Phase 2. Available information will be developing temperature and outfall solutions that utilized; all required approvals, permits, and Phase 2 enhance the aesthetics, recreational, and educational studies will be clearly summarized; and a permitting opportunities surrounding the WWTP, without strategy will identify opportunities for impact avoidance restricting current public uses of Glendower Pond and and potential mitigation. other open space assets. We will work with the City to Task 2.2. Preliminary Wetland Delineation: Delineate deliver a project that provides not only short term regulatory wetlands and waters within the defined support but long term value. We will build this support boundaries of the study area. The task will include the through meetings with the Ashland Parks Commission, background research, field work, and preliminary neighborhood associations, and an on-line web wetland mapping to inform the preliminary design presence. process. Completion of the wetland delineation report Preliminary Statement of Work and submittal to agencies will occur in Phase 2. Our team has developed a preliminary statement of Task 2.3. Agency Pre-Application Meeting: Following work that accomplishes the requested tasks through the the completion of Task 1, 3.1 and a draft level completion of Phase 1. A Gantt chart with major work completion of Task 2.1, 3.2, and 3.3, we will hold a pre- tasks, milestones, and durations through Phase 1, for application meeting with key agency staff to solicit input completion by October 1, 2014, is presented in on the planned project elements. Results of this meeting Figure 1-2 at the end of this section. will inform the completion of Task 2.1 and the identification of conveyance routes and wetland Task 1. Project locations to be incorporated in Task 3. Task 1.1. Project Initiation: Attend kick-off meeting with Task 2 Deliverables: Technical memorandum and the City to confirm project goals and success factors, meeting notes for incorporation into the predesign communication protocols, and key project stakeholders. report. Additionally, we will discuss priority issues that have been raised by permitting agencies, the parks commission, stakeholders, and the public. 2 WBG0214142029SIPDX Ashland Wastewater Treatment Plant Effluent Outfall Relocation Project Task 3. Preliminary Design members will present project proposals for discussion and will document public comments. Presentations are Task 3.1. Field Data Collection: Obtain data required to planned for at least one Ashland Parks Commission and support the outfall mixing zone dilution study and one City Council meeting. preliminary design of the outfall pipeline, diffuser, and Task 4 Deliverables: Public communications strategy, constructed wetlands. Field data collected during spring/ communications media, and talented specialists to summer 2014 will include: geomorphic investigation and support public outreach efforts. Tours of other Oregon detailed riverbed bathymetry/velocity profiles at the wetland/pork sites can be arranged if desired. proposed new outfall locations. Project ~ Task 5. Management and Quality Control Task 3.2. Outfall and Diffuser Preliminary Design: Develop two outfall relocation concepts and dilution Task 5.1. Ongoing Project Management: Develop the modeling of the concepts for existing, selected planning project execution plan, project instructions, and prepare horizon, and buildout flows. Perform hydraulic modeling monthly progress reports and billings. evaluations to define future capacity needs so that Task 5.2. Quality Assurance/Quality Control: Develop outfall diffusers can be designed to accommodate full and follow the Quality Management Plan (QMP). buildout. Meet with the City to review findings and recommendations to facilitate selection of a preferred Project Management and Quality Assurance alternative. Incorporate the preferred alternative into a Our project management approach will include timely mixing zone dilution report that meets the requirements and effective communication with Scott Fleury, including of Oregon DEQ's Mixing Zone Internal Management review of key findings, permitting, design, meeting Directive. coordination, status of regulatory discussions, public Task 3.3. Wetland Preliminary Design: Develop outreach, and budget and schedule status (including preliminary design of constructed wetlands necessary to date of deliverable submittals). Our project manager, meet the near field temperature criteria. Prepare Jason Smesrud, will meet regularly with Mr. Fleury to hydraulic profiles and identify major conveyance needs, review the project status. The meetings will review work routes, and sizing. Finalize HSW models developed recently completed and forthcoming work, and will under Task 1.3, with final wetland footprints and flow address outstanding or newly identified information routing to simulate the effluent cooling. Compile the requests. At the conclusion of each month, CH21VI HILL information into a revised analysis of migration blockage will prepare a monthly written report to accompany and spawning impairment conditions; quantify total invoices, including scope, schedule, and budget status. excess thermal load benefits (annually, by month) to The monthly status reports will include a graphical complement efforts by the City to address far field representation of the project financials, so that Mr. temperature impacts and thermal mitigation Fleury and City staff can quickly ascertain status by requirements. project task. Task 3.4. Preliminary Engineering Design Report: Mark Madison will serve as the team's quality manager, Document the results of Tasks 1 through 3, along with overseeing the implementation of CH2M HILL's Water facility cost estimates, in accordance with the DEQ Business Group QMP. The key tenets of CH2M HILCs Guidelines for Writing Engineering and Pre-Design quality program are: 1) Continuous quality control is Reports, to facilitate written DEQ approval of the design built into the project by involving the appropriate report. technical staff from project inception; 2) While the project manager is ultimately responsible to ensure Task 3 Deliverable: Preliminary Engineering Design quality work products, the entire project team is Report - Draft and Final. responsible for the quality of work being performed; and • 3) All deliverables must be reviewed by a qualified Task 4. Public technical reviewer before being submitted to the City. Task 4.1. Public Outreach and Communications The project will have a QMP that defines the work plan Strategy: Develop a public outreach and for quality assurance/quality control. The QMP will communications strategy, in concert with the City, to succinctly identify deliverables for review, qualified create an effective communication process that is reviewers, and establish timelines and budget for transparent and inclusive. reviews. Task 4.2. Public Meetings: Prepare supporting graphic poster boards, handouts, and other materials to facilitate information exchange. Key CH2M HILL team WBG021414202951PDx 3 n ti m N O N a I ~ I'! 3 n c c ay `m d >LO C FI C C (r Y2-" C i d ~?^I 3. w N a ~ 3 I ~ 6 C 0 Q C W WE 5 b Q 4 p' N r! d ~~I i O t At d Atg ~ a i ~ a ~ I n o 1Y0 m « V N i tC ~ y 3 v ~ c y C p O 00oa m a ~ E f C.,..._.. .__..w.. x > , a 22 I 3h n na' 3r g N I I ~ a+ In j ~ i 5 i i I~ g r p 3 g Q 8 m°gg rg~` r€ s'~ig~~ I~ 5 ~1Ei~) e u s YUgg 18T`!E~ q~d8yp81o~ aw g g~ ; ~afg 21 t 918`2 21 1E z m a aS y a - ry N e' '£i LL 5 u 'i6'£I d~ 5 8g Q LL U LL LL U m W 6.U 3 i£ 8 ~i ''y' 1" 1 Ni 1 E.'1,^'o A Si I d'2 cif Fa P''I 6 U U ti3 2! LL "F F F F! F F F F F • ! F ! ry f o '^'n a m Im o' Iti iro'e m ;n ~m iR I,tl ,R I° n R N iR (~4. f`.Y R g O y Ashland Wastewater Treatment Plant Effluent Outfall Relocation Project 2. Project Team and Resources and other efforts in Oregon and we look forward to The CH2M HILL project team offers the City proven partnering once more for Ashland's success. resources with experience delivering similar outfall and Our project team will be led by CH21M HILL'S Project temperature mitigation projects in Oregon from Manager, Jason Smesrud, located in our Portland office. planning through permitting, design, construction, and Jason has proven success designing and delivering highly operations. This team also has a deep understanding of complex thermal control wetland projects throughout the complex local community and regulatory issues Oregon, as demonstrated by his work at Woodburn, critical to the success of the project. Albany, and Roseburg. He is particularly adept at Project Team coordinating permitting issues and communicating with regulators to deliver projects on schedule and under CH21M HILL, a world renowned wastewater planning and budget. Jason, highly respected as the region's top design firm, will lead our team with key project expert in temperature mitigation wetland design, personnel based primarily in our Portland and Corvallis developed the HSW model (described further under the offices. We are proud to include Keller Associates and Project Resources section). CH2M HILL will also provide The Freshwater Trust, with their deep understanding of some of the region's top experts in mixing zone analysis, local stakeholders and regional regulatory issues, as outfall design, permitting and community outreach, all subconsultants to augment our expertise. Our combined with extensive project experience in Oregon. team is shown on Figure 2-1. James Bledsoe, Keller Associates, will provide planning FIGURE 2-1. Organization Chart and design of pumping and off-site piping improvements. James was the project manager for Scott Fleury Ashland's Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Master Plan • .-1111711161 and is currently overseeing the completion of Ashland's - Wastewater Facility Planning Study. He also helped with C M rk'Madison' , ' Jason Srnesrud' J E, Lynne Chicoine' 'r) the State Revolving Fund loan process associated with MMEENMENWO related wastewater projects and brings a unique Ondttall and Permitting Wetlands Design understanding of Ashland's WWTP and planning efforts Mixing Zone, Peggy O'Neill' Jason Smesrud' to address the City's thermal load compliance. David Wilson David Prlmozich Mark Madison Eugene Wier will serve as TFT's project manager ~Virice' Rybel' . Public Outreach conveyance Linda Macpherson' coordinating its contribution to the community outreach James Bledsoe' -Eugene Weir' and permitting support efforts with CH2M HILL. Eugene 'CH2MHILL 'KenerAasaclates 'TheReshmterT,9 brings a wealth of local knowledge, with more than a decade of professional experience conducting fish and Keller Associates specializes in wastewater treatment wildlife research and habitat restoration in southern and design and has been successfully providing Oregon and northern California. Based in Ashland and wastewater planning and design support services to the working in the Rogue Basin for more than 16 years, City of Ashland for the last three years, including Eugene has developed strong relationships with local Ashland's Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Master Plan landowners, watershed councils, nurseries, and and its Wastewater Facility Planning Study. The community stakeholders from projects in the Rogue Freshwater Trust (TFT) is a nonprofit organization with River region. 30 years of experience implementing high-quality restoration projects in the Pacific Northwest. The Trust Key personnel are listed in Table 2-1 along with project has been active in the Rogue Basin since 1994, recently roles, specialized expertise, related project experience, providing active riparian restoration on the Rogue River, and percent time commitment during key periods of Little Butte Creek, and Applegate Creek as part of the project execution. Medford Water Quality Trading Program. TFT is also Project Resources currently undertaking analysis of in-stream flow One of the key project resources that is unique to the augmentation opportunities in the Bear Creek region for CH21A HILL team is the HSW model that was developed the Bureau of Reclamation, which could provide in-house by Jason Smesrud for design of temperature valuable context when examining alternatives for the mitigation wetlands. This hourly time step dynamic City. CH2M HILL and TFT are currently working together energy balance model has been validated using to provide a multi-faceted total temperature compliance measured flow/temperature data on a range of aquatic solution for the City of Boise. We have developed a systems, from open ponds to densely shaded emergent strong and enduring relationship from the Boise project vegetation wetlands, and has been applied to projects in OR, CA, WA, and ID. Model documentation and proofs of calibration are available upon request. WBG021414202951PDX 5 Ashland Wastewater Treatment Plant Effluent Outfall Relocation Project Commitment Name Role Specialized Expertise % CH2M HILL Jason Smesrud, PE Project Manager, I • 16 years experience in managing complex permitting and design project 60 Portland, OR Wetlands Design with multi-disciplinary teams • Developer of HSW thermal wetlands model Mark Madison, PE Quality Control, • 30 years natural treatment systems experience 10 Portland OR Wetlands Design Lynne Chicoine, PE Principal-in-Charge • 30 years project management experience 10 Portland, OR • Broad experience in NTS project management • Well-versed in OR regulatory issues David Wilson Ouffall & Mixing • 30 years experience with mixing zone studies, siting outfalls, and design 50 Seattle WA Zone Stud of outfall diffusers Vince Rybel, PE Outfall • 28 years experience with designing outfall pipelines and diffusers and in- 50 Corvallis OR water construction Peggy O'Neill Permitting • 12 years experience preparing federal and state (OR, WA) permits. 50 Portland, OR • Secured permits for all of CH2M HILL's recent constructed wetland and ou all projects Linda Macpherson Community • 30 years creating public support for WWrPs, odor control efforts, and 10 Portland OR Outreach water reuse IKeII~Associates Jim Bledsoe, PE Conveyance • 16 years wastewater pump station and pipeline design experience 60 Boise ID Oversees all Keller work in OR &The1Freshwater1Trust Eugene Wier Community Ashland based with strong communities ties 60 Ashland, OR Outreach Over 10 years experience in fish and wildlife research and habitat restoration in southern Oregon and northern California David Primozich Permitting Recognized US expert on water quality trading and environmental 40 Portland, OR accounting • 10 years experience with regulatory compliance related to water quality and endangered species • Former Director of Willamette Partnership 3. Related Project Experience descriptions for several directly relevant projects along with schedule and budget information and references Our team's experience managing temperature (Table 3-1 provides a broader list of C1121VI HILL's outfall mitigation wetlands and outfall design projects in projects). We invite you to contact our references Oregon is extensive. We will rely on our experience and (provided as an attachment) for additional information technical expertise to maximize value for the City and and to discuss our performance. acceptance by stakeholders. Below we provide project Albany-Millersburg Talking Water Gardens, Albany and Millersburg, Oregon and ATI Wah Chang Team Members: Jason Smesrud, Mark Madison, Linda Macpherson, Peggy O'Neill, David Wilson Project Description: This 37-acre functional wetlands system provides cooling and natural treatment of treated effluent from the Albany-Millersburg Water Reclamation Facility and local rare metals manufacturer ATI Wah Chang before discharge to the Willamette River. Our team developed the project concept, applied for all permits, secured ARRA funding, completed designs and construction management, and advised the operations team. The innovative project concept results in a treatment system that effectively addresses new regulatory challenges while creating ancillary social, environmental, and economic benefits, including trails and outdoor recreation amenities. Project Outcome: Winner of awards from USEPA, American Academy of Environmental Engineers; Oregon Chapter of the American Public Works Association; and League of Oregon Cities. Talking Gardens Wetlands Park has become a valued community asset attracting positive attention from around the world. Budget and Schedule: Final Design/SDC Plan Budget - $912K; Actual Budget - $912K Scheduled Completion - April 2010; Actual Completion -April 2010 Natural Treatment System, Roseburg Urban Sanitary Authority (RUSA), Oregon Team Members: Jason Smesrud, Mark Madison, Linda Macpherson, Peggy O'Neill, David Wilson CH21M HILL provided permitting, preliminary and final design, and services during construction and operation for the natural treatment system, which includes constructed wetlands, land application at agronomic and high-rate irrigation, subsurface hyporheic discharge, and restoration of historic natural wetlands located on 340 acres of RUSA-owned farmland adjacent to the wastewater treatment facility. Our team also provided key support in compliance negotiations and permit modifications with regulating agencies. Project Outcome: Successfully reducing phosphorus loads and temperature in the South Umpqua River beyond permit requirements. Budget and Schedule: Final Design/SDC Plan Budget-$920K; Actual Budget $920K Scheduled Completion - May 2009; Actual Completion - May 2009 6 WBG021414202951PDX Ashland Wastewater Treatment Plant Effluent Outfall Relocation Project Woodburn Natural Treatment System Improvements, City of Woodburn, Oregon Team Members: Jason Smesrud, Lynne Chicoine, Mark Madison, Linda Macpherson, Peggy O'Neill, David Wilson, Vince Rybel CH2M HILL worked closely with the City of Woodburn, beginning in the early 1990s, to establish a natural treatment system at the W WTP to cost-effectively improve and preserve Pudding River water quality. Our work included facilities planning, design, construction, and operations assistance for a full-scale 84-acre poplar plantation. In 2008, CH2M HILL helped the City plan for the next phase of WWTP upgrades to meet new temperature TMDLs. CH2M HILL led the facility plan update and completed preliminary through final contract document preparation for WWTP upgrades and natural treatment systems, including 25 acres of poplar trees, 26 acres of constructed wetlands, new pump stations and conveyance, a new outfall into the Pudding River, and a 10 MG irrigation reservoir. Project Outcome: Project has received all required permits and approvals for construction. Construction is pending resolution of Oregon TMDL issues. Budget and Schedule: Schedule A Final Design Plan Budget-$498K; Actual Budget $498K Scheduled Completion -April 2012; Actual Completion - February 2012 Projects by Keller Associates and The Freshwater Trust Keller Associates: • Ashland, OR: Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Master Plan; coordinated evaluation of disposal options, including shading plan; evaluated maintenance management software; evaluated SCADA system; staffing analysis support; oversaw assessment of pumping facilities. • Stayton, OR: Served as Owner's Representative for the Mill Creek Lift Station and Pipeline Design-Build Project. The Freshwater Trust: • Medford, OR: Contracted in 2012 to manage an ongoing $8 million temperature trading program for the City of Medford to comply with thermal load requirements of NPDES permit. To date, have completed 6 riparian restoration sites of a necessary 20-25 by 2022, and through revegetation work have developed close working relationships with restoration and permitting groups in the basin. • Rogue River Basin, OR: Contracted by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation in 2013 to determine potential riparian and other habitat restoration and flow augmentation activities to meet obligations under a recent biological opinion, with ongoing analysis primarily centered on Bear Creek. Active project implementation for Reclamation to begin as early as Fall 2014 and continue through 2020. • Boise, ID: Working in partnership with the City of Boise and CH2M HILL to develop an integrated thermal load solution for effluent discharge from the West Boise and Landers Street WWTPs. Solutions include a combination of riparian restoration (TFT) and cooling wetlands/ponds (CH2M HILL) designed to meet thermal load requirements throughout the year. 4. Responsiveness FIGURE 4-1. Team Locations CH2M HILL's team anticipates fielding questions and inquiries from the City that will require immediate attention at the project site or at City, agency, or stakeholder offices. We are very well positioned to respond (Figure 4-1). With CH2M HILL offices in Redding, Corvallis, Bend, and Portland, qualified *Portland - - staff can arrive on site in about two hours, and the majority of the team can Jeff ? •Salern. arrive within about four hours. Furthermore, Keller Associates has aCo rv Ilis• demonstrated track record supporting Ashland's engineering needs from its •Bend Salem, Oregon office and corporate headquarters in Meridian, Idaho. •Boise Finally, TFT has two employees working in Ashland, led by public(Ashland participation team member Eugene Wier, with supporting staff at its main office in Portland, OR. •Redding As a matter of sound economics and productivity, our team relies on the use° 11 Office Lwetions of on-line tools to facilitate meetings when face-to-face contact is not • CH2MHILL required. Our project manager will use CH2M HILL's web-based Oracle e K Fmshwater Nst ssodates project database to track costs in real time (updated on at least a weekly basis), and to project costs forward to develop estimates-to-completion and associated estimates-at-completion. The tools we use to manage communications, time, and costs are a big part of our commitment to our clients. WBG021414202951PDX 7 x d m N V •i a # # # # # # # # m 3 # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # o w - C JQ C y Z C Z O 3 O m b O N - -y o -y 'v o o -y o o o y ~3 ~ ~0 3 3 z 3~ 3 3 > C p M .W J o N w C4 C - d N .Nr N O 07S a V 'O -O C ~ O w '0 C W N m c m 00 O 3 J 00 J N O C) N C O C N 4J Vf vl a ti-~ U c_H a x 'u c 0 .n on" m- mo D o o c - > c0 'X N O d O N V1 y rG m O d O Gl y 'O O 'X O X - ~ ` -ON •-I -O> a° v E X O H Ul N N w N - 3mo c c~ > v w gyn. O°~-' 06 m e o o v .y c y « m„ >a ~o '.2 m 0- O m ~m°o u Eo o o -o y v- J.%O ° 1 3:°" 3° 47 w 0coZ. ~w^ x°a° oo2° o~ o~ oz ° z~ N N N N Ul y d O m u n un u n o u ~t0 vt m p v>N p~,~y 00 00 00 ~h mi0 Hm muN E3C U~.W • d d d N 60 N J` m d cij3 aiw aiw aiw vJi V Yp 3o ai > dMCU~ OUP E00~ N~ m3 N~ dN~W yyN H~vOi~WmW WO~~O ~ wtiz°e`wo z°o`wo zm Mw r~ mcc "~M-, m-a.u m3ti • Z aZi v.a mm a `0 m'a 1Om z.v. l7 o a, Z 'u m p,u u"o p acv m mm ~ m v^i rco 1m v^i c~ M. o 6 ~ n o a v ~ v Vf W I~ 5~~ d' K G~ G~ N CL W Cl V N LL O U~~ U Vf Z d t/1 m v ~ m v c • m m -a -a A ~ 'o m m m 3 3 vfOi m 3 aJ 3 z ~w "w mw w ~a v N Y C Y C Y c Y C H O p O c U O 3 OJO U J U J U J V i 0 w N Y uV ° UU uu uu m°o u3 U uan u m References Albany-Millersburg Talking Water Gardens, Albany and Millersburg, Oregon and ATI Wah Chang Tom Tenpas, Talking Water Gardens Manager, Albany, OR, tom.tenaas@citvofalbanv.net, 541.497.6224 (ill~~~ ft ll .~1~ HIM Natural Treatment System, Roseburg Urban Sanitary 1 • A ~P Authority (RUSA), Oregon Ron Thames, General Manager, RUSA, Roseburg, rsthamesCc rusa-or.org, 541.672.1551 , . } I Woodburn Natural Treatment System Improvements, City of Woodburn, Oregon Randy Scott, Division Manager, Water Resources, Woodburn, OR ra ndv.scottOci.wood burn.or.us. 503.980.2427 Curtis Stultz, Section Supervisor, Wastewater, Woodburn, OR, 'n curtis.stultz@ci.woodburn.or.us, 503.982.5281 -CS - Projects by Keller Associates and The Freshwater Trust Keller Associates: Ashland, OR: Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Mike Faught, Public Works Director, Ashland, fauehtmCruashland.or.us. 541.552.2411. Slayton, OR Dave Kinney, Public Works Director, Stayton, dkinney(mci.stavton.or.us. 503.769.2919. The Freshwater Trust: Medford, OR. Plant Superintendent, Medford, dennis.baker@citvofinedford.ore. 541-774-2750 Rogue River Basin, OR Dawn Wiedmeier, Deputy Area Manager, Bureau of Reclamation, dwiedmeierCwusbr.eov. 509-575-5848 WBG021414202951PDX Resumes CH2M HILL Lynne Chicoine Linda Macpherson Mark Madison Peggy O'Neill Vince Rybel Jason Smesrud David Wilson Keller Associates James Bledsoe The Freshwater Trust David Primozich Eugene Wier WBG021414202951PDX • CH2MHILL. Lynne Chicoine, PE Principal in Charge Relevant Experience I Etlucatronrr k'r Ms. Chicoine is a civil engineer and project manager with M s Envron mental g"neering "n Gvil Engineering, CI-12M HILL's Water Business Group in Portland, Oregon. She has k } ( University of Illinois 30 years of experience on a wide range of water and wastewater , ' , tr B S Gvil Engmeenng, University of Illinois engineering projects. In addition to managing three signilicant Oregon wetlands projects, her experience includes facilities planning, 8 conceptual to detailed design, preparation of specifications and Professional Engineer: Oregon (1990, No.1534fi); drawings and operation and maintenance (0&M), and engineering Illinois (1982, No. 6 040923) services during construction for aeration basins, digesters, thickeners, Distinguishing Qualifications centrifuges and belt filter presses. * P"roject Manager Fernhin Phase lA, Clean Water Representative Project Experience services ~j Project Manager, Femhill Wetlands Phase 1A; Clean Water 20 year hatory with Glean Water Services projects Services; Washington County, OR. Ms. Chicoine managed the ~,t project Manager Oregon Garden Wetlands, design and construction of 2 acres of surface wetlands, the first phase x# SilVerton Oregon of a 400 acre natural treatment system which will include storage for ~t k ~ d * Experience managing complex projeets with large water reuse, agricultural irrigation and subsurface wetlands. The r~ project also included development of a site-Wde conceptual plan. E design staff/a 5ubconsultants * Experience managing design and construction of Project Manager, Woodburn Mill Creek Pump Station, Publicly wastewater treatment projects with public Owned Treatment Works and Natural Treatment System; interface Woodburn, OR. Managed design of $10 million improvements for the r master. Gardener, Oregon State University City of Woodburn that includes improvements to and expansion of a Extension Service: Trojan 4,000 UV system and 23 acres of treatment wetlands for FkLowtion: Portland Oregon effluent temperature control. Task Lead; Wastewater Facilities Plan; City of Woodburn, OR. Prepared alternatives analysis and developed recommended plan for industrial and municipal wastewater treatment for liquids and solids facilities including separate and combined treatment of industrial flow. Treatment consists of conventional activated sludge and anaerobic digestion in addition to on-site reuse to poplar trees and weflands for dry season ammonia and temperature Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) compliance. Project Manager, Silverton WWTP and Oregon Garden Wetlands; Silverton OR. Managed innovative wastewater treatment plant expansion and design of wetlands and collection system improvements associated with wastewater management facilities. Complex project included first of its kind wetland discharge permit, wetland construction, and irrigation of a showcase botanical garden, sewer and lift station improvements, peak flow management, treatment plant expansion. $15M construction value Project Manager; Durham AW WTF Brown Grease Receiving and Cogeneration Project; Clean Water Services; Washington County, OR. Managing project to design and construct a receiving station for brown grease and a new 2 MW cogeneration facility. The $13 million project is expected to be on line in 2014. Project Manager; Durham AWWTF Headworks Improvements Project; Clean Water Services; Washington County, OR. Managed the design and construction of headworks expansion which cost effectively increased hydraulic capacity from 150-200 mgd in existing channels while improving screening effectiveness. Project included new bar screens, grit classifiers and cyclones, sluice conveyance and washer-compactors. Project has resulted in significant reduction in screenings hauling and associated cost. 2011 PNCWA LCS Project of the Year. Project Manager; West Basin Facilities Plan; Clean Water Services; Washington County, OR. As a subconsultant, provided wetlands technical input to the recent WBFP update. Input included summary of regulatory requirements, design criteria, conceptual design and implementation plan for Forest Grove and Hillsboro wetlands. Previously was task leader/project manager for the West Basin Facilities Plan, which incorporated the Forest Grove and Hillsboro Facilities Plans and a Reclaimed Water Master Plan. WBG021414202951PDX LYNNE CHICOINE, PE Wastewater Treatment Technical Consultant; Clean Water Services Wetlands Preliminary Design; Washington County, OR. Lynne worked with the wetlands design team providing an interface with the treatment facilities and advising on treatment required for influent into the wetlands planned for the Forest Grove and Hillsboro facilities. Acting Project Manager, Durham Advanced Wastewater Treatment Plant (AWWTF) Facilities Plan; Clean Water Services; Washington County, OR. Managed completion of final Facilities Plan for the 18 mgd (ADWF) BNR facility. The plan evaluated alternatives for hydraulic expansion and continued biological phosphorus and nitrification to meet stringent Tualatin River discharge limits. The recommended plan provides expanded headworks, chemically enhanced primary treatment (CEPT) and additional tertiary treatment. Project Manager; Miscellaneous On-call Projects; Clean Water Services; Washington County, OR. Managed tasks that included structural modification of an influent pump station to accommodate Ostara process and filter backwash pipe support analysis and design; feasibility study for development of wetlands for tertiary treatment (nutrient removal); process capacity analysis of Hillsboro and Forest Grove Wastewater Treatment Facilities; development of District standard fine bubble membrane disk diffuser specification. Project Manager; Wastewater Facilities Plan Update and Collection System Master Plan Update; City of McMinnville, OR. Managed completion of a facilities plan and collection system master plan update and prepared solids stream evaluation and analysis. The 3-mgd (ADWF) treatment plant must provides BPR and nitrification. NTS were evaluated for temperature TMDL compliance. The innovative recommended plan included collection system rehabilitation to limit flow to the plant to eliminate wet weather bypass, expansion of secondary treatment and expansion of the solids treatment process with alternate technologies that would produce Class A sludge. Project Manager; Technical and Regulatory Support for South Yamhill River TMDL; City of McMinnville, OR. Managing this project and providing support for the City's wastewater management staff during the development of the South Yamhill temperature Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL). Work includes advising on data collection and temperature model development and general support during TMDL development. Project Manager, Columbia Boulevard Secondary Improvements Project, City of Portland, OR. Managed design and construction of complex and highly visible project to maximize capacity of secondary treatment process. The $12 million construction includes upgrading and automating the aeration system including valves and instrumentation, conversion to step feed and contact stabilization operation and conversion to Profibus control platform. Successful operation will defer costly WWTP expansion. Project Manager; Hillsboro Facility Aeration Basin Improvements; Hillsboro, OR. Managed the design and construction of the Hillsboro Aeration Basin improvements to increase performance and provide BPR and nitrification forfuture summer operation. WBG021414202951 PDX ® CH2MHILL. Linda Macpherson Public Outreach Relevant Experience Linda Macpherson specializes in stimulating new ways of thinking r about sustainable water management. She is a senior policy planner, Education public involvement specialist, and reuse technologist with CH2M HILL, Masters of Public Administration, Portland State where she is often called upon to develop public education campaigns university and policy strategies that build consensus among parties who are grappling with challenging water, wastewater, and environmental Massachusetts-Amherst (Phi Beta Kappa) quality issues. Linda is based in CH2M HILL's Portland, Oregon, Distinguishing Qualifications office. * More than 30 years of experience developing Through her extensive work with environmental education and policy, public awareness programs for water, Linda has developed a keen understanding of howto get people of all wastewater, and environmental quality ages involved in water stewardship. Her concepts for educational * Globally recognized reuse communications expert facilities- ncluding interactive exhibits and video"ave engaged the and strategist public in unique and exciting new ways and garnered numerous awards. Linda has worked with clients to create public support for * Actively involved in planning and service such projects as wastewater treatment plant siting and expansion, organizations dealing with water resources issues, odor control efforts, and water reuse programs. Her communications including the Water Environment federation approach is to design plans to reach broad audiences; to address a (WEF) Public Education Chair and wide range of learning styles by relaying information through a variety Communications Task Lead for the Compounds of of media; tailor the message to address the unique character of local f Emerging Concern Community of Practice (CEC communities; and to recognize the importance of and to incorporate COP), National Association of Clean Water feedback into the process. j Agencies (NACWA), and the Water Reuse Representative Projects Association Board of Directors, currently serves on the Executive Committee as secretary. Public Outreach Manager, Wastewater System Improvement * Winner of the 2009 Water Reuse Person of the Program; City of Albany; Albany; Oregon. Prepared information for the 2006/2007 Wastewater System Improvement Program including Year award the integrated wetlands reuse project. Coordinated with the Willamette * Demonstrated expertise creating consensus River Partnership to showcase the habitat improvement aspects of I among parties involved in challenging issues this wastewater project. through planning, policy analysis, and public Community Outreach Task Lead; Oak Lodge Sanitary District education and involvement l - Master Plan; Clackamas County. Worked with a citizen's committee to develop a managed design process to guide the selection of wastewater treatment plant alternatives. Public Outreach Manager, Tryon Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant Enhancement Plan, City of Lake Oswego, Oregon. Developed and implemented a citizen and stakeholder involvement program, which included a "sounding board" made up of the public, TCWTP staff, key neighbors, and other stakeholders. The sounding board provided feedback on existing odors and on concepts and potential approaches for addressing odors and aesthetic issues, and potential uses and locations for a community building, as well as assisting in developing a phasing plan for recommended improvements. Boise Water Visitor Center Interpretive Experience; City of Boise; Boise, Idaho. Reevaluated and established a concept direction for the visitor experience to create an enhanced understanding of the linkages among citizens, water stewardship, and wastewater treatment. Developed an interpretive experience mission and messages to prepare a visitor center storyline that can inspire the Boise community to invest in the Center. Linda Macpherson then oversaw the design, construction, and installation of 3,600 square feet of exhibits to enhance visitor understanding of the connection between citizen water stewardship and wastewater treatment. The final Boise Watershed Environmental Education Center (BWEEC) includes exhibits that range from static graphic displays to interactive touch- screen kiosks that challenge and inform users on water use and conservation. Public Outreach Manager, Wastewater Treatment Plant Location; City of Blaine; Blaine, Washington. Worked with the City of Blaine to evaluate and develop the public involvement strategy and final plan. Assisted the City to develop a Citizen's Wastewater WBG021414202951PDX LINDA MACPHERSON Advisory Committee to be involved in recommendations to City Council, facilitated meetings, and prepared outreach materials for the public. Public Outreach Manager, Combined Sewer Overflow Remediation Project; Corvallis; Oregon; 1995. As public outreach manager, created a community values-driven public involvement strategic plan. Required designing a public outreach and decision- making process that ensured a supportable remediation solution was reached. Recognized that public opinion about the project was critical for its success. Developed a plan that provided an understanding of the problem in order for a thoughtful judgment to be made about the solution. Activities involved preparing materials for a citizen's committee and educational materials to develop community understanding. Developed a kiosk with an interactive computer game containing information about causes, locations, solutions, and options for the remediation plan that communicated the work of the citizens committee. The kiosks and computers were placed in public buildings throughout the city, including libraries, schools, and city hall. Education and Outreach Strategist; Td-City Service District Wastewater Treatment Plant; Clackamas County; Oregon. Developed a comprehensive water education and outreach strategy with a citizen's advisory committee to generate public interest and support for the facilities plan update. The resulting plan provides amenities (such as odor control) and visual considerations, including a forested floodplain setting of trees, shrubs, bioswales, wetlands, and hiking trails. Developed a video "Good Neighbors: The New Face of Wastewater Treatment," that won an AMSA award for excellence in environmental education in May 2001. The plant's advanced facility plan won an award from the American Academy of Environmental Engineers in 2003. Public Involvement Task Leader; Spokane River Use Attainability Analysis; City of Spokane; Spokane, Washington. Led the public involvement and outreach task that involved setting up consultations with tribal governments to assure that the study, scope, and purpose of the effort is responsive to tribal interests. Also led the preparation of posters, displays, and other learning events used to explain the project in a multicultural setting involving tribal interests. Public Involvement Task Leader, Spokane Riverside Wastewater Treatment Plant; City of Spokane, Spokane, Washington. Prepared the public communication and education enhancement components for the Riverside Aesthetic Master Plan. Worked with the client team and engineers, landscape and building architects to define the community interfaces to the plant. Public Involvement Task Manager; Columbia Boulevard Wastewater Treatment Plant Facility Master Plan; Portland, Oregon. As public involvement task manager, designed the decision process and facilitated meetings of the Citizen Advisory Committee. Developed "We Care Where it Goes" video, that won AMSA's National Achievement Award in 1996. Project Manager; Willow Lake Wastewater Treatment Plant Public Awareness Program; Salem; Oregon. Project manager for a public acceptance effort related to land application of biosolids from the plant. Developed a pamphlet and fact sheet to assist the public in developing a positive view of biosolids land application and to minimize public attitudes developed through misunderstanding. WBG021414202951PDX ® CM2MHILL. Mark Madison, PE Quality Control Relevant Experience Mark Madison is an internationally known agricultural, environmental, Education and civil engineer as coauthor of "Design and Operation of Farm Irrigation Systems°, the 860 page design standard for the American B.S., Agricultural Engineering Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers. Mr. Madison has A.S., Production Agriculture (Irrigation Emphasis) 34 years experience specializing in managing soil, water, plants, and Professional Registrations nutrient relationships for wetlands, and upland agricultural production Professional Agricultural, Environmental, and Civil through the use of irigation. His experience includes site investigation, Engineer': OR data collection, modeling, model calibration, design, construction, Certified Water Rights Examiner: OR management, operations, and monitoring and maintenance. He has Distinguishing Qualifications led design for the oldest treatment wetland research site in Oregon. * 34 years experience studying, designing, and Representative Project Experience building irrigation, land application, and natural - Project Manager; Talking Water Gardens Low-Energy Passive treatment systems Effluent Cooling Project; Albany, OR. A pilot wetland study was * Helped write new wastewater reuse regulations used to confine treatment potential and collect data to assist in for the Oregon Department of Environmental permitting. The constructed wetlands remove heat plus heat Quality (DEQ) 26drfferent effluent constituents that were proven to have a synergetic * National expert in design of constructed wetlands treatment benefit. The proprietary CH2M H ILL treatment wetlands for wastewater quality improvement that also model was used to accurately predict performance. have mitigation credits a The 37-acre wetland is the nation's first constructed weflan6s * Managed four national award-winning effluent designed to furthertreat a unique combination of treated municipal wetlands and reuse projects that enhance water wastewater directly blended with industrial effluent. The wefland will quality and improve habitat polish the water to remove metals and nutrients to levels that allow Location: Rio de Janero, Brazil river discharge through the existing outfall as well as hyporheic discharge of 10 percent of the flow. The wetland system will also function to educate and inform the public (the "talking waters") and the regulatory community about the benefits of wetlands treatment to reducethermal loads and other pollutants. OSU uses the wetland fora living laboratory and as a subject for senior design projects and graduate research. The project was awarded federal stimulus funding and the highest honor nationally from the American Academy of Environmental Engineers. Subject Matter Expert (SME); Natural Reclamation System (NRS) for Phosphorus Removal; Roseburg Urban Sanitary Authority (RUSA); Roseburg, OR. Provided technology input to develop the nations' first large-scale NRS to remove phosphorus from municipal effluent to below 0.05mgIL. The 340-acre farm owned by RUSA uses constructed wetlands, overland flow, and 60 acres of restored natural wetlands for infiltration of effluent into clay soils that bind phosphorus. The NRS discharges into an ephemeral stream from the hyporheic zone along both sides of the stream with more than three miles of diffuse stream bed hyporheic springs. The NRS removes about 100 pounds per day of phosphorus from 5.5 mgd of effluent that was previously discharged directly to the South Umpqua River. The NRS is a landmark project in that the restoration of the natural wetlands with effluent provides both treatment and mitigation cred is for the uplift in ecosystem function and habitat benefits. Principal Engineer; Williamson River; River Delta Restoration Aflematives; The Nature Conservancy, Upper IOamath Lake; OR. Principal engineer for evaluation of alternatives to restore the Williamson River Delta in Klamath Lake to historic wefiand conditions for endangered species fish spawning and rearing. Evaluated impacts of flooding, sedimentation, and agriculture on water quality and habitat values. Project Manager; Sycan Marsh Restoration; The Nature Conservancy; Beattie, OR. Managed design and construction services to facilitate restoration of the original hydrology and native plant communities of the 25,000-acre Sycan Marsh in the headwaters of the Klamath River. Permitting and constructon of three large water control structures in the 600 cfs Sycan River. Tasks included landowner coordination, site survey, hydrology and soils evaluations, hydraulic modeling, hydraulic control structure design, services during construction, and post-construction performance evaluation. WBG0214l4202951PDX MARK MADISON, PE SME; Demonstration Natural Reclamation System (NRS); Cityof Salem; Salem, OR. Designed a wetland treatment demonstration project that compares three NRS technologies: overland flowwet meadow wetlands, vertical flow subsurface wetlands, and surfaceflow wetlands. The wetlands treat summer temperature, phosphorus, and ammonia, and create new vAldlife habitat. The project also provide a source of class A agricultural and golf course reuse water, in conjunction with the Title 16 U.S. Bureau of Reclamation program which funded 25 percent of the construction cost. This system has been in operation for 10 years and has the most robust data set on treatment wetlands operations and water quality in Oregon. SME; Welland Treatment Demonstration Project; Pope & Talbot; Halsey, OR. Managed design, construction, and startup. Project developed with OSU as a field laboratory for demonstration and research in wetland treatment technology. This project was built 22 years ago and is the oldest treatment wetland research site in Oregon. Multiple OSU graduate students have done research at this treatment wetland resulting in advanced degrees and expanded knowledge specific to treatment wetlands in Western Oregon. The system includes water control structures and ten separate wetlands with variable flow rates and plant management regimes. One cell is a subsurface flow wetland with rock media. The system reuses paper mill effluent and polishes lt before river discharge. SME; Wetlands for Phosphorus Removal; City of Boise, ID. Developed a Wastewater Facilities Plan Amendment that evaluated constructed wetlands for cooling, effluent polishing, and phosphorus removal for the West Boise wastewater reclamation facility. Evaluated innovative constructed treatment wetlands with hyporheic discharge and soil treatment to allow no surface discharge. SME; Treatment Welland System Feasibility Review, South Suburban Sanitary District; Klamath Falls, OR. Feasibility review/conceptual design for treatment wetand construction next to municipal wastewater treatment facilities to polish effluent before river discharge. SME; Tualatin River Wetlands Mitigation; Hillsboro Landfill; Waste Management, Inc.; Hillsboro, OR. Welland restoration and creation as mitigation for landfill expansion in the floodplain. Project included design, construction oversight, and monitoring. SME; Treatment Wetland Hyporheic Research; Woodburn, OR. Provided site evaluation, design, and construction services for a hyporheic discharge research wetland that was precisely monitored by OSU researchers to establish design criteria for hyporheic discharge specific to Western Oregon. SME; Welland Predesign; Clean Water Services; Hillsboro, OR. Sited, designed, and provided field investigation oversight for a 350-acre wetland complex for water cooling and phosphorus and ammonia removal. The predesign included meeting with stakeholders and regulators. A peat filter cell was modeled to enhance metals removal followed by a series of treatment weflands to further filter, polish, and cool the water. SME; Welland Design; Clean Water Services; Forest Grove, OR. Technology input for design of the Phase One treatment wetlands at Femhill. Evaluated subsurface flow wetlands for metals removal and hyporheic discharge for a portion of the total flow to remove additional phosphorus provide diffuse flow. WBG021414202951 PDX CFI2MHILL. -4111111111110 Peggy O'Neill, PWS Permitting Relevant Experience Peggy O'Neill is an environmental scientist with CH2M HILUs Water Business Group (WBG) in Portland, OR. She has 14 years of I Education experience coordinating, loading, and conducting biological M.S., Environmental Sciences and Resources investigations. Her experience includes regulatory compliance; (Plant Ecology), Portland State University wetland delineation, mitigation, and monitoring; stream and wetland B.A., Portland State University restoration; resource inventories; feasibility studies; site selection, B.S., Earth Science, Western Oregon University planning, and design; NEPA and SEPA documentation; environmental assessment and environmental impact statement documentation; and Professional Registrations rare plant surveys. She has been responsible for federal, state, and Professional Wetland Scientist, (Society of local natural resources permitting for projects with the potential for Wetlands Scientists, 2005) impacting wetlands. In this capacity, she worked closely with the Distinguishing Qualifications U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Oregon Division of State Lands, * Successful management of biological field teams Washington Department of Ecology, and numerous local agencies on large, complex projects throughout Oregon and Washington. She has also been responsible * 14 years experience conducting biological for development of wetland compensatory mitigation and monitoring nvestigations including riparian corridor plans, functional assessments of freshwater wetlands, and collaborating in the design of wetland site enhancements and assessments, wetland delineations, vegetative construction for habitat and water quality benefits. analyses, botanical surveys, habitat assessments, and threatened and endangered species Ms. O'Neill has extensive experience in riparian and wetland habitat evaluations assessment and in protocol-level surveys for sensitive plant species. * 12 years experience preparing federal, state She has been integral in developing action plans for protection of (Oregon, Washington) and local permits for wetlands, riparian, stream, and other sensitive habitats from impacts associated with urban development, highway improvements including removal-fill activities, including use of SLOPES bridge replacements, and siting of wind energy facilities. Her programmatic biological opinion process responsibilities include public presentation of study results to * Commitment to coaching/mentoring/training coordinating agencies as well as to citizen groups. junior staff in biological investigations, wetlands delineation, and environmental permitting Representative Project Experience * Researched and implemented biological control Environmental Task Lead; Natural Treatment Wetlands Project; for invasive plant species on wetland mitigation City of Woodburn, OR. Coordinated environmental investigations site and permitting for design of natural treatment wetlands at the Woodburn, Oregon wastewater treatment plant. Conducted * Developed and maintained extensive database of investigations for sensitive plant and vnldlitespecies. Provided senior plant species including, description, habitat, review for wetlands delineation and assessment. Participated in threatened and endangered species information, coordination and informational meetings with client and regulatory wetland indicator status, and project information agency personnel. Currently preparing conceptual mitigation plan and Location: Portland, Oregon completing applications for state and federal wetlands permits. Environmental Task Lead; Natural Treatment Wetlands Project; Clean Water Services; Hillsboro, OR. Coordinated environmental investigations including wetland delineation and assessment for pre-design of natural treatment wetlands at wastewater treatment plants in Forest Grove and Hillsboro, OR. Conducted investigations for sensitive plant and wildlife species. Provided senior review for wetlands delineation and assessment. Participated in coordination and informational meetings with client and regulatory agency personnel. Permit Specialist/Wetlands ScientistBotanist; Albany-Millersburg Joint Water System; OR. Performed wetland delineation on 107-acre city-owned site and for 3.2 miles in a 50-foot corridor along Century Drive in the Albany-Millersburg area. Purpose of the wetland delineation was compliance with permit requirements of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and the Oregon Removal-Fill law to facilitate construction of a joint water system include a new intake structure in the South Santiam River to serve the two towns. Conducted a complete survey for sensitive plant species identified as potentially occurring in the area. Prepared a Joint Removal-Fill permit WBG021414202951 PDX PEGGY O'NEILL, PWS application, including coordination with the appropriate jurisdictional agencies. Prepared a technical memorandum detailing mitigation options, including timelines, and estimated installation costs. Environmental Task Lead; Treatment Wetlands Project; City of Albany, OR. Provided task management and oversight of environmental investigations and permitting. Provided technical expertise for development of planting plan for treatment wetlands. Participated in meetings with project engineers, client, and agency personnel to present this project and to propose an "advance mitigation" concept to address mitigation requirements for future city projects. Environmental Task Lead; Treatment Wetlands Project; Roseburg Urban Sanitary Authority (RUSA); Roseburg, OR. Coordinated environmental investigations and permitting activities for 180-acre natural treatment wetlands project. Provided scientific expertise to project engineers to assist in development of constructed wetlands for water quality treatment. Developed plans for enhancement of existing wetlands and construction of additional wetlands for habitat and water quality benefits. Prepared planting plans and construction specifications. Conducted protocol-level surveys for rare plants. Prepared information for and participated in multiple planning meetings with project engineers, regulatory agency personnel, and client. Lead the effort to secure "advance mitigation" credits for wetland enhancement and creation that was beyond that needed for project mitigation. Permit Specialist/Project Biologist; Tualatin Valley Water District; Portland, OR. Conducted assessments of wetlands and vegetated comdors on project site and adjacent areas. Prepared a Natural Resources Assessment and Tier 2 Analysis to support application for Washington County Clean Water Services Service's Provider Letter. Prepared state and federal removal fill permit applications. Provided input to project design engineers to minimize impacts to wetlands and vegetated corridors. Designed mitigation plans for impacts to wetlands and vegetated comdors to meet permit requirements. Provided coordination with federal, state, and local regulatory personnel. Wetlands Scientist; E5 Graves Creek Bridge Replacement; ODOT; Josephine County, OR Performed wetlands delineation and habitat assessment; used SLOPES biological opinion for determination of compliance (for permitting purposes) and prepared state and federal wetlandsMraters removal-fill permit applications. Also developed revegetation plan and conducted construction monitoring. WBG021414202951 PDX ® CH2MHILL. Vince Rybel, PE Outfall & Mixing Zone Relevant Experience Mr. Rybel is a geotechnical engineer who has more than 28 years of Education ocean outfall and related marine pipeline design and construction experience on over 25 major outfallprojects. Hisworkwith pipeline MS, Civil Engineering(Geotechnical) dverandbay crossings on fiveprojects using ahorizontallydnlled BS, Civil Engineering directional method includes a former world record bore made in Professional Registrations Virginia. He has prepared geotechnical site reports for numerous Professional Civil Engineer: Oregon (No. 8849), projects and has participated in the design and construction of a variety Washington (No. 25956) of other civil engineering projects. Mr. Rybel also has extensive Professional Geotechnical Engineer: Oregon experience with submerged pipelines, dams, wastewater facilities, (No.08849PE) hydroelectric projects, and geotechnical site reports containing Distinguishing Qualifications foundation design and construction recommendations. These projects have been completed for various public and private facilities along the * 41 years of geotechnical and general civil West Coast. experience with an emphasis on marine and underwater projects, including project and Representative Project Experience construction management for water, wastewater, Lead Engineer, TH Cities Outfall Modifications, Oregon City, hydro and wind power projects Oregon. Lead engineer for fitting Check valve on end of existing outfall * More than 28 years of experience with outfall for improved dilution during low flows. projects Lead Engineer, Netarts Bay Outfail Repair, Oceanside, Oregon. * Design and construction engineer for the Tri City Lead engineer for diffuser repairs to existing horizontal directional- WPCPandBoise-St.Helens outfallExtension and ddlled ouffall off the Oregon coast. Diffuser Replacement Projects Design Engineer, Seaside WWTP Outfall Replacement Project, * Leader in expediting fast-track design- Seaside, Oregon. Design engineer for replacement of outfall and construction projects diffuser; 1,100-foot-long, 32-inch-diameter HDPE outfall and 3-port diffuser (Tideflex ports) in the Necanicum River and tidal estuary. Lead Engineer, Ponce Ocean Outfall Repair, Ponce, Puerto Rico. Lead Engineer for repair of leaks 2 miles offshore in over 200-foot water depth. Lead Engineer, Boise Cascade Outfall Extension, St. Helens, Oregon. Lead engineer for design and construction of 600-foot-long extension to existing 48-inch-diameter outfall for a large paper mill near St. Helens, Oregon. Outtall discharged to the Columbia River in an area where large sand waves move across the river bottom. Senior Reviewer, Taylor Water Treatment Plant Outfall Extension and Upgrade, Corvallis, Oregon. Provided senior review for outfall upgrades for the 21-mgd Taylor WTP on the banks of the Willamette River. Scope of work included extending the ouffall and adding diffusers and a foam and air control chamber. Project Manager, McKenzie River Outfail, Weyerhaeuser Paper Company, Springfield, Oregon. Managed design and construction of improvements to a 15-mgd ouffall owned and operated by the Weyerhaeuser Paper Company on the McKenzie River in Springfield, Oregon. The McKenzie River is a blue-ribbon trout stream, and the ouffall is in an extremely sensitive area. Directed an evaluation that included a river survey measuring currents and depth and computerized dilution modeling. Responsible forthe design of a new diversion structure, pipeline and diffuserthat greatly reduced visual impacts and provided better thermal dilution. In addition, the design had several novel concepts to greatly reduce foam and air entrainment. Also assisted Weyerhaeuser staff in overseeing construction at the very difficult construction site. Senior Reviewer, Tryon Creek Outfall, City of Portland, Oregon. Provided senior review for this project. The 300-foot-long, 36-inch- diameter ouffall was designed and constructed at the City of Portland's Tryon Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant on the Willamette River in Lake Oswego. The outfall was constructed in approximately 70 feet of water and includes three separate multi-port diffusers. Significant concerns on the project were dilution of residual chlorine and ammonia in the Willamette River. WBG021414202951PDX VINCE RYBEL, PE Design Engineer, Weyerhaeuser Paper Company Outfall, Springfield, Oregon. Led design and construction of a 100-foot-long, 30-inch-diameter diffuser in the McKenzie River near Springfield. Design and Resident Engineer, Newport Outfall, Newport, Oregon. Design and resident engineer for 24-inch-diameter, 750-foot- outfall extension into surf zone. Lead Engineer, Port Gardiner Outfall, Kimberly Clark Company, Everett, Washington. Lead engineer for nearshore portion of 42-inch-diameter, 1,800-feet-long outfall. Design Engineer, Texaco Refinery Outfall, Anacortes, Washington. Design engineer for addition of a 200-foot-long, 24-inch-diameter diffuser to an existing outfall. Design Engineer, Reichhold Chemical, Inc. Outfall, Tacoma, Washington. Design of a 100-foot-long, 6-inch-dameter outfall into Blair Waterway near Tacoma. Lead Engineer, Kingston Outfall, Kitsap County Department of Public Works, Kingston, Washington. Lead engineer for design of 18-inch-diameter, 5,400-foot-long outfall entry in 160 feet of water. Assistant Design Engineer, Commencement Bay Outfall, Tacoma, Washington. Assisted in predesign and final design efforts for 54-inch-diameter outfall 3,000 feet long, 120 feet deep. Lead Engineer, Monterey Bay Outfall, Ballast Rock Stability Assessment, Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency, Monterey, California. Coordinated study to reassess stability of ballast rock in near shore environment. Assistant Design Engineer, Terminal Island Outfall, Los Angeles, California. Assisted in the predesign phase of the 5,000-foot-long, 72-inch-diameter ouffall through Los Angeles harbor. Lead Engineer, Agingan Point Outfall, Commonwealth Utilities Corporation, Saipan, Marianna Islands. Lead engineer for design of a 24-inch HDPE ouffall, 1,100 feet long, installed by HDD methods. Ouffall will discharge into Tiniau Channel. WBG021414202951PDX CH2MHILL. f~ Jason Smesrud, PE Project Manager Relevant Experience Mr. Smesmd is a principal technologist with CH2M HILL's Water u'r" ' nl fl; !rim Business Group based in Portland, Oregon. He has more than Education t) 15 years of experience providing technical expertise and leadership to water resources and natural treatment systems projects and has been B.S., Soil Science involved in all phases of project planning, permitting, design, Professional Registrations construction, and operations. Mr. Smesmd is a recognized irrigation professional Engineer: OR, WA and natural treatment systems expert with experience on more than Certified Water RightsExamine r:OR 50 projects involving agricultural, forestry, and landscape reuse of Distinguishing Qualifications wastewater and residuals and engineered wetlands for water quality enhancement. * Over b5 years of experience on more than 50 natural treatment system projects in Oregon and Representative Project Experience across the West Design Manager; Woodburn WWTP Poplar Tree Irrigation and ,t proven success in designing and delivering Natural Treatment System; City of Woodburn, OR. Managed a complex thermal control wetland projects and multi-disciplinary design and permitting team through final design and managing multi-disciplinary permitting and design contract document preparation of a new Pudding River outfall, sonteamsiinciUdiii ng outfalls and natural treatment 25 acres of poplar tree irrigation, 28 acres of constructed wetlands, systems with effective stakeholder 10 million gallon irrigation regulating reservoir, pumping, conveyance, communications SCADA, and water control structures to meet discharge limitations for temperature and ammonia. Work involved multi-agency coordination * Developed the Heat Source Wetlands model for and securing permits for construction. design and analysis of wetland water cooling ( Project Manager; Woodburn WWTP Natural Treatment Systems utilized on projects for Albany, Woodburn, Pilot Studies; City of Woodburn, OR. Coordinated the efforts of Stockton, Boise, Willamette Partnership and research teams from OSU, WSU, and CH2M HILL for pilot studies Stockton) investigating: high rate irrigation forgroundwater recharge; thermal Location: Portlind,Oregon reduction and hyporheic discharge to a river system from a leaky constructed wetland; coppice management of a hybrid poplar tree plantation; and ammonia treatment through a horizontal subsurface flow wetland system. Senior Consultant; Talking Waters Garden Constructed Wetlands; Albany, OR. Led the thermal evaluations for temperature TMDL compliance to support the City in regulatory negotiations and to support the design team in determining necessary wetland areas, volumes, and configurations for effective effluent cooling. A key part of this work included developing a dynamic energy balance, hydraulic, and temperature model (Heat Source Wetlands) for the application to Welland systems. Drainage Design Manager; Roseburg Urban Sanitary Authority (RUSA) Natural Treatment Systems Project; Roseburg, OR. Performed soil investigations for soil infiltration and drainage characteristics, developed design criteria for sprinkler systems and drainage facilities, and managed the drainage design for this 340-acre ranch irrigated with recycled water for phosphorus and temperature control through hyporheic discharge. Design Manager; Belfair Forestiands Irrigation Reuse Project; Mason County, WA. Managed the design of a 90-acre spray irrigation system for reuse of Class A recycled water to irrigate commercial forestlands. Project components included sizing combined storage (185 acre-ft) and irrigation (95 acre) areas, designing the irrigation land application system, and supporting the project through construction. Senior Consultant, Natural Treatment Systems Basis of Design Report; Clean Water Services of Washington County, OR. Developed temperature evaluations of heating and cooling through the planned series of wetlands and ponds at the Forest Grove (Femhill) and Hillsboro (Davis Tool and Jackson Bottoms) sites using the Heat Source Wetlands model. Also provided senior review and guidance for soil and hydrogeologic evaluations. WBG021414202951PDX JASON SMESRUD, PE Senior Consultant; Stockton WWTP Effluent Pond and Constructed Wetland Temperature Evaluation; Stockton, CA. Used the Heat Source Wetlands model to evaluate the effect of effluent storage pond and constructed wetland cell operations on ultimate river discharge temperatures. Senior Consultant; Boise WWTP Temperature Compliance Evaluation; Boise, ID. Led the evaluation of effluent cooling opportunities from the use of existing gravel mining ponds and future constructed wetlands around the WWTP. The Heat Source Wetlands model was used to quantify cooling and excess thermal load reduction benefits from both facilities. Senior Consultant; South Truckee Meadows Water Reclamation Facility Reuse Expansion Master Plan; Reno, NV. Led the master planning services for doubling the capacity of reclaimed water storage and distribution facilities from the existing 2,600 acre-fUyear capacity while balancing future water supply and demands. Project Manager; Industrial Wastewater Irrigated Reuse Pilot Study; City of Dallas, OR. Managed the monitoring, reporting, and groundwater investigations for this 3-acre reuse pilot study where poplar trees were irrigated with industrial wastewater. Also served as design engineer for the irrigation system (storage lagoon, automated pump and filtration station, and spray application system) and designed a vadose zone monitoring array and subsurface tile drain monitoring systems to track movement of water and solutes into the soil and as discharged through file drains. Agricultural Engineer, Jeddah Sewage Lake Project; KSA National Water Company; Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Senior consultant for agricultural use of water and sediments produced through dewatering of a 2-square-kilometer sewage lake. Spent 3 weeks in-country developing plans for safe utilization of sediments and reclaimed water on tree plantations surrounding the lake and for in-place soil improvement. Project won the 2010 Global Water Intelligence reuse project of the year award. Agricultural Water Conservation Lead; Hawaii Water Conservation Plan; USACE Honolulu District; HI. Led agricultural water conservation efforts for a joint project with USACE and the Hawaii Commission on Water Resources Management to develop a statewide water conservation plan. Work included leading advisory group workshops, stakeholder focus sessions, statewide agricultural water use analysis, development and ranking of BMPs, and implementation and funding strategies. Agricultural Engineer; Cellulosic Ethanol Feedstock Farm Development; TX. Led soil investigations, irrigation design criteria, and developed land grading designs for furrow irrigation of 1,600-hectares of cropland being converted from rice to energy cane biomass cropping. Senior Consultant; Willamette Partnership Ecosystem Credit Trading Marketplace; Salem, OR. Developed a thermal credit screening tool to assess thermal credit trading opportunities through wastewater reuse, water rights transactions, and cooling through wetland systems. Project Manager; Hermiston Generating Power Plant Cooling Water Irrigated Reuse; Echo, OR. Conducted permit negotiations with Oregon DEC and prepared OM&M plan modifications and annual reports over two cropping years for the blended cooling water irrigation program over 700 acres of commercial food and forage crop land. WBG021414202951 PDX ® CFI2MHILL. David Wilson Outfall & Mixing Zone Relevant Experience Mr. Wilson is a senior technologist specializing in the evaluation and i design of wastewater discharges. He serves as the technical lead for Education water quality studies, modeling analyses, and conceptual designs of I MS, Marine Sciences, 1978 wastewater discharges including existing discharges, alternative BS, Zoology, 1975 discharge designs, and new discharges sites. He focuses on Distinguishing Qualifications environmental analysis, with a specialty in NPDES permit negotiation it Technical lead for the design and development of and compliance issues. Mr. Wilson is a recognized leader in the many new outfalls and diffuser improvements. Pack Northwest foroutfall mixing studies and design improvements, * More than 30 years of experience designing and as well as analyses of water and sediment quality, issues. These studies have included point and non-point sources for nutrients, directing studies to assess wastewater and metals, and thermal impacts. His particular skills are regulatory temperature discharge impacts and water quality strategy development, agency negotiations, study design and compliance implementation of field data collections, design of modeling analyses, * Extensive experience working in Oregon; including statistical analysis, knowledge of aquatic communities, and project recenfioutfall work for Clackamas County (Tri- ` management. He has conducted dilution modeling analyses to City, Hoodland, and Kellogg Creek Outfalls), evaluate compliance with water quality standards, including many Albany, M W MC, Portland, Seaside, Salem, thermal discharges. He has designed and directed more than thirty- McMinnville, Troutdale, Woodburn, and others. five ouffall dilution studies for river, estuarine, and marine dischargers. * Lead negotiator for NPDES permit projects for j clients throughout the Northwest. Representative Project Experience Technical Lead, Kellogg Creek WPCP Outfall Improvement and Ammonia Compliance Project, Clackamas Service District No. 1. Technical lead for concept development of outfall improvement options, dilution modeling, water quality compliance assessment, and field inspection of the Kellogg Creek WPCP ouffall in the Willamette River. Screening-level assessment evaluated three ouffall options including extension down-slope with new diffuser at depth. Technical analyses to develop approach to comply with water quality criteria based on existing and projected maximum effluent ammonia discharge values. An extended ouffall and new diffuser was shown as reliable approach to meet dilution requirements (with safety factor). Diffuser Lead, Tri-City WPCP Outfall Remediation Project, Clackamas TH-City Service District, Oregon City, Oregon. Task lead for development of diffuser improvements to Tri-City WPCP ouffall (Willamette River) for effluent ammonia discharges to comply with ammonia criteria in Oregon water quality standards. This time-critical project (conducted to meet MAO), evaluated ammonia compliance approaches with simple improvements to existing three-port ouffall diffuser, along with new ouffall and diffuser options. The solution selected by the District was a combination of diffuser port modification, dry season flow control into the modified ouffall, and ammonia treatment. The engineering documents and construction were completed within the MAO timeline in 2012, and effluent ammonia limits were eliminated from the Td-City WPCP permit. Project Lead, Mixing Zone and Dilution Studies, Clean Water Services, Tualatin River, Oregon. Designed and directed field data collections and outfall inspections, and led modeling and report development for this study which was developed and completed in accordance with the DEO's new Regulatory Mixing Zone - Internal Management Directive (RMZ-IMD). Work included outtall inspections, field data collections at all outtall sites, discharge flow modeling to represent season river flows and stages, dilution modeling, environmental mapping, and reporting. Task Lead, Outfall Extension and Diffuser Replacement Project (Columbia River), Boise Cascade and City of St Helens, Oregon. Task leader for environmental studies and design development of an extension of the existing outtall and new replacement diffuser section in the Columbia River. The extended ouffall and new diffuser was designed to meet dilution requirements, to move the plume offshore into the main river channel, and to eliminate potential impacts to migratory salmon. The outtall diffuser was designed to provide dilutions that will meet Oregon's new temperature standards under all discharge conditions. He directed field studies, dilution modeling analyses, diffuser designs, and development of the engineering report. This unique cooperative project between an industry and municipality was completed (studies, permitting, design, and construction) in 18 months and began service in November 2006. WBG021414202951PDX DAVID WILSON Project Lead, Mixing Zone Study and New Outfall Conceptual Design, City of Woodburn, Pudding River, Oregon. Designed and directed field data collections and outall modeling and report development forthis study which was developed and completed in accordance with the DEQ's new Regulatory Mixing Zone - Internal Management Directive (RMZ-IMD). Work included site-selection and outall design concepts for a new wetlands outall to address temperature limitations during the dry season. Project Lead, Mixing Zone and Dilution Studies, City of Redding, Sacramento River, California. Designed and directed field dilution study, modeling, and report development for evaluation of two new ouffall diffusers designed by CH2M HILL. This study was developed and completed in accordance with the requirements of the Central Valley Regional Board. Work included outall inspections, field data collections at all outall sites, discharge flow modeling to represent season river flows and stages, dilution modeling, environmental mapping, and reporting. The study results were used to define the mixing zone boundaries and dilution ratios for the dry and wet weather diffusers for the Clear Creek WWTF. Project Lead, Outfall Dilution Study and Diffuser Operation and Management Plan; City of Albany, Oregon. Led field dilution study, modeling, and reporting to demonstrate that the City of Albany's wastewater discharge to the Willamette River complied with State Water Quality Standards under all conditions. In addition, an outall diffuser performance, operation, and management plan was developed to allow the City of Albany to plan diffuser port configuration changes to match future effluent flows. Albany's Wastewater Treatment Plant discharges effluent into the Willamette River near river mile 115. He designed and directed field performarice studies and modeling of the 96-fool ouffall diffuser, including: detailed field measurements of effluent concentrations (using a dye tracer) and receiving water temperatures within and at the boundary of the defined mixing zone, under low flow receiving water conditions; dilution modeling for the field-measured conditions and 7Q10 river conditions; and an evaluation of effluent compliance with the state water quality standards. Lead Diffuser Design, Marine Park WRF Outfall Diffuser, City of Vancouver, Washington. Lead fordiffuser design and environmental studies of a new 48-inch-d iameter, I8afeet-long outall diffuser into the Columbia River. Lead Environmental and Diffuser Design, Kimberly-Clark Company & City of Everett, Port Gardiner Replacement Outfall and Diffuser, Everett, Washington. Lead for diffuser design and environmental studies and permitting for new 42-inch-diameter, 1,800-feet- long ouffall into 350 depth in Port Gardiner Bay. Lead Environmental and Diffuser Design, Texaco Refinery Outfall, Anacortes, Washington. Lead for diffuser design and environmental studies and permitting for a new 200-foot-long, 24-inch-d ameterdiffuser to an existing ouffall. Lead Diffuser Design, Seaside WWTP Outfall Replacement Project, Seaside, Oregon. Led diffuser design and field data collections for replacement of existing Seaside outall with new ouffall and diffuser. Led siting studies and agency communication for design of 1,100-foot-long, 32-inch-diameter HDPE ouffall and Sport diffuser (Tideflex ports) in the Necanicum River and tidal estuary. Lead Diffuser Design, Kingston Outfall, Kitsap County Department of Public Works, Kingston, Washington. Lead for diffuser design of 18-inch-diameter, 5,400-foot-long outall with 150-foot diffuser in 160 feet of water. Senior Technical Lead, Multiple Outfalls Dilution Evaluation and NPDES Permit Assistance, City of Corvallis. Extensive dilution modeling analyses were performed using the model UDKHDEN and a range of model cases to represent the two mukiport ouffall diffusers in the Willamette River. Special analyses were developed to represent the overlapping plumes of the existing and proposed turreted, multiport diffusers. Evaluation of effluent compliance with state water quality standards demonstrated that effluent metals limits were not required. Oregon DEQ is using the Technical report to develop the NPDES permit and Fact Sheet. Task Lead, Outfall Diffuser Air Release Evaluation and Repair Concepts; Willow Lake Water Pollution Control Facility Outfall (Willamette River), City of Salem, Oregon. Responsible for leading CH2M HILL's hydraulic experts (Dr. Loren Davis and Roger Lindquist) in the evaluation, analyses, and conceptual design of repairs to the Salem ouffall diffuser to address air entrainment and air releases from nearshore ports. Field measurements and recordings inside the bankside manhole were used along with the design drawings to develop hydraulic analyses of the flows plunging into the diffuser section. Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) modeling was used to represent and evaluate the effluent flows plunging into the diffuser section. A total of eight repair concepts were developed and one specific repair concept was recommended along with a cost estimate. CI-12M HILL also reviewed the issue of debris and sediment deposition along the new ouffall diffuser, and provided concepts to address the issue. Technical Lead, Outfall Dilution Study, City of McMinnville, Yamhill River, Oregon. Dilution and temperature modeling analyses were conducted to evaluate potential changes in the facility discharge operations that could reduce temperatures at the mixing zone boundaries. These analyses included field dilution measurements and modeling, comparison of model predictions with historical field temperature measurements, and an evaluation of the discharge compliance with water quality chemical criteria. WBG021414202951 PDX James Bledsoe, PE Project Engineer James Bledsoe brings 16 years of water and wastewater experience to the project team. His experience includes wastewater planning, design, and construction management services. He manages the water resource group of Keller Associates corporate office, and oversees all work completed in Oregon. Prior to joining the Keller team, James worked as the technical support manager for three internationally used civil engineering software packages. His planning 4 experience is augmented by his project management experience in the design and construction management of utility improvements. f vt Educations t» James measures his success by the satisfaction of repeat clients including Ashland, Wilsonville, Stayton, Oregon and Boise, Meridian, Nampa and MS CivihEngmeenng t t~.~~: Summa Cum Lauded Mountain Home, Idaho. Representative projects include: Brigham Young Umversityf Project manager/engineer for numerous Boise sewer collection system projects Yearsof'Ezpenenceist` ; ~ ~ ° t• Ashland Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Master Plan; coordinated evaluation of disposal options, including shading plan; evaluated Professional Engineer maintenance management software; evaluated SCADA system; staffing analysis support; oversaw assessment of pumping facilities Registrations , Aftl ' Idaho -10803 Served as Owner's Representative for the Statton Mill Creek Lift Station *a and Pipeline Design-Build Project Oregon-73454PE ,''~r~.n Washington-43984 Hydraulic modeling and planning for Wilsonville, Sheridan, Gates, Wood Village, Ontario, Moscow, Burley, Jerome, Nampa, Rexburg • Project manager for Mountain Home Facility Planning Study, West Work Experience 1999-Present Kellen;-, m , Interceptor, 5`h West Interceptor, and lagoon piping projects Nampa West Regional Lift Station and Pipelines, Karcher Lift Station Associates, Meridian, ID and Pipelines, and pipeline projects for the displacement of Lift Stations 199&-1999 Envuon~m ntal; 4and6 Project manager/engineer for Nampa Regional lift stations Modeling Systems Inc.; a-' Funding support for numerous DEQ SRF loan projects, USDA-RD Provo; UT projects, Department of Commerce grants, Idaho Slate Bond Bank funding, and congressional special appropriation grants Project manager/engineer for Idaho Power Pump Station and 9 Mile Transmission Pipeline Project. Project designed in six months KELLER aseociatee 65 egon97204 r ite 200 e Changing Po the course of conservation. PoSW rtland,YamOrregon 97204 / Th Freshwater Trust* 503 222efres MAIN OFFICE www.thfreshwatertrust.org David Primozich Senior Director of Ecosystem Services primozich cr thefreshwatertrust.org David Primozich is a leading expert on water quality trading and environmental accounting in the United States. He has more than a decade of experience working with private and public entities on regulatory compliance related to water quality and endangered species. At The Freshwater Trust, David leads efforts to quantify environmental improvements that result from land and water management actions in new and relevant units, making it possible for regulated entities to secure permits for water quality trading and help grant makers improve the effectiveness of conservation investments. David has a long history of experience helping people make decisions about management and use of natural resources. Prior to joining The Freshwater Trust, he served as Executive Director of the Willamette Partnership, where he helped shape emerging measurement science and tracking procedures around ecosystem services to achieve better conservation results. He served as Coordinator for Yamhill County Parks, where he managed community engagement and production of the County's first Parks and Open Space Plan. Prior to developing this Plan, David led an extensive community engagement process associated with new regulations affecting the use of streamside lands in Tillamook County, Oregon. In addition to the Willamette Partnership, David has helped to form two nonprofit entities dedicated to community engagement and private land management. Experience The Freshwater Trust, Portland, OR Senior Director of Ecosystem Services, 2010-present • Created and manages the Ecosystem Services department to advance The Trust's restoration mission through conservation measurement science and performance tracking • Leads The Trust's interaction with regulated entities seeking to apply quality standards and secure permits for water quality trading and mitigation programs • Leads The Trust's engagement with natural resource and regulatory agencies associated with water quality trading and conservation measurement and performance tracking • Represents The Trust in national policy discussions related to water quality trading • Member of Senior Staff responsible for The Trust's strategic direction, policy development, and external communications Willamette Partnership, Salem. OR Executive Director, 2004-2010 • Helped form the Willamette Partnership, a coalition of conservation, business, and science leaders in the Willamette River basin to develop market-based tools for conservation • Responsible for strategic direction and external communications and representation. • Secured approval from stakeholders in Oregon, including regulatory agencies, on a package of credit standards and protocols-the first agreement of its kind in the country Willamette Restoration Initiative, Salem, OR Project Coordinator, 2003-2004 • Led organization-wide effort to develop a comprehensive restoration strategy to address water quality improvements, flooding, fish and wildlife habitat issues, and the overall watershed health of the Willamette Basin • Developed and implemented new approaches to engage private landowners in natural resource policy making focused on riparian protection Yamhill County, McMinnville Oregon Parks Coordinator, 1999-2003 • Managed eleven-member Parks Board of appointed community representatives that advised County Commissioners on Parks Department operations and management • Managed fundraising and completion of comprehensive Plan for Parks and Open Space in one of the fastest growing counties in Oregon • Successfully managed broad stakeholder communities through contentious land use and planning negotiations Education M.A. Applied Anthropology, Oregon State University, 2002 B.S, Anthropology, University of Oregon, 1994 A.S, Applied Science-Agriculture, Clark College, 1999 Credit Program Design/Implementation • City of Medford, Oregon • City of Ashland, Oregon • Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission, Eugene-Springfield, Oregon • Portland General Electric/Port of St.Helens, St. Helens, Oregon • City of Boise, Idaho • Idaho Power Company, Boise, Idaho • Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board Selected Publications • Dupuis T, Primozich D, Smesrud J, Wirz D. Water Quality Thermal Credit Trading: Methods for Quantifying Thermal Credits for Water Quality Trading. The Water Report 52(June 15, 2008) • Institute for Natural Resources; Achterman G, Aylward B, Duncan S, LaRocco G, Primozich D, Vickerman S. Policy Cornerstones and Action Strategies for an Integrated Ecosystem Marketplace in Oregon. Oregon State University, 2008 • Bastach R, Primozich D. The Willamette Subbasin Plan. Willamette Restoration Initiative, 2004 • Gilden J, Primozich D, Smith C. Complex Courses from Conflict to Action: A Riparian Management Case. Oregon Sea Grant, Oregon State University, 2002 • Primozich D. Using PLACE Mapping to Improve Tillamook County Riparian Action Planning. This Is Reality and It's Not Bonanza: Voices from the Restless West. Edited by Courtland L. Smith. Anthropology Northwest 13(2002): 87- 100 Selected Grants • Joint Regional Agreement on Best Practices for Water Quality Trading for the Pacific Northwest (Bullitt Foundation, 2013), $50,000 • Rogue Basin Habitat Restoration Program (Bureau of Reclamation, 2013), $175,000 • Pacific Northwest Water Quality Trading Program - Streamflow Transactions (Kresge Foundation, 2013), $100,000 • Advancing Environmental Markets to Benefit Puget Sound (Boeing Company, 2012), $75,000 • Advancing a Replicable Framework for Environmental Markets in the Pacific Northwest (Bullitt Foundation, 2012), $40,000 • Northwest Water Quality Trading Program (Meyer Memorial Trust, 2012), $300,000 • Oregon Environmental Markets Initiative (Compton Foundation, 2011), $25,000 • Conservation Innovations Grant (U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service, 2011 Northwest Environmental Markets Initiative, $966,722 • Applying Proven Tools to Advance Ecosystem Markets (Bullitt Foundation, 2010), $50,000 Oregon Environmental Markets Initiative (Compton Foundation, 2010), $25,000 • Advancing the Role of StreamBank in Oregon's Developing Environmental Marketplace (Jubitz Family Foundation, 2010), $25,000 • Catalyzing Environmental Markets (Meyer Memorial Trust, 2010), $150,000 Awards • U.S. Water Prize for innovative water quality trading program - The Freshwater Trust, 2013 • Oregon Association of Clean Water Agencies, Special Recognition, Advancing Water Quality Trading- The Freshwater Trust, 2012 • ACEC Oregon Engineering Excellence Awards for the Ashland Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Master Plan - The Freshwater Trust, 2012 The Changing the course of conservation. Portland65SW,YamOrregon 97egonr972Suite200 204 ww.thefresMAINOFFICE w 503,222.9091 nNwxrhefreshwatertrust.org Freshwater Trust* Eugene Wier Restoration Project Manager eugene@thefreshwatertrust.org Eugene Wier is the Restoration Project Manager for Southwest Oregon, where he provides innovative solutions for riparian restoration. His background in fish and wildlife biology and ecology set the stage for a deep understanding of the value and function of riparian habitats. With more than 10 years of experience in hands-on field science and restoration work, in Oregon and abroad, Eugene has developed an intimate knowledge of the resources, management concerns and methods that can be utilized to achieve restored river function. Eugene has lived in the Rogue Valley since 1997 and has actively participated in many conservation initiatives and community efforts, locally and regionally. He has been involved in TMDL water quality monitoring on Bear Creek, macroinvertebrate studies, spawning surveys, smolt trapping and more. Eugene's work connects him to land use managers and the restoration community in Bear Creek and the greater Rogue watershed. Prior to The Freshwater Trust, Eugene worked at Rogue Valley Council of Governments, where he was involved in natural resource planning, water quality monitoring, riparian restoration and consulting services to municipalities throughout the Rogue basin. Experience The Freshwater Trust. Portland, OR Restoration Project Manager, 2012-present • Implemented restoration projects as a component of Oregon's first water quality trading program • Develops The Trust's approach to riparian restoration and translates water quality trading framework into implementable projects • Leads The Trust's outreach effort to landowners and development of materials used in communication with landowners and stakeholders • Represents The Trust in the local community and develops and strengthens partnerships and relationships with local groups and initiatives Rogue Valley Council of Governments, Central Point, OR Natural Resource Technician 2008-2012 • Conducted water quality sampling and illicit discharge investigations in Bear Creek watershed • Managed projects for riparian restoration, land use and conservation planning • Provided education, outreach and presentations related to riparian ecology and other projects Bureau of Land Management Medford District Office, Medford. OR Field Technician in Hydrology and Wildlife Programs, 2006-2008 • Conducted hydrologic surveys and mapping of surface hydrology for Ashland resource area • Conducted surveys for owls, red tree voles, pacific fisher, rare insects and more in support of district timber programs and conservation efforts U.S. Department of the Interior, Aquatic and Riparian Effectiveness Monitoring Program, Corvallis, Oregon Field Crew Leader, 2005 • Trained and led a field crew, sampling a variety of parameters on streams in the Northwest Forest Plan's late- successional reserves • Successfully managed field data and trained staff on rigorous sampling protocols Education B.S, Environmental Studies, Southern Oregon University, 2003 A.S, Environmental Studies, Columbia College, 1997 Memberships • Board member of Bear Creek Watershed Council • Organizing committee member of Jefferson Fish Society • Member of The Society for Northwestern Vertebrate Biology lAk U ~ d J ~ IJ1 ~ F 9Y~, ~w yj.,t, Hl• _,/L. Y I `n ! ,r s } `l !f o ~ ~ p T .'.NN ~ iy 9 3 NG~ 4 ll d City of Ashland Scope of Work Outfall Relocation Study Project Understanding The current National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit for the Ashland W WTP expired hi 2008 (currently administratively extended) and the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) is planning to initiate the NPDES permit renewal process in October 2014. The renewed NPDES permit will include new requirements for effluent temperature and copper limits at the point of discharge and will consider revised mixing zone dilution associated with a relocated outfall. Compliance with the new limits is expected to be required within five years of permit issuance. The new requirements create several challenges for the existing Ashland W WTP outfall to Ashland Creek, which has limited dilution during low flow periods. Consequently, the City of Ashland has decided to relocate the outfall from Ashland Creek to the higher-flow Bear Creek to improve dilutions and eliminate the current temperature impacts to Ashland Creek, while reducing the level of effluent cooling required to address migration blockage, thermal shock, and spawning impairments. A Bear Creek outfall location will provide greater dilution and a better mixing zone environment to meet restrictions on copper and other effluent constituents. The City of Ashland has discussed the concept of relocating the wastewater outfall to Bear Creek with DEQ and has received their initial support in permitting this project. Even with the outfall relocation to Bear Creek, effluent cooling (by up 15 to 2 degrees Celsius in September) will be required to avoid a migration blockage condition for salmonids. In addition, during low flow portions of the spawning period (October 15 through May 15), effluent cooling may be necessary to meet spawning temperature restrictions at the new outfall site. As part of the Comprehensive Sanitary Sever Master Plan (April 2012) and the current Wastewater Facilihj Plan effort the use of wetlands and/or ponds was identified as the selected alternative for achieving the necessary near-field temperature reductions. However, the location, sizing, and operations of these wetlands and/or ponds is still undefined. In order to support the City of Ashland and DEQ's permit renewal process, the following efforts need to be completed prior to October 2014: • Conceptual design of the new outfall to determine the outfall location, conveyance route, and discharge configuration; • Outfall mixing zone dilution study for the relocated outfall to provide DEQ with the dilution factors and outfall mixing zone characteristics necessary to determine permit Omits; PAGE 1 OF 8 • Conceptual design of constructed wetlands or ponds capable of meeting near-field temperature limits for the new outfall; and • Identification of permits and approvals necessary to implement the outfall relocation and constructed wetland developments. Project Description The City of Ashland plans to proceed with the Outfall Relocation Project in a phased approach to first solidify the conceptual design of the facilities and support the NPDES permit renewal and secondly to proceed with the preliminary and final designs and implementation of the facilities. This project is anticipated to be conducted in the following three phases: Phase 1a - Conceptual Design and Mixing Zone Dilution Study • Phase lb -Preliminary Design and Permitting • Phase 2 - Final Design • Phase 3 - Construction Administration Under this scope of work, C112M HILL will complete Phase la. At the completion of Phase la, the design will be approximately 15% complete; the alternatives analysis will be complete and major process elements, equipment and structure sizes, and major conveyance corridors will be known; the outfall mixing zone dilution study will be completed for the new outfall; and permits and approvals necessary to implement the outfall relocation and constructed wetland developments will be identified. Detailed site investigations to support facility design such as geotechnical field investigations, hydrogeologic characterization, site survey, and wetland delineation will be conducted during Phase 1b. This approach will ensure that costs for those activities are not incurred until a facilities concept has been endorsed by the necessary City and agency stakeholders, and it is determined that the DEQ and other agencies will support the project in permitting. For each major component of the project, CH2M HILL will prepare a project schedule and opinion of project costs based on the 15% design. CH2M HILL will also identify key design components that are critical or time sensitive to avoid delay or changes later in design. CH2M HILT. wit] submit the conceptual design to DEQ for review and feedback, and will invite DEQ to participate in the design review meetings. Assumptions • Except where noted, electronic and up to five (5) hard copies of final submittals will be provided • Drawings will be prepared in AutoCAD and will be presented as half-size (11"x17") sheets • Outfall relocation to Bear Creek will be acceptable to the City, DEQ, and natural resource agency stakeholders. PAGE 2 0F8 • In providing opinions of cost, CH2M HILL has no control over cost or prices set by 3m parties and/or the market and therefore cannot guarantee that actual costs will not vary from our estimates. • CH2M HILL will reasonably rely upon the accuracy, timeliness, and completeness of the information provided by City to CH2M HILL. City-Provided Information • Construction record drawings in AutoCAD format for affected facilities • Specifications and operations and maintenance data for existing facilities to be affected by planned improvements • Location of known utilities and utility easements in project areas • Geotechnical investigation reports from past WWTP designs • Digital elevation model with 2-foot contours covering project area • WWTP effluent flow, temperature, dissolved oxygen, and chemistry (metals and ammonia) data records necessary to support the outfall mixing zone dilution study and to set design criteria for facility sizing • Water quality sample results for effluent (10-12 minimum) and background Bear Creek (3-4 minimum) water quality collected to provide a minimum chemical analyses of total and dissolved metals, hardness and ammonia. City will collect and submit additional samples needed through a laboratory mutually selected by the City and CH2M HILL. Scope of Work The scope of work has been organized into seven tasks: • Task 1- Project Definition and Alternatives Analysis • Task 2 - Natural Resources and NPDES Permitting • Task 3 - Conceptual Design and Mixing Zone Study • Task 4 - Public Outreach and Communications • Task 5 - Project Management and Quality Control Task 1. Project Definition and Alternatives Analysis Task 1.1. Project Initiation The purpose of this task is to confirm project goals and success factors, communication protocols, and key project stakeholders. Additionally, we will discuss priority issues that have been raised to dale by permitting agencies, the parks commission, stakeholders, and the public, and will discuss design flows to be used for the analysis and other data to be provided by the City. This task will include one client kick-off meeting with City staff and one internal Consultant team kick-off meeting to charter the Consultant project team. Assumptions • The Client kick-off meeting will be held by conference call. The CH2M HILL project manager and key Consultant project team members will participate by phone. Deliverables PAGE 3 OF 8 • Client kick-off meeting minutes. Task 1.2. Preliminary Flow, Temperature, and Dilution Analysis This task will include a preliminary flow, temperature and dilution analysis to support the alternatives analysis and project definition. Available flow and temperature data from Bear and Ashland Creeks and Ashland W WTP will be analyzed. Heat Source Wetlands (HSW) models of Glendower Pond (open water pond) and densely vegetated constructed wetlands will be developed using Ashland climatic data. Temperature results will be used to guide initial sizing of pond/wetland areas needed to meet temperature standards. The DEQ analysis of dilutions to avoid migration blockage and spawning impairment will be updated. Deliverables • Draft technical memorandum. Final content will be incorporated into the conceptual engineering design report. Task 1.3. Project Alternatives Definition Af br the field visit identified in Task 3.1 and draft completion of Task 1.2, up to four alternatives for wetland and pond development and outfall relocation and conveyance routing will be identified considering potential construction and permitting issues. Wetland and pond options that cannot meet the water quality criteria will not be considered further. For each option that can meet the water quality criteria, technical and permitting requirements and construction and maintenance issues will be outlined to assist in the evaluation of project alternatives. This information will be developed to provide the basis for discussion in the first public meeting. Deliverables • Draft technical memorandum. Final content will be incorporated into the conceptual engineering design report. Task 2. Natural Resources and NPDES Permitting Task 2.1. Preliminary Environmental and Permitting Analysis Using the selected alternative from Task 1.3, a preliminary environmental permitting analysis will be conducted to identify potential environmental constraints and approvals/permits needed from local, state, and federal agencies (DEQ, Jackson County, USACE, USFWS, NMFS, DSL, SHPO) during Phase 2. Available information will be utilized; required approvals, permits, and Phase 2 studies will be clearly summarized; and a permitting strategy will identify opportunities for impact avoidance and potential mitigation and expected permitting timelines. Assumptions • The Consultant project permitting lead will conduct a one-half day site visit as part of Task 3.1 to identify potential resource concerns. No additional field work will be conducted in this project phase. Deliverables PAGE 4 OF 8 • Draft technical memorandum. Final content will be incorporated into the conceptual engineering design report. Task 2.2. Agency Pre-Application Meeting Following the completion of Task 1 and 3.1 and draft completion of Task 2.1, 3.2, and 3.3, the Consultant will hold a pre-application meeting with key agency staff to solicit input on the planned project elements. Anticipated participants include DEQ, USACE, DSL, ODFW, and NMFS. Results of this meeting will inform the completion of Task 2.1 and the identification of the outfall location, conveyance routes, and wetland locations to be incorporated in Task 3 and identify constraints to construction. Assumptions • One meeting with agencies will be held in Ashland • The CH2M FALL project manager, permitting lead, and one subconsultant staff will be present at the agency meeting (other project team members may attend by phone) Deliverables • Meeting minutes Task 3. Conceptual Design and Mixing Zone Study Task 3.1. Field Studies This task includes two site visits to support the site selection and conceptual design of the outfall pipeline, diffuser, and constructed wetlands and the outfall mixing zone dilution study. The first visit will be a site reconnaissance to determine outfall location, conveyance routing, and wetland options considering constructability, resource issues, operations and maintenance issues, and technical feasibility. This information will be used in developing the project alternatives under Task 1.3 to assist in agency and stakeholder support of a selected alternative. After selection of the proposed outfall location from the identified alternatives, the second visit will collect detailed riverbed bathymetry/velocity profiles at the proposed new outfall location to support the outfall mixing zone dilution study. Assumptions • Up to four technical staff covering constructability, permitting, outfall design, and wetland design will be present to conduct the first site visit (one-half day on site) • The outfall mixing zone dilution study lead and one support staff will be present to conduct data collection with the second site visit Deliverables • Draft field visit summary technical memorandum. Final content will be incorporated into the conceptual engineering design report. Task 3.2. Outfall and Diffuser Conceptual Design and Mixing Zone Dilution Study This task will develop up to two outfall relocation concepts and dilution modeling of the concepts for existing, selected planning horizon, and buildout flows at the one selected outfall location. Hydraulic modeling evaluations will be conducted to define future capacity PAGE 5 OF8 needs so that outfall diffusers can be designed to accommodate full buildout. A meeting will be held with the City at the completion of the draft study to review findings and recommendations to facilitate selection of a preferred alternative. The preferred alternative will be described in the mixing zone dilution report prepared to comply with the guidance in the DEQ's Mixing Zone Internal Management Directive. Deliverables • Draft outfall dilution mixing zone dilution study. Final content will be incorporated into the conceptual engineering design report. Task 3.3. Wetland Conceptual Design This task will develop a conceptual design of constructed wetlands necessary to meet the near field temperature criteria. Major conveyance needs, routes, and sizing will be developed and hydraulic profiles will be prepared. HSW models developed under Task 1.2 will be updated with final wetland footprints and flow routing to simulate the effluent cooling. This information will be used to support the completion of the outfall mixing zone dilution study under Task 3.2 and to quantify total excess thermal load benefits (annually, by month) to complement other efforts by the City to address far field temperature impacts and thermal mitigation requirements. Deliverables • Wetland conceptual design incorporated into the conceptual engineering design report Task 3.4. Conceptual Engineering Drawings The following eight (8) sheets of conceptual engineering design drawings are anticipated: • Title, index, vicinity map (1 sheet) • Overall site plan (1 sheet) • Hydraulic profile (1 sheet) • W WTP yard piping and pump station plan (1 sheet) • Outfall pipeline plan and section (1 sheet) • River outfall plan and section (1 sheet) • Constructed wetlands plan and cross sections (2 sheets) Deliverables • Drawings included within the conceptual engineering design report Task 3.5. Cost Estimate A Class 4 (+30%/-20%) cost estimate will be prepared for all major conceptual design components at the completion of the conceptual design. The cost estimate will be included within the conceptual engineering design report. Deliverables • A class 4 cost estimate included within the conceptual engineering design report PAGE 6 OF8 Task 3.6. Conceptual Engineering Design Report This task will document the results of the subtasks described above in a conceptual engineering design report suitable for submission to DEQ. Most of the sections of the report will be written as part of the corresponding subtasks, as indicated in the deliverables listed under each subtask. Report sections that will be written as part of this subtask include the executive summary, introduction, design criteria and flow projections, and project implementation plan. Other sections of the report will generally correspond to the subtasks. Deliverables • Draft and final Conceptual Engineering Design Report Task 4. Public Outreach and Communications Task 41 Public Outreach and Communications Strategy This task will develop a public outreach and communications strategy, in concert with the City, to create an effective communication process that is transparent and inclusive. A draft communications strategy will be prepared and distributed to the City, a conference call will be held with City staff, and a final communications strategy will be documented to incorporate City comments. Deliverables • Draft and final public communications strategy memoranda Task 4.2. Community Consultation This task will include Consultant facilitation of two planned public meetings and presentation during one City Council meeting plus a contingency for two additional meetings if needed. Supporting graphic poster boards, handouts, and other materials will be prepared to facilitate information exchange. Key CH2M HILL and subconsultant team members will present project proposals for discussion and will document public comments. Assumptions • Two meetings will be held with Ashland Parks Commission, business/property owners, and other agency stakeholders identified in the public communications strategy • Presentation at one City Council meeting • Contingency has been provided to support up to two additional meetings if needed • The CH2M HILL project manager and one subconsultant staff will be present at the public meetings and City Council meeting I Deliverables • Graphic poster boards, handouts, and other materials to support public meetings • Meeting minutes from public meetings I PAGE 7 OF8 Task 5. Project Management and Quality Control Task.5.1. Project Management This task includes Consultant activities needed to initiate, plan, manage, and close the project. Throughout the project, the consultant project manager will maintain frequent and open communication with the City's project manager and will work closely with the City's project manager to anticipate changes in project needs. Assumptions • The level of effort assumes up to six (6) coordination meetings by phone with City staff and monthly invoices and status reports for six (6) months (May through October 2014) Deliverables • Project instructions, monthly invoices and project status reports Task 5.2. Quality Assurance/Quality Control This task includes the development of the Quality Management Plan (QMP) and reviewer time to review deliverables. This QMP will define the "work plan" for quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC), specifying who needs to review which deliverables, what their budget is for this review, and when the reviews need to be conducted. The QMP for this project will be succinct and will clearly define the roles and responsibilities of the technical reviewers. Deliverables • Project Quality Management Plan Schedule A proposed project schedule is attached to this scope of work. The costs associated with this scope of work assume that the project duration will be no more than 6 months. PAGE 8OF8 `a S ~ i j a i S SS i~ a ~ 8 I g~ a ° g a B ° ~ 3& S ~I I I a~ c'c I~ ~ I c IS c c c° i c c i~ c c c c c~ = 15 S 3 ,5 ~a`'m n i 4-4 c c I~ ~S S S I.~ IS I,S S SS ~a c c .S S I 9-B.E s b R e 1 i I ° ° ~ @ i~ ~ III 1 s I IF !o a Ig i~ i. I Spp I '''Q5Q58 r fd € i$ ~ !5 R I~ ~J 3 ~ 318 e i Z ~Y I~ IE 8 tl ~ypf ~E'p ° I p 1- / g 2 ~g S r i 5 (n IS f~ Io g 1~ k IV 1:: IV ~ ° g ~ •'o F g $ E flI° et uSE j3s I°y g °3 'g i^~ s° 8 1 9~ 4 ~E X Z 'E ' I 1 Iu ~ 5 9 i~ ~ IE ~3 ° € e~8 (~~~a lc{tee ~a~~~~~6~$(~1~4yo~~o§.c al°~~°glgg$ ds °o ear lit RAR Rxn go ! OR 1 9 3 R• a a a oil ea a 5 c i -q - R e• a 11 R~7 x ill I No 8`s'a:«a 1 0 a R ! t6 aRa~ °a•«_ N6~ ^CR °SRSa- t ! a^a~ °s $s ~a [ G R - 35 5~ 8$« °F a a ~ 9 •a 9« „ « » « « E~ a^~ sl+a.a F a p g pF j~p 7 M Y F Qo E[[ aaaM ~Y« g ~a „a a« a~ C.g I a~ S~A 4 :e $y. •p ~aH ~r d f~ as^ i A •&a$ ~6 E5« g a « « » » » ~ L Y s 6 e ! F tF E t°•§f tt fox^~s`tm t! Ott&F o~ `saga saa` sa CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication May 6, 2014, Business Meeting Liquor License Application for Robert Harvey dba Harvey's Place FROM: Barbara Christensen, City Recorder, christeb@ashland.or.us SUMMARY Approval of a Liquor License Application from Robert Harvey dba Harvey's Place at 50/52 E 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 Robert Harvey dba Harvey's Place. ATTACHMENTS: None Page 1 of I CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication May 6, 2014, Business Meeting Intergovernmental Agreement with Jackson County Community Justice FROM Stu Wilkie, Fleet Maintenance Supervisor, stu.wilkiegashland.or.us Bruce Dickens, Park Superintendent, bruce.dickensgashland.or.us SUMMARY This is an intergovernmental agreement under which Jackson County Community Justice will provide supervised work crews for work projects as required by the City and Parks at minimal cost to the City. Work will consist of grounds maintenance of City buildings, cemeteries, parks, trail maintenance, litter pick-up, ditch cleaning, fuel reduction, and similar manual work. The term of the agreement will begin on the date all parties have signed the agreement and terminate on June 30, 2016. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: The City currently utilizes the Jackson County Community Justice work crews as follows: Cemetery Division: The Cemetery utilizes the work crews for two to three days in late May to do a thorough clean up of the three cemeteries in preparation for Memorial Day. Water Division: In early April, the Water Division uses the crews to clean out the debris that builds up in the TID ditch over the winter. This clean up takes a full work crew about 10 days to complete. Ashland Parks & Recreation: Please refer to the.attached memorandum for an understanding of the importance of renewing this agreement with Jackson County Community Justice to utilize their work crews to help in the performance and facilitation of many of Parks' goals and programs. City owned property: In early June, the work crews are utilized for about one week to keep City owned property in compliance with fire requirements and weed abatement program. Several vacant lots and areas around various city installations such as pump stations and reservoirs are cleared of brush in preparation of fire season Fees are as follows: Job Type Minimum # of Clients Price per crew or rental Work Crew 6 $400.00 Brushing Crew 6 $450.00 Chipper Rental $127.50 Chipping Crew 2 $450.00 Note: Fees have not been increased since the previous agreement was approved by Council May 1, 2012. Page 1 of 2 ~r, CITY OF ASHLAND FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: Funds for this work are appropriated in the 2013-2015 biennial budget. Parks budgets $32,000 per year for forestry work, City budgets $4,000 for these services, and Cemetery budgets $1,600 for these services. STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends the Intergovernmental Agreement between Jackson County Community Justice and the City of Ashland be approved. SUGGESTED MOTION: The Council, acting as the Local Contract Review Board, moves to approve the Intergovernmental Agreement between Jackson County Community Justice and the City of Ashland, and authorize the city administrator to sign the agreement. ATTACHMENTS: Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission Memorandum Master Participating Agreement between Jackson County and City of Ashland Page 2 of 2 ~r, 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 Ste(ani Se8ingar It it FAX: (541) 488-5314 Vanston Shaw n ,rt MEMORANDUM TO Kariann Olson, Purchasing Manager FROM Jeffrey McFarland, Central Division Manager DATE April 28, 2014 SUBJECT Jackson County Justice The contract between Ashland Parks and Recreation and Jackson County Community Justice is up for renewal. It is very important for Parks to renew this contract so we can continue to have their help in the per and facilitation of many of our goals and programs. Justice program workers help us leverage our budgets and accomplish a great deal of work each year. The crews often work alongside and complement Parks staff as.they work on various properties/projects. Additionally, they are often contracted to perform.other seasonal projects for the public under Parks staff supervision. Without the ongoing contract with Jackson County Community Justice, many of our programs.would be hindered, and it would make it much more difficult for Parks to accomplish complementary/supplementary work. The Parks Department continues to perform weed abatement, fuels reduction and forestry work on hundreds of acres of Parks properties each year, and has a two year riparian/restoration grant through Bear Creek,Watershed Council in the Ashland Creek/Pond area. Many of these treatments are Performed by Community Justice forestry crews working alongside and under the supervision of the Parks Department. The ability to use these crews on appropriate weed abatement, forestry/restoration-related projects helps us accomplish more work and leverage grant monies received. These crews provide a lot of "bang for the buck" compared to other contractual options. Annual work Community Justice crews help perform include: • Weed abatement work to achieve required treatments before City of Ashland mandated deadlines each year. Home of Famous Lithia Park • Cutting, grubbing and piling for noxious weed treatments and re-treatments each year on various City parks and City-owned properties/parcels. • Forestry work including thinning, cutting, piling, chipping and sometimes slash burning to implement fuels reduction and stand density management in many of our Wildland Urban Interface properties. Justice crews often work alongside Parks staff and supplement the in-house and volunteer work performed. • Various annual weeding and clearing treatments and re-treatments in some parks and open space areas. • Occasionally crews help various trails construction, maintenance and clean-up projects and similar work at the Oak Knoll Golf Course as needed. • Other City Departments use the crews from this program to perform important annual work that must be completed (i.e. Cemetary, Water Department). It is vital for us to have the ability to continue using these crews when impromptu work/other situations arise. Having the immediate and ongoing availability of these crews to perform various tasks has become important to Ashland Parks and Recreation, especially with budgets getting tighter. We highly recommend renewal of our contract with the Jackson County Community Justice work program. Sincerely, Jeffrey McFarland, Central Division Manager Ashland Parks & Recreation 541.951.1311 Jeffrey.mcfarland@ashland.or.us MASTER PARTICIPATING AGREEMENT Between JACKSON COUNTY And CITY OF ASHLAND 1. ORS 190 AGREEMENT WITH CITY OF ASHLAND This Participation Agreement is hereby entered into by and between Jackson County, hereinafter known as the County, and, City of Ashland hereinafter known as the City. A unit of local government may enter into a written agreement with any other unit or units of local government for the performance of any or all functions and activities that party to the agreement, its officers or agencies have authority to perform. (ORS 190) 11. RECITALS - A. Jackson County is responsible for supervision and treatment of offenders. It desires to place selected minimum-security offenders in appropriate work situations to perform work for public benefit while providing opportunities for participation offenders to learn work skills and develop appropriate work habits. These training activities will aid the clients in successfully re- entering society with practical skills and a viable work ethic. B. City is responsible for maintaining the land and serving the people within the City of Ashland. The parties have a mutual interest in maintenance of the aforementioned maintenance of land. City and the County desire to cooperate in a program of improving resources in the City and to do such work with Jackson County Work Crews. Work will consist of grounds maintenance of city buildings, cemeteries, and parks, trail maintenance, litter pick-up, ditch cleaning, fuel reduction, and similar manual work. C. City can facilitate and accomplish work projects for the City by hosting the Jackson County Work Crews, which provide work and training opportunities for the crews. HL AGREEMENT A. RESPONSIBILITIES In consideration of the above premises, the parties agree as follows: 1. Mutual - County and City shall mutually agree upon a schedule for the performance of the County's services, allowing time for the City Project Manager to review the work. 1 2. City of Ashland- City a) City will supply a Work Order, in the general form provided as Exhibit A, for each job with Project Work Specifications. Each job will be unique. b) City will supply a person to inspect the work of the County. City will not be on site supervising the County work crew. 3. COUNTY - County agrees to: a) Perform directly the work under this Agreement as described in work order referred to in subparagraph H1.2.(a). b) County agrees to provide all equipment, tools, labor and materials required to carry out the specifications of the projects. The work shall be performed using the County's own equipment. The County shall furnish all supplies and parts. c) County agrees to perform the work expeditiously in conformance to specified Work Orders and in accordance with relevant industry standards. d) County agrees to provide a Work Crew Supervisor on site to directly supervise and lead clients on the crew. B. CHANGES IN WORK The County will perform no work beyond that described in the Work Order except pursuant to written change orders submitted to the County by City. IV. TERM The term of this agreement shall begin on the date all parties have signed the agreement and terminate on June 30, 2016. V. CONSIDERATION A. City shall be billed by the County, per eight hour day, the following rates: Job Type Minimum # of Clients Price per crew or rental Work Crew 6 $400.00 Brushing Crew 6 $450.00 Chipper Rental $127.50 Chi in Crew 2 $450.00 B. Reimbursement for work performed shall not exceed a maximum as may be specified in the Work Order without written consent of both County and City. 2 C. Consideration shall be paid only after completed work has been inspected and approved by City Project Manager, upon submission of invoice. Invoices for all work performed under this agreement shall be sent to City of Ashland, Attention: Accounts Payable, 20 East main, Ashland, Oregon 97530. City agrees to pay invoice within (30) days of receipt providing County has met all conditions and requirements of the agreement. VI. TERMINATION A. This agreement may be terminated immediately at any time by mutual consent of both parties, or by either party upon (10) days written notice, in writing, delivered by certified mail. Either party may terminate this agreement effective immediately upon delivery of written notice to the other under any of the following conditions: 1. If funding from federal, state, or other sources is not obtained and continued at levels sufficient to allow for purchase of the indicated quantity 2. If federal or state laws, rules, regulations, or guidelines are modified, changed or interpreted in such a way that services are no longer allowable or appropriate for purchase under this agreement or are no longer eligible for the funding proposed for payment authorized by this agreement. 3. If any license or certifications required by law or regulation to be held by County to provide the services required by the agreement is for any reason denied, revoked or not renewed. B. Any termination of this agreement under paragraph A of this section shall be without prejudice to any obligations or liabilities of either party already accrued prior to termination. VII. DEFAULT A. City by written notice to County of default, including breach of agreement, may terminate the whole or any part of this agreement: 1. If County fails to provide services called for by this agreement, or any extension thereof; or, 2. If County fails to perform any of the other provisions of this agreement, or so fails to pursue the work as to endanger the performance of this agreement in accordance with its terms, and the receipt of written notice from City fails to correct such failures within three days or such longer period as City may authorize. B. The rights and remedies of City provided in this section shall not be exclusive and are in addition to any other rights and remedies provided by law or under this agreement. 3 VIII. GENERAL CONDITIONS A. RECORD MAINTENANCE County shall keep and maintain complete and accurate records concerning all aspects of the work. County shall allow City representative to examine and copy records which are pertinent to the agreement while the work is in progress and within six years after the completion of the work or termination of the agreement. This includes a daily log of who worked at each site on each day. B. ASSIGNMENT County shall not assign or transfer interest in this agreement without the express written consent of the City. C. AMENDMENTS Terms of this agreement shall not be waived, modified, supplemented or amended, in any manner whatsoever except by written instrument and as signed by both parties. D. FORCE MAJEURE County shall not be responsible for delay or default by fire, riot, acts of God and war, which is beyond the County's reasonable control. E. WAIVER The failure of City to enforce any provision of this agreement shall not constitute a waiver by City of that or any other provision. F. INDEMNITY To extent permitted by the Oregon Tort Claims Act, County will indemnify and defend City from any claim or liability resulting from error, omission, or act of negligence on the part of the County, its officers, employees, or agents in the performance (or nonperformance) of work done pursuant to a Work Order under this agreement provided, however, that neither party shall be required to indemnify the other for any claim, loss or liability arising solely out of the wrongful act of the other party's officers, employees, or agents. 4 G. INSURANCE The County is self-insured and maintains adequate and appropriate types of insurance coverage in amounts no less than state law requires for workers compensation, comprehensive general liability covering both body injury and property damage, and automobile liability covering both bodily injury and property damage. Should other parties require that additional insurance coverage beyond State of Oregon levels be maintained throughout the term of this agreement, such parties agree to reimburse County for the additional cost as determined by the County Risk Management Office. H. COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE LAW Both parties agrees to comply with all federal, state, county and local laws, ordinances and regulations applicable to the agreement. 1. MERGER This agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties. No waiver, consent, modification or change of terms of this agreement shall bind either party unless in writing and signed by both parties. Such waiver, consent, modification or change, if made, shall be effective only in the specific instance and for the specific purpose given. There are no understandings, agreements, or representations, oral or written not specified in this agreement regarding this agreement. Each party, by the signature of its authorized representative, hereby acknowledges that it has read this agreement, understands it and agrees to be bound by its terms and condition. 5 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, COUNTY and CITY OF ASHLAND have executed this agreement as, the date, signature below. COUNTY CITY OF ASHLAND (Printed Name) (Printed Name) (Title) (Title) (Signature) (Date) (Signature) (Date) 6 Appendix A Project Work Order Form Jackson County Community Justice Frank Drake, Supervisor Phone: 541-774-6638 Fax: 541-774-6629 Email: drakefa@jacksoncounty,org Requesting Agency: Contact Person: Phone Number: Cell Number: Fax Number: Coordinating Project Manager in the field who will explain the project and specifications, what equipment needed, plan work schedules: Project Manager and Phone Number: Description of project, equipment or tools requested, special consideration or restrictions: Requested Date: Ongoing: Agency Representative: Date: CJTC Representative: Date: 7 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication May 6, 2014, Business Meeting Declaration and Authorization to Dispose of Surplus Property in a Sealed Bid Auction FROM: Lee Tuneberg, Finance Director, lee.tuneberg(Da ashland.or.us SUMMARY City staff intends to facilitate a sealed bid auction in accordance with AMC 2.54 to dispose of City property that has been declared surplus property. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: Near the end of each fiscal year, City staff conducts a sealed bid auction in accordance with AMC 2.54 to dispose of City property that has been declared surplus property. The public sale allows the general public, including local citizens of Ashland, to participate in the sealed bid auction process. Thus far, there has been a great deal of interest, numerous sealed bids received and a successful turn-out at each of the previous sealed bid auctions. Therefore, staff recommends that we conduct another sealed bid auction to dispose of the property being declared surplus property. Please refer to AMC Chapter 2.54 for more information regarding the disposal of surplus property FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: Disposing of this property will avoid any future storage, handling and labor costs. The City fund (730) and Parks fund (411) will receive the revenue generated by the sealed bid auction under the category of "sale of assets" (480.310). STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends that the vehicles and equipment on the attached list, and miscellaneous low dollar items no longer of value to the City and held in storage for the sealed bid auction, be declared surplus property and City staff be given authority to conduct a sealed bid auction in accordance with AMC 2.54 to dispose of the surplus property. SUGGESTED MOTION: The Council, acting as the Local Contract Review Board, moves to declare the property surplus, allow City staff to include any additional low dollar items offered up by departments and/or located in storage areas prior to advertising for the sealed bid auction, and gives City staff authority to conduct a sealed bid auction. ATTACHMENTS: AMC 2.54 Page I of 2 1r, CITY OF ASHLAND The list of vehicles and equipment (major items) intended to be declared as surplus property is as follows: CITY AUCTION VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT Veh # Description #398 1997 John Deere 310-E Back Hoe Loader #310 1997 John Deere 410E Back Hoe Loader #318 1998 John Deere 410E Back Hoe Loader #386 2000 Ford Ranger Pick-up #432 1999 Ford F-250 4x4 Ext Cab SWB #414 2001 Ford F-350 4A Dually w/Service Body #416 2001 Ford F-350 4A Dually w/Service Body #446 2002 Dodge Std Cab 4A Pick-up 4460 2003 Ford Ranger Pick-up 4A #576 2007 Kubota ZD326 Mower #420 2001 Ford Ranger Ext Cab 4x4 Pick-up #402 2001 John Deere Gator 6x4 Utility Cart #504 2005 Johnston Street Sweeper #823 2011 Ford Crown Victoria (wrecked totaled 9499 2004 Ford Crown Victoria #563 2007 Ford Crown Victoria #564 2007 Ford Crown Victoria #565 2007 Ford Crown Victoria #283 1996 Ford E350 Ambulance 4x4 #596 1996 Kawasaki Mule Utility Cart PARKS AUCTION VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT Veh # Description #346 1999 Ford Ranger Pick-up 4A 4745 2003 Ford F150 XL Pick-up #726 2003 Ford F250 Pick-up #660 2004 Toro 4500-D Groundsmaster #650 1992 Jacobsen T422-D Mower w/attachments #634 1997 Toro Groundsmaster 345 Mower w/Olathe blower attachment Note: Miscellaneous low dollar items no longer of value to the City and held in storage for the sealed bid auction will be logged and tagged when the items are transported from storage and staged on sight for the sealed bid auction. Page 2 of 2 Pte, 4!30/2014 City of Ashland, Oregon- Municipal Code 2.54 Disposal of Surplus Property 2.54.010 Disposal of Surplus and Abandoned Property The City of Ashland Finance Department may transfer, trade, auction or sell surplus or abandoned property to other city departments, political subdivisions, state agencies, or non-profit organizations. However, the disposal of surplus property having residual value of more than S 10,000 shall be subject to authorization by the Local Contract Review Board. (Ord 3018, 2010) 2.54.020 Definitions The following definitions apply to this chapter: A. 'Bid" means a competitive Offer to purchase advertised Surplus Property at a price specified by the bidder. B. "Cash" means U.S. currency, cashier's checks, and money orders made payable to the City of Ashland. C. "Employee's Household" means all persons residing with employee. D. "Employee's Immediate Family" means the children, step-children, parents, stepparents, grandparents and spouse of employee. E. "Invitation to Bid" means a competitive Offer to bid on Surplus Property available for public sale and is also known as a bid advertisement. F. 'Not-for-profit organization" means a nonprofit corporation as defined in ORS 307.130. G. 'Political Subdivision" means divisions or units of Oregon local government having separate autonomy such as Oregon counties, cities, municipalities or other public corporate entities having local governing authority. H. 'Purchasing Agent" means the City Administrator or his or her designee. 1. "State agency" means every state officer, board, commission, department, institution, branch or agency of state government whose costs are paid wholly or in part from funds held in the State Treasury, and includes the Legislative Assembly and the courts, including the officers and committees of both, and the Secretary of State and the State Treasurer in the performance of the duties of their constitutional offices as defined in ORS 279A.250(4). http://ashiand.a.us/CodePrint.asr?Branch=True&CodelD=3900 115 4/3012014 Cityof Ashland, Oregon - Municipal Code I "Surplus Property" means all personal property, vehicles and titled equipment property designated as surplus for sale to state agencies, political subdivisions of the State, and private not-for=profit organizations or the general public or any combination thereof. (Ord 3018, 2010) 2.54.030 Surpllus Property Offered to Government & Non Profits A. Prior to offering surplus property for public sale, the Surplus Property may be made available by direct transfer or direct sale to the following: 1. Other City departments, 2. Political Subdivisions, 3. State Agencies, and 4. Any non-profit organization determined to be eligible by the Purchasing Agent. B. Surplus Property acquired by political subdivisions, state agencies, or qualified not-for- profit organizations through direct sales or transfers twist be used only in the conduct of their official public programs. C. Surplus Property must not be acquired through warehouse floor sales or direct transfer for any use or purpose other than conduct of their official public programs, and not for resale or distribution unless otherwise pre-approved by the Purchasing Agent. D. Non-qualifying private entities and private citizens, separately or combined, must not be eligible to acquire surplus property except at public sales. (Ord 3018, 2010) 2.54.040 Surplus Property Offered for Public Sale A. The Purchasing Agent must conduct public sales for the disposal of Surplus Property. B. Methods of disposal may include, but are not limited to: oral auctions, sealed bid sales and fixed price retail sales, separately or in any combination thereof. (Ord 3018, 2010) http://ashiand.or.m/CodePrinl.asp?Branch=True&CoclelD=3900 25 4130/2014 City of Ashland, Oregon - Municipal Code 2.54.050 Conduct of Auctions and Sealed Bid Sales A. The Purchasing Agent must advertise the date, time and location of public auction or sealed bid sales. B. An invitation to Bid must be available at the auction site of an auction or sealed bid sale. C. The public may inspect property offered for sale at the time and place specified in the invitation to Bid; D. The Purchasing Agent reserves the right to reject any and all bids regarded as not in the best interests of the City of Ashland; E. All items must be sold to the highest Bidder. All Surplus Property must be offered "As-Is, Where-Is" with no warranty or other guarantee as to its condition or fitness for use. A purchaser or disappointed Bidder does not have recourse against the City of Ashland or any of their respective officers, employees or agents. F. All sales must be final. (Ord 3018, 2010) 2.54.060 Eligibility A. Members of the general public may participate as buyers at public sales. B. No employee or volunteer of the donating Department and/or Purchasing, whether full- time, part-time, temporary or unpaid volunteer, or any member of the employee's household, the employee's immediate family, or any person acting on the employee's behalf may participate in public sales if the employee has had any role in declaring the item surplus, processing the item or related paperwork, or offering it for sale. (Ord 3018, 2010) 2.54.070 Payment Full payment must be made within five (5) business days, unless otherwise specified in the invitation to Bid. Payment must by made by cash, cashier's check or money order. The methods of payment, time limit for making full payment, and the place where payment must be made will be specified in invitation to Bid. (Ord 3018, 2010) hftp://ashland.ar.us/CodePrint.wp?Branch=True&CodelD=3900 315 4302014 City of Ashland, Oregon- Municipal Code 2.54.080 Promulgation of Disqualifying Criteria by Resolution The Purchasing Agent may establish criteria to disqualify participants from surplus sales pursuant to this Chapter by Resolution. Such criteria may be based on: A. Conviction of fraud; B. Inappropriate conduct; C. Failure to claim purchases; or D. Other documented activities determined by the Purchasing Agent to warrant disqualification. (Ord 3018, 2010) 2.54.090 Claiming Items A. Items that are not paid for in fiill and claimed by the time specified in the Invitation to Bid will be offered to the next highest bidder. B. Property paid for, but not claimed within the time specified in the Invitation to Bid must be considered abandoned and ownership must default back to the City of Ashland, unless prior approval is obtained from the City of Ashland Purchasing Agent. C. Title to the property sold will be transferred to the purchaser when payment is made in fWL D. An Oregon Motor Vehicles Division trip permits must be obtained to drive unlicensed motor vehicles that are purchased. The purchaser will be responsible for obtaining a trip permit and certifying that the driver of the vehicle has a valid driver's license and is insured as required by Oregon law before a trip permit can be issued. (Ord 3018, 2010) 2.54.100 Other Means of Disposal of Surplus Property A. With the prior approval of the Purchasing Agent, an authorized designee may transfer computers and related hardware that are surplus, obsolete or unused to a common or union high school district or education service district. The authorized designee may not charge the school district a fee for the transfer. http://ashland.or.m/CodePrint.asp?Branch=True&CodelD=3900 4/5 4/30/2014 City of Ashland, Oregon- Municipal Code B. The Purchasing Agent may recycle or otherwise dispose of property when the Purchasing Agent determines the value and condition of the property does not warrant the cost of a sale. (Ord 3018, 2010) 2.54.110 Proceeds from Surplus Property The Purchasing Agent shall determine what fund and/or funds will be credited with the proceeds received from the disposal of surplus property. (Ord 3018, 2010) PRINT CLOSE http://whiand.or.us/CodePrint.asp?Branch=True&CodeID=3900 515 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication May 6, 2014, Business Meeting Approval of a change order to a contract allowing structural repairs to be performed as part of the information booth reroofing project FROM: Mike Morrison, Public Works Superintendent, morrism@ashland.or.us SUMMARY Council is asked to approve a change order for the Plaza Information Booth reroofing project. During the reroofing project it was determined that a considerable amount of the structure has significant dry rot and requires replacement. This could not have been inspected and identified until the roofing was removed. Repairing the dry rot requires a change order greater than 25% of the original contract. Total costs cannot be determined until the damaged areas are fully removed but will not exceed $10,000. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: In October of 2013 it was determined that the roof on the information booth needed to be replaced. At that time staff began the process of soliciting bids but due to the unique design of that structure, only one roofing contractor submitted a bid. A new formal bid was sent out in January of this year in an effort to garner additional bidders but once again, because of complexity of the job, only one contractor bid the project. Ten different roofing contractors were asked to submit bids on this project during these two attempts. The one contractor that bid on this project is capable of completing the job and was selected to begin reroofing the information booth. In mid April, the roofing contractor began removing the roofing material and found dry rot. Some dry rot was expected but the amount of dry rot there is considerably more than was anticipated. This dry rot will require the roof structure to be completely rebuilt. Currently we are partially into the reroofing process but need to complete the structural repairs before reroofing can be completed. The structural repairs require a change order to the original contract of an amount that requires Council approval. The original contract to reroof the plaza information booth and the smaller bulletin board on the plaza is $11,450. The repairs will need to be done on a time and materials basis and the full extent of the dry rot cannot be determined until the repair work begins. The billing rate will be $60 per labor hour, and materials with an additional 10% charge for the materials. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: Funds for this project will come from the Facilities Maintenance budget, the same fund as the original roofing project. The total cost for the dry rot repairs is not known at this time but will not exceed $10,000. It is expected that the project will be considerably less than this amount but until the full extent of the dry rot can be determined, the total repair price cannot be calculated. Page I of 2 il, CITY OF ASHLAND STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends the Council approve a change order to the contract for reroofing the plaza information booth. SUGGESTED MOTION: I move to approve a contract change order to the information booth reroofing project for structural repairs in an amount not to exceed $10,000. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Original project estimate from the roofing contractor. 2. Photo of the dry rot in the roof structure. Page 2 of 2 Ir, Pressure Point Roofing, Inc. rp-PZ fEE;!E; U Pt 1= .a ® 5235 Rainbow Dr. Central Point, OR 97502 Phone: (541) 772-1945 Customer Info: Fax: (541) 664-1772 Job #:.1480 Company Representative: City of Ashland - City of Ashland, Matt Stone 20 E Main Street, The Plaza, (541) 210-2312 Ashland, OR, 97520 mattstone®pressurepointroofmg.com (541) 552-2325 Re-roofing of Lithia Plaza Visitors Center Description Quantity Unit Remove existing metal roofing and the "built in" gutter system. 4 sq Inspect existing sheathing for any dry rot or necessary repairs. *See notes below. 1 each Install new high temp adhesive leak barrier over roof area. 2 rolls Install new painted metal "built in" gutter system using high grade sealant at seams. - 80 fee Install 24ga Kynar finish 16" wide Lac Seam curved metal panels. *Due to the curved nature of the 4 SQ panels Bruce and Dana will not work for specs. We are quoting using Taylor Metals product. Install all necessary trim and finish pieces with matching Kynar paint flashings. 1 each Clean up and haul away any construction debris. I each Re-roofing of Lithia Plaza Visitors Center total: $7,500.00 For the re-roofing of the bulletin board roof. Description Quantity Unit Remove the existing roofing and haul away. 2 squares Inspect roofing structure and repair as needed.* 1 each Install high temperature self adhering leak barrier over roof deck. 1 roll Install 24ga Loc Seam metal roofing. 2 squares Install all trim and flashing per manufacturer's specifications. 1 each Install new 5" OG gutter with color to match metal panels. 20 feet Clean up and haul away all construction debris. 1 each For the re-roofing of the bulletin board roof. total: $3,950.00 Total for all sections: $11,450.00 Total: $11,450.00 Notes/Comments: Proposal prices are good for 30 days. CCB 480247 Understructure, (if necessary) is additional at Time ($60 per man hour) and Materials (plus 10%). We will notify owner if additional work is needed before proceeding. Payment terms: 1/2 Down, Balance upon project completion. Payment to be made within 10 days receipt of invoice. f 1 _ J f 0 se c~ `~r1 ~~,~`{Y 1'.1\ ~'~5~4\ i ,(ems..` .,•Yx~,~A~ig~ ~ y., t? _ t rr moo. rr Ili .•.1. ~ I ~ t P. r y~ • . t i ' /~L % 'tom ~ / i G';/:\t t ~ ~ oe.. .,f !lr I 1 X42 ~ J IAA i 4 ~r ~ ~ 1 F - I 4 01 Y Y a Y ? p ~ S CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication May 6, 2014, Business Meeting Approval of a Contract Amendment with Cascade Research for Testing of an Archeological Site at Ashland Creek Park FROM Bruce Dickens, Parks Superintendent, bruce.dickens@ashland.or.us SUMMARY This is a contract amendment not to exceed $11,172 with Cascade Research for the archeological testing of the Ashland Creek Park site, located at 27 E. Hersey Street. The testing will include notifying Native American groups of the nature of the site, excavating within the site, analyzing artifacts, preparing draft and final reports and recommending mitigation measures if needed. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS Upon submitting the Ashland Creek Park project permit application to the State of Oregon, the Parks Department was notified that no previous archeological surveys had been completed within the area. Parks hired Cascade Research to do a site inspection to determine if in fact a test was needed for a proposed primitive site. After completion of the site survey, Parks was informed that the site includes a variety of artifacts. The State is now recommending further studies; therefore, the cost and scope of the archaeological work has increased. This contract amendment exceeds 25% of the original contract cost, so Council approval is required. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS The additional cost for this work will not exceed $11,172. The funds are appropriated within the capital funds set aside for the construction of this park. STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION Staff recommends approval of the additional costs for archeological work toward the construction of Ashland Creek Park. SUGGESTED MOTION I move that Council, acting as the Local Contract Review Board, approve the contract amendment from Cascade Research to cover the cost of archaeological site testing at Ashland Creek Park at a cost not to exceed $11,172. ATTACHMENTS Proposal and Agreement Page 1 of 1 1r, CASCADE RESEARCH, LLC 23 W. Hersey, Ashland Or. 97520 541-708-0899 cascaderaashlandhome.net PROPOSAL AND AGREEMENT DATE: April 16, 2014 TO: Ashland Parks and Recreation City of Ashland 340 S. Pioneer St, Ashland, OR 97520 REF: Ashland Creek Park Site FOR: Testing of a prehistoric site at Ashland Creek Park, 27 E. Hersey St., Asliland, Oregon. SCOPE OF WORK: A. Notification of concerned Native American groups regarding the nature and scope of the testing. B. Excavation of three square meters, totaling 4.5 cubic meters of fill, within the prehistoric site identified during the subsurface inventory of Park. C. Analysis of recorded artifacts and associated recovered data. D. Preparation of draft and final reports. Final report to be submitted to the City of Ashland, SHPO, and concerned Native American groups. E. Recommendations for mitigation (i.e., data recovery) measures if needed. SCHEDULE: Fieldwork: Spring 2014. A letter report, if required by the City of Ashland, would be drafted within ten days of completion of the testing. The final testing'report will be submitted as soon as possible (within 120 days) aver completion of fieldwork. ADDITIONAL SPECIFICATIONS: a. All deadlines subject to delays caused by unsuitable weather conditions at the field site. b. The work outlined in this proposal constitutes initial testing of the site. Additional work (data recovery) may be required by federal or state officials to mitigate impacts to the archaeological site from the proposed park project. BUDGET: Field Work: $4,365.00 Labor Payroll taxes Data Analysis: $3,000.00 Soil profiles Site map Artifact/data analysis Illustrations/photographs Report: $2,350.00 Draft report Site Form update Final report Report preparation expenses Artifact/data curation at S.U. U. Profit and Overhead: $1,457.00 PRICY:: Not to exceed $11,172.00 TERMS: Net thirty days. Bruce Dickens, Parks Superintendent Dennis J. Gray, owner City of Ashland Parks and Recreation Cascade Research, LLC Date Date CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication May 6, 2014, Business Meeting Special Procurement for the purchase of two aerial lift bucket trucks FROM Stu Wilkie, Fleet Maintenance Supervisor, stu.wilkie@ashland.or.us SUMMARY The Fleet Division is planning the scheduled replacement of two AFN van style bucket trucks with two Ford F450 Cab and Chassis with Altec Service Body and Altec AT200A Aerial Lift Bucket Trucks. Staff intends to purchase these vehicles from Altec Industries. The National Joint Powers Alliance has a cooperative contract with Altec Industries that is available for use by local governments. The cost per vehicle is $75,250.00 and the total cost for two vehicles will be $150,500.00. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: Ashland Fiber Network currently utilizes two van-style bucket trucks that are scheduled for replacement in FY 2014. AFN utilizes bucket truck vehicles on a daily basis to complete a variety of daily tasks requiring working access to aerial telecommunications space on utility poles. On a daily average each bucket truck is responsible for 5 to 7 installations, and 5 to 10 service calls. Service calls include overhead work performing pole change outs, service upgrades and downgrades, disconnects, non-pay disconnects, service checks, wireless service installations, cable TV and internet installations, PUC corrections, and network maintenance. In lieu of the van style bucket trucks, the industry is currently building these dual rear wheeled vehicles with service bodies for additional stability, storage capability and safety. These service body and aerial lift bucket trucks will enable the AFN field technicians to perform their work safely and efficiently. A Special Procurement is used for the purpose of seeking an exemption from the competitive bid process, custom designing a contracting approach, or the direct selection or award of a public contract or for a series of contracts. The completed Special Procurement, Approval Request Form is attached for your review and consideration. AMC 2.50.090 Exemptions from Formal Competitive Selection Procedures All Public Contracts shall be based upon Competitive Sealed Bidding (Invitation to Bid) or Competitive Sealed Proposals (Request for Proposal) pursuant to ORS 279A - 279C and the Model Rules except for the following: G. Special Procurements - a public contract for a class special procurement, a contract specific procurement or both, based upon a contracting procedure that differs from procedures described in ORS 279B.055, 27913.060, 279B.065, 27913.070. The contracting approach may be custom designed to meet the procurement needs. Page I of 2 CITY OF -ASH LAN D 1. Special procurements shall be awarded in accordance with ORS 27913.085 and all other applicable provisions of law. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: The amount budgeted for these two new vehicles is $140,000.00. The difference between the budgeted amount and actual price is $10,500.00. To cover the difference in this purchase and the difference in two fire trucks and camera van already ordered, we will delay the replacement of dump truck 936 budgeted at $170,000.00. STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends that the "Contract-specific Special Procurement" be approved. SUGGESTED MOTION: The Council, acting as the Local Contract Review Board, moves to approve the Contract-specific Special Procurement for the purchase of two aerial lift bucket trucks. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Form #9, Special Procurement, Request for Approval and Written Findings 2. NJPA Contract 060311-A11 Information 3. Altec Industries NJPA Quotation #246950 Page 2 of 2 ~r, CITY OF FORM #9 ASHLAND SPECIAL PROCUREMENT] REQUEST FOR APPROVAL To: City Council, Local Contract Review Board From: Stu Wilkie, Fleet Safety Supervisor Date: May 6, 2014 Subject: REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A SPECIAL PROCUREMENT In accordance with ORS279B.085, this request for approval of a Special Procurement is being presented to the City Council for approval. This written request for approval describes the proposed contracting procedure and the goods or services or the class of goods or services to be acquired through the special procurement and the circumstances thatjustify the use ofa special procurement under the standards set forth ORS 279B.085(4). 1. Requesting Department Name: Ashland Fiber Network 2. Department Contact Name: Stu Wilkie - PW Fleet Safety Supervisor 3. Type of Request: Class Special Procurement X Contract-specific Special Procurement 4. Time Period Requested: From: Order to be placed upon Council approval To: 270-300 Days ARO 5. Total Estimated Cost: $75.250.00 Each - Total $150,500.00* *$140,000.00 was budgeted for two new vehicles: the difference of $10,500.00.'I'o cover the difference in this purchase and the difference in two fire trucks and camera van already ordered, we will delay the replacement of dump truck #36 budgeted at $170,000.00. 6. Short title of the Procurement: Ford F-450 Cab and Chassis w/Alter AT200A Bucket Aerial Lift and Service Body, Quantity: (2) Each Supplies and/or Services or class of Supplies and/or Services to be acquired: The Fleet Division intends to purchase two (2) Ford F450 Cab and Chassis with Altec Service Body and AT200 A Bucket Aerial Lift vehicles to replace AFN Vehicles #452 and #476 scheduled for replacement in FY 2014 7. Background and Proposed Contracting Procedure: Provide a description of what has been done in the past and the proposed procedure. The Agency may, but is not required to, also include the following types of documents: Notice/Advertising, Solicitation(s), Bid/Proposal Forms(s), Contract Form(s), and any other documents or forms to be used in the proposed contracting procedure. Attach additional sheets as needed. Background: Ashland Fiber Network currently utilizes two van style bucket trucks that are scheduled for replacement in FY 2014. AFN utilizes bucket truck vehicles on a daily basis to complete a variety of daily tasks requiring working access to aerial telecommunications space on utility poles. On a daily average each bucket truck is responsible for 5 to 7 installations, and 5 to 10 service calls. Form #9 - Special Procurement- Request for Approval, Page 1 of 3, 4130/2014 Service calls include overhead work performing pole change outs, service upgrades and downgrades, Disconnects, non-pay disconnects, service checks, wireless service installations, cable TV and intemet installations, PUC corrections, and network maintenance. The bucket trucks enable the AFN Field Technicians to perform their work safely and efficiently. The industry is currently building these dual rear wheeled vehicles with service bodies for additional stability, storage capability and safety in lieu of van style bucket trucks. Proposed procedure: Staff is seeking an exemption from the competitive bid process to utilize the cooperative NJPA Contract #060311-AI I with Altec Industries to purchase two (2) new aerial bucket trucks. NJPA conducted a formal competitive proposal process and advertised in the Daily Journal of Commerce in Portland, Oregon on 04/20/2011, 04/21/2011, 04/22/2011, 04/25/2011, and 04/26/2011. Advertising in the Daily Journal of Commerce satisfies ORS 27913.055 (4) public notice requirements. National Joint Powers Alliance (NJPA) was created by the State of Minnesota as a Service cooperative to service any agency of the State of Minnesota or the United States. The NJPA allows members of the NJPA to piggyback on NJPA contracts. NJPA contracts give local governments' nationwide access to volume purchasing and discounts. 8. Justification for use of Special Procurement: Describe the circumstances that justify the use of a Special Procurement. Attach relevant documentation. Utilizing this NJPA cooperative contract will allow the City to purchase the vehicles that will best serve the needs of AFN and receive the benefits of volume purchasing discounts. 9. Findings to Satisfy the Required Standards: This proposed special procurement: X (a) will be unlikely to encourage favoritism in the awarding of public contracts or to substantially diminish competition for public contracts because: The NJPA competitive proposal solicitation was advertised in the Daily Journal of Commerce (publication located in Portland, Oregon) on the following dates: 04/20/2011, 04/21/2011.04/22/2011. 04/25/2011, and 04/26/2011 (Please provide specific information that demonstrates how the proposed Special Procurement meets this requirement.); and X (b)(i) will result in substantial cost savings to the contracting agency or to the public because: NJPA contracts give local governments' nationwide access to volume purchasing and discounts. (Please provide the total estimate cost savings to be gained and the rationale for determining the cost savings); or X (b)(ii) will otherwise substantially promote the public interest in a manner that could not practicably be realized by complying with the requirements of ORS 279B.055, 279B.060, 279B.065, or 27913.070, or any rules adopted thereunder because: Safety factors and work efficiency are of utmost importance. These vehicles will provide a safe and reliable vehicle for City employees to perform their job duties in a safe and efficient manner. (Please provide specific information that demonstrates how the proposed Special Procurement meets this requirement.) Form #9 - Special Procurement - Request for Approval, Page 2 of 3, 4/30/2014 Public Notice: Pursuant to ORS 279B.085(5) and OAR 137-047-0285(2), a Contracting Agency shall give public notice of the Contract Review Authority's approval of a Special Procurement in the same manner as a public notice of competitive sealed Bids under ORS 279B.055(4) and OAR 137-047-0300. The public notice shall describe the Goods or Services or class of Goods or Services to be acquired through the Special Procurement and shall give such public notice of the approval of a Special Procurement at least seven (7) Days before Award of the Contract. After the Special Procurement has been approved by the City Council, the following public notice will be posted on the City's website to allow for the seven (7) day protest period. Date Public Notice first appeared on www.ashland.or.us - [May 7, 2014, ifapproved by Council] PUBLIC NOTICE Approval of a Special Procurement First date of publication: [May 7, 2014, if approved by Council] A request for approval of a Special Procurement was presented to and approved by the City Council, acting as the Local Contract Review Board, on [May 6, 2014, ifapproved by Council]. This Contract-specific Special Procurement is for the purchase of two (2) Ford F450 Cab and Chassis with Alice Service Body and AT200 A Bucket Aerial Lift vehicles. The City intends to purchase the aerial bucket trucks from Altec Industries, Inc. Altec Industries, Inc. was awarded the NJPA National Cooperative Contract for Public Utility Vehicles. NJ PA cooperative contracts are competitively bid and give local governments' nationwide access to volume purchasing discounts. It has been determined based on written findings that the Special Procurement will be unlikely to encourage favoritism in the awarding of public contracts or to substantially diminish competition for public contracts, and result in substantial cost savings or substantially promote the public interest in a manner that could not he realized by complying with the requirements that are applicable in ORS 279B.055, 2796.060, 279B.065, or 279B.070. An affected person may protest the request for approval of a Special Procurement in accordance with ORS 27913.400 and OAR 137-047-0300. A written protest shall be delivered to the following address: City of Ashland, Kari Olson, 90 N. Mountain Avenue, Ashland, OR 97520. The seven (7) protest period will expire at 5:00pm on [May 14, 2014, if posted May 7'h] This public notice is being published on the City's Internet World Wide Web site at least seven days prior to the award of a public contract resulting from this request for approval of a Special Procurement. Form #9 - Special Procurement- Request for Approval, Page 3 of 3, 4/30/2014 National Joint Powers Alliance Altec Industries, Inc. Page 1 of 1 Home > National Cooperative Contract Solutions >Heavy & UNlity Equipment > Altecc Industries, Inc. r9- `k mmA/~AWARDED' Altec Industries, ITn llC. J1L1'CONIRA01 t y 4:.s _ y Contrachi: 060311-All Category: Heavy & Utility Equipment Overview Sub Category: Heavy Construction Equipment Description: Public Utility Equipment Contract Documentation Maturity Date: 07/19/2015 Pricing . Mine Industries, Inc. is the world's leading manufacturer of aerial lifts, digger derricks and specialty equipment for Marketing Materials the electric utility, telecommunications, tree care and light and sign maintenance Industries. Allec has manufacturing, sales and service facilities located throughout North America and, sells and services equipment in NJPA Contact Information over 120 countries. In addition to sales and servioe, Altec offers operator training, and a host of auxiliary services that include used and rental equipment, and equipment financing. HOW TO PURCHASE Our slap> -Step guldet _ Vendor Contact Info Altec Green Fleet Elana Martinez Direct Phone: 205-995-9862 elana martineztIaltec com Altec Products www.alteccom Cullen Bull Direct Phone: 205-222-0137 Introduction Video - - cullen.hulR0altec mm www.aitec.com http://www.njpacoop.org/national-cooperative-contract-solutions/heavy-utility-equipment/060311-aii/ 4/24/2014 p,2y ~79~, o5s~w> AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION / DJC 921 SW Washington, Sulte 210 / Portland, OR 97205 (503)226.1311 FAX (503) 222.5358 STATE OF OREGON, COUNTY OF MULTNOMAH, -ss. 1, KRISTINE HUMPRHIES, being first duty swam, depose and say that I am a Manager of the DAILY JOURNAL OF COMMERCE, a newspaper of general circulation in the counties of CLACKAMAS, MULTNOMAH and WASHINGTON as defined by ORS 193.010 and 193.020; published at Portland In the aforesaid County and State; that I know from my personal knowledge that the REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL NATIONAL JOINT POWERS ALLIANCE - HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT TOGETHER WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES, SUPPLIES, AND SERVICES a printed copy of which is attached, was published In the entire Issue of this newspaper for 5 (ime(s) in the following Issues: 0412n/2 0412212011, 0412572011, 04/2612011. THENATfONAL'JDINT ' Subscrib and sworn to before me this 16th day O.OWEAS;ALLIANCE' „ of August, 2011. HF1Vy,0)4STRU6Tn9N EAUIPr;A TOGETHER WITH RELATED ACCESSO. • RIES. SUPPLIES, AND SERVICES P11190"Ise laMDO ppan CT Jois 2• +"REOUEST FOR PROPOSALS Tha NaOpnelWolad:Powars•Alllanca® FP) Iswev. ;req'am br proposal ONSTRUCTION eOIIPMEM T pEEj- ULLSEAL ER. WITH - RELATED (:.ACCESSORIES C , JOSHUA K SEAL SUPPLIES, AND SERVICES; on behod O JOSHUA i NOT OSH UBUCOATES ourselves and our Mambere trom:ywem- men/ education, and non-pmre ageaelee COMMISSION NO. 45M7 loeated'b191140519tea' and potentlely lo- MYCOMMISSION EXPIRES NOVEMBER 07, 2014 Iarnellonalb?. (Walls•oMNI RFP.us avafl- Oda beglnning%Aprtl 20, 201 land omdirnf Ing unit May 11, 201 T. Detaeo end-sped- acaliorta rrAy' be.oblalned by leg, of ra- 000 Im GM99': Maierholer, NJPA.' 2o0 First street NOrlheasl.Staplat, MN 58479, or by o-meil'at RFPOnjpaooop.,g Pri Peedls wilt be reo Wd unin Juno 2, 2011 ' at 2:00 P,m, Central Tama at the above ad. Brass and o77aned June. 9;12011 at 8:00AM Central TmO.'-,' - PubsshedApP20, 2172.2;113428; 2011. 101734103.51 NATIONAL JOINT POWERS ALLIANCE Attn: GINGER LINE Order No.: 10173431 200 FIRST STREET NE Client's Reference No.: STAPLES, MN 66479 RFP 060311 Proposal Offering And Acceptance and Award RFP #060311, FORM D HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT TOGETHER WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES. SUPPLIES, AND SERVICES. Proposal Offering (To be completed Only by Proposer) In compliance with the Request for proposal (RFP) for HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT TOGETHER WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES, SUPPLIES, AND SERVICES, the undersigned warrants that Vwe have examined this RFP and, being familiar with all of the instructions, terns and conditions, general specifications, expectations, technical specifications, service expectations and any special terms, do hereby offer and agree to furnish the defined products/services and services in compliance with all terms, conditions of this RFP, any applicable amendments of this RFP, and all Proposer's Response documentation, Proposer further understands they are the sole offeror herein and that the performance of any sub-contractors employed by the Proposer in fulfillment of this offer is the sole responsibility of the Proposer. Company Name:Altec Industries, Inc. Date: 6/1/2011 Company Address: 210 Inverness Center Drive City: Birmingham State: AL Zip: 35242 Contact Person: Courtney Meredith Title: Inside Sales Representative Authorized Signature (ink only): A(11!19~41~_~ Courtney Meredith 4 (Name printed or typed) Contract Acceptance and Award (To be completed only by NJPAI Your proposal offering is hereby accepted and awarded. As an awarded Proposer, you are now bound to provide the defined goods and services contained in your proposal offering according to all terms, conditions, and pricing set forth in t is REP, any amendments to this RFP, and the Proposer's Response. The effective date of the Contract be _ and continue for four years thereafter AND which is subject to annual renewal at the option of boll) parties. National Joint Powers Alliance@ (NJPA) /J A NJPA Authorized signature: a Ida Title: _ goat c k (Name printed or typed) Awarded this I i day of ~JAH t `oil Contract Number # 060311,N37T NJPA Authorized signature: /OX C 1 Ova (!'rse..o V,V ~ (Name printed or typed) Title: COX ac:-.+ff -.,c 1/ I RKG~ti Executed this ~Tt day of a It Contract Number # 060311 ~A SZ Page 41 of 47 ANNUAL RENEWAL OF AGREEMENT Made by and Between Altee industries (Vendor) 210 Jnerness Center Drive Birmingham, AL 35242 and National Joint Powers Alliance@ (NJPA)' 20212" Street NE Staples, MN 56479 Phone: (218) 894-1930 h rens: "Vendor" and "NJPA" have entered into an "Acceptance and Award #060311-Ali" for the procurement of Heavy Construction Equipment Together with Related Accessories, Supplies, and Ser J-c&s,-andhaviugn.maturity-dat"fluly-9-,-2Og5,, and-which-are-subjoettommmal'r8i awa1g-aaf---- the option of both parties, Now therefore: "Vc3ttdsi" amid NJPA" hereby desire and agree to extend and renew the above defined contract for the period of July 9, 2013 to7nly 9, 2014. - ationn`Joi tP6~reAlliance JPA_T-- By' aMA f d~ R& Its: ~lr Name printed or typed:_ A fJL Data t . J3 3 A1tecTndnstries n By: f ah)) Its; C~ynn r Fs I ~Q, &L- A t Name printed oi• typed: r lA &m h l I_ (x ) Date ici 12 It y0 ! ]0 het desu@ to en calf lCe SI r r' r Pae ~ t''p ~@ ~1Te1Byv.~nd tp(urn t1liS 8gre8thentr ~ r ' ,{c, $S , f w y1'g;t~Rsrre,to dr§COnhdna toe cofitrat, t. , 3 .,F . 1 co a) (0 ONi N m N Oa N .41 m •gj OO Fwp' O n W N N co N 6S U ~j J rn N rn 0) co N co (0 IAA N e0 ' U o m N q ro w N (D LO 0) (D Cl) N 'yWy~ 1V~-]7~ O N b O ° c00 (DD V 6Ni (00 N co . y 3 N M tl W C U 01°D ° 0~ u 2 N Q cD N V co O (D tD N c0 (00 YO N O a) ED LO 20 s -N 2 CO a) E co ( cy'o [z] •d t+ S OD N V (D t°o ~O N m G Z CO U 3 0 Q o Op. (Y❑M~ p, /y~~~ ~D z N U 0 ~a co 'D 0 OD (0 '0 CD CV OD t0 -do ZO i ca co W w ~ ppi o u c N v rn n m rn . to 'a-1 O P to m N c . ` w z Q _ !O. O O r 'R N m N o N ti N O N O O O C, N 'N m A~ N OE C 01 {Cd N O N jcn aC, c"i o ~06 9cn V ~ 41 ca C7 € C N ?L N C O N G O O{ O O N d) L d1 L Q T1 O- O i5511J1 O U •O C y N U) p y y U N 0 C U m a c Q °'P' o ° occ7i a v`n3 v~~ v ~>°€a ~C mom a LT cR ai w U m a m {d z m > 5 F- 0 ~i N rn a o I- co co M N N N O m 00 N co N r 00 N co N n co d N ~ y 00 o M R H H K 00 o u~ M N pp M rn V o ~ O O O N uJ r ~ v ~3 C C : U ~om CD c .2 U 9 C o m N m y? N N D 5 co o v Om0 Oa (JPA National Joint Powers Alliance 200 First Street NE • Staples NN, 56479 888.894.1930 • www.iijpacoop.org COMMENT AND REVIEW To the INVITATION FORBID (IFB) 11060311 Entitled HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT TOGETHER WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES, SUPPLIES AND SERVICES The following advertisement was placed in the Star Tribune on April 21, 20011 and April 27, 2011 and the Daily Journal of Commerce slid on the NJPA website www.ninacoon,org, Onvia and on noticetobidders.com website: The National Joint Powers Alliance® (NJPA) issues this request for proposal (RFP) to provide HEAVY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT TOGETHER WITH RELATED ACCESSORIES, SUPPLIES, AND SERVICES, on behalf of ourselves and our Members from government, education, and non-profit agencies located in all 50 states and potentially internationally. Details of this RFP are available beginning April 20, 2011 and continuing until May 11, 2011. Details and specifications may be obtained by letter of request to Gregg Meierhofer, NJPA, 200 First Street Northeast, Staples, MN 56479, or by e-mail at RFP cr,njpaeoop.org. Proposals will be received until June 2, 2011 at 2:00 p.m. Central Time at the above address and opened June 3, 2011 at 8:OOAM Central Time. IFB's were requested fiom and distributed to: Altec Best Equipment Co. Bierschbach Equipment and Supply Bobcat Company Boyer Trucks Caterpillar CNH Case New Holland Construction Products and Consultants, Inc. Drive Cam Federal Contracts Corp. Group Elabrie Henderson Products Henke Manufacturing Indian Eyes, LLC John Deere Link-Belt Construction Equipment, Co. Manitowoc Cranes Mauldin Paving Products M-B Companies, Inc. Mitsubishi Caterpillar Forklift America, Inc. Multiquip, Inc. NAPA NorArn Norco Equipment Old Dominion Brash Company, Inc. RDO Equipment Sierra Systems State of South Carolina State of South Dakota Sullair Sunbelt Rentals Terex Titan Machinery United Rentals EPA- National Joint Powers Alliance 200 First Street NE • Staples MN, 56479 888.894-1930 • www.nipacoop.org VT Leeboy, Inc. Wirtgen America Late inquiries were requested from: Finn Corporation Hammerhead Henderson Products Modern Machinery Co., Inc. Bids were opened on June 10, 2011 at the offices of NJPA offices 200 lsr Street Northeast in Staples, Minnesota 56479. All bids received were deemed responsive. Bids were received fiom the following: Grove US LLC (Manitowoc) Caterpillar, hie, CNH America, LLC Labrie Environmental Group, Inc. Sullair Corporation Federal Conti-acts Corp. Old Dominion Brush Co„ Inc. Altee Industries, Inc. DriveCam, Inc. Wirtgen America, Inc. Multiquip VT Leeboy, Inc. John Deere Construction Retail Sales, a division of JDSS Noram Marketing SVGS Clark Equipment Company Terex Corp, dba Terex Construction Americas The following bids were deemed to be non-responsive: Noram Marketing SVGS Lack of required insurance Terex Corp. dba Terex Construction Americas Lack of required insurance The following bids were removed from consideration after being deemed to be substantially outside the scope of our solicitation: Labrie Environmental, Gsoup, Inc. Old Dominion Brush Company Federal Contracts Crop. We sincerely invite these bidders to re-submit their bids when NJPA issues a solicitation for bids for the goods and services offered in those submissions. Bids were reviewed by the Bid Review committee consisting of: Ginger Line, Coordinator of Bids and Contracts Gregg Meierhofer, Coordinator of Bids and Contracts Tracy Plitiske, Coordinator of Bids and Contracts Keith Hanson, Assistant to Manager of Financial Services, CPA i 4s,JPA. National Joint Powers Alliance 200 first Street NE • Staples MN, 56479 888.894-1930 • www.nipacoop.org The findings of the Bid Review Committee are summarized as follows: The Bid Evaluation Committee found the bid responses to be generally well put together and offering a wide array of products.and services. The Committee also found the bids to be within a "Competitive Range". For these reasons the NJPA Evaluation Team recommends award ofNJPA #060311 to: Grove US LLC (Manitowoc) Caterpillar, Inc. CNH America, LLC DriveCam, Inc. Sullair Corporation Multiquip Alice Industries, Inc. Clark Equipment Company Wirtgen America, Inc. VT Leeboy, Inc. John Deere Construction Retail Sales, a division of JDSS ✓f Ginger Line o rdinator of ids and Contracts Date r 7 f I/ Gregg 'erhofer, Coor . • of Bids and Contracts Date _._e q True P s o, Ltros n . or of Bids and Contracts Date I6M Hanson, Assistant to the Manager of Financial Services, CPA Date CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication May 6, 2014, Business Meeting Approval of Contract-Specific. Procurement for Construction Phase Inspections and Project Management of the Calle Guanajuato Project FROM Don Robertson, Parks and Recreation Director, don.robertson@ashland.or.us SUMMARY This is a request for City Council, acting as the Local Contract Review Board, to approve an exemption from the competitive bid process and directly award a contract to OBEC for project management, inspection of demolition and construction activities, design and consultation during construction, review of shop drawings and submittals, preparation of monthly progress payment estimates and preparation of as-built plans for the Calle Guanajuato resurfacing project. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS The Parks Department, along with Water and Electric departments, has completed the Calle Guanajuato Project as of Friday, May 3, 2014. The Parks and Recreation Department worked with OBEC on all phases of the project, including survey work and engineering, project management and construction inspection. The project was expected to be completed on April 1, 2014, but because of unforeseen obstacles during the excavation operations, the project was not completed until Friday, May 3, 2014, adding.extra inspection and project management hours to the end of the project. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS The cost is $16,230.00 Water: $1487.50 Parks: $1950.00 Electric: $12,792.50 This will be paid out of budgeted CIP Funds from each department. STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION Staff recommends approval of the Special Procurement to Award contract. SUGGESTED MOTION I move that Council, acting as the Local Contract Review Board, adopt the findings set forth in the attached Special Procurement Request for Approval and approve the Special Procurement described therein. ATTACHMENTS Special Procurement-Request for Approval Statement of Work Page I of I PFFAM CITY OF FORM #9 ASHLAND SPECIAL PROCUREMENT REQUEST FOR APPROVAL To: City Council, Local Contract Review Board From: Don Robertson, Director, Ashland Parks and Recreation Date: 5-6-14 Subject: REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A SPECIAL PROCUREMENT In accordance with ORS27913.085, this request for approval of a Special Procurement is being presented to the City Council for approval. This written request for approval describes the proposed contracting procedure and the goods or services or the class of goods or services to be acquired through the special procurement and the circumstances that justify the use of a special procurement under the standards set forth ORS 279B.085(4). 1. Requesting Department Name: Ashland Parks and Recreation 2. Department Contact Name: Rachel Dials, Recreation Superintendent 3. Type of Request: Class Special Procurement X Contract-specific Special Procurement 4. Time Period Requested: From April 1.2014 To: MU 30, 2014 5. Total Estimated Cost: $16,230.0 0 6. Short title of the Procurement: Contract Specific Procurement for Construction Inspection an d Project Management ofCalle Guanajuato Project Supplies and/or Services or class of Supplies and/or Services to be acquired: Construction project management and construction inspection, design consultation during construction. The Parks Department, alone with Water and Electric Departments- has completed the Calle Guanajuato Project as of Friday May 3, 2014. The Parks and Recreation Department worked with OBEC on all phases of the project, including survey work and en ing eering_project mana eg ment and construction inspection. The project was expected to be completed on April 1, 2014 but because of unforeseen obstacles encountered during excavation *-operations, the project was not completed until Friday May 3, 2014 adding extra inspection and lroiect management hours . 7. Background and Proposed Contracting Procedure: Provide a description of what has been done in the past and the proposed procedure. The Agency may, but is not required to, also include the following types of documents: Notice/Advertising, Solicitation(s), Bid/Proposal Fonns(s), Contract Form(s), and any other documents or forms to be used in the proposed contracting procedure. Attach additional sheets as needed. Background: Utilization of project management is a practice for bigger projects within the department that staff does not have the expertise to manage. Form #g - Special Procurement- Request for Approval, Page 1 of 3, 4/30/2014 Proposed procedure: Directly award public contract to OBEC as the project has been 99% completed with OBEC as the project manager and construction inspectors. 8. Justification for use of Special Procurement: Describe the circumstances that justify the use of a Special Procurement. Attach relevant documentation. All phases of contracts were awarded by direct appointment. Seeking an exemption for the competitive bid process because OBEC has seen the proiect through all stages of completion. 9. Findings to Satisfy the Required Standards: This proposed special procurement: X_ (a) will be unlikely to encourage favoritism in the awarding of public contracts or to substantially diminish competition for public contracts because: (Please provide specific information that demonstrates how the proposed Special Procurement meets this requirement.); and X_ (b)(i) will result in substantial cost savings to the contracting agency or to the public because: (Please provide the total estimate cost savings to be gained and the rationale for determining the cost savings); or (b)(ii) will otherwise substantially promote the public interest in a manner that could not practicably be realized by complying with the requirements of ORS 279B.055, 27913.060, 279B.065, or 279B.070, or any rules adopted thereunder because: (Please provide specific information that demonstrates how the proposed Special Procurement meets this requirement.) Form #9 - Special Procurement- Request for Approval, Page 2 of 3, 4/3012014 Public Notice: Pursuant to ORS 279B.085(5) and OAR 137-047-0285(2), a Contracting Agency shall give public notice of the Contract Review Authority s approval of a Special Procurement in the same manner as a public notice of competitive sealed Bids under ORS 279B.055(4) and OAR 137-047-0300. The public notice shall describe the Goods or Services or class of Goods or Services to be acquired through the Special Procurement and shall give such public notice of the approval of a Special Procurement at least seven (7) Days before Award of the Contract. After the Special Procurement has been approved by the City Council, the following public notice will be posted on the City's website to allow for the seven (7) day protest period. Date Public Notice first appeared on www.ashland.or.us - May 7, 2014 PUBLIC NOTICE Approval of a Special Procurement First date of publication: May 7, 2014 A request for approval of a Special Procurement was presented to and approved by the City Council, acting as the Local Contract Review Board, on May 6, 2014. This is a Contract-specific special procurement" to directly award a contract to OBEC for the Final Construction Phase of the Calle Guanajuato for construction inspection and final project management. April 1, 2014-May 30, 2014. The final cost and amount budgeted is $16,682.00 It has been determined based on written findings that the Special Procurement will be unlikely to encourage favoritism in the awarding of public contracts or to substantially diminish competition for public contracts, and result in substantial cost savings or substantially promote the public interest in a manner that could not be realized by complying with the requirements that are applicable in ORS 279B.055, 279B.060, 27913.065, or 27913.070. An affected person may protest the request for approval of a Special Procurement in accordance with ORS 279B.400 and OAR 137-047-0300. A written protest shall be delivered to the following address: City of Ashland, Ashland Parks and Recreation, Rachel Dials, 340 S. Pioneer St. Ashland, OR 97520 The seven (7) protest period will expire at 5:00pm on May 13, 2014. This public notice is being published on the City's Internet World Wide Web site at least seven days prior to the award of a public contract resulting from this request for approval of a Special Procurement. Form #g - Special Procurement- Request for Approval, Page 3 of 3, 4130/2014 ' s fdNJ1111Ni s Nill((If ADDITIONAL CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING (CE) & CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION (CA) CALLE GUANAJUATO RESURFACING PROJECT CITY OF ASHLAND PARKS STATEMENT OF WORK (SOW) The purpose of this WOC is to add additional scope of work as necessary tasks related to Construction Engineering (CE) and Contract Administration (CA) for the Calle Guanajuato Resurfacing Project (the "Project"). The additional scope of work is necessary due to the increase in construction work which resulted from unforeseen obstacles encountered during excavation operations, as well as work added to the contract during construction. This agreement for additional work does not delete, revise, or replace the tasks or requirements for previous phases of the Project unless otherwise specifically provided in this Contract. Consultant shall provide Construction Engineering (CE) services and Contract Administration (CA) necessary to meet the following requirements: Addifional CE and CA work tasks include the following: • Additional Construction Project Management • Additional Inspection of demolition and construction activities TASK 1 - ADDITIONAL CONSTRUCTION PROJECT MANAGEMENT & COORDINATION The Scope of this task remains as stated in the original Scope of work as follows: Consultant shall perform the following services as part of Task 1, Construction Project Management and Coordination. The major objective of this Task is to establish the lines of communication, and set forth the priorities between the City of Ashland Parks Department and the Consultant. As the work progresses, the Consultant shall keep the City informed of the Project work progress and aware of changes affecting the Project including schedule and related costs. Consultant shall prepare and provide monthly Project invoice with progress reports to the City of Ashland Parks Department. Consultant shall: • Immediately after receipt of the NTP, schedule and conduct a preconstruction conference in order to discuss with the Construction Contractor (CC) and City of Ashland Parks Department the construction schedule, utility involvement, required documentation submittals, materials testing, surveying, and other items relevant to the construction of the Project. • Prepare an agenda for the preconstruction meeting. • Prepare and distribute minutes for the meeting within five (5) business days after the meeting. Up to five (5) Project team meetings may be held with the CC and the City of Ashland Parks Department to discuss the Project schedule and other outstanding issues for the Project. Consultant's resident inspector must attend these meetings. Consultant's Project Manager (PM) shall attend one (1) meeting per month up to five (5) meetings. Scope of Seryices, CEICA Amendment OBEC Job No. 505-004 City of Ashland Parks Page I Task I - Deliverables: Consultant shall: ♦ Develop agenda for the preconstruction meeting and distribute to City of Ashland Parks Department and CC. Schedule: Three (3) business days prior to the meeting. ♦ Prepare minutes to document the meeting to the CC and City of Ashland Parks Department. Schedule: Within five (5) business days after the meeting. ♦ Prepare minutes to document up to five (5) progress conferences with the CC, and City of Ashland Parks Department staff. Schedule: Within five (5) business days after the meeting. ♦ Provide monthly progress reports with invoices to the City of Ashland Parks Department. Schedule: Monthly in the normal billing cycle. TASK 3 - ADDITIONAL CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING AND INSPECTION Consultant shall perform additional engineering and inspection required to ensure conformance of the Project with the plans and specifications for the Project. The engineering and inspection must take place concurrently with the CC's operations. For budgeting purposes, it is assumed that the additional construction will be limited to 5 weeks and that OBEC's inspector will be needed for an additional 24 hours per week for 5 weeks. The general order and nature of inspection will be as follows: Consultant shall: • Inspect erosion and sediment control measures. • Inspect removal of existing structures and obstructions and miscellaneous items. • Inspect Underground and above ground utility installation. • Inspect surfacing removal. • Inspect structure installation. • Inspect wearing surface installation. • Inspect electrical system material and placement. • Inspect water main replacement. • Inspect planting and irrigation installation. Task 3 - Deliverables: Consultant shall provide: ♦ General daily progress reports. ♦ Photos (as necessary) ♦ Field notes, measurements, and general documentation. Schedule: As requested. Scope of Services, CE/CA Amendment OBEC Job No. 505-004 City of Ashland Parks Page 2 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication May 6, 2014, Business Meeting Request for Approval of Special Procurement for Wildfire Fuels Reduction FROM: Chris Chambers, Forest Division Chief, Ashland Fire & Rescue, chambersc@ashland.or.us SUMMARY This is a Special Procurement authorizing payment of $175,000 to the National Forest Foundation ("NFF") which will add $175,000 from its own sources to make a grant of $350,000 to Lomakatsi Restoration Project, or to another contractor with similar skills and experience, to perform wildfire fuels reduction work in the Ashland Watershed. The funding provided by the City and NFF would be used to continue watershed fuels thinning as part of the Ashland Forest Resiliency Stewardship Project ("AFR"). BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: NFF is a grant-making foundation chartered by the U.S. Congress to be the official non-profit partner of the U. S. Forest Service. NFF marshals private gifts and non-federal resources to make and administer grants for community-based projects that help restore the health, resiliency and natural functions of national forests and grasslands. In discussions with Mayor Stromberg, NFF officials have shown interest in the City's AFR project and have agreed to fund further fuels thinning work within the Ashland Watershed by means of a $350,000 grant, provided the City pays 50% and provided a qualified contractor, such as Lomakatsi Restoration Project, submits a suitable application for the grant. Lomakatsi is now working on its grant application. NFF has said it expects to be able to award the grant within a few weeks after receipt of the grant application and the City's matching funds. The City's payment to NFF will be contingent on an agreement (still to be drafted) in which NFF (1) will commit to refund the full payment in the event NFF does not make a grant in the amount of $350,000 to an appropriate contractor for fire hazard reduction treatment in the Ashland Watershed; and (2) enters into an agreement with the contractor selected to perform the work that (a) specifically defines the scope of work and the work areas and (b) has terms consistent with those in the City's past contracts with Lomakatsi Restoration Project for similar work. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: Approval of this special procurement will authorize expenditure of $175,000 of the City funds budgeted in this biennium for AFR fire hazard reduction work. Of the $350,000 identified for such work in the biennial budget, $140,000 has been expended to date to contract with Lomakatsi to perform fire hazard reduction work elsewhere in the watershed. This money is budgeted in the Water Fund. Page 1 of2 ~r, CITY OF ASHLAND STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends approval of this Special Procurement. SUGGESTED MOTION: I move that the City Council, acting as local contract review board, approve a contract-specific special procurement authorizing payment of $175,000 to the National Forest Foundation as a match for a grant the Foundation will issue for fire hazard reduction treatment in the Ashland Watershed. ATTACHMENTS: Form for Special Procurement, Request for Approval Page 2 of 2 ~r, CITY OF FORM #9 ASHLAND SPECIAL PROCUREMENT REQUEST FOR APPROVAL To: City Council, Local Contract Review Board From: John Karns and Chris Chambers, Ashland Fire & Rescue Department Date: April 30, 2014 Subject: REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A SPECIAL PROCUREMENT In accordance with ORS279B.085, this request for approval of a Special Procurement is being presented to the City Council for approval. This written request for approval describes the proposed contracting procedure and the goods or services or the class of goods or services to be acquired through the special procurement and the circumstances thatjustify the use of a special procurement under the standards set forth ORS 279B.085(4). 1. Requesting Department Name: Ashland Fire & Rescue 2. Department Contact Name: Chris Chambers Forest Division Chief 3. Type of Request: Class Special Procurement X Contract-specific Special Procurement 4. Time Period Requested: From 5/6/14 To: 12/31/14 5. Total Estimated Cost: $175.000 6. Short title of the Procurement: National Forest Foundation Ashland Watershed Fuels Reduction Project 7. Supplies and/or Services or class of Supplies and/or Services to be acquired: Continuation of surface and ladder fuel reduction treatments in the Ashland Watershed as part of the Ashland Forest Resiliency Stewardship Project 8. Background and Proposed Contracting Procedure: Background: With ground work started in 2010, the AFR project was conceived in large part by the community and supported by City Council from concept in 2004 through ongoing implementation. Initially funded through over $6 million in federal "Stimulus" grants, the project has reached a critical point in which $4 million is needed to complete the initial round of work on 7600 acres. The National Forest Foundation (NFF), chartered by Congress in 1993, works with communities adjacent to National Forest Lands to leverage non-federal dollars for critical work on federal land in the National Forest System. The NFF has offered to match up to $175,000 of City funds and send the $350,000 total to a qualified contractor, such as the City's AFR project partner Lomakatsi Restoration Project, for direct implementation of fire hazard reduction work in the City's watershed. The City dedicated Form #9 - Special Procurement- Request for Approval, Page 1 of 3,4/30/2014 $350,000 in the current biennium, $140,000 of which is already under contract with Lomakatsi for the same work as would expand under the NFF funding. Proposed procedure:_ Upon receipt of the proposed City payment, the National Forest Foundation will process an application from Lomakatsi Restoration Project, or another contractor with like skills and experience, for a grant of $350,000 for continuing surface and ladder fuel reduction treatment in the Ashland Watershed. The City's payment to NFF will be contingent on an agreement in which NFF (1) commits to refund the full payment in the event NFF does not make a grant in the amount of $350,000 to an appropriate contractor for surface and ladder fuel reduction treatment in the Ashland Watershed; and (2) enters into an agreement with the contractor selected to perform the work that (a) specifically defines the scope of work and the work area and (b) has terms consistent with those in the City's past contracts with Lomakatsi Restoration Project for similar work. 9. Justification for use of Special Procurement: Describe the circumstances that justify the use of a Special Procurement. Attach relevant documentation. This is a unique situation in that the City's investment in a critical infrastructure maintenance project will be doubled by entering into an agreement with the National Forest Foundation. NFF, not the City, will choose a contractor that submits a complete and timely grant application. Lomakatsi has been a partner with the City in the AFR Master Stewardship Agreement and has shown interest in applying for such a grant. The City has previously awarded contracts to Lomakatsi under Special Procurements for work in the AFR project and similar work on City property. 10. Findings to Satisfy the Required Standards: This proposed special procurement: _X (a) will be unlikely to encourage favoritism in the awarding of public contracts or to substantially diminish competition for public contracts because: This opportunity to double the City's budget for protection of an irreplaceable resource is unique to the National Forest Foundation: no other entity affords such an opportunity. As noted above, the City will not determine which contractor is selected to perform the actual work. Lomakatsi will be an applicant for the NFF grant and, to the City's knowledge, has the unique knowledge, the skills, experience, and expertise to implement the surface and ladder fuel thinning required by the guidelines and regulations of the AFR project. (Please provide specific information that demonstrates how the proposed Special Procurement meets this requirement.); and _X_ (b)(i) will result in substantial cost savings to the contracting agency or to the public because: An award of funds to the National Forest Foundation is effectively a City match for a grant of twice that amount from NFF. This is an opportunity to double the area of fire hazard reduction treatment the City would otherwise be able to achieve in the Ashland Watershed with its own $175,000 alone. (Please provide the total estimate cost savings to be gained and the rationale for determining the cost savings); or (b)(ii) will otherwise substantially promote the public interest in a manner that could not practicably be realized by complying with the requirements of ORS 279B.055, 279B.060, 279B.065, or 279B.070, or any rules adopted thereunder because: (Please provide specific information that demonstrates how the proposed Special Procurement meets this requirement.) Form #9 - Special Procurement- Request for Approval, Page 2 of 3, 4/30/2014 Public Notice: Pursuant to ORS 279B.085(5) and OAR 137-047-0285(2), a Contracting Agency shall give public notice of the Contract Review Authority's approval of a Special Procurement in the same manner as a public notice of competitive sealed Bids under ORS 279B.055(4) and OAR 137-047-0300. The public notice shall describe the Goods or Services or class of Goods or Services to be acquired through the Special Procurement and shall give such public notice of the approval of a Special Procurement at least seven (7) Days before Award of the Contract. After the Special Procurement has been approved by the City Council, the following public notice will be posted on the City's website to allow for the seven (7) day protest period. Date Public Notice first appeared on www.ashland.or.us - May 7"', 2014. PUBLIC NOTICE Approval of a Special Procurement First date of publication: [Enter date] A request for approval of a Special Procurement was presented to and approved by the City Council, acting as the Local Contract Review Board, on May 6u', 2014. Continuation of surface and ladder fuel reduction treatments in the Ashland Watershed as part of the Ashland Forest Resiliency Stewardship Project where the National Forest Foundation will receive $175,000 and as described in "Proposed Procedure" above, issue $350,000 to Lomakatsi Restoration Project. This is a contract specific procurement whereby the City will be issuing funds directly to the National Forest Foundation under the terms of this agreement with work to be completed by December 31, 2014. It has been determined based on written findings that the Special Procurement will be unlikely to encourage favoritism in the awarding of public contracts or to substantially diminish competition for public contracts, and result in substantial cost savings or substantially promote the public interest in a manner that could not be realized by complying with the requirements that are applicable in ORS 279B.055, 279B.060, 279B.065, or 279B.070. An affected person may protest the request for approval of a Special Procurement in accordance with ORS 279B.400 and OAR 137-047-0300. A written protest shall be delivered to the following address: City of Ashland, Chris Chambers, 455 Siskiyou Boulevard, Ashland, OR 97520. The seven day (7) protest period will expire at 5:00pm on May 13u', 2014. This public notice is being published on the City's Internet World Wide Web site at least seven days prior to the award of a public contract resulting from this request for approval of a Special Procurement. Form #9 - Special Procurement- Request for Approval, Page 3 of 3,4/30/2014 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication May 6, 2014, Business Meeting First Reading of two separate ordinances amending the City of Ashland Comprehensive Plan, Comprehensive Plan Maps, Transportation System Plan, and Street Standards to adopt the Normal Neighborhood Plan FROM: Brandon Goldman, Senior Planner, Community Development Department, Brandon. Goldman@ashland.or.us SUMMARY These two ordinances amend the Comprehensive Plan and Transportation System Plan to implement the Normal Neighborhood Plan. A Normal Neighborhood District Land Use code amendment is presented for discussion only. It will be reviewed as part of a separate legislative action in the upcoming months and is intended to be included in the Unified Land Use Ordinance. Given the interrelated nature of the Normal Neighborhood Plan elements this Draft Land Use Ordinance, this language is presented for Council consideration, discussion, and direction at the May 6`h hearing. The Normal Neighborhood Plan will guide future development associated with approximately 94 acres of unincorporated lands within Ashland's Urban Growth Boundary. It attempts to implement existing City land use policies that promote the construction of diverse housing types and a neighborhood network of connected streets, walkways and cycling facilities, while requiring integration of, and protection for, the neighborhood's natural areas, consisting of wetlands, creeks and associated floodplains and riparian areas. BACKGROUND In March of 2011 the City Council directed the Community Development Department to apply for a Transportation and Growth Management (TGM) grant to prepare a neighborhood master plan for the 94 acre Normal Neighborhood area. Having received the grant award in May 2012, an extensive public involvement process was undertaken to develop the plan. Public engagement included 32 public meetings where the viewpoints of a variety of participants including the general public, property owners and neighboring residents affected the plan's evolution. On December 2 2013, the City Council received an update on draft plan which had been discussed by the Transportation Commission and Planning Commission at their September, October, and November meetings. The final Normal Neighborhood Plan and draft implementing ordinances were initially presented to the Planning Commission at a study session on February 25, 2014. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the final plan on March I I1h, and completed its deliberations on April 8, 2014. Page 1 of 4 MINN CITY OF ASHLAND The Normal Neighborhood Plan is comprised of Normal Neighborhood Plan Framework document, official Normal Neighborhood Plan maps, and the proposed Normal Neighborhood District land use ordinance amendments (Ch. 18-3.13). Collectively these documents create the underlying physical form and regulatory structure for the area's future development. Development of this area is expected to occur in an incremental way, as individual parcels propose annexation for specific housing developments. The adoption of a Neighborhood Plan for the area will ultimately provide a general framework for evaluating future annexation requests to ensure that in addition to housing the coordination of streets, pedestrian connections, utilities, storm water management and open space is considered as part of development proposals. A detailed description of the proposed Normal Neighborhood plan's land use, transportation, and open space, frameworks is provided in the attached Planning Action Staff Report (PL-2013-01858) NEXT STEPS Upon approval of first reading of the Normal Neighborhood Plan's implementing ordinances, the final plan and ordinances, as amended, will be presented to the City Council for second reading. The Normal Neighborhood District Land Use Ordinance will be presented for legislative approval as part of the Unified Land Use Ordinance hearing process and will be forwarded to the City Council following the Planning Commission's public hearing and deliberation. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: N/A COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS Transportation Commission The Transportation Commission took public testimony, reviewed the Existing Traffic Conditions technical memorandum (dated September 12, 2012) and the Future Traffic Analysis (dated November 19, 2013) over the course of three meetings on September 26, October 24, and November 14, 2013. Upon review of the materials provided and deliberation the Transportation Commission approved a motion (3-2) to recommend elimination of two of proposed new street connections to East Main Street, leaving only the new Normal Neighborhood Collector connection in its proposed location. Prior to this motion the Commission was split with a 3-3 motion to approve the transportation element of the plan as proposed. Housing and Human Services Commission The Housing and Human Services Commission did not hold a public hearing regarding the draft plan and as such provided no formal recommendation pertaining to plan adoption. Upon being updated on the plan and future development potential of the area, the Commission did express the importance of the area in meeting Ashland's affordable housing needs and the emphasized the value of integrating affordable housing throughout the plan area consistent with the requirements of the City's annexation ordinance. Planning Commission The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the Normal Neighborhood Plan's land use framework, transportation framework, open space framework, and implementing ordinances Page 2 of 4 IAA, CITY OF ASHLAND with specific recommended amendments as outlined in detail in the attached Planning Commission Report dated April 22, 2014. STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff believes the revisions that have been made over the last 15 months have refined and improved the neighborhood plan, and are largely consistent with the original goals and objectives for the planning project. Staff recommends Council approve first reading of the ordinance amending the Comprehensive Plan, Comprehensive Plan Map, and adopting of the Normal Neighborhood Plan Framework as a technical supporting document of the Comprehensive Plan. Staff recommends Council approve first reading of the ordinance amending the Transportation System Plan maps and Street Standards handbook to incorporate the Normal Neighborhood Street Network as proposed. The Future Traffic Analysis conducted as part of this planning effort found that all existing intersections in vicinity of the project are expected to continue to function within operational standards at full build out of the plan area. Further the report confirms that each of the planned street intersections with East Main Street are expected to function within applicable mobility standards upon the improvement of East Main Street to meet City standards to include sidewalks and bike lanes. The proposed Normal Neighborhood District Land Use ordinance will be reviewed as part of the broader Unified Land Use Ordinance amendment process. However, given the interrelated nature of the Normal Neighborhood Plan elements, the City Council is asked to provide recommendations on this ordinance as part of tonight's hearing. SUGGESTED MOTION(S): Individual motions are required to address each of the proposed ordinances separately: I move to approve the first reading by title only of an ordinance titled "An Ordinance amending the City of Ashland Comprehensive Plan to add a Normal Neighborhood Plan designation to Chapter II [Introduction and Definitions], Change the Comprehensive Plan Map designation for approximately 94 acres of land within the City of Ashland Urban Growth Boundary from Single Family Residential and Suburban Residential to the Normal Neighborhood Plan Designation, and adopt the Normal Neighborhood Plan Framework as a support document to the City of Ashland Comprehensive Plan," and move the ordinance on to second reading. I move to approve the first reading by title only of an ordinance titled "An Ordinance amending the Street Dedication Map, Planned Intersection and Roadway Improvement Map, and Planned Bikeway Network Map of the Ashland Transportation System Plan for the Normal Neighborhood Plan area, and amending Street Design Standards within the Street Standards Handbook to add a new Shared Street classification," and move the ordinance on to second reading. I move to recommend the Draft Land Use Ordinance for the Normal Neighborhood District be incorporated into the Draft Unified Land Use Ordinance (as amended) to be reviewed under a separate legislative action. Page 3 of 4 CITY OF ASHLAND ATTACHMENTS: 1. Plan Brief Summary 2. Ordinance 1 (Comprehensive Plan) a. Exhibits 3. Ordinance 2 (Transportation System Plan) a. Exhibits 4. Draft Land Use Ordinance -Normal Neighborhood District 5. Planning Commission Report (dated 4/22/2014) 6. Staff Report PL-2013-01858 (dated 3/11/2014) 7. Normal Neighborhood Plan goals and objectives 8. Written Comments (through 4/29/2014) 9. Open City Hall topic posts (through 4/29/2014) Additional background information The following documents were prepared over the span of the two year planning project to study the area, plan elements, and informed the development of the final plan and implementing ordinances: • Future Traffic Analysis (dated 11/19/2013) o Traffic Report Figures o Traffic Report Appendices • Existing Traffic Conditions technical memorandum (dated 9/12/2012) • Individual background frameworks (completed in January-February 2013) o Housing and Land Use o Mobility o Greenway and Openspace o Infrastructure o Sustainability • Existing Conditions Summary (dated 9/17/2012) • 2012 Housing Needs Analysis (approved Sept. 3, 2013, ORD#3085) • 2011 Buildable Lands Inventory (approved Nov. 15 2011, ORD43055) Page 4 of 4 Normal Neighborhood Plan Brief Summary The Normal Neighborhood Plan District is situated between East Main Street to the north and the railroad tracks to the south, Clay Street to the east and the Ashland Middle School to the west. Currently, the 94 acre area has a mix of Comprehensive Plan designations including about 50% single family residential (minimum 4.5 units per acre) and 50% suburban residential (minimum 7.2 units per acre), and is presently outside the City of Ashland (City) city limits but within the City Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). Land Uses The proposed Normal Neighborhood District will contain four residential zones, NN-01, NN-2, NN-03, and NN-03-C distributed throughout the plan area as follows: 37.25 acres of NN-01: The Land Use designation NN-O1 is intended to provide single family 296 land use Distribution dwellings, accessory residential units, and cottage within 94 acre Neighborhoc housing with a base density of 5 units per acre. El NN-01 50.25 acres of NN-02: The NN-02 designation N NN-02 provides housing opportunities for individual households through development of a mix of single- 40% ■ NN-03 dwelling housing, duplexes, townhomes, accessory ■ NN-03C residential units, and pedestrian oriented clustered 53% housing with a base density of 10 units per acre. 4.25 acres of NN-03: The NN-03 land use designation is intended to address Ashland's housing needs through development of multi-dwelling housing with a base density of 15 units per acre. Note, the Planning Commission has recommended the maximum height allowance be increased to three stories in both the NN-03 and NN-03-C zones. The current limit included in the proposed ordinance is only 2.5 stories and as such Council would have to direct staff to make such an amendment plan. 2.25 acres of NN-03: C the NN-03-C zone is a residential designation consistent with NN-03, however it would additionally allow for limited neighborhood serving commercial uses such as a coffee shop on the ground floor. Open Space In addition to the designated residential Land Uses noted above the plan also calls for the establishment of approximately 26.5 acres designated as Conservation Areas, or 28% of the total project area. Although these areas do have an underling residential zone they would not be developable under the plan, however the allowable housing density could be transferred to areas outside of these natural areas under the plan. The Open Space Network Map shows the areas intended to be preserved as natural areas or open space within the district which absent of any environmental constraints would additionally provide recreational amenities to the districts residents. Page 1 of 2 Transportation The Normal Avenue neighborhood's internal street network has largely been designed to keep travel speeds in the range of 20 mph by introducing elements such as a planted median, small traffic circles, and subtle changes in direction at block intersections. The backbone of the street network is a re-routed neighborhood collector that extends from the southern intersection at a future improved Rail Road Crossing, to East Main Street between Clay Creek and Cemetery Creek. Including this new Neighborhood Collector, there are three proposed intersections with East Main Street, located to distribute traffic to and from the neighborhood onto East main. This distributed interconnected grid was reviewed in the Future Traffic Analysis report by SO Alliance found that all existing intersections in vicinity of the project are expected to continue to function within operational standards in the year 2038 at full build out of the neighborhood plan area. The Report further noted that East Main Street Should be improved to meet City street standards as an "Avenue" including sidewalks, bike lanes, and potentially a center turning lanes at the proposed intersections. Page 2 of 2 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY OF ASHLAND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO ADD A NORMAL NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN DESIGNATION TO CHAPTER II [INTRODUCTION AND DEFINITIONS], CHANGE THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION FOR APPROXIMATELY 94 ACRES OF LAND WITHIN THE CITY OF ASHLAND URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY FROM SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL TO THE NORMAL NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN DESIGNATION, AND ADOPT THE NORMAL NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN FRAMEWORK AS A SUPPORT DOCUMENT TO THE CITY OF ASHLAND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Annotated to show deletions and additions to the code sections being modified. Deletions are bold lined-through and additions are in bold underline. 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 City of Ashland Planning Commission considered the above-referenced recommended amendments to the Ashland Comprehensive Plan at a duly advertised public hearing on March 11, 2014 and subsequent public hearing continuance dates, and on April 8, 2014, following deliberations, recommended approval of the amendments by a vote of 6-0; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Ashland conducted a duly advertised public hearing on the above-referenced amendments on May_ 2014, and on [subsequent blic hearing contmuance dafesb 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 Page 1 of 3 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Ashland has determined that in order to protect and benefit the health, safety and welfare of existing and future residents of the City, it is necessary to amend the Ashland Comprehensive Plan in manner proposed, that an adequate factual base exists for the amendments, the amendments are consistent with the comprehensive plan and that such amendments are fully supported by the record of this proceeding. THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The above recitations are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 2. The City of Ashland Comprehensive Plan, Chapter II, [INTRODUCTION AND DEFINITIONS] is hereby amended to add the following new Section [NORMAL NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN 2.04.17] and to adopt the Normal Neighborhood Plan Framework, s amended, as a supporting document to the City's Comprehensive Plan; former Section 2.04.17 is renumbered [PLAN REVIEW 2.04.18], to read as follows: PLAN REVIEW (2 04 17) NORMAL NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN (2.04.17) This is a residential area that promotes a variety of housing types including single family, attached, and multi family residential, with densities ranging from 5 to 15 units per acre. This area implements the Normal Neighborhood Plan Framework (2014) to accommodate future housing, neighborhood scaled business, create a system of greenways, protect and integrate existing stream corridors and natural wetlands, and enhance overall mobility by planning for a safe and connected network of streets and walking and bicycle routes. PLAN REVIEW (2.04.18) SECTION 3. The City of Ashland Comprehensive Plan Appendix entitled "Technical Reports and Supporting Documents" is attached hereto and made a part hereof as Exhibit A. SECTION 4. The document entitled "The City of Ashland Normal Neighborhood Plan Framework (2014)," attached hereto as Exhibit B, and made a part hereof by this reference is hereby added to the above-referenced Appendix to support Chapter II, [INTRODUCTION AND DEFINITIONS] of the Comprehensive Plan. SECTION 5. The officially adopted City of Ashland Comprehensive Plan Map, adopted and referenced in Ashland Comprehensive Plan Chapter 11 [PLAN MAP 2.Q3.04] is hereby amended to change the Comprehensive Plan map designation of approximately 94 acres of land inside the urban growth boundary from Single Family Residential and Suburban Residential, to the Normal Neighborhood Plan designation including designated Conservation Areas as reflected on the revised adopted Comprehensive Plan Map, attached hereto as Exhibit C, and made a part hereof by this reference. Page 2 of 3 SECTION 6. 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 7. Codification. Provisions of this Ordinance shall be incorporated in the City Comprehensive Plan 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 1, 3-6 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 12014, 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 Lohman, City Attorney Page 3 of 3 Exhibit A Appendix A: Technical Reports and Supporting Documents City of Ashland, Oregon Comprehensive Plan Periodically, the City may choose to conduct studies and prepare technical reports to adopt by reference within the Comprehensive Plan to make available for review by the general public. These studies and reports shall not serve the purpose of creating new city policy, but rather the information, data and findings contained within the documents may constitute part of the basis on which new policies may be formulated or existing policy amended. In addition, adopted studies and reports provide a source of information that may be used to assist the community in the evaluation of local land use decisions. Chapter II, Introduction and Definitions The following reports are adopted by reference as a supporting document to the Ashland Comprehensive Plan, Chapter II, Introduction and Definitions. 1. Croman Mill Site Redevelopment Plan (2008) by Ordinance 3030 on August 17, 2010 2. Normal Neighborhood Plan Framework (2014) by Ordinance on 2014., Chapter IV, Environmental Resources The following reports are adopted by reference as a support document to the Ashland Comprehensive Plan, Chapter IV, Environmental Resources. 1. City of Ashland Local Wetland Inventory and Assessment and Riparian Corridor Inventory (2005/2007) by Ordinance 2999 on December 15, 2009. Chapter VII, Economy The following reports are adopted by reference as a support document to the Ashland Comprehensive Plan, Chapter VII, The Economy. 1. City of Ashland: Economic Opportunities Analysis (April 2007) by Ordinance 3030 on August 17, 2010 Chapter XII, Urbanization The following reports are adopted by reference as a support document to the Ashland Comprehensive Plan, ChapterXll, Urbanization. 1. City of Ashland: Buildable Lands Inventory (2011) by Ordinance 3055 on November 15, 2011. V i Q 04 M1l ~u E`AC F C ny l fl 1 3~ lilt" ! w f t V 6y.~ ~r ® Q IW Y O W E l0 LL c m a m a m 0 2 0 L d O > a a L Z OI Z ~ c E o " Z o U a c m v N J C - N E d c a c 3 c d m 3 a o c Y 3 O O Q N U N L U Q N E ° O m E _ m N O C A D C C Y O C a ~ O1 O d T C Q p~ O C O - O O C T U C C 6 C D C c ~p p~ y 0 a c O N N Ol O N m L K J d c C O C n C C N _ c U L c 2 E DO E U v a~ U !0 m Y w° c m ~ a n m ~ m c o x E `w T o 'c r m a a o c o m W c o E o m c ~ c c m O t 'c O v n 7 a ~ .^N~ `m m `o ii E a 'o m ° a~ E a a 0 o m o o a C 10 L Z C7 v C C N LL T C y n - m d W ~ ~ ~ 01 C C ~ W n m L UI N 01 r O a E m Q a` in ° v o m~ R m o N E m a V « O c O N N m Q O C J N N N L W % W O N d O N W R O a ° UI N 6 m n Q o a o a m> v E m > c ui o t a c v~ v d r o. v O a CO ° d Z it F C7 o m P m w m F m u N N N N M c E d N C O C O .q O d C r F P O N W T A 7 W V w w J p vi F 07 ~ ~ 3 z ~ ~ z o z 3 ~ G N vi ~C r N M a Ln m m N N Ln N b n O] C r r d C O V O Q d O a ~n F w Fw N F x X ¢ Q CC ~ o V O Z a 3 0 w O O d Z P ~ E p U w H c = VI N U Q O ¢ EL p F N z o O IL o > O U Z ¢ O ~ ¢ ° m v~i O ~n z O w W o O w Z Fn z Q O p d Z H Z w O Z Q > L V O0 a 3 Q vi F w m Y ¢ Q O U w rn O F l7 a Q 0 t7 a Q Q J } u' J O ~n d p U Z w = Z O Z O O 3 ¢ F Z Q¢ Z F Z O , F U LL h p w O Z w w w Z_ Z C. O N Z W ' Z Z) > LL LU F m F W w Q F CL X O ¢ O W LL W Q F U r 2' ¢ O z d w U LL = J Y WO Q Z o VI Q VI O f 2 r N M CCI Y vt ~O I~ OD D\ N N N N N N O 3 E m LL c ~ m c a Y C m 0 m ~ O d Z O ry C w O O O m > L w 0 z L m Z m C) w L L - z 3 3 m co w w 3 E E O n n p n Z O O L V ` w m o 0 G d w D. w U Lo Lo N c u D L L ° J ` m tT Ot ~ Z Z v G _ m a a a o. o. w rn LL ~T rT FT ~T c w c 0 v d v v v m ` L 1O ~n vi in vi U a J C 3 0 F u5 m N M ~ vl ~O I~ W ~ O O N ~ b n O\ O ~ N M N N N N ~ Ol ~ C L Y U m o_ ¢ m v ~ N 3 c E N V1 Y m m c p a - m ~c w R `m Y L a w z a ° o `o w c ° v v F 3 N 3 v E av in L a _m °a pc 3 a~ 3 D 3 y v w rn W 12 c a m 4 R 4 'm° r c ° o o m ¢ m a - Z Z Z w c U O L p• O 3 Z Z Z u Y Y ¢ 6 N O ° m m o o c c c m _ v a a! m ¢ v t t t vai 3 E m E r m a T a j c m N _ a+ a a a p_ Z O Z Z Z Z S a c _ O w N w w w w O V N C > c 3 3 3 3 w w m w m a a a a o. L w .2 .2 .2 CL Y O ww L m `I ~xxp N w N w L a L N W Ow`l W W W ,r d > U J U W U W O O O O U O U N in V1 Vf VI Vf T LL U 2 9 o y y ~ e C E' c: w B° c m o o o ~v oq u aG 'o ~u „ c y° c r~. "U 4 3 0 c w y v > v O C L ~ o y b 3 C C u t q v v u v W v C O b n C <°d uv' v L b 4 G C L>` m p d S > O G u k m 3 4 C_1 ~ v O v ? .G ~ E ~ ti 4' u tO -2i u C c E u O N Gq C 'd ti "G ro O L1, .C 'tl v A C v H E' ° u ° v v v O v C N Y `a u ~ ~ C G 7 ~ u Gq O u C 'J E C v GL w d u G 'O .2. O L' U w v v o v Q~~ c ~ q v v U -A c s ~ ° o v~ ~ ro a c q 3 [ o w ~ ~ ~ ➢ U m ~ a ~s ocn ° E v E v ~ c ~ m o E w c q ° u > c E E "E ° G 3 s o 'y u o° 7 0 n c m c c x o c`"r 3 v b .rE ray v o c v G e e°°n E v v v .0 7 X v 3 ro O z O u V V y v W u u O um u m 0 ° u m °J c > t'i' v °D ° is o b .c > ^3o G 'm y o ` 7 cn w e O = aC. E G w v u v V v 'u d O E T b G n <°0 O vC u` v C 9 4 ro C z q E v o e d a y v n = s o c. v v m y° o V ro N .E y o. o e y v p 'n e° c o Q.'` a c ° v -^E > ma -2 O o 'b a, o s 0 3 v s m u v m v° a m 0 v O 7° o v r o f E v E 3v_ o e°ns E 'o > oo s v> C7 V c. E Q c. A 6 m c. m a Z m m E ~i 3 0 6 v _ i Y N LL c m a 0 L_ O a L +)1Y OI O Z' m 0 z i g Y ~ 1 YY 'Y y . m ~ LL ~ c ~ ■ m M1L _ 5 1~ s3 a A c a m o s'.' fl g d c l0 _ 1 I ~ ~s G ~ ~~r ■ i ~ ~ wroW M -i i ■ i V ~ ' gD1 c - - - a o i'ro NWIW Wapiti ~ • F- 3 G N ° b _T u d - ~ O ~ y •C ~ d ° L t u~ -n u .4 u v o v o b E m~ o A '3 v ~'cn >o• °o b ° 'Len m v .d o y o, c C" C " C .C N v pp o m C t ro ~ X ~ 4 1 F w .G v y > -o C ,v, ro u n. d C ou ~ <tl p v 7 ~ O~ ro 'tl F w n L' O ~ U¢ ~ O v~ C~ W ro~ n. v g ~ C~ o a -d T u ~ Z m o ~ e u on ~ 3 m - v 'ro T v. a ~ v~ '4 C T p y ro u ,d O ° u W 00 = ~ 'd C w ,,LL Y o? v t",'% .d '3 'tl " U o -tl N v b c E co C C O T E d O 'G 7 u C ro v G O P. 'L u " y y °u 3 7 f+' L q 'L'00 N OOa. O ro L 0. v T N ro 'tv'' i ` N G UC. v O v a .a o " ~ V .c°. v, 4 ` F v > v- .G 3 ro n v i C v v v ~v ` a u c m .v v c .c ~..n ti o b v o Ca 3 v c 'c a v G m o J v b v c ro v ro C ro y ,C E n v ,C ~ L L C is L ~ .ti .ro. S O. b U ~ .E ~ v ~ 'b G -C 4 a'"3 r L E~ b o e, ? 3 0~ o u E~ v c o~ q cco Y E E c E v o ° ° ro 'Lr li v o U h_ u o 0 ~n ~ ~ ~ o v y -n ~ o ~ 3 u o A " E o v > c 'E ~ = ° 4 c ~ _ :o .c v L 4 cn = ai $ z° o °~vq C :2 .c v ~yy c c O N v V G °O U e°0 C] h C O E > t ` O O ~T a, p C z v L .4 j Of 3 u 4 o o O Q° L I n, u -5 0 'E E a E> E a o v .c v W v ❑ v o ro ~i' ° v u -d U z 'i7 y ''3 o c c o z s3 3 -si 14- N M N C u7 9 ~ E E C bC ~ w d ~ ~ O u W ~ ~ E 'd °O v 'a ~ N ~ u 4 '4 C [ v v d 5 y v~ .y G E c E c ~n ~ m a .c v v E 'v. ~ G o= m ~ ~ 'n v c ~ h o ~ > m o o .5 0. v cu4 a u .v 0 3 ~ ~ >oz ~ ?u ~ v v v o u a Kj v ~ u~ v ~ m " OCO .v, z 'd E O 'C b u v C 4 v ~ y s v O yC 3~ h tu! U v xi. 7 L a v p O 'J L u~ 6~ v ~i u 'tl u CG v C v a C~ 'C N z N C y°. N71 .G '9 .y v u E N u d '9 c m o c4 v c .u v v c e u p o E v d .c ~a v u~~ E v .y o z° `c ~ ra E 7 U z E ro ~ ~ u w 'd 3 u -ti 'E ?M °4 ~ E m N G~ C G N p v A C .d v .b C v "9 G N u u N F ~ ~ a ~ v ~ EL v C ~ E b v ~ p, GO N E d w _ v N 7 ~ ~ C C v .E' rt O O ~ va E «n o o b r c~ b 'LJ` y u ° E 'p o 3 3 v b v 'C O u d 'y va 0. v E v E❑ u E v b v E Y v c o c v a o v v E n Q ~ E E Q 3 v s° ro w 'tr E m c ~ v E o U~ o u v a ° b 7 w w L' O k u .OA A 'C a u L r[i vNC. d v m 4 3 .a C C O u u u v m w °u v u v E .G v ~ v a v c e ~ v A a 'u a, v -O C o a, G ~ ou v_ 'u a v ° E E" v n c E.>_ ? o c 4 v E 2 > Z v o G b in v j C G .L' u v E j C O j ry b '.iO C j u E cca p~ in o~ c ~ O°° v a' v a 'Lr o -n" U d 3 .E -n o ~ ~ °u S c G E ,s c O 'r**nbm .u ~ E 9 9 ~ ` 3 3 E aMa ~ s' 9w).tuvwa> O 3 d E LL [IM V~aNM C m a n w..ewww o = o m bMpueWM a L M Z C5 8 E 0 2 i ` F Y , ~ N O N AL m a/ M C 1 ~ f ; ti 1. ! z . €ar [ ary: .r," w f rn r t, R 4 f 4, V ! tr J'n m ~ -~~J l X _r. " • ~ . M r rt{ ~7 ~t C r~ O, yy, .Y~ x 4 i.~J 'r C v w E e ~ c G, ro « ro G O U ~ 3 v O U d ro ~ 'O ¢y N C r U p 'E E v b G ~ Q U O. vro. ~c ro b O ,arJ N m o b >j a y ro t u CJ 3 79 o0 0. .T m o c ^ V 'y O G' ~l Y b Y v "c ~ E on L ,b ,c c 3 J G -p .b v .v u " d~ ti J~ C W b ~ V~ b b L .c v 00 c ~ 2 A ~ ro 'g x u r o c v~ E -c Lii en a 'd 'm ~ a ° ~ E A c m .ro v G ro~ o. o m m m c E w. v u ro ~ w -p " v .c. c~ O .D u .,G ecn o w L ~ ~ 40 Q " O v O 6 W vui v d GL 1L V V v_ ~ v v ti en m O v O S -o v o v -5 ^v x .3 ~ c E ~ m -fi Fc c o s o ~o ~ u -o ~3 fi~ W e~ r A ro o 6° v c ro eu v m n. u ° c v m o ro v ~ o ~ y y o c o. ~ u~ xap u E o v c v o v -v s C~ ~ ~ o ~ L o z~ C b n, b o V m id ~ m t7 LI.I u v' a m C L° y 'e C m v v x k O 0 ro G v V1 A o C p 7 '9 u ,G o^9 ~ r.°, x p~~ c o w 'd ~ m ~ v 3 :n m i'a ~ c u ~ o Gu -d v w ~ « Q °i b y .5 v 'O °o a s o o v c v e u 'd - ro J u o+ v u v p C ro v G 3 ~ A Z .°0 'S 3 3 c u .c a m p o c y o Q b v L v b b 'a N L C C u 'G L L cC9 v rv 1 Z G m ro o v o v n, u o ~ A 2~~ z o 3 3 a ro c a J 2~ s ~ 3° ~ h .c° o..~ .c% ~ o a ~ N • 9 A 0 REM C hr ~ 'N m O ~ A E,r N z a °o 0.O .Y n 7- c 2 O A Old O N Z { Z tl/ Q .Q 9 z A ~'.twe..' A E C m . Z.3 0 3 ~ I l E m ~ rl + a c U .I l6 A ~ t Sd J c N L Ul r• . Z ~ m uy_~ c Z ~ o r' V° c 45~ ' d +F J a t4 ~ + ~ it C y f ill It i c N ~ 5•d m v m C `v C E -d -O v b .C- A v v '3 x~ q v v v v ~ m> c>~> o I w° o o -ti b~ .a 2 .a •v c o m o .c m 4 w-E 3 G° CO c Q o E E c m cu A v C c u c- m s 3 y' 'o cA C o v e; Z E s' ° -u g v° E .v 0° co o v o O E c o o N c v s o d v a E .mac v -d ? 'b $ o no ~ -r o v o ~ E o~ ~ v Z o v v E .E m~ v x o. a '3 ~ ~ c 2 vG v ~j z ~ m ~ v v .n .5 o c m~ A v x v y Ll. C u 7 L N C_ ~ ~ b ~ d p m v v~ 7 ~ ~ b ro w m E .C 'C O pp G E ~ '9 L o 't C 0~ ' 'm yv v 3 c 'S FE ° v `5' v ~ c G~ L v~~ ~ b~ E v v w Eo' v c y N a 00 E It ° c :7 '3 v v v v c C a u u v v H° E E o v ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c v . y v [ c ~ c ~ y o. o. 10 ~ E `o > > 3 S .C 'o o. o go C v v o .E cb:° o C v .c°. Ca a o o E v n, ° v r ul y° z' o m E °C° -s v a ~p ~ 'u m T 'O ~ O C O VJ T~ z E W ~ u i~ L C L E v d v app i w o. v a -o O v .E 3 c E o `0 v oO v z w E g o s .4 v G o° 4 z d° v° 3 0 U 3 A 'S 0 0 v° S FG 2 0 v a c E .c° n 0 2 u 0 5 v 5 E ° C E ,c a E ~ z d ti C C ~ o ~ ~ m~ ] .iy3 ~ v ti ~ ~ b ~ ? v v 4 ~e a c _ y E v g a L c t~ 3 c m y m c E .C N a, v .i°. v E 7 E m~ L~ °p y v "O ~ N v L L L R L ~ O v L y h ^v C u~ y o c c c° u °c° c>~ b ti u~ _ L c w ro ~ o ~ Q ~ .A ~ ~ n. o E 4 v ^ b m "a _ 3 v; u S v o L c~ c c>, L ~ E~ ~ v 3 c= .a v Q ~ ~ L E u t 3 E c 'c v E e c~ s ro v c 3 v c on v v v n 3 0 ° E q v v W3 0 0 3 h o = Q evn ,y c E in m ~ on ~ ~ L ~ -n ~ ° en 'G c 4 L oo c ~ A m o c q_ o ° E v L c z ° c .y ] o E c v in E v v S v c u c~ u 3 c e U u o v O N ,tee ° u `z w° .E y 3 e, E t0 N c~ L ~O y m .o E ecn L ,c o A L G m Z c L 7 ~ v 'O o n o < ~ v ~ Q v~> z m u 3 o m .u - v 5 c m o 4 2 y m O _ L C " C o v~ u E ~ m C R~ Z N u~ off`- n ~ 3 o f ~ `c 0 ~ o a L c Z° 'ui '.E ° v A s o Z y s u E v m E¢ m yy f CG v rt 'O .C u OJ n 7 z L 4 is O O O u C a' C E 0 v E y E c c °o ~ v `L° ro m ~ m c~ u o v aNi s~ 2 v 72 E c~ L ~ 3 = 1 0~ o v o .A ° c o u~ o ° ~ E No ❑ V O G U G N t k E w L v ~ L v v N N v u ,b 3 N O v Q' Z m v v cva C u O G m L j.2 79 p 4 'q O 2 (~.1 'O y z Gu- 'O u m [n b = O O 'd 3 O n~ K Q A a v~ 7 Q ~ a C o a _ N ^ O L 4Y l~ 1 • t Y . O 3 m x E r LL I, r a 0 L t l m ~ t 1, O ' € C _ (0 ' m ~ a* rn o y F L 1:. ~ UI 7 O > 4~ t. N c m 1~ l It E a O ~~pyQ C Z ~Mxi}' tt. F~ ~ ~ U U C ~ C O C N u O O J s,+O u' Z W y L O u c v o Z c v n A c v$ .E ~ 3 :ti ~ o ~ ~ E c v G a E C C E b o x ° o'er v" bo ~ v o ~ a. O E m ro o~ c. o z o s v °C° 6~~~ :d 3 C o m 'L m .y o t o o o o 0 0. c O o¢ 3 7 'p a E~~ o o ~ v v v c .L" b N C c E S E r o :n w o .G v o o' W .c o 3 °q E '7 v ..d ° w V V N t~ f14 Y E v L '00 cJ d y v ~ m~ v¢ z m v a~ c o O v' O O' 0 'v u vv v O y ,Q y NN C a a m v 6 3 b m o v A v .x v c .d v um ❑ C O C K 3 _G C v~ u v ~ ~ v a o ~ c~ c 'a ~ ° 3 Eo ~ 3 x v .d v v ❑ m Q o. v y m U E ' Y` C ° o ~ -d c w v ~ N en ~ 'S ,v_ ° -v° ~ A -d ro ~ m v ro v~ ~ v h v p C ~ v O Q 5 v b v m~ v u ~ a> m 3 o E d E u c U _E " O b c E 4 E 3 y o p E a C v o a v 'd o ° o ❑ o v ov a y j C.7 L 3 L s o cL C N n C O v C w O -o yi1 n T~ E 4 y o a d_m o 2 0 7 0 v 'r v 'u m m E G O C en 3 ,v, U L ~ Y ti L o C7 a r v~ ~ v Q x 3..c i c c x d s' y P C ~ y ~ o C L C m p C p ' y Ca 'A P G % ~ C~ d~ L a v M ° v o~ o vv~~ ro o ms ppp .d tE L M 'O L u~ G ro t A v E ro E c o ' ~ Q a r r } F b E " x "t .fl v a v p r 3 G y C u E c > C 9 N O ~ ro ~ O ~ i. ~ E i { .A ~ ~ v c v U a U v w ~ ~ v v a C U ~ a G e~ ~ ~ U M C9 L ro ~ Q N G. ~ C a .d C C 'G A N N v 3 o 7a Z2 .Y~C G U o 4 u u o L a .c e m c v v a u o o ke f: ° g V E o _y E m m~Y c 'd 7 'r3 G v m co If= m c u o c tt c o c m v E E E L c y~.. a N vE ro L 4° L LE 4f1 c o b a 3 r v v o y v b E" t" ' j " PE ° 7° ~ v = a, s a, o ~ H o "o ~ ~ ° a co F j~ ~ c na y E ~ O E L o ~a o 1 O O1 1 i LL ~ ~ o c GGn ~ V~ b m d :p ~ I~. v a ro 'o ° m m L .m. CL E `y v Gq L „ro b c ~ ~ y c °Oy ~ ~ t~. ; m ~~~JJJ}}}F t.`~ Of Ga0 is L O G, t° W C d ~C~3' l'S" E o ~ 'a .c o~~ ° m ,Y v E o y o ro~ a x 0 M G U x ro e s s E- -E LL c M .C m C a M 'z m a ~ ~ rn o z Z Z v~ a c - o~ d t ~ y ~ z OI y U' ~ .4 ' Z 3 g ~ m 0 0 - c m - E j C p O ~4 N Z N Z ~ c L W o m y p U u c m N m ~ v y J N 7 ~ C R 4 ~ Q ~ c J A d ,o 0 m N O C~ c O z = ZE m Z Y J Z = ~ V d c i' ~ ~ N 3 3 y~ t Q o d0 - a` E 1/l t6 m N yuy n • ,4 Q. o 3 N t` E a r ~ x O 0:2 a w C r ~ ; 7~ •a m Q ~ " u' 0 10 U N o N o z Z' f o z z z z A T i21d3 Y r V O tt...,.-- « E y f L C '1 A r , ~ U a 4` 1 N.l~ Q l7 FF E 'Tri I' a tit i~ ~ ((6((! ~ A v L b C 4 C ro C v v ~ v o E L L C d W u o j~ G9 a GL\ - o v ` u G C° C 9 C 3 o. m u b 'bC ti~ u 7 y O .n v G v p b ~ 2 N ~ G=G y ~ i '9 O C C d A ~ T A O C rt "v0 'O b 7 3 ~ ~ y A v A {tl n b G ie 6 u q y v J v A W >r N G G u ]i C C b m o v ~iQ` k Nv v a~ ^y o A u R C C CC O S O v O L v V` v L u C A v A u O d k v u G t.. ,f0, v v A v ,d G y sN L m[ v ~ E O C C ~o ~ 'O ~Y' C~ G m o v d 0 o v C >3 w W v o en > L v A u ~ -b ❑ u m Q u° v~ 'v c L .a u' F o- 3 L tA U2 t" _12 0 c Fr o v c A b o v > E b v m TO d W y O w C v a ro C v v w u A u^ d b .V b "m m y ap u C 4y u u -E o 3 °o B y v .5 3 0 .a 2° ° a_ m .4. c b O 3 O L Z C L o m 'O .C b w v C' w° Q a C 'C C m Q d, v o g .c°' 4 3 0 m w 4 v w v U .s {n m z z c A m o u ro v U 'cv~c++ ro E W v u ^C C -o d 'Y..` 7.. E 3 y cE C~ v v y n .G '9 o K v .E Ly" ° ti v E o Q 'b A E C u U U v C A, -a Z l7 {n o b o Z N m Y O 9 O R O 3 v ~ . ~ v -n o~ c E b ~ c ° E 'd o o v~ 43 ° s F u 3 E m c .mac [ v 2 ll O L°v' ~ u O C -O L o G av. N 4 b ~ Co b 'G ~ v .m a u p C OCo O O 'd v C a CC 4 " O u~ u U 'y w ~ Lv to p d k N u O -pC~ N 'C G v z o0 1j b t P .'°c XE '>0 ° " .Ya " u N v 4 E `O° o, a v U o v u U g. ,o m >j vax, v o m v o v u o 4~, v o E m 42 .'°S^ v ro r o v a v o. v z E o" L v U G o .c .c o v c v d .k O v C v L w v v~ d [L C ~ O L G 3 O v N b z o ~ E x~ v o c ~ E :c ~ q o E E v ro~ M rn ~ a s ,i', o c ~ ro c o 0 o v~ o S b o m a w ~ L o 3 U 'rj °u " u 3 u v 3 h ° -a N `O ~ ~ C v ^LN' 'D v N C ~ rV>`~ O v v ~ w O (tl ~ ~ ~ R C N Z •n 4 U S' .O •c -5 v_ -roC J " paj v '-Gi v a 7 ° ° v E s 3 3 v~ o. ~ -o 'v o E o u A m y 3° o. v ,ti oc c 'p o b L v J ° '3 v p C 0. "O L O o O E ° y y O C .N p 'd O W O ov fC ~ "vd °C v=. C 'A ~ C G E .E c v ro v E E 3 0 v E 3 v m ~ m~ o °v v ro m c c 00 E 'v a~ 3 p ~ A> 3 m b o mC °u ° c v v 7 p v .E m L' N C 'v O u ° n o v w E u a 4 N v y n C u .n v C ~n L 4} a ° v v c. ~y^ n. E m 'c 5 E E u E~~ ~ ~ E v v m l7 Oy v V'~ OG W O u 'SG k G u^ y b y A " c s° ~ v ~ E ro .E o v°' w ,,uo v C y ~ S O u C~ C 'O cG E -O ~ 'G ea v v o n O O~ is G n U v > 7' v v o 3 y a °i o m .ri o. u _c c 'ti a G v v ~ ~°a O v m7A ~ "O a O N C ~ L m C G. E p C u ^ v L G > v v v a s E v u ~ u a O a m y v ° N Y .>j v p o ° v V O A v O u N vv. ° N CJ' 3 n .y °i '3 3 v 3 a w ~ G x 3 .E s r° E LS.° E y v a N Y 3 a x w E N m a t a c a s 0 T . V 3 v G~ ~ " 4 -y 'G C Gp L O m L O v u O G u w0. v O C V L v cJ _ V N v o. ~ E ~ v LY ti o. m ? c y ~ ~ s ° A L E o u a o s cc E c y ~ v"i a~ v y3 ~ o. ° a a 3 u C V -O v v ~ 2 0 v v c ~ " ° vv.. s O m ° ° N v O C G .0, n c L 4 - o a~ ~ n 3 c n aq c~ a ro C ~ i0 7 C u ° ro a v 7 0 7 rn 3_ .C a c w a a~ v~ o° a / p I aa~ n v o r a a m } I QO ` LL ( J ~j} y i'k. x x k "{i .+f~ a p v Q Z g, J3 z Oil C z ~ v ;7 c m u ❑ 5 ,e o' gn ° E v E ~ 4 u u N ~ W v ~ L~ u o p O .d b y ~ 'G a 4 .a a o v -c b c c c z c v A 3° v m v u 7U ° E 3 3 a m o .c c] [ -E°d o o o u v a v o v o m rn v 'u C "u C C v C = v E v o .G .E .b L v - z o u y b m d c v o o z c 2 x E a" E c 79 E v 2 :b o B c " 2 m E E o u¢ c y w c 8 C Z w v v N v ~J ° k .d Z k w ro v 4, v v emn y) ° O L w ° C j o G 2 ,G v°' v o T h v E 0 U ro u i, v 'ti ° v E C o c 'u u° Z' c E v 4 v m c v '3 a v ro v c Ed E v ai ? u c v c u? v 'd O b 4 v .v. E° v :ti 'G m O u 4 m .G C w ° > ° C N u c v~ 'n 4 C y G. N y O V ~ L ~ en L J r E r~ .c° C c o on o c Q ~w° c° c m m o _ zi a°i y e c c v 3 z v w 'r 3 o v y u ,,GG •cci n° v v o. v a v E c c vm. "O W b ° 'p u l^ y O is w u c„ N ,fl C m eon a v c w v o s o E `ctl v a C ~ (C ~ C d ° v w N pv o1 O ° u C , C C o A a, ~o°y v y° 3 E N C 1 .G "b u E E OO W b a v '3 v.°_ C d u ° en v m o ~ c a g o as 'b v u 5, en n a 0. v m T .o gym. v e'rh c ° u N c G 'i d s o 00 o W U -a E o o Y u u a -y 4 m y c >u, b> a f Ef m C w`? E v L E y ti C w ,G°v ~°i. Ci Cn Y L N ~tl v~ Y I~-' C V ° v y O N O y H E E v u 7 v E w b y ti v v > 'C L F- a° om "d v E o e o v .y m E `S". J Z m C a b v E °u v .b :a s v N -o c v E 00 y u v G o. o 'h v `o y 3 u c u E 4 c v' 3 ue m v L m d i v v L '9 .vv. C z v v v L N y O w E N Y O 3 N ~d o", x d 05 Z .'w E W Q' c a 0 m i _ E. / { F L ~ U i O iL N 3 t 4 u } cu W v" ~ ~ .n F L- N `a1 c v e^n -b m CD b ~ v ~ .v. v GO G u O G v .G p CG X j u u .C v o -o E Ca a, E c e ~ ro E o v m ~ 'a cc.. ~ [ G~ v O u O u CN C o v C C i3 u .X X m p` C ¢ h v N y E v o ~ v o s .a o _m o E 8 m c c 3 ro .ro ro E -uc„ c O v m "D u to c O o -p 'u O ~ ~ s E m°~ y E ~ o E F' n. c r y .c v n~ .T. b `o E B 7 v° .C u -L" a. L u E y n v E A u . c £ G o u o, v ,c G cow U o. v ~°r -E v a. O 00 n u G L L 3 C -Otl C v z eq c C] 3 v v 'y o ~ v ~ m ~E an > E „ F°- 3 W^ E c ~ A n o. u v ice o b z W c .a ° v c o. v u Y O Z L " z > U O O v u u n 0 4> V u 'O ro `o C -n L 'O p 6 u F' C O` u r `u' s vn y r v ,Ev a 6 E t° v o c C e v .E co A 72 - uo -u 0 -E U v c c °l c o 4 L E c y c o m E 0 -2 o_ o m o. E c_ o E ,ti c E v u a v v " c .3 c ao E c x ro E C i 3 0 0 " c •A s w v u o y L t v ov u 2 `2 30 L m A AG .v. v v ~i h u v u m 7^ G z -O L3- CO ti rn ? u a o E 3 A m U .c y U E c Z' v 'o g? c A o. m v` s E R .c " W v" c v E z c E° . C c c E v v o ti 'A rj o en .E R v u ti C d y C o v o v o..C uc". v 3 c v s v C h¢ ~°r ° as w o. w .E z F~ ro L v F~ o.°_ .E Q dU E ° E v 3 e m r Y C 0 E m A ~ ~ v ti .E u ~ ~ .a v o s m O c o o G E u° = U a to L A o v v o° Q o m c `0 a. on ~ v ~ `c _ 2 ~ y LL A 'D a~ C 3 O GN y E v aG. C L a~+ ~ 'd L L ~ G .v. cC vv. C C v O O O O y~ E C O ° lc O ~ !.C v L L ° Y C< N a o u o m v C7 L° mm c U o a$ L$ eo C c p c r> m U a>" L = 0 u G G G V G G q GG° F~ v C4 E w E a ° c v a. -0^' 3 E z p E s, .o m .y o ° N 1 A z o m y ;c U a• u u u `u` E Lit G y" v i a. w a 0, at u Q V z m a N 3 'd .c c at ,e4 .c°. L u~ 0 2' H c g o W o r M o. v m E v ro o ro c -n . o m a E .9 2 v z o v .5 s on a[ z o° v~ c z v ~u v v ar ° H o 'S N o o .a c v d o E E o Z .P~ Ln U o G c... O u v u 'G ° ° v) C v N OA m m m e o v o° L CL E x a E "b'vp N o v G .~v. o. u c c E c v c '4' U v v o E v A v v A 0F~ ro o z m o 'm c o E ro o ° E o> v o f c v '3 v v E L' r o o c m a~ `c° o s E A Z 'o u g ,GV, c 7 c 'o °c Gx ° v v A v u O `u C a v C U u E Y C m Q _fi c o ° -o 3 4 c v .d -R .uc E o y `G° E R c b m a « E v G p Z p m 0 v O U E a+ Z' O C U= id '9 J n x 3 a 4 v L v A v L' L c t W b M o ° ~ c c m a c 3 0 ~~Qr ttryry t Lr %Oj e L ~ I {•~~~(~j~~}y 11 / .~L"T'hd "M d. JJ ~"!'T-0 ✓..t R~~b}Ab~ a ~'L'(~~lli9(Lt a4M~ I Ja y. jet ° - to - Y - y ~r Fes, r b Vjl o a I 11 I ,.-g+ .i C411 LOP, 'lei > . (D d) O m - a it s1 ago Q y cr C~ a Oio, v v m •G °o °o L Z Z Fn C Y E Y O C Y L O C O q O 6 C N a 0 N T N N DO m 2~ N b O G C v C. v ° C 2 v ~ -b ~ ~ L a L v~ h 2 G N m v `n 7 a U ~ v o °c' = y v v H ,v, .v c r N .o ~ c ~ Hg z v E c O'_ C. " v ~ c E ~ m e a ~ `a E~ N~ c v 'v ° ° on m ~ v " o .E v Z x r~ 3~~~ v Y v o g ~ d O u G ~ w L O Y n v E o c 'L' m c al .-,I °O c c O m C a a. tl v LA -5 y C vR C' y r ~ L C -p O L N GA ~ v v u ' Ip 4 Y N > .Y. C. C Q 6 d " c o ti v v c° °o D -E cm V 0 W 01 v Z L u ` ~ Q V L G .a V m C z C O ,C E ° D 5 41 Z E. G- v O 1 0 Y Q 3 Y S E E« N c o z o° o, K a~+ ~ eta K u U ~ LL m Z v o. F F` Y < o v .E ° a Z m v 3 'a u .A ~ v v m c ` Z v E LL V C O ry U L "O N 3 ` O O `v " v O h C C G ~ 10 y W v y ~ c 5 C u 'n A ~,1` c O r o o ro 'ti ro 3 u o ° e o A m "u v a lJ d v u d V o s "n b o c v m m :Z2 B c 'O 0 3 O G o y .d v 3 d W L b L 3 L y w 0 0 m U o c v c° v ° o c V E v c a z 0 ~ ~'e s° ~ A '9 ~ ~ ~ v ~ c ~ .c° v c 3 ~ E ~ .ti 'O V 'O N O G v ~ L ~p ° o v m W v n v L ~ w .n ~ u~ y m a~ Z t rnn. o 'o $ a E> H L N d E v v v Z c-° E m y v >3 0> v G s z Z y ma CE Vf '3i y y O v C L.. C y ie y .C « L L c_ ` C v u U C~ w .9 v N u LGO q 3 v v 3 v` 73 0 2 O Z ti v o. 3 S o 3 n, v c°J. m° -5 z h 0 C O U T ~ J D! C A ® a e'er.. c 0 F J-' • a8 n d U t U O a Q .SSr £se~ ~ 101,11, , O N j 1t K E A m a 9 C A F S a o T V C _ d P d C N { \ L JJ \ - ~ A ~c~„ro^y~;„~ . C f°"' s, S vYg" ~ E ~ d .r Y sdkyy~~ ypt3"gi Y€ • d e5 r F' d. , mx~ut y~ *s i .r: E o b ~ 3 Y o E 3 m e ~ s b~ z ~ 0 "6 2 ~O v ° n, d y O O cc 3 v > a `o L L Ol A N C v W S E 7 4 C 6 v v u C " O w O O v v .n w a Z a .D Y o h 4 y m v t t m V L d ro v ❑ a d d v '6 v o~~ c o. a. m o o sJ- Z Z ai n o o 'u a s u 7u i7n E" ° v K r E O o m v" v en o 3 v z z°~ s z :E A -S o z 0 N N G b C o ? o V_ `p v ~ C b C d b -p y ~ C V C ~ N t o° 0 3 m N L w .C N '3 Y~I j ° O v v 0. ~ o t u` ~ 7 E '9 z ° d Ol u v o a c v~ v ~ Z CJ O ~p+ N 1' ~ C f a a J f - o c _ m r a c ImX a y« r ~Z M y{ • N I: U S Q + f' Ya f N { E 1 a ~ Q N C ~ Y o r 3 \~.f d a G O - ~ x (0 aL. E 3 N a d Y N 9 0 c O q / J L J/ A a f1f ~ C v E v m w c N t 3 O t7 C O .q ~ c l a ~ ~R, _.4 w4 l _rI fY ~ a~ ii v E °i m "O ~ 3 tl~ 3 v m ~ Y u Y ~ C ~ 01 ~ O c ~ ~ o O C v ' v v C w b a Y ti v 3O E ?i m ❑ m C rn a ~ d L~ o E~ v W ~ o .a c~ a v o '3 s E ° G o r m L to o ° o u r o 'N c v ti a E~ s v .y E 3 v v z z 0 z H W o3 o a°'. x° 2 N N N N 79 s o u E ` f~. O 'D O O o p ~ ~ 3 v~ .y -v a ~ s y o CL v c ° a a i rt v c .3 G .E c ? a c o Z o rt 5 u z N Ci ~y rt G ~e O pO v 'a u c ~ ~ W E o r4E-. o v Ol O L ~i p L Cp 6 m p 1~ Z Of ~ a E ~ p z CL I co o ° Z - c 0 U a c m _ v J o c m 3 P&g o f F pmt''3k r,.... VA fij#x L P k kk*" t 1~~r 1Y^ {m IN Ppk 1, C7 < t I rs a a c m r 0 T V C W E A m A C A L 3 O { C I ~ ~ O o 11 1 6 r A } 3 Y a .s a 0 E m o Y s v B v ~ a. o d v 7 « v n, v o m O ~ 'b b C ~ y v .G ~ v A LL R y$ 3 o c O o 'v 'O A B c aYi E a 0 4 u« z t m v u u° 3 E [ b v L C U v ~ ~ ? W N ~ W C a~ v N ` A O U ~y x [ v d u b Z O ~ y CL y~ y 3 0~ u E G C ~ ai v e o v" ro u o E ~ v an ~ x v `o, v N N ` N ` y v E 3 o H z v z E- s ~ ro m m .3 u 3 .3 c i s vc 'o c c L m c $ ~ a z v o. K .c h c 0! v v v v N •i. U c q 2 m o y c `m ci Z,r, 'S' o z L -6 rj Rt u G C u C S N 6. ~a ~ L t o u .3 .y E o. Ei o z o b c n. n. m o o' O 'a 1 o u 2 z -C _ c x~ U m G c } m d t a` i r E m a c P ` a 0 r ® T C q E q N q C A t 3 O V O a c q f a 0 n T A .r=Yt" k "'W4 :r n a i~ J Y ~ rt M ns T Y O U 4 t~a E d u e 0o 0 b 5 m A " o u C •C E LL r n yu v 8 8 E ' s 'PO o u c c a o 8 ° ? 5 z tl o •v a v ~ 'v n W u~ ~ w rt w O L vF: C O s ~ ~ L v a y a s m vy ~ .a y s ,uu, q ~ v u m '6 E o G~~ ~ v y s `n ro -v 0 E A s v- ° E ~ cE L q U fE Nv A ~ 'T o L s~ c q o W W 'v t o Z N ~ A h .5 ~ o ~ o z y~ A ~n 4= c0 N n N x v m 3 c v = o E E z O ay" v ~ cc `v m E o v m v L v b LL ~ ~i L p C C N~~ m ~ v m rv ~ v u 3 v .v. > ro ~ y .D ro c a ~ a 5 ro v rJ > o v o ~ -d o u A ~ 3 A u n. 'G z L y 6"n v ~ v~ y ro E 8 v Z ~ S', o J a Ffi .a ~ 3 uh v o, ~ 3 L z t ° ~ ro v `n ~ E ati o _ Z O d~ .n ~ O O~~ v [ U V O t C J o F, -5 2O z ° U D C N d J T o ~ m a 3 0 H v - - u _ m L 0 a ro Y O 3 N a x m E m m a D C A L a 0 T V C A E A m A C A L 3 O ' lJ r •A O 6 1. C - - a N A Y f Y 3 q n Q P d U N C m c b ipy.E, LL ~ O `IL v v L;S 0 b ro o o g o ° v v v ~ ~ o L > a Z N G 'r7 'b o ro E ~ 3 c z ° E z ~ ~ ° r c •n m N N U 6 -C C N ~ v ° e o c m v o N e '"3 E v 7 c R 'm tL v b `u' n~ 0 4 r 3 ° m E E E o a u E y ro o c m e `utl A `u C° c m s v v o E 3 0 o f v a o p L rJ v E v a c 1 ro o o d u cu g :T C d o t r U W E> c L c E n~ 49 ^S~ c U c o u i a 0 E' ~e e A u v v C d E 3 v . a .E v 'o, d cc o Z .°c E v E u a .y ti ° w7 rn b u c u? m m 'o o° 3 c c c c h ro 3 0, o f c u - m m m e v c c -n V Q o ~ c ❑ L U ro c~ ~ v v Z~~ h _o 3 o E ~ ° r U ~ m~ :c m 7 e E °i E 'L c ° y° E o E° r c° cc r° ~u m ~L o m v ~ 'S u v c 4 ° so v .5 ~ s° c u ~ v s' g y g ~ ` E v c E u E u 2 v c 3 a o c 'L° ' L p m o v L .v. E N N E L v G o c V L o c .b v c 3 E E 'a C U. c s Eo o y V z° E~~ c -n v °c o d a C v c ro < 3 E cm E o v GG° v v a > o c W v u a G c - m b C C i'°' C a~ O o u v ?r° v E p rt C y C `v i [ ~i C ' C rt O ~i L 3 H v E .v c 'A v c o E .no; o. = s m E Z' u o v? 3 u 3 E c ° ° C o c°y, j N o d m O u O Q a a C ~.G V 'C, m N H a 'O -pe L L 'd C N L d O L o L N C E yy rt o v '~y V1 _ A E m C W v 3 E ~ 'v-' m ~°c c n vi a ° ~c co 3 E E o o .o 'a u 'E -O 3 0 0. -c `m a aq+ In u E a 'E .4 `v ° E E 3 7 E U W y C U v c -7 o. v 2 ~n to z y S y v o$ c °u x sd w A a In w 3 w o a o {F w • 3 i N a E ~ (!l ! kFg _r f u - 2 w a C N E u a N C 9 L O C O .q O 6 C V ` _ L w m m o m e v x c o o t v 3 v L v o Q s ~ E~ z p. L " o ro n L y O C ° r is m L u ~ 4• u O yO N O C N "7 ° 0 ~ -c a 'G ~ v E z~ y~~ z co c_ ~ E v cc u u o u ~ E Q O ° y u v - c. o c m ~ E 0 w~ I-° ° L c g o. o c v m .a " L 'O u E o C u u ~ 3 o s o y ~ c a ~ E y v `o FL r 8 c E m ~ = r 0 3 - ~ > U O rt ° C C4 A 4~ .C ~ N O~ OCO ° "JL' v v a 0 v~ cL O N Gm y. 7 C v aci vv. v O C o z .cv. ~ 3 ~ 'c 'o E v v o m 'y v~ 0 v c~ z o Z` ~ o O w ~ C ~ u m u w U 3 v ~ o c v y o c ~ -o -d v c b 3 ~ v c a o. ~ E O m v~ o u H ~ E c u = u c u ~ d 3 O ff" G. ❑ ^O Q u~ u m L L u u O ~ ~ ~ ~ c E c ro m cc O Z. J o v v` v ro v ~i m O 2 v" CC L ~y OI " C A. 4 u E C ~ > m N~ 7 C ~ C+ ~ L D9 v v C F C G L L C C `p U -m CyJ .?9 0 c " E .m b a m m Z m tn a ~c 3= z n o v vai z a v " 0 M CITY OF ASHLAND ain St r e et of Ashland i Muw , Middle School Walker / i Elementary School s v m m 0 200 400 800 1,200 Feet Normal Neighborhood Plan I Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment M Normal Neighborhood Plan ® Conservation Area 3/11/2014 CITY OF ASHLAND M Z~§ ° ,BSI' {}~sj~ '4 }I ~i+ yr,. T'%#'w o I I; 4 I ! dFa _ t. off- ~~.ainSf v r `t l ShINaR ~REMgH ` t U z ST ~schoo pof~ , , n ~ f ,SS G Sid be Walker a - Ele nary ~ - ! rSchooIP-r~ V ND9T Normal Neighborhood Plan 0 200 400 800 Feet Land Use Designation Overlay Zones NN-01 NN-03-C 1~ 1) NN-02 ® Conservation Areas NN-03 3/1112014 CITY OF ASHLAND P°s t Fa3 r ' i sh EMI ~ i ti r : Schoo _ ■ 3 u' ,.,r ~ xr'~A, Walker Elementary i t . I 1 1 1 /q 1 Normal Neighborhood Plan o zoo aoo eoo 1,200 Feet Open Space Network - natural area/open space green streets - pocket park multi-use path 3/11/2014 CITY OF ASHLAND s ;4 h 7 ~ ~ app ~ • MINN 'ar-~ 4 4 1 AEm i t Ashy Mid Ule *n~~~~ 4 v ~~Sr ♦ _ s :1 ' School- ~ f • , Shared Streets may be r f,e i • alternatively developed br-rir as alleys or multi-use paths. o f•r T ? k-a T Mb , 3 Improved crossing will regwre i an application for an at gradei ~a / • , railroad crossing be approved. it r SIV P .t„ Y * x 4 Normal Neighborhood Plan 0 200 400 800 1,200 Feet Street Network Neighborhood Collector Alley Neighborhood Street - - - - Multi-Use Path Shared Street 3/11/2014 CITY OF ASHLAND s . e ~~nASt ir$ y'' ~3t T shlan~ ~Mi ~schoo r i 01. 1 w , WTlker ~ € Elie m~eritary, Schools e - - ~ ;;''Y ~ ~ < s, alLc Y t ~ ~R L#H9 S7 ".AA® ® SHE Normal Neighborhood Plan o zoo 400 eoo 1,200 Feet Street Network - Green Streets green streets ® conservation areas 3/11/14 CITY OF ASHLAND r• Y G- Nz*.4 a4~Tt C ~~K r. l w I N .4 14 , q', V b ~a. ~ L ,4 h Y ! ~/v.~ t A A h 1=s. 4 • fl eft ~ a § Cs , Q 77 sh ;Pi men ✓~J A ~~L schoo r~ry 1 Y ~ 1.7 ~4] Vl ~ F' -1,)v izs 41 i; I raj _ 0R, Elem Mary,, c #i School? v L w ~5 • 4a, Normal Neighborhood Plan 0 200 400 800 1,200 Feet Pedestrian and Bicycle Network ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' islooll, alley shared street - streets with sidewalks multi-use path avenue with sidewalks & bikelanes 0 0 0 0 central bike path 3/11/2014 CITY OF ExhibitC ASHLAND d ~ aln Street Ashland Middle School e Walker Elementary S~ School y ~ 1 m 0 200 400 800 1,200 Feet Normal Neighborhood Plan I . . . Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment Q Normal Neighborhood Plan ® Conservation Area 3/11/2014 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE STREET DEDICATION MAP, PLANNED INTERSECTION AND ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT MAP, AND PLANNED BIKEWAY NETWORK MAP OF THE ASHLAND TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN FOR THE NORMAL NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AREA, AND AMENDING STREET DESIGN STANDARDS WITHIN THE STREET STANDARDS HANDBOOK TO ADD A NEW SHARED STREET CLASSIFICATION. Annotated to show deletiens and additions to the code sections being modified. Deletions are bold fined-through and additions are in bold underline. 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 City of Ashland Planning Commission considered the above-referenced amendments to the Transportation System Plan at a duly advertised public hearing on March 11, 2014 and subsequent public hearing continuance dates, and on April 8, 2014, following deliberations, recommended approval of the amendments by a vote of 6-0; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Ashland conducted a duly advertised public hearing on the above-referenced amendments on May 2014, and on [subsequent public hearing - - - - continuance dates]; 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 Ashland Comprehensive Plan includes goals and policies intended to work towards creating an integrated land use and transportation system to address the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) Oregon Administrative Rule 660-012-0000 directive for coordinated land use and transportation plans should ensure that the planned transportation system supports a Page 1 of 3 pattern of travel and land use in urban areas that will avoid the air pollution, traffic and livability problems faced by other large urban areas of the country through measures designed to increase transportation choices and make more efficient use of the existing transportation system."; and WHEREAS, the Street Dedication Map, Planned Intersection and Roadway Improvement Map and Planned Bikeway Network Map are adopted official maps for long range planning purposes, and are periodically amended to identify streets and pedestrian and bicycle pats that will be needed in the future to connect the street network and provide access to undeveloped areas within the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB); and WHEREAS, the Ashland Comprehensive Plan includes the following policies addressing street dedications: 1) Development of a modified grid street pattern shall be encouraged for connecting new and existing neighborhoods during subdivisions, partitions, and through the use of the Street Dedication map. (10.09.02.32); and 2) Street dedications shall be required as a condition of land development. A future street dedication map shall be adopted and implemented as part of the Land Use Ordinance. (10.09.02.34).; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Ashland has determined that in order protect and benefit the health, safety and welfare of existing and future residents, and to address changes in existing conditions and projected needs related to land use and transportation patterns, it is necessary to amend the Ashland Comprehensive Plan in the manner proposed, that an adequate factual base exists for the amendments, the amendments are consistent with the comprehensive plan and that such amendments are fully supported by the record of this proceeding. THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The above recitations are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference. SECTION 2. The officially adopted City of Ashland Street Dedication Map, referenced in Ashland as Figure 10-1 in the Ashland Transportation System Plan is hereby amended to include the Normal Neighborhood Plan Street Network attached hereto as Exhibit A. SECTION 4. The City of Ashland Planned Bikeway Network Map, referenced in the Ashland Transportation System Plan as Figure 8-1. is hereby amended to include the Normal Neighborhood Plan Pedestrian and Bicycle Network attached hereto as Exhibit B. SECTION 5. The City of Ashland Planned Intersection and Roadway Improvement Map, referenced in the Ashland Transportation System Plan as Figure 10-3. is hereby amended to include East Main Street as a Planned Avenue from Walker Avenue to Ashland St. SECTION 6. The Ashland Street Standards Handbook, Street Design Standards is hereby amended to include a new classification of "Shared Street" as attached hereto as Exhibit C. Page 2 of 3 SECTION 7. Severability. The sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses of this ordinance are severable. The invalidity of one section, subsection, paragraph, or clause shall not affect the validity of the remaining sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses. SECTION 8. Codification. Provisions of this Ordinance shall be incorporated in the City Comprehensive Plan 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 1, 3-6 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 '12014. Barbara M. Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this _ day of , 2014. John Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: David Lohman, City Attorney Page 3 of 3 CITY OF Exhibit A ASHLAND i V. iZ1t~ - u.: C' Y 4 Ashs,,,,,J` Sc ool, I. Shared Streets may be t ■y - alternatively developed ■ ' as alleys or multi-use paths. a '!E,, k? ~ Y ■ r r " f ~a min m Improved crossing will require an application for an at grade t4 '6" ■ railroad crossing be approved oOlti . l,. yt$ x. ~ ` . r4,l!IC~~~sSn r r r- P FIL-AfIDrST t Normal Neighborhood Plan 0 200 400 800 1,200 Feet Street Network Neighborhood Collector Alley mmmmmmo Neighborhood Street - - - - Multi-Use Path mOmrrm1° Shared Street 3/11/2014 CITY OF Exhibit B ASHLAND h e III <n 1 a _i X 1IK vy ~r i 2 ~ ti a r QIJ I sh arty •~~~~~~~r~i ~~~~~~~"~k ~a z ter L S 1+ .•.`i Y yi p IIII~---"'' SC 00 T 161 C eft 1YS~ CJ- I} My 1"'',5 1 t- ~ 1~ Gtr r ;=;r^a' rK a1 1 j . 4- ~ z ~ C , i I b f ~z 1 ♦ Walker Schoolp .s on~~ Normal Neighborhood Plan 0 200 400 800 1,200 Feet Pedestrian and Bicycle Network ' I I I' I I I' I I I alley shared street v a` streets with sidewalks multi-use path avenue with sidewalks & bikelanes 0000 central bike path 3/11/2014 Exhibit C Shared Street Provides access to residential in an area in which right-of-way is constrained by natural features, topography or historically significant structures. The constrained right-of-way prevents typical bicycle and pedestrian facilities such as sidewalks and bicycle lanes. Therefore, the entire width of the street is collectively shared by pedestrians, bicycles, and autos. The design of the street should emphasize a slower speed environment and provide clear physical and visual indications the space is shared across modes. Street Function: Provide vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle neighborhood circulation and access to individual residential and commercial properties designed to encourage socializing with neighbors, outdoor play for children, and creating comfortable spaces for walking and biking. Connectivity: Connects to all types of streets. Average Daily Traffic: 1,500 or less motor vehicle trips per day Managed Speed: Motor vehicle travel speeds should be below 15 mph Right-of-Way Width: 25' Pavement width: 18' minimum, maintaining full fire truck access and minimum turning paths at all changes in alignment and intersections. Motor Vehicle Travel Lanes: Minimum 12' clear width. Bike Lanes: Not applicable, bicyclists can share the travel lane and easily negotiate these low use areas Parking: Parking and loading areas may be provided within the right of way with careful consideration to ensure parked vehicles do not obstruct pedestrian, bicycles, or emergency vehicle access. Parkrow:. Not applicable Sidewalks: Not applicable, pedestrians can share the travel lane and easily negotiate these low use areas. Refuge areas are to be provided within the right of way to allow pedestrians to step out of the travel lane when necessary. Shared Street Cross Section ~a 188 25' Normal Neighborhood District Draft May 6, 2014 The proposed Normal Neighborhood District Land Use Ordinance will be reviewed as part of a separate legislative action, as it is to be incorporated into the Unified Land Use Ordinance (UL UO) process presently underway. However, given the interrelated nature of the Normal Neighborhood Plan elements this Draft Land Use Ordinance Language it is being presented for Council consideration, discussion, and direction at the May 6th hearing. This code and any recommended amendments will be incorporated into the UL UO for final adoption. Chapter 18 Code Amendments 18-3.13.010 Purpose 18-3.13.020 Applicability 18-3.13.030 General Requirements 18-3.13.040 Use Regulations 18-3.13.050 Dimensional Regulations 18-3.13.060 Site Development and Design Standards 18-3.13.070 Conservation Area overlay 18-3.13.080 Review and Approval Procedure 18-3.13.010 Purpose The neighborhood is designed to provide an environment for traditional neighborhood living. The Normal Neighborhood Plan is a blueprint for promoting a variety of housing types while preserving open spaces, stream corridors, wetlands, and other significant natural features. The neighborhood commercial area is designated to promote neighborhood serving businesses with building designs that reflect the character of the neighborhood and where parking is managed through efficient on-street and off-street parking resources. The neighborhood will be characterized by a connected network of streets and alleys, paths and trails, with connection to the natural areas, wetlands, and streams. This network will also connect to the larger network of regional trails, paths, and streets beyond the boundaries of the neighborhood. The development of the neighborhood will apply principles of low impact development to minimize the extent and initial cost of new infrastructure and to promote the benefits of storm water management. 18-3.13.020 Applicability This chapter applies to properties designated as Normal Neighborhood District on the Ashland Zoning Map, and pursuant to the Normal Neighborhood Plan adopted by Ordinance [#number (date)]. Development located within the Normal Neighborhood District is required to meet all applicable sections of this ordinance, except as otherwise provided in this chapter; where the provisions of this Page 1 of 10 chapter conflict with comparable standards described in any other ordinance, resolution or regulation, the provisions of the Normal Neighborhood District shall govern. 18-3.13.030 General Regulations A. Conformance with the Normal Neighborhood Plan. Land uses and development, including construction of buildings, streets, multi-use paths, and conservation shall be located in accordance with those shown on the Normal Neighborhood Plan maps adopted by Ordinance [#number (date)). B. Performance Standards Overlay. All applications involving the creation of three or more lots shall be processed under chapter 18-3.8 Performance Standards Option. C. Amendments. Major and minor amendments to the Normal Neighborhood Plan shall comply with the following procedures: 1. Major and Minor Amendments a. Major amendments are those that result in any of the following: i. A change in the land use overlay designation. ii. A change in the maximum building height dimensional standards in section 18-3.13.050 iii. A change in the allowable base density, dwelling units per acre, in section 18-3.13.050. iv. A change in the Plan layout that eliminates a street, access way, multi-use path or other transportation facility. v. A change in the Plan layout that eliminates or reduces an area designated as a conservation or open space area. vi. A change not specifically listed under the major and minor amendment definitions. b. Minor amendments are those that result in any of the following: i. A change in the Plan layout that requires a street, access way, multi-use path or other transportation facility to be shifted fifty (50) feet or more in any direction as long as the change maintains the connectivity established by Normal Avenue Neighborhood Plan. ii. A change in a dimensional standard requirement in section 1 8-3.13.050, but not including height and residential density. iii. A change in the Plan layout that changes the boundaries or location of a conservation or open space area to correspond with a delineated wetland and water resource protection zone provided there is no reduction in the contiguous area preserved. 2. Major Amendment -Type II Procedure. A major amendment to the Normal Neighborhood Plan is subject to a public hearing and decision under a Type II Procedure. A major amendment may be approved upon finding that the proposed modification will not adversely affect the purpose of the Normal Neighborhood Plan. A major amendment requires a determination by the City that that: a.The proposed amendment maintains the transportation connectivity established by the Normal Neighborhood Plan; Page 2 of 10 b.The proposed amendment furthers the street design and access management concepts of the Normal Neighborhood Plan. c. The proposed amendment furthers the protection and enhancement of the natural systems and features of the Normal Neighborhood Plan, including wetlands, stream beds, and water resource protection zones by improving the quality and function of existing natural resources. d.The proposed amendment will not reduce the concentration or variety of housing types permitted in the Normal Neighborhood Plan. e.The proposed amendment is necessary to accommodate physical constraints evident on the property, or to protect significant natural features such as trees, rock outcroppings, streams, wetlands, water resource protection zones, or similar natural features, or to adjust to existing property lines between project boundaries. 3. Minor Amendment - Type 1 Procedure. A minor amendment to the Normal Neighborhood Development Plan which is subject to an administrative decision under the Type Procedure. Minor amendments are subject to the Exception to the Site Design and Use Development Standards of chapter 18-5.2.050(E). 18-3.13.040 Use Regulations A. Plan overlay zones. There are four Land Use Designation Overlays zones within the Normal Neighborhood Plan are intended to accommodate a variety of housing opportunities, preserve natural areas and provide open space. 1. Plan NN-01 zone The use regulations and development standards are intended to create, maintain and promote single-dwelling neighborhood character. A variety of housing types are allowed, in addition to the detached single dwelling. Development standards that are largely the same as those for single dwellings ensure that the overall image and character of the single-dwelling neighborhood is maintained. 2. Plan NN-02 zone. The use regulations and development standards are intended to create, maintain and promote single-dwelling neighborhood character. A variety of housing types are allowed including multiple compact attached and/or detached dwellings. Dwellings may be grouped around common open space promoting a scale and character compatible with single family homes. Development standards that are largely the same as those for single dwellings ensure that the overall image and character of the single-dwelling neighborhood is maintained. 3. Plan NN-03 zone. The use regulations and development standards are intended to create and maintain a range of housing choices, including multi-family housing within the context of the residential character of the Normal Avenue Neighborhood Plan. Page 3 of 10 4. Plan NN-03C zone. The use regulations and development standards are intended to provide housing opportunities for individual households through development of multi-dwelling housing with the added allowance for neighborhood-serving commercial mixed- uses so that many of the activities of daily living can occur within the Normal Neighborhood. The public streets within the vicinity of the NN-03-C overlay are to provide sufficient on-street parking to accommodate ground floor neighborhood business uses. B. Normal Neighborhood Plan Residential Building Types. The development standards for the Normal Neighborhood Plan will preserve neighborhood character by incorporating four distinct land use overlay areas with different concentrations of varying housing types. 1. Single Dwelling Residential Unit. A Single Dwelling Residential Unit is a detached residential building that contains a single dwelling with self-contained living facilities on one lot. It is separated from adjacent dwellings by private open space in the form of side yards and backyards, and set back from the public street or common green by a front yard. Auto parking is generally on the same lot in a garage, carport, or uncovered area. The garage may be detached or attached to the dwelling structure. 2. Accessory Residential Unit. An Accessory Residential Unit is a secondary dwelling unit on a lot where the primary use is a single-family dwelling, either attached to the single-family dwelling or in a detached building located on the same lot with a single-family dwelling, and having an independent means of access. 3. Double Dwelling Residential Unit (Duplex). A Double Dwelling Residential Unit is a residential building that contains two dwellings located on a single lot, each with self-contained living facilities. Double Dwelling Residential Units must share a common wall or a common floor/ ceiling and are similar to a Single Dwelling Unit in appearance, height, massing and lot placement. 4. Attached Residential Unit. An Attached Residential Unit is single dwelling located on an individual lot which is attached along one or both sidewalls to an adjacent dwelling unit. Private open space may take the form of front yards, backyards, or upper level terraces. The dwelling unit may be set back from the public street or common green by a front yard. 5. Clustered Residential Units - Pedestrian-Oriented. Pedestrian-Oriented Clustered Residential Units are multiple dwellings grouped around common open space that promote a scale and character compatible with single family homes. Units are typically arranged around a central common green under communal ownership. Auto parking is generally grouped in a shared surface area or areas. Page 4 of 10 6. Multiple Dwelling Residential Unit. Multiple Dwelling Residential Units are multiple dwellings that occupy a single building or multiple buildings on a single lot. Dwellings may take the form of condominiums or apartments. Auto parking is generally provided in a shared parking area or structured parking facility. 7. Cottage Housing. [Description to be added consistent with Unified Land Use Ordinance] C. General Use Regulations. Uses and their accessory uses are permitted, special permitted or conditional uses in the Normal Neighborhood Plan area as listed in the Land Use Table. T4151e18~3.13f040"Laiid:Use NN'01 NW6 NNr03 NN'031G Descriptions ngle family Multi-family Multi-family esi Ah low density High Density Residential Residential Residenli"alUses =1~ Single Dwelling Residential Unit P P N N (Single-Family Dwelling) Accessory Residential Unit P P P P Double Dwelling Residential Unit N P P P (Duplex Dwelling) Cottage Housing P N N N Clustered Residential Units N P P P Attached Residential Unit N P P P Multiple Dwelling Residential Unit N P P P (Multi family Dwelling) Manufactured Home on Individual Lot P P . P P Manufactured Housing Development N P P P Neiohborhood3Business and Service UUses Home Occupation P P P P Retail Sales and Services, with each building limited to N N N P 3,500 square feet of gross floor area Professional and Medical Offices, with each building N N N P limited to 3,500 square feet of gross floor area Light manufacturing or assembly of items occupying six hundred (600) square feet or less, and contiguous N N N P to the permitted retail use. Restaurants N N N P Day Care Center N N N P Assisted Living Facilities N C C C Publiaandlnshtution~afUse~s*~, . , Religious Institutions and Houses of Worship C C C C Page 5 of 10 Public Buildings • P P P P Community Gardens P P P P Openspace and Recreational Facilities P P P P P = Permitted Use, CU = Conditional Use Permit Required, N = Not Allowed 1. Permitted Uses. Uses listed as "Permitted (P)" are allowed. All uses are subject to the development standards of zone in which they are located, any applicable overlay zone(s), and the review procedures of Part 18-5. See section 18-5.1.020 Determination of Review Procedure. 2.Conditional Uses. Uses listed as "Conditional Use Permit Required (C)" are allowed subject to the requirements of chapter 18-5.4 Conditional Use Permits. 3.Prohibited Uses. Uses not listed in the Land Use Table, and not found to be similar to an allowed use following the procedures of section 18-1.5.040 Similar Uses, are prohibited. 18-3.13.050 Dimensional Regulations A. The lot and building dimensions shall conform to the standards in Table 1 8-3.13.050 below. Table 183 131056 Dimensional Standards NN-OT;', ' NN NN 03 YOP x NN~03~C i , Base density, dwelling units per acre 5 10 15 Minimum Lot Area', square feet 5,000 3500 3000 (applies to lots created by partitions only) Minimum Lot Depth', feet 80 80 80 (applies to lots created by partitions only) Minimum Lot Width', feet 50 35 25 (applies to lots created by partitions only) Setbacks and yards (feet) Minimum Front Yard abutting a street 15 15 15 Minimum Front Yard to a garage facing a public street, 20 20 20 feet X2 Xs X2 Minimum Front Yard to unenclosed front porch, feel Currently under discussion as part of the ULUO update to be consistent Minimum Side Yard 6 6 10 6 3 3 Minimum Side Yard abutting a public street 10 10 10 Minimum Rear Yard 10 ft per Bldg Story, 5 feet per Half Story Solar Access Setback and yard requirements shall conform to the Solar Access standards of chapter 18-4.10. Maximum Building Height, feet / stories 35 / 2.5 35 / 2.5 35 / 2.5 Maximum Lot Coverage, percentage of lot 50% 65% 75% Page 6 of 10 Minimum Required Landscaping, percentage of lot 0% 35% 25% Parking See section 18-4.3.080 Vehicle Area Design Requirements Minimum Outdoor Recreation Space, percentage of lot na 8% 8% 1 Minimum Lot Area , Depth, and Width requirements do not apply in performance standards subdivisions. 2 Minimum Front Yard to an unenclosed front porch (Feet), or width of a public easement whichever is greater. 3 Minimum Side Yard for Attached Residential Units (Feet) B. Density Standards Development density in the Normal Neighborhood shall not exceed the densities established by Table 18-3.13.050, except where granted a density bonus under chapter 18-3.8 Performance Standards Options and consistent with the following: 1 General Density Provisions. a. The density in NN-01, NN-02, NN-03 and NN-03-C zones is to be computed by dividing the total number of dwelling units by the acreage of the project, including land dedicated to the public. b. Conservation Areas including wetlands, floodplain corridor lands, and water resource protection zones may be excluded from the acreage of the project for the purposes of calculating minimum density for residential annexations as described in sectionl8-5.7.050F. c. Units less than 500 square feet of gross habitable area shall count as 0.75 units for the purposes of density calculations. d. Accessory residential units consistent with standards described in section 18-2.3.040 are not required to meet density or minimum lot area requirements. e. Accessory residential units shall be included for the purposes of meeting minimum density calculation requirements for residential annexations as described in 18-5.7.05OF 2. Residential Density Bonuses. a. The maximum bonus permitted shall be 40 percent. b. Cottage Housing. In the NN-01 zone, developments meeting the standards of section 18-2.3.090 Cottage Housing will receive a density bonus consistent with 18-x.xx.xxx [to reference the density bonus standards stipulated in the ULUO] 18-3.13.060 Site Development and Design Standards. The Normal Neighborhood District Design Standards provide specific requirements for the physical orientation, uses and arrangement of buildings; the management of parking, and access to development parcels. Development located in the Normal Neighborhood District must be designed and constructed consistent with the Site Design and Use Standards chapter 18-5.2 and the following: A. Street Design and Access Standards. Design and construct streets and public improvements in accordance with the Ashland Street Standards. A change in the design of a street in a manner inconsistent with the Normal Neighborhood Plan requires a minor amendment in accordance with section 18-3.13.030.8. Page 7 of 10 1. Conformance with Street Network Plan: New developments must provide avenues, neighborhood collectors, streets, alleys, multi-use paths, and pedestrian and bicycle improvements consistent with the design concepts within the mobility chapter of the Normal Neighborhood Plan Framework and in conformance with the Normal Neighborhood Plan Street Network Map. a. Streets designated as Shared Streets on the Normal Neighborhood Plan Street Network Map may be alternatively developed as alleys, or multiuse paths provided the following: i. Impacts to the water protection zones are minimized to the greatest extent feasible. ii. Pedestrian and bicyclist connectivity, as indicated on the Normal Avenue Neighborhood Plan Pedestrian and Bicycle Network Map, is maintained or enhanced. 2 Storm water management. The Normal Neighborhood Plan uses street trees, green streets, and other green infrastructure to manage storm water, protect water quality and improve watershed health. Discharge of storm water runoff must be directed into a designated green street and neighborhood storm water treatment facilities. a.. Design Green Streets. Streets designated as Green Streets within the Street Network, and as approved by the Public Works Department, shall conform to the following standards: i. New streets must be developed so as to capture and treat storm water in conformance with the City of Ashland Storm Water Master Plan. 3. Access Management Standards: To manage access to land uses and on-site circulation, and maintain transportation safety and operations, vehicular access must conform to the standards set forth in section 18-4.3, and as follows: a. Automobile access to development is intended to be provided by alleys where possible consistent with the street connectivity approval standards. b. Curb cuts along a Neighborhood Collector or shared street are to be limited to one per block, or one per 200 feet where established block lengths exceed 400 feet. 4. Required On-Street Parking: On-street parking is a key strategy to traffic calming and is required along the Neighborhood Collector and Neighborhood Streets. B. Site and Building Design Standards. 1. Lot and Building Orientation: a. Lot Frontage Requirements: Lots in the Normal Neighborhood are required to have their Front Lot Line on a street or a Common Green. b. Common Green. The Common Green provides access for pedestrians and bicycles to abutting properties. Common greens are also intended to serve as a common open Page 8 of 10 space amenity for residents. The following approval criteria and standards apply to common greens: i. Common Greens must include at least 400 square feet of grassy area, play area, or dedicated gardening space, which must be at least 15 feet wide at its narrowest dimension. 2. Cottage Housing.: Cottage housing developments are allowed within the Normal Neighborhood subject to the applicable standards of chapter 18-2.3.090 Cottage Housing and as follows: a. Cottage housing developments are allowed within the NN-01 zone subject to the applicable provisions of the underlying zone and review through Chapter 18-3.8 Performance Standards Option. i. In the NN-01 zones, two-cottage house units developed consistent with the requirements of chapter 18-2.3.090 will be awarded a density bonusas as approved under section 18- 3.8.050.6.5. 3. Conservation of Natural Areas. Development plans must preserve water quality, natural hydrology and habitat, and preserve biodiversity through protection of streams and wetlands. In addition to the requirements of 18-3.10 Water Resources, conserving natural water systems must be considered in the site design through the application of the following guidelines: a.Designated stream and wetland protection areas are to be considered positive design elements and incorporated in the overall design of a given project. b.Native riparian plant materials must be planted in and adjacent to the creek to enhance habitat. c. Create a long-term management plan for on-site wetlands, streams, associated habitats and their buffers. 4. Storm Water Management. Natural water systems regulate water supply, provide biological habitat, and provide recreational opportunities. To minimize infrastructure costs and the adverse environmental effects of storm water run-off, from building roofs, driveways, parking areas, sidewalks and other hard surfaces must be managed through implementation of the following storm water management practices: a. When required by the City Engineer, the applicant must submit hydrology and hydraulic calculations, and drainage area maps to the City, to determine the quantity of predevelopment, and estimated post-development, storm water runoff and evaluate the effectiveness of storm water management strategies. Computations mustbe site specific and must account for conditions such as soil type, vegetative cover, impervious areas, existing drainage patterns, flood plain areas and wetlands. b. Future Peak Storm water flows and volumes shall not exceed the pre-development peak flow. The default value for pre-development peach flow is .25 CFS per acre. c. Detention volume must be sized for the 25 year, 24 hour peak flow and volume. d. Development must comply with one or more of following guidelines. Page 9 of 10 i. Implement storm water management techniques that endeavor to treat the water as close as possible to the spot where it hits the ground through infiltration, evapotranspiration or through capture and reuse techniques. ii. Use on-site landscape-based water treatment methods to treat rainwater runoff from all surfaces, including parking lots, roofs, and sidewalks. iii. Use pervious or semi-pervious surfaces that allow water to infiltrate soil. iv. Design grading and site plans that create a system that slows the stormwater, maximizing time for cleansing and infiltration. v. Maximizing the length of overland flow of storm water through bioswales and rain gardens, vi. Use structural soils in those environments that support pavements and trees yet are free draining. vii. Plant deep rooted native plants. viii, Replace metabolically active minerals, trace elements and microorganism rich compost in all soils disturbed through construction activities. 5. Off-Street Parking. Automobile parking, loading and circulation areas must comply with the requirements of chapter 18-4.3 Parking, Access, and Circulation Standards, and as follows: a. Neighborhood serving commercial uses within the NN-03-C zone must have parking primarily accommodated by the provision of on-street parking spaces, and are not required to provide off-street parking or loading areas, except for residential uses where one space shall be provided per residential unit. 18-3.13.65 Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards An exception to the requirements Site Development and Design Standards must follow the procedures and approval criteria adopted under section 18-4-1.030, unless authorized under the procedures for a major amendment to plan. 1 8-3.13.070 Conservation Area Overlay All projects containing land identified as Conservation Areas on the Normal Neighborhood Plan Land Use Zone Map must dedicate those areas as: common areas, public open space, or private open space protected by restrictive covenant. It is recognized that the master planning of the properties as part of the Normal Neighborhood Plan imparted significant value to the land, and the reservation of lands for conservation purposes is proportional to the value bestowed upon the property through the change in zoning designation and future annexation. 18.3.13.080. Review and Approval Procedure. All land use applications are to be reviewed and processed in accordance with the applicable procedures of Part 18-5. Page 10 of 10 CITY OF ASHLAND Planning Commission Report DATE: April 22, 2014 TO: Ashland City Council FROM: Ashland Planning Commission RE: PA#20130-1858 Normal Neighborhood Plan Planning Commission Recommendations Summary The Ashland Planning Commission held a public hearing on March 11, 2014 related to the Comprehensive Plan, Comprehensive Plan Map, Transportation System Plan, and Ashland Land Use Ordinance amendments proposed to implement the Normal Neighborhood Plan (Planning Action 2013- 01858). The Commission concluded their review on April 8`h and following discussion and deliberation unanimously recommended the City Council approve of the Normal Neighborhood Plan with a number of specific recommendations as outlined in this report. The Normal Neighborhood Plan area is one of the last sizeable tracts of largely undeveloped land designated for residential purposes in Ashland's Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). The future development of this area is expected to contribute toward accommodating long range population growth consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan, and Ashland's position in the Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Problem Solving Plan (RPS). The Planning Commission recognizes in order to maintain a compact urban form and to ensure the orderly and sequential development of land (Comprehensive Plan Goal 12.09) that neighborhood planning is an appropriate tool for this area. The creation of a neighborhood plan in this area is particularly valuable as over three decades of development has occurred in the area, under county standards, since the original Comprehensive Plan land use designations were assigned to the area. Consideration of the area's existing pattern of development, presence of water resource protection areas, existing and projected traffic volumes, and public testimony has allowed the Planning Commission to better understand the development constraints within the plan area, and carefully address the coordinated provision of open space, transportation, infrastructure, and housing. Recommendations The Planning Commission identified two categories of recommended amendments, those changes that are minor editorial corrections, and those changes that have broader policy implications. Amendments that are editorial in nature and necessary to clarify terminology and provide inter-document consistency are to be included in the final documents presented to the City Council. A list of these editorial changes is attached to this report (Appendix A). The Commission's recommendations pertaining to allowable land use standards, the stated purpose of open space, and the extent and timing of transportation system improvements are addressed in this report as specific recommendations for Council's consideration. Comprehensive Plan Change and Land Use Designations The Planning Commission supports the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments and Land Use Designation Overlay Zones as proposed, and recommends the following: -2- • Approval of the proposed amendment to the Ashland Comprehensive Plan Map to create a designation for the Normal Neighborhood Plan District, including revised boundaries for Conservation Areas within the plan area. o Adoption of the Normal Neighborhood Plan Land Use Designations Overlay Zone Map. o Adoption of the Normal Neighborhood Plan Framework document as a supporting document to the City's Comprehensive Plan, with recommended changes to the mobility and open space chapters as described below. Mobility (Transportation) Framework The Planning Commission supports the Street Network, Pedestrian and Bicycle Network, Green Street Network, Shared Street Standard, and Street Classifications as proposed, and recommends approval of amendments to the the City Transportation System Plan (TSP) and City Street Standards to incorporate these elements of the Normal Neighborhood Plan as follows: o Amend to the Street Dedication Map (TSP Figure 10-1) to incorporate the plan area's proposed Street Network, and reclassification of Normal "Avenue" to be a Neighborhood Collector. o Amend the Planned Intersection and Roadway Improvement Map (TSP Figure 10-3) to include East Main Street as a Planned Roadway Project. o Amend the Planned Bikeway Network Map (TSP Figure 8-1) to incorporate the planned multi-use trails within the Normal Neighborhood Plan. o Amend the Street Design Standards within the Street Standards Handbook to incorporate the Shared Street classification. The Planning Commission has specific recommendations relating to the timing of transportation improvements associated with the future development of the plan area. In order to address current and future transportation along to East Main Street, the Commission recommends the mobility chapter of the Normal Neighborhood Plan Framework Document be amended to reflect the following: • The south side of East Main Street, from Walker Avenue to Clay Street, should be fully improved to City Street Standards prior to, or coinciding with any future annexation and development within the plan area. • A future transit stop coordinated with the Rogue Valley Transportation District, in the immediate vicinity of the NN-03 Land Use Zone, should be incorporated into the East Main Street roadway design and development. • That prior to annexation and development within the plan area the following items relating to the future Railroad crossing at Normal Avenue be addressed: o That the proposed public Rail Road crossing can be installed without necessitating the closure of any existing public crossing within the City. o A financing plan be developed and approved by the City for the future improvement of the rail road crossing. Open Space Framework The Planning Commission supports the Comprehensive Plan map amendment to establish designated Conservation Ares as proposed, which include the Cemetery Creek and Clay Creek 100 year Floodplains, Wetlands identified in the 2007 Local Wetland Inventory, and wetland and riparian buffer Ashland Planning Commission 20 E. Main Street Ashland, Oregon 97520 , www.ashland.or.us -3- areas consistent with the Water Resource Protection Zones. The Planning Commission further supports the Open Space Network map as presented and recommends approval of these plan elements. The Planning Commission has determined that the provision of open space within the plan area has environmental, recreational, and aesthetic value to the neighborhood. The contiguous open space corridors are a neighborhood defining characteristic and as such the Planning Commission recommends the Normal Neighborhood Plan Framework Document's Greenway and Open Space chapter be amended to further emphasize the community value of open space retention with a concluding statement on page 14 as follows: The Normal Neighborhood's distinctive character is shaped by the presence of prominent open spaces and natural areas. The preservation of these neighborhood defining features is central to the success of the neighborhood plan as they ensure the protection offragile ecosystems, provide passive recreational opportunities where people can connect with nature, protect scenic views considered important to the community, protect future development from flood hazards, and preserve community character and quality of life by buffering areas of development from one another. The permanent establishment of interconnected open spaces and contiguous conservation areas as proposed in the Open Space Framework is essential to promote and maintain high quality residential development which is appropriate to the distinct character of the neighborhood. Land Use Ordinance The proposed Normal Neighborhood District Land Use Ordinance will be reviewed as part of a separate legislative process as it is to be incorporated into the Unified Land Use Ordinance (ULUO) process presently underway. However, given the interrelated nature of the Normal Neighborhood Plan elements the Planning Commission took testimony regarding the draft Normal Neighborhood District Land Use Ordinance at March 1 1 th public hearing in order to evaluate the draft ordinance and formulate recommendations for the Council's consideration. The Planning Commission supports the draft land use ordinance's mix of land uses, housing types and proposed densities, Site Development and Design Standards, and flexibility afforded by the proposed major and minor amendment provisions, with following recommended policy change: • The Commission recommends the dimensional regulations in the proposed land use ordinance (18-3.13.050) and the review procedures be amended to include a Conditional Use Permit to increase building height from the proposed 35ft and 2%2 story maximum up to 40ft and 3- stories exclusively within the NN-03 and NN-03C zones. The Commission finds that such a change would provide applicants greater site and building design flexibility in achieving the stated densities (15 units per acre) within the NN-03 and NN-03-C zones, while retaining a publically noticed review process to evaluate the bulk and scale of proposed buildings to ensure neighborhood compatibility is preserved. Conclusion Through the two year public neighborhood planning process the Planning Commission has evaluated the impacts of future development in consideration the of goal to ensure a variety of dwelling types and provide housing opportunities for the total cross section of Ashland's population, consistent with preserving the character and appearance of the City (Comprehensive Plan goal 6.10). The resulting Ashland Planning Commission 20 E. Main Street Ashland, Oregon 97520 wvw ~r, .ashland.or.us -4- neighborhood plan strives to preserve the character of the neighborhood, accommodate a variety of housing types, connect a system of greenways, protect and integrate existing creek corridors and wetlands, and enhance mobility for area residents through establishing safe and direct walking and bicycle routes. The Planning Commission finds the Normal Neighborhood Plan, with the additional recommendations included in this report, achieves these objectives and will be a valuable guide for future annexation and development of properties within the 94 acre area. Ashland Planning Commission 20 E. Main Street Ashland, Oregon 97520 , wxw.ashland.or.os .5- Appendix A Editorial Changes incorporated into the final plan documents The editorial changes recommended by the Planning Commission and Staff were needed to clarify terminology and provide inter-document consistency. These changes have already been incorporated into the draft documents presented to the City Council for consideration. The following lists the specific changes that were made to the plan documents presented at the first public hearing on March 11, 2014: • Amend the framework document (page 7) under Double Dwellings to strike NN-01 as a zone where they are permitted. • Amend the Framework Document to alter references to Pedestrian Oriented Cluster Housing (e.g top of page 7) to be consistent with the description of the Housing Type as written on page 8. • Amend the Framework Document to eliminate statements that stipulate that rear alleys "help to eliminate pavement" as although true in some site configurations it is not universally true in all circumstances (pg 16). • Amend the Framework Document's "Use Table" on page 10 to include Pedestrian Oriented Cluster Housing as permitted in NN-02 and NN-03 consistent with the draft Land Use Ordinance. • Amend the draft Land Use Code 18-3.13.040 as follows: o A2: The use regulations and development standards are intended to create, maintain and promote single-dwelling neighborhood character. A variety of housing types are allowed including multiple compact attached and/or detached dwellings. Dwellings may be grouped around common open space promoting a scale and character compatible with single family homes. Development standards that are largely the same as those for single dwellings ensure that the overall image and character of the single-dwelling neighborhood is maintained. o B5: Pedestrian Oriented Cluster residential Units are multiple dwellings grouped around common open space that promote a scale and character compatible with single family homes. Units are typically arranged around a central common green under communal ownership. Auto Parking is generally grouped in a shared surface area or areas. o 137: Add a place holder for a Cottage Housing description consistent with the Unified Land Use Ordinance. • Amend the draft Land Use Code 18-3.13.050 to read as follows: o B I (e). Accessory residential units shall be included for the purposes of meeting minimum density calculation requirements for residential annexations as described in 18- 5.7.050F. .o 132(b): Cottage Housing. In the NN-01 zone, developments meeting the standards of section 18-2.3.090 Cottage housing shall receive a density bonus consistent with 18- x.xx.xxx .(to reference the density bonus put forth in the ULUO) • Amend the draft Land Use Code 18-3-13.060 to read as follows: A3(a): Automobile Access to development is intended to be provided by alleys where possible consistent with the street connectivity approval standards. Ashland Planning Commission 20 E. Main Street Ashland, Oregon 97520 www.ashWnd.or.us ASHLAND PLANNING DIVISION STAFF REPORT March 11, 2014 PLANNING ACTION: PL-2013-01858 APPLICANT: City of Ashland LOCATION: Normal Neighborhood District Boundary ZONE DESIGNATION: Jackson County RR-5 (Rural Residential 5 acres) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: City of Ashland Single-Family and Suburban Residential Jackson County Rural Residential Lands ORDINANCE REFERENCE: Chapter 18-3.13 Normal Neighborhood District STATEWIDE PLANNING GOALS: Goal 2 Land Use Planning Goal 14 Urbanization OREGON REVISED STATUTES (ORS): Chapter 197 -Comprehensive Land Use Planning Coordination REQUEST: To amend the Comprehensive Plan, Comprehensive Plan Map, Transportation System Plan, and Ashland Land Use Ordinance to implement the Normal Neighborhood Plan. 1. Relevant Facts A. Background - History of Application Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 2, Land Use Planning, as well as Chapter 197 of the Oregon Revised Statues requires a land use planning process and policy framework as a basis for all,decision and actions related to use of land. Specifically, plans and implementation measures such as ordinances controlling the use and construction are permitted as measures for carrying out Comprehensive Plans. Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 14, Urbanization, directs communities to plan for the orderly and efficient transition from rural to urban land use, to accommodate urban population and urban employment inside urban growth boundaries, to ensure efficient use of land, and to provide for livable communities. The existing Comprehensive Plan designation for the Normal Neighborhood Plan area was Planning Action PL#2013-01858 Ashland Planning Division - Staff Report bg Applicant: City of Ashland Page 1 of 12 established in 198 1. The area's development as low density residential, changes in the City's population demographics, land availability, housing supply and type, and water resource protection standards over the decades warrant a re-evaluation of the area's Comprehensive Plan designations in consideration of these changed conditions. In March of 2011 the City Council directed the Community Development Department to apply for a Transportation and Growth Management (TGM) grant to prepare a master plan for the 94 acre Normal Neighborhood area, and the City's project was selected for award in June 2011. The TGM program is ajoint program of the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) and the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT). The City of Ashland received the TGM grant for consultant services in May 2012 to undertake the neighborhood planning process. A number of urban design, planning, engineering, environmental services and architecture firms were selected to prepare the draft plan. Consultants included Parametrix Inc, UrbsWorks Urban Design, Joseph Readdy Architect, Qamar Architecture and Town Planning, Leland Consulting Group housing market analysts, and Nevue Ngan Landscape Architects. The submission of preliminary draft plan materials and a revised final draft plan concluded the TGM funded portion of the project in September 2013. The neighborhood planning process has involved considerable public involvement including a resident survey, two neighborhood meetings, three public open houses, two Planning Commission site visits, individual stakeholder meetings with property owners and nearby residents, and numerous Planning Commission, Transportation Commission, Housing Commission and City Council study sessions. The design phase of the planning process was initiated in October 2012 with a three day public design charrette, or workshop. The charrette allowed for the identification of issues and concerns, development of goals and objectives for the master plan, and creation of a conceptual neighborhood design. Following the October 2012 charrette, plan options were developed and presented at study sessions and public open houses to obtain public input to assist the design team, city staff, and the Planning Commission to further refine the plan concept. The final Normal Neighborhood Plan, and draft implementing ordinances, were completed in February 2014 and initially presented to the Planning Commission at a study session on February 25'", 2014. The issues and opportunities identified during the first public workshop and key participants meetings were used to create the project goals and objectives as listed below: Maximize land use efficiency by concentrating housing in a strategically located area within the City Urban Growth Boundary. Planning Action PL#2013-01858 Ashland Planning Division - Staff Report bg Applicant: City of Ashland Page 2of 12 • Create a development pattern of blocks and streets that supports a balanced, multi-modal transportation system that offers a full range of choices to its occupants and that supports active transportation opportunities like walking, bicycling or using transit in those areas planned for transit service; • Provide a range of housing choices and a variety of open space, public space, and green infrastructure improvements, in a way that preserves and enhances the area's creeks and wetlands; • Design a local street grid for the Project Area including connections to existing and planned street, pedestrian, and bicycle facilities beyond the project area that overcome the challenges to connectivity and better integrate the area into the Ashland transportation system; • Provide for pedestrian and bicycle routes and facility improvements within the plan area that will provide safe access to local schools, activities, neighborhoods, and destinations; • Apply those principles of low impact development to minimize the extent and initial cost of new infrastructure and to promote the benefits of stormwater management; • Provide developable alternatives at planned densities that will eliminate the need for expansion of the urban growth boundary; and • Reduce greenhouse gas emissions by implementing transportation and land use plans that encourage reductions in vehicle miles traveled. Background Studies To inform the neighborhood planning process a number of studies were completed and previously presented to the Planning Commission in support of this project including: • A .Buildable Lands Inventory (approved November 15, 2011- ordinance #3055) provided a basis for evaluation of the amount of available land within the City Limits and Urban Growth Boundary. • A HousinlZ Needs Analysis (approved September 3, 2013 - ordinance #3085), summarized the types of housing that have been developed throughout the City in the recent decades, as well as the projected needed housing based on income and population demographics. • An Executive Summary of Existing Conditions to provide background information for the Normal plan area including the results of a resident survey conducted in June-July 2012. • An analysis of five components of the neighborhood design including infrastructure, mobility, sustainability, open space and greenways, and housing and land use. o Infrastructure Framework Planning Action PL#2013-01858 Ashland Planning Division - Staff Report bg Applicant City of Ashland Page 3 of 12 o Sustainability Framework o Mobility Framework o Greenway and Open space Framework o Housing and Land Use Framework • The traffic engineering firm SO Alliance completed an Existing Traffic Conditions technical memorandum (dated September 12, 2012) , and a Future Traffic Analysis (dated November 19, 2013) to investigate current and future traffic conditions in the Normal Neighborhood Plan study area. B. Detailed Description of the Site and Proposal The Normal Neighborhood Plan District is situated between East Main Street to the north and the railroad tracks to the south, Clay Street to the east and the Ashland Middle School to the west. Currently, the 94 acre area has a mix of Comprehensive Plan designations including single family residential and suburban residential, and is presently outside the City of Ashland (City) city limits but within the City Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). This area constitutes the largest remaining area of residentially designated land that is suitable for medium- to high-density development which remains largely vacant or redevelopable. The plan area contains 35 properties ranging in size between 0.38 acres up to 9.96 acres. There are 26 property owners within the plan area with a number owning multiple parcels. Residential development in the plan area has historically been low density large lot single family homes consistent with Jackson County's rural residential zoning standards. The Normal Neighborhood Plan District includes significant natural features including Cemetery Creek, Clay Creek, and three designated wetlands (W9, W 12, W4) that are included on the City of Ashland 2007 Local Wetland Inventory (LWI). The local wetland inventory was approved by the Department of State Lands (DSL) which means the LW I is part of the Statewide Wetland Inventory. The mapped wetland boundaries are estimated boundaries, they have not been surveyed, and there are inherent limitations in mapping accuracy as hydrology conditions change over time. The City of Ashland will require applicants for annexation with potential wetlands on their property to obtain a wetland delineation by a qualified consultant and submit it to DSL and the City prior to development. The Normal Neighborhood Plan is comprised of Normal Neighborhood Plan Framework document, official Normal Neighborhood Plan maps, and the proposed Normal Neighborhood District land use ordinance amendments (Ch. 18-3.13). Collectively these documents provide the underlying conceptual and regulatory structure for area's future development. Development of this area is expected to Planning Action PLn2013-01858 Ashland Planning Division - Staff Report bg Applicant: City of Ashland Page 4 of 12 occur in an incremental way, as individual parcels propose annexation for specific housing developments. An adopted neighborhood plan allows individual development proposals to better coordinate the provision of streets, pedestrian connections, utilities, storm water management, and open space. Such an approach can ultimately help reduce development costs through appropriate sizing of needed facilities, provision of easements, and secured street access. Additionally a significant benefit of an adopted plan is a clear expectation and understanding regarding the level of development anticipated by both developers and neighboring residents. In this way the development and annexation process for all properties with the plan area is streamlined while ensuring the City can accommodate its future growth in a systematic and efficient manner. The proposal involves Comprehensive Plan Map amendments, Transportation System Plan amendments, as well as amendments to the proposed Ashland Unified Land Use Ordinance (ULUO). The proposed implementation plan includes: • Adopting the Normal Neighborhood Plan Framework document as a supporting document to the City's Comprehensive Plan. • Adoption of official Normal Neighborhood Plan maps: o Land Use Designations Map (NN-01, NN-02, NN-03, NN-03C) o Street Network o Pedestrian and Bicycle Network o Street network: Green Streets o Open Space Network • Amending the Ashland Comprehensive Plan Map to create a designation for the Normal Neighborhood Plan District, and revised boundaries for the Conservation Areas within the plan area. • Amending the Transportation System Plan (TSP) as follows: o Amend the Street Dedication Map (TSP Figure 10-1) to incorporate the plan area's proposed Street Network, and reclassification of Normal "Avenue" to be a Neighborhood Collector. o Amend the Planned Intersection and Roadway Improvement Map (TSP Figure 10-3) to include East Main Street as a Planned Roadway Project. o Amend the Planned Bikeway Network Map to incorporate the planned multiuse trails within the Normal Neighborhood Plan. • Amend the Street Standards to incorporate Shared Streets. • The draft Unified Land Use Ordinance will be revised through a separate legislative planning action to include a new Chapter 18-3.13 Normal Neighborhood District, to guide and direct both public and private improvements. Additionally, multiple section of Chapter 18 will be amended to provide reference to, and consistency with, the proposed Chapter 18-3.13 Normal Neighborhood District. Planning Action PL#2013-01858 Ashland Planning Division - Staff Report bg Applicant: City of Ashland Page 5 of 12 IL Project Impact A. Approval Process and Noticing The proposal involves Comprehensive Plan and Transportation System Plan amendments, as well as additions and revisions to the Ashland Unified Land Use Ordinance (ULUO) necessary to implement the Normal Neighborhood Plan. The Planning Commission makes a recommendation on the package of amendments, and the City Council makes the final decision. Approximately 200 written notices (postcards) were mailed to property owners in and surrounding the Normal Neighborhood District boundary regarding the Planning Commission public hearing (March 11`h, 2014) and City Council public hearing (May 6`h, 2014). A notice was published in the newspaper and a meeting announcement was emailed to residents and workshop/open house participants that provided their email addresses to the City. Meeting announcements and plan materials are posted on the project web page www.ashland.or.us/normalplan B. Proposal Impact The Planned Housing Types and Land Use Designations The proposed Normal Neighborhood District will contain four residential zones, NN- 01, NN-2, NN-03, and NN-03-C. The use regulations and development standards set forth in the proposed land use ordinance (Ch. 18-3.13) for these zones are intended to provide a significant degree of flexibility as to the form and character of individual developments.. Affordable housing with the plan area would be provided by future development as a condition of annexation consistent with current requirements. The Normal Neighborhood Land Use Zones map establishes the proposed designations for the properties within the district. NN-01: The Land Use designation NN-01 is intended to provide single family dwellings, accessory residential units, and cottage housing with a base density of 5 units per acre. The "cottage" housing type is to be consistent with the standards proposed in the Unified Land Use Ordinance as proposed under a separate legislative planning action. NN-02 The NN-02 designation provides housing opportunities for individual households through development of a mix of single-dwelling housing, duplexes, townhomes, accessory residential units, and pedestrian oriented clustered housing with a base density of 10 units per acre. Clustered housing, commonly referred to as "pocket neighborhoods", are a new housing type envisioned for the plan area where multiple compact detached or attached dwellings are grouped around common Planning Action PL#2013-01858 Ashland Planning Division -Staff Report bg Applicant: City of Ashland Page 6 of 12 open space. Through the consolidation of common open space and or parking cluster housing developments can often achieve a housing density comparable to attached row houses or low-rise apartments, yet with a lower profile retaining the appearance of traditional single-family homes. NN-03 The NN-03 land use designation is intended to address Ashland's housing needs through development of multi-dwelling housing with a base density of 15 units per acre. NN-03-C The NN-03-C zone is a residential designation consistent with NN-03, however it would additionally allow for limited neighborhood serving commercial uses such as a coffee shop on the ground floor. Greenway and Open Space The Plan's approach to the greenway and open space framework is establish "Conservation Areas" through a proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Map. As proposed these areas are to include FEMA's 100 year floodplain, Ashland's designated floodplain boundaries, wetlands identified in the 2007 Local Wetland Inventory, and wetland and riparian buffer areas identified in the Water Resource Protection Zone ordinance. Precluding development in these areas will reduce or prevent the detrimental effects of flood waters, support native vegetation, provide habitat and a travel corridors for wildlife, and promote environmental quality by absorbing, storing, and releasing storm water. The Open Space Network Map shows the areas intended to be preserved as natural areas or open space within the district which absent of any environmental constraints would additionally provide recreational amenities to the districts residents. Streams and wetlands will be maintained as amenities with access to area residents due to the carefully considered transportation network that ensures that these areas are not hidden in back yards. Accommodation of the pedestrian, bicycle, and automobile circulation along the edges of the riparian zones and designated wetlands provides visual and physical access and increases the buffer zones between pockets of development enhancing the character of openness within the plan area. Transportation The Normal Neighborhood Plan includes a transportation framework that would be implemented by the proposed amendments to the Transportation System Plan (TSP) and Normal Neighborhood District Standards. The transportation framework includes a street network, a pedestrian and bicycle framework, and a green street framework. The general location of future roads and paths is addressed by the Normal Neighborhood Plan Street Network Map, although design and engineering at the time Planning Action PL#2013-01858 Ashland Planning Division - Staff Report bg Applicant: City of Ashland Page 7 of 12 of the actual development will determine their precise locations. The proposed Street Network additionally includes designations for streets within the plan area that are to be developed as "green streets" designed to capture and treat storm water in conformance with the City of Ashland Storm Water Master Plan. The proposed street network would amend to the TSP's Street Dedication Map in the Normal Neighborhood District area. The Pedestrian and Bicycle Network map includes facilities incorporated into the streets, as well as off-road multi-use paths including the establishment of two paths crossings Cemetery Creek, paths or shared streets along the west side of Cemetery Creek, a path connecting the terminus of the existing Normal Avenue to East main Street, and a connection from the plan area to the eastern boundary of the Ashland Middle School property. The proposed multi-use paths would amend to the TSP's Planned Bikeway Network Map in the Normal Neighborhood District area. The Normal Avenue neighborhood's internal street network has largely been designed to keep travel speeds in the range of 20 mph by introducing elements such as a planted median, small traffic circles, and subtle changes in direction at block intersections. The backbone of the street network is a re-routed neighborhood collector that extends from the southern intersection at a future improved Rail Road Crossing, to East Main Street between Clay Creek and Cemetery Creek. Given the anticipated traffic volumes on this new road being approximately 1000 average daily trips it is not necessary that it be classified as an "Avenue" but rather a "Neighborhood Collector" designation would suffice. Neighborhood Collectors are expected to accommodate 1500 to 5000 vehicle trips per day and as such this lesser classification would adequately accommodate expected use. The Normal Neighborhood plan also introduces a street type that was recently included in the Transportation System Plan: the "shared street". A shared street is a very low speed street where all of the functions of the transportation system coexist in the same space. There are no individual sidewalks separated from the street surface by curbs and planted medians. There are no bicycle lanes separated from the street by painted lines. The low volumes, low-speeds, narrow cross-section, and traffic calming design elements make it possible for all users safely occupy the street surface by yielding to the slowest and most vulnerable present at a given moment. The use of rear lane alleys helps to reduce the extent of paved areas, and will support a complete grid of finely-grained urban blocks. These alleys will provide the primary access to garages and backyards. The specific alley locations within the designated blocks is left to future development site design considerations, subject to the maximum block length and parking access standards. As such those potential alley locations most subject to adjustment are not included in the Street Network map but it Planning Action PL#2013-01858 Ashland Planning Division - Staff Report bg Applicant City of Ashland Page 8 of 12 is expected that future development will provide alleys to meet access management and connectivity standards. The Future Traffic Analysis report by SCJ Alliance found that all existing intersections in vicinity of the project are expected to continue to function within operational standards in the year 2038 at full build out of the neighborhood plan area. The report recommended that East Main Street should be improved to comply with existing City standards at which point that the improved Avenue could accommodate vehicular, pedestrian and bike traffic, and that each of the proposed street intersections with East Main Street would function within applicable operational standards. Plan Amendments A minor and major amendment process is included in the proposed Chapter 18-3.13 Normal Neighborhood District, which will be the land use ordinance chapter governing the future development of properties within the plan area. The proposed amendment process provides flexibility to address unforeseen changes in conditions such as shifts in demand for types of uses, and physical or natural constraint challenges in individual developments. • Major amendments provide for a change in a land use overlay, modification of the street layout plan or other transportation facility, reduction or elimination of designated Conservation Areas, a change in the applicable standards, and any other changes not listed. • Minor amendments include shifting the location of streets, alleys or paths more than 50 feet, adjustments to the boundaries of designated Conservation Areas, and changes in dimensional standard requirements not including building height and residential density. C. Discussion Items The attached Normal Neighborhood Plan maps, Framework Document, and draft land use ordinance (18-3.13), have been revised to include items the Planning Commission has discussed over the past several months. A summary of the highlights of the latest revisions as follows. • Designation of open space lands as protected conservation areas. • Provisions allowing the transfer of housing density out of the water resource protection zones. • Establishment of a minor amendment process to allow final open space locations to be moved to correlate with natural features (future wetland locations and boundaries), and a major amendment process if a proposal would reduce the contiguous acreage of conservation area/open space as represented in the plan. Planning Action PL42013-01858 Ashland Planning Division - Staff Report bg Applicant: City of Ashland Page. 9 of 12 • Flexibility to allow shared streets to alternatively be developed as alleys or multiuse paths where appropriate adjacent to water protection zones. • Inclusion of mandatory standards relating to storm water management. • Alignment of streets and zoning to correlate with existing property lines. • A change in the street designation of the previously proposed alley in the North west portion of the plan area (Wetland 12) to be a shared Street, thereby allowing the potential to be alternatively developed as a multiuse path if necessary to preserve wetlands or open space. • Clarification to the description of Pedestrian Oriented Cluster Housing within the Normal Neighborhood Plan Framework document. III. Procedural - Required Burden of Proof 18.108.060 Standards for Type III Planning Actions: 1. Zone changes, zoning map amendments and comprehensive plan map changes subject to the Type III procedure as described in subsection A of this section may be approved if in compliance with the comprehensive plan and the application demonstrates that one or more of the following: a. The change implements a public need, other than the provision of affordable housing, supported by the Comprehensive Plan; or b. A substantial change in circumstances has occurred since the existing zoning or Plan designation was proposed, necessitating the need to adjust to the changed circumstances; or c. Circumstances relating to the general public welfare exist that require such an action; or d. Proposed increases in residential zoning density resulting from a change from one zoning district to another zoning district, will provide 25% of the proposed base density as affordable housing consistent with the approval standards set forth in 18.106.030(G);or e. Increases in residential zoning density of four units or greater on commercial, employment or industrial zoned lands (i.e. Residential Overlay), will not negatively impact the City of Ashland's commercial and industrial land supply as required in the Comprehensive Plan, and will provide 25% of the proposed base density as affordable housing consistent with the approval standards set forth in 18.106.030(G). The total number of affordable units described in sections D or E shall be determined by rounding down fractional answers to the nearest whole unit. A deed restriction, or similar legal instrument, shall be used to guarantee compliance with affordable criteria for a period of not less than 60 years. Sections D and E do not apply to council initiated actions. 18.108.170 Legislative Amendments A. It may be necessary from time to time to amend the text of the Land Use Ordinance or make other legislative amendments in order to conform with the comprehensive plan or to meet other Planning Action PLIt2013-01858 Ashland Planning Division - Staff Report bg Applicant City of Ashland Page 10 of 12 changes in circumstances and conditions. A legislative amendment is a legislative act solely within the authority of the Council. B. A legislative amendment may be initiated by the Council, by the Commission, or by application of a property owner or resident of the City. The Commission shall conduct a public hearing on the proposed amendment at its earliest practicable meeting after it is submitted, and within thirty days after the hearing, recommend to the Council, approval, disapproval, or modification of the proposed amendment. C. An application for amendment by a property owner or resident shall be filed with the Planning Department thirty days prior to the Commission meeting at which the proposal is to be first considered. The application shall be accompanied by the required fee. D. Before taking final action on a proposed amendment, the Commission shall hold a public hearing. After receipt of the report on the amendment from the Commission, the Council shall hold a public hearing on the amendment. Notice of time and place of the public hearings and a brief description of the proposed amendment shall be given notice in a newspaper of general circulation in the City not less than ten days prior to the date of hearing. E. No application of a property owner or resident for a legislative amendment shall be considered by the Commission within the twelve month period immediately following a previous denial of such request, except the Commission may permit a new application if, in the opinion of the Commission, new evidence or a change of circumstances warrant it. IV. Conclusions and Recommendations The planning process which resulted in the Normal neighborhood Plan involved a wide variety of participants including the general public, property owners and neighboring residents. Staff believes the revisions that have been made in the development of the implementation package over the last 15 months have refined and improved the neighborhood plan, and are largely consistent with the original plan goals and objectives. Staff recommends approval of the Comprehensive Plan Map amendments, adoption of the official Normal Neighborhood Plan Maps, and adoption of the Normal Neighborhood Plan Framework as a technical supporting document of the Comprehensive Plan. Staff recommends the Transportation System Plan be amended to incorporate the Normal Neighborhood Street network as proposed. The Transportation Commission recommended that the proposed Neighborhood Collector be the sole vehicular connection to East Main Street, thereby recommending elimination of two of the three intersections as proposed in the draft plan. The proposed Normal Neighborhood District Land Use ordinance will be reviewed as part of the broader Unified Land Use Ordinance amendment process. However, given Planning Action PL#2013-01858 Ashland Planning Division - Staff Report bg Applicant: City of Ashland Page 11 of 12 the interrelated nature of the Normal Neighborhood Plan elements, the Planning Commission is asked to provide recommendations on this ordinance as part of tonight's hearing. Staff recommends approval of the Normal Neighborhood District Land Use ordinance. Attachments • Normal Neighborhood Plan Framework Document (March 2014) • Normal Neighborhood Plan maps: o Comprehensive Plan Map amendment o Land Use Zones o Street Network o Pedestrian and Bicycle Network o Street network: Green Streets o Open Space Network • Normal Neighborhood District Chapter 18 Code Amendments (draft dated 3/11/14) • Letters: o Open City Hall public comments as of 3/5/14 o Hunter letter dated 2/25/14 ' o Public letters submitted relating to prior iterations of the draft plan are not physically attached to this Staff Report, however they remain available online at www.ashland.or.us/normalolan including the following electronically linked letters: • DeMarinis letter and exhibit (10/31/2013) • DeMarinis letter and exhibits (10/8/13) • Meadowbrook Home Owners (Anderson) letter and exhibits (10/8/13) • Ashland Meadows (Skuratowicz) letter (10/8/13) • Koopman letter and exhibits (10/8/13) • Lutz letter (9/26/2013) • Vidmar letter (7/29/13) • Carse letter (6/27/13) • Gracepointletter(6/12/13) • Vidmar letter (4/26/13) • Shore letter (4/10/13) • Marshall letter (4/10113) • Horn letter (3/05/13) • Filson letter (2/25/13) • Vidmar letter (2/25/203) Planning Action PL#2013-01858 Ashland Planning Division - Staff Report bg Applicant: City of Ashland Page 12 of 12 Normal Neighborhood Plan Project Guiding Principles and Objective Throughout the process of developing the Normal Neighborhood Plan the Planning Commission, design team, resident participants engaged in the process, and staff have referenced the following goals and objectives to help guide discussions about various plan elements: • Increase efficiency in the use of land through concentration of housing in a centrally located area within the City UGB planned for future urban development; • Achieve a development pattern that results in a balanced, multi-modal transportation system and that enhances opportunities for walking, bicycling or using transit in areas planned for transit service; • Delineate housing, neighborhood serving commercial, open space, public space, and green infrastructure improvements, in a manner that provides for preservation and enhancement of creeks and wetlands; • Develop new illustrative conceptual architectural and site plans for the project area consistent with Transportation and Growth Management objectives. Concepts will meet the City's and the property owners' development goals and standards. • Design a local street grid for the project area including connections to existing and planned street, pedestrian, and bicycle facilities outside the project area to more fully integrate the project area into the City transportation system; • Provide for pedestrian and bicycle routes and facility improvements within the project area that will provide safe access to local schools; • Provide alternatives to, or delay the need for, expansion of the City UGB; • Reduce emissions that contribute to climate change through changes to transportation or land use plans that reduce expected automobile vehicle miles traveled; • Provide an implementation strategy that includes supporting Comprehensive Plan and updated TSP amendments, form based codes, and design standards; and • Present the Plan and documentation necessary to support adoption to City's Planning Commission (PC) and City Council (Council). Zimbra goldmanb@ashland.or.us regards 3 story height limit opposite Creek From : Jonathan Seidler <jonathan.seidler@gmail.com> Wed, Apr 30, 2014 08:23 AM Subject : regards 3 story height limit opposite Creek To : brandon goldman <brandon.goldman@ashland.or.us> Brandon, As it seems likely compromise will continue with developers till last day on the plan, it would be comforting to see some items non-negotable. 3 story heights will have huge impact on our quality of life for all of us living next door to Creek. Please try to limit height to 2 stories. Sincerely yours, Jonathan Seidler, Hilary Jacobson 357 Meadow Dr. Normal Neighborhood Plan letters 1 Public Comments Zimbra goldmanb@ashland.or.us RE: Normal Neighborhood Plan Public Hearing May 6th From :Gil Livni - Helman <helmansprings@gmail.com> Wed, Apr 30, 2014 12:06 PM Subject : RE: Normal Neighborhood Plan Public Hearing May 6th To : brandon goldman <brandon.goldman@ashland.or.us> Cc :'Gil Livni - Helman' <Helmansprings@gmail.com> Hello Brandon, Please see my letter to the city council below. Thank you Gil Livni 510-913-5110 April30, 2014 Hello City Council Members The report from ODSL was completed in 2003 (11 years ago) adopted by Ashland in 2007. In any case, the report is not valid at this point because DSL Wetland Reports are valid for five years. These reports were general observations as well and not scientific reports according to the Wetlands Specialist that I hired. I am unclear why significant decisions are being based on such informal, invalid reports (2003). Basically, when this was brought to the Planning Commission, instead of calling it a Wetlands Area, it has been rephrased as a Conservation Area, taking the land for city purposes,, in full disregard of my rights as a Property Owner. In Ashland, I have a right to delineate a Wetland, if it exists, and these rights have been taken away from me and the other Land Owners. I am with the belief that this action is illegal because I am being treated differently than other Ashland Land Owners. In my case, more than 50% is going to Conservation Area. A Wetland Expert from Eugene, who works with the DSL very closely, did his testing and inspections on my land about two weeks ago, and concluded that this area (my lot) is NOT Wetland. I keep on hearing that the area used to be a Wetland, yet it remains the case that the area is currently not Wetland area, nor over the past few years has the area been considered Wetlands. When checking for Wetland, the soil is tested down to 12 inches and examined for composition. The resu1it&afNthi&sWh testing does not alter in atshort span of years, even if theryeamamhts considered dry years. The soil tests show no signs of being a Wetland, to date. I want to remind everyone that the Co-Op in the past had been a Wetland Area. For the record, one of the reasons why my lot was thought to be Wetland is due to the standing water from the illegal (without any permission) of dumping storm drain water from 30+ homes and accompanying streets of the adjacent Home Development: Meadow Brook Park Estates. Due to this major oversight by the City of Ashland, my land is now in question for both Wetland and/or Conservation Allotment. As an owner, I am clearly perplexed. Thank You, Gil Livni 240 Normal Avenue Normal Neighborhood Plan letters 3 Public Comments Zimbra goldmanb@ashland.or.us Normal Neighborhood Plan From : Eric Sharp <eric.andrew.sharp@gmail.com> Tue, Apr 29, 2014 01:55 PM Subject : Normal Neighborhood Plan To : brandon goldman <brandon.goldman@ashland.or.us> Hi Brandon, I am a former resident of Ashland having grown up there, and would like to move back one day. Having heard a bit about the Normal Neighborhood plan, I'd like to voice my support for incorporating the Normal neighborhood into the city limits. As someone who could see themselves moving back to Ashland one day, I'd like to see hope prices not be overly inflated due to our city limits being so small. While it wouldn't make a massive impact, I think the incorporation of the Normal neighborhood is a step in the right direction to help keep Ashland from becoming prohibitively expensive to those of us who would like to one day return to our wonderful home town. Thank you for your time and consideration. Eric Sharp 916-749-8069 Normal Neighborhood Plan letters 4 Public Comments Zimbra goldmanb@ashland.or.us Normal Neighborhood Plan From : T & P Jacobson <Jacobson510@comcast.net> Sun, Apr 27, 2014 07:40 AM Subject : Normal Neighborhood Plan To : brandon goldman <brandon.goldman@ashland.or.us> Brandon- I own a condo in Ashland Meadows facing Creek Drive. I am worried about the increased congestion in the neighborhood if the City of Ashland goes forward with a high-density development plan in the Normal neighborhood. While I fully understand the need to provide appropriate housing for all residents, I also think there should be sufficient space for all residents. Putting high-density apartments into this small section of Ashland without proper green space, walking paths, appropriate access etc. will not enhance the beauty or livability of Ashland. Much more study needs to be done on this plan before implementation. Please consider my comments in future discussions about this plan. Thank you, Patti Jacobson Tom Jacobson 2110 Creek Drive Ashland 510-409-5033 Normal Neighborhood Plan letters 5 Public Comments Bryce C. Anderson 2092 Creek Drive Ashland, OR 97520 April 8, 2014 Troy Brown, Jr. Michael Dawkins Richard Kaplan Deborah Miller Melanie Mindlin Tracy Peddicord Lynn Thompson City of Ashland Planning Commission 51 Winburn Way Ashland, Oregon Re: Normal Neighborhood Final Plan Dear Commissioners, The undersigned is chair of an ad hoc committee representing the homeowners' associations of Meadowbrook Park Estates, Ashland Meadows and Chautauqua Trace regarding the Normal Neighborhood Final Plan. This letter addresses the concerns we have regarding that portion of the plan area that lies between Clay Street on the east, Cemetery Creek on the west, Creek Drive on the south and East Main Street on the north, and known informally as the "Baptist Church property." At the March 11, 2014 meeting, we presented our concerns regarding density on this property and asked that the NN-03 and NN-037C areas be changed to NN-02 until the problems regarding utilities and improvements on East Main are solved. At that same meeting, staff expressly stated that once a property is given a certain zoning, the most difficult change to make is to lower the density. It makes no sense to lock this property into a higher density zone when future circumstances may indicate a lower density is preferable, particularly when the density can be increased if the need arises. For all of the above reasons, the three homeowners' associations ask this commission to amend the plan to eliminate the NN-03 and NN-03-C zones from the plan. Very truly yours, Bryce C. Anderson Normal Neighborhood Plan letters 6 Public Comments Paula Skuratowicz 2124 Creek Drive Ashland, OR 97520 March 31, 2014 Troy Brown, Jr. Michael Eawkins Richard Kaplan Deborah Miller Melanie Mindlin Tracy Peddicord Lynn Thompson City of Ashland Planning Commission 51 Winburn Way Ashland, Oregon Re: Normal Neighborhood Final Plan Dear Commissioners, I have been following the development of the Normal Neighborhood Plan for the past two years and I am still asking the same question I originally asked of the Planning Commission. Who will benefit from putting concentrated high density (NN-03 and NN-02) in only one area of the Normal Neighborhood Plan instead of distributing it throughout the neighborhoods. It is no secret that there is a developer ready to build on the Baptist Church property and can't help but wonder if this circumstance has been a driving force behind the decisions on where to put the high density building. 1 was recently surprised to hear that high density building is not really necessary to meet future growth needs of the city. And even more distressing were the comments made at the last Planning Commission meeting that once this high density zoning is in place it will be very difficult to reduce it later. It also appears there are still very major issues regarding traffic on East Main that may not be resolved for years and still no current plans to provide reasonable public transportation through the area. As a resident of Ashland Meadows, I have seen the increase in traffic on East Main and am very concerned about the problems that will arise with even more traffic on this road. 1 understand that sewer and water infrastructure is another of the unresolved problems and have heard the existing sewer and water lines are already barely adequate. I do know the creek that runs through our common area requires constant maintenance for sewer backup. Stressing this system with even more density could be quite a long term problem. Because of the above reasons, I am urging the Planning Commission and the City Council to eliminate the NN-03 and NN-03-C zones on the Baptist Church property and make the entire parcel no more than NN-02 density. Thank you for your consideration of this. Sincerely, Paula Skuratowicz Normal Neighborhood Plan letters 7 Public Comments l From Grace Point Church Submitted by email 3/11/2014 Planning Commission, We are concerned about the restriction the current Normal Avenue plan will place on future uses of the lot behind Grace Point Church. First, the plan designates the W-9 wetland, as adopted by local and state agencies, based on an estimate of this region rather than an actual delineation by species and groundwater survey of the property. The actual wetland area may be larger or, as we see it after 7 years of mowing and maintaining, is significantly smaller than current estimates. In the case of the wetland being larger than current estimates, the area available for development will be smaller and our use will be limited. However, in the event that the required delineation results in a smaller area of wetland, there seems no remedy in the current plan for a reduction of the Open Space designation to allow us to use the space available for development. In speaking with the Ashland Community Development Department it was confirmed the W-9 open space size would not change even if a wetland delineation survey showed it to be smaller. It seems that there is some attempted amelioration of.this by density transfer from open space to the rest of our property, this allowing a maximum of 64 dwelling units on the.entire property. This is a tradeoff but is only usable to us if we make unacceptable changes to the property by placing residential dwellings on our front field and in our parking lot. It does not allow us to make up for that loss to the South of the church in our field. From a 5 to 10 year timeline we have a property that really cannot be used. From a longer term planning viewpoint this may be a reasonable planning concept except I must remind this commission that this Nazarene Church was started in Ashland in 1905 (109 years ago) so we do plan with a longterm viewpoint. Normal Neighborhood Plan letters 8 Public comments 1 't A combination of 2 possible solutions exists..The first is allowing the decrease or increase in the conservation area based on an accurate delineation. Secondly, increasing the density allocation from NN-02 (10 units per acre) to NN-03 (15 units per acre) on the only usable space to the South of the church. This would leave the current NN-02 designation for the rest of the church's property. We request you adopt both. Shifting the focus now to the matter of 2 transportation corridors traversing this area. I am told by staff that an alley or multi use path is required by code adjacent to open spaces. This means that in addition to a 50 foot swath through this property for the road another 25 feet will be taken by the proposed alley. This is in addition to the required 50 foot buffer zone around wetlands. That raises the public taking for transportation corridors to about 75 feet and 125 feet if you consider the buffer zone. This seems exorbitant from our viewpoint. Our request as a solution is to move the current road as far to the south as allowable, within 50 feet of the W-9 open space. This would eliminate the coded need for another transportation corridor. Where in this code and planning action is there a use for this property? There is a public straightjacket to most reasonable uses of this property. We might just have to lease to a farmer who wants fence for livestock to raise cows, sheep, goats and pigs and not ever annex. Finally, there have been comments made in the public forum pertaining to ditching we have done on the property. Some well meaning folks seem to think that this is their property to police. Prior to any ditch cleaning we contacted the Oregon Department of State Lands and were told that there were existing ditches on this parcel and that maintaining these ditches was allowable. We did as they recommended, cleaning these drainages to their previous depth and removing brush from these ditches. We were able to find the previous depth because there were existing culvert pipes in at least 3 locations to set our cleanout depth. Normal Neighborhood Plan letters 9 Public Comments - - 't,p i 1 ?014 Ashand Planning Commission Meeting April 11; 2014 MAR 1 Subject : Normal Housing Proiect Thank you for your civic and professional time and services on this ambitious project. I realize it is an important plan in Ashland's housing future. While there have been some helpful zoning, location and other changes made as the planning process has moved on, even a good plan might be improved or provide more guidance for future implementation by decision makers and contractors. Some concerns like about water and waste- water hook-ups, East Main Street modifications, and financing plans are still to come. It would seem that any initial development would almost require that those elements would be resolved before there could be any occupancy. 1.My earlier concerns about planning for accessability for seniors and ADA for disabled have been allayed by planning staff. 2.Accessorv Resdential Units (p. 7 ) will be permitted in nearly all zones, no information was provided. Does this potentially authorize a doubling of living units to this plan? If so, does that voilate the zone density standards. I understand that not many in Ashland have used that infilling strategy as a long-term rental option. If this particular development might attract more people to live in small detached units, it would be a big consideration for the design plan. 3. Affordable housing and less-expensive housing (p. 9). Design for less lawns and maintenance which helps on home-owner association fees. Vest pocket parks (p.14). are labor intensive and not very functional, particularly for any recreational use. A larger central park with picnic facilities and informal play space would be easier to maintain. and allows for more recreation than just walking or biking. 5. Shared streets (p.15) by biker, walkers and autos can be hazardous, particularly if any parking is allowed on them. All on-street parking should be restricted to bays or parking pads. 6. Street mobility (p. 15) +walk-ability look okay within the plan, but anticipate a significant increase of traffic on the east-west corridors, particularly on East Main because that is where the high density housing will be. The improvement of East Main will need turn lanes and the retention of bike lanes at the minimum. Hopefully sidewalks on lower East Main, too. Walking and biking are healthly and encouraged but the long linear layout of Ashland at the base of the Siskiyous has its commercial locations, entertainment, and most dining facilities at its north-west rnid-section and south-east ending section located several miles appart. Realistically, not many residents of this plan will be walking or biking to shop for food and basic supplies, or for dining and entertainment. Hopefully this plan will be sure that there is adequate off-street parking to accomodate the influx of senior retirees and others who will rely on their vehicles. Thanks for your consideration of these points. Dale Swire 233 Clay St. Ashland Normal Neighborhood Plan letters 10 Public Comments Bryce C. Anderson 2092 Creek Drive Ashland, OR 97520 March 11, 2014 Troy Brown, Jr. Michael Dawkins Richard Kaplan Deborah Miller Melanie Mindlin Tracy Peddicord Lynn Thompson City of Ashland Planning Commission 51 Winbum Way Ashland, Oregon c F Re: Normal Neighborhood Final Plan Dear Commissioners, i s The undersigned is chair of an ad hoc committee representing the homeowners' associations of Meadowbrook Park Estates, Ashland Meadows and Chautauqua Trace regarding the Normal Neighborhood Final Plan. This letter addresses the concerns we have regarding that portion of the plan area that lies between Clay Street on the east, Cemetery Creek on the west, Creek Drive on the south and East Main Street on the north, and known informally as the "Baptist Church property." A reasonable development of this property would be welcome, as the portion of the site behind the existing community church is both an eyesore and a fire hazard. There are some problems with the current plan, however, which should have been addressed in more depth. Because this property is very likely to be the first to be developed, and because these concerns ' should have been addressed more fully in the existing plan, the above associations would ask that the current plan be modified to eliminate the NN-03 and NN-03 -C areas from the plan until these problems are solved. 1. Traffic on East Main: Currently, this narrow two-lane road has no curbs or sidewalks east of Walker Avenue other than the portion of East Main fronting the Mormon Church, no left turn lanes, and narrow shoulders which serve as both pedestrian and bicycle lanes adjacent to large drainage ditches that pose hazards to both pedestrians and bicyclists. Moreover, only the d southern side of East Main is in the plan boundaries because the northern side is not within the City of Ashland Urban Growth Boundary. Normal Neighborhood Plan letters it Public Comments z F To: Ashland Planning Commission March 11, 2014 Re: Normal Neighborhood Final Plan Page 2 As is indicated on page 15 of the plan, entitled "Mobility," no improvement is planned for the northern side of East Main, and any improvement on the southern side must await development of all or nearly all of the properties along the entire frontage of East Main. In the meantime, the inclusion of high density residential and commercial uses on this property will immediately cause traffic hazards as drivers coming east and west on East Main in a 40-mph speed zone attempt to navigate around other drivers turning left or right on the streets leading into this proposed development. Although these hazards cannot be eliminated without improving East Main, they can be significantly lessened by eliminating the commercial and high density residential uses fiom this property. As tacitly noted at page 6 of the plan introduction, the possibilities for commercial uses in this area are dubious at best, and need for such services highly questionable. High density residential uses are also questionable due to the absence of rapid transit facilities (see page 18), the limited parking which would be available in this zone, and the above traffic problems. 2. Sewer and Water Infrastructure: As indicated at page 29 of the plan, the existing sewer and water lines on East Main and Clay Street are barely adequate, and occasionally inadequate, to serve the existing neighborhoods. The plan, however, has no provision for expanding these lines even though the development of the 10-acre Baptist Church property alone under the current plan would add more than 100 dwelling units, more than exist in Meadowbrook Park Estates and Ashland Meadows combined, in addition to the allowable commercial development. Even a medium density residential development will severely strain existing infrastructure; any higher density will overload it with no planned solution for decades. For all of the above reasons, the three homeowners' associaiions ask this commission to amend the plan to eliminate the NA-03 and NA-03-C zones from the plan. Very truly yours, Bryce C. Anderson Normal Neighborhood Plan letters 12 Public Comments 2105 E. Main St. Ashland, OR 97520 February 25, 2014 Re: Normal Street Development Plan Please read this document atyour planning meeting so it will be entered into the records of the Ashland Planning Commission We have some serious concerns with the Normal Street Development Plan; we feel that, if implemented, a multi-story development on the Baptist Church property on East Main Street would adversely affect the quality of life for the property owners on the north side of the street. In prior testimony and letters, no mention has been made of the impact on those properties, since they are in the county and not in the urban growth boundary. We have lived here and farmed this land since 1986. just because the properties on our side of the street are not under the jurisdiction of the City of Ashland doesn't mean that we should be ignored during the planning process. Our concerns are in three areas: water, traffic, and future expense. We depend on a combination of TID water and Clay Creek to irrigate our fields, which we are required to farm under an EFU (Exclusive Farm Use) designation. This past summer (2013) was one of the most difficult irrigation seasons we've experienced since 1986; the water just wasn't flowing enough to irrigate our fields. And this year's drought conditions may cause an even more difficult summer watering season. Twice in the past 15 years we have also experienced problems with the drinking water fi•om our well. Both times our well dried up during the hot summer days, and we were forced to dig a deeper well, at great expense. This happened soon after new development on both sides of lower Clay Street and after the Mormon Church sunk a new well for irrigating their ball fields. Our property is at the end of the "water chain," adjacent to Bear Creek, so we are at the mercy of those using the water above us - or buildings and concrete limiting the flow of water. We can only imagine what a new high-density development across the street from us would do to exacerbate the water flow issue. Looking at current traffic problems, we would definitely not support an increased number of cars speeding by our property if new feeder streets pour traffic into East Main. At some times of the day it's already a 5-minute wait to safely walk across the street or leave the driveway in a car. If the proposed plan for the area on the south side of East Main Street were to be implemented, there would be a significant increase in vehicle trips along our street. Normal Neighborhood Plan lepers 13 Public Comments From what I gathered at the October meeting, some think the traffic solution is to widen East Main Street, adding sidewalks and gutters. Since we have a long street frontage, I am concerned that we would be forced to incur a massive expense to "improve" East Main, which we would rather not see turned into a city street. We all know that EFU and high density residential are incompatible uses near each other; property on the edge of town is usually kept at a very low density to make the transition to agricultural use logical and seamless. If the parcel of land in question were planned for mostly single family homes instead of higher density housing - with strong protective measures for dealing with water problems - then fewer houses would be built, the street would not need to be redone, there would not be additional concerns about water, and the retention of a rural atmosphere would prevail. Thank you for listening to our concerns and considering them in your planning process. Yours truly, Jim and Marcia Hunter i Normal Neighborhood Plan letters 14 Public Comments To: craig;'David Chapman; Mike Faught; graf a sou.edu; shown; Corinne; dyoung ajeffnet.org; carol; April Lucas; tbrownpc; rpkaplan46; Debbie Miller; Melanie Mindlin; Bill Molnar; mike; tmpeddicord October 31, 2013 Dear Commissioners, After speaking with Senior Planner Brandon Goldman, I have modified recommendations for your consideration in the Normal Ave Neighborhood Plan. Following staff guidelines for the Normal Ave Neighborhood Plan, locating similar densities of develo)ment across from established neighborhoods has been a primary objective since the Charrette process. North of Creek Drive, and west of Clay Street, the zoning plan has been changed from NA-03 to NA-02 because the proximity and density of the higher multi-family housing type would put too much traffic out onto existing (NA-02) single-family neighborhood street frontage. I believe this should hold true for the existing (NA-01) neighborhood along the current Normal Avenue as well. The proposed new Normal Ave. (main collector road traversing north/south) should have the most density along this "spine" road, thereby retaining the single family dwelling (NA-01) neighborhood character where it already exists along the current Normal Ave. If the housing density is shifted towards the new Normal Ave., then the need for the problematic egress across the Wetlands #9 is eliminated. The better alternative egress for a centrally located density would be to direct residential traffic DUE NORTH to E. Main (see option #2 below). The closer you have the higher density zoning (NA-02, NA-03) to the new main neighborhood collector road, the less vehicle miles people will have to travel through neighborhoods to egress onto a major arterial like E. Main St. The City's goal to preserve its natural areas, especially its largest designated wetland, will then be possible. In considering alternatives necessary for the project area connectivity to E. Main St. from the west side, there are two options. 1. If connectivity is proposed by extending the current Normal Ave. through to E. Main St., the following problems are encountered: a. The connector road would be a pretty tight fit restricted between existing structures, and even necessitating the demolition of some. b. The potential intersection with E. Main St. from the existing Normal Ave. would suffer the consequences of its proximity to the blind curve hindering line of sight of oncoming E. Main traffic from the west, and making for a very dangerous left turn onto a main arterial. c. The City planners have made great efforts to create a road that doesn't produce a straight shot through the project (from the RR tracks to E. Main). Connecting traffic would see a straight line through the current Normal Ave to continue directly to E. Main, where speeds could increase to 30 mph (similar to the problem on Faith St.). Without that straight line connection, a more central "spine" route using the new Normal Ave., with its circuitous design, will require behavioral modification as it slows vehicular speeds, making it safer for cyclists, Normal Neighborhood Plan letters 15 Public Comments children, and even cars passing each other. The new sinuous Normal Ave. will be more obvious as the main collector going through to E. Main, and will be seen as access to the development, rather than a cut- through for non-residents. 2. If connectivity is proposed by extending the "spine" road (new Normal Ave.) through to E. Main, you solve a multitude of problems: a. There are no structures which would need to be demolished and, due to lack of nearby existing buildings, the road would not need to be a tight fit or restricted in its placement. b. The intersection onto E. Main would have twice the visual clearance distance since it is further away from the blind curve in the road (along Temple Emek property) than option 1's hazardous egress. c. With the zoning density more centrally shifted, this egress option is closer and more accessible for residents, with less vehicle miles required to reach the main arterial of E. Main. d. The visual straight shot North/South road is eliminated and through traffic will more likely be development/resident related and safer. The current Normal Ave. will retain its neighborhood feeling and safely encourage pedestrian/cyclist multi-modal use to open space and school zones. The City has housing types which it needs to provide for all types of residences, as well as simultaneously achieving density goals for the Normal Ave Neighborhood Project. Rezoning the land and its uses into the center of this project will allow for economy of scale, with full block lengths accommodating multi-family dwellings and their required parking areas. Transitioning out from this core (NA-03) zone, cluster cottage-type housing (NA-02) around common greens can develop. The single family (NA-01) character can then be retained in the existing neighborhoods on the edges of the project area. The overall density of the project will remain with approximately the same number of dwelling units (450) as outlined in the most recent iteration of the Planning Land Use Zone Map. Please review the attached version of the alternative connections and zoning recommendations I have identified. I hope you will consider these as viable options in your final plan for the Normal Ave. Neighborhood Project. Thanks for your thoughtfulness and time. I would also like to thank Brandon Goldman, Senior Planner, for all his expertise and patience in explaining and working with me to find viable solutions that will retain the goodwill of the community involved in this project. Sincerely, Sue DeMarinis 145 Normal Ave. Ashland, OR 97520 suedem(abcharter.net cc: Brandon Goldman Normal Neighborhood Plan letters 16 Public Comments Submitted Illustration by Sue DeMarinis: p ~ 7ergple~r , t L N~Y ,LJ 1 w,: O9 25 r~ a x ~ a yti '~:ts I ~ k 'gy'p ~yk . ti 4 p 3a0 ~D ® Mib T.T Iu..ai~ &Dod Cnoo ~~l~ vfF i'i°SP'~^n.'.'.~' ~ " cs..1 Int?d1':v.d bg"0", 1.01 x-.--~ 1~~31~13 Normal Neighborhood Plan letters 17 Public Comments From: "Sue D." <suedem@charter.net> To: "craig ashland" <craig.ashland@gmaiLcom>, davidchapman@ashlandhome.net, faughtm@ashland.or.us, graf@sou.edu, Shawn@polarissurvey.com, corinne@mind.net, dyoung@jeffnet.org, carol@council.ashland.or.us, "april Lucas" <apriLlucas@ashland.or.us>, tbrownpc@gmaiLcom, rpkaplan46@gmail.com, "Howard Miller" <hmiller@jeffnet.org>, sassetta@mind.net, molnarb@ashland.or.us, mike@council.ashland.or.us, tmpeddicord@gmaiLcom Cc: normalpeople@tenderelf.com Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2013 12:23:13 AM Subject: Normal Ave Neighborhood Plan Revisions October 24, 2013 Dear Transportation Commissioners, As a concerned citizen of the Normal Ave Neighborhood Plan, I have thought long and hard about the issues that keep plagueing this Master Plan. I finally realized that it was the distribution of the zoning densities that was creating the problems. These problems were hazardous traffic patterns/roads, diminished wetlands with asphalt roads through them, long,straight connectors inviting hazardous speeds (regardless of the posted speed limits), as well as too many road crossings over sensitive wetlands/creeks. So, I sat down with a bottle of white out and some markers and redrew the Land Use Zones and the subsequent road patterns that would be needed to accomodate these zoning densities and traffic flow. If you compare the attached latest iteration from Planning Staff (9/24/13) to my attached modified version, you will see some beneficial changes. I have included an attached map of the Wetlands Inventory for you reference as well. Even with all these changes, THE SAME NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS IS STILL WITHIN THE NORMAL AVE NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN ! 1. The Wetlands #9 (5.38 acres) is now shown as intact with only a foot/bike path (indicated with an "F") traversing it. This allows a connection and access to the Ashland Middle School that is not only safe, but encourages the new neighborhood's children to use it. This design also keeps safe the arrival and pickup of students using the school bus turn around by not having a major road connector dumping vehicular traffic into this area. This connector road is not necessary when the zoning is redistributed to the center of the development. The central density will more naturally use the closer outlet roads feeding onto E. Main St. (the horseshoe exits around the commercial zoning within NA-03) 2. The decreased density just north of the AMS school bus turn around (showing some more NA-01 yellow), as well as not having a major connector road bringing more vehicular traffic across from the center of the development, will limit the problems and hazards when connecting onto E. Main Street. from Ashland Middle School bus turn around. 3. In following the Staff guidelines for Normal Ave Neighborhood Plan, I have tried to locate similar densities of development across from established neighborhoods. Mostly, the front of any existing house is now facing the same zoning density in which it itself is located. Even some of the proposed development areas are occasionally facing a lower density. This design gives the Neighborhood a "Bell Curve" shape with the edges having the lower densities adjacent to/facing existing neighborhoods, and concentrates the higher zoning density toward the center of the development where no neighborhoods currently exist. Letter and Exhibits submitted by Sue DeMarinis Oct. 24, 2013 RE: Normal Avenue Neighborhood Plan. Normal Neighborhood Plan letters 18 Public Comments 3. 1 have shown a decrease in roads crossing the Wetlands #12, thereby preserving and enhancing the creek/wetland habitat and flow. The water protection zone buffer of 50' adjacent to Wetland #12 necessitated my moving the west side of the new Normal Ave to now go between the new NA-01,(yellow) & NA-02 (orange) land use zones just west of Wetlands #12. The east-west cut throughs between the new blocks off of the west side of the new Normal Avenue are staggered, rather than straight across, which will, by design, require vehicles to travel at a slower speed, rather than hoping they follow the speed limits. 4. Foot/bike paths are indicated with an 7" for their crossings of Cemetery Creek/Wetlands #4. 5. The most southeastern portion of the Plan had only NA-02 zoning. I increased it to NA-03 since it will only be facing open space and the RR tracks and no existing neighborhood. Where the pocket of NA- 02 adjacent to Wingspread Mobile Home Park backed up to an existing home, I changed a portion of that block to be NA-01 thereby matching a density with an existing homesite. Also, this most southeasterly portion of the development did not show any road around the NA-02 blocks, so I added them. 6. In the most northeastern portion of the development area, which faces single family homes on Clay Street, I changed the density zoning (to NA-01 yellow) to match across the road with the existing neighborhood. As the density changes on Clay Street after passing Abbott St., the development zoning changes (to NA-02 orange) to match the density of the neighborhood it faces. This is also why the portion of the development that faces the established neighborhood on Creek Drive has retained its NA- 02 character. I believe these changes in design to the Normal Ave Neighborhood Plan will help solve many of the public's concerns which haven't been addressed by the current staff plan. My ideas are just another way of looking at potential development that truly has input from the people who will live with it. Thanks for taking your time to consider this alternative to making Ashland livable, affordable, safe and beautiful. Regards, Sue DeMarinis 145 Normal Ave. Ashland, OR suedem a)charter.net Letter and Exhibits submitted by Sue DeMarinis Oct. 24, 2013 RE: Normal Avenue Neighborhood Plan. Normal Neighborhood Plan letters 19 Public Comments "4v1•ytf ~f~yg ! t.?s'" 't~-~'~I ~ ~'fv„r ..Ark ,~C' -roil - ~ a yam; ,'_a r; li~e~~- ~yy$$~~ * x ~ ~f~f d 4ee r - E 7. Yy ~ Y ~ p t/aA , ~ G a 4 ~ tr 1 17 177. -L yS` t C nom. f ai "i n ` ~1 rcY C~NA-oi phi„ a: I U . ~s FFeo+ o+ Ef) 2; 'open Spam u ib6~oowo nonh rZZ,&s Neighborhood Cominercial Allowed s_ S F '4 :.i Letter and Exhibits submitted by Sue DeMarinis Oct. 24. 2013 RE: Normal Avenue Neighborhood Plan. Normal Neighborhood Plan letters 20 Public Comments City of Ashland Local Wetlands Inventory Wv or ASHLAND T39S R1 E 10 fl Y''~'.•~-:w..~z'.~., '~tsuam. rs.sr•xae'^s a-ce~.r ~:._~ua..'~.: t 1 \ a g , n I T39 1E'10 I! 'wi- i 41 CkC 4L i I n 1 t .11 14 ~ ...Y ~ t K ~ FL ~w.ru.rr.. 4'1 rm 1, ~•rr.~~s~. IAA - ~ w~~~ P~WYVyMW CYY,BU0bm1 ~Y~-~ ~MIYMnY M~CpliO G IYIrpMOOYfA •-'a M y i fw 1.. OMwOO+ :T'.i W,~4CbOb • jai T fr11•W{W V0 ~ WIYII• V•O11M •i~y.u...s.. awwrrwa i wsmuwa.m,we•rri.r.w•.we Letter and Exhibits submitted by Sue DeMarinis Oct. 24, 2013 RE: Normal Avenue Neighborhood Plan. Normal Neighborhood Plan letters 21 Public Comments From: "Marni Koopman" <marnikoopman@yahoo.com> To: tbrownpc@gmaiLcom, rpkaplan46@gmaiLcom, bmiller@jeffnet.org, sassetta@mind.net, molnarb@ashland.or.us, mike@council.ashland.or.us, tmpeddicord@gmail.com Cc: john@council.ashland.or.us Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2013 1:49:57 PM Subject: Normal Avenue Development comments Dear Commissioners- I wanted to thank you for your time last Tuesday night and for listening carefully and respectfully to the comments of the public, including my comments about the increased risk of building in floodplains with accelerating climate change impacts. In May of 2012, the City Council approved, based on recommendation of the Conservation Commission, an amendment to develop a City Operational Sustainability Plan and use that experience as a pilot project in the subsequent development of a broad community Sustainability Plan. The complete amended Council goal is as follows: "Develop a concise sustainability plan for the community and for City operations, beginning with development of a plan framework, suggested plan format, timeline and resource requirements for City Operations that can be used as a model for a community plan to follow" The sustainability plan closely follows the guidelines set out by ICLEI, of which the City of Ashland is an affiliate community. I am currently helping to develop the community sustainability framework. An important component of this framework is to make sound decisions based on likely FUTURE conditions rather than historical conditions. Another component is to consider social equity issues in conjunction with climate change impacts in ongoing planning efforts. Unfortunately, the Normal Ave. development would not align with the Sustainability Plan for numerous reasons, including flood risk and the greater risk to lower-income individuals. An example of social inequity of risk is the fact that much of the trailer park on Clay Street is directly in the high risk flood zone as indicated by FEMA's flood maps. I'm sorry that the sustainability planning framework is not yet fully realized, as I think it would greatly inform the Normal Avenue Development process. I heard comments from the Planning Commissioners about how this development should not be treated any differently than other developments in Ashland. But I would like to remind the Commissioners that things are DIFFERENT than they used to be (last summer as the warmest ON RECORD for this area). Conditions are changing and they will continue to change even more quickly. We cannot afford to plan and build in the ways we have in the past. It will put people's safety at risk, low-income populations at even greater disadvantage, and it will cost more and more in damages and lives. Normal Neighborhood Plan letters 22' Public Comments Its time to look forward rather than to the past to inform our decisions. The conditions that our grandfathers experienced, or those of the 1960's floods, will not resemble future conditions. Ignoring record floods in Colorado, New York, Vermont, and along the Mississippi, record rainfall in Washington, record drought in Texas, and record heat in California while making decisions based on historical averages is dangerous practice. We know better. Please see the attached research from Stanford University, showing a 25-30% increase in severe storms that produce destructive rainfall, hail, and tornadoes. "The severe thunderstorms we experience now can result in very high economic losses," Diffenbaugh [Stanford professor of Environmental Earth System Science] said. "Sadly, we have many examples of cases where a single storm has had disastrous impact. So a 25 or 30 percent increase in the annual occurrence represents a substantial increase in the overall risk." Building affordable housing in a floodplain is risky and inequitable - if you decide to move forward with the project, I hope you are willing to hold the responsibility for taking that risk. Thanks for your attention to this issue. Marni Koopman, Ph.D. Climate Change Scientist 971-221-9868; marnikoopman@yahoo.com Normal Neighborhood Plan letters 23 Public Comments Meadowbrook Park Estates Homeowners Association Bryce C. Anderson, Board Member October 8, 2013 Troy Brown, Jr. Michael Dawkins Richard Kaplan Deborah Miller Melanie Mindlin Tracy Peddicord City of Ashland Planning Commission 51 Winburn Way Ashland, Oregon Dear Commissioners, As we have stated before, the Meadowbrook Park Estates, Ashland Meadows and Chautauqua Trace Homeowners Associations are in favor of the development of the property in the Normal Avenue Neighborhood Plan that lies between the western half of Creek Drive and East Main Street, known informally as the "Baptist Church property." The portion of the site behind the existing community church is both an eyesore and a fire hazard, and development would be a welcome improvement. At the same time, as indicated on pages 15 and 16 of the September 24 report, there are serious traffic problems along East Main. This narrow two-lane street has no curbs or sidewalks east of Walker Avenue other than the portion of East Main fronting the Mormon Church, no left turn lanes, and very narrow pedestrian and bicycle lanes adjacent to large drainage ditches that pose hazards to both pedestrians and bicyclists. Moreover, only the southern side of East Main is in the plan boundaries because the northern side is not within the City of Ashland Urban Growth Boundary. As a result, any improvement of East Main in the development area will result in bicyclists, as well as pedestrians running or jogging in the bicycle lanes, using the southern side of East Main for travel in both directions. To make matters worse, if the current plan is followed, the development of the Baptist Church property will immediately result in at least two additional streets feeding into East Main, as well as an unknown amount of commercial traffic from the proposed development. The additional street traffic feeding into a two-lane road with a 40 mile per hour speed limit will present numerous additional hazards. (The attached map shows East Main, with the 40 mile per hour portion indicated in blue.) This problem will not be solved until the City of Ashland gets control of, and develops the north side of East Main, which will probably have to be done by expanding the Urban Growth Boundary, but the alternative is a crowded, unsafe street. These issues are only hinted at in the current development plan, and we submit that they should be set forth explicitly in considerably more detail. Normal Neighborhood Plan letters 24 Public Comments To: City of Ashland Planning Commission October 8, 2013 From: Meadowbrook Park Estates HOA et al. Page 2 We would note again that the above comments are focused mainly on that portion of the plan covering the Baptist Church property, because this portion is likely to be the first developed, and to have the most immediate impact on the three homeowners associations affected by such development. There may well be other serious concerns regarding that portion of the plan covering the Normal Avenue extension, such as wetlands preservation, storm water dispersion and the like, but we will leave any comment on these aspects of the plan to the homeowners immediately affected by them. Thank you for your consideration of these items and your work on the plan. Very truly yours, Bryce C. derso n Meadowbrdok Park Estates HOA I I i i Normal Neighborhood Plan letters 25 Public Comments J l 7/:: F," J T is i L- l~ F' i °g Normal Neighhdrhood Plans \ letters 26: Publm'Commenis a 1_~ 26 Sep 2013 To: City of Ashland Transportation Commission Ashland City Council City of Ashland Planning Commission 20 East Main Street Ashland, OR 97520 From: Brett & Susan Lutz 1700 East Main Street Ashland, OR 97520 541-218-5203 Council and Commission Members, My wife and I moved to Ashland 7 years ago; in the latter half of 2006. We moved here to become part of the vibrant community, for the good schools, the balance of open space with wise development, and plentiful outdoor recreation, among other reasons. Last summer we moved to 1700 East Main Street, into the proposed Normal Avenue Neighborhood Development area, with our 3 young children. Our property lies on 1.16 acres`adjacent'to the Ashland Middle School and Grace Point Church. My family and I wish to continue to remain zoned in Jackson County. We do NOT want to be annexed into the city of Ashland. My comments to follow, specific to the transportation plan, will explain some of the reasons why. In the Phase 2 (long term) portion of the "Neighborhood Plan", the diagram found at iittp://www.ashland.or.us/SIB/files/Rhase2 Aerialx.pdf shows a neighborhood street for the project going through what are deemed "locally significant" wetlands. These should be preserved for water filtration and wildlife habitat. Additionally, the existing road is used by the Middle School as a bus turn- around area, parking during sporting events for both Ashlanders and family and friends of visiting schools, and by both Grace Point Church and Temple Emek Shalom. Current traffic volume is so high already during certain times of certain days that adding additional traffic would certainly result in increased congestion likely resulting in the need for a traffic light. Adding a traffic light would increase road noise, pollution to air and water (there is both a stream and a TID line on the north side of our property that ends up in Bear Creek), and slow traffic movement on East Main Street. Additionally, we fear that a traffic light would make it more difficult to get In and out of our driveway that exits to East Main Street and would almost certainly.lower the value of our property. Instead, we would like to see the nearby wetlands expanded, not reduced In size. As our climate continues to change, the need for wetlands for filtering water and to buffer us from flash flooding due to increased rainfall rates will increase. During dry times, these wetlands can buffer us from drought by serving as water and moisture storage for us and wildlife. Therefore, we believe that there should be a wildlife corridor established and preserved from these wetlands to Bear Creek, and see ourselves as part of that. Normal Neighborhood Plan letters 27 Public Comments Thus, we wishtt~yy be excluded from the expansion project and ask that no road beyond what already exists be establisffth.rough the locally significant wetlands and along the east edge of our property. Rather than develop our land, we want to use it for local food production, green space, as a wildlife corridor, and for renewable energy production. Thanks for your time and understanding. Sincerely, p Signed V 4,-F C~^ 4Fn (J. rn/ Brett & Susan Lutz and Family C~ C Normal Neighborhood Plan letters 28 Public Comments 71 71 J 10 ` 1 r ~ ,/ice r~ • Normal Neighborhood Plan " ~ letters 29 `'Y 4 Puh iclicl Co is ar 1 x~ ar r .x a 1 rN7`lbk5f~Z3~` - r 8 October 2013 Dear Ashland Planning Commission I am providing written and verbal comments today about the proposed Normal Avenue development. I want to first mention that 1 fully support infill to prevent sprawl. I applaud the Planning Commission's diligence in meeting the city of Ashland's goals to provide affordable housing for residents while honoring the city boundaries. I am concerned about the proposed construction of so many units in such a delicate and vulnerable area, however, and feel that just because the property is within city limits does not automatically make it a desirable place to build. My job is to help cities prepare for the impacts of climate change. I have worked for the communities of San Luis Obispo, Fresno, Missoula and Fort Collins, Colorado. I am currently helping Fort Collins city planners, just like yourselves, identify where residents are most vulnerable to climate change impacts and develop strategies to reduce their vulnerability. Fort Collins has had 2 recent wake-up calls to the impacts of climate change - the first was when school was cancelled city-wide due to heat (rather than snow) and the second was the devastating 1000-year floods they experienced just a month ago. Climate change is expected to lead to more extreme events - more heat waves, droughts, catastrophic wildfires, and floods. I have looked closely at the models for southern Oregon and there is a clear signal of increasing potential for large winter storms for this area. With this new knowledge of increasing flood risk related to climate change, it is no longer responsible to build in areas where we once considered building. We need to reduce the risk to people in flood zones. Unfortunately, the people most at risk during floods are usually those with the lowest incomes and least ability to respond or bounce back. I looked at the FEMA flood maps for the Normal Ave. planned development, which is immediately next to the Clay St. development. The Clay St. development is mostly in a Moderate Risk area for flooding, which FEMA defines as between the 100-year and 500- year flood risk zones. Parts of it (especially the trailer park) are in the High risk area as well, which is within the 100-year floodway. The Normal Ave. development area was not studied by FEMA, but is adjacent to it and has similar features, including streams and wetlands that are of similar size and volume of water. This shows that the area is currently at risk, but we need to remember that climate change presents us with even greater risk to consider. Climate change is expected to increase substantially in the coming decades, with greater and greater risk of floods, drought, and wildfire. Planning for resilient communities means thinking ahead and keeping people out of hazardous areas now, to reduce their vulnerabilities during future disasters. While I support infill, I cannot support this project. The area is perfect for a park with natural vegetation and trails that can be used by the schools nearby and local kids. Thank you, Marni Koopman, Climate Change Scientist Ashland Resident (1790 Homes Ave.) 3 attachments: (1) Excerpts from the Climate Resilient Communities Primer, (2) FEMA Maps of the proposed Normal Ave. development area, and (3) pictures of Colorado floods. Normal Neighborhood Plan letters 30 Public Comments Clll O410F.\5u90111,.\\I/ . - . qa 1. J P lald r - - ' lial-iaQe L. • 10 c 9a u a afi o mot C.IT'1'OFd9lll„\nn I rvlnoEUiioaSLaL (awn 0 410090 ~ . E ~/9 rl 4iFF. '1~ pROr9NOY UvI1 Ci 51 E ZONE e,E n 11 d AE e"xr `6~'': x IBI I °a I 4" llmedron 1918 I .f 'Crc:A P ME BR$£U E ...J.. 1r 1 r t 1974 d o]Ioa.12 1 . l °A T 191 es,. don -'ki 0 41 JACRSO\ * p p WUdd[ ar a;I U\L\COItI 41 h 415 5 „-.~--~^y r X959 .irwaavazs i i Rd S~Oe ^I by. e 11!y~~s«."-'.=,T 9G J I~ - N it 'i (.1.1.. X95] I rx x`41. i !L f96] J FqlLlj',1{t1 a $ d1 'abnue \ 1 ~ ! K € jNEe R'It'~50' I9 aivPnr' 433MM FT JOINS PANEL Y2t6 JACKSON ' . usrncoarORATEDoN,rrenA .\Nens NED Stay Dry 1 a ~ i y 4 Rcfine Laven ~ 0 nFHLU%d AnlJp t~rNLl f d'.el faMdy } FfO Risk Neas 2. Qj laf nxhea-Faowr] F L.. _ ®N9Y Rsthea . QLLsixffi Fkkhea ❑ wi11tb6: pFea IOnb IYAUri Mk hda Vfd2m1W Rs1h<a tl ii w I I Figures 1 and 2. These maps are from the FEMA Flood Hazard mapping website (msc.fema.gov). The top map shows the boundaries of the area where FEMA completed their detailed study. The bottom map shows i that the areas that were studied all showed up as high and moderate risk for flooding. The areas that were outside the study boundary were not classified. These maps were accessed 10-7-2013. Of note is that fact that the Clay St, develo ment is at moderate to high risk, and is similar to the proposed Normal St. I al o Plan "between 1 Pub' Co mints development. ~ cue mes moderate risk as between & limits of 100-year and 500-year hoods. i 3 L R w. ti. a ! I Figures 3 and 4. Areas of Lyons Colorado where homes built near local creeks were flooded in September, 2013. Normal Neighborhood Plan letters 32 Public Comments I ~#r [(A FT r .tl aOctr3 ,~y't~:'~RA r ~ i - r " t' ~ al1EA }'1♦Y iii i qp W il/, !Y t„ ■.N l1~{~~(. )i!i - Mi IMbMi Mi ~M `i t! fi~".4'a'. 3..^Y 1 F* ra}r arrRlAr irl.. -h r n~wb anti R. Ill ` R'a 111Wryy i}R L 1^ r bl~yi l{i iii ~ r RTw a'w #.i IJi if li. i➢Y 14 n ~tW ~ •.rb s~ r fit' =~dia ii rr '4 tl YwA ° §W InRr ~d. v( Awf w rA rAr r•r Hl on -yip 'U ~c1 * +'A +i rio Q. Rir yirrr ^ . Q• i{nrr~. r • -A+ sin o Mrr 6~ E9(rr~, H.! - ~ nvw N~.1 , 4ARe F~1 rWiJl tlr±ww t Akft :T Z"'^TA il., ri(ry 6.Mf. lY yr NR iaY i4 fiY Pa={li'i( tf 11 + y'`. i . i 3 ( ~ 1 1 Primer 1 Reducing Vulnerabilities to Disasters Neer=a iPrasa`d-Fedenca Ranghier -Fatima Shah ,Zoe Frohanis - Earf Kes"slat- Ravi Sinha i. a 4 1 THE t.. 0A Aw, Q;:, WORLD BANK a/ CLIMATE RESILIENT CITIES A PRIMER TABLE 1.1 / Possible a Idnioquen , impacts of extreme climate change relevant to urban areas (mostly Warmeywrthrfewer.cold days and Ila Hel island effect adverse in Gast Asia) nights, warmer and more frequent ❑ Increased demad for cooling hot daysfand nights; D,eclininglair quality In dties'- - - Soura:IecgSyn&e4i7Rrpnn ' JaViectson winter fourism - sunmuafor Pa7ignioku (viAuallyc&laln) l❑ Reduced energy demand for heating (a short=term benefit but rtscssmcat of Working Groups. tf not in East Asia) ~ 1, if, and III to rlic Thiml ( o Reduced disruption: to transport due to snow ,4c _ e (a short-term Assessment Report of the 1 ' benefit, but not In'East Asia) Panel on Climate Changc {Warm spells/heat waves. _ In Increased water demand pPCC: CasnbsidgcUnisci:iq Frequency mcreases over most ~t❑ Water quality problems Pmss, 2007) I lan&areas ~o Increased risk of heat relater) mortality, especiallyforrthe elderly, chronlcally;sick very young, andsoclally'solated ~(verylikely) Reduction In quality of Ilfe'for people In warm areas without approprlafe eusmg-_ _ Heavy precipitation events ❑ A e srets on qualityof'surface and groundwater I Frequency Increases over most., ontamination of water supply areas. l❑ Increased risk of deaths, Injuries, and infectious, respiratory; l and skin diseases. ,likely} `t❑ Disruption of settlements, commerce, transport;and,societles. )duwto.flooding ;i❑ Large dlsplacementof-people I. Pressures on urbad.and?uralinfrastructures ' ❑ ss of property '1o Wata fessx ' he relieved (short-t rte fl Intm,e'troplcal cyclone activity 1{❑ Power outages mcreases l in Distress mlgrabon to urban areas to Disruption of public water supply (likely) ❑ Increased risk of deaths mjuriesi water and food-borne 4 diseases post traumatic stress disorders ila Disruption by flood and high winds. ci Withdrawal of risk coverage In vulnerable areas.6y private insurers tl❑ Potential for population migrations t ❑ Lossof property Increased incidence of extreme o Decreased freshwater avalleblli't y due to saltwater intrusion hlgh.sea level (excludes tsunamis) ❑ Increased risk of~deaths and Injuries by drowning in floods and ~J, migration-related health effects 1(likely)❑ Loss ,ofpropertyand'Ilvellhood I ❑ Permanent erosion and submersion of land tf❑ Costs of.coastal protection versus: costs of land use. relocation i f ❑ Potential for movement of populations and Infrastructure A supportive institutional and policy environment at the state and national levels can enable local adaptation. Mainstreaming these issues into policy and practice leads to holistic rather than secloral engagement in climate change; Cities act cross•seetorally, a critical approach for dealing with climate . 'change and disaster manage tent. In this context, mainstreaming implies integrating awareness of future climate change impacts into existing and future policies and plans of developing countries, as Normal Neighborhood Plan letters 34 Public Comments 24/ CLIMATE RESILIENT CITIES: A PRIMER FIGURE 2.3 / Relationship between the cost of adaptation and climate change Sm,ee:Srern, N., Ske , Rniem M the Economies of Climmle Clmirge (Cambudr;- Cambridge Costs Wlllund Unimtsity Press, 2006). adaptation d llel benefit of v adaptation Costs vrilh adaptation Y M + residual rlillato E C5 change damage 18 Gross benefit a~I o of adaptation Casts of residual (dG climate change ~fi~~ damage !J Cdc'~ U/ 'Casts of climate change after adaptation Global Mean Temperature Societies have a long record of managing the impacts of weather- and climate-related events. Never- theless,additional adaptation measures will be required to reduce the adverse impacts of projected climate change and variability, regardless of tire scale of mitigation undertaken over the next two to three decades. Xforcove , vulnerability to climate change cin be exacerbated by other stresses. These arise from, for example, current climate hazards, poverty and unequal access to resources, food inse- curity, trends in economic globalization, conflict, and incidence of diseases. Sonic planned adaptation to climate change is already occurring oil a limited basis. Adaptation call reduce vulnerability especially when iris embedded within broader sectorat initiatives. There is high confidence that there are viable adaptation options that can be implemented in some sectors at low cost, and/or with high benefit-cost ratios. However, comprehensive estimates of costs and benefits of adaptation need to be evaluated for each urban area. j The. urban poor are typically at the highest risk in the event of natural cliswters due to the location of low-income settlements. These settlements are often on sites vulnerable to floods and landslides, infrastructure is weak or lacking, and housing is substandard and prone to fire damage or collapse. The urban poor thus face threats to their lives, assets, and future prosperity due to an increase in risks of storms, floods, landslides, and extreme temperatures; Urban poor are also likely to get un- equal distribution of scarce assets such as water, energy supply, and urban infrastructure, thereby increasing' their vulnerability: Recovering from disasters is also particularly difficult for the poor as they do not have resources or o adequate safety nets, and public policies often prioritize rebuilding in Normal Neighborhood Plan letters 35 Public Comments SECTION 02 EXPLAINING CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS AND DISASTER RISK MANAGEMENT / 26 other parts of the citye2n Environmental- and climate change-related problems affect the urban poor disproportionately because of poor quality and overcrowded housing and the inadequacies in provi- sion of water, sanitation, drainage, health care, and garbage collection. The adaptive capacity of a society is intimately connected to its social and economic development. However, (lie adaptive capacity is unevenly distributed across and within societies. A range of bani- ers limit both the implementation and effectiveness of adaptive measures. The capacity to adapt is dynamic and influenced by a society's productive base, including natural and man-made capital as- sets, social networks and entitlements, human capital and institutions, governance, national income, health, and technology. Even societies with high adaptive capacity remain vulnerable to climate change, variability, and extreme events. Early mitigation of GHG emissions will decrease future adaptation costs: However, even if efforts The urban Poor to stabilize GHG concentrations are relatively successful, some degree of warming and related im- pacts will continue to occur in the, future. An effective response to city-level climate change must !rl'e ~~IlCrrtl)t !!t the therefore combine both mitigation (to avoid the unmanageable) and adaptation (to manage the highest risk in the unavoidable) 24 event of natural There are synergies behveen successful climate change adaptation and successful local development. disaStea because In urban areas, poverty induction, including the provision of housing upgrading and basic civic infrastructure and services, is central to adaptation. Successful, well-governed cities greatly reduce of the location climate-related risks for low-income populations. 101f1-ineonl e All adaptation leasiges can be categorized into five categories . lc their combinations: (a) mobility; Set tlenienis. (b)'storage, (c) d v atiatioi, (d) communal pooling, and (e) change. The effectiveness of these strategies is a function of tin socialand institutional coZesuch f of the city and needs to be designed to be region specific. I m Mobility is the most cnnmo daptatiou respo~ as relocation of a vulnerable popu- dslidc- one slopes. l~fobility may have extremely ad- lation away front flood plains nnc mm" verse social consequences if it is I uu d as a pnit of an adaptation strategy clue to the attendant social and political inst/"'os U r as when people are forced to relocate. away from their livelihoods and social suppm, on \qua are u nwanted in their new neigh- borhood). m Storage refers to pooling of ri s time. trategies are relevant to individual households and communities f adequate. I -ban infrastruct ure is provided to a community, the itee<I for stoage con be substantially re iced. Storage age is most useful. to address food and % a[cu s t rcity in the immediate aftermath of a isaster. Several sound prat- titer for storage existfst~i as the 72-hour self-sustaining food suppl fiatis recommended for each family by the disaster management plans in several cities. o Diversifrention refers to pooling of risks across assets and resources households and communities. Some good adaptation strategies include mixed land-use tuba development plans so that the community has a mix of economic background, commercial a ies, and employment opportunities. I Normal Neighborhood Plan letters 36 Public Comments 26 /CLIMATE RESILIENT CITIES: A PRIMER G Conro:utral pnoli, refers to pooling of assets and resources, sharg of incomes from particular activities aci -s households, or mobilizing the use of res dices that are collectively held during times of scar ' y. Communal pooling spreads risks -Ccross households. It can take place through better inters ion between the various stak elders or communities that are likely to be affected by a disast The most common c niwtal pooling programs are those that aim to de~~elop cmnmtmity- vet support group or self-.help groups. \~ficro-finance pro- 'grams that pool community resi)iq sand prot~ support on the basis of need are another example of adaptation' through comet nal p ,t~g. III Exchange is the most versatile adaptati ,'response, and it is extremelyinrliortam for urban areas. Exchange and market mechan' ms, both formal and informal, are critical for eco- nomic development of the cities. I arket-ba d or exchange adaptation includes provision of access to better and newer >np ets by the con unity. Programs that provide insurance to cover buildings that may be aamaged due to card uake or floods are examples of market- basedadaptationpt.•rcdceIarket-based approaches o allow a city to monetize their assets, which can then be use braise resources for underfakin various developmental and disaster risk management pr grams. This adaptation response therefor enables the community and the city to share risks with the much wider global'community. An illustrative list of national, regional, and local mitigation policies and instruments. that have been suggested is shown in Table 2.4, which also presents some examples: of applications in the water, en- ergy, transport,: building, and industry sectors. It also presents key constraints and key opportunities [hit these measures, policies and instruments may cause when applied at city level. TABLE 2.4/ Selected 1 examples of key II Ex sectoral adaptation •Waler d Expanded rainwater `National water-policies !(-),Financial human opportunities pertaining '(e.g., Kin.g.County/ harvesting;.waler and integrated resources, and physical to urban areas Seattle, Singapore), storage and conservation ,water resources ybarriers techniques; water reuse; ' management, water- Integrated water , So,rac IPCC, clinmte Chmigq desalinatlon; water use related hazards resources management; 2007 S)ttlherfsRrpw!-Smmnny. and irrigation efficiencC8na synergies withothersectors fora liginaea.. Assessment of . roups I, II, and III Infrastructure Relocation; seawalls rds and ' (-Financial and 1%brking C to ncc Thhd Assessment Rcpou •and settlements and stormsurge barrieons that chnologlcal barriers of the ImcigaxLrnmenctl Rand Qncluding coastal dune reinforcement;le climate Availability of relocation on efin,are change ppCC: zones) !!acquisition and creaticonsiderations •spce; Integrated policies Cambridge Uniccrsity Press, (e g; Venice of marshlandsetlan 2oW ign;,land-use an management; London,•NowYork) asrbufferagainstsea tiulldmg s- ergleswithsustainable level rise and floodingInsurance evelopmentgoals protection of.existing natural barriers sit oPa4,t~ IV(nlz,s~rz~t~v~ Normal Neighborhood Plan letters 37 Public Comments SECTION 02. EXPLAINING CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS AND DISASTER RISK MANAGEMENT / 27 TABLE 2.4/ (cont.) RUM',, health Fiea -,heilt -act on plans ,Public health polices O Limds t0 human i,(eg Singapore ~,6m6rgericymedical't I thaatrKe g ize iltolerance(vulnerable i NevvYork) "services improved" , climatensk;' ,group's), 'climate sensitive disease i,Mrengihened health Knowledge limitations ;surveillance and control tser lice regional Financial capacity r ifii . safe water and improved and i ernati net Upgraded health sanitation cooperation services, Improved quality oflife Tourism Diversification of tourism .r Integrated planning Appeal/marketing of (egSyntzodand) attractions&rvenues ,t(eg 64yingcapacity; new attractions; shifting ski slopes 10 .l linkages with, other Financial and logistical higher; altitudes-and. 'sectors) financial challenges glaciers , incentives, eg, Potential,adverse Impact subsidies and tax on other sectors r'crei:16 artificial snowmaking May increase energy use) - Revenues fromi attractions Involvement of wider grow- of stakeholders Transport Realignment/reloealion; Integrating climate Financal and °(eg,KingUdesldlfslandardsarid '"changeconsiderations ,technologic atbarriers County/Seattle, ` planning forroails; rail, into natlonall Availability of less Albuquerque, and other infrastructure transport"policy; vulnerable routes Rockville, to cope. with warming and Investment in R&D Improved technologies Singapore, Tokyo) . drainage i6i special situatio ns, integration with key permafrost'areas) sectors (e g, energy) Energy.. .Strengthening of overhead National energy, ' Access to viable (e.g; King transmission and policies, regulations, alternatives County/Seattle, i,distrioution infrastructure, land'fiscal and C=) Financial and Albuquerque, , undgrground'catiling for 'financa incentives technological barriers. Rockville; utilities, "energy efficiency, ito encourage use of(-) Acceptance of new Singapore; Tokyo) use of renewable sources, ' alternative sources; technologies; reduced dependence on Incorporating climate Stimulation of. new single s_ouiE.6 6f energy change'indesign technologies standards'- Use of local resources The Primer now looks at the main consequences of climate change, with a focus on sea-level rise, temperature change, precipitation change, resilience, and extreme events. The relatio 7ship between consequences and the extent of mean global lemperature.rise is shown in figure 2.4. When glob- al annual temperature increases, several effects are likely to occur. The figure shows the potential impacts of a VC change in temperature to the water, ecosystems, food, coasts, and health sectors. . I Normal Neighborhood Plan letters 38 Public Comments April Lucas From: Sue D. [suedem@charter.net] Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2013 5:40 PM To: april.lucas@ashiand.or.us; tbrowhpc@gmail.com; rpkaplan46@gmail.com; Howard Miller; sassetla@mind.net; molnarb@ashland.or.us; mike@council.ashland.or.us; tmpeddicord@gmail.com; carol@council.ashland.or.us; craig.ashland@gmail.com; davidchapman@ashlandhome. not; faughtm@ashland.or.us; graf@sou.edu; shawn@polarissurvey.com; corinne@mind.net; dyoung@jeffnet.org Subject: Normal Ave Neighborhood Plan Concerns Attachments: Scan0006.jpg; Scan0007.jpg; Scan0008.jpg; Scan0009.jpg Dear Commissioners, I am a concerned resident in the Normal Ave. neighborhood of Ashland. My concerns involve 3 categories: traffic/pedestrian safely, development density, and wetlands preservation. Pedestrian/Traffic Safety Concerns Vehicular circulation through the Normal Ave Plan area has shifted dramatically from the original design charrette In Oct. 2012 which showed a pedestrian/bike path connection for access to the Middle School. The current transportation Street Network shows a major Connector Road linking the original Normal Ave to the curve of the Ashland Middle School bus drop off. Attached scans #0008 (8:37am) and #0006 (6:33pm) show how busy this area is with school buses, children and families during the day. This is exactly where the Collector Road has been designed to empty all the new westward (heading to downtown) traffic from the neighborhood developments. Scan #0007 shows the limited visibility of the connection of the Collector Road onto E. Main St. (adjacent to an incoming curve/blindsight on E. Main). If most of the development density was to be concentrated in the middle of the 94 acre area (as Was discussed at the Charrette Process), then the design for the two new egresses onto E. Main St. (around the Baptist Church property, west of Clay St.). would serve the new residential development population adequately and without traffic safety concerns for visibility and pedestrian/student congest/on from a Major Connector Road going through to the Ashland Middle School. Development Density/ Land Use Zoning Concerns The housing types within the Normal Ave Neighborhood Plan are supposed to be distributed in such a manner as to locate similar.densities of development across from established neighborhoods. The area along the existing Normal Ave. has single family detached dwellings, usually with at least one or more acres/homesite. The current staff design does NOT follow development standards to preserve and promote single-dwelling neighborhood character around the ex/sting neighborhood with a zone of NA-02 (as defined as multi-family low density) cutting a swath across the north end of Normal Ave.to the Ashland Middle School. Also, adjacent to the designated wetlands in the Normal Ave Plan area, the staff design has abutted an NA-02 zoning density, where a reduction in density, possibly NA-01, should be considered to accommodate the natural hydrologic features and ecosystem (see Wetlands Concerns below). If such non-compatible zoning density is allowed, it will adversely affect this established community's quality of life, increase noise level with traffic congestion/air pollution, and negatively affect the local natural habitat/environment. The undeveloped land in the middle of the 94 acres, just west of Cemetery Creek & east of the proposed new Normal Ave., should be re-designated from NA-02 to NA-03 with multiple compact attached dwellings to easily accommodate the required 90% maximum density for the entire area to be annexed Into the City. This area currently doesn't have an established neighborhood to be affected by such increased developmental impact. Wetlands Concerns There is a large section of the Normal Ave Neighborhood Plan that has been identified and designated by the Oregon Dept. of State Lands on their City of Ashland 2001 Local Wetlands Inventory Map (scan #0009). This 1.68 acre Designated Wetiand #12 is seasonally saturated with water with no designated outlet for runoff or drainage. It provides a role In local flood control, groundwater regulation/purification, and replenishment of local aquifers for neighborhood domestic well water. Additionally, a'distinct ecosystem has developed around this Wetland to support the biodiversity of the specific plants and animals that depend on it. As a neighboring resident to this natural water feature, I have observed red tail hawks, quail, doves, owls, as well as families of deer & gray fox. I Normal Neighborhood Plan tellers 39 Public Comments The original charreUs map, as well as the original Normal Neighborhood Master Plan map/Phase 2, have shown this Wetland to extend from the Ashland Middle School bus turnaround/soccer fields and behind Grace Point Church, and across almost to the existing Normal Ave. The current zoning map shows a shrunken down version of the Wetland, and a MAJOR Connector Road going right through the north end of the Wetlandl As City Commissioners, I would hope that you have reviewed an Environmental Impact Report on this Ashland Wetland #12 prior to allowing its boundaries to be manipulated for development and transportation plans. Has anyone requested such a report or information regarding this sensitive significant water feature? Please consider the impact of changing this Wetland Ecosystem, as well as the potential educational opportunities it could provide (especially adjacent to the Ashland Middle School) if left intact and buffered by lower density development. I would appreciate your inclusion of my concerns in your discussions and decisions regarding the Normal Ave Neighborhood Plan. Thank you for you time and service, Susan DeMarinis 145 Normal Ave. Ashland, OR 97520 suedem(Ocharter.net . i I i i i I i i j i 2 Normal Neighborhood Plan letters 40 Public Comments ~~>GG(J✓l ~~IV ~eZl~~wl S ~~li-w~~SS~ ~vL. _ City of Ashland 2011 Buildable Lands Inventory The primary indicator of future residential land needs is projected population growth. The BLI, compiled by the City of Ashland, stated that the buildable lands WITHIN the City Limits could accommodate approximately 1,883 units. With an average household size of 2.03 people, 1,604 units would be needed over the next 20 years. That's 279 more units available than are needed, already WITHIN City Limits. Outside the City Limits, yet within the UGB, approximately 97o additional units could be accommodated. The net buildable lands within the UGB could accommodate up to 5,791 new, residents, which according to the City Comprehensive Plan population projection, is not expected to be reached for approximatelY32 more years! I Potential growth within the UGB, as shown on the zoning densities of the Normal Ave Neighborhood Plan, is EXCESSIVE to the 20-year supply of needed buildable lands required by the state. The housing types according to the Normal Ave Neighborhood Plan (Ch.18 code Amendmts-18.3.x.o1o) are supposed to be distributed in such a manner as to locate similar densities of development across from established neighborhoods The area along the existing Normal Ave. has single family detached dwellings, usually with at least one or more acres/homesite. The current staff design does NOT follow development standards to preserve and promote single-dwelling neighborhood character around the existing neighborhood with a zone of NA-02 (as defined as multi-family low density) cutting a swath across the north end of Normal Ave. to the Ashland Middle School. I Buildable Land, as defined in City of Ashland's toss BLI, means residentially vacant, partially vacant, & re-developable land within the UGB that is NOT severely constrained by natural hazards or subject to natural resource protection measures. Residential annexations ultimately have a required go% max. density UNLESS reduction in total # of units is necessary to accommodate significant natural features e. a. wetlands. The designated wetland in the Normal Ave Plan area (Wetlands #9 on the City of Ashland/DSL Local Wetlands Inventory Map) has been cut down in size. A WETLAND DELINEATION Site Man, prepared by a natural resource professional, is required for activities/uses in a Wet.Protc.Zone(Code 18.63.210). Since the BLI doesn't require such a high density due to the available buildable lands within the City Limits, a reduction in density, adjacent to the wetlands (not thru them), possibly NA-o1 single family dwellings, should be considered to accommodate (see City of Ashland Wetlands Regulations Code 18.63.070) the natural hydrologic features and ecosystem, as well as maintaining the single-family dwelling neighborhood character. Normal Neighborhood Plan letters 41 Public Comments Traffic and Pedestrian Safety Even if the Designated Wetland #g. is allowed to be manipulated and minimized for development in the Normal Ave Neighborhood Plan, there is still a very real concern regarding traffic and pedestrian safety. If a major connector road is allowed to route the new development traffic toward the Ashland Middle School bus turnaround and subsequently feed out onto E. Main St., there will be hazardous conditions for the students and families with the increased usage. Photos were sent to commissioners showing morning and evening congestion of students, buses, &cars. There's limited visibility by an incoming blind curve with the egress to the south. To see to the west, a vehicle must pull almost into the traffic lane. Public health, safety, and quality of life should be considered when crafting a Master Plan for an area to be annexed into the City for future development. Among the costs of growth, infrastructure needs, environmental and social costs especially to the residents of the local neighborhood, can produce the following negative impacts: • Decreased Air Quality • Decreased Water Quality - possible aquifer depletion • Lost Open Space • Lost Resource Lands : Wetlands, Agricultural Land • Lost Visual & other amenity values • Lost Wildlife Habitat • Traffic congestion/dangers • Increased noise pollution • Increased light pollution 1 • Lost sense of neighborhood community By Fodor & Assoc., 2002 "Assessmt ofStatetivide Growth Subsidies in Oregon" The costs of such increased housing densities should be evaluated in a Quality of Life and Fiscal Impact Analysis. There are hidden costs to the City's taxpayers created by such unnecessary dense growth. The adequacy of existing fire, ambulance, police, water, sewer and sewage treatment, street infrastructure, student/teacher ratios and school facilities will be tested and proportionately need to increase with such growth. A Fiscal Impact/Cost of Community Services Analysis should show annexation and development will pay for its own growth! These hidden costs are not covered by the Systems Development Charges that the developers will pay. Will Ashland taxpayers be required to "subsidize" these costs of increased housing densities with new bonds, or increased property taxes? (For example, when Strawberry Lane had an uphill development that required paving the whole road and downhill residents were each charged a massive $414o LID tax bill). Normal Ne**P6EA~SE ADDRESS THESE CQNCERNS WHEN MAKING Y0,VRhhcgECI5ION! igimOrriDO~ hail is# o oiiniies i~ tf Z SY.' _ rl ~ ~ 'S y, a fi$, , -i: fl l 3. 3. 4. t ~ 3 Yµ S T#J '~DPt~ ~ ~f ~ erl ~ ~ a s ~I t~, ~d fi i i 3£1 ds: t 1 4u e. i t ~ arv~.~ F.(. F 7 1_ , A t ~1 S 1.. , to v.'S R{ ti k Y ' 'NA-01,5p~/ng NA-03: 'Ultvti;,' NA-02: NA-04: Open Space '0 10 0 300 500 north %jj//, Neighborhood Commercial Allowed 1 ,~JOrma`ighborhood Plan letters 43 Public Comments 4 i~ 'l.) la gg$5 i r'i~F 1~r Ill 7 W ~ S / ~ ~~Y~ 1 .11~a N o i ~ J i ! I , s- { lr^/Jrl-t~r ~ rf ~ ro ~f 711 t, a$ I y y' iii ~ s r . r 4i Af/a / f "'i' d z tt) ~ ~ P slt1 „~1 s lrn7 i'..)w~~l Lr ~ , a y + r!. r~ r , IL .r . -..,(1111 J It t . 1, , ass 7 et~~~ ~ ~T r+? J) I i u `yr?'~ 4 r ~ 1 J": ' / tird Tyrr i ♦ ~ Jt~,~4rf ;~'Y< ' r~~ =~lt' I i i 11 Y~s a (tr l (+4°',.. _ / _1 I :~f r s* I ~ 3 = !~a 1 I ~=ri'r„s~k r r ,5h1'~ "`o;•S I 1i tr1 ~ r~., ,t 7 X y x 1 I 7} vt ~M1 4 ft a F ~f ~ ~YS ~l1I~Y}t 1,t~i~ Itt~ i~v ~ t • x i {=~y r, fr J sc4 ~ 7 i t e i 1 tl 1z 4~ r 4 ,•r / L 1' ie3 t} ~ ~ ~ . d I . t, ,,'Sr jtF ,`r,~~+3~ ~ tf [ky'~~ t 7, I - e4 y~ rht F )~~r 4` a ~ g d Re~ 18.E s £ P.'~~.• ) rg = ~ ~ ~ Normal Neighborhood an °letters 44, tit, Comments I City of Ashland Local Wetlands Inventory CITY OF ASHLAND -x395 R 1 E 10 ,BOBn r 1 T39c~ 1E 10 .PoNB ' wtz 11 10 _ ~I I :'I - of#j - • tl - ( II 1I Fos- I ®xtwmF4Ja RxiCe T.m. ti sY! ..im.ikxhYw•a ;fM ~••i'~a.~.... l~vxvraT,roi wa ®uw,w.uew+mr °tl6°"• . O Ba•lY]NR¢vM 1 T•bttalpa6m IXOltlfwl a ~wram ®Mtl ne.nw•v 0.'N/ WM1b Semav 1. Ok.M+a Sawa w~+un.7rt~i mtii~Li~m~ 8a4 WAOr(bkep • "AVU T.r:N WA x° '"iw•+a+oo+~wmmrr • EY+pM.W - ~iAd , A , „uw.uuc~`ism ~ Obma5m.oF1 Y _ e w . a- .v~aai:~iw w• Sh anadwMafwO n+Ylvfi N•Bea. ds•kw•:•MM "+'e•°"° Normal Neighborhood Plan letters 45 Public Comments , r l; 11 ' Li k. I. W'I rey, r .r i I c I `,i E I ~s `k"i q. 1. 4- r t zl to z isI 14 ; 44~h rY ~ pal tmi~yejk Normal Neighborhood Plan letters 46 Public Comments L= II ' *~j~ry }'xS c rh ~ a'It 1' t It a~W Kak' ~ fy Y ;n a t 1 >;Y , L 3 f k ' d - a i i 1 t .3 y•. ~t 4 ~I'+I 1 ~I 3 I Normal Neighborhood Plan letters 47 Public Comments d jt~ '"SS F~ ~ c ~f. L oil, F z--' If 0~` i - a E S r" li - t~ a a a.5 ax Normal Neighborhood Plan letters 48 Public Comments ' Dear Planning Commissioners, in discussions about the Normal Avenue Plan, I don't recall if any proposal was made concerning the possibility of a retirement center on East Main property. That seems to be housing that will be in more demand in the future, and the advantage of attracting the retired and providing the opportunity to Ashland home owners to remain local, is wise. A couple of years ago I donated copies of a book, "13 Ways to Kill Your Community" to the City office library. To quote: "Seniors across North America have two important assets, and have them in a greater abundance than the average citizen within the general population: time and money. These are key factors in building a successful community." Seniors are the largest group of volunteers, and some communities even have a volunteer coordinator to identify and recruit volunteers and match them with the proper organization. Economically, most seniors have retired and freed themselves from the obligations of daily life. They are going to do what they want to do, and since many of them have the funds, they are able and willing to pay for what they want. One of the biggest factors that so many communities, and business people, forget about when it comes to seniors as consumers, is housing. Please consider approving more senior housing in Ashland, and perhaps the Normal Avenue Plan would be ideal. Respectfully, i Jan Vidmar I Normal Neighborhood Plan letters 49 Public Comments From: "Amy and Peter" <andinistal@aol.com> To: "Brandon Goldman" <brandon.goldman@ashland.or.us> Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2013 6:46:36 AM Subject: comments from June 25 meeting Dear Mr Goldman and Planning Commission members, I attended the Planning Commission meeting on June 25 and would like to submit my comments in writing as they pertain to the New Normal Neighborhood concept plan. My wife and I reside at 253 Normal Ave with our two young children, ages 4 months and 2 years. We are newcomers to Ashland, having moved here from Bozeman, MT on May 1 of this year. We chose Ashland for the whole package of what it offers: progressive politics, the university and thriving tourism sector, excellent schools, bike-friendly transportation, mellow climate, and accessible outdoor recreation opportunities including the local ski hill. Before we purchased our home we became familiar with the term "urban growth boundary" and studied up on the Normal Neighborhood concept plan. We were intrigued and pleased to discover that so much time and effort were being spent on the planning process, including community involvement, far in advance of any development. But, I guess that's one reason why we moved to Oregon instead of staying in Montana! Although the rural nature of the current neighborhood is attractive, it is "downtown" compared to what we are accustomed to. Already I have felt at risk while walking along the single-lane Normal Ave while my son rides his tricycle, as a steady flow of residents in large SUVs and service workers in large diesel pickups roar back and forth, causing us to retreat off the road every few minutes. I look forward optimistically to seeing the rewards of careful planning revealed as a state of the art modern community with pedestrian-friendly and bike-friendly transportation connectivity. Certainly, in Ashland, we can expect to set a high bar for creating comfortable, usable, friendly, beautiful living spaces. Perhaps state and local regulations are already in place which will not only encourage, but require that the development of this neighborhood seeks to showcase all that we may have learned about building communities which support people. I would encourage the planners to be bold about strongly recommending progressive, alternative design requirements when presenting the concept plan to the city. Specifically, the items mentioned in the meeting on tuesday: 1) neighborhood commercial support in the form of a cluster of small shops within residences, supplying basic needs within the neighborhood; 2) public parks along the creeks with shade, benches, multi-use trails, and a playground; 3) a neighborhood shared garden where residents may lease space for growing food and ornamentals; 4) and most importantly, the priority to make the automobile the least attractive mode of transportation. The Woonerfs sound great, as do the design elements of the pocket communities outlined in the recent Daily Tidings article. I would like to express my sincere appreciation for the work that you all are doing, and I look forward to supporting the process as this neighborhood moves into the future. Best regards, Peter Carse 253 Normal Ave Normal Neighborhood Plan letters 50 Public Comments 7r GracePo int C Church of Nazarene A Church for People Like You Planning Commission City of Ashland 20 East Main Street Ashland, Oregon 97520 Re: Ashland Gracepoint Church submission for June 25, 2013 Planning Commission Hearing Session To Whom It May Concern: We have watched the planning process move forward for the Normal Street development project and are entering into this process somewhat late because we were out of the communication loop. Nevertheless, we do have several ideas for the future development of our property at 1760 East Main Street and would ask your consideration in these matters. One of our tentative ideas is a Senior Living Facility that would probably require a higher density than much of the envisioned space in your Normal Street development plans. Many senior living facilities include skilled nursing and possibly medical. Also staffing of a facility like this may require some form of daycare for their children. These two aspects of this project make this significantly different than a five unit per acre development. We have spoken with Brandon Goldman about the proposed connection across our land between Normal Street and East Main Street. Currently what is proposed in the Phase 2 plan is a straight-through street. We have the desire to make whatever development we do be as pleasing as possible. In this regard, moving the eastern entry onto our land to the most southern corner will allow the road to meander diagonally through the development. This will calm traffic and make it a nicer place to walk and live. This proposed road connection would exit onto East Main Street over the easement that we have granted to the Ashland School District. We assume that the costs of road building would be shared with the school district unless they make some plan for other bus and traffic access. Sincerely, John Colwell and Ray Eddington for Ashland Gracepoint Church Ashland GracePoint Church of the Nazarene 1760 East Main Street • Ashland, OR 97520 541-482-1784 www.ashlandgracepoint.com e-mail: office@ashlandgracepoint.com r' Normal Neighborhood Plan letters 51 Public Comments From : Jan Vidmar <jan_vidmar@yahoo.com> Fri, Apr 26, 2013 08:16 AM Subject Animal Ordinance and Normal Ave. Plan tbrownpc@gmaiLcom, rpkaplan46@gmaiLcom, To : sassetta@mind.net, molnarb@ashland.or.us, mike@council.ashland.or.us, tmpeddicord@gmaiLcom, brandon goldman <brandon.goldman@ashland.or.us> Dear Planning Commissioners, I attended the interesting study session on Tuesday, April 23rd, which addressed the Keeping of Animals Ordinance Amendment. I was pleased by your openness to the proposals, which displayed your support for quality lifestyles and choices in Ashland. Since my house borders the Normal Avenue Plan area, I was struck by the unique opportunity we have to incorporate this support of animal husbandry and community gardens. We who own homes in the many developments bordering the proposed plan area are generally on very small lots, and don't have the opportunity to have animals or large gardens. There was virtually no thought given to community space for such activities. However, with the eminent development of adjoining, semi-rural land, the planning commissioners are in a position to decide and advocate for maintaining that rural feeling. Much of Ashland has already succumbed to higher density housing, with small lots and little open space around units. Please consider the approval of a lower density housing plan, perhaps incorporating cottage homes and townhouses with spaces for animal husbandry and community gardens. The areas to be developed incorporate the special wetlands of Clay Creek and Cemetery Creek, and are in a prime area to consider green development plans. This is a unique opportunity you have to approve plans for a livable, breathable, less congested part of Ashland. Lower density housing would also greatly alleviate the inevitable future traffic congestion in this area. We appreciate your dedication and hard work on the Planning Commission. Respectfully, Jan Vidmar 320 Meadow Drive 541-301-3271 Please copy for Michael Dawkins. Normal Neighborhood Plan letters 52 Public Comments From: michael shore <shrgrp(cDrnind.net> Subject: thank you Date: April 10, 2013 5:39:40 PM PDT To: Melanie Mindlin <sassetta()mind.net> Melanie, I want to thank you for the way you handled the meeting last night. I really appreciated that you used your prerogative to ask questions when various the public speakers ran themselves out of time. 1 would also like to sympathize and appreciate that your requests to your fellow board members for details was met with nostalgia, and patronizing admonishments to the public but no attention to the details of the plan. I am very much taken by your comments regarding the mindless convenience of putting housing (of any density) on the area simply because it appears vacant and by your comments regarding the hydrology of the area. The disregard of the public comments and the refusal by the rest of the board to address anything except a vague reference to the benefits of putting a plan in place before the developers start digging was very disheartening. Except that there are women both on the commission and in the audience, the new normal plan so far reminds me of our national creation myth.... grey haired property owners drawing up plans with regard only for profit, power and "practicality". If we are talking about providing dwelling spaces at 500 addresses and perhaps 1500 souls, with their 1200 automobiles and six hundred bicycles and 200 dogs, can't the commission, without using drinking water as a limiting factor, ponder the cost of providing schools, sanitation, road maintenance, water treatment and sanitation versus the benefits these new comers would yield? I agree that exerting control is the purview of the city. If the city must show a certain amount of housing stock, it makes sense to me that other areas be explored. I would agree that being able to walk to town should be a preferred criteria. Or the New Normal plan needs to have a business section along with a meaningful shuttle system. From my perhaps radical point of view, in light of "the end of oil" and our state's predictions of a looming monster earthquake, it behooves city planning to seek a less conventional paradigm. When the 5 freeway goes missing and fuel is $10/gallon (if it can be found) hungry residents will greatly appreciate the City of Ashland Demonstration Organic Farm and Beef Lot. We could present the world with a world class demonstration of local food supply. Finally, I would like to include in these considerations a look at the first order of business at the meeting last night. What if the New Normal developers run into "funding problems" half way through their construction plans? Normal Neighborhood Plan letters 53 Public Comments The country is certainly not out of the woods in terms of how money is being loaned. Will the wetlands in Normal be last on the to-do list? Will the trucks and dozers start ripping and exposing until they stop..... and then will developers ask for a 15 year extension? Will the downstream fish, the hovering birds have a voice at the planning meeting where warm hearted commissioners who do not live nearby extend permits? Okay that is my rant and my heartfelt appreciation for your work herding the commission and including the public. If you can point me to ways to help the commission understand the hydrology of the area and if you can point me towards understanding where else the housing reserves could be found, 1 will follow your clues. Thanks again michael shore Normal Neighborhood Plan letters 54 Public Comments From: "Stan Druben" <sd96950@hotmail.com> To: tbrownpc@gmail.com, rpkaplan46@gmail.com, "MillerDeborah" <hmiller@jeffnet.org>, "MindlinMelanie" <sassetta@mind.net> Cc: molnarb@ashland.or.us, carol@counciLash land. or. us, mike@council.ashland.or.us, dennis@council.ashland. or.us, john@council.ash land. or. us, greg@council.ashland.or.us Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2013 1:50:19 PM Subject: Thank you, Commissioners Dear Planning Commissioners: I wanted to thank you for last night's very useful discussion of the Normal Avenue Plan, your courtesy to the citizenry and your openness to our concerns. As I listened, several thoughts came to mind. The most important related to "the box" (or "framing conditions"(1]) within which decision-making now occurs. It became clear that for the Commission to serve Ashland best, the framing conditions must be changed to account for a changed context. When Oregon's approach to land was put into place, we were a less-populated country placing fewer demands on our environment (the foundation of all economic activity, not to mention human existence) and yet we "continue to do the same things over and over again and expect the same outcome despite the fact of a changed context." A "definition of insanity," as they say. There are elements of our land policy that are in obvious and serious conflict with our new context. Three are: #1: the ongoing requirement for a 20-year supply of "developable" land (often leading to slow sprawl) #2: the exclusion of insufficient water as a reason for not "developing" (I use quotation marks because "develop" is a biased framing; it implies, for example, that pavement is somehow superior to wetland.) #3: the consent to private takings of publicly created value #s 1 and 2'are clearly there to push the endless replacement of nature with housing, roads, and such--a boon to those who pressed for inclusion of these restraints in the framework, though not necessarily to the public. I doubt they need elaboration. #3 warps the marketplace with unearned profits to landowners, creating a conflict between their private benefit and their interest (and ours) as members of the public. The point may be made clear by these January 21 remarks by Guardian (U.K.) columnist George Monbiot: In 1909 [Winston Churchill] explained the issue thus: "Roads are made, streets are made, services are improved, electric light turns night into day, water is brought from reservoirs a hundred miles off in the mountains - and all the while the landlord sits still. Every one of those improvements is effected by the labour and cost of other people and the taxpayers. To not one of those improvements does the land monopolist, as a land monopolist, contribute, and yet by every one of them the value of his land is enhanced. He renders no service to the community, he contributes nothing to the general welfare, he contributes nothing to the process from which Normal Neighborhood Plan letters 55 Public Comments his own enrichment is derived [T]he unearned increment on the land is reaped by the land monopolist in exact proportion, not to the service, but to the disservice done." As Churchill, Adam Smith and many others have pointed out, those who own the land skim wealth from everyone else, without exertion or enterprise. They "levy a toll upon all other forms of wealth and every form of industry". A land value tax[2] would recoup this toll. It would have a number of other benefits.... It ensures that the most valuable real estate - in city centres - is developed first, discouraging urban sprawl. It prevents speculative property bubbles, of the kind that have recently trashed the economies of Ireland, Spain and other nations, and that make rents and first homes so hard to afford. Because it does not affect the supply of land (they stopped making it some time ago), it cannot cause the rents that people must pay to the landlords to be raised. It is easy to calculate and hard to avoid: you can't hide your land in London in a secret account in the Cayman Islands.... My hope is that this e-mail exposes for your consideration the normally invisible "box" and that you are inspired to get Ashland involved in updating Oregon's outdated land policies. Again, thank you for last night. Sincerely, Stan Druben 125 Brooks Lane Ashland, OR P.S. Please provide a copy of this e-mail to Commissioner Dawkins. [1] What are framing conditions? "At first sight, it seems extraordinary that snowflakes and other crystalline structures are able to form almost perfect, symmetrical shapes in the complete absence of conscious control or design. The mechanism by which this occurs can be demonstrated by setting out a flat box-like framework on a table. By pouring a stream of tiny balls over this frame, we find that we eventually, and inevitably, end up with a more or less perfect pyramid shape.... No one is designing the pyramid, or forcing the balls into place, the pyramid is simply an inevitable product of the framing conditions of round objects falling onto a square wooden frame."--Free to Be Human, by David Edwards (For more related to framing conditions, see "Chapter 4 The Parable of the Red Beads," in The Deming Management Method, by Mary Walton.) [2] Monbiot notes that the "term is a misnomer. It's not really a tax. It's a return to the public of the benefits we have donated to the landlords. When land rises in value, the government and the people deliver a great unearned gift to those who happen to own it." Normal Neighborhood Plan letters 56 Public Comments From: Suzanne Marshall <suzanne.marshall(a)vahoo.com> Subject: thank you Date: April 10, 2013 6:38:24 PM PDT To: Melanie <sassetta(d_)mind.net>, R Kaplan <rrpkaplan46aC),.gmail.com>, T Brown <tbrownpcna.gmail.com>, Carol Voisin <Jvoisin(@..yahoo.com> Dear Commissioners, I appreciated your time, expertise and courtesy last night at the Planning meeting. I am impressed that you took the time to listen to concerned citizens and even answer some questions for those who had never attended such a meeting. It is good to live in a town like Ashland with our interested, involved citizenry and city officials. I lived most of my life in the South where little planning has been done in the past with some horrible results to be sure. Now that I'm fortunate enough to live here, I value good urban/ community planning for Ashland. I hope that the Normal Avenue plan will be carefully reconsidered. Laws on planning made thirty years ago may need re- working. New issues, new population patterns, and new environmental concerns exist in 2013. 1 would like to see more balanced dense housing in the city. It seems like most is on the Southside now with more planned. Finally, please know that members of our HOA DID attend earlier meetings with the task of reporting back to others; hence the growing interest and concern. We were not LATE to the issue. It takes time to get information circulated and digested. thank you again for your dedicated voluntary work on the Planning commission. Suzanne Marshall 369 Meadow Drive Normal Neighborhood Plan letters 57 Public Comments KAREN HORN 140 CLAY STREE"r • ASHLAND, OR • 97520 PHONE: 541.646.7391 • FAX: 866.653.9706. EMAIL: KARENHORNaMJND.NET March 4, 2013 Mr. Brandon Goldman Senior Planner City of Ashland By email to brandon.goldmanaashland.or.us Re: Normal Avenue Plan Dear Mr. Goldman: I attended the Planning Commission Study Group session on February 26, 2013, and I would like to register my opinion of what is being developed for the Normal Avenue area. My concern stems from proximity - I live on Clay Street, across from the field behind the Mormon Church, so I would be directly impacted by increased traffic on Clay and by a dense development of that field, or even the one behind it, which apparently has a developer already attached who favors three-story apartment buildings on that site. I was disappointed not to be included at the beginning of this process - when questionnaires were distributed to people living in the proposed planning area. I not only live across the street from this area, I pay for a sewer connection with the City of Ashland. I found about the charrette by chance after the questionnaire process had ended by reading the flyer enclosed with the utility bill. My husband attended that meeting, but I was unable to make it. I am distressed that the north east corner of the planning area is where the densest development is slated to go in. During the study session, the reasons for this choice seemed very arbitrary to me. As I remember it, the presenters said the reasons for putting the densest development there were two fold: first, the residents of Normal Avenue, on the south west side of the area, turned out in force at the charrette and requested no dense development near them, and second, that there is an existing developer and landowner on part of the north east corner who are ready and willing to build. I am also concerned that traffic on Clay Street, which is already very busy, since there is dense development on both sides of the street up to Ashland Street, will become oppressive with hundreds more residents close by. And East Main - if there will not be public transportation added there for all these new residents, you are not following your own guidelines. Let's not create more sprawl at this time in history. Normal Neighborhood Plan letters 58 Public Comments believe planning in general is a good thing, and I am glad the Planning Commission is attempting to do something new and get ahead of the curve in this process. However, the way the process is working out is very unsatisfying. If all it takes to change a plan is a vocal group of citizens, then I think you should be required to start over with proper notification of ALL neighbors of the area, whether or not they live inside the city limits. guarantee you that the neighbors to the east of the planning area do not want dense development near them any more than the Normal Avenue group does. If you want to turn this process into a shouting match, at least give us a chance to present our case. However, my main concerns have to do with the actual best use of the Normal Avenue area. In my opinion, we are headed into a time of drought, scarcity, and reduced economic activity. The most important thing Ashland can do to help residents prepare for the future is to teach and facilitate the process of making our lives here more sustainable. We grow about 2% of the food we eat here in the Rogue Valley. That must change if we are to survive what's coming at us. propose that the Normal Avenue area be maintained as farm land. It is sunny, and the ground water that makes it so hard to develop it for housing will be a benefit for growing plants and pasturing animals. Ideally, it could be divided into allotments, as is done in London, where citizens who already live here in condos with tiny yards can grow their own food on a small plot of their own for a nominal rent. I can already hear the standard objections - I heard some of them the night of the Study Session. What about all those people who own land there and have been waiting for years, or decades, for the time when they can cash out big on their land? My answer is: just because you own land on the edge of town should not guarantee you a right to become wealthy from selling that land. I lost my savings in the stock market in 2008. 1 may lose some or all of my Social Security benefits due to the dysfunction in Washington DC. My house on Clay Street is worth less today than when I bought it. And the landowners in the Normal Avenue area may not get as rich as they thought they were going to get by building on their land. That is the world we live in today. Please try to look beyond business as usual when considering this plan. Sincerely, Karen Horn Cc: Troy Brown-Jr, Richard Kaplan, Melanie Mindlin, Michael Dawkins, Bill Molnar, Michael Morris Normal Neighborhood Plan letters 59 Public Comments From: "Daemon Filson" <daemonfilson@gmail.com> To: goldmanb@ashland.or.us Sent: Monday, February 25, 2013 12:28:25 PM Subject: Normal Planning Comment Hi Brandon, Good meeting you last week. As you requested, here is our comment to share at the next planning meeting (tomorrow night), in case I can't attend. In terms of any and all interface with wet lands/open space/creeks we would prefer a multi-use path vs. a road. But if it must be a road, request that it be STRICTLY no parking and NO PARKING signage be subtle and in keeping with the natural beauty of the adjacent open space/creek/wetlands. Sincerely, Daemon & Heidi Filson 318 Meadow Drive Ashland, OR 97520 541.292.1450 daemonfi Ison@gmai I.com Normal Neighborhood Plan letters 60 Public Comments From: "Jan Vidmar" <jan_vidmar@yahoo.com> To: goldmanb@ashland.or.us Cc: molnarb@ashland.or.us Sent: Monday, February 25, 2013 1:20:56 PM Subject: Normal Ave. Plan Dear Brandon and Bill, I want to thank you both for the informative presentation on February 19th. The large Phase 1 &2 maps are particularly clarifying. I do have some thoughts on the Normal Plan, particularly in light of what is referred to as significant streams and wetlands in the Greemvay and Open Space Framework. As you pointed out, the stream orientation and flow is from south to north, draining a multitude of water from the highland areas. When planning any development, the contiguous flow and the potential for blockages and flooding needs to be taken into account. As I interpret the Phase 1&2 maps, I am concerned by the proposed crossings of wetland areas by roads. My first concern is the potential fur flooding. Many have witnessed the height to which Cemetery Creek can rise, although for a short period of time. It never fails to amaze me how fast and dangerous a small wet area or creek can become. Bill informed some of us that live in Meadowbrook Park Estates that our houses would not have been built today until current guidelines. Our properties sit within the wetlands buffer zone, and I was not aware of that. In the past I consulted with the City of Ashland and the current FEMA guidelines, and was told that we on Meadow Drive do not need flood insurance. The Wingspread neighborhood is in a flood zone of Clay Creek, and it also borders on Cemetery Creek wetland. The flow of the lower section of Clay Creek needs to be watched, as high density housing and roads could impact flow, causing a backup. Portions are currently choked by blackberry bushes. What assurances would be made to neighborhood residents, current and proposed that we would be secure and insured if a flood occurs? These comments are not directed toward future neighborhood development, as I haven't heard any objections to the use of land and future construction. The concerns are directed for planning around the "wet" areas to assure the free flow and lack of impediment to water. I would ask that road development be restricted from directly crossing the wetlands. All road surfaces provide for faster run off of water, increasing the flow into the wet areas at a faster pace than ground. Perhaps a buffer zone such as gravel or grass and then a path would slow run oft. The viewing of creeks/wetlands is important to residents of Ashland, but few appreciate them from a car. The Bear Creek Greemvay and Lithia Park are gems, and no roads run directly next to the water for viewing. The paths have high use by walkers and bicyclists, and are considered as enhancements to the quality of life in this area. Any sections that are private and behind houses unfortunately are blocked to the public. Paths should have been established in the past to prevent that. The Phase 1&2 plans are poised to make a great connection between the current path that passes by Normal Street, through to Fast Main/Clay Street. It would be wonderful path following Cemetery Creek. Other concerns for the creeks/wetlands are as wildlife corridors. '['he south/north flow orientation is a natural migration route. An Ashland resident and ornithologist, who could be consulted during the development process, came to my house to document the uncommon species and variety of birds that migrate through the Cemetery Creek vegetation (particularly willow bushes). These corridors are also important for a rich variety of butterflies, frogs, reptiles and mammals that are present year round. My personal favorite is our native grey fox that I observe along Cemetery Creek. With minimal impact from development, this can be appreciated by all the neighborhood residents in the future. After years of horse pasture use in part of the Cemetery Creek area, perhaps a restoration project consisting of plant and tree enhancement would be justified. I've seen the enthusiastic involvement of Ashland residents volunteering in other wetland enhancement projects. Maybe this could be incorporated into a developer's plans, allowing for such enhancement. Respectfully, Jan Vidmar 320 Meadow Drive 541-301-3271 Normal Neighborhood Plan letters 61 Public Comments Normal Neighborhood Plan Please review the draft Normal Neighborhood Plan: , 1) Tell us which elements of the plan you disagree with and which elements of the plan you support and 2) What is your overall impression of the plan? All On Forum Statements sorted chronologically As of April 30, 2014, 10:08 AM i V4 Cl" 'Y'~J ~~J 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 Ae of April 30. 2014. 10:08 AM hnp:l/peakdemocrscycom/1738 Normal Neighborhood Plan Please review the draft Normal Neighborhood Plan: 1) Tell us which elements of the plan you disagree with and which elements of the plan you support and 2) What is your overall impression of the plan? Introduction The City of Ashland is in the final stages of developing a plan for the future neighborhood at the north end of Normal Avenue and is seeking additional citizen input. The proposed Normal Neighborhood Plan reflects nearly two years of public participation and neighborhood involvement. Neighborhood planning is the opportunity to think ahead and determine a vision for the future of the neighborhood. Having an adopted plan in place will ultimately provide for the coordination of streets, pedestrian connections, utilities, storm water management and open space. The final plan is intended to provide a clear expectation and understanding for both developers and neighboring residents regarding future development. Please review the draft Normal Neighborhood Plan http://www.ashland.or.us/SIB/files/NormaIPlanDocument_20140225.pdf 1) Tell us which elements of the plan you disagree with and which elements of the plan you support and 2) What is your overall impression of the plan? City officials will read the statements made on Open City Hall and consider them in their decision making process. The Planning Commission will hold a public hearing at 7:00 p.m. on March 11th, 2014 in the City Council Chambers at 1175 East Main Street. If you have questions please contact Brandon Goldman at (541)552-2076 or brandon.goldman@ashland.or.us. Written comments may also be submitted via email or mailed to: City of Ashland Community Development Department 20 East Main Street Ashland, OR 97520 All On Forum Statements sorted chronologically As of April 30, 2014, 10:08 AM hdp3/peakdemocracy.mm/1738 Page 2 of 18 Normal Neighborhood Plan Please review the draft Normal Neighborhood Plan: 1) Tell us which elements of the plan you disagree with and which elements of the plan you support and 2) What is your overall impression of the plan? As of April 30, 2014, 10:08 AM, this forum had: Attendees: 294 On Forum Statements: 26 All Statements: 39 Hours of Public Comment: 2.0 All On Forum Statements sorted Chronologically As of Apt 30. 2014,10:08 AM http://paekdamo T,.mll]38 Page 3 0(18 nerveren ire eren narmaI usghhomom nan: Normal Neighborhood Plan p Tell us which elemenu dine pan pu aaapme wim aed which ebmeds arms pan y su,,,t and kelly Arsac outside Ashland April 29, 2014, 11:01 PM I grew up on lower Normal Ave and graduated from Ashland High School. At the time the Normal Avenue was rural and open. Gradually expensive homes were built in the area and it became more congested. A private paved road was put in. All of this "change" happened even if the original owners didn't want it. It seems to me the area will be better served by a thoughtful, well-designed plan. Ashland is a wonderful town. I would love to move back here some day and raise a family, but it seems it's getting more and more exclusive. People like me who grew up there can no longer afford to live there. We've had two elementary schools close and the numbers at the high school have been dropping over the years. I would hope this plan would enable more young families to live in our town and go to our great schools and experience the wonderful community like I did. I was blessed to have grown up in the area, and I only wish the same for my kids. Elizabeth Bishop outside Ashland April 29, 2014, 7:50 AM Generosity and inclusivity in Ashland was always the norm, and it can be again. Ashland wants to be "even more family-friendly" as stated on the city's website. It is an on-going goal to encourage diversity by allowing young families to raise their children here. It was more that way 25 years ago. We should fear becoming a city of wealthy retirees who have fled the cities and now want to keep a homogeneous look to their new neighborhood. It's not the Oregon way. Anyone who moved to the Normal area knew it was urban growth area destined to be developed. The few houses in the area 40 years ago knew it, too. Yes, we all appreciate the beautiful new homes built in Ashland, but can't we share the area with young families? Let us allow others to enjoy our city as well. We need to realize that younger people will move to Ashland and their children will graduate from our schools only if they can buy a home within their budget. So let it be! nancy boyer inside Ashland April 25, 2014, 11:15 AM Re; Normal Ave Plan. Recently the City of Ashland announced an increase to 4.3mil to be spent to join TAP, and to be completed by August. This urgency is related to low water levels, climate change, and drought. My understanding is that we will only use TAP for emergencies. Along with many concerns (wildlife,wetlands density and etc.) water has always been a main concern of mine. How much impact will the building of 300-400 or more houses have on our already taxed (no pun intended) water sources ? We, did turn down the chance to join TAP several years ago for much less money, but we didn"t need the water. However we continued to build more houses, increasing our needs.Who pays and how much more can this cost all of us? Ironically we have at the end of Normal, what some may call a" Garden of Eden" and the churches are cutting down huge trees, and draining wet!ands,all to "Pave Paradise" I hope the city council will review these changing plans with a fine tooth comb!!! Regards,Nancy Boyer Normal Ave Victor Chang inside Ashland March 13, 2014, 11:55 PM Overall the planning looks solid and I appreciate the emphasis on these things: affordable housing, multi- All On Fomm Statements sone0 chronologically As of April 30, 2014, 10:08 AM hltp:/fpeekdemocracy.oom11738 Page 4 of 18 Normal Neighborhood Plan %eeSe revleu lM1e dmfl NOmaI NegM1WM JRan: 1)TelluswM1kM1 elemen60l Pa Nan you dlsa0ree with and whirr eNmenls of Na Olany supprteM density housing, green spaces, multi-use paths, minimizing drive-thru traffic, etc. Concerns: I'm curious as to the efficacy of shared streets. It may be cool for pedestrians but I'd had to live on one and have to drive around people every day. Also, I'm not sure what the plan for water and wastewater is- it cites wells and septic tanks, but surely that would not continue to be the plan. Would have liked to see planning and cost estimates for that. Lastly, though its very eco-chic to emphasize walkability but besides maybe walking to Walker ES, Ashland MS, Scienceworks, Hunter Park... people will be driving. I would like to see the traffic impact study of that many more residents and drivers on the traffic flows on Ashland St, Walker, E. Main, Tolman, etc. Thanks for considering these comments. Tanya Way inside Ashland March 12, 2014, 1:06 AM The increase in population for this area warrants an immediate plan and installation of a public park similar to the size of Garfield Park in Ashland. The affordable housing being proposed would undoubtedly increase the number of families with children who would benefit immensely from a large park at this end of town. If quality-of- life measures such as park size and placement cannot be maintained for residents along the eastern border of the development, the south end of Ashland will likely see a large drop in property value, recreational activity for families, and overall satisfaction of residents in this area: Beyond this, building homes on a 100-year flood plain will put these homes at high risk for irreparable or expensive damages over time, and the natural beauty of this area would be long gone. This is truly not going to add anything positive to Ashland. This plan needs to be tabled and re-visited after more research and public works planning is completed. Marni Koopman inside Ashland March 11, 2014, 5:06 PM I attended the Charrette and some of the planning meetings. During the Charrette, every group but one communicated that they did not want to see this new development have serious negative impacts to the surrounding existing neighborhoods. They asked that it be designed to avoid creating new stressors such as traffic and safety issues for neighborhoods along Normal Ave., Homes Ave., and Clay Street. These issues were ignored and the development plan in its current state creates a large volume of traffic, congestion, and safety issues along Normal Ave., Homes St., Clay St., and East Main St. These will be costly to rectify later, and the tax payers and home owners on those streets will be the ones to pay the price. Because the corner of Homes and Normal already has very high traffic from the proximity to ball fields, tennis courts, and schools, this area will quickly be overwhelmed by traffic if 450 units are built with 2 cars per unit and multiple trips to and from schools and downtown. I think that the planning for traffic has been inadequate and that the considerations of the surrounding neighborhoods, their quality of life, safety, and housing values have not been adequately addressed with this plan. I was also disappointed that the input from the Charrette participants was ignored. My other comment is completely unrelated to the first one. I have been working for the City of Fort Collins to help them plan for climate change, and they are currently working with private businesses and residences to move their infrastructure OUT of the 100-year and 500-year flood plain due to increasing severity of storms with climate change. This is expensive (the Woodward technology company, for instance, is moving its entire campus out of the 500-year flood zone), yet the city is taking an active role in protecting its residents and making businesses secure in their investments. All On Forum Statements sorted chronologically As of April 30, 2014, 10:08 AM Int,11peakdamocra,cerell738 Page 5 of 18 Normal Neighborhood Plan Please reaiex Ifle dafl Normal Ne'gM1EOTCM Plan'. 1~ Tell us wM1icM1 elamenls of tM1e A., you J¢agree.n h aM w11di elemen5.1n. plan pu -,norl ePE Severe storms have already increased across the West and are expected to continue to increase. It is irresponsible to put new development in 50-year and 100-year flood plains (not to mention 500-year) at this time. Either those developments will need to be moved in the future, at great cost to the owners and tax payers, or they will be damaged and peoples' livelihoods impacted by severe storms. While I support infill and the avoidance of sprawl, there is no need to put peoples' investments and their safety at risk. Climate change is here, it is affecting communities now, and we know better than to continue to do things that put people in danger from natural disasters. There is very high agreement among climate models that precipitation is expected to increase in the Pacific Northwest, with more severe storms in the winter and dryer, hotter summers. This increases the likelihood of flooding and water shortage. FEMA flood maps do not yet reflect the increasing risk over time, but they are working to update their information using forward-looking projections rather than historical averages. I am attaching a short overview of climate trends for the PNW that was produced by the US Global Change Research Program. A link is provided in that summary for the full report, which provides in depth information on current and future climate trends for this area. One sentence to note says "An increase in annual mean precipitation is simulated for the majority of the Northwest U.S., for all future time periods and both emissions scenarios. The CMIP3 models are mostly in agreement that precipitation will increase." There is no excuse for excluding climate change considerations from any current planning efforts, as the science is clear and accessible. Doing so puts people and infrastructure at risk and creates costs for families, businesses, and local government decades from now. We are in a time of transition where our zoning ordinances and development standards reflect historical conditions, but we fully understand that future conditions will be quite different. At one of the planning meetings, it was obvious that wetlands are not a valued feature and that they are destroyed without much concern. I happen to value wetlands for their wildlife and aesthetic values, but can understand that not everyone shares these values. However, I do want to point out that wetlands do provide very important services to people, including water filtration, flood protection, and nature for kids to enjoy. Because these wetlands are so close to the schools, they could be an important outdoor classroom for school children. In fact, kids that spend time outdoors have been shown to do better in school and have fewer behavioral problems, such as ADHD. The wetlands also hold water during floods, releasing it slowly and protecting neighboring infrastructure. By lining streams and channeling flows, we reduce the capacity of this "sponge" to function properly and protect us during severe storms. This reduces community resilience. Finally, I want to note that many communities in California, Montana, Colorado, Washington, Oregon, Vermont, Maryland, and many other states are taking proactive steps to protect their communities from climate change and increase their resilience in the face of natural disasters and other stressors such as water shortage, dam failure, heat waves, new diseases and disease vectors, etc. Ashland needs to become a leader in community resilience rather than continue to plan and develop in the same ways as we have in the past. Ashland is a progressive community, yet this development plan does not reflect our progressive roots and societal values. Thank you for your consideration. Please feel free to contact me for more information. All On Forum Statements sorted chronologically As of April 30, 2014, 10:08 AM http:/1neakdemocrac,.m1l738 Page 6 of 18 Normal Neighborhood Plan Please reviex--Normal NayhEOmgtl Plan it Tell us wheh demands of the Man you dbaBree with and Which elements of the Pun Wu supp d and Marni Koopman, Ashland Resident 1 Attachment https: //pd-oth. s3. amazonaws.com/prod uction/uploads/attachments/ 1255sq 3yxj kw.3 k4/N CA- NW_Regional_Scenario_Summary_2O13O517_banner.pdf (1.18 MB) Alma Alvarez inside Ashland March 10, 2014, 9:06 PM Like many others that have posted comments, I have also participated in some of the planning sessions. While I understand that the city of Ashland would like to keep its growth within the boundary of the city, I was surprised to see that the plan, after all of the residents' discussions still listed the possibility of up to 560 dwellings. Most of the residents at the planning sessions attempted to "bargain down" the number to 450 units. While the plan is made with an eye towards encouraging walking and biking as alternative modes of transportation, I am concerned about the amount of traffic we will experience in the neighborhood if we were to have up to 560 units. The reality of modern living is that most households have at least two vehicles. The amount of traffic in such a densely populated area would mean a lot of cars. Like other Normal neighbors, I am concerned with maintaining the natural character of the area. I hope that our city takes good care of preserving the wetlands and the natural life connected with it. While I am not in support of the plan in terms of the proposed number of units, I do hope that our city makes a commitment to having some of the units marked as affordable housing units. Peter Halt outside Ashland March 10, 2014, 12:43 PM I own one of the parcels on normal Avenue directly abuttiing the wetlands currently slated for development. I currently have non-develop able wetlands in my back yard. There are several things concerned about this plan. 1. When I went to the planning commission meeting last week, it was apparent that the developers have no real interest in preserving the rural feel of this neighborhood. While they are careful to talk about preserving the wetlands, it is fairly clear that they are skeptical that wetlands exist or should exist on their property. Currently the plan states that the adjoining property with designated wetlands on it will be zoned NN-02, allowing for 10 units per acre. There is a provision in this plan that allows them to increase the density of housing by 1.5 if any portion of that lot is designated wetlands. That means that what is currently open space and in my backyard will have housing at the density of 15 units per acre, where there is none right now. Is there a housing shortage so grave that we need to put high density row houses into what is now unspoiled open land and wetlands? Is this the only alternative, or are we bowing to pressure from monied developers? I haven't seen this density of housing anywhere in Ashland. It makes no sense to drop it into the middle of farmland. Where are the studies demonstrating a need for this type of housing? Even if all the property in question was zoned at NN-01, at 5 units per acre, this is an enormous number of small homes to add to the real estate market in Ashland. 2. 1 have heard concerns about the capacity of Ashland City water and sewer and that there have been problems with the Clay street development. Has the city thoroughly explored it's capacity to support this huge All On Forum Statements sorted chronologically As of April 30, 2014, 10:08 AM http:l/peakdomocmgmm/1738 Page 7 of 18 Normal Neighborhood Plan Please reiiev Ine drill Narmel NeghEaTm] Plen: 1~iNl us wnlcn demama dlhe Man p dse wi,h 8m. w enm Of Na gan, WPW and acreage filled with homes? 3. Currently the plan states that Normal Avenue will open to East Main. There was some talk at the planning commission meeting that this was a bad idea and will change to prevent Normal Ave from becoming a thoroughfare. I would agree with that and hope that this wisdom prevails. That straight road opened up to East main would be the most destructive feature of this plan if there is any true desire to preserve the "feel" of this neighborhood. 4. Do those of us that don't want to be annexed, that moved here for the rural feel, get to keep our TID irrigation, our horse and farm friendly zoning? Carol Block / Nicole Lee outside Ashland March 10, 2014, 6:56 AM would like to draw the Planning Commission and citizens of Ashland's attention to a comment made by one of the other posters who noticed that several trenches have appeared in the southern section of designated Wetlands9 [Roxanne Jones post of March 7, 2014]. In walking that area the last two days, that person is absolutely correct in their observation! These trenches serve only one purpose: to draw rainwater away from the wetlands into a storm drain at the upper section of the Ashland Middle School turnaround. It's an obvious, blatant attempt to dry up the Wetlands of course. Some of these trenches are new (within the last year based on the lack of vegetation I suspect). You can even see the tractor marks! Why and who did this I wonder? There is no doubt that this work was done to minimize and reshape Wetlands9 in order to allow for higher density zoning allowance on the property. If the wetlands dried up, the property owners would have a larger footprint to build upon. If they have to mitigate wetlands, a smaller parcel would have to be identified (and not the 5.38 acres this wetland encompasses). I do believe that a permit is required to do any soil disruption on designated wetlands and includes a significant financial penalty. I wonder whether a permit was obtained? The Normal Neighborhood Plan is clearly the driver to having these trenches pull water away from the area and the citizens of Ashland should be up in arms over this. We should be nurturing these wetlands, not destroying them to make room for homes, retirement facilities, etc. This is the second time a pro-development speculative landowner has tried to minimize the designated wetlands on property they own. The first report was when someone cut down several All On Forum Statements sorted chronologically As of April 30, 2010, 1 Us AM htlp:/Ipeakdemooracy mml1 733 Page a of 18 Normal Neighborhood Plan Please miex Ne tlafl Normal NeVhnarliaatl Man: 1) ran le wfli[li.-lis of ma plan pu d,-, ee will and wfli a akmanla o1 NB On yJa SupWrl eiM Poplars and leveled out a section of their property. Does the City/County care that this kind of behind the screen destruction of naturescape is happening? I am sure the Department of State Land does. And in the earlier case, the developer was red tagged by DSL. For those who live and love this area of Ashland, this is an egregious act and I hope the Planning Commission is as concerned with this deliberate act and understands the motivation behind it. I hope these land owners are held accountable and are required to restore that which they are trying to destroy. These people should be ashamed of themselves. https://fbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd. net/hphotos-ak- ash3/t1/p261x26O/1488648_664526177532_65466OO52_n.jpg 5 Attachments hftps:Hpdoth.s3.amazonaws.com/production/uploads/attachments/1252ykfd8Ofk.4ro/photo.JPG (247 KB) https://pd-oth.s3.amazonaws.com/production/uploads/attachments/1252ykpnui74.3hn/photo2.JPG (337 KB) https://pd-oth.s3.amazonaws.com/production/uploads/attachments/1252yl381row.6gO/photo3.JPG (329 KB) https://pd-oth.s3.amazonaws.com/production/uploads/attachments/1252yidh6gds.4n7/photo4.JPG (347 KB) https://pd-oth.s3.amazonaws.com/production/uploads/attachments/1252ylt46zls.611/photo8.JPG (324 KB) Karen Horn outside Ashland March 9, 2014, 9:53 PM I live across Clay Street from the Norma{ Neighborhood area. We were not brought into the planning process when it started because, we were told by a city representative, we do not live within the area itself. Since then, we have gone to many meetings about this plan, made statements at Planning Commission meetings, and strategized with our neighbors on how to best make our opinions heard. First, I commend the Planning Commission for even attempting to create a written plan for development rather than allowing it to happen in the traditional way of waiting for developers to come forward with their own plans and then saying yea or nay. That said, I do not feel the finished plan reflects the opinions that I heard voiced in the meetings. Instead, a group of consultants from out of town seems to have been let loose to do what they thought best, even though they were missing some key pieces of information about public transportation on E. Main, the extent of the wetlands on the property, and the latest urban planning ideas about how to create housing without wasted space for front lawns. Unfortunately there is nothing innovative or interesting about this plan. It does not reflect the best of what Ashland has to offer. I am not even sure that the people who wrote this pretty plan walked the property even one time. We recently spent many thousands of dollars to mitigate water damage in the crawl space of our house. All All On Forum Statements sorted chronologically As of Apn130.2014, 10:08 AM Mip1lasiktlern racy.mm/1738 Page 9 of 18 Normal Neighborhood Plan Pleese s which a aran rvormel Nisill aroooE Plan. t) Tell us which elements ouhe 0.1 pw ebegres with and winch elemenb m this oleo roe 11 ena three of the housing developments along Clay Street south of us are plagued by water damage and the constant remediation that is required because they were built over ancient creeks. The Normal Neighborhood is not development-friendly; anyone who builds there would be wise to make a sale and get out before the next wet year. Are those the kind of developers we want to encourage? Another seemingly insurmountable problem with this Plan is that E. Main will never have a bus route. Public transportation is necessary for a development of the size described in the Plan, and everyone involved repeats that mantra. However, the county won't put a bus route on E. Main because right now there is not enough demand for it and because there is no room for a bus to stop without holding up all traffic behind it. Forces could be aligned to overcome these obstacles IF all parties agreed it was a vital goal to do so, but we are far from that today. The best use for the land in the Normal Neighborhood is agricultural. To grow plants, the overabundance of ground water suddenly becomes a positive thing. I have heard repeatedly through this planning process that using the land for community gardens is unrealistic because we need more development here in Ashland. There is no shortage I see of housing for the wealthy, but it is true that there is not enough low-income housing. The vision of protecting land outside the urban growth boundary depends on urban infill. But why not do infill on the vacant lots on Ashland Street, just a few blocks south? There is already a bus route there and lots of stores and restaurants to walk to. I think protecting farmland by keeping sprawl inside the urban growth boundary is a good idea. But for those who will live within the urban area, in condos on small lots without garden space, let's set aside parts within the urban growth area as a place where they can grow food on small allotments, similar to the British system. Let's face it: the challenge facing us in the future will not be to provide more and more newcomers with housing. It will be to make our town more self-sufficient for the people who are living here now, in growing our own food, reducing the miles that our food travels, and strengthening the community bonds that hold us together as we are drawn forward into an increasingly uncertain future. John Colwell outside Ashland March 7, 2014, 9:17 PM Our committee has had opportunity to review Ashland Planning Commission's final draft of the Normal Street project. This review has been disappointing and we feel that our requests and input were, if not ignored, minimized and substituted with the planners own ideas of what they would like to see on our property. We were continually advised to give input and we did. We asked to have a zoning that would allow for a retirement facility to be included, we asked for the open area to be based on a real wetland survey rather than an out of date best guess of the extent of the wetland size, we asked for the required road to be moved and not be a straight through thoroughfare. Of these requests only the last one was adopted and even with this there was another road, surreptitiously called an "alley", also placed on our land. If this wasn't adding insult to injury we don't know what is. Our current opinion is that we will not support this plan and will do anything we can to fight its adoption. We will be at the Ashland City Council meeting when this is up for a vote and plan to discuss the leading way we were drawn into this process only to have nothing we said be adopted despite the fact that we are a major land owner All On Forum Statements sorted chronologically As of April 30, 2014. 10:08 AM hdp://peakdamocracywM1738 Page 10 of 18 Normal Neighborhood Plan %eese Ireview Ifle draft Normal NeghEOTmd ren'. 1) Tell us which Nemenls of the plan wh dlsapree with and which ebmenk of he plan we support am within the boundaries of this project. At issue first, is planning staff indicating that the wetland designation and the open spaces were to be compensated by increased density zoning elsewhere in the plan. We were led to believe this meant on our land, giving us a 15 unit per acre NN-03 zoning which would allow for density close to retirement facility requirements. Secondly there was no indication of a second transportation corridor on any plans we saw until the final one. Now the planning staff think it is their prerogative to pull an alley out of our land also. We are disappointed in our planning process and the lack of consideration given to property owner's concerns and also with the promise to participate in a process that seems predetermined from its outset. Sincerely: John Colwell and Ray Eddington for Gracepoint Church Roxanne Jones outside Ashland March 7, 2014, 7:06 PM When a change is instituted within a city it is not always a bad thing, provided the change is being done for the right reasons. Many people have asked, who is it that is wanting the Normal Plan? The vast majority of the property owners who live on Normal Avenue, and the surrounding neighborhoods, do not want any drastic changes to the beautiful natural environment that currently exists. It was stated at a city council meeting that Ashland currently has a surplus of housing and will not be needing any additional housing in the next twenty years. So, once again I ask, who is the plan for if it is not for betterment of the neighborhood or the city Additionally, what's the rush? Let's do things once, and do it right. It seems that the only people who are intent on pushing this plan forward are speculators looking to make a fast return on their investment. To do this, they will attempt to convince us that high-density, high-impact housing that replaces the natural beauty of one of the last undeveloped parcels of county land adjacent to Ashland is required. Some of those individuals don't even live in Ashland, and they will very likely take their profit and leave without doing anything to enhance or contribute to our local economy. Instead, Ashland residents will be left paying for "improvements" to East Main Street and other areas within the project site for years to come. I am in favor of developing a plan that accommodates the city's future needs, but I ask you to stand with me against a plan that irreparably damages the pristine acreage of lower Normal Avenue, robbing our community of a great resource. A successful plan will blend seamlessly with the existing environment. Ashland is an exceptional town filled with a diverse cross-section of residents who have chosen to live, work, shop, donate their time and resources, and educate their children in this uniquely progressive and open-minded town. Those of us who have lived here for many years have a high benchmark for what constitutes an improvement. Standards exist All On Forum Statements sorted chronologically As of April 30, 2014, 10:08 AM hKoApieakdemocracy.comH 738 Page 11 of 18 Normal Neighborhood Plan was miew iibann nmmai wighuomooa Pun, rl Ten ua wh' a moms of the Pan you dLa with en7 whim ek rAe or Me Pan you supwn am that make it seem straightforward for a city to pave roads, install utilities, and designate dwellings here and there. However, Ashland is not Anytown, U.S.A. We hold ourselves to high standards, and as such we expect more of ourselves and our neighbors. To that end, our city council does works tirelessly to protect our interests for our community today as well as for future generations. There has been a tremendous amount of work and dialogue invested into the Normal Plan, but we are still waiting for a version which we can stand behind. Before that can happen, we will need to address the following questions: 1. Why is the City of Ashland not more concerned about destroying the rural nature of the land? 2. Why have we not chosen to celebrate and preserve the excellent soil in the Normal Plan area and set aside an extensive amount of acreage to be used as a community garden by the neighborhood that could also be conveniently accessed by the middle school to provide learning opportunities? 3. Why must many of the streets be so massively wide, some in excess of 50 feet, that they will end up looking like Anywhere U.S.A.? 4. What would the cost savings to the project be if the streets had a smaller footprint? 5. What will happen to the thousands of birds and other wildlife who currently call this area home? We are already seeing a lack of respect for nature in the Normal Plan area. It has been stated by others at city council meetings that one developer indiscriminately cut down trees and made an attempt to diminish a creek bed, another developer has blocked the flow of runoff water so that it now poses a threat to an existing neighborhood, and it also appears that the largest wetland in Ashland, Wetland 9, has been extensively altered this past year. Someone used a tractor to dig a series of lengthy trenches to direct the wetland water away from the ecosystem it supports and into a storm drain, and then they cleared a massive area of the wetland of all vegetation. These acts of environmental destruction are deliberate, on-going, and being carried, out furtively on multiple properties with the end-goal of diminishing the wetland area. Smaller wetland, more room to build. This is only the first taste of the environmental degradation, motivated by financial gain, that will completely destroy the ecosystem of Wetland 9 and the area surrounding lower Normal Avenue if the current plan is All On Forum Statements sorted chronologically As of April 30, 2014, 10:08 AM hVpa/peakdemocracy.co"1738 Pago 12 of 18 Normal Neighborhood Plan R¢ese realer Ne Eiefl Normal NegflWr Pan: 1) TO us whr MemM dNe{ np Gap WN eM wl a -h WNep ny auppNM approved. The Normal Plan represents the largest area that could possibly be incorporated into the city, so let's continue working on this plan until a vision that maintains the current beauty and rural feel can be effectively meshed with the potential for additional housing some twenty years down the line when the housing is actually needed. Sue DeMarinis outside Ashland March 6, 2014, 3:20 PM I have reviewed and participated in every public meeting regarding the Normal Neighborhood Plan (NNP) since the first Charette in 2012. Every iteration and discussion of the Plan slightly changes the look of the potential zoning, roads and open spaces. I agree that there should be open spaces preserved/protected within this area. I commend the planners in their vision to do so. However, in the latest zoning map (Feb.25, 2014), there appeared an overlay of NN-02 zoning under the open space designations. Is the plan able to double zone lands within the NNP just in case a private land owner is able to mitigate their designated natural/wetland area off their land? What happens then to the overall "green space" as envisioned for the whole NNP? What compensation would be given, and by whom, to land owners if they must have their land zoned for public use as a green space/park or road? What if a land owner wanted to preserve their private farming rights where a public park or road is delineated? The transportation network is currently designed for connections between E. Main and Ashland Street, but the egresses onto E. Main should follow the density zoned for the eastern half of the NNP. To add another exit on the western half creates three real concerns regarding safety for the children at the AMS school bus turnaround, crossing through a State designated wetland, and exiting onto a blind curve of E. Main St. If that cut-through street doesn't exist, then the new meandering road network within the NNP will truly be for the new residents. Otherwise, I see this western egress becoming a problem as a regularly used alternative vehicle route between the major boulevards in order to avoid the congestion and school speed zones on Walker Ave. A pervious surface (not paved), multi-use path toward AMS would serve the NNP community better, preserve our wetland resource, and encourage a green lifestyle and safe access for pedestrians and bicyclists. Also, the transportation map shows paved neighborhood streets, shared streets, and alleyways all going through planned conservation areas and current State Designated Wetlands. Shouldn't impact studies and delineations be mandatory with this plan before locating roads through sensitive areas and established wildlife corridors, as well as for the effect these roads would have on storm water drainage, aquifer recharge and soil compaction? My overall impression of the NNP is that it is being driven by consideration for development and not much concern given to the impact on the existing neighborhood/environment. System development charges are said will be included in developer's permits, but there will be hidden costs to all the citizens of Ashland for overall improvements to its sewer, water treatment, roads and RR crossings. And, no one has specifically stated what the mandatory "local improvements, or neighborhood LID" will cost the current residents already in the Normal Neighborhood who may not want these "improvements". Thank you for listening, Sue DeMarinis Ashland, OR 97520 Jean Taylor inside Ashland March 5, 2014, 2:41 PM All On Forum Statements sorted chronologically As of April 30, 2014, 10:08 AM htPX,Peskdemove ,.,11138 Page 13 of 18 Normal Neighborhood Plan Please reaiex Ne loll Normal Negh.m me.: 1)Tell us whiGl elements W the Man y Oisegnee with and whiC epments of the pan y sup,od and 1 oppose this development. As with all recent housing developments, Ashland has been attempting to infill as much as possible, which leads to the most houses possible crammed into a little area. I think this policy causes unattractive homes with very little space between neighbors. The proposed "green space" is not enough. And, as others have mentioned, has anyone asked for this development or is it just a way to spend grant money? jonathan seidler inside Ashland March 5, 2014, 9:17 AM I have attended all the study groups and have come away with a couple of disturbing facts that none here have alluded to. First is the total size of the proposed annexation. 90+ acres creates a guaranteed scenario of piecemeal development. This has been addressed as fact during comment time from developers at the study groups. It is a fact not disputed and over how many years the plan becomes realized is anyones guess. Real estate being very cyclical and risky in itself provides the scenario of abandoned efforts and a checkerboard effect of muddy half developed blocks amongst finished efforts. It has been put forth at the meetings that it is likely development would migrate in a southern direction from E. Main as primary services would begin there as it is the most cost effective starting point and the lure of the most profitable sales. The next point that has been made numerous times is the whereabouts of, if any, of wetlands. The developers have made numerous assertions that there are NO wetlands and that the "creeks" are presently irrigation flows during season and that their flows can be manipulated as so to make their presence as minimum and as invisible as possible. I would hope the council will address the fact of how large this annexation is and how little experience it has with one this size. I hope the council will only annex proposals ready to proceed with a guarantee that incidentals are in place to incorporate and promote to connecting properties for their future development. I hope the council does NOT back down on promoting wet land creation and preservation. If a developer then feels that he/she is losing their economic viability then they can raise their prices accordingly and see if the risk pans out in the market they've entered. People here need to understand that annexation does not mean that Ashland owns the land. Creating market gardens,sporting ovals,stomping grounds,etc, are all at the expense of the developers so it is likely the proposals will attract minimum expense when costs are considered. Angelina McClean inside Ashland March 3, 2014, 10:07 PM I appreciate the effort that has been made so far to try to accommodate so many different interests in the community. Personally, I would like to see this area as undeveloped as possible. I don't know how realistic that is, but I am interested to know if considerations and studies have been or will be made concerning the environmental impacts that more development will have on this area. Specifically, I am concerned about the wetlands and if the proposed buffer zones are adequate. How did this area fare after the heavy rains we had recently, and how would that differ once it is developed? All On Forum Statements sorted chronologically As of Ann 30. 2014, 10:08 AM http:ONeakdemwnecy.oom/1738 Page 14 of 18 Normal Neighborhood Plan pleau m+ew uaean xorma1 xaynmmom Ran: 1) Tell vs wnkn Nemems a IM pan wu eLSeone wpn em wnlrn aroments or ua pen wv support-a am also curious about wildlife impact studies. I have heard there are owls, foxes, and other sensitive wildlife in the area. Is their habitat and mobility being taken into consideration? Do any species, like birds or waterfowl rely on this area for migration or overwintering? However this project plays out, I would like to add my support to the few who have already suggested a community garden. Natural, open spaces, parks, and community gardens are all things that will increase the value of our community far into the future. Lately I have seen articles about food forest plans that are cropping up in places like Seattle and Austin. I tried to paste a photo of the plans for the Austin food forest, but am only able to link to the webpage. It's worth considering. The article is at: www.austinchronicle.com The plans for the food forest are at: http://festival beachfoodforest.weebly. com/food-forest-pla ns. htm l Margaret Garrington inside Ashland March 3, 2014, 4:16 PM Provide multi use path connectivity for bicyclists and pedestrians separate from streets. Link East Main bike path via a multi use path through the Normal neighborhood to the existing bike path to the south, and also create a western path link to the middle school. Shared streets are inconsistent with safety concerns when you have the opportunity to create separate transportation byways. Also designate place holders for public art and require developers to set aside a certain percent of development costs for multi use paths, parks, and public art. Jan Vidmar inside Ashland March 3,2014,10:31 AM Jan Vidmar inside Ashland support the Normal Plan with two caveats. The proposed development of land adjacent to Cemetery Creek, just close to the railroad tracks, is currently designated NN-02. It makes more sense to have single family homes, similar to the homes currently built along Normal. In other words, like facing like and designated NN- 01. Ashland has very few "below the boulevard" neighborhoods with large yards. My second concern is the flow of Cemetery Creek. Although the creek is not always visible, walking through the wetland area is a soggy affair. A wetland does not always present itself with lakes, stream flow and ducks. Cemetery Creek should be considered a pathway for drainage. At times, after a hard rain, the creek flows and the water has a way to proceed from the hills to the valley floor. Any development that blocks that flow potentially puts home owners in flood peril. The current Normal Plan has homes and roads that would potentially impede this water flow. Michael Shore outside Ashland February 28, 2014, 2:19 PM All On Forum Statements sorted chronologically Aa of April 30, 2014, 10:08 AM Intpl/peakaemocrac,w 1738 Page 15 of 18 Normal Neighborhood Plan Pbaas miew IMErzfl Nwmel NspM Ran: tt TeA uswN'efl ebmmis tl IM Mn ry do O'aayree wM eM sMM ebmenb of Ne o6n 1cu nugroN eM The process that arrived at this plan was fueled in part by a grant of money from the state. Part of the motive for this plan was described as finding a way to comply with rules laid out by the state pertaining to sprawl. Any plan like this would bump into the freedom of use that property owners would like to assume as rights vs the ability of either the state or the town to exert some controls on that use. This is a perfect set up for a turf battle. In an effort to find a middle ground some interested parties were invited to the "table", some were not. Certain developers made it clear that they would move forward to get the most value out of the land. I presume that value would be measured in dollars extracted. Some factions thought that with the "right amount" of preservation and beautification , controlled density would be abided....... so long as the density was not in proximity to them. What ever you believe about the power of special interests in determining policy, in this plan you can find evidence of owners and developers and government entities striving to get what they want. I think it is good for citizens to work hard to arrive at compromise. However some citizens represented ideas without the so called authority of ownership. Are mere residents and neighbors people who have legitimate claims to voice in the outcome? Are land owners the only legitimate voices in this decision? During the discussions some important points were raised and important questions went unanswered. Streets, safety,sewage, water, cost of fire protection, actual connectivity to public transit, cost of maintaining the proposed "natural" areas, these were all costs and conditions left hanging. Meanwhile some suggestions regarding the loss of beauty, habitat and ground water recharging area were received as charming but crank notions un related to the pragmatic business of real estate investment or satisfaction of State mandates. The plan arises from a need to control a blight called sprawl. The proponents say that at least there needs to be a plan because without a plan chaotic growth will be worse. I believe Ashland should annex the land and create a demonstration farm providing organic food for the local institutions, training and employment for the local interested citizens and yes some low income housing for those who choose to work and learn full time in the created facility. I believe over time we will look back on a plan that decreased Ashland's dependence on imported food, increased Ashland's influence on food quality with a civic pride in non GMO local seeds and maintained the beautiful view and free space of the Normal area acres with the pleasure that comes from seeing a secured and precious conservation plan in action. The Ashland Organic project would be one more reason for tourists, eco tourists, to visit and be enriched by our embrace of sustainable culture. Barry Vitcov inside Ashland February 28, 2014, 11:58 AM I'm happy to see how the latest version of the Normal Neighborhood Plan has changed the area immediately north of Creek Drive to NN-02. This makes sense as it better blends the Meadowbrook Park Estates community to whatever might be developed in that area. I'm also pleased with the amount of open space in the plan. However, the NN-02 designated areas to the land west of Meadowbrook Park Estates and the adjacent open All On Forum Statements sorted chronologically Ae of April 30, 2010, 10:08 AM http://peakdemocraq.mM1738 Page 16 o118 Normal Neighborhood Plan _aa. 9r isw Ne E,ell Na,mel NeghWT Plan' 1) Tell ua whicM1 Wemanb al 11e pan y E'-,- wile.. wain, egman. of Me plan y -,,n eM space does not seem appropriate. I believe that entire area, with the possible exception of the NN-02 designation that abuts North Main Street, ought to be designated NN-01. It doesn't make sense to me to have a swathe of higher density housing cut through what is now larger single-family parcels. There are increasingly fewer opportunities for families to purchase homes with significant yard space in Ashland, and I think it would be a good idea to reserve some potential for that type of property. Barbara Comnes inside Ashland February 28, 2014, 10:13 AM The plan does not directly address possible changes in railroad crossings. I live north of the Railroad District across the tracks and am very interested in seeing the 4th Street rail crossing be developed at least for pedestrians, if not for cars. I am concerned that the Normal Neighborhood Plan could remove the possibility of developing the 4th Street crossing. The distance between safe rail crossings with sidewalks and access to people with mobility issues in this part of town is one mile, which seems unacceptable for this most central location that blends housing with commercial activity, promoting a green lifestyle. Priscilla Hunter inside Ashland February 28, 2014, 7:04 AM There are a couple of confusing items in your plan that I thought you'd like to know about. 1. In your list of housing types, your second category is a Double Dwelling Residence Unit, which I believe one would also call a duplex. You describe it as a pair of self-contained living facilities existing in either a side-by- side or a stacked configuration. I point out first that this housing type also exists in an "L" configuration. (This category appears to be a form of the Attached Residential Unit, your category 5, which seems to refer to the triplex or, as suggested by one of your photos, even the quatriplex structure, without reaching the housing capacity of the Multiple Dwelling Residential Unit, your category 6). 2. The third residential unit type listed in your plan is an Accessory Residential Unit (you describe it as a small living unit sharing a lot with a Single Dwelling Residential Unit). It is apparently a structure one would call a cottage, and, although you don't mention that word in your description of it, it does seem to be the same thing as what you call Cottage later in your report. It is clearly not the same thing as your second category in this list of housing forms, a Double Dwelling Residential Unit or your fifth category, an Attached Residential Unit. You have apparently listed the Accessory RU (cottage) as zoned for NN-01, NN-02, and NN-03. Later in your chart showing target housing density in each zoning district, the Cottage is the second category you have listed. However it does not appear to be included as a permitted structure in zones 02 and 03, which seems to contradict what you have said about the Accessory RU in the earlier part of your plan. I hope you find this helpful information. Brian Kolodzinski inside Ashland February 27, 2014, 9:44 PM I support the project overall but was surprised when I got to the end and read there was no city water or sewer All On Forum Statements sorted chronologically As of April 30. 2014, 10:08 AM htlp://peakdamocrac wW W38 Page 17 of 18 Normal Neighborhood Plan Reave reiirw IK eafl Normal NeMN 1l Tell ua wnkfl 9emenls d Ine Mn rN M eeagme vnln MM xTM demen6 of Me We }au supwe eM service. Is this true for all developments in that part of town? I also hope there would not be too many roadways over streambeds. The natural layout of the area should be incorporated into the design of the neighborhoods as much as permissible. In addition to the open spaces, it would be nice to see some community gardens for residents that are residing in the higher density dwellings. Steve Read inside Ashland February 27, 2014, 7:26 PM First a question: Who or what is driving this project, ie. what needs does it fulfill. Did the neighborhood request changes? Second: The story about the trains blocking emergency vehicles must be a really old one as there have been almost no trains for 10 years or so. Inserting that scare tactic into the discussion destroys the credibility of the entire project. If you will use scare tactics to sell your project then I will never support it. Your credibility has been damaged. Jim Curty outside Ashland February 27, 2014, 5:15 PM I stand in opposition to the plan. Roadways have been planned without listening to the owners. The size of wetland W9 is grossly overstated. As a representative of land that will be procured for roads... we feel that use of our land is being decided without our future plans being taken into consideration. (Two roads across the land!) We do not want to stand in the way of progress, but the plan means our land will no longer be able to be developed in any way that would enhance our mission. Donald Stone inside Ashland February 27, 2014, 4:00 PM I have no objection to the plan. However, my concern would be whether or not the residents of the Normal Neighborhood have been active in wanting and requesting these changes. If not, and they are simply "victims" of another City Administration pie in the sky "improvement plan" similar to the Plaza renovation, then I would favor the City just butting out and considering that it likely ain't broke so don't try to fix it. Don Stone 395 Kearney St All On Forum Statements sorted chronologically As of April X 2014.10:08 AM hdpl/peakdemocracy.11738 Page 18 of 18 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication May 6, 2014, Business Meeting Public Hearing - Resolutions Proposing Utility Rate Increases and Repealing Prior Resolutions FROM: Lee Tuneberg, Finance Director, lee.tuneberv@ashland.or.us SUMMARY Recent practice has been to consider needed rate increases for city-owned and operated utilities together at one time in the spring. Attached are proposals from the Electric and Public Works Departments for increases in electric, water wastewater, transportation and storm drain fees that, if approved by Council at the May 6`h meeting, following a scheduled public hearing, would go into effect July 1, 2014. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: Reviewing the need for increases at one time affords Council the ability to consider total impacts to the customers for the year. This approach was adopted a few years ago but it does compromise the Electric Department in that many of their significant cost increases (primarily Bonneville Power Administration's changes to wholesale power) won't be known until August. However, corrective action could be taken if there are significant changes between now and then. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: The biennium budget was created in spring of 2013 with anticipated rate adjustments based upon forecasted need. In many cases the anticipated need for an increase is based upon master plans for the corresponding enterprise. Updated reviews of studies, revenues and expenses are utilized to confirm or modify proposed adjustments. A short history of rates and budgeted and proposed increases for the second year of the biennium are as follows: W05 teAdiusimenlsinF~Y 2011 2012 FY 2012-2013 FY2013-2014 FY 2014-2015 Actual, Budgeted & Proposed Actual Actual Bu!dget2,d A ctual Budgeted Actual Budgeted sP,roposed' Fff Transportation Utility Fee 0.0% 0.0% 5.0% 0.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 2.57% Sturm Drain Utility Fee 0.0% 0.0% 5.0'/0 0.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 2.57% Water Fees 10.0% 10.0% 10.0% 10.0% 10.0% 10.0% 1©.0% 10.08% Wastewater Fees 6.0% 10.0% 100.0% 10.0% 112.010/01 10.0% 10.0% 10.00% Electric Rate Increase 0.0% 4.0% 5.0% 5.3% 5.3% 5.3% 5.0% 3.60% Page I of 2 CITY OF ASHLAND The impact of the proposed increases on a residential utility account using 750 kwh and 1000 cubic feet of water (nearly 7500 gallons) per month would be: Monthly 2014 2015 Difference Street User Fee 8.17 8.38 0.21 Storm Drain Residential 4.29 4.40 0.11 Water Residential 1000cf 42.90 47.24 4.34 Sewer Residential 29.45 32.40 2.95 Electric Residential 750kwh 57.86 59.94 2.08 Electric Users Tax 14.47 14.99 0.52 Total $157.14 $167.35 $ 10.21 6.50% Rounding may occur. Draft resolutions are provided after each department's report. STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends Council review the supporting documentation, ask questions as warranted and approve the resolutions as presented or amended through discussion. SUGGESTED MOTION: I move to approve the resolution(s) adjusting utility rates as identified and/or revised by Council discussion and repealing prior resolutions as appropriate. (This action can be done individually or en masse.) ATTACHMENTS: Electric Department Council Communication Electric rates resolution Public Works Department Council Communication Water rates resolution Wastewater rates resolution Transportation resolution Storm Drain resolution Page 2 of 2 CITY OF -ASHLAND Council Communication May 6, 2014 Business Meeting Proposed 3.6% Electric Utility Rate Increase FROM: Mark Holden, Director of IT and Electric Utility, mark.holden@ashland.or.us SUMMARY The Electric Utility proposes a 3.6% rate increase. The increase will be applied to all rate classes. The increase is anticipated to be effective July 1, 2014. The projected rate increase provides additional funding for operations (Personal Services and Materials/Services), BPA Costs (Power and Transmission), and the long term financial health of the Electric Utility (working capital). BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: Rate Considerations The Council has recently reviewed results of the Electric Departments Cost of Service and Rate Design Study (COS). The results of the study provide a roadmap for rate design and align with the rate projections in the current biennium budget. The budget and the COS both recognize the Electric Utility's need to continue to reverse declining ending fund balances. The Council expressed the desire to set rates based on a combination of rate review and COS. In order to provide for a thorough review process, the Utility proposes to use established practice and apply a 3.6% rate increase uniformly across all rate classes. Results of the rate review and COS will be used for future rate changes. The following graph and table show the areas supporting the need for the rate increase. The rate increase is driven by the increases in Personal Services, Materials and Services, BPA costs and the need to continue to reverse a declining Ending Fund Balance (Beginning Working Capital). The rate increase is anticipated in the adopted FY 2013-2015 Biennium Electric Department budget. 5.0% ■ Personal 4.0% Services Increase Increase ■ Materials and 3.0% Services Cost Areas $(k) bySource 2.0% ■ EPA Costs Personal Services 91,616 0.66% 1.0% 1.79% Materials and Services 39,297 0.28% 0.0% ® Contribution to BPA Costs 120,914 0.87% Increase... Ending FB Contribution to Ending FB 250,173 1.79% Totals 502,000 3.60% The requested rate increase provides funding for the cost areas. Additional details of the cost areas are provided below: Page 1 of 4 Imo, CITY OF ASHLAND • Personal Services - standard compensation increases (compensation and benefits) • Materials and Services - anticipated increased materials costs (inflation) • BPA Costs o Power costs- Over Supply Management Protocol (OMP; reimbursement to wind generators when oversupply conditions exist) o Transmission costs - Segmentation (allocation of additional transmission costs based on cost to serve) • Contribution to Ending Fund Balance - continues the process of restoring a prudent and stable ending fund balance, which becomes beginning working capital in the next budget cycle. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: Rates and fees for the Department are reviewed each year. Council has indicated to staff a preference for more frequent, measured increases over infrequent, large increases. The current budget, together with the recently reviewed COS, provide for rates intended to achieve long-term department financing needs while providing for the measured implementation of rates. A summary of actual and projected rate adjustments for the Electric Department are: Rate Adjustments b FY 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Increase % 0.0 4.0 0.0 4.0 5.3 5.3 3.6 3.5 3.3 Ac"tua"l Projected Electric consumption is growing between 0.1 -0.5% per year. The increased costs identified (Personal Services, Materials and Services, BPA Costs and Ending Fund Balance) are met through electric rates. The Council has the option of not doing this rate increase and allowing the Electric Fund's unappropriated fund balance to decline. This approach is not recommended by staff. The effects of no rate increase on Unappropriated Ending Fund Balance (which provides the subsequent year's Working Capital Carryover) and the Ending Fund Balance plus Contingencies are shown for the FY2013-2015 Biennium. The effect will continue into subsequent years. Without Rate Adopted Budget Increase Difference Unappropriated Ending Fund Balance FY2014-2015 590,117 70,117 520,000 Ending Fund Balance Plus Contingencies FY2014-2015 1,049,117 529,117 520,000 Fund Balance Policy 1,840,000 1,840,000 The Fund could operate with the reduction; however, the balance continues below financially prudent levels (shown in the above table as Fund Balance Policy). In addition, the Department is taking more risk (potential lack of sufficient funds for emergencies). Alternative solutions: Cost Reductions Page 2 of 4 i`, CITY OF ASHLAND • Reduce BPA costs - BPA costs are tied to usage. However, reducing usage does not displace an equal share of other costs. Fixed costs such as maintenance, materials, and infrastructure are not reduced when usage is lowered. • Reduce conservation costs -Reduces the benefits of conservation initiatives. • Reduce capital investment further - Capital investment costs are an investment in the safety, reliability and operation of the electric system. Past economic conditions required a reduction in capital investment. The lack of funding for the electric system created a backlog of projects needed to safeguard the reliability and operation of the system. A further reduction in investment would further weaken the reliability of the system. • Reduce operation costs - Requires personnel reduction within a lean organization. Personnel reductions would hinder the operation and maintenance of the system leading to lower system reliability and lower system safety. Cuts to internal charges or technology debt payments will shift costs to other departments. The other departments will likely be unable to meet the additional costs. Recommended Solution: • Maintain adopted budget, keep the benefits and outcomes - Approve the projected 3.6% rate increase Electric Bill Comparisons Residential comparisons are not always apples to apples. Different utilities design their charges to satisfy the unique needs of the utility's environment. Pacific Power, the only other significant power provider in the Rogue Valley, is an investor owned utility, not a municipality. A comparison of current and projected charges follows. City of Ashland Residential - Single family dwelling- Pacific Power 1 City of Ashland - current 3.6% increase Average monthly usage=750 kwh kwh cost unit Total kwh cost unit Total kwh cast/unit Total Total Usage 750 750 750 Basic Charge $ 9.50 $ 9.50 $ 8.89 $ 8.89 $ 9.21 $ 9.21 DeliveryCharge 750 0.04277 32.08 500 0.060631 30.32 500 0.062813 31.41 250 0.074581 18.65 250 0.077265 1932 .Gene2tian Credit 750 I Supply Energy Charge Block l for 32 Days 750 0.05326 39.95 Public Purpose 750 0.03000 2.45 I Energy Conservation Charge 750 0.00279 2.09 Low Income Assistance 750 0.85 I JC Boyle Dam Removal 750 0.00036 0.27 Copco& Iron Gate Dam Removal 750 O.OD111 0.83 BPA Columbia River Benefits for 32 Days 750 (0.00570). (4_28) Talent City Franchise Fee 750 0.01500 1.22 Ashland Electric Users Tax 750 $ 14.46 $ 14.98 1 84.971 f 72311 74.92) Est! mated amount COA bill (less)/more than Padic Power bill for same kwh use: j12.65)1 1 (10_05) Please note: 1. The average Ashland residential customer uses about 750 kWh per month at a cost of $72.31 (including Electric User tax). The projected 3.6% rate change will increase the cost by $2.61. Page 3 of 4 ~r, CITY OF ASHLAND 2. The average Ashland residential customer currently pays $12.65 less than a comparable Pacific Power customer. After the rate increase the average Ashland residential customer will still pay $10.05 less than a comparable Pacific Power customer. If qualified, programs may be available to City of Ashland utility customers in order to help pay utility bills. The bulk of the funding for these programs comes from fees and charges collected through utility rates. While budgeted at fixed amounts, the City's practice has been to never deny an applicant due to a budget constraint. The programs are: • Senior and Disabled Discount program - helps qualifying customers to pay monthly utility bills. The dollar amount of assistance usually rises with the size of the bill. • Low Income Energy Assistance Program • The City provides a HEAT donation program • The City's Conservation Department helps residents by providing services to lower energy use. STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends Council approve a 3.6% rate increase to be effective July 1, 2014, to cover the increased costs and continue to build a prudent and stable fund balance. SUGGESTED MOTION: I move approval of a resolution titled, "A resolution revising rates for electric service pursuant to Ashland Municipal Code Section 14.16.030 and repealing Resolution 2013-34" ATTACHMENTS: None Page 4 of 4 Ir, RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION REVISING RATES FOR ELECTRIC SERVICE PURSUANT TO ASHLAND MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 14.16.030 AND REPEALING RESOLUTION 2013-34 THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The electric rate schedules are increased 3.6% for rates for electric service provided by the City of Ashland, effective with usage on or after July 1, 2014, as per the attached rate tables. SECTION 2. Copies of this resolution shall be maintained in the Office of the City Recorder and shall be available for public inspection during regular business hours. SECTION 3. Classification of the fee. The fees specified in Section 1 of this resolution are classified as not subject to the limits of Section 1 lb of Article XI of the Oregon Constitution (Ballot Measure 5). SECTION 4. Resolution 2013-34 is repealed on the date new rates established by this Resolution are effective. SECTION 5. This resolution takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. This resolution was duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of 2014, and takes effect on July 1, 2014, upon signing by the Mayor. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of 2014. John Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: David Lohman, City Attorney Page I of 1 City of Ashland, Oregon RESIDENTIAL SERVICE Applicable: To single-family residential customers when all service is supplied to one point of delivery. Monthly Billing: The Monthly Billing shall be the sum of the Basic and Energy Charges. Basic Cs a ee e Per Month $ 8.89 $ 9.21 _ p• k h ~e e -ne1 C , First 500 kWh $ 0.06063 $ 0.06281 Over 500 kWh $ 0.07458 $ 0.07726 Minimum Charge: The monthly minimum charge shall be the Basic Charge. A higher minimum may be required under contract to cover special conditions. Special Conditions: Residential Horsepower load requirements of greater than 3 HP crust comply with the City of Ashland's Electric Service Manual. Three-Phase Service: i-or residential customers requiring wree-pnase service, wnose single-pnase requirements are, or will oe suppiieo unoer any residential schedule, three-phase service will be supplied only when service is available from the City's presently existing facilities, or where such facilities can be reasonably installed, and in any event, only when deliveries can be made by using one service for customer's single phase and three-phase requirements. The demand charge applicable only to customer's three-phase demand shall be $3.76 for each kilowatt of demand, but not less than $9.21 minimum basic charge. The energy charge shall be in accordance with the schedule set forth herein. hree-Phase erv ce 7$E 0 Per kW of Demand 3.63 $ 3.76 Minimum Char e $ 8.89 $ 9.21 Continuing Service: This schedule is based on continuing service at each service location. Disconnect and reconnect transactions shall not operate to relieve a customer from monthly minimum charges. City of Ashland, Oregon SEASONAL RESIDENTIAL SERVICE Applicable: This rate is applicable to seasonal residential uses such as owner occupied single-family residential customers providing travelers accommodations, and when all service is supplied at one point of delivery. Monthly Billing: The Monthly Billing shall be the sum of the Basic and Energy Charges. aULE C ar a Dece e 0 Per Month $ 8.89 $ 9.21 er C a e e h ece be 20 0 First 600 kWh $ 0.06737 $ 0.06979 Over 600 kWh $ 0.07447 $ 0.07715 Minimum Charge: The monthly minimum charge shall be the Basic Charge. A higher minimum may be required under contract to cover special conditions. Special Conditions: Residential Horsepower load requirements of greater than 3 HP must comply with the City of Ashland's Electric Service Manual. Three-Phase Service: For residential customers requiring three-phase service, whose single-phase requirements are, or will be supplied under any residential schedule, three-phase service will be supplied only when service is available from the City's presently existing facilities, or where such facilities can be reasonably installed, and in any event, only when deliveries can be made by using one service for customer's single phase and three-phase requirements. The demand charge applicable only to customer's three-phase demand shall be $3.76 for each kilowatt of demand, but not less than $9.21 minimum Basic charge. The energy charge shall be in accordance with the schedule set forth herein. hree-P ase Se rice Decem er 1 Per kW of Demand $ 3.63 $ 3.76 Minimum Char e $ 8.89 $ 9.21 Continuing Service: This schedule is based on continuing service at each service location. Disconnect and reconnect transactions shall not operate to relieve a customer from monthly minimum charges. City of Ashland, Oregon GOVERNMENTAL SERVICE Page 1 of 3 Applicable: This schedule is applicable to governmental customers whose entire requirements are supplied hereunder, and whose loads have never registered 1,000 kilowatts or more, more than once in any consecutive 18-month period. Deliveries at more than one point, or more than one voltage and phase classification, will be separately metered and billed. Monthly billing: The monthly billing shall be the sum of the Basic, Demand (if applicable), Energy, and Reactive Power Charges, plus applicable Metering and Delivery adjustments. Basic Charge: Sin Le Phase e_c_e ber 2 30 kW or less $ 15.92 $ 16.49 Over 30 kW $ 59.74 $ 61.89 three-Phase Service eee be 0 30 kW or less $ 31.85 $ 32.99 Over 30 kW $ 103.56 $ 107.28 * Note: Kilowatt load size, for determination of Basic Charge, shall be the average of the two greatest non-zero monthly demands established during the 12 month period which includes and ends with the current billing month. Demand Charge: No charge for the first 15 kW of demand For all kW in excess of 15 kW T)eand C- aS a Dec_em er 0 Per kW $ 3.88 $ 4.01 Energy Charge: le Phase Dece_ ber 3 SJT79 Per kWh u to 3,000 kWh $ 0.08718 $ 0.09031 Per kWh for the next 17,000 kWh $ 0.06538 $ 0.06773 Per kWh for all additional kWh $ 0.06127 $ 0.06347 Tih_re .base .e-cembe 201 0 Per kWh u to 3,000 kWh $ 0.09313 $ 0.09648 Per kWh for the next 17,000 kWh $ 0.07062 $ 0.07316 Per kWh for all additional kWh $ 0.06620 $ 0.06858 City of Ashland, Oregon GOVERNMENTAL SERVICE Page 2 of 3 Minimum Charge: The monthly minimum charge shall be the basic charge. A higher minimum may be required under contract to cover special conditions. Reactive Power Charges: The maximum 30-minute reactive demand for the month in kilovolt-amperes in excess of 25% of the measured kilowatt demand the same month will be billed, in addition to the above charges, at rate shown below per kvar of such excess reactive demand. ,~eaetve owe C-hay a Dece e 0 Per kvar $ 0.71495 $ 0.74068 Demand: Demands shall be the kilowatts shown by, or computed from the readings of the City's demand meter for the 30-minute period of customer's greatest use during the month, determined to the nearest kilowatt. Metering & Delivery Voltage Adjustments: The above monthly charges are applicable without adjustment for voltage with delivery and metering are at the City's standard secondary voltage. Metering: For as long as metering voltage is at the City's available primary distribution voltage of 11 kV or greater, the above charges shall be reduced by one and one-half percent (1 1/2 to compensate for losses. Delivery: For as long as delivery voltage is at City's available primary distribution voltage of 11 kV or greater, the total of the above charges will be reduced by 15 Cents per kilowatt of load size used for the determination of the Basic Charge billed in the month. A High Voltage Charge of $41.80 per month will be added where such deliveries are metered at the delivery voltage. When a new delivery is, at the request of the customer, made by means of City-owned transformers at a voltage other than a locally standard distribution voltage, the above charges for any month will be increased by 15 Cents per kilowatt of load size used for the determination of the Basic Charge billed in the month. The City retains the right to change its line voltage or classification thereof at any time, and after reasonable advance notice to any customer affected by such change, such customer then has the option to take service at the new line voltage or to accept service through transformers to be supplied by City subject to the voltage adjustments above. Contract: The City may require the customer to sign a written contract which shall have a term of not less than one (1) year. City of Ashland, Oregon GOVERNMENTAL SERVICE Page 3 of 3 Installation and Maintenance: The City may contract for the installation and maintenance of electric facilities on the customer's premises. The terms of such service shall be set forth in a contract, the form and terms of which shall be approved by the City Council. Monthly charges made by the City as reimbursements for ownership, operation and maintenance costs applicable to facilities installed to furnish service under rules of this schedule shall be determined in accordance with the following: (1) Operating Charge shall be equal to 2/3 of 1% per month of the installed cost of facilities paid for by the customer. (2) Facilities Charge shall be equal to 1 1/2 % per month of the installed cost of facilities paid for by the customer. (3) Transformer Capacity Charge shall be equal to 15 Cents per nameplate kva. Special Conditions: Customers shall not resell electric service received from the City under provisions of this schedule to any person, except by written permission of the City, and where customer meters and bills any of his/her tenants at City's regular rates for the type of service which such tenant may actually receive. Continuing Service: This schedule is based on continuing service at each service location. Disconnect and reconnect transactions shall not operate to relieve a customer from monthly minimum charges. City of Ashland, Oregon GENERAL SERVICE - GOVERNMENTAL LARGE SERVICE Page 1 of 2 Applicable: This schedule is applicable to electric service loads which have registered a peak demand of 1,000 to 3,000 kilowatts more than once in any consecutive 18-month period. Deliveries at more than one point, or more than one voltage and phase classification, will be separately metered and billed. Service for intermittent, partial requirements, or highly fluctuating loads, or where service is seasonally disconnected during any one-year period will be provided only by special contract for such service. Monthly Billing: The Monthly Billing shall be the sum of the Basic, Demand (if applicable), Energy, and Reactive Power Charges, plus appropriate Metering and Delivery adjustments. ~ece e 0 Basic Char e $ 2,437.95 $ 2,525.71 Demand Charge per kW $ 4.54232 $ 4.70584 Energy Charge per kWh $ 0.05327 $ 0.05518 Minimum Charge: The monthly minimum charge shall be the basic charge. A higher minimum charge may be required by contract. On-Peak Period Billing Demand: The on peak period kilowatts shown by or computed from the readings of City's demand meter for the 30-minute period of customer's greatest use during the month, determined to the nearest kilowatt. Reactive Power Charge: The maximum 30-minute reactive demand for the month in kilovolt-amperes in excess of 25% of the measured kilowatt demand for the same month will be billed, in addition to the above charges, at rate shown below per kvar of such excess reactive demand. ece e 0 0 Per kvar $ 0.71488 $ 0.74061 Metering: For as long as metering voltage is at the City's available primary distribution voltage of 11 kV or greater, the above charges shall be reduced by (1-1 1/2%) to compensate for losses. City of Ashland, Oregon GENERAL SERVICE - GOVERNMENTAL LARGE SERVICE Page 2 of 2 Delivery: For as long as delivery voltage is at City's current locally available primary or transmission voltage the total of the above charges will be reduced by the-following amount per kilowatt of load size used for the determination of the Basic Charge billed in the month; and where such deliveries are metered at the delivery voltage, the following high voltage charges shall be added. ~e e e 0 S_tandar, Serwiee Volta e, Re uc io .e c Prima voltage of 11 kV or greater $ 0.15 $ 0.15 Transmission voltage of 60 kV or greater $ 0.30 $ 0.31 i h olta e a Pe o f Prima voltage of 11 kV or reater $ 40.35 $ 41.80 Transmission voltage of 60 kV or reater $ 392.07 $ 406.18 When a new delivery, or an increase in capacity for an existing delivery is, at the request of the customer, made by means of City-owned transformers at a voltage other than a locally standard distribution voltage, the above charges for any month will be increased by 15 cents per kilowatt of load size for the determination of the Basic Charge billed in the month. The City retains the right to change its line voltage or classifications thereof at any time and after reasonable advance notice to any customer affected by such change, such customer then has the option to take service at the new line voltage or to accept service through transformers to be supplied by City subject to the voltage adjustments above. Contract: The City may require the customer to sign a written contract which shall have a term of not less than one (1) year. Installation and Maintenance: The City may contact for the installation and maintenance of electric facilities on the customer's premises. The terms of such service shall be set forth in a contract, the form and terms of which shall be approved by the City Council. Monthly charges made by the City shall be approved by the City Council. Monthly charges made by the City as reimbursement for ownership, operation and maintenance costs applicable to facilities installed to furnish service under rules of the Schedule shall be determined in accordance with the following: (1) Operating Charge shall be equal to 2/3 of 1 % per month of the installed cost of facilities paid for by the customer. (2) Facilities Charge shall be equal to 1 1/2% per month of the installed cost of the facilities as determined by the City for facilities installed at City's expense. (3) Transformer Capacity Charge shall be equal 15 (cents) per nameplate kva. Special Conditions: Customers shall not resell electric service received from the City under provisions of this schedule to any person, except by written permission of the City, and where customer meters and bills any of his/her tenants at City's regular rates for the type of service which such tenant may actually receive. City of Ashland, Oregon MUNICIPAL SERVICE Page 1 of 3 Applicable: This schedule is applicable to municipal customers whose entire requirements are supplied hereunder, and whose loads have never registered 1,000 kilowatts or more, more than once in any consecutive 18-month period. Deliveries at more than one point, or more than one voltage and phase classification, will be separately metered and billed. Monthly billing: The monthly billing shall be the sum of the Basic, Demand (if applicable), Energy, and Reactive Power Charges, plus applicable Metering and Delivery adjustments. Basic Charge: Sin_ le Phase Deee be 0 0 30 kW or less $ 15.92 $ 16.49 Over 30 kW $ 59.74 $ 61.89 Three-P ase Se~ee Dece ber 0 30 kW or less $ 31.85 $ 32.99 Over 30 kW $ 103.56 $ 107.28 Note: Kilowatt load size, for determination of Basic Charge, shall be the average of the two greatest non-zero monthly demands established during the 12 month period which includes and ends with the current billing month. Demand Charge: No charge for the first 15 kW of demand For all kW in excess of 15 kW UemandLGh-a a [EeZe -all Per kW $ 3.88 $ 4.01 Energy Charge: Sin le P ase De_cem e 0 Per kWh u to 3,000 kWh $ 0.08718 $ 0.09031 Per kWh for the next 17,000 kWh $ 0.06538 $ 0.06773 Per kWh for all additional kWh $ 0.06127 $ 0.06347 uhree PfZase December 201 J-_I. 20 Per kWh u to 3,000 kWh $ 0.09313 $ 0.09648 Per kWh for the next 17,000 kWh $ 0.07062 $ 0.07316 Per kWh for all additional kWh $ 0.06620 $ 0.06658 City of Ashland, Oregon MUNICIPAL SERVICE Page 2 of 3 Minimum Charge: The monthly minimum charge shall be the basic charge. A higher minimum may be required under contract to cover special conditions. Reactive Power Charges: The maximum 30-minute reactive demand for the month in kilovolt-amperes in excess of 25% of the measured kilowatt demand the same month will be billed, in addition to the above charges, at rate shown below per kvar of such excess reactive demand. t~e~etve Powe C a a De_c_e a 20 3 J 0 Per kvar $ 0.71495 $ 0.74088 Demand: Demands shall be the kilowatts shown by, or computed from the readings of the City's demand meter for the 30-minute period of customer's greatest use during the month, determined to the nearest kilowatt. Metering & Delivery Voltage Adjustments: The above monthly charges are applicable without adjustment for voltage with delivery and metering are at the City's standard secondary voltage. Metering: For as long as metering voltage is at the City's available primary distribution voltage of 11 kV or greater, the above charges shall be reduced by one and one-half percent (1 1/2 to compensate for losses. Delivery: For as long as delivery voltage is at City's available primary distribution voltage of 11 kV or greater, the total of the above charges will be reduced by 15 Cents per kilowatt of load size used for the determination of the Basic Charge billed in the month. A High Voltage Charge of $41.80 per month will be added where such deliveries are metered at the delivery voltage. When a new delivery is, at the request of the customer, made by means of City-owned transformers at a voltage other than a locally standard distribution voltage, the above charges for any month will be increased by 15 Cents per kilowatt of load size used for the determination of the Basic Charge billed in the month. The City retains the right to change its line voltage or classification thereof at any time, and after reasonable advance notice to any customer affected by such change, such customer then has the option to take service at the new line voltage or to accept service through transformers to be supplied by City subject to the voltage adjustments above. Contract: The City may require the customer to sign a written contract which shall have a term of not less than one (1) year. City of Ashland, Oregon MUNICIPAL SERVICE Page 3 of 3 Installation and Maintenance: The City may contract for the installation and maintenance of electric facilities on the customer's premises. The terms of such service shall be set forth in a contract, the form and terms of which shall be approved by the City Council. Monthly charges made by the City as reimbursements for ownership, operation and maintenance costs applicable to facilities installed to furnish service under rules of this schedule shall be determined in accordance with the following: (1) Operating Charge shall be equal to 2/3 of 1% per month of the installed cost of facilities paid for by the customer. (2) Facilities Charge shall be equal to 1 1/2 % per month of the installed cost of facilities paid for by the customer. (3) Transformer Capacity Charge shall be equal to 15 Cents per nameplate kva. Special Conditions: Customers shall not resell electric service received from the City under provisions of this schedule to any person, except by written permission of the City, and where customer meters and bills any of his/her tenants at City's regular rates for the type of service which such tenant may actually receive. Continuing Service: This schedule is based on continuing service at each service location. Disconnect and reconnect transactions shall not operate to relieve a customer from monthly minimum charges. City of Ashland, Oregon COMMERCIAL SERVICE Page 1 of 3 Applicable: This schedule is applicable to non-residential and multiple-family residential customers whose entire requirements are supplied hereunder, and whose loads have never registered 1,000 kilowatts or more, more than once in any consecutive 18- month period. Deliveries at more than one point, or more than one voltage and phase classification, will be separately metered and billed. Service for intermittent, partial requirements or highly fluctuating loads, or where service is seasonally disconnected during any one year period will be provided only by special contract for such service. Monthly Billing: The monthly billing shall be the sum of the Basic, Demand (if applicable), Energy, and Reactive Power Charges, plus applicable Metering and Delivery adjustments. Basic Charge: Sin a Phase Dece e 2 -0 30 kW or less $ 15.92 $ 16.49 Over 30 kW $ 59.74 $ 61.89 Tf Three- tease Se vice Dee er 0 30 kW or less $ 31.85 $ 32.99 Over 30 kW $ 103.56 $ 107.28 Note: Kilowatt load size, for determination of Basic Charge, shall be the average of the two greatest non-zero monthly demands established during the 12 month period which includes and ends with the current billing month. Demand Charge: No charge for the first 15 kW of demand. For all kW in excess of 15 kW Demand Char a De_ee a 20 J I 0 Per kW $ 3.80542 $ 3.94241 Energy Charge: Sin le P ase Dece pe 20 09-VU-TOM Per kWh u to 3,000 kWh $ 0.07209 $ 0.07468 Per kWh for the next 17,000 kWh $ 0.07232 $ 0.07492 Per kWh for all additional kWh $ 0.07267 $ 0.07528 tTjhree W_Jase_eeem_b_er ~0 0 Per kWh u to 3,000 kWh $ 0.06601 $ 0.06838 Per kWh for the next 17,000 kWh $ 0.06645 $ 0.06884 Per kWh for all additional kWh $ 0.06663 $ 0.06902 City of Ashland, Oregon COMMERCIAL SERVICE Page 2 of 3 Minimum Charge: The monthly charge shall be the basic charge. A higher minimum may be required under contract to cover special conditions. Reactive Power Charges: The maximum 30-minute reactive demand for the month in kilovolt-amperes in excess of 25% of the measured kilowatt demand the same month will be billed, in addition to the above charges, at rate shown below per kvar of such excess reactive demand. Reactive Powe Chat ece be 20 Et I, 0 Per kvar $ 0.71495 $ 0.74068 Demand: Demand shall be the kilowatts shown by, or computed from the readings of the City's demand meter for the 30-minute period of customers greatest use during the month, determined to the nearest kilowatt. Metering & Delivery Voltage Adjustments: The above monthly charges are applicable without adjustment for voltage with delivery and metering are at the City's standard secondary voltage. Metering: For as long as metering voltage is at the City's available primary distribution voltage of 11 kV or greater, the above charges shall be reduced by one and one-half percent (1 1/2 to compensate for losses. Delivery: For as long as delivery voltage is at City's available primary distribution voltage of 11 kV or greater, the total of the above charges will be reduced by 15 Cents per kilowatt of load size used for the determination of the Basic Charge billed in the month. A High Voltage Charge of $41.80 per month will be added where such deliveries are metered at the delivery voltage. When a new delivery is, at the request of the customer, made by means of City-owned transformers at a voltage other than a locally standard distribution voltage, the above charges for any month will be increased by 15 Cents per kilowatt of load size used for the determination of the Basic Charge billed in the month. The City retains the right to change its line voltage or classification thereof at any time, and after reasonable advance notice to any customer affected by such change, such customer then has the option to take service at the new line voltage or to accept service through transformers to be supplied by City subject to the voltage adjustments above. Contract: The City may require the customer to sign a written contract which shall have a term of not less than one (1) year. City of Ashland, Oregon COMMERCIAL SERVICE Page 3 of 3 Installation and Maintenance: The City may contract for the installation and maintenance of electric facilities on the customer's premises. The terms of such service shall be set forth in a contract, the form and terms of which shall be approved by the City Council. Monthly charges made by the City as reimbursements for ownership, operation and maintenance costs applicable to facilities installed to furnish service under rules of this schedule shall be determined in accordance with the following: (1) Operating Charge shall be equal to 2/3 of 1% per month of the installed cost of facilities paid for by the customer. (2) Facilities Charge shall be equal to 1 1/2 % per month of the installed cost of facilities paid for by the customer. (3) Transformer Capacity Charge shall be equal to 15 Cents per nameplate kva. Special Conditions: Customers shall not resell electric service received from the City under provisions of this schedule to any person, except by written permission of the City, and where customer meters and bills any of his/her tenants at City's regular rates for the type of service which such tenant may actually receive. Continuing Service: This schedule is based on continuing service at each service location. Disconnect and reconnect transactions shall not operate to relieve a customer from monthly minimum charge. City of Ashland, Oregon OUTDOOR AREA LIGHTING SERVICE Monthly Billing: The following rate schedule is no longer available for new residential installations and is for outdoor area lighting service furnished from dusk to dawn by City-owned high pressure sodium luminaries which may be served by secondary voltage circuits from City's existing overhead distribution system, and mounted on City-owned wood poles and served in accordance with City's specifications as to equipment and facilities, shall be as follows: (1) Net Monthly Rate Per Luminaire: T , e o umtnaire NomI at Lu_ a Rates De-c_embe 20r$ SOME 01IM!W11111111111111111 High-Pressure Sodium 5,800 f$$ 20.04 $ 20.76 Hi h-Pressure Sodium 22,000 28.93 $ 29.97 Hi h-Pressure Sodium 50,000 46.27 $ 47.93 Existing Residential Monthly Billing: e o uminaire Nomi a Lien Ra i0 . ece a 01 0 High-Pressure Sodium 5,800 t$$ 15.42 $ 15.97 High-Pressure Sodium 22,000 22.26 $ 23.06 Hi h-Pressure Sodium 50,000 35.60 $ 36.88 (2) Pole Charge: A monthly charge of $1.81 per pole shall be made for each additional pole required in excess of the luminaries installed. ~o a Cha_, a Decee 201 Per Month $ 1.75 $ 1.81 Maintenance: Maintenance will be performed during regular working hours as soon as practicable after customer has notified City of service failure. The City reserves the right to contract for the installation and/or maintenance of lighting service provided hereunder. Suspension of Service: The customer may request temporary suspension of power for lighting by written notice. During such periods the monthly rate will be reduced by the City's estimated average monthly re-lamping and energy costs for the luminaire. Contract: Due to the investment involved and cost of initial installation, the term of the contract shall be by written agreement with the Electric Department, the form of which shall have prior approval by the City Council, and the term of which shall be for not less than three (3) years. City of Ashland, Oregon TELECOMMUNICATIONS CHARGE Applicable: This schedule is applicable to unmetered service provided to Telecommunication companies for electric service for their node power supplies and other active devices requiring electric service attached to City of Ashland owned utility poles. Monthly Billing: The monthly billing will be the sum of the base amount multiplied by the number of power supplies the customer is requiring and the energy charge based on the average amount of kWh used in accordance with the Commercial Service schedule below. Basic Charge: Dece ber 0 3 0 4 J~y Charge per Power Su I $ 15.92 $ 16.49 Energy Charge: ecemb_e 013 0 Per kWh u to 3,000 kWh $ 0.07209 $ 0.07468 Per kWh for the next 17,000 kWh $ 0.07232 $ 0.07492 Per kWh for all additional kWh $ 0.07267 $ 0.07528 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication May 6, 2014, Business Meeting Increases to Water, Wastewater, Transportation, and Storm Drain Utility Rates FROM: Michael R. Faught; Public Works Director, Public Works Department, faughtm@ashland.or.us SUMMARY: The following across-the-board increases in utility rates are proposed to become effective July 1, 2014: Utility % Increase Water 10.08% Wastewater 10.00% Transportation 2.57% Storm Drain 2.57% Total (Average % Increase) ( 8.95°/x) 1 1 The water and wastewater rate increases are consistent with the respective water and wastewater master plans and are contained in the revenue projections in the FY2014 and FY2015 biennium budget. Also, the transportation and storm drain utility fee increases are based on the rate of inflation for construction projects (the Construction Cost Index) as reported by the ENR (formerly the Engineering News Record published by McGraw Hill). These increases, if adopted, would cost a typical residence an additional $7.41 per month. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: Based on the water and wastewater master plans, and the need to keep up with inflation in both the transportation and the storm drain funds, the Public Works 2015 biennium budget anticipates across- the-board utility rate increases as shown in the Table above. This recommended rate increase is for the second year (FY2015) of the two-year budget only. If approved, the new rates will become effective July 1, 2014. Water Rate Increase The proposed 10.08% water rate increase is based on the recommended rate plan outlined in Chapter 9 of the April 17, 2012 Water Master Plan (http://www.ashland.or.us/Page.asp?NavlD=15317). All recommendations outlined in the Water Master Plan were vetted and ultimately recommended by both the Water Master Plan Technical Advisory Committee and the Ashland Water Advisory Committee. The plan recommends $30.5 million in water capital projects in order to ensure compliance with all regulatory requirements and to meet Ashland's current and future water system demands. Page 1 of 7 CITY OF ASHLAND The 2012 Water Master Plan outlines a 10-year plan to ramp up water rates to generate adequate funds to pay for the proposed capital projects and to support day-to-day operations. The monthly bill for a residential customer that uses 1,000 cubic feet of water per month (usually only in the summer months), is shown below: $100.00 $90.00 $80.00 - $70.00 $65.52 $61.78 $63:60 $60.00 558.17 $59.87 556.07 $51.96 $50.00 547.22 $48.41 '$42.90 $40.00 - $38.97 ,$3402 $30.00 $20.00 - $10.00 - 5. .2012 2013 2034 2015 2036 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 IIIIIIIIIIIAvefage monthly rate at 30 ccf. with the funding or agate stabilization account y~ Inflation reference Ilne at 3% PROJECTED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL WATER RATES (ASSUMING 10 CCF OF WATER USE PER MONTH) Council adopted the first two years of the 10-year rate adjustment plan as proposed and staff is now recommending that Council continue to follow the water master plan financial recommendations and adopt the proposed FY2015 10.08% water rate increase effective July 1, 2014. The monthly bill for a residential customer using 1,000 cubic feet (cf) will increase $4.34. Comparisons of the current and proposed rates are as follows: Single Family Residence Change Water Rates Current Proposed $ % Base Charge $19.44 $21.40 $1.96 10.08% ConsumptionNolume Charge Zero to 300 cf $0.02 $0.02 $0.00 10.45% 301 to 1000 cf $0.02 $0.03 $0.00 10.04% 1001 to 2500 of $0.03 $0.04 $0.00 10.27% Average Monthly Bill $42.90 $47.24 $4.34 10 Wastewater Rate Increase The proposed 10.0% wastewater rate increase is based on the recommended rate plan outlined in Chapter 14 of the April 17, 2012 Wastewater Master Plan Page 2 of 7 CITY OF ASHLAND (http://www.ashland.or.us/Page.asp?NavlD=14696). All recommendations outlined in the master plan were vetted and ultimately recommended by the technical advisory committee. The plan outlines $10.8 million of high priority capital projects to ensure compliance with all regulatory requirements and to meet Ashland's current and future wastewater system demands. Since the 2012 Wastewater Master Plan was completed, only minor changes have occurred in the capital improvements schedule. The Wastewater Master Plan outlines an eight-year rate plan developed to generate adequate funds to pay for the proposed high-priority capital projects and day-to-day operations. The following chart outlines the proposed eight-year rate increases to fund the wastewater program: Table 3 Current & Forecast Sewer Rates Forecast Current 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Customer Class Rates^ 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 % Rate Increase (per year) 10.00% 1000% 10.00% 10.00% 10.00% 10.00% 5.00% 5.00% Residential Ratesf Base $18.70 $20.60 $2270 $25.00 $27.50 $30.30 $33.30 $35.00 $36.80 Commodity($/ccq 5180 $3.08 53.39 5333 $4.10 $4.51 $4.96 $5.21 $547 Commercial Rates Base $19.54 $21.50 523.70 $26.10 $28.70 $31.60 $34.80 $36.50 $38.30 Commodity (Sleet) $3.11 $3.42 $3.76 $4.14 $455 $5.01 $5.51 $5.79 S6A8 ^ Base Rates are rounded to the nearest $0.10 month. Commodity Rates are rounded to the nearest $0.01. t Most msidential customers pay only the base rate, which includes 400 cubic feet of water consumption. Council adopted the first two years of the eight-year rate adjustment plan as proposed and staff is now recommending that Council continue to follow the wastewater master plan financial recommendations and adopt the proposed FY2015 10.0% wastewater rate increase effective July 1, 2014. Some examples of the wastewater capital projects include; effluent outfall relocation and Bear Creek shading; a new oxidation ditch at the treatment plant; new sewer capacity pipes that parallel Bear Creek; and pipe replacement projects. A comparison of the current residential rates and the proposed rates are as follows: Sin e Family Residence Chan e Wastewater Rates Current Proposed $ % Monthly Service Charge $22.66 $24.93 $2.27 10.02% uantity Charge per cf $0.03 $0.04 $0.00 10.06% As a result of these changes, the average household monthly sewer bill will increase from $29.45 to $32.40, a $2.95 increase. Page 3 of 7 11FAWA CITY OF ASHLAND Transportation Utility Fee Staff is recommending the transportation utility fee be increased 2.57% to cover the increasing costs of future capital improvements. The cost of construction as measured by ENR (publisher McGraw Hill) has been increasing annually at a slower rate than the 100-year history of the index, 2.57% vs. 4.56%. This proposed increase would be effective July 1, 2014. Revenue for the street maintenance fund include; state gas taxes; transportation utility fees; state and federal grants; system development charges (SDCs); and franchise fees. The state-shared gas tax revenues and the utility fee revenues are the most stable sources of revenue for street operations, maintenance and capital improvements. The other sources vary substantially based on federal and state policies and the rate of real estate development. The state gas tax and transportation utility fees are primarily used to fund the day-to-day operations, debt service and a portion of the capital projects (sidewalk replacement, slurry seals, non-grant funded overlays, etc.). The average annual cost of street operations has been $2.91 million while the revenue from the utility fee has been $1.31 million. Fee revenues are covering less than one-half the cost of just street operations and maintenance. Annual % 2011 2012 2013 A Revenues & Other Sources Taxes $ 52,848 $ 53,314 $ 55,504 2.5% Intergovernmental 1296 353 11859,792 1,729,083 14.4% Charges for Services - Rates 11301,964 1306,620 1,309 151 0.3% Charges for Services - Misc. Service Fees 17,789 17,719 23,249 13.4% System Development Charges 60,805 356,267 106,855 28.2% Assessments 17,867 43,542 41,048 41.6% Interest on Investments 3 571 14,636 11,398 58.0% Miscellaneous 5 101 3 000 160 740 172.5% Other Financing Sources - 1,032,601 NA Total Revenues and Other Sources $ 2,756,298 $ 3,654,890 $ 4,469,629 24.2% Expenditures Public Works - Street Operations 2 986 071 2,788,840 2,951,935 -0.6% Public Works - Transportation SDC's 196,484 119 923 83,061 L.I.D.'S &Transportation 175,326 107,317 Total Expenditures and Other Uses $ 3,357,881 $ 3,016,080 $ 3,034,996 -5.1% Excess(Deficiency) of Revenues and Other Sources over Expenditures and Other Uses (601,583) 638,810 1,434,633 Fund Balance, Jul 1, 2010 1,769,275 1,167,692 1,806,502 Fund Balance, Jun 30, 2011 $ 1,167,692 $ 1,806,502 $ 3,241,135 Page 4 of 7 CITY OF ASHLAND Another way to measure the impact of declining revenues in this fund is to determine if 100% of our streets have a pavement condition index rating (PCI) of 40 or greater. Unfortunately in 2013 the percent of roads meeting this performance measure has declined from 96% in 2007 to 77% in 2013. Once a street's condition drops below 40 PCI, it falls into the reconstruction category. A street has a 20-year lifecycle and if overlaid within 15 years, at about $400,000 per mile, the street life can be extended for 20 years after each overlay. In contrast, if a street falls into the reconstruction category it costs about $2.5 million per mile to repair. To remedy the current funding trend, staff recommends that a transportation utility fee financial assessment be completed to determine adequate funding levels to maintain the street system at a 40 PCI or greater level. The comparison of the current to the proposed transportation utility rates is as follows: Single Family Residence Change Trans ortation Utility Fee Current Proposed $ % (Single Family, per month $8.17 $8.38 I $0.21 2.57% This fee increase will cost the average household $0.21 per month. Storm Drain Fee Staff is recommending a 2.57% rate increase in the storm drain fund effective July, 2014. Similar to the transportation utility fund, the storm drain fee has not kept pace with inflation. Funding for this program comes primarily from the storm drain fee-accounting for about 97% of ongoing Storm Water Operating expenses. SDCs, Intergovernmental revenues from other funds, and Other Financing Sources are used primarily for capital improvements. Since revenues just cover operating costs, the storm drain system relies on outside funding for major repairs and capital improvements which averaged $73,100 over the past 3 years. Page 5 of 7 CITY OF -ASHLAND I Annual % 2011 2012 2013 4 Revenues Taxes $ - $ - $ - Intergovernmental 22,891 106,914 - NA Charges for Services - Rates 588,703 589,690 588,287 -0.04% System Development Charges 19,256 25,471 22,317 7.38% Interest on Investments 14,329 6,272 4,885 -53.81% Miscellaneous - 10,376 NA Other Financing Sources - 157,002 NA Total Revenues and Other Sources $ 645,179 $ 738,723 $ 772,491 9.00% Total Without Other Sources $ 615,489 -2.36% Expenses Public Works - Storm Water Operations 586,524 552,940 672,923 6.87% Public Works - Storm Water SDC's 41,289 17,602 160,372 67.84% Total Expenditures and Other Uses $ 627,813 $ 570,542 $ 833,295 14.16% Excess(Deficiency) of Revenues and Other Sources over Expenditures and Other Uses 17,366 168,181 (60,804) -62.66% Fund Balance, Jul 1, 11051,243 11068,609 1,236,790 Fund Balance, Jun 30, $ 1,068,609 $ 1,236,790 $ 1,175,986 The following provides a cost comparison between the existing storm drain fee and the proposed 2.57% rate increase. Single Family Residence Change Storm Drain Fee ( Current Proposed $ ( % ~gle Family per month $4.29 $4.40 $0.11 2.56% A single family house will pay $0.11 more per month. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: The proposed rate increases are built into the FY2015 budget. The rate increases are consistent with the water and sewer master plan recommendation and ensure adequate funding for day-to-day operations and the capital projects outlined in the adopted plans. The proposed transportation utility and storm drain fees are recommended to minimize inflationary impacts. The accumulative increases in fees to an average residential customer are as follows: Page 6 of 7 ~r, CITY OF - ASHLAND Average Single-Family Bill Change Utilit Current Proposed $Increasel %Increasel Water $42.90 $47.24 $4.34 10.08% Wastewater $29.45 $32.40 $2.95 10.00% Transportation $8.17 $8.38 $0.21 2.57% Storm Drain $4.29 $4.40 $0.11 2.57% Total (Average % Increase) 1 $84.81 1 $92.42 $7.611 8.95%1 1 1 1 STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends approval of the proposed utility rate increases. SUGGESTED MOTION: I move approval of a resolution titled, "A resolution revising rates for water service pursuant to Ashland Municipal Code Section 14.04.030 and repealing Resolution 2013-11" I move approval of a resolution titled, "A resolution revising rates for wastewater (sewer) service pursuant to Ashland Municipal Code Section 14.08.035 and repealing Resolution 2013-12" I move approval of a resolution titled, "A resolution adopting a Transportation Utility Fee Schedule pursuant to Ashland Municipal Code Section 4.26 and repealing Resolution 2013-14" I move approval of a resolution titled, "A resolution adopting a Storm Drain Utility Fee Schedule pursuant to Ashland Municipal Code Section 4.27.050 and repealing Resolution 2013-13" ATTACHMENTS: 1. Adopted Water Master Plan documents may be viewed online at: http://www.ashland.or.us/SIB/files/2012°/u20C WMP-Carollo(l ).Pdf 2. The adopted Wastewater Master Plan may be viewed online at: http://www.ashland.or.us/Page.asp?NavlD=14696 Page 7 of 7 pr, RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION REVISING RATES FOR WATER SERVICE PURSUANT TO ASHLAND MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 14.04.030 AND REPEALING RESOLUTION 2013-11 THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The water rate charges and rates as shown on the water rate schedule attached as Exhibit "A" shall be effective for actual or estimated consumption on or after July 1, 2014. Prorated calculations are permitted for any bills prepared for a partial month or billing period that overlaps the effective date of this Resolution. Miscellaneous Charges and Connection Fees established by previous resolutions remain in effect until revised by separate Council Action. SECTION 2. Copies of this resolution shall be maintained in the Office of the City Recorder. SECTION 3. Classification of the fee. The fees specified in Section I and Section 2 of this resolution are classified as not subject to the limits of Section 11 b of Article XI of the Oregon Constitution (Ballot Measure 5). SECTION 4. Resolution 2013-11 is repealed. This resolution was duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of 2014, and takes effect on July 1, 2014, upon signing by the Mayor. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of 12014. John Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: David H. Lohman, City Attorney Page 1 of 1 CITY OF ASHLAND, OREGON EXHIBIT "A" WATER RATE SCHEDULE RESOLUTION NO. 2014- EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2014 METERED SERVICE All water service provided by the City of Ashland will be in accordance with Chapter 14.04 of the Ashland Municipal Code. 1. WATER RATES WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS A. MONTHLY SERVICE CHARGE: The basic service charge applies to all metered water services and does not include any water consumption. OLD NEW 0.75 Inch Meter $19.42/month $21.37/month 1 Inch Meter $38.81/month $42.72/month 1.5 Inch Meter $55.33/month $60.90/month 2 Inch Meter $72.88/month $80.22/month 3 Inch Meter $152.38/month $167.73/month 4 Inch Meter $232.95/month $256.43/month 6 Inch Meter $436.81/month $480.84/month 8 Inch Meter $727.98/month $801.36/month B. WATER QUANTITY CHARGE: All customers will be charged the following rates per cubic foot of water used. Single Family Residential Consumption OLD NEW 0 to 300 cf per month $0.0201/cf $0.0221/cf 301 to 1000 cf per month $0.0248/cf $0.0272/cf 1001 to 2500 cf per month $0.0331/cf $0.0364/cf Over 2500 cf per month $0.0427/cf $0.0470/cf Multi-Family Residential Consumption OLD NEW 0 to 300 cf per month per unit $0.0201/cf $0.0221/cf 301 to 1000 cf per month per unit $0.0248/cf $0.0272/cf 1001 to 2500 cf per month per unit $0.0331/cf $0.0364/cf Over 2500 cf per month per unit $0.0427/cf $0.0470/cf EXHIBIT A - PAGE 1 - Effective July 1, 2014 Non-Residential Consumption OLD NEW 0 - 50,000 cf per month $0.0284/cf $0.0312/cf Over 50,000 cf per month $0.0292/cf $0.0321/cf C. TID IRRIGATION WATER RATES: Unmetered Service $140.41/acre or portion of an acre-OLD $154.56/acre or portion of an acre-NEW Metered Service Base Service Charge Same as "A" above Water Consumption $0.0046/cf-OLD $0.0050/cf-NEW D. BULK WATER RATE: For water provided on a temporary basis through a bulk meter on a fire hydrant, The following charges apply: OLD NEW Deposit* $1,535.49 $1,690.26 Basic Fee $193.89 $213.43 Cost of Water Same as Commercial *Deposit is refundable less basic fee, cost of water, and any damage to the city meter, valve, wrench, and/or hydrant. E. FIRE PROTECTION SERVICE WATER RATE: This rate shall apply to all fire protection services or fire guards. The basic service charge will be equal to the minimum basic service charge. Water will be billed at commercial rates. 2. RATES OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMITS All rates and charges for water service provided outside the city limits will be 1.5 times the rates for water service provided within the city limits. EXHIBIT A - PAGE 2 - Effective July 1, 2014 3. SEASONAL RATES - WATER QUANTITY CHARGE All customers will be charged the following rates per cubic foot of water used for the months of June through September. Single Family Residential Consumption OLD NEW 0 to 300 cf per month $0.0201/cf $0.0221/cf 301 to 1000 cf per month $0.0248/cf $0.0272/cf 1001 to 2500 cf per month $0.0331/cf $0.0364/cf 2501 to 3600 cf per month $0.0427/cf $0.0470/cf Over 3600 cf per month $0.0556/cf $0.0612/cf Multi-Family Residential Consumption OLD NEW 0 to 300 cf per month $0.0201/cf $0.0221/cf 301 to 1000 cf per month $0.0248/cf $0.0272/cf 1001 to 2500 cf per month $0.0331/cf $0.0364/cf 2501 to 3600 cf per month $0.0427/cf $0.0470/cf Over 3600 cf per month per unit $0.0556/cf $0.0612/cf EXHIBIT A - PAGE 3 - Effective July 1, 2014 RESOLUTION NO. 2014- A RESOLUTION REVISING RATES FOR WASTEWATER (SEWER) SERVICE PURSUANT TO ASHLAND MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 14.08.035 AND REPEALING RESOLUTION 2013-12. THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The wastewater (sewer) rate charges and rates as shown on the wastewater (sewer) rate schedule attached as Exhibit "A" shall be effective for actual or estimated consumption on or after July 1, 2014. Prorated calculations are permitted for any bills prepared for a partial month or billing period that overlaps the effective date of this Resolution. Miscellaneous Charges and Connection Fees established by previous resolutions remain in effect until revised by separate Council Action. SECTION 2. Copies of this resolution shall be maintained in the Office of the City Recorder. SECTION 3. Classification of the fee. The fees specified in Section I and Section 2 of this resolution are classified as not subject to the limits of Section l lb of Article XI of the Oregon Constitution (Ballot Measure 5). SECTION 4. Resolution 2013-12 is repealed. This resolution was duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of , 2014, and the effective date is July 1, 2014 upon signing by the Mayor. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of , 2014. John Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: David Lohman, City Attorney SEWER RATES EXHIBIT "A" PAGE 1 EXHIBIT "A" CITY OF ASHLAND, OREGON SEWER RATE SCHEDULE RESOLUTION NO. 2014- EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2014 All sewer service provided by the City of Ashland will be in accordance with Chapter 14.08 of the Ashland Municipal Code. 1. SEWER RATES WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS Single Family Residential July 2013 July 2014 Monthly Service Charge $22.66 $24.92 Quantity Charge per cf $0.0338 $0.03718 Quantity Charge is based on average winter water consumption in excess of 400 cubic feet (cf) per month. Winter consumption is defined as the average of water meter readings taken in the months of January, February and March. Annually on April 1 the bill will be adjusted based on the water meter readings taken during the previous three months. Single family residential water accounts with no consumption during the months of January, February and March will be based on 700 cubic feet. Multi-Family Residential July 2013 July 2014 Monthly Service Charge per Unit $22.66 $24.92 Quantity Charge per cf $0.0338 $0.03718 Quantity Charge is based on average winter water consumption in excess of 400 cubic feet per month per unit. Winter consumption is defined as the average of the water meter readings taken in the months of January, February and March. Multi-family residential accounts are all accounts in which more than one residential dwelling is attached to the same water service. Annually on April 1 the bill will be adjusted based on the water readings taken during the previous three months. Multi-family residential water account with no consumption during the months of January, February and March will be based at 500 cubic feet. Two dormitory rooms are equal to one multi-family residential unit. SEWER RATES EXHIBIT "A" PAGE2 Commercial, Industrial and July 2013 July 2014 Governmental Monthly Service Charge $23.65 $26.01 Quantity Charge per cf $0.0376 $0.0413 Quantity Charge is based on actual monthly water consumption. Mixed residential and commercial accounts will be billed as commercial. For commercial, industrial or governmental users where monthly water consumption is not measured through city water meters, the sewer rate will be established as follows: The annual water consumption will be determine by an estimate made by the Director of Finance who shall use water consumption records of similar users or water consumption record of past use, if available. The annual water consumption will be multiplied by the Quantity Charge set forth above and the product divided by twelve. The quotient will be added to the Monthly Service Charge set forth above. The sum shall be the monthly sewer rate for the user. This rate shall be effective beginning in the month after the rate is determined until the rate schedule is amended by resolution of the council. At such time the Director shall redetermine the annual water consumption and compute the monthly sewer rate using the formal asset forth above. Water consumption determined in this manner shall be lowered if the user can demonstrate through the use of a meter approved by the city that the user's actual consumption is less than the estimate. 2. ADJUSTMENTS AND EXEMPTIONS TO COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL SEWER RATES A. If a commercial, industrial or governmental user can demonstrate that the volume of sewage discharged by the user is less than 50% of the water consumed, the City Administrator may adjust the sewer user charge accordingly. Methodology for Special Cases for City Administrator 1. Greenhouses, Churches, and Schools (grades K-12) operating on a nine month school year. July 2013 July 2014 Monthly Service Charge $23.65 $26.01 Quantity Charge per cf $0.0376 $0.0413 SEWER RATES EXHIBIT "A" PAGE3 Quantity Charge is based on average winter water consumption. Winter consumption is defined as the average of the meter readings taken in the months of January, February and March. Annually on April 1 the bill will be adjusted based on the water meter readings during the previous three months. 1. Bed and Breakfasts and Ashland Parks Bathroom July 2013 July 2014 Monthly Service Charge $23.65 $26.01 Quantity Charge per cf $0.0376 $0.0413 Quantity Charge is based on winter water consumption. Winter consumption is defined as the total of water meter readings taken in the months of January, February and March. Annually on April I the bill will be adjusted based on the water meter readings during the previous three months. B. Water sold through an irrigation meter is exempt from sewer user charge. 3. SEWER RATES OUTSIDE THE CITY LIMITS A. The sewer user charge shall apply to those sewer users permitted under Section 14.08.030 of the Ashland Municipal Code. B. The sewer rates for outside the City limits shall be two times the sewer charges for inside the City limits. Unmetered residential accounts will be calculated on an average winter usage of 700 cubic feet of water for single family residences, and 500 cubic feet per unit for multi-family residences. RESOLUTION NO. 2014- A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A TRANSPORTATION UTILITY FEE SCHEDULE PURSUANT TO ASHLAND MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 4.26 AND REPEALING RESOLUTION 2013-14. THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The "Transportation Utility Rate Schedule," marked "Exhibit A" and attached to this Resolution, is adopted as the transportation utility fee incorporating a 2.57% rate increase effective July 1, 2014. SECTION 2. One copy of this Resolution and "Exhibit A" shall be maintained in the office of the City Recorder and shall be available for public inspection during regular business hours. SECTION 3. The fees adopted pursuant to this Resolution shall be effective July 1, 2014. SECTION 4. Resolution 2013-14 is repealed on the effective date of this Resolution. SECTION 5. The fees imposed by this Resolution are classified as not subject to the limits of Section l lb of Article XI of the Oregon Constitution (Ballot Measure No. 5). This resolution was duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of 2014, and takes effect July 1, 2014, upon signing by the Mayor. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of 2014. John Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: David H. Lohman, City Attorney Exhibit A City of Ashland TRANSPORTATION UTILITY FEES WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS RESOLUTION 2014 Effective Date, July 1, 2014 3% rate increase 2.57% rate increase Transportation Fee effective 7/l/2013 effecfive7/1/2014 Unit A. Single Family $ 8.17 $ 8.37 Per month B. Multiple Family $ 6.23 $ 6.39 Per month per unit C. Retail Store $ 1.11 $ 1.13 Per month per 100 sq ft. D. Wholesale Use $ 0.64 $ 0.65 Per month per 100 sq ft. E. Office Use $ 0.74 $ 0.75 Per month per 100 sq ft. F. Medical/Dental Use $ 0.99 $ 1.01 Per month per 100 sq ft. G. Service Use $ 0.99 $ 1.01 Per month per 100 sq ft. H. RestaurantrBar Use $ 2.92 $ 2.99 Per month per 100 sq ft. 1. Manufacturing Use $ 0.64 $ 0.65 Per month per 100 sq ft. J. Warehousing Use $ 0.37 $ 0.37 Per month per 100 sq ft. K. Hotel/Motel Use $ 2.92 $ 2.99 Per month per guest room L. Institutional and all other accounts not $ 2.92 $ 2.99 Per month per required parking spaces classified above. Including nursing as specified in Chapter 18.92, homes and retirement homes M. Churches and places of Worship NOTE: Users with in the Downtown Overlay District shall be charged on the same basis as elsewhere within the city. The minimum fee per month for any commercial account is: $ 8.17 $ 8.37 RESOLUTION NO. 2014- A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A STORM DRAIN UTILITY FEE SCHEDULE PURSUANT TO ASHLAND MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 4.27.050 AND REPEALING RESOLUTION 2013-13. THE CITY OFASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The "Storm Drain Utility Fee Schedule," marked "Exhibit A" and attached to this Resolution, is adopted as the Storm Drain Utility fee incorporating a 2.57% rate increase effective July 1, 2014. SECTION 2. One copy of this Resolution and "Exhibit A" shall be maintained in the office of the City Recorder and shall be available for public inspection during regular business hours. SECTION 3. The Fees adopted pursuant to this Resolution shall be effective July 1, 2014. SECTION 4. Resolution 2013-13 is repealed on the effective date of this Resolution. SECTION 5. The fees imposed by this Resolution are classified as not subject to the limits of Section l lb of Article XI of the Oregon Constitution (Ballot Measure No. 5). This resolution was duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of 2014, and takes effect July 1, 2014, upon signing by the Mayor. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of 2014. John Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: David H. Lohman, City Attorney Exhibit A City of Ashland STORM DRAINAGE UTILITY FEES WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS RESOLUTION 2014- Effective Date, July 1, 2014 3% rate increase 2.57% rate increase Storm Drainage Fee effective 7/01113 effective 7/01/14 Unit A. Single Family $ 4.29 $ 4.40 Per month B. Condominium, 1-9 Units $ 1.85 $ 1.89 Per month per unit C. Multi-Family, 1-9 Units $ 1.85 $ 1.89 Per month per unit D. Mobile Home & Trailer, 1-9 Unites $ 1.85 $ 1.89 Per month per unit E. All other uses not classified above $ 1.43 $ 1.46 Per 1000 square feel impervious area F. Minimum charge per account $ 4.29 $ 4.40 Per month NOTE: Users with in the Downtown Overlay District shall be charged on the same basis as elsewhere within the city. The minimum fee per month for any commercial account is: $ 4.29 $ 4.40 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication May 6, 2014, Business Meeting Public Hearing and adoption of Miscellaneous Fees & Charges for FY 2015 FROM: Lee Tuneberg, Administrative Services Director, tuneberl@ashland.or.us SUMMARY This public hearing is to consider changes to some of the various fees and charges used by the city. Many are remaining the same but some are recommended to increase by an inflationary factor. Others are to be adjusted to cover cost of service as recommended by staff. There are also a few new charges recommended. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: In the past the City of Ashland adopted many separate resolutions and ordinances that set specific rates and fees for the multitude of services rendered to the public. That was greatly simplified during FY 2010-2011 when the current process of adopting a single fee resolution was approved. A staff goal had been to create an annual process that deals with most, if not all, miscellaneous fees and charges, and a booklet that is comprehensive yet easy to use. This is the third annual renewal of that process. Attached are the draft booklet and a resolution to establish or update the included fees effective July 1, 2014, unless another effective date is set by separate Council action. New fees and changes to old ones are identified in a "proposed" column and are bolded in red. If an entry is not bolded in red or identified as a new or changed fee it is the existing amount or methodology for calculation. Also attached are memos from departments explaining significant changes beyond inflationary adjustments. Please note that: 1. Items not approved may come back to Council separately or in this process next year. 2. Not all fees and charges are changing. 3. City and Park fees are included. 4. Utility rates and system development charges are examples of charges that are not incorporated within this process and resolution. 5. Some of the larger increases relate to "cost of providing the service," as substantiated by the departmental memo, and are intended to have the requester bear the cost. We should expect that there may be some "errors and omissions" so staff is requesting through the resolution that the new fee schedule take priority over any disconnects or conflicts with prior resolutions that were not repealed. When such incidents occur, staff will correct them as soon as possible and incorporate the revisions in updates to this new, annual process. Page 1 of2 ~r, CITY OF ASHLAND Those departments requesting changes are listed below. To assist you in your review, the following proposed changes are attached: • Finance • Community Development • Electric • Fire • Information Technology • Municipal Courts • Police • Public Works • Parks & Recreation FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: These adjustments will fund or help to fund operations, most representing payments for requested services. STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends Council approve these charges. SUGGESTED MOTION: I move approval of the resolution titled, "A Resolution Adopting a Miscellaneous Fees & Charges Document and Repealing Prior Fee Resolution 2013-17." ATTACHMENTS: Resolution Miscellaneous Fees & Charges Document - Draft 2014-2015 Departmental Memos: • Finance • Community Development • Electric • Fire • Information Technology • Municipal Courts • Police • Public Works • Parks & Recreation Page 2 of 2 RESOLUTION NO. 2014- A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MISCELLANEOUS FEES AND CHARGES DOCUMENT AND REPEALING PRIOR FEE RESOLUTION 2013-17 Recitals: A. The City currently has many resolutions and ordinances that establish fees for different departments and activities. B. The City desires to provide all of its miscellaneous fees and charges in one document so citizens can easily determine the costs of city services. C. The City desires to repeal all prior resolutions that establish fees and charges and adopt all fees and charges with one resolution for convenience of its citizenry. THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The Miscellaneous Fees and Charges Document, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, is hereby approved and establishes the fees and charges for City services. New fees, those not charged before, are not affective until 30 days following date of approval unless otherwise established by Council action. SECTION 2. The following resolutions are specifically repealed: Resolutions 2013-17 and all other fees and charges inconsistent with the fees and charges set forth herein are repealed. SECTION 3. This resolution was duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of 2014, and takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of April, 2014. John Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: David Lohman, City Attorney Page 1 of 1 CITY OF ASHLAND F%Aisl MISCELLANEOUS FEES AND CHARGES DOCUMENT ADOPTED: June 4, 2013 EFFECTIVE: July 1, 2013 2014 PROPOSED CHANGES ASHLAM13 PARKS St RECREATION PARKS AND RECREATION MISCELLANEOUS FEES AND CHARGES ADOPTED: June 4, 2013 EFFECTIVE: July 1, 2013 2014 PROPOSED CHANGES Miscellaneous Fees and Charges page 2 miscellaneous fees 8 charges Table of Contents CITY OF -ASH LAN D MISCELLANEOUS FEES AND CHARGES ALPHABETICALLY BY DEPARTMENT SECTION 1 - Administrative Services/Finance Administrative Billing Charge ..............................................................................................................................Page 8 Initial Business License Application Fee ..............................................................................................................Page 8 Temporary Business License Application Fee ......................................................................................................Page 8 Renewal Application Fee ......................................................................................................................................Page 8 Rental Property Fees .............................................................................................................................................Page 8 Late Application Fee .............................................................................................................................................Page 8 Late Renewal Fee (paid 30 days after the due date) ..............................................................................................Page 8 Utility Billing Administrative Fees .......................................................................................................................Page 9 Reconnection Charge ............................................................................................................................................Page 9 Service Connection ................................................................................................................................................Page 9 Parking Structure Fees ..........................................................................................................................................Page 9 Downtown Parking Area Fees ...............................................................................................................................Page 9 SECTION 2 - City Recorder Copy Fees ............................................................................................................................................................Page 10 Audio Tapes ........................................................................................................................................................Page 10 Liquor Licenses ...................................................................................................................................................Page 10 Taxicab Licenses .................................................................................................................................................Page 10 Lien Searches ......................................................................................................................................................Page 10 Elections ..............................................................................................................................................................Page 10 Street/Alley Vacations ........................................................................................................................................Page 10 Ambulance ..........................................................................................................................................................Page 10 Annexation ..........................................................................................................................................................Page 10 Research Fee .......................................................................................................................................................Page 10 SECTION 3 -Community Development Pre-Application Conference ................................................................................................................................Page I I Administration Actions .......................................................................................................................................Page 11 Type 1, 11 and III Reviews ...................................................................................................................................Page I I Legislative Amendments .....................................................................................................................................Page 12 Appeals ................................................................................................................................................................Page 12 Solar Access ........................................................................................................................................................Page 12 Community Development Fee ............................................................................................................................Page 12 Copy Fees ............................................................................................................................................................Page 12 Prepared Documents ...........................................................................................................................................Page 12 Research Fee .......................................................................................................................................................Page 12 Building Permit Fees ...........................................................................................................................................Page 13 Plan Review Fee for Commercial and Residential ..............................................................................................Page 13 Miscellaneous Fees for Commercial ...................................................................................................................Page 13 Inspection Fees for Commercial and Residential ................................................................................................Page 14 Change of Occupancy Fees Page 14 Residential Plumbing Permit Fees ......................................................................................................................Page 14 Commercial Plumbing Permit Fees .....................................................................................................................Page 15 Residential Mechanical Permit Fees ...................................................................................................................Page 15 Commercial Mechanical Permit Fees ..................................................................................................................Page 16 Electrical Permit Fees .........................................................................................................................................Page 16 Residential Restricted Energy Electrical Permit Fees .........................................................................................Page 17 Renewable Energy Systems ................................................................................................................................Page 17 State of Oregon Surcharge ..................................................................................................................................Page 17 Building Permit Refund Policy ...........................................................................................................................Page 18 Excavation/Grading Fees ....................................................................................................................................Page 18 miscellaneous fees 8 charges page 3 Table of Contents SECTION 4 - Electric Temporary Service Drop .....................................................................................................................................Page 19 Meter Charges Page 19 Non Radio Frequency Meter Charges .................................................................................................................Page 19 Non Sufficient Funds Check Fee ........................................................................................................................Page 19 Reconnection Charge ..........................................................................................................................................Page 19 Service Calls .......................................................................................................................................................Page 19 Service Connection Page 19 Scheduled Work After Hours ..............................................................................................................................Page 19 Unauthorized Connection ...................................................................................................................................Page 19 Line Extension Charges ......................................................................................................................................Page 20 ENR Calculations ........................................:.......................................................................................................Page 20 SECTION 5 -Fire Copy Fees ............................................................................................................................................................Page 21 Report Fees Page 21 Research Fee .......................................................................................................................................................Page 21 Fire Fees ..............................................................................................................................................................Page 21 Emergency Medical Services ..............................................................................................................................Page 21 Plan Checks .........................................................................................................................................................Page 22 Other Page 22 First Aid/CPR Classes .........................................................................................................................................Page 22 Inspection Fees ....................................................................................................................................................Page 22 Weed Abatement .................................................................................................................................................Page 22 SECTION 6 - Information Technology Installation Fees ..................................................................................................................................................Page 23 Disconnect Fees ..................................................................................................................................................Page 23 Truck Roll ...........................................................................................................................................................Page 23 Field Technician Hourly Rate .............................................................................................................................Page 23 Consulting and Technical Support Hourly Rate ..................................................................................................Page 23 Non-City Employee Staff Screening ...................................................................................................................Page 23 Fiber Service Installation ....................................................................................................................................Page 23 Transit Fees .........................................................................................................................................................Page 23 Static IP Address .................................................................................................................................................Page 24 Quality of Service Fee .........................................................................................................................................Page 24 Business Augmented Upload Package ................................................................................................................Page 24 Non-Return of Customer Premise Equipment (CPE) Devices ............................................................................Page 24 CATV Seasonal Reconnects & Disconnects .......................................................................................................Page 24 CATV House Amp Fee .......................................................................................................................................Page 24 Utility Billing Lobby Signage Fee ......................................................................................................................Page 24 page 4 miscellaneous fees & charges Table of Contents SECTION 7 - Municipal Court Appeal Transcript Fee .........................................................................................................................................Page 25 City Attorney Deferred Sentence/Diversion .......................................................................................................Page 25 Civil Compromise Costs .....................................................................................................................................Page 25 Compliance Inspection Fee .................................................................................................................................Page 25 Court Appointed Counsel Fees and Charges .......................................................................................................Page 25 Default Judgment ................................................................................................................................................Page 25 Discovery Fees ....................................................................................................................................................Page 25 Diversion by Municipal Court .............................................................................................................................Page 25 Extend/Amend City Attorney Deferred Sentence/Diversion ..............................................................................Page 25 Failure to Appear for Bench Trial/Show Cause Hearing ....................................................................................Page 25 Failure to Appear for Jury Trial ..........................................................................................................................Page 25 Forfeiture of Security ..........................................................................................................................................Page 25 Mediation of Violation (Municipal Court Mediation) ........................................................................................Page 25 Non Sufficient Funds Check Fee ........................................................................................................................Page 25 Court Costs .........................................................................................................................................................Page 25 Expunction ..........................................................................................................................................................Page 25 Show Cause Admission of Allegation .................................................................................................................Page 25 Bench Probation Fee ...........................................................................................................................................Page 25 Warrant ................................................................................................................................................................Page 25 Withholding on County Assessment ...................................................................................................................Page 25 Domestic Partnership Registration ......................................................................................................................Page 25 SECTION 8 -Police Police Reports Page 26 Research Fee .......................................................................................................................................................Page 26 Visa Letters .........................................................................................................................................................Page 26 Finger Print Cards ...............................................................................................................................................Page 26 Photographs (CD) ................................................................................................................................................Page 26 Audio Tapes/ICOP Videos ..................................................................................................................................Page 26 Non Sufficient Funds Check Fee ........................................................................................................................Page 26 Impound/Tow Fee ...............................................................................................................................................Page 26 Taxi Operator License .........................................................................................................................................Page 26 Bicycle License ...................................................................................................................................................Page 26 SECTION 9 - Public Works - Miscellaneous Fees & Charges Copy Fees, Black, White and Color ....................................................................................................................Page 27 Plat & Plan Checks ..............................................................................................................................................Page 27 Public Works/Engineering Inspections, Permit Etc ............................................................................................Page 28 GIS Data & Mapping Services ............................................................................................................................Page 29 Sanitary Sewer Connection Fees .........................................................................................................................Page 30 Water Connection Fees .......................................................................................................................................Page 30 Cemetery Fees .....................................................................................................................................................Page 31 Sexton Fees .........................................................................................................................................................Page 32 Miscellaneous Fees .............................................................................................................................................Page 32 Vases ...................................................................................................................................................................Page 32 CPI & ENR Calculations .....................................................................................................................................Page 32 miscellaneous fees 8 charges page 5 Table of Contents SECTION 10 - Parks and Recreation Miscellaneous Fees and Charges Wedding Packages ..............................................................................................................................................Page 34 Group Picnic Rentals ..........................................................................................................................................Page 34 Deposits ..............................................................................................................................................................Page 34 Special Event Fees ..............................................................................................................................................Page 34 Alcohol Fee .........................................................................................................................................................Page 34 General Building Reservations ...........................................................................................................................Page 34 Field Usage .........................................................................................................................................................Page 34 Calle Seating .......................................................................................................................................................Page 35 Daniel Meyer Pool Page 35 Youth & Adult Recreation Programs Ashland Rotary Centennial Ice Rink .......................................................Page 35 Oak Knoll Golf Course Fees ...............................................................................................................................Page 35 Community Garden Fees ....................................................................................................................................Page 36 Nature Center School Programs ..........................................................................................................................Page 36 Nature Center Community Programs ..................................................................................................................Page 36 Oak Knoll Golf Course Wedding Fees ...............................................................................................................Page 36 Maps ....................................................................................................................................................................Page 36 SECTION 11 - List of Rates and Charges Set by Separate Resolutions System Development Charges (SDCs) List of Resolutions Parks and Recreation Resolution 2000-29 ..........................................................................................................Page 37 Transportation Resolution 1999-42 .....................................................................................................................Page 37 Sewer Resolution 2006-27 ..................................................................................................................................Page 37 Storm Resolution 2002-15 ..................................................................................................................................Page 37 Water Resolution 2006-27 ..................................................................................................................................Page 37 Utilities Rates and Fees List of Resolutions AFN Resolution 2010-28 ....................................................................................................................................Page 37 Electric Resolution 2012-34 ................................................................................................................................Page 37 Sewer Resolution 2013-09 ..................................................................................................................................Page 37 Storm Drain Resolution 2013-28 ........................................................................................................................Page 37 Transportation Resolution 2013-27 .....................................................................................................................Page 37 Water Resolution 2013-08 ..................................................................................................................................Page 37 SECTION 12-Research Fee Research Fee .......................................................................................................................................................Page 37 SECTION 13 - Building Valuation Data Building Safety Division-Building Valuation Data-February 2013 ...............................................................Page 38 SECTION 14 - Attachments Community Development - Excavation Grading Fees - Exhibit A - Resolution 2006-19 ..................................Page 39 page 6 miscellaneous fees & charges Miscellaneous Fees and Charges Miscellaneous fees 8 charges page 7 Section 1-Administration Administration Services/Finance Miscellaneous Fees and Charges Administrative Billing Charge (up to 10%) Per Billing Business License Fees Initial Business License Application Fee Licensee shall pay a prorated fee of $10 for each month, $120.00 for first 2 employees* or portion of a month, remaining in the fiscal year from +$5.00 for each additional the date of the application with a minimum fee of $25.00 employee Temporary Business License Application Fee $25.00 Renewal Application Fee $75.00 for first 2 employees* +$10.00 for each additional employee Rental Property Fees Same as above for activity including six or more properties. Late Application Fee $25.00 Late Renewal Fee (paid 30 days after the due date) 10% with a minimum of $25.00 *Pursuant to AMC 6.04.020.E an employee is an individual who performs service for another individual or organization. The number of employees reported shall be the number of employees as of the date the new ap- plication or renewal will become effective if approved. It does not matter whether an individual is a full, part- time, or temporary employee for business license purposes. page 8 miscellaneous fees and charges Section 1-Administration Utility Billing Miscellaneous Fees and Charges Administrative Fees: Current Proposed Notification of Pending Collection $10.00 Retumed Check Charge $35.00 Reconnection Charge: During Business Hours $25.00 After Hours or Holidays $100.00 Service Connection: Normal working hours $10.00 Other Hours or Holidays $100.00 Parking Fees Parking Structure Fees: 6:00 a.m. - 6:00 p.m. (or segment) $1.00 6:00 p.m. - 2:00 a.m. (per hour) $1.00 6:00 a.m. - 2:00 a.m. (maximum) $3.00 Parking permit (where applicable in City structure or lot) 6:00 a.m. - 6:00 p.m. Monday - Saturday (unless otherwise posted) $20.00 Parking Ticket Surcharge (citywide) $4.00 Downtown Parking Area Fees: Short Term (<30 minutes) unloading from "marked" No charge business vehicle with flashers Daily parking permit (Orange)- I st day or fraction of day $5.00/day $10.00/day Additional days (limited to 5 days; no charge on Sunday or $1.00/day $2.00/day federal holidays) • Limit of two per business address at a time • Applicable permits/licenses must be current • Each permit is good for one parking space • Not applicable to handicapped or short term spaces equal to or less than 15 minutes, green loading zones, fire or other restricted areas. miscellaneous fees and charges page 9 Section 2-City Recorder City Recorder Miscellaneous Fees & Charges Copy Fees: Black and White Copies Letter/Legal Single-Sided $ .20 each Black and White Copies Letter/Legal Double-Sided $ .40 each Black and White Copies Tabloid Single-Sided $ .40 each Black and White Copies Tabloid Double-Sided $ .80 each Color Copies Letter Legal Single-Sided $1.50 each Color Copies Tabloid Single-Sided $3.00 each Audio Tapes: CD/DVD/Cassette $5.00 each Liquor Licenses: Temporary Liquor License (processing fee) $10.00 Liquor License (new processing fee) $100.00 Liquor License (change of ownership processing fee) $75.00 Annual Renewal Liquor License $35.00 Taxicab Licenses: New Certification application (one-time processing fee) $250.00 Annual Renewal of Certificate $200.00 (per vehicle) Lien Searches: (fees set by Ordinance 2385 in 1986) Routine requests $20.00 Rush/Fax Requests $30.00 Elections: (amount set by Resolution #2009-05) Required deposit for Citizens Initiative $500.00 Street/Alley Vacations: (filing fee set by Resolution 1994-24) Required deposit of filing fee $500.00 Ambulance: Annual renewal fee $300.00 Annual ambulance fee (each vehicle) $100.00 Annexation: Processing fee for County Department of Assessment $300.00 Research Fee: Refer to Section 12 on page 37 page 10 miscellaneous fees and charges Section 3-Community Development Planning/Community Development Miscellaneous Fees and Charges Current Proposed Pre-Application Conference: $130.00 $131.00 Administration Actions: Final Plat Review: Partitions* $130.00+$10/lot $131.00+$10/lot Subdivisions* $330.00+$28/lot $335.00+$28/lot New Sign Permit $130.00+$2.50/sq ft $131.00+$2.50/sq ft Replacement Sign Permit $28.00+$2.50/sq ft Home Occupation Permits $28.00 Zoning permit (fence, accessory structure, etc.) $28.00 Land Use Approval Extension Request $330.00 $335.00 Lot Line Adjustments $330.00 $335.00 Any other Administrative Action $330.00 $335.00 Type I Reviews: Tree Removal Permit (not associated with another action) $28.00 Solar Setback Variance $998.00 $1,012.00 Amendments to Conditions $998.00 $1,012.00 Physical & Environmental Constraints Permit $998.00 $1,012.00 Conditional Use Permit - Accessory Residential Unit $649.00 $658.00 Conditional Use Permit (Type I only) $998.00 $1,012.00 Variance (Type I only) $998.00 $1,012.00 Residential Site Review $998.00+$66/unit $1,012.00+$67/unit Final Plan Performance Standards $998.00+$66/unit $1,012.00+$67/unit Land Partitions $998.00+$66/unit $1,012.00+$67/unit Commercial Site Review $998.00+.5% of $1,012.00+,5% of project value** project value** Any other Type I Review $998.00 $1,012.00 Independent Review of Wireless Communication Facilities* **$5000.00 Type II Reviews: Conditional Use Permit (Type II only) $2,002.00 $2,032.00 Variance (Type 11 only) $2,002.00 $2,032.00 Outline Plan or Preliminary Plat for Subdivisions $2,002.00+$134/lot $2,032.00+$136/lot Final Plan with Outline $2,666.00+$134/lot $2,705.00+$136/lot Commercial Site Review $2,002.00+.5% (.005) $2,032.00+.5%(.005) of project value** of project value** Any other Type 11 Review $2,002.00 $2,032.00 Independent Review of Wireless Communication Facilities***$5000.00 *(Does not include Public Works review fee, See pg 17) **Project value includes the estimated valuation of all structures (per State of Oregon Building Code), as well as all related project site improvements, such as grading, paving, landscaping, bioswales, etc. ***The initial deposit required with an application for a new wireless communication facility that is not collocated is $5,000, and shall be used by the City for the costs of expert review of the application. If any time during the planning ap- plication process the account balance is less than $ 1,000, the Applicant shall upon notification by the City replenish the account so the balance is at least $5,000. The maximum total consultant fees to be charged to the Applicant shall be $ 10,000, and any unused portion of fee will be refunded. miscellaneous fees and charges page 11 Section 3-Community Development Type III Reviews: Current Proposed Zone/Comprehensive Plan Map Change $2,666.00 $2,705.00 Comprehensive Plan Change $2,666.00 $2,705.00 Annexation $4,010.00 $4,070.00 Urban Growth Boundary Amendment $4,010.00 $4,070.00 Any other Type III Review $3,339.00 $3,389.00 Legislative Amendments: Comprehensive Plan Map/Large Zoning Map Amendment $4,680.00 $4,750.00 Land Use Ordinance Amendment $4,680.00 $4,750.00 Comprehensive Plan Amendment $4,680.00 $4,750.00 City Sponsored Legislation (City Council Directive) $0.00 Appeals: Appeal for initial Public Hearing $150.00 (Building Appeals BoardlDemolition Review Board/Planning Commission) Appeal for Final Decision of City $325.00 (Planning Commission or City Council) Solar Access: Solar Access Permit (not a Solar Variance) $50.00+$10.00 per lot affected Community Development Fee: This fee is charged concurrently with Building Permit 1.1% (.011) of Fees at the time of building permit application for all new construction building permits requiring a plan review. per building code definition of valuation Community Development Copy Fees Copy Fees: Black and White Copies Letter/Legal Single-Sided $ .20 each Black and White Copies Letter/Legal Double-Sided $ .40 each Black and White Copies Tabloid Single-Sided $ .40 each Black and White Copies Tabloid Double-Sided $ .80 each Color Copies Letter/Legal Single-Sided $1.50 each Color Copies Tabloid Single-Sided $3.00 each Prepared Documents: Site Design & Use Standards $5.00 Street Tree Guide $5.00 Transportation Element $5.00 Downtown Plans (2001, 1998) $5.00 Street Standards Guide $5.00 Comprehensive Plan/Land Use Code $40.00 Research Fee: Refer to Section 12 on page 37 page 12 miscellaneous fees and charges Section 3-Community Development Building Division Permit Fees for Commercial and Residential In accordance with OAR 918-050-0030, the applicant for a building permit shall provide an estimate of con- struction costs at the time of application. Permit valuations shall include value of all work, including mate- rials and labor, for which the permit is issued. This estimate shall also include the cost of electrical, gas, me- chanical, plumbing, and permanent equipment and systems. The City will also prepare an estimate of the building valuation based on the current ICC Valuation table that is published and updated annually. The building permit will.be based on the highest of these two estimates. Building Permit Fees: Total Value of Work Performed: $1.00 to $500.00 $10.00 $501.00 to $2,000.00 $10.00 for the first $500.00 plus $1.50 for each additional $100.00 or fraction thereof, to and including $2,000.00 $2,001.00 to $25,000.00 $32.50 for the first $2000.00 plus $6.00 for each additional $1000.00 or fraction thereof, to and including $25,000.00 i $25,001.00 to $50,000.00 $170.50 for the first $25,000.00 plus $4.50 for each additional $1,000.00 or fraction thereof, to and including $50,000.00 $50,001.00 to $100,000.00 $283.00 for the first $50,000.00 plus $3.00 for each additional $1,000.00 or fraction thereof, to and including $100,000.00 $100,001.00 and up $433.00 for the first $100,000.00 plus $2.50 for each additional $1,000.00 or fraction thereof Plan Review Fee for Commercial and Residential: Plan Review Fee A plan review fee equal to 65% of the structural permit fee shall be due at application Additional Plan Review Fee $65.00 per hour Deferred Submittal Fee 65% of structural permit fee of deferred submittal valuation with a $50.00 minimum fee Miscellaneous Fees for Commercial: Commercial Fire Sprinkler/Fire Suppression/ Total value of work performed (structural permit Fire Alarm fee) Commercial Fire Sprinkler/Fire Suppression/ 65% of structural permit fee Fire Alarm Plan Review Note: See appendix for methodology for calculation of valuation for all permit fees utilizing valuation/ value of work miscellaneous fees and charges page 13 Section 3-Community Development Inspection Fees for Commercial and Residential: Inspections for which no building permit applies $65.00 per hour; (minimum 1 hour) per inspector Re-inspection Fee $50.00 Inspections outside normal business hours (minimum 1 hr) $130.00 per hour; per inspector Change of Occupancy Fees: Special Inspection: Single Building $65.00 per hour; 1 hour minimum Multiple Buildings or Tenant Spaces in a building or on a single lot $65.00 per building, per inspector, per hour; 1 hour Minimum Special Inspection Report $65.00 per hour Re-issued Certificate of Occupancy No Charge Residential Plumbing Permit Fees New Residential: Cost Each 1 bathroom/kitchen (includes: first 100 feet of water/sewer lines; hose bibs; ice maker; under floor low-point drains; and rain-drain packages) $285.00 2 bathrooms/1 kitchen $345.00 3 bathrooms/1 kitchen $405.00 Each additional bathroom (over 3) $45.00 Each additional kitchen (over 1) $45.00 Remodel / Alterations: Remodel / Alterations (minimum fee) $40.00 Each fixture, appurtenance, and first 100 ft of piping $15.00 Miscellaneous Residential: Minimum Fee $40.00 Piping or private storm drainage systems exceeding the first 100 feet $22.00 Backflow Assembly $15.00 Residential Fire Sprinkler (include plan review): $2.44 x total square footage of structure = Sprinkler Valuation (use Building Permit Fees Valuation Table on page 13 for fee calculation) Manufactured Dwelling or Pre-Fab: Connections to building sewer and water supply $50.00 RV and Manufactured Dwelling Parks: Base fee (including the first 10 or fewer spaces) $150.00 Each additional 10 spaces $100.00 page 14 miscellaneous fees and charges Section 3-Community Development Commercial Plumbing Permit Fees Commercial, Industrial, and Dwellings other than one - or two-family: Minimum fee $40.00 Each fixture $15.00 Piping (based on number of feet) $0.75/ft Miscellaneous: Minimum fee $40.00 Specialty fixtures $15.00 Re-inspection (no. of hrs. x fee per hour) $65.00 Special requested inspections (no. of hrs x fee per hour) $65.00 Medical gas piping: Minimum fee $50.00 Valuation $500 to $2,000 $50.00 + $5 per $100 of valuation Valuation $2,001 to $25,000 $125.00+$18 per $100 of valuation Valuation $25,001 to $50,000 $540.00+$14 per $100 of valuation Valuation $50,001 to $100,000 $890.00 + $9 per $100 of valuation Valuation greater than $100,000 $1,340.00 + $8 per $100 of valuation Residential Mechanical Permit Fees Mechanical Permit Minimum Fee: $50.00 Furnace/Burner including ducts & vents: Up to I00k BTU/hr. $12.00 Over 100k BTU/hr. $15.00 Heaters/Stoves/Vents: Unit Heater $15.00 Wood/pellet/gas stove/flue $15.00 Repair/alter/add to heating appliance or refrigeration $12.00 unit or cooling system/absorption system Evaporated cooler $15.00 Vent fan with one duct/appliance vent $7.50 Hood with exhaust and duct $10.00 Floor furnace including vent $15.00 Gas Piping: One to four outlets $6.00 Additional outlets (each) $0.75 Air-handling Units, including Ducts: Up to 10,000 CFM $10.00 Over 10,000 CFM $15.00 miscellaneous fees and charges page 15 Section 3-Community Development Compressor/Absorption System/Heat Puma: Up to 3 hp/100K BTU $15.00 Up to 15 hp/500K BTU $25.00 Up to 30 hp/1,000 BTU $50.00 Up to 50 hp/1,750 BTU $60.00 Over 50 hp/1,750 BTU $75.00 Incinerator: Domestic incinerator $25.00 Commercial Mechanical Permit Fees Minimum Fee $50.00 Total valuation of mechanical system and installation costs 0.5% of valuation Miscellaneous Fees: Re-inspection $50.00 Specially requested inspection (per hour) $65.00 Regulated equipment (un-classed) $50.00 Electrical Permit Fees Residential per unit, service included: Cost Each 1,000 sq. ft. or less $106.00 Each additional 500 sq. ft. or portion thereof $19.00 Limited energy $25.00 Each manufactured home or modular dwelling service or feeder $50.00 Multi-family residential $45.00 Residential and Commercial-Services or Feeders: installation, alteration, relocation: 200 amps or less $63.00 201 to 400 amps $75.00 401 to 600 amps $125.00 601 to 1,000 amps $163.00 Over 1,000 amps or volts $375.00 Reconnect Only $50.00 Temporary Services or Feeders: 200 amps or less $50.00 201 to 400 amps $69.00 401 to 600 $100.00 Over 600 amps or 1,000 volts, see services or feeders section above Branch Circuits: new, alteration, extension per panel: Branch circuits with purchase of a service or feeder $3.00 Branch circuits without purchase of a service or feeder: First branch circuit $43.00 Each additional branch circuit $3.00 page 16 miscellaneous fees and charges Section 3-Community Development Miscellaneous Fees: service or feeder not included: Each pump or irrigation circle $50.00 Each sign or outline lighting $50.00 Signal circuit or a limited energy panel, alteration or extension $50.00 Specially requested inspection (per hour) $65.00 Each additional inspection over the allowable $50.00 Residential Restricted Energy Electrical Permit Fees Fee for all systems*: $25.00 Audio and stereo systems Burglar alarm system Doorbell Garage-door opener Heating, ventilation, & air-conditioning systems Landscape lighting & Sprinkler controls Landscape irrigation controls Outdoor landscape lighting VACUUM Systems Each additional inspection $25.00 *For new construction, this permit fee covers all systems listed or can be sold separately. Renewable Energy Systems: 5 KVA or less $79.00 5.01 KVA to 15 KVA $94.00 15.01 KVA to 25 KVA $156.00 Wind generation systems in excess of 25 KVA: 25.01 KVA to 50 KVA $204.00 50.10 KVA to 100 KVA $469.00 For hind generations systems that exceed 100 KVA the permit fee shall be calculated in accordance with OAR 918-309-0040 Solar generation systems in excess of 25 KVA: $6.25/KVA The permit charge will not increase beyond the calculation for 100 KVA. Permits issued under this sub- section include three inspections. Additional inspections will be billed at an hourly rate. Building Permit Reinstatement Fee A building permit expires after a period of 180 days from the date of issue with no inspection activity. To reactivate an expired permit, a fee of $50.00 per construction discipline is required (Building, Plumb- ing, Mechanical, Electrical). State of Oregon Surcharge - ORS 455.210(4) State of Oregon permit surcharge is 12% of structural, plumbing, mechanical and electrical components of the overall building permit. miscellaneous fees and charges page 17 Section 3-Community Development Excavation/Grading Fees See attachment 1. Exhibit A, Resolution 2006-19 (page 40) Building Permit Refund Policy The City Ashland Community Development Department offers partial refunds for building permits that have been issued, have had no inspections performed and have not yet expired (six months from issue date). Refunds for permits that have expired are limited to any Systems Development Charges (SDC's) that were part of the permit fees. The following fees are not refundable: • Building Plan Check Fee • Fire Protection Review Fee • 50% of Community Development Fee (maximum equal to Building Plan Check Fee) • 50% of Engineering Development Fee (maximum equal to Building Plan Check Fee) The remainder of the permit fees are refundable. A $50 administrative fee will be subtracted from the eligible refund amount for costs associated with the refund process. Refund amounts can be placed on account for future use and no administrative fees are charged. How to request a refund Submit the following documents to the Community Development Department at 51 Winburn Way: • Approved set of plans (stamped) • Job Inspection card • Letter of refund request signed by applicant/owner with mailing address for refund check The refund will be processed within 30 days of the date of the request letter. page 18 miscellaneous fees and charges Section 4-Electric Electric Miscellaneous Fees and Charges Temporary Service Drop: Current Proposed Single Phase Underground temp 300 amps or less $245.00 $247.00 Single Phase Overhead temp 300 amps or less $291.00 $295.00 Three Phase Actual Cost Meter Charges: Meter Tests for accuracy: Once in twelve months No Charge Two or more times in twelve months $172.00 $176.00 Meter repairs/replacement (Damaged by Customer) Actual Cost Non Radio Frequency Meter Charges: Conversion from Radio Frequency (RF) to Non RF meter No Charge Monthly Fee to manually read Non RF meter No Charge Non Sufficient Funds Check Fee: $35.00 Reconnection Charge: Normal working hours $25.00 Other hours or Holidays $100.00 Service Calls: Once in twelve months No Charge Two or more times in twelve months $199.00 $203.00 Other hours or Holidays $297.00 $303.00 Service Connection for Applicant: Normal working hours $10.00 Other hours or Holidays $100.00 Deenergize Service NA $254.00 Scheduled work after hours: Actual Cost Unauthorized Connection: $215.00 miscellaneous fees and charges page 19 Section 4- Electric Line Extension Charges New Single-Family Residential Service: Current Proposed Overhead service in existing developed areas from distribution line to and including meter $568.00 Overhead service upgrade or increased service for 300 amps or less $568.00 Replacement of service from overhead to underground, 300 amps or less. Customer provides all trenching, conduit, backfilling and compaction as directed by the City. $1,161.00 Underground residential service of 300 amps or less. Customer provides conduit, trenching, back fill, compaction as directed by the City. $695.00 *Underground Distribution Installation Charges: Per Lot less house service and engineering fees. $1,158.00 $1,186.00 *Subdivisions of0 to 20 engineering fee per lot $167.00 $171.00 * Subdivisions of 2l+engineering fee per lot $253.00 $259.00 *Three Phase subdivision as required by city per lot $253.00 $259.00 Any overhead/underground service over 300 amps Actual Cost Commercial, Institutional and Industrial Service Actual Cost **Blower Door Leak Test (gas heat customers only) $75.00 **Duct Leak Test (gas heat customers only) $125.00 * Methodology: Current ENR Rate - Old ENR Rate/Old ENR Rate = % Rate of Adjustment (9515.86-9289.65)/9289.65 = 2.44% Source: Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index (ENR) **Electric heat customers = no fee miscellaneous fees and charges page 20 Section 5-Fire Fire Miscellaneous Fees and Charges Copy Fees: Current Proposed Black and White Copy Letter/Legal Single Sided $ .20 each Black and White Copies Letter/Legal Double Sided $ .40 each Black and White Copies Tabloid Single Sided $ .40 each Black and White Copies Tabloid Double-Sided $ .80 each Color Copy Letter/Legal Single Sided $ 1.50 each Color Copy Tabloid $ 3.00 each Report Fees: Non patient Pre-hospital Care Reports $12.00 for 10 pages or less $15.00 over 10 pages Fire Incident Reports $12.00 for 10 pages or less $15.00 over 10 pages Photographs $12.00 per case request CD/DVD $19.00 per case request Mailing Cost Actual Cost Research Fee: Refer to Section 12 on page 37 Fire Fees: Cost Recovery Equipment *Per Current Oregon State Fire Marshal Standardized Cost Schedule Personnel *$50.00 per person per hour - 2 Hour minimum per person Hazardous Materials Cleanup Actual Cost Emergency Medical Services: FireMed Annual Household Fee-Annual Renewal $55.00 per year FireMed Plus Annual Household Fee-Annual Renewal $95.00 per year Emergency Medical Service Fee -Aid Call $302.40 per patient $305.42 Ambulance Base Rate (per current rate schedule) $1,029.54 per patient $1,039.84 Ambulance Mileage Rate (per current rate schedule) $14.00 per mile Ambulance Base rate for sit-up patients $514.77 per patient $519.92 Ambulance Waiting Time $25.00 per 1/2 hour Ambulance Stand By (2 hour minimum) $100.00 per hour On scene Coordinator $50.00 per hour Extra attendant $45.00 each Ambulance Service Area 1112013 rate schedule Base rates ivill be adjusted each calendar year by the most current rate schedule posted by the Center for Medicare/ Medicaid Services (CMS) that sets the "Ambulance Inflation Factor". Other rates and mileage charges will be updated as approved by the County Commissioners. miscellaneous fees and charges page 21 Section 5-Fire Fire and Life Safety: Plan Checks: Any Building Permit - 24% of the Building Division Structural Permit Fee and Plan Check Fee New Subdivision or Land Partition - 24% of the Engineering Subdivision Plat Check Fee Other: Fire Hydrant Flow Tests required for new installations will be assessed at $100 per flow test. Any review required by the Oregon Fire Code, and which does not involve a building permit, will be charged at the rate of $50.00 per hour. A minimum charge of $25.00 will be assessed to these reviews. When the Building Division assesses additional fees for plan reviews and/or field inspections, any fire department staff time associated with that activity will be included in their fees at their specified rate. First Aid/CPR Classes: Current Proposed Basic Life Support (BLS) for Healthcare Providers CPR Class $55.00/person Heart Saver CPR & First Aid Class $55.00/person Heart Saver CPR Class $35.00/person Family and Friends CPR Class $5.00/person Inspection Fees: Initial Inspection (Re-inspection Included) Occupancy Type "B" 0-1,000 St. $34.00 $35.00 1,001-3000 sf. $51.00 $52.00 Occupancy Type "A, E, F, H, 1, M, S" 0-3,000 sf. + B 1,001-3,000 $51.00 $52.00 Occupancy Type "A,B, E, F, H, 1, M, S" 3,001-10,000 sf. $100.00 $102.00 10,001-20,000 sf. $150.00 $152.00 Over 20,000 sf. $200.00 $203.00 Occupancy Type "R, SR" 3 to 10 Units $51.00 $52.00 11 to 40 Units $100.00 $102.00 41 to 70 Units $150.00 $153.00 Over 70 Units $200.00 $203.00 Non-Compliance after 2"d Inspection Inspection Fee + $53.00 $54.00 Non-Compliance after 3rd Inspection Inspection Fee+ $105.00 $107.00 Non-Compliance after 4'h Inspection / Subsequent Inspections Inspection Fee + $156.00 $158.00 Weed Abatement: Staff time Refer to Section 12 on page 37 Mailing Cost Actual Cost Weed Abatement by Contractor Actual Cost page 22 miscellaneous fees and charges Section 6-Information Technology Information Technology Miscellaneous Fees and Charges' Installation Fees: Basic installation-Pre-wired CATV outlets only $ 20.00 (Additional charges for parts and supplies apply) Add Trap ("filter") $10.00 New customer cable modem activation $10.00 Cable Modem $50.00 Refurbished 90 -day replacement warranty Additional materials $10.00 Over-and-beyond regular installation including multi outlets, outlet plates, additional wiring, replacement of customer damaged outlets. Wi Max standard installation $200.00 Disconnect Fees: Disconnect $50.00 Remove Trap ("Filter") $10.00 Truck Roll: $35.00 Field Technician Hourly Rate: Non-standard work such as advancing troubleshooting, $55.00 non-standard outlets, fishing wire inside walls, etc. Consulting and Technical Support Hourly Rate: For support issues not related to AFN infrastructure, performance, $85.00 and reliability. Minimum charge on hour. Non-City Employee Staff Screening: Charge for each vendor employee submitted for authorization to Access AFN and City Service Center facilities. $150.00 Fiber Service Installation: Minimum one -tine fee for overhead served eennee':__-, individual n_.______ Mandatory two-yea, agi ennt. (IBC) & quote 11000' &et of existing ove, head AFN fibe, netwo, k will be elina ged by quote. Overhead served connections. Individual Business Case (IBC) & quote Underground served connections IBC & quote EthernetT ans*rees- Transit @ 100 Mbps IBC & quote miscellaneous fees and charges page 23 Section 6-Information Technology Static IP Address: $5.00/mo each Maximum of 5 Static Internet Protocol (IP) addresses* • Minimum level of service for static IP and Quality of Service (QoS) is "CHOICE" or higher service tier. oS Fee: $3.50/mo VOIP (phone) enhancement available with AFN Choice or higher service level through AFN certified Modems. Business Augmented Upload Package (additional 5 Mbps): $15.00/mo Available exclusively on AFN Direct ~ Current CityofAshland Business License ~ Business Augmented Upload Poelinge available enly with! Small Office/Home Office (SOHO) or Small Business Must have current City of Ashland Business License *Additional fee added to base AFN Direct retail rates on specific packages. Maximum SOHO upload speed with augmented upload service at up to 9 Mbps Small Office/Home Office Business Augmented Upload Package @$80/month Maximum Small Business upload speed with augmented upload service at up to 10 Mbps Small Business Augmented Upload Package @ $100.00/month Non-return of customer premise equipment (CPE) devices: $300.00 CPE's must be returned on disconnect date of AFN Amynhereaudio, max services. Cable TV (CATV) Seasonal Reconnects & Disconnects: $10.00/visit Non-pay disconnects & reconnects Service change Install HBO filter CAN House Amp Fee: $35.00/each Utility Billing Lobby Signage Fee: $100.00/mo. Cable Modem Rental $5.00/mo. Non Return of Rented Modem at Closing of Account $50.00each Cable Modem Purchase $50.00/each * Resolution 2010-28 (Section 2, page 38) grants Information Technology management ability to set promotional rates. page 24 miscellaneous fees and charges Section 7-Municipal Court Transit @ 1000 Mbps Municipal Court Miscellaneous Fees and ChalOds quote Court Administration Fees: Crime Violation Appeal Transcript Fee $35.00 $10.00 City Attorney Deferred Sentence/Diversion $60.00 $40.00 N/A Civil Compromise Costs $75.00 N/A Compliance Inspection Fee N/A $25.00 Court Appointed Counsel Fees and Charges Billed ranging from $250 - $600 Default Judgment N/A $15.00 Discovery Fees Imposed in Accordance with Miscellaneous Fee & police Department Resolutions See Police and City Recorder Fees Diversion by Municipal Court: Classes I-IV, A-D Unclassified and Specific Fine Violations N/A Presumptive Fine Extend/Amend City Attorney Deferred Sentence/Diversion $45.00 $45.00 N/A Failure to appear for Bench Trial/Show Cause hearing $90.00 $70.00 Failure to Appear for Jury Trial $150.00 N/A Forfeiture of Security $25.00 $25.00 Mediation of Violation (Municipal Court Mediation) N/A $65.00 Non Sufficient Funds Check $25.00 $25.00 Court Costs $35.00 $45.00 Expunction $240.00 $240.00 Show cause Admission of Allegation $25.00 X99 N/A Bench Probation Fee $100.00 N/A Bank Costs Warrant $25.00 40% at monthly Other Domestic Partnership Registration $25.00 All other fees and charges inconsistent with the fees and charges set forth herein are repealed. Nothing in the Resolution is intended to detract from the inherent power of the Court pursuant to general law to im- pose fees and charges established in state law of city ordinance in addition to the fees and charges speci- fied herein. master miscellaneous fees and charges page 25 Section 8-Police Police Miscellaneous Fees and Charges Current Proposed Police Reports: $12.00 for reports 10 pages or less $15.00 for reports over 10 pages Research Fee: Refer to Section 12 on page 37 Visa Letters: $19.00 Fingerprints Cards: $20.00 first card $35.00 first card $10.00 each additional card Photographs (CD): $19.00 Audio Tapes/ ICOP Videos: $19.00 Non Sufficient Funds Check Fee: $35.00 Impound/Tow Fee: $105.00 Cash only Taxi Operator License: $20.00 renewal $42.00 new page 26 miscellaneous tees and charges Section 9-Public Works Public Works Miscellaneous Fees and Charges Copy Fees: Current Proposed Black and White Copies Letter/Legal Single-Sided $0.20 each Black and White Copies Letter/Legal Double-Sided $0.40 each Black and White Copies Tabloid Single-Sided $0.40 each Black and White Copies Tabloid Double-Sided $0.80 each Color Copies Letter/Legal Single-Sided $1.50 each Color Copies Tabloid Single-Sided $3.00 each Existing maps printed in color on HPI055CM plotter (241b bond Paper) Arch C 18 x 24 3.00 sq. ft. $18.00 Arch D 24 x 36 6.00 sq. ft. $36.00 Arch E 36 x 48 12.00 sq. ft. $72.00. Existing maps or copies of existing maps copied in B&W on Xerox 3030 large format copier (201b bond paper) Arch C 18 x 24 $8.00 $2.00 Arch D 24 x 36 $12.00 $3.00 Arch E 36 x 48 $16.00 $4.00 Note: Maps printed on materials other than the specified bond are double the standard print fee Plat & Plan Checks: Current Proposed Subdivision Plats (does not include planning review fee See page 11) $730.00 plus $741.00 plus $110.00 per lot $112.00 per lot Condominium Plats $730.00 plus $741.00 plus $110.00 per lot $112.00 per lot Partition Plats (does not include 24% Fire Department Review Fee) $391.00 $397.00 Subdivision Improvement Plat Check 5% Engineer Fee (5% of the public improvement cost) Engineering Development Fee (this fee is charged concurrently with Building Permit Fees at the time of building permit applications. Applies To all new residential dwelling units and commercial 0.75% of valuation Developments. Remodels, additions and accessory Buildings are not assessed this fee.) miscellaneous fees and charges page 27 Section 9-Public Works Public Works/Engineering Inspections. Permits, etc: Current Proposed Subdivision Construction Inspection/ 5% Engineer Fee (5% of Public Works Improvement Inspection the public improvement cost) Street or Alley Excavation Permit $197.00 + per ft. cost S200.00+ based on pavement age Encroachment Permit $197.00 $200.00 Miscellaneous Construction Permit $64.00 $65.00 (Construction of curb, sidewalk, driveway Apron, etc.) Dust Suppression Permit $64.00 $65.00 Driveway Painting Permit $16.00 (includes a can of paint) Right-of Way Closure-Street $197.00 $200.00 Right-of Way Closure-Sidewalk(>72 hrs) $64.00 $65.00 Right-of Way Closure-Sidewalk(<72 hrs) $16.00 Right-of Way Closure-Parking Space(>72 hrs) $64.00 $65.00 Right-of Way Closure-Parking Space(<72 hrs) $16.00 Block Party $16.00 Sidewalk Dining-Annual Renewal $4.00/sq. ft. $4.50/sq. ft. (minimum 50 sq. ft) 1st increase in 4 yrs Functional Item-Annual Renewal $64.00 $65.00 Special Event Permits (per Resolution 2012-08): Base Special Event Permit Fee (plus applicable $130.00 $132.00 Fees below) Events that require city staff overtime 60% of city staff Off 60% of city staff Rush Fee (less than 90 days advance notice) $250.00 page 28 miscellaneous fees and charges Section 9-Public Works Public Works/Engineering Inspections, Permits, etc. (cont) Current Proposed Loaned Functional Item, Pennant Application Fee $133.00 $135.00 Publication Box Per Publication-Annual Renewal $27.00 Special vehicle Permit-Initial Fee $272.00 $276.00 Special vehicle Permit-Annual Renewal $109.00 $111.00 Penalty for No Permit 150% of permit cost Street or Alley Vacation $659.00 $669.00 An administrative fee of 25% will be assessed on all permit refunds. Refunds will not be issued if requested later than one-year following the application date. GIS Data & Mapping Services: GIS Hourly Rate $80.00 $81.00 Information on Disk $40.00/utility per $41.00/utility per Quarter section Quarter section Planning Pre-Application Maps $22.00 Plotting Fee $6.00/square foot New Address Assignment $37.00/address # $38.00/address # Street Name Approval Fee $105.00 $107.00 miscellaneous fees and charges page 29 Section 9-Public Works Sanitary Sewer Connection Fees: Current Proposed Sanitary sewer mainline video inspection $317.00 minimum $325.00 minimum (cost based on time and materials) Water Connection Fees: The installation of all new water services and large taps regardless of size will be charged on a time and materials basis. First Utility Locate at an address No Charge Additional Locates at same address $69.00 $71.00 Water meter re-read Once in 12 months No Charge Each additional re-read in 12 months $31.00 $32.00 Water Meter Field Test $49.00 $56.00 Water Meter Bench Test 3/4" or I" Water Meter $107.00 $110.00 1 1/2" or 2" Water Meter $201.00 $206.00 Larger Meters Actual Cost page 30 miscellaneous fees and charges Section 9-Public Works Water Connection Fees Continued Current Proposed Water pressure check once in 12 month No Charge Each additional pressure check in 12 months $39.00 $40.00 Water Chlorination Test -Subdivision retest upon failure (cost based on time and materials) $636.00 $653.00 Water Pressure Test -Subdivision retest up failure (cost based on time and materials) $381.00 $391.00 Cemetery Fees: Sales of grave spaces or burial plots: (fees split, 40% to the cemetery fund & 60% to the cemetery trust fund) Grave Space -Lawn and Monument Sections $506.00 $514.00 Grave Space -Baby Land $160.00 $162.00 Grave Space -Niches (bronze) $428.00 $434.00 Grave Space -Urn garden $160.00 $162.00 Grave space-Crypt $1,071.00 $1,087.00 Sales of liners and markers: (fees split, 40% to the cemetery fund & 60% to the cemetery trust fund) Concrete cemetery box, including setting $428.00 $434.00 Concrete liners Cost plus 10% Final inscriptions $125.00 min charge $158.00 min charge Niche Vases* $160.00 $162.00 Grave markers Wholesale cost X 2.5 not to exceed $700.00 Grave marker setting, concrete base $160.00 $162.00 Monticello burial vault (sealed concrete) $1,178.00 $1,196.00 *Previously not in book. miscellaneous fees and charges page 31 Section 9-Public Works Sexton Fees: Current Proposed Opening and closing graves, ground $428.00 $434.00 Opening and closing graves, double-deep $481.00 $488.00 Opening and closing graves, infant $160.00 $162.00 Opening and closing crypts $428.00 $434.00 Opening closed crypts $428.00 $434.00 Opening and closing niches $108.00 $110.00 Opening closed niche NA $110.00 Inter cremains in grave spaces $160.00 $162.00 Scattering of cremains $108.00 $110.00 Disinterment $1,050.00/in advance $1,081.00/in advance Saturday, Sunday or Holiday burial $428.00 $434.00 Miscellaneous Fees: Grave Setup Rental $106.00/occurrence $108.00/occurrence Tent Rental $53.00/day $54.00 Perpetual care lots, sold before 1927 $108.00 $110.00 Vases: Galvanized $43.00 $44.00 *cemetery fees will be subject to a 1.5% finance charge per month if not paid within 60 days of use. All above services will be sold pre-need in installments, interest free, with a minimum payment of one-twelfth of the total sale. 2013 CPI and ENR Calculations: Methodology: Current CPI Rate - Old CPI Rate/Old CPI Rate = % Rate of Adjustment (232.773-229.292)/229.292= 1.5% (236.293-232.773)/232.773=1.5% Methodology: Current ENR Rate - Old ENR Rate/Old ENR Rate = % Rate of Adjustment (9455.98-9267.57)/9267.57= 2.00/6 (9701.96-9455.98)/9455.98=2.6% CPI used for: ENR used for: Plat & Plan Checks Sanitary Sewer Connection Fees Public Works/engineering Inspections, Permits, etc. Water Connection Fees GIS Data & Mapping Services Cemetery Fees page 32 miscellaneous fees and charges Section 10 - Parks and Recreation ASHLANII) PARKS, 8c RECREATIC3M Section 10 Parks and Recreation Miscellaneous Fees and Charges miscellaneous fees and charges page 33 Section 10-Parks and Recreation Parks Miscellaneous Fees and Charges Current Proposed Wedding Packages: Lithia Park Sites $800.00/8 hrs. $400.00/4 hrs. Community Center $1,150.00 park site included Pioneer Hall $1,150.00 park site included Group Picnic Rentals: Cotton Memorial Area $75.00/4 hrs. Madrone Area $60.00/4 hrs. Top Southern Lawn $55.00/4 hrs. Hillside Picnic Area $55.00/4 hrs. Sycamore Grove $75.00/4 hrs. Brinkworth Area $60.00/4 hrs. Lawn below Upper Duck Pond $60.00/4 hrs. Butler Bandshell $220.00/8 hrs. Deposits: Picnic Areas $75.00 Lithia Park Weddings $75.00 Butler Bandshell $190.00 Buildings Security $300.00 for events (refundable) $150.00 for meetings (refundable) Special Event Fees: Special Event Application Fee (previously omitted) N/A $25.00 Street Closure Fee $75.00 Park Booth fee $25.00/per booth (max. 10) Alcohol Fee: $150.00 (non-refundable) General Building Reservations: The Grove Full Facility $41.50/hr. on weekdays $50.00/hr. on weekends The Grove Otte/Petterson $22.50/hr. on weekdays $25.00/hr. on weekends Hunter Park Senior Center $21.00/hr. on weekdays $33.00/hr. on weekends Long Term User Fee $18.00/hr. (at least 6 days/yr) Oak Knoll Golf Course $21.00/hr. on weekdays $33.00/hr. on weekends Pioneer Hall/Community Center $21.00/hr. on weekdays $33.00/hr. on weekends Miscellaneous Equipment Fee $100.00 Field Usage: Tournaments $36.50/day each team Ball field Lights $31.00/hr $34.00/hr page 34 miscellaneous fees and charges Section 10-Parks and Recreation Calle Seating: Current Proposed Artisans $5.00/sq. foot $7.00/sq. foot Restaurant Seating $6.00/sq. foot Daniel Meyer Pool: Admission $2.00 Lap Swim $2.50 Water Aerobics $3.25 Swim Lessons $40/$42/$48 (adjusted in 2012) (age of child/length of lesson) Private Lessons $18.00 Open Swim punch card $30.00 Lap Swim punch card $40.00 Water Aerobics punch card $55.00 Season Pass $140.00 Youth Recreation Programs: 60/40 split with instructor and Parks Department Adult Recreation Programs: 60/40 split with instructor and Parks Department Ashland Rotary Centennial Ice Rink: Youth Admission $3.50 Adult Admission $4.00 Skate Rental $2.50 Hockey Admission $5.50 Adult Hockey Admission (previously omitted) NA $5.50 Youth Hockey Admission (previously omitted) NA $5.00 Adult Hockey Punch Card (previously omitted) NA $50.00 Youth Hockey Punch Card (previously omitted) NA $45.00 Open Skate/Kids Only Punch Card (previously omitted) NA $30.00 Ice Skating Private Lesson (previously omitted) NA $10.00 per 30mins Helmets (previously omitted) NA $8.00 Group Rental $5.00 Oak Knoll Golf Course Annual Passes: Annual Pass-Single $1,100.00 Annual Pass-Family $1,540.00 Daily Adult Fees (ages 18 to 54) 9 Holes: November-February $14.00 March-October $16.00 18 Holes: November-February $20.00 March-October $24.00 Daily Coupon Rate $10.00 miscellaneous fees and charges page 35 Section 10-Parks and Recreation Daily Senior Fees (ages 55 & up) Monday-Friday Only 9 Holes: November-February $12.00 March-October $14.00 18 Holes: November-February $18.00 March-October $22.00 Daily Junior Fees (ages 8 to 17) 9 Holes: Year-Round $5.00 18 Holes: Year-Round $10.00 Driving Range One token (35) balls $3.00 Cart Fees (per person) 9 Holes: Year Round $10.00 Year Round Senior rate $8.00 18 Holes: Year Round $13.00 Community Garden Fees: 10x10 $29.00-$34.50 depending on location 10x20 $49.00-$57.50 depending on location 20x20 $75.00-$86.50 depending on location 4x12 $29.00 Refundable Deposit $20.00 Nature Center School Programs: $200.00/Class Nature Center Community Programs: 70/30 split with instructor and Parks Department Oak Knoll Golf Course Wedding Fees: November-February $1,500.00 - full day November-February $800.00 - half day March-October $750.00 - full day March-October $400.00 - half day Maps: City of Ashland Map $3.00 (or 2 maps for $5.00) Watershed Map $3.00 (or 2 maps for $5.00) page 36 miscellaneous fees and charges Section 11-Rates and Charges Set by Separate Resolutions Rates and Charges Set by Separate Resolutions Listed Below* System Development Charges (SDCs) Parks and Recreation SDCs -Resolution 2000-29 Transportation SDCs -Resolution 1999-42 Sewer SDCs -Resolution 2006-27 Storm SDCs -Resolution 2002-15 Water SDCs -Resolution 2006-27 Utility Rates and Fees AFN Utility Fees -Resolution 2010-28 Electric Rates - Resolution 2013-34 Sewer Rates -Resolution 2013-12 Storm Drain Fees -Resolution 2013-13 Transportation Fees -Resolution 2013-14 Water Rates -Resolution 2013-11 SECTION 12 - Research Fee A. The City shall charge a research fee based on the hourly wage of the staff person doing the re search, and the fee shall be billed in fifteen minute increments. The hourly wage used to calcu- late the research fee shall not include the cost of benefits. The City will establish a fee in its an- nual fee resolution that is reasonably calculated to reimburse the City for the actual cost of mak- ing public records available, including locating the requested records, reviewing the records to delete exempt material, supervising a person's inspection of original documents to protect the integrity of the records, summarizing, compiling, or tailoring a record, either in organization of media, to meet the person's request. The City may charge for search time even if it fails to locate any records responsive to the requestor even if the records located are subsequently determined to be exempt from disclosure. Copies of documents provided by a routine file search of 15-30 minutes or less will be charged at a copy rate established in the annual fee resolution. B. The City may include a fee established to reimburse for the costs of time spent by the city attorney in reviewing the public records, redacting materials from the public records into exempt and nonexempt records. The City fee may also include the cost of time spent by an attorney for the City in determining the application of the provisions of ORS 192.505. C. The City may not establish a fee greater than $25 unless the requester is provided with written notification of the estimated amount of the fee and the requestor confirms in writing that he/she wants the City to proceed with making the records available. D. Prepayment shall be required if the amount of the request is greater than $25. If the actual charges are less than the prepayment, and overpayment shall be refunded. *A114 the above resolutions can be found in full text on the City of Ashland's Website: http://ashlandor.us miscellaneous fees and charges page 37 Section 13 - Building Valuation Data Community Development Department-Building Safety Division Methodology for calculation of permit valuation ¢c INTERNATIONAL 11 COUNCIL Building Valuation Data - February 2014 The International Code Council is pleased to provide the does not take into account any regional cost differences. As following Building Valuation Data (BVD) for its members. The such, the use of Regional Cost Modifiers is subject to the BVD will be updated at six-month intervals, with the next authority having jurisdiction. update In August 2014. [CC strongly recommends that all permit Fee Multiplier jurisdictions and other Interested parties actively evaluate and assess the Impact of this BVD table before utilizing it in their Determine the Permit Fee Multiplier: current code enforcement related activities. 1. Based on historical records, determine the total annual The BVD table provides the 'average" construction costs per construction value which has occurred within the square foot, which can be used in determining permit fees for jurisdiction for the past year. a jurisdiction. Permit fee schedules are addressed in Section 2 Determine the percentage of the building 109.2 of the 2012 International Building Code (IBC) whereas department budget expected to be provided by building Section 109.3 addresses building permit valuations. The permit fees can be established by using the BVD table and a permit revenue. Permit Fee Multiplier, which is based on the total construction Bldg. Dept. Budget x value within the jurisdiction for the past year. The Square Foot Permit Fee Multiplier = Construction Cost table presents factors that reflect relative Total Annual Construction Value value of one construction classification/occupancy group to Example another so that more expensive construction is assessed greater permit fees than less expensive construction The building department operates on a $300,000 budget, and . It expects to cover 75 percent of that from building permit fees. ICC has developed this data to aid. jurisdictions in determining The total annual construction value which occurred within the permit fees. It is important to note that while this BVD table jurisdiction in the previous year is $30,000,000. does determine an estimated value of a building (i.e., Gross $300,000 x 75% Area x Square Foot Constriction Cost), this data is only Permit Fee Multiplier = - = 0.0075 Intended to assist jurisdictions In determining their permit fees. $30,000,000 This data table is not intended to be used as an estimating guide because the data only reflects average costs and is not Permit Fee representative of specific construction. The permit fee is determined using the building gross area, the This degree of precision Is sufficient for the intended purpose, Square Foot Construction Cost and the Permit Fee Multiplier. which is to help establish permit fees so as to fund code Permit Fee = Gross Area x Square Foot Construction Cost compliance activities. This BVD table provides jurisdictions x Permit Fee Multiplier with a simplified way to determine the estimated value of a Example building that does not rely on the permit applicant to determine the cost of construction. Therefore, the bidding process fora Type of Construction: 116 particular job and other associated factors do not affect the Area: 1st story= 8,000 sq. ft. value of a building for determining the permit fee. Whether a 2nd story - 8,000 sq. ft. specific project is bid at a cost above or below the computed Height: 2 stories value of construction does not affect the permit fee because Permit Fee Multiplier 0.0075 the cost of related code enforcement activities Is not directly Use Group: B affected by the bid process and results. 1. Gross area: Building Valuation Business =2 stories x 8,000 sq. ft. = 16,000 sq. ft. The following building valuation data represents average 2. Square Foot Construction Cost: valuations for most buildings. In conjunction with IBC Section B/IIB = $158.70/sq. ft. 109.3, this data is offered as an aid for the building official to determine If the permit valuation is underestimated, Again It 3. Permit Fee: should be noted that, when using this data, these are Business - 16,000 sq. ft. x $158.70/sq. ft x 0.0075 'average costs based on typical construction methods for -$19,044 each occupancy group and type of construction. The average costs Include foundation work, structural and nonstructural building components, electrical, -plumbing, mechanical and interior finish material. The data is a national average and page38 miscellaneous fees and charge Section 13 - Building Valuation Data Important Points . For purposes of establishing the Permit Fee Multiplier, the • The BVD is not Intended to apply to alterations or repairs estimated total annual construction value for a given time to existing buildings. Because the scope of alterations or period (1 year) is the sum of each building's value (Gross repairs to an existing building varies so greatly, the Square Area x Square Foot Construction Cost) for that time period Foot Construction Costs table does not reflect accurate (e.g., 1 year). values for that purpose. However, the Square Foot , The Square Foot Construction Cost does not Include the Construction Costs table can be used to determine the price of the land on which the building is built. The Square cost of an addition that is basically a existing alone building Foot Construction Cost takes into account everything from which happens to attached to an existing building. foundation work to the roof structure and coverings but the case of such additions, the only alterations to the e existing does not include the price of the land. The cost of the land building would involve the attachment of the not affect the cost of related code enforcement addition to the existing building and the openings between does activities and Is not included in the Square Foot the addition and the existing building. Construction Cost. Square Foot Construction Costs aag4 Group 2012 International Building Code IA IB RA 118 IIIA IIIB N VA vB A-1 Assem ,theaters, with stone 224.49 217.12 211.82 202.96 190.83 185.33 196.14 174.43 167.83 A-1 Assembly, theaters, without stage 205.71 108.34 19104 164.18 172.15 166.85 177.36 155.75 149.15 A-2 Assembly, nightclubs 177.15 172.12 167.31 160.58 150.83 146.74 154.65 138.68 132.81 A-2 Assembly, restaurants bars, banquet halls 176.15 171.12 165.31 159.58 148.83 145.74 153.65 134.68 131.81 A•3 Assembly, churches 207.73 200.36 195.06 188.20 174.41 168.91 179.38 158.02 151.41 A-3 Assrnbl general, community halls libraries museums 173.36 185.99 159.69 151.83 138.90 134.40 145.01 122.50 116.89 Ad Assembl' arenas 204.71 197.34 191.04 183.18 170.15 165.65 176.36 153.75 148.15 $ Business 179.29 172.71 166.96 158.70 144.63 139.20 152.43 128.93 121.32 E Educational 192.11 185.49 180.05 171.90 160.09 151.62 165.97 139.90 135.35 F-1 Factory and industrial moderate hazard 108.42 103.32 97.16 93.38 83.24 79.62 89.22 68.69 66.39 F-2 Factory and industrial low hazard 107.42 102.32 97.18 92.38 83.24 78.62 88.22 68.69 83.39 H-1 Hi Hazard explosives 101.53 96.44 91.29 88.49 77.57 72.95 82.34 63.02 NP. H234 High Hazard 101.53 98.44 91.29 88.49 77.57 72.95 82.36 63.02 57.71 H-5 HPM 179.29 172.71 166.96 158.70 14413 139.20 152.43 126.93 121.32 1-1 institutional, su wised environment 177.76 171.50 166.52 159.45 146.31 142.45 159.13 131.29 126.72 1-2 lnsfitutimal, hospitals 302.44 295.85 290.11 281.64 266.80 N.P. 275.58 249.09 N.P. 1-2 Institutional nursing homes 209.38 202.79 197.05 188.78 175.72 N.P. 182.52 158.01 N.P. 1-3 Institutional, restrained 204.27 197.68 191.94 183.67 171.10 164.68 177.41 153.40 145.80 14 Institutional, day care facilities 177.76 171.50 166.52 159.45 148.31 142.45 159.13 131.29 126.72 M Mercantile 132.04 127.01 121.20 115.47 105.47 102.39 109.54 91.33 88.45 R-1 Residential hotels 179.14 172.89 167.90 160.83 147.95 144.10 160.52 132.93 128.36 R-2 Residential multiple family 150.25 143.99 139.01 131.94 119.77 115.91 131.62 104.74 100.18 R-3 Residential, one. and tw family 141.80 137.80 134.46 131.00 125.88 122.71 12629 117.71 110.29 R4 Residential, carelassisted living facilities 177.70 171.50 166.52 159.45 148.31 142.45 159.13 131.29 128.72 S-1 Storage, moderate hazard 100.53 95.44 89.29 85.49 75.57 71.95 81.34 81.02 56.71 S-2 Storo e, low hazard 99.53 94.44 89.29 84.49 75.57 70.95 80.34 61.02 55.71 U Utility, miscellaneous 75.59 71.22 66.78 83.37 56.99 53.22 60.41 44.80 42.48 a. Private Garages use Utility, miscellaneous b. Unfinished basements (all use group) c $15.00 per sq. ft. c. For shell only buildings deduct 20 percent d N.P. = not perr ulted miscellaneous tees and charges page 39 Miscellaneous Fees and Charges Attachment 1. ~ C. I T Y OF Exhibit A ~ a ASHLAND GRADING FEES Genehal. Fees shall be assessed In accordance with file provisions of this section. Plan Review Fees. When a plan or other data are required to be submitted, a plan review fee shall be paid at the Ume of submitting plans and specifications for review. Said plan review fee shall be as out forth In Table A. Separate plan review fees shall apply to retaining walls or major drainage structures as required. For excavation and fill on the same site, the fee shall be based on the volume of excavation or fill, whichever is greater. Grading Permit Fees. A fee for each grading permit shall be paid to the City of Ashland, Building Dept. as set forth in Table B. Separate pemdb and toes shall apply to retaining walls or major drainage structures as required. There shall be no separate charge for standard terrace drains and similar facilities. TABLE A-GRADING PLAN REVIEW FEES 60 cuble yards or less No Fee 51 to 100 cubic yards $100,00 101 to 1,000 cubic yards $125.00 1 001 10 10 000 cubic rds 150.00 10,001 to 100,000 cubic yards $100.00 for the first 100,000 cubic years, plus $25.00 for each additional 10,000 yards or fraction thereof. Other Fees: Additional plan review required by changes, additions or revisions to approved plana.....$65.25 per hour' minimum charge -one-half hou 'Oh the total hourly cost to Me City, whichever is the greatest This cost shall Include supervision, overhead, equipment hourly wages and Mnge benefits of the employees Involved. TABLE B-GRADING PERMN FEES' 60 cubic yards or less No Fee 51 to 100 cubic yards $75,00 101 to 1,000 cubic yards $75.00 for the first 100 cubic yards plus $25.00 for each additional 100 cubic rde or fraction thereof. Other Inspections and Fees: • Inspections outside of normal business hours (minimum charge -two hcure)$65.25 per hour • Re-inspection fees $65.25 per hour • Inspection for which no fee Is specifically Indicated (minimum chargeane half hour) hoof The fee for a grading permit authorizing additional work to that under a vans permit shall lea the difference between the fee paid for the original pemdt and the fee shown for the entire project Or the total hourly cost to the City, whichever Is the greatest. This cost shall include supervision, overhead equipment, hourly wages and fringe benefits of the employees Involved. page 40 miscellaneous fees 8 charge Miscellaneous Fees and Charges Miscellaneous fees & charges page 41 CITY OF ASHLAND Memo DATE: April 29, 2014 TO: Dave Kanner, City Administrator CC: FROM: Lee Tuneberg, Finance Director DEPT: Administrative Services SUBJECT: Parking Fees I am recommending that the daily charge for the orange placard to park for an extended period in a regular space in the Plaza be raised from $5 the first day and $1 per day thereafter with a weekly total of $10 to $10 the first day and $2 per day thereafter with a weekly total of $20. The current fee was established one year ago attempting to recover some of the cost of managing the permitting and to reduce the prior demand for free parking for construction projects (or other activities that can't be done in a 2 hour timeframe) that were not necessary or abused. Recent experience has shown that charging for the permits is beneficial in that it eliminated most of the frivolous requests but also that bona fide requests require management, especially during periods of high demand where contractors are trying to complete projects before a specific deadline or during the high season of tourism. Like our current parking ticket of $11, many visitors consider the low amounts we charge as a cost of doing business. Especially since other large cities or tourist destinations charge so much for regular parking. Been to downtown Portland lately? This indicates we are priced to low for both permitted parking and ticketing for time violations. Staff is researching the basis for changing parking ticket fees but feels the increase for parking all day or all week should be adjusted to better recognize the economic value of the space. Current estimates indicate a parking space's economic value is many.times that of $10 per day and charging appropriately will still provide a benefit to the requesting party while minimizing the over-use of permits in the plaza. Staff plans to submit a request for changes in ticketing when research has been completed. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DEPARTMENT D. L. Tunebargeberg, Director Tel: 5414885300 20 East Mah Street Fax: 541-552-2059 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 w .ashland.or.us CITY OF ,ASH LAN D Memo DATE: April 28, 2014 TO: Lee Tuneberg, Director of Administrative Services FROM: Bill Molnar, Director of Community Development RE: Miscellaneous Fees and Charges Update The Community Development Department is requesting the following updates to the Miscellaneous Fees and Charges document: 1) Update the Planning Fees in accordance with the March 2014 CPI. 2) Add reference to Public Works plat review fees. A notation' has been added that cross references Public Work's Plat and Plan Check fees identified later in the document. It is intended to inform the customer that a plat review fee is charged by both the Community Development and Public Works Departments. These are existing fees. 3) Add Building Appeals Board to the Appeals Fee structure. This is a new fee targeted at covering a percentage of the costs associated with conducting an appeal hearing before the Building Appeals Board. AMC 15. 04.200 outlines the, appeal process and notes that "an appeal shall include the applicable appeal fee or deposit.as applicable. " This fee will assist in recovering a percentage of the administrative costs associated with preparing public notice for the appeal hearing, convening the six member Building Appeals Board, compiling a packet of relevant information regarding the nature of the appeal, including the Building Official's staff report, and preparation of the Appeals Board final decision. 4) Add Change of Occupancy Fees. Often times a new tenant will move into an existing commercial building and open a new business without knowing that the building they occupy has been constructed and intended for a different use. The Oregon' Structural Specialty Code has specific requirements that apply to specific occupancy types. If a building is constructed to a less restrictive construction method and amore hazardous or intensive occupancy type moves into the building, alterations are required to make the building safe for the new occupancy type. This change in use triggers the need for a special inspection and the reissuance of the Certificate of Occupancy, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Tel:54IA88-5305 51 Winbum Way Fax:54iA68aW Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 500-735-290D www.ashland.orms 5) Insert Excavation/Grading Fees Chart (Exhibit-A). The Excavation/Grading Fees chart was originally adopted by Resolution 2006-19 and was accidentally omitted from the 2013-14 Miscellaneous Fees & Charges Book. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Te1:54i488-5305 51 Winbum Way Fax: 541488MM Ash", Oregan 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 vvw .ashlandzrms CITY OF ASHLAND Memo DATE: April 18, 2014 'to: Lee Tuneberg, Administrative Services Director FROM: Warren DiNapoli, Electric Distribution Systems Manager RE: 2014 Miscellaneous Fees and Charges Attached'are the Electric Department's proposed miscellaneous fees and charges for 2014. Payroll, with the exception of minor increases in materials, is the driver for the fee increases. The 2013 schedule incorporates a bargaining union's 2.5%o pay increase. The remaining fees on the table were increased using the April 2014 Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index (ENR) of 9749.51 in relation to the previous ENR of 9515.86. An additional fee "denergize service" was developed for 2014. This is to reimburse the City for costs associated with a customer request to denergize their electric service for modification associated with their customer owned panel. Also included in the packet for your review are the itemized costs for each of the fees. The detail consists of material, vehicle and labor as estimated for each line item. All fees have been rounded to the nearest dollar. If you have any questions or need additional details, please let me know. Electric Department Tel: 541552-9307 - 90 N. Mountain Ave. Fax: 541552-2438 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.ocus City of Ashland 2014 Electric Department Mise Fees and Charges Proposed Current % Change Fees Fees Tempora Service Dro : Single Phase Underground temp 300 amps or less $247.00 S 245.00 0.8% Single Phase Overhead temp 300 amps or less $295.00 $ 291.00 1.4% Three Phase - Actual Cost Actual Cost Meter Char es: Test or accuracy Once in twelve months No charge No charge Two or more times in 12 months--test for accuracy $176.00 $ 172.00 Meter repairs/replacement (Damaged b y Customer Actual Cost Actual Cost Service Calls Once in twelve months No charge No charge Two or more times in 12 months $203.00 $ 199.00 2.0% Other hours or on Holidays $303.00 $ 297.00 2.00/6 Deener ize service $254.00 NA Scheduled Work after hours Actual Cos[ Actual Cost Line Extension Charges: NEW Single-family Residential Service: Overhead service in existing developed area from distribution line to and including meter $580.00 $ 568.00 2.1% Overhead SERVICE UPGRADE or increased service for 300 am s or less $580.00 $ 568.00 2.1% ep acement o service rom ove ea to un ergmun , 300 amps or less. Customer provides all trenching, conduit, back filling and compaction as directed by the City. $1,217.00 $ 1,161.00 4.8% Underground rest enta service o 300 amps or less Customer provides conduit, trenching, back fill, compaction as directed by the City $697.00 $ 695.00 0.3% UO Distribution Installation Charges: Per Lot less house service and engineering foes $ 1,186.00 S 1,158.00 2.42% Subdivisions of 0-20 en innerin fee per lot $ 171.00 $ 167.00 2.40% Three Phase as required b city per lot $ 259.00 $ 253.00 2.37% Subdivisions of 21+ engineering fee per lot $ 259.00 $ 253.00 '2.37% City of Ashland 2014 Electric Department Misc Fees and Charges Proposed Current % Change Fees Fees Tempora Service Dro : Single Phase Underground temp 300 amps or less $247.00 $ 245.00 0.8% Single Phase Overhead temp 300 amps or less $295.00 S 291.00 1.4% Three Phase Actual cost Actual Cost Meter Cha es: Test for accuse No char e Once in twelve months No charge Two or more times in 12 months--test for accuracy $176.00 $ 172.00 23% Meter re airs/re lacement (Damaged b Customer Actual Cost Actual Cost Service Calls Once in twelve months No charge No charge Two or more times in 12 months $203.00 S 199.00. 2.01 Other hours or on Holidays $303.00 S 297.00 2.0% Deener ize service $254.00 NA Scheduled Work after hours Actual Cost Actual Cost Line Extension Charges: NEW Single-family Residential Service: Overhead service in existing developed area from distribution line to and including meter $580.00 $ 568.00 2.1% Overhead SERVICE UPGRADE or increased service for 300 am s or less $580.00 $ 568.00 2.1% ep acement o service from overhead to underground, 300 amps or less. Customer provides all trenching, conduit, back filling and compaction as directed by the City. $1,217.00 $ 1,161.00 4.8% Underground resi ental service o 300 amps or less Customer provides conduit, trenching, back fill, compaction as directed by the City $697.00 $ 695.00 0.3% UG Distribution Installation Charges: Per Lot less house service and engineering fees S 1,186.00 $ 1,158.00 2.42% Subdivisions of 0-20 en innering fee per lot $ 171.00 $ 167.00 2.40% Three Phase as re aired b city per lot $ 259.00 $ 253.00 2.37% Subdivisions of 2l+engineering fee per lot - $ 259.00 $ 253.00 237% 2of11 CITY OF ASHLAND Electric Department Project Invoice ' Name' Temporary Service Drop 4115/2014 C/o Address Phone City, State Zip Project# Account# _ Description Single Phase Underground temp 300 amps or ' less - Total Material $23.52 qtySITIOCK # Description Price EA Extended, 3 2-0801-00 CONNECTOR, PED 3-250 $5.29 $15.87 3 2-0783-01 CONNECTOR, COVER 4-HOLE $2.55 $7.65 Total Equipment $43.13 Qty Description Unit Cost Extended 1.5 E-6 - Service Vehicle $28.75 $43.13 Total Labor $180A7 • My-StAff Description Unit Cost Extended 1.5 1 Groundsperson $49.43 $74.15 1.5 1 Line Installer/Serviceperson $70.88 $106.32 Total Project $247.91 Prepared By: Signature: CITY OF ASHLAND Electric Department Project Estimate Name, _Temporary Service Drop _ 4115/2014 c/o Address Phone City, State Zip Project# Account# _ Description Single Phase Overhead temp 300 amps or less Total Material $69.20 • STOCKfk Description Price EA Extended 2 2-0950.00 DEADEND WEDGE CLAMP 2 - 6, SM $1.00 $2.00 65 2-2905-00 WIRE #4 OH TRIPLEX ACC OYSTER $0.84 $54.60 6 2-0705-01 CONNECTOR ALUM PARALLEL #8-210 STIR $1.42 $8.52 2 2-2667-00 WIREHOLDER, NYLON ALLOY $2.04 $4.08 Total Equipment $43.13 • 1.5 E-6 - Service Vehicle. $28.76 $43.13 Total Labor $183.12 Qty-HRs Z4ty;Staff Description 1.6 1 Groundsperson, Meter Reader $49.43 $74.15 1.5 1 Line Installer/Serviceperson $72.65 $108.98 Total Project, $295.45, Prepared By: Signature: CITY OF ASHLAND Electric Department Project Estimate Name , Meter Test for Accuracy 411612014 CIO Address Phone City, State Zip Project# Account# Description, Two or more times in twelve months. Total Material Description Price EA • r-obki# Total Equipment $23.00 Qty- Description 1.111ft Cost Extended 2 E-3 - Meter Relay Van $11.50 $23.00 Total Labor $162.56 e Description . Extended 2 1 Meter Relay Technician $76.28 $152.56 Total Project. --,$.i75.56 Prepared By: Signature: CITY OF ASHLAND Electric Department Project Estimate Name Service Calls. 4/1 512 0 1 4 c/o Address Phone City, State Zip Project# Account# Description two or more times in twelve months - normal business hours Total Equipment $57.50 Description 2 E-6 - Service Vehicle $28.75 $57.50 Total Labor $145.30 Qty-HRs a Description 2 1 Line InstalledServiceperson $72.65. $145.30 Total Project $202.80 Prepared By: Signature: CITY OF ASHLAND Electric Department Project Estimate Name _ Service Calls 4115/2014 . c/o Address Phone City, State Zip Project# Account# Description Two or more times in twelvemonths - after hours or holidays Total E ui ment $57.60 a -Description Unit Cost Extended 2 E-6 - Service Vehicle $28.76 $57.50 Total Labor $245.04 pty-Staff Description Unit Cost Extended 2 1 Line Installer/Serviceperson (oT) $122.62 $245.04 Total Project) $302.54 Prepared By: Signature: CITY OF -ASHLAND Electric Department Project Estimate NameDenergize Service 4115/2014 c/o Address Phone City, State Zip Project# Account# Description Request to denergize existing electric service for any modifications to customer owned i electric panel . Total Equipment $71.88 a Description Unit Cost lzxtende~o 2.5 E-6 - Service Vehicle $28.75 $71.88 Total Labor $181.63 w a o 2.5. 1 Line Installer/Serviceperson (OT) $72.65 $181.63 Total Project'. $263.501 Prepared By: Signature: CITY OF ASHLAND Electric Department Project Estimate Name Line Extension Charge 4/15/2014 c/o Address Phone City, State Zip Project# Account# Description, Overhead service in existing developed areas ' from distribution line to and Including meter Total Material $202.46 Price EA Extended • • 2 2-0945-00 DEADEND WEDGE CLAMP 1/0-4, LG $3.37 $6.74 1 0-0000-0 METER 1PH RES RADIO READ $65.84 $65.84 100 2-2915-00 WIRE. 1/OOH TRIPLEX MUREX $1.16 $116.00 16 2-0705-00 CONNECTOR ALUM PARALLEL #8 - 2/0 STR $1.42 $8.52 1 2-2667-00 WIREHOLDER, NYLON ALLOY $2.04 '$2.04 1 2-2670-00 WIREHOLDER, SERVICE PIPE CLAMP $3.34 $3.34 Total Equipment $71.88 • gip_tmn Unit Cast Extended 2.5 E-6 - Service Vehicle $28.75 $71.88 Total Labor $305.20 JSMM•ty:Staff Descrip(ion Unit Cost Extended M 2.5 1 Groundsperson, Meter Reader $49.43 $123.58 . 2.5 1 Line Installer/Serviceperson $72.65 $181.63 Total Project $579.56 Prepared By: Signature: CITY Of ASHLAND Electric Department Project Estimate Name .,Line Extension Charge 4/15/2014 c/o Address Phone city, state zip Project# Account# Description' Overhead service upgrade or Increased service for 300 amps or less- Total Material $202.48 ! ! 2 2-0945-00 DEADEND WEDGE CLAMP 1104, LG $3.37 $6.74 1 0-0000-0 METER 1PH RES RADIO READ $65.84 $65.84 100 2-2915-00 WIRE 1/0 OH TRIPLEX MUREX $1.16 $116.00 6 2-0705-00 CONNECTOR ALUM PARALLEL #8 - 2/0 STR $1.42 $8.52 1 2-2667.00 WIREHOLDER, NYLON ALLOY $2.04 $2.04 1 2-2670-00 WIREHOLDER, SERVICE PIPE CLAMP $3.34 $3.34 Total Equipment $71.88 Qty Description Unit Cost Extended 2.5 E-6 - Service Vehicle $28.75 $71.88 Total Labor $305.20 Description Unit Cost Extended 0 ! ! 2.5 1 Groundsperson, Meter Reader $49.43 $123.56 2.5 1 Line Installer/Serviceperson $72.65 $181.63 Total Project' $579.56 Prepared By: Signature: CITY Of ASHLAND Electric Department Project Estimate Name _L ne Extension, Charges 411612014 c/o Address Phone City, State Zip Project# Account# _ Description Replacement of service from overhead to underground, 300 amps or less. Customer ( provides all trenching, conduit, backfilling and l comoactlon as directed by the Citv 1. Total Material $349.00 MUlty ! Description 3 2-0197-00 BRACKET 3" KENDORF STRAP $2.42 $7.26 3 2-0194-00 BRACKET, STANDOFF, 12" $13.46 $40.38 10 2-0447-00 CONDUIT 3" PVC SCH 80 10' $2.57 $25.70 40 2-0446-00 CONDUIT, 3" PVC, SCH 40 $1.75 $70,00 125 2-3030-00 WIRE, UG, #410 TRIPLEX, URD ALUM 600V $1.55 $193.75 3 2-0801-00 CONNECTOR ALUM PARALLEL #8-210 STR $1.42 $4.26 3 2-9998-00 CONNECTOR, COVER 4-HOLE $2.55 $7.65 Total Equipment $241.60 ! D• 3 E-10 - Bucket Truck $34.50 $103.60 3 E-12- Line Truck $46.00 $138.00 Total Labor $626.07 ! P Description UnitCost Extended 3 1 Lead Working Line Installer $78.58 $235.74 3 1 Line Installer $72.65 $217.95 3 1 Line Truck Driver $57.46 $172.38 Total Project' $1,216.57 Prepared By: Signature: CITY Of ASHLAND Electric Department Project Estimate Name; Line Extension Charges 4115/2014 c/o Address Phone City, State Zip Project# Account# Description., Underground residential service of 300 amps orl less. Customer provides conduit, trenching, backfill, and compaction as directed by the City Total Material $234.01 0 0 Descripti6n Price EA Extended 3 2-0784-00 CONNECTOR, PED 4-350 $4.39 $13.17 1 0-0000-0 METER 1PH RES RADIO READ $65.84 $65.84 100 2-3030-00 WIRE, UG, #4/0 TRIPLEX, URD ALUM 600V $1.55 $155.00 Total Equipment $158.11 Qty Descriotion Unit Cost Ext6nded 2.5 E-6 - Service Vehicle $28.75 $71.88 2.5 E-9 - Bucket truck $34.50 $86.25 Total Labor $305.20 p p . , 2.5 1 Groundsperson, Meter Reader $49.43 $123.58 2.5 1 Line Installer/Serviceperson $72.65 $181.63 Total Project' $697.34 Prepared By: Signature: i I LINE EXTENSION CHARGES I Previous Proposed Underground Distribution Installation Charges: Per Lot less house service and engineering fees. $ 1,158.00 $ 1,186.00 Subdivisions of 0 to 20 engineering fee per lot $ 167.00 $ 171.00 Subdivisions of 21+ engineering fee per lot $ 253.00 $ 259.00 Three phase subdivision as required by city per lot $ 253.00 $ 259.00 i i Previous ENR (Engineering News Record Construction Cost 9515.86 April 2014 ENR Construction Cost 9749.51 % Rate of Adjustment 2.46% i I i CITY OF -AS H LAN D Memo DATE: April 21, 2014 TO: Kristy Blackman FROM: Margueritte Hickman, Division Chief/ Fire Marshal RE: Inspection Fee Increase Please adjust the fire inspection fees in accordance with the CPI of 1.5% effective March 1, 2014. with 1.7% Increase 2014 rounded up. 10,001- -Occupancy 0-1,000 1,001-3,000 0-3,000 3,001-10,000 20,000 >20,000 B $35.00 $52:00 $102.00 $152.00 $203.00 A, E, F, H, I, M, S $52.00 $102.00 $152.00 $203.00 NumberofUnits 3-10 11-40 41-70 >70 R, SR $52.00 $102.00 $153.00 $203.001 1 Reinspection Fees 3rd $54.00 4th $107.00 5th or greater $158.00 ASHLAND FIRE & RESCUE 455 Sisklyou Boulevard Ashland, OR 97520 (541)482-2770•Fax (541) 488-5318 - TTY: 800-735-2900 PaDlIDl DfIarCYCrrDPMEa o 14'_P P 0 Y`,MOI OY y~ F °O'cF5 B pp a s s s s s T~ n ~ cC r~ ~ N V V W h O U L O O E 8 0 P N O r G~ 0 0 Y ' `+f f L ~ U~ H N a M O V h N~ vOi y~y iiS H HH H H H ~ N 6 w ~iL Q H H H H H H H H H VI \ N 9 N O NO q Y bng Y Y YI Y y 8 Yg.O N'~Y5 Q o .5 ~oCy 9o C• 0 Eb 00 mp ~O O^ ON~ 0 O^ YY y yy p O P. 0. U Nn Y ,apt y~.~ o h .o $ o 0 0 0 0 y y C 4. L b . tV h tV vi fV O. ° . y .-1 F F rl F H H H H H H Q 4: O C U i Y U2U2 y b ~i ~ N y bO u ~'o~~'`°'en E b~ ~ Z g s w Y Y ~ 3 pp m O 1Y o y Q Y Y u rY. W 1"' 0" 0" t All w~wN~~Yggg~ . qq~! u u ~ ~ ' 8 ~ivavv ~a u ~ a c°) L y g cd~a ~`8 8 UY Y, 'Y+'; LL ~d ~ ~ UCg Y m 06°.s $ e .5 m m~~ s'~s's'a 3LF o`oo m9~oo~ 5' r O~ ~i ~`E e~dEEEEE 4~ O ~ e o ummmmUu aZa a U rc I,t Uo w ,.w ¢aaa~.w ~s x s~ x 5 E G a ry 4 ~ ~ N S .N N~NIVfH NL N ~N.' •Nf x~ g 4~ V p~. p_~_p~ pO p 8,g gp888 p 8 g 8y„V~ ~;~9 OOO j/ gOO O pC GOO OO o VI `O rl G3 ON(Oy „ OU N O yL,' 9 $DIY NNlH1N MN N N N' yS H N N H N N H H H N N N- H N N N OS Q 8~ ~gc u c ~ °m ! p H.E .E .E oa 3Ua ~ 8g n g$~5a83~ + .~n e~~ @ d- d M=e ry u° c $ o 3 c x~ ~~o qsQ c l~ ~ V.pe yN'J; „NN ~l.y6 i N ry tEll O~ i. q FU~ N.C.1 d V x y~N xN 6x1 ° C D 15 m Q w'° a a U U S S. S. S. 8 S E E ~ Y 5 CN3 U in V 9 C I- F-~FS 1- ~LL 6V. y.. N N a w ? l'i` b` 'Z`¢: gZg` E cEj VmB' LT Q.]N i, 5LL YI d $i 8EO ~.a .F o9< Lr paap I~$ w LL <X a~LLQ LL LL 0] a X'X X.in3 x . CITY OF -ASHLAND Memo DATE: April 29, 2014 TO: Lee Tuneberg, Administrative Services Director FROM: Michael Ainsworth, Telecommunications Manager CC: Kristy Blackman, Administrative Services/Finance Administrative Assistant RE: Telecom's Proposed Changes/Revisions to Miscellaneous Fees and Charges The AFN Telecommunications Division is proposing changes solely to the text descriptions listed in the Information Technology section pages 23 and 24 and no changes to the actual fees or fees structure. Changes to the document (pages 23 and 24) are primarily revisions of the description of services and text formatting to improve the reading flow. Significant changes include: - Page 23, under the category of Installation Fees: The line "Wi Max standard installation $200" has been moved to the bottom of the category listings. Page 23, formatting only changes, replacement of standard font with bold font for improved clarity. Page 24, under the category of Non-return of customer premise equipment (CPU) devices: $300 "Anywhere and/or AFN Max" are deleted so that the CPE's will not be associated solely to wireless services. Page 23 the header Transit Fee is being changed to Ethernet to better describe the connection circuit. Page 23 under the category of Fiber Service Installation: "Mandatory two-year agreement" is deleted and future service terms will be defined by Individual Business Case (IBC) Product descriptions have been trimmed down to "overhead served" and "underground served" to simplify the two primary service descriptions. Page 24 under the category of Business Augmented Upload Package (additional 5Mbps) The wording for the product descriptions have been tightened up. Dated descriptions have been revised and/or deleted. No changes proposed for actual fees or to the fee structures for Telecommunication services listed on pages 23 and 24. DEPARTMEWHERE Tel: 541488-60112 Streel Address Fax: 541-088-5311 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2988 w ashland.or.us 1 , Section 6-Information Technology Information Technology Miscellaneous Fees and Charges* Installation Fees: Basic installation-Pre-wired CATV outlets only $ 20.00 (Additional charges for parts and supplies apply) Add Trap ("filter") $10.00 New customer cable modem activation $10.00 Cable Modem $50.00 Refurbished 90 -day replacement warranty Additional materials $10.00 Over-and-beyond regular installation including multi outlets, outlet plates, additional wiring, replacement of customer damaged outlets. :W"!Max standard6s'tailation $200 Q0 Disconnect Fees: Disconnect $50.00 Remove Trap ("Filter") $10.00 Truck Roll: $35.00 Field Technician Hourly Rate: Non-standard work such as advancing troubleshooting, $55.00 non-standard outlets, fishing wire inside walls, etc. Consulting and Technical Support Hourly Rate: For support issues not related to AFN infrastructure, performance, $85.00 and reliability. Minimum charge on hour. Non-City Employee Staff Screening: Charge for each vendor employee submitted for authorization to Access AFN and City Service Center facilities. $150.00 Fiber Service Installation: -:mm,w,.c-inae'ieezer eE,or.headsef:red eenn6eti`en-: - , s.:4n _ Overhead served connections. Individual Business Case (IBC) & quote Underground served connections IBC & quote Etherne"'~~ Transit @ 100 Mbps IBC & quote miscellaneous fees and charges page 23 Section 6-Information Technology Static IP Address: $5.00/mo each Maximum of 5 Static Internet Protocol (IP) addresses* • Minimum level of service for static IP and Quality of Service (QoS) is "CHOICE" or higher service tier. oS Fee: $3.50/mo VOIP (phone) enhancement available with AFN Choice or higher service level through AFN certified Modems. Business Augmented Upload Package (additional 5 Mbps): $15.0011110 Available' exclusively on,AFN Direct. -:nasr~rese-~age3eaa= '~-i~;~=~.el~ageA aJekae e(rl~~~vtih_._ _ Snfnll Office/Honre (Iffrce-(SOHO) or Sntall Business 1VIust ha'v`e cur rent.C ty d Aslihidd Business L' atse *Additional fee added to base AFN Direct retail rates on specific packages. Maximum SOHO upload speed with augmented upload service at up to 9 Mbps Small Office/Home Office Business Augmented Upload Package @$80/month Maximum Small Business upload speed with augmented upload service at up to 10 Mbps Small Business Augmented Upload Package @ $100.00/month Non-return of customer premise equipment ICPE) devices: $300.00 CPE's must be returned on disconnect date of AFN•Anywherc rttlfei+ AFNMiv services. Cable TV (CATV) Seasonal Reconnects & Disconnects: $10.00/visit Non-pay disconnects & reconnects Service change Install HBO filter CATV House Amp Fee: $35.00/each Utility Billing Lobby Sianage Fee: $100.00/mo. Cable Modem Rental $5.00/mo. Non Return of Rented Modem at Closing of Account $50.00each Cable Modem Purchase $50.00/each * Resolution 2010-28 (Section 2, page 38) grants Information Technology management ability to set promotional rates. page 24 miscellaneous fees and charges C I T Y OF ASHLAND Memo DATE: April 30, 2014 TO: City of Ashland, Finance Department FROM: Ashland Municipal Court RE: Miscellaneous Fees and Charges (Updated) The Court has 4 changes to our Fees and Charges: City Attorney Deferred Sentence/Diversion for Violations: Not charged on Violations -0-. Extend/Amend City Attorney Deferred Sentence or .Diversion: Not charged on Violations -0-. Show Cause Admission of Allegation: Not charged on Violations -0-. Withholding on County Assessment: N/A/New County Assessment all collected goes to the County. M MUNICIPAL 1175 UNICIPAL COURT Tat: 541 482-52 4 , East Main Street Fax: 541468-5586 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 w .asNand.or.us CITY OF f Memo . ASHLAND DATE: April 22, 2014 TO: Lec Tuneberg, Administrative Services Director FROM: Kelly Haptonstall, Lead Police Clerk RE: Fingerprint Fee Increase Attached is the Ashland Police Department's proposed fingerprint fee increase. General cost increase is the main driver for the fee increase. Also included in the packet for your review are the itemized costs for fingerprinting. The detail consists of the clerk's thne, maintenance fees, use of machine, toner, and gloves. The proposed fee increase is $35.00 per initial card and $10.00 for additional cards. If you have any questions or need additional details, please let me know ASHLAND POLICE DEPT. Tel: 541482.5211 1155E. Maln Sl Fax: 541-0885351 AsHand, OR 91520 TTY: NO-1352900 vmw ashland.or.ns APD Pon 42. Rev 8112 City of Ashland Police Department Cost of Services for FYnger printing Number of cards per year 540 Number of years use of machine 6 Number of toner cartridges per year 2 Cost per unit (finger print card): Time Clerk hr rate $ 22.76 Gross up for benefits $ 35.28 Half hour per unit 50% Cost of time $ 17.64 $ 17.64 Maintenance Fee Cost per year $ 2,400 Number of cards per year 540 Cost of fee $ 4.44 $ 4.44 Use of Machine Cost of Machine $16,538 Useful life 6 yrs Replacement cost Q 3% inflation $20,507 Replacement cost per year $ 3,418 Number of cards per year 540 Cost of machine $ 6.33 $ 6.33 Toner Toner cost per year (2 * $1,015) $ 2,030 Number of cards per year 540 Cost of machine $ 3.76 $ 3.76 Gloves - Cost per box of 500 gloves $ 150 Cost per glove $ 0.30 , $ 0,30 Total Cost Per Unit $ 32.47 L L OF Memo ASHHCITY AND Date: 4/25/2014 From: Betsy Harshman To: Lee Tuneberg Re: Miscellaneous Fees and Charges Please make the adjustments in the FY 2014/2015 Miscellaneous Fees and Charges Document as shown in the attached documents. To cover some of our refund processing costs, we'd also like to add a clause that states: An administrative fee of 25% will be assessed on all permit refunds. Refunds will not be issued if requested later than one-year following the application date. On page 27 of this year's book, following Subdivision plats and partition plats, please add: (does not include planning review fed, see page 11). Planning requested we add these statements so customers know there are will be additional fees upfront; they have added similar verbiage to their update. Engineering Tel: 5411488-5347 20 E. Main Street Far 5Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 8001735-2900 ywvw.ashland.or.us Section 9-Public Works Public Works Miscellaneous Fees and Charges Copy Fees: Black and White Copies Letter/Legal Single-Sided $0.20 each Black and White Copies Letter/Legal Double-Sided $0.40 each Black and White Copies Tabloid. Single-Sided $0.40 each Black and White Copies Tabloid Double-Sided $0.80 each Color Copies Letter/Legal Single-Sided $1.50 each Color Copies Tabloid Single-Sided $3.00 each Existing maps printed in color on HP1055CM plotter (241b bond Paper) Arch C 18 x 24 3.00 sq. ft. $18.00 Arch D 24 x 36 6.00 sq. ft. $36.00 Arch E 36 x 48 12.00 sq.1 $72.00 Existing maps or copies of existng,maps copied in B&W on Xerox 3030 large format copier (201b bond paper) Arch C 18 x 24 $8.00 Arch D 24 x 36 $12.00 Arch E 36 x 48 $16.00 Note: Maps printed on materials other than the specified bond are double the standard print fee Plat & Plan Checks: CdOCSJ90`1 %~p' ~ ~,loh~ifnf Subdivision Plats $730.00 plus $110.00 per iot rr10 UO ~ *ez' P" Condominium Plats $730.00 plus $110.00 per lot Partition Plats (does not include 24% Fire Department Review Fee) $391.00 Subdivision Improvement Plat Check 5% Engineer Fee (5% of the public improvement cost) Engineering Development Fee (this fee is charged concurrently with Building Permit Fees at the time of building permit Applications. Applies To all new residential dwelling units and commercial 0.75% of valuation Developments. Remodels, additions and accessory Buildings are not assessed this fee.) miscellaneous fees and charges page 27 Section 9-Public Works Public Works Miscellaneous Fees and Charges Coot/ Fees: Black and White Copies Letter/Legal Single-Sided $0.20 each Black and White Copies Letter/Legal Double-Sided $0.40 each Black and White Copies Tabloid Single-Sided $0.40 each Black and White Copies Tabloid Double-Sided $0.80 each Color Copies Letter/Legal Single-Sided $LS0 each Color Copies Tabloid Single-Sided $3.00 each Existing snaps printed in color on HP1055CM plotter (241b bond Paper) Arch C 18 x 24 3.00 sq. ft. $18.00 Arch D 24 x 36 6.00 sq. ft. $36.00 Arch E 36 x 48 12.00 sq. ft. $72.00 r Existing maps or copies of existing maps copied in B&W on Xerox 3030 large format copier (201b bond paper) Arch C 18 x 24 00 Arch D 24 x 3612.0U Arch E 36 x 48` Note: Maps printed on materials other than the specified bond are double the standard print fee Plat & Plan Checks: !7Qe IplCis 1 ' " Subdivision Plats $1S 10!OOpeea1 t { Condominium Plats 730!OOgilus y $110! 0 erolo ` ee'_M T Partition Plats (does not include 24% Fire Department Review Fee) O~ Subdivision Improvement Plat Check 5%o Engineer Fee (5% of the public improvement cost) Engineering Development Fee (this fee is charged concurrently with Building Permit Fees at the time of building permit applications. Applies To all new residential dwelling units and commercial 0.75% of valuation Developments. Remodels, additions and accessory Buildings are not assessed this fee) miscellaneous tees and charges page 27 Section 9-Public Works Public Works/Engineering Inspections, Permits, etc: Subdivision Construction Inspection/ 5% Engineer Fee(5% of Public Works Improvement Inspection the public improvement cost) Street or Alley Excavation Permit $'t9,7'0J6 + per ft. cost M1111111!~ ~ based on pavement age Encroachment Permit $19 400 Miscellaneous Construction Perin it $64r00~ F ° F (Construction of curb, sidewalk, driveway Apron, etc.) Dust Suppression Permit $00 Driveway Painting Permit $16.00 (includes a can of paint) Right-of Way Closure-Street $1.9i7r.QO/dsa1i;~ Right-of Way Closure-Sidewalk(>72 hrs) 64 00 * °ill Right-of Way Closure-Sidewalk(<72 hrs) $16.00 Right-of WayClosure-Parking Space(>72 hrs) $64 0 Right-of Way Closure-Parking Spaee(<72 hrs) $16.00 Block Parry $16.00 Sidewalk Dining-Annual Renewal OnO it _ ' r (minimum 50 sq. ft) Functional Item-Annual Renewal $iet 64!lib~ ' Special Event Permits (per Resolution 2012-08): Base Special Event Permit Fee (plus applicable fees +31(!00 tililJiY1WM~ below) Events that require city staff overtime 60% of cityjstaffi0/I - , "`pit tly Rush Fee (less than 90 days advance notice) $250.00 page 28 miscellaneous tees and charges Section 9-Public Works Public Works/Engineering Inspections. Permits, etc. (cont) - - - - - Loaned Functional Item, Pennant Applica- OW00009iiiM -h- ~°lion Publication Box Per Publication-Annual Renewal $27.00 Special vehicle Permit-Initial Fee Special vehicle Pennit-Annual Renewal 40$10 :0'0 f f " Penalty for No Permit 150% of permit cost Street or Alley Vacation $ 55_ GIS Data & Mapping Services: GIS Hourly Rate 80;00'x} y Information on Disk $40 00/utilityY ar Quarter 'tioDAMMINAMIMM . Planning Pre-Application Maps $22.00 Plotting Fee $6.00/square foot New Address Assignment !P ffjy/a'd'dre~" 'flfii rP. Street Name Approval Fee $5; DO` miscellaneous lees and charges page 29 Section 9-Public Works Sanitary Sewer Connection Fees: _ Sanitary sewer mainline video inspection $3 7 00 minimum (cost based on time and materials) Water Connection Fees: The installation of all new water services and large taps regardless of size will be charged on a time and materials basis. First Utility Locate at an address No Charge Additional Locates at same address t$$0 Water. meter re-read Once in 12 months No Charge Each additional re-read in 12 months $31[00 tt ~j Water Meter Field Test }09 ' ~ Water Meter Bench Test 3/4" or P Water Meter $07 q d. 1 1/2" or 2" Water Meter $ O1~?O o 5 y Larger Meters Actual Cost page 30 miscellaneous fees and charges Section 9-Public Works Water Connection Fees Continued Water pressure check once in 12 month No Charge Each additional pressure check in 12 months $39t00~` Z Water Chlorination Test -Subdivision retest upon failure (cost based on time and materials) 10$6 0 Water Pressure Test -Subdivision retest up failure (cost based on time and materials) $381p Cemetery Fees: Sales of grave spaces or burial plots: (fees split, 40% to the cemetery fund & 60% to the cemetery trust fund) Grave Space -Lawn and Monument Sections Grave Space -Baby Land $10 Grave Space-Niches (bronze)' :00 , Grave Space -Urn garden 1fs0!00 Grave space -Crypt $1;071%b0 Sales of liners and markers: (fees split, 40% to the cemetery fund & 60% to the cemetery trust fund) i Concrete cemetery box, including setting $428 0 Concrete liners Cost plus 10% Final inscriptions $`fr25r066min dlfarge I 1*a~i 4liiNN! ! ( ' Grave markers Wholesale cost X 2.5 not to exceed $700.00 Grave marker setting, concrete base $ ~0. 0 O Monticello burial vault (sealed concrete) 78?rr I oil 1 t'1Yt>tatMc v miscellaneous fees and charges page 31 Section 9-Public Works Sexton Fees: Opening and closing graves, ground $42§ 0d . '00 Opening and closing graves, double-deep $48190' Opening and closing graves, infant $I 0:0-0 Opening and closing crypts' $428 00 ~ ' ; ° . Opening closed crypts $428:0 JJNNffiWj. - Opening and closing niches $108:00 ~~Fr1ry;_,,_,,...~..^~mO,(khllh~rj .•,,i~ t~dtv.'~t`i9;,. t" t Inter creains in grave spaces $ W0 00 Scattering of cremains $10$:00 Disinterment $I,Ooleafin advance Saturday, Sunday or Holiday burial $4ry8.000 IA1 C Miscellaneous Fees: Grave Setup Rental $]0¢40/occurrence ~'"'tom Tent Rental $5533°007day ' Perpetual care lots, sold before 1927 $10 . 0 Vases: Galvanized 4 0' *cemetery fees will be subject to a 1.5% finance charge per moo! ifnot paid within 60 days of use. All above services will be sold pre-need in installments, interest free, with a minimum payment of one-twelfth of the total sale. 2013 CPI and ENR Calculations: Methodology: Current CPI Rate - Old C I Rate/Old CPI Rate = % Rate of` djustment r t•ri. -in2:773=229.292)/229:292=7:5% Methodology: Current ENR Rate - Old.\ENR Rate/Old ENR Rate = % Rate of Adjustment .(%5.5t9$9267f57)/9269 57= 2 0% CPI used for: ENR used for: Plat & Plan Checks Sanitary Sewer Connection Fees Public Works/engineering Inspections, Permits, etc. Water Connection Fees GIS Data & Mapping Services Cemetery Fees page 32 miscellaneous fees and charge ( wlPtloR-(NEW-OLD)IDLD 62014 CV1vofu6 2J419)(N01VJ A1uJi201].(:Pl vdm 2J1)tl(OLD) 91_?)g:771)O.1397J=y3X~-~ 1236.2 u3R1014EN13<Plue 970196RMV) ..r~ ~fwc 1013_egR plop '9{5S.9H(OLD) - (9j01.06,9453r98)N~35.96e1.6%.+.. 3461 fWmPMi SD .311¢OOpYM -.SNim 4111 pe M - t C9.lYM:~I4m zr 307LoodW311400pcM tl,imphufll;ODperbt' IbIi1ltaOM C d -s ) - 4191m p SITY.W . } dMY AmY RU9 Sro Pamai"' j ~ -~v t19Ym PN p]rool IbuW piCtal:n M f199,nOplupafedcalb.idpjSeap I LYNY6mm Pimp ;v,. ` i -F•. JI91o0 < f f10YSp / - 1+1' )(Wd~mv.t: wsNm Pame fCtJhso dmdr Nm44h 9wA.:YC) SNm INMOO.. z.' t iHm r-> 3 a dtltvPne.le.u ))rlu Yl .urj Pgmll i t - 51400 NQao- wfblw3vvck~w suY, * ;,w N9lm 4 a I's10P.ao y +s wW -v , u3RO MAo. - d P7Iybld\vra:mm suwdtP71 HDOY!w•PMt9R 'SddeAll<)tNnl e % SI400 :N Nm m. R4N<IW YOenM M1l N3pre( libu.) 4 IN 00 r ] rY' Sr 7Y s < 1 ~t<t~ Slp 3 P+4NdWl<Y14.p1 ~ r 516,0mo P W-AeaavlRmmJARefowN x y~ Hmp..w ::r t pu3N..... Elms-, 41SC 1h% ANdnm Pd . t{ w i lSSpp, Y9.t6rYn9p PmwY.fgdwae.F 1 t SU100 .a DID pO 1: . R.: Pnli&m . AwW4aYKJ mab ] S1fa0' l~eu14 aa hiy Dal il '"x N]om r. - ' N];40 Y) ¢pYide<Itsmp arauoulcgrilie i7 YdY mlme t;. a, 1. dNSd a)'rJrosNma 30ltetsib NPO SMe PY tlamlPNm. RuaF (Ieu As.90d) W Y~1 S3RILp > S1S1100 (d Vdd.I.P n WVtl Fro i7Tlm - s 3!1600 ~ ~ $EVdudepavil A•W Px.J -i' SI09m " _i _ 'r .llll oo IYRrN k..N IS%SWpemneW v I1b)tN9+®4.oY - r $M1Mt<AI4YVKWp rP_ r 3 h r"".. 5~3390P$ ..r ~ ~f SUNPp 7r- ti~ir 'Cdl HPWYRiiv - - •i ,]rNDdOPV d311PVMWu'q.Wa¢dm MmH .S60 papv14juYlaYds 1 INmw pDbk Nr 43 PY-/gP3Wa31gr fi l71m J L -:vim - . ease r '.s6appY aw:ir.d 1. f0A0Nr.i^Y.6Y r. ] { 4 eP'Aadiu.Av13MW N)ao W:m: by i --US.ObpYWba. bY; 3 , I Mm Mra9m(mpb.N IN.d Y.bd]b) 'In1m6mrriM:i. y. fll60o Wm .3~. VM CNTeiMr.Y{491 :al.dkulftlrc,xV Ndfd~4MW .b"dibY4 AS4d Cpl bi Ad..10o1 .y ~ Wf1YSar!kYn udat3' t - 110C1w. WINYIo•+ wY .d4at { _ No m SiL07 . Y4sY m+ad r F.. - Qxvw limm4 4a" t' i 1 N9Ouy rrF . „Dopey A +.-r -FastiWaxMU:wNai na w• ~ NLao - ~ w6p Y>S1YgFWd TN { x' , fDm i `3!39.30 _ Y''Ntivlliib TN N t K.er64M 1' 7. !4!0].00 311490 _ 1K.e3^4Rieura "-t - <f161.au3 i1a600 LY{I(mYa.. moo 9y - K x-. Y09Y.un93«ROe96I7YenCe N:Q4W • N tlv ill0bW1<e^R brctY Nmm43 t SDAO 4\Y]43CSIwui6NTN SSF iJN Wa NNftl4n(mibMlMb.Wa..d.bl "MUD. .fN]m pTM~?.M-Tl~1 3 bLiamiilelW®fiua lmd 4d m ~i.lmd:) 3HIm~.._~ - _r+o- bn ry.m:li .d bk..MWd4eu -L 'Slodm i:~ 1 1"~ 'f ~SSII,SQ rC"' tt•SSi ~ Orta 4up-~dMYW Y,._ Y 31a00D , 4 :t -SINm ] s . tin ilpl. T0A M I - P MIm , ! SO/m OC7 -j O.weyw.,iMr PaN i Nam ;fI r-1 - P{.NMY CnN r w SIR)I Op _ rr- "S1Al)m DI y [baNlemctMf Wf.d.AweY3N i NSS99 HH.90 ] l a e: Su' Cb 'fl53Sist IUM` s i I, .,('eii pp.lox f//- I Ji.JimmpOyf r e' t 'c y m daiv.mdurK SDtmnidn dwp i' ]YWNV tr - fISD90 1, r -SlSioo _ G t 1t1Wa4wnlima la .Y mvlfN4o0 Wbplei4we I9. rolwsveoA3MOP0✓~ OnY. kpuleuu N: mYbu 4 1 ] f ] .T516000 - I 3°..% +;:fl{SOO s "f . zf1.19630 ✓ ) ; t A1Ynw[110M Wd WtY'ilN eab7 -C , p- Oy.w3W ikJNNi«owd I -c. f13MA0 7 P. Y/' j'~ 4 r LpmF3.WSniNwm,a.a4+w t r Nttm NSSm _ ~PmIN a31aNWe W'W F fll490~.._ -`,Slfi.d0 y t 1O~q~.I~N a<4xN DTD is M630 ` ~ r r { NHm A . ..PrN<bwd in9b 4 rrt : aK z .Y4 N1R00, _ t 5 llMlm y/ 4 V s PPPdN y{~k!4Nnkbil t 1 s i194W ~ k 9 ~ SIIOm - 7 OpmWdxW Wcb i i 710400 ".~5 L3 -i110R0 ' f !4®.99 } t I1f190 ✓ fi i&uDr.i t:~.~b ~ r' r r Nadm f; I t zN493 / a IJlimeman" ~ t b h t ~ f196f 00. W,a l9tllw :t r 'Hm00 ~ 9h .s../~ 37 fra Ab1910w 3PN'YPi Ndil.ybuid 3 ti : .533100 t h yr 33. IknYPnW s ) i105mh..nme. ! f1pf.9N.{mm(. r ~ rl v„ ~ 4 : Rap RmW r, SHmtl c}r tw y3geM1.9YM;Wb7rM 1971. S;x Y _i ~ 0y' i _'SIIOWe / IMk.diwl::..:: .a':..-.. .,...Y...::.b._H]00.]~:4i..-.... _..L.".~-a...;_._SNAO. 4':M1nq']frla.PulN4b']TWf~04.1.6r/n 9IIN1 W'!ON ASHLAND PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION 340 SO. PIONEER STREET ASHLAND, OREGON 97520 COMMISSIONERS: Don Robertson Mike Gardiner Director Rick Landt Jim Levels TEL: (541) 488-5340 Stelani Sollinger FAX: (541) 488-5314 Vanston Shaw MEMORANDUM TO Lee Tuneberg, Finance Director FROM Rachel Dials, Recreation Superintendent DATE 4-18-14 SUBJECT Fees and Charges-Ashland Parks and Recreation In 2006 the Parks and Recreation Commission set a goal of reviewing fees and charges for the Ashland Parks and Recreation Department each year in November. The annual review includes fees and charges associated with the Calle Guanajuato, North Mountain Park Nature Center, . Ashland Senior Center, adult and youth recreation programs, indoor and outdoor reserved facilities, the Oak Knoll Golf Course; the Daniel Meyer Pool, and the Ashland Rotary Centennial Ice Rink. As of this date, the Parks Commission has not reviewed fees'and charges and moving forward will sync up the process with the biennium budgets. Staff did find a few corrections and omissions from previous reviews that are highlighted below and reflected in the proposed document. They are: Special Event Application Fee $25.00 (omitted from document) Ballfield Lights $34.00/hr (scheduled for increase in 2014) Calle. Guanajuato-Restaurant Seating $7.00/sq. foot(scheduled for increase in 2014) Swim Lessons $40/$42/$48 (adjusted in 2012) Adult Hockey Admission $5.50 (omitted from document) Youth Hockey Admission $5.00 (omitted from document) Ice Skating Private Lesson $10.00 for 30 min (omitted from document) Youth Hockey Punch Card $45.00 (omitted from document) Adult Hockey Punch Card $50.00 (omitted from document) Open Skate/Kids Only Punch Card $30.00 (omitted from document) Helmets $8.00 (omitted from document) Home of Famous Lilhfa Park CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication May 6, 2014, Business Meeting Bring Your Own Bag (BYOB) An Ordinance prohibiting the distribution of certain single use plastic bags FROM: Adam Hanks, Management Analyst, adam@ashland.or.us SUMMARY At its April 15, 2014 Business Meeting, Council approved the first reading of an ordinance that would prohibit the distribution of single use plastic bags by retail businesses in Ashland as well as require the distribution of paper bags to contain a minimum recycled content. The originally proposed fee of twenty-five (25) cents for the distribution of paper bags was reduced by Council to ten (10) cents and that modification is captured in the attached ordinance document presented to the Council for second reading and final approval. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: The Council discussion at the April 15, 2014, business meeting centered on the appropriate fee to be charged for the distribution of paper bags at the point of sale. The Conservation Commission recommended a twenty-five cent fee for the use of paper bags and based that recommendation on a variety of research that indicated a quicker and longer-lasting transition from single use plastic to reusable bags occurred in cities that instituted a more substantial fee for the use of paper bags. The Commission found similar research indicating that plastic bag ban programs with a small or no fee for the use of paper bags were successful in eliminating single use plastic bags, but the result was a substantial increase in the use of single use paper bags and limited progress or success in moving to reusable bags. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: City Program Costs Initial program costs will include staff time for initial education/outreach efforts to local retailers. This would include development of program FAQ's, poster/display templates for businesses to utilize in their customer communication efforts to be distributed from the City's website and also as part of on- site business visits and several scheduled business centric informational sessions. The City of Eugene has offered the free use of their program material templates with approval to modify as desired, lowering costs and leveraging an already in place and successful campaign. Additionally, to emphasize the Commission's desire for the program to be a Bring Your Own Bag (BYOB) ordinance rather than a plastic bag ban, an element of the education/outreach includes the creation of BYOB program branded reusable bags. The bags would provide another outlet for education/outreach and also be made available for free for qualifying residents to mitigate the impacts of the ordinance on lower income shoppers in the community. The Commission has been developing Page I of 2 1PEJAR CITY OF ASHLAND and evaluating different models for partnership/sponsorship of the costs involved with the bag purchase, branding graphics and distribution and has indicated their desire to remain involved in bring the concept to fruition. Modifying existing City of Eugene program materials and using electronic files for download from the City website significantly reduce program operating costs, estimated at $1,000 or less. The variable program cost is dependent on the final solution for the community oriented BYOB reusable bag concept. Partnering opportunities that incorporate the ability for business promotions and advertising could address the entire hard cost associated with the bag purchase and graphics and could reduce city costs to staff time for coordination of partners and communication efforts regarding the BYOB distribution. STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: As noted in previous meeting materials, many of Ashland's larger grocery outlets have already proactively moved away from the use of single use plastic bags and have also transitioned to recycled content paper bags, the proposed ordinance concept has actually been tested and accepted within the community. Staff recommends that Council adopt the ordinance with any needed adjustments and direct staff to begin the outreach efforts to the business community to ensure a successful implementation. SUGGESTED MOTION: I move second reading and adoption of an ordinance prohibiting the distribution of single use plastic bags as modified and direct staff to begin appropriate education and outreach efforts to both the business community and residents. ATTACHMENTS: Draft Ordinance - Prohibition on the Distribution of Single Use Plastic Bags LINKS: April 15, 2014 Council Business Meeting Packet - First Ordinance Reading http://www.ashland.or.us/Page.asp?NavlD=l 6193 November 18, 2013 Council Study Session Minutes http://ashland.or.us/Agendas.asp?Display=Minutes&AMID=5506 November 18, 2013 Council Study Session Meeting Packet http://www.ashfand.or.us/Pape.asp?NavID-1 5930 Open City Hall Public Comments http://www.ashland.or.us/Page.asl2?NavID=13461#peak democracy Page 2 of 2 1r, ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING A PROHIBITION ON THE DISTRIBUTION OF SINGLE USE PLASTIC BAGS 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 City desires to encourage the reduction of many single use items that negatively impact the local environment and likewise encourage the use of reusable products when safe and practical to reduce the volume of the community's waste stream. WHEREAS, single use plastic bags increase litter, degrade local wildlife habitat and are seldom recycled. THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Chapter 9.21 is hereby added to read as follows: SECTION 9.21.010 - Definitions A. ASTM standard. The American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM)'s International D-6400 B. Carryout bag. Any bag that is provided by a retail establishment at the point of sale to a customer for use to transport or carry away purchases, such as merchandise, goods or food, from the retail establishment. "Carryout bag" does not include: (a) Bags used by consumers inside retail establishments to: 1. Package bulk items, such as fruit, vegetables, nuts, grains, candy or small hardware items; 2. Contain or wrap frozen foods, meat, fish, whether packaged or not; 3. Contain or wrap flowers, potted plants, or other items where dampness may be a problem; 4. Contain unwrapped prepared foods or bakery goods; or 5. Pharmacy prescription bags; (b) Laundry-dry cleaning bags or bags sold in packages containing multiple bags intended for Ordinance No. Page I of 4 use as garbage waste, pet waste, or yard waste bags; (c) Product bags. C. City sponsored event. Any event organized or sponsored by the city or any department of the city. D. Customer. Any person obtaining goods from a retail establishment or from a vendor. E. Food provider. Any person in the city that provides prepared food for public consumption on or off its premises and includes, without limitation, any retail establishment, shop, sales outlet, restaurant, grocery store, delicatessen, or catering truck or vehicle. F. Grocery store. Any retail establishment that sells groceries, fresh, packaged, canned, dry, prepared or frozen food or beverage products and similar items and includes supermarkets, convenience stores, and gasoline stations. H. Pharmacy. A retail use where the profession of pharmacy by a pharmacist licensed by the state of Oregon's Board of Pharmacy is practiced and where prescription medications are offered for sale. 1. Product bag. Any bag provided to a customer for use within a retail establishment to assist in the collection or transport of products to the point of sale within the retail establishment or to protect a specific single purchased item for transport. A product bag is not a carryout bag. J. Recyclable paper bag. A paper bag that meets all of the following requirements: (a) Is 100% recyclable and contains a minimum of 40% recycled content; (b) Is capable of composting consistent with the timeline and specifications of the ASTM Standard as defined in this section. K. Retail establishment. Any store or vendor located within or doing business within the geographical limits of the city that sells or offers for sale goods at retail. L. Reusable bag. A bag made of cloth or other material with handles that is specifically designed and manufactured for long term multiple reuse and meets all of the following requirements: (a) If made of natural or synthetic fabric, is washable or otherwise able to be sanitized; or (b) If plastic, has a minimum plastic thickness of 4.0 mils. M. Single-use plastic carryout bag. Any plastic carryout bag made available by a retail establishment to a customer at the point of sale. It does not include reusable bags, recyclable paper bags, or product bags. N. Vendor. Any retail establishment, shop, restaurant, sales outlet or other commercial establishment located within or doing business within the geographical limits of the city, which provides perishable or nonperishable goods for sale to the public. Ordinance No. Page 2 of 4 O. Undue hardship. Circumstances or situations unique to the particular retail establishment such that there are no reasonable alternatives to single-use plastic carryout bags or a recyclable paper bag pass-through cannot be collected. SECTION 9.21.020 Plastic Bag Use -Regulations Except as exempted in 9.21.040 of this code: (a) No retail establishment shall provide or make available to a customer a single use plastic carryout bag; (b) Retail establishments that choose to provide customers a paper bag at the point of sale must provide a recyclable paper bag meeting or exceeding the minimum standards defined in 9.21.010 J. (c) No person shall distribute a single-use plastic carryout bag at any city facility, city managed concession, city sponsored event, or city special events permit activity. SECTION 9.21.030 Plastic Bag Use -Cost Pass-Through. When a retail establishment makes a recyclable paper bag available to a customer at the point of sale pursuant to section 9.21.040(b) of this code, the retail establishment shall: (a) Charge the customer a reasonable pass-through cost of not less than 25 10 cents per recyclable paper bag provided to the customer; and (b) Indicate on the customer's transaction receipts the total amount of the recyclable paper bag pass-through charge. SECTION 9.21.040 Plastic Bag Use -Exemptions. Notwithstanding sections 9.21.020 and 9.21.030 of this code: (a) Single-use plastic carryout bags may be distributed to customers by food providers for the purpose of safeguarding public health and safety during the transportation of hot prepared take-out foods and prepared liquids intended for consumption away from the food provider's premises. (b) Retail establishments may distribute product bags and make reusable bags available to customers whether through sale or otherwise. (c) A retail establishment shall provide a reusable bag or a recyclable paper bag at no cost at the point of sale upon the request of a customer who uses a voucher issued under the Women, Infants and Children Program established in the Oregon Health Authority under ORS 409.600. (d) Vendors at retail fairs such as a farmers' market or holiday fair are not subject to indicating on the customer's transaction receipt the total amount of the recyclable paper bag pass through charge required in section 9.21.030(b) of this code. (e) The city administrator or the designee may exempt a retail establishment from the requirement set forth in sections 9.21.020 and 9.21.030 of this code for a period of not more than one year upon the retail establishment showing, in writing, that this code would create an undue hardship or practical difficulty not generally applicable to other persons in similar circumstances. The decision to grant or deny an exemption shall be in writing, and the city administrator's or designee's decision shall be final. Ordinance No. Page 3 of 4 SECTION 3. Severability. The sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses of this ordinance are severable. The invalidity of one section, subsection, paragraph, or clause shall not affect the validity of the remaining sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses. SECTION 4. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect on the day of 2014 (six months from ordinance approval date) SECTION 4. Codification. Provisions of this Ordinance shall be incorporated in the City Code and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "code", "article", "section", "chapter" or another word, and the sections of this Ordinance may be renumbered, or re-lettered, provided however that any Whereas clauses and boilerplate provisions (i.e. Sections 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 12014. 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 4 of 4 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication May 6, 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 • 2.04.01017 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 1 of 4 CITY OF ASHLAND • 2.04.1020D I 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] • 2.04.050D4 Establishes preference for Ashland residents during Public Forum • 2.04.050F 1 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 • 2.04.1 OOB 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 i 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 1r, 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 Ir, 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 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, 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 unieipal ChaFte~ of the City Ashland City Charter, Abele AlH! S on 3, 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.'04.610C (Study Session days, tim"nd'content) 3 AMC 2 04:040B (Attendance by electronic commumcaf►on) 4'? F -g-.-,gym 4 7,MC 2 04.040C 4 (Parliamentar procedure) 5 AMC 2:04A50D.1 (Placement of Public Forum'imagenda) 6 -AMC 2 04 OSOG:1 (Onnortuiiitysforipu6~lic omment'on a¢enda=items) AMC 2:04.OSOJ.1 `(Sabmrttalzof~ordinances~l4 days'in advance=of~r►ieeting) 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 bV 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 M 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 Mayer-Or- tWA M-P-M-h-Pr-s of the Couneil may eall a stud), session at an), time with 36 hour- notiee for- the purpose of infer-ming members of the Couneil as to City affairs. Study sessions are held so that Couneil ean eonfer with staff arid other experts on items under erinsoderation that may eventually require offieial netions. Couned may not deliberate towards a deeision but ean give staff dir-eetion to prepare mfiterials for- -a 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. 1_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. ■o an), r,.. ne flocs °°°I do not feel that on ..should be in exeeutive session they should state so in the exeeutive 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 >z it does not sespeei€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, b 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. FF. 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. Asp :ded in A Aiele [7111f Section 4 of the City Ch ar-ter-f the Mayor and not less than three f or four f motion, quorum present deter-m-imeq the netion on any question, or-dinfinee, Of resolution. On questions requiring a two thirds vote of the Couneil, as provided in the !•:t.. Ch aa4er there shall be w red a affirmative vote of at le ast P.aaa.. Cmina:laa'^ to present, exereise on), sueh speeial powers. if the roll eall shows no quorum as defined a:dnbly detainedf that their- as -ed to a able the t`,.aaneil to p aad the members present shnil ndjeurn 1 woth business. Should nny then fail soon to to a date fi,.aa.u by aueua and xed by them and all agenda will be eontinued t 41 4 Daa..la to ^`=uNaa. au as Meeting exists, G. Emer-geney Meeting Woeedures and Quorum. The City Administrator is mespensible for- implementation of the Emergeney 0- - -1 . When the City Administrator deter-mines that a state of emergeney the administrator-will ntake a deelar-atiett to that effeet and request the Mayor to The speeial meeting of the Gouneilwill oeeur as soon as possible after the deelfiration of emergeney. A quorum of the !'.aa neil may of be possible d eireumstanees and is not required for the speeial meeting. Notiee of the speeial meeting .a be made in the most a pedient manner- det.aa-mined by the Mayor and need not Iaa 36 hours in advanee. Ordinance No. Page 4 of 28 H. Robert' s Rules of Or-der, Robert' s Rules of Order- shall be the authority for the gover-nment of the Conned during its sessions, when not nnflint ...oth thp, Cit.. Charter and these eode rules-. Failure to strietly fallow Robert' s Rules of Order shall not be Pause to void or- otherwise disturb a deeision or- netion of the Couneil. The Couneil will strive to be clear- in its proeeedings: 1. Voting. When a question or motion is put to avote by the chair-, eaeh member- present shall vote for- or- against the motion unless the Conned exeuses that member front so doing. if thereafter- the Mayor- or- any member calls for- a roll call vote, then eneh member- must vote. vote. The Mayor- ean only vote in the ease of a tie, and then is required to I Reconsidering it Vote. - ordinance, A motion to r-eeonsider a vote ean be made only onee and at the session at which the motion or matter wns adopted, or at the next regular- meeting of the Couneil, provided that no vote to r-eeensider- shall be made after the resolution, or- aet has been offleially r-eeor-ded, filed or- transmitted or otherA,ise gone out of the possession of the aom.cir. K. C-,Ai-npql Deliberation. it is the duty of the Mayor or presiding officer- to ensure that eneh Cou"eil member- has the opportunity to speak. Couneilor-s should ask the Mayor to be recognized. No member shall speak more than onee until ever-y member- ehoosing to spealk shall have ..ken o waived their right to dos N•.... mbar shall speak a..:•.e on a motion on the floorwithout leave of the Mayor- or presiding officer-. Couneil members speak only for- themselves find shall be open, direet and eandid. They 1> if the diseussion f Mayor, becomes begged dolvil. Time fihm 41~- may be set on topies by the offieerf or by a eonsensus of the Council L. 0", Attarney as Parliamentarian. The City Attorney is designated as parliamentarian far the C-ouneil. Questions of parliamentary rules may be referred 1 11 G". ' -ney through the presiding offiee rests with the presiding offieer .v. interpretation. The .uau.. u.us 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 I. All items considered by the Council during Study Sessions, which require a subsequent o ffleial netion from the 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. L Any Councilor may request that place an item prior to initial Getineil disetissian ' , placed on the Council's agenda that does nat invel've staf 'J: research, of drafting of an ordinance 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. E 2. A Councilor who desife.. majef „,.1:,....o o reh and diseussieft or dr-a ft:„,. Of ,._,i:„°„e° 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. that the discussion vr this 4em 1, ve fvixa all on the - }a.rHe. The 0HH SB~e E~tict ~~~---rrix~-iic~rr~n1' place' on the agenda : efdanee with „ „1. B e f this Sect:,.„ The Council should consider items 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. RD. 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 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 meetin 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 Preside 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 Flag exeept the Mayo-, . 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 officer- shall be sible for ensuring '..der- and d..eor-..m mnintained. Comments nnd disagreements should be addressed to the topic at hand and avoid negative personal remarks. Attendees and speakers are required to strietly abide by the dir-eetiens of the presiding ofReer. Behavior or aetions-that are u nrea°onably loud or disruptive ..hall be cause for ..°...oyal from Council meetings Failure to abide by the presiding officer' instructions constitutes "disruption of a i engaging in violent or distr-aeting uu assembly" action, lawful malking loud or disruptive noise or using loud or disruptive language, and refusing to obey an order- of the presiding offieen Signs nre not permitted and will be eonsidered disruptive. The presiding offieer- m", set time limits on agenda items. 2. beliberatiori 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 personal traits of others. 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 audiences Any person's failure to abide by the presiding officer's instructions constitutes "disruption of a lawful assembly" as provided in ORS 166.025(1)(c) and may be cause for the presiding officer, or a maiority 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 obiection 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 by 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 majority 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 subject 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 peaking until the "reguest,for informationhas:been denied:or satisfie°dNo second is reguired'and iio'colloguy is all wed,on`the'reg6isf for` dormatim except to the eztentr srieeific"$Ilv'set forth? 144rein. The information sought must concern either the subiect 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 sfatementof the nature of the information so fight 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 obieetio`n to, antrai4kly superfluous regaests"forMin orm on maybe made through a nMi fof rder. (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 obiection is made, a vote on sustaining the objection must be taken. The obiection 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 adjourn 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 maiority 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. FWithdrawal: of ,a motion does not reaaire a second, and debate of $aMroffered withdrawalls not allowedl 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 adiourns, 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 subiected 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. j. 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 majority 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 maiority 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 majority 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 majority 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 adjournment 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 been °°•abused' by ordinance 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 majority 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;posgible-and; feasible preference will be Eivewthe individuals who reside within the,city limtts:of Ashland Rersons who do not reside in the City may be placed at the end of the list of those wiWR to speak ai public forum DE. 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 9130 pm 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. F. r-mnxcT-vrsan Ordinance No. Page 13 of 28 Pubhe forum is an opportunity for the publie to eomment on items whieh are not ineluded on the agenda. The agenda for publie forum is 15 minutes, unless a majority of the Couneil votes to extend the time. Per-sons wishing to speak are to submit a LL ff prior to the eommeneement of the forum and deliver the fornt to the City Reeor-der. The Mayor . presiding rfCrrr is to inform the ..dime • forum, irequirements for submission of the form. Members of the publie may speak about any topie during the publie unless th-e topie is indeed on the agenda for the same meeting. if a member of the publiewishes to speak on an agenda item or- publie hearing item they may do so at the time set aside Publie forum is not to be used to provide or- gather- additional testimony or- infor-mation d L..'~cia..1 naa ie testim 61' on a giia3i Jvvv tsc~ter. x Paoublri scasimbn~ \VI not be aeeeryte on a -f)vmie hearing where the reeord has been elosed if the matter is still pending. The Mayor- will qpt tomi,, 10motq Mr- people who ask to speak during publie forum. in general the time limits should be set to enable all people who wish to eemplete their testimony. Time limits shall not be so short as to not allow speaker-s to address their tepee-• When possible and feasible, or-efer-enee will be eivm-to individuflis Who r-psklp. m4thin the Ashland eitv limits. Per-sons who do not reside in the Citv mav be vineed at the en .of the list of thesewishine to speak at pubhe 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. III. New business. IJ. 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 length), ordinances ° it ° Lengthy ordinances may be read by title only at Council meetines if the Ordinance title has been published in the local paper at least seven days in advance of the Council meeting thus allowing the or-dinanee to be by title only at the Council meeting. 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 term "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 Citi Citizens Fnay speak en any item not on the agenda during publie forum. Any eitizen has the right may request the item be plaeed en a fttttire agenda. 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. Tbey 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. 4,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 Boar- Appointed advisory commissions and boards and other advisory bodies which are permanent {Regular-} shall be eedi€ied described in other sections of AMC Chapter 2 and designated as "Regular" boards, commissions, or advisory bodies. These shall ineluding but not include but not be limited to Forest Lands Commission, Planning Commission, Transportation Commission, Planning Hearings Board, public Reereation 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 e0mmon Ordinance No. Page 16 of 28 applicable to all Appointed Commissions and Boo Regular and ad hoc commissions, boards, task forces and other advisory bodies. B. Ad-hoc Committees °°aTask . 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 task es shall abide by uniform rules and procedures set forth in AMC 2.10 and such other rules as prescribed by the order establishing such ad hoc entities. Committees or task forces 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 to ee. The Mayor with the consent of the Council shall appoint the membership of such committees or- task forees. Members of Regular Boards and Commissions may be appointed to ad hoc committees and flask forces. 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'. task foree at any time, with or without cause. The City Council by majority vote may amend or dissolve an ad hoc committee or task fore . 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 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, eommittee or 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 boards, City eemmissions and as well its ad ho =eemmittees and `ask `o-ees the City's Regular and ad hoc advisory bodies and are expected to represent the full City Council obiectively and accurately in interacting with the such entities. 3. City Councilors may attend meetings of City "a- °son, Beards and Commissions and other as hoe entities 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. B. Attendance. Liaisons should attend aN rRegular meetings of the Commissions and Boards, or Ad hoe Committees or Task z•,._ces 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 tin alternate to attend or- review the videa or other reeord of the proeeeding. in the event of a eontinuing seheduling eonfliet, the Liaison should ask the Mayer 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 as 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 City. To faeffitate the nbove, and notwithstanding any other provision of the Code, the Chnir of an ndvise", body shall per-iodiefffly plitee on the Agenda for the advisery bady, tin item labeled "Report of Council LiaisoiW-. F. Rele of Liaisen as Regards Advice on Filling Vacancies. The Council lLiaison 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. Renor-fine to the Coune-0-1. a..l...dvis,..... 1.edv 4a high the have been ..s~:a.. a.l L`.... advisen, bedv should be hivited to eive a short annual presentation t :al 7 : aal, a t..^aa &am the Fplevant staff liaisons 4.... ..R.. ..4:a :1.:1:4.. HG. Liaison Appointment Process and Term. The Mayor will appoint a Councilors to act as a Council ILiaisons 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 ae 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 Counselor eeted 4, e e et' the a.n Q«.. ~ n !heir ,.-1, Rem In their work.as City--Representatives, CitY.Councilors area xpected torepresent the `full'06'Council aecurately and obiectiveW.'and to'~depict the position-of other Councilors accuratelv"and objectively! 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 Counciloon the matter discussed in the external organization at the next feasible 6"ortu-ii tlier'~' of . Representing a position other than the offleial position of the City of Ashlan 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 ea-"jet with unless such action would not be in the best interest of the City of Ashland. When presented 10, 5. it the City Councilor- serving as a Repr-esentatiye i asked to take an offieial position s offleial position is f oft an issue that affeets the City of Ashland and the unknown or- f the City Couneiler should request that the item be placed on a- Ordinance No. Page 20 of 28 City Couneil agenda in oeear-denee with AMC 2.04.030 for full City Couneil aetion. 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 aft 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 hoc 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 fon.=c6 tair members of the Municipal Audit "Commission, as provided in' 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. AH members are expected to attend all regularly seheduled meetings, stud), sessions and special meetings, meeting, when applicable if a member- -Ali!! be absent fFom a the member must notify the chair or the staff linkan -at least two hours prior- to the meeting. Any member who has s i...........~ J. 1 iune 3n or omy 1 Deee ber- 311 shall be a °:dl°r-°d in °..t:ye and the position Duna + onus. ✓v or vaeant. Further- any member not attending a minimum of two thirds (2/3) of all seheduled meetings (inelusive of study sessions and speeial meetings) shall eonsidered inaetive and the position The Planning Commission and Budget Committee shall set their own meeting attendance requirements. All members of other Regular or ad hoc advisory bodies afe -expeeted- to must attend all at least seventy "five se sions_and spec al meeting advisory in e hbfull year of their tenures 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 °h..u be _e..:,..-. ed by the eommission board during the regularly scheduled meetings in 7..........., and myf with a report er: to and report to the City Recorder approximately every six months. Ci!j Recorder will advise the Mayor and City Council advising-o€ on the need for appointments or re-appointments, if necessary. Section 2.10.040 Quorum and Effect of Lack Thereof Unless ethei=wise ordained, 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. y to adopt any 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 for any other official business other than adjournment takes place; and (3) all matters tonjcs advertised shall are automatically he eentinued to 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 twe 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 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 periodieally 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 Orde AMC 2.04.040 shall be used as the standard for meeting rules and procedures. Failure to strictly fellew comply with Reberls Rules ofOrder 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. Seetionz2.-1-v.085 Deliberations. it is the duty of the chair or presiding officer- to ensure that enuh ffi-e-mber has the opportunity to speak. Members speak only for the-in-w1ves and shall ..did. Members o..w.. u.. a v ..hall strive to deliberate to a decision and shall rely upon the '•hnir to ,.w..v.v shall speak more N... until eveFy member keep the diseussion moving. No member ehoosing to speak shall have spoken or waived their right to do so. No mend more than Pwiee on the same motion without leave of the Section 2.10.105 Reports. A. Each Aadvisory body shall submit copies of its meeting minutes to the City Recorder for presentation to the eCity eCouncil and shall prepare and Ordinance No. Page 24 of 28 submit sueh reports as front time to time may be requested by the Mayor and City Ceunei6 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 federal, the City Couneil to state the eity's effleial position en state of eaunty legislative , advisefy eaffifflissions and beards. An individual member is free to voiee a position aft afty issue as leng as it is made eleaF that the speaker is net speakill, El~ 1411alillp R Members'ofi tg'a I soi' lies sh IN not st e IS I the posi hon; ofi the.Crtvsor ofMa:C►tv~adV isorvvbodMOmeetingsaorin.correspondence with federal, state, r ¢ al local o ommumiy.organizations orelected.bodies unless specifically author"ized tondo so`bya he CiCo n it antlabv the advisory body at duly adxertisedm eeeAM ;An indi rv du ,aduisorv 6ody member is;freedto express personal views on any issue n an forum asaong as t e nd dual makes,elearxthat he or she is not speaking+as a niem6 r"ofUtt aduisoWbody anditha the views,e_xpresse aare;personal..and do,not.repres nt th'e position of the,City or f;Yhe".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 C Recorder and L~aisonFBudget Committee membersshall be fo`r one Year` each eziring nDecember 31 each-a€Year. All other terms shall be as _ - provided in AMC 2.10.020. Section 2.16.010 P-ublie 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 P-ublie 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 Publie 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 Publie Recreation Commission -Recreation Director. The Publie 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 Publie 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 Eleetrie Utility Direetor shall sen,e as the primary staff Liaison a Secretary „c 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 implement on Ordinance No. _ Page 26 of 28 progr-nins for- energy .ation r red by state or federal lawf or as approved by the 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-,*xeeW the Parks and ReeFention C-ammks ; receipt, storage and issuance of supplies, materials and equipment; the disposal of surplus property; fiscal and property accounting for all departments 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 iteli -aa_d; a o-dina•ion of the leaning, mnintenanee and repair- of all public buildings Lela.., ng to the City used ta.. general administrative purposes; establishing and operating a eentrnlized warehouse~' general administration and eantral of the Cemetenr Department; 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 Par-ks and Recreation 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; and, 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; Bud the Ordinance No. Page 27 of 28 development and implementation of ener-p, eonsen,ation programs as may be appr-oved-by the Cot), Administr-ator or City Ceu*M. 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 MWJ (Page 3 of 28) (Addition suggested by Councilor Voisin.) Section 2.04.020 Meetings C. Study Sessions (Page 3 of 27) 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) (Addition suggested by Councilor Lemhouse.) Section 2.04.040 Conduct of Meetings C. Council Deliberation 2. Deliberation Rules (Page 8 of 27) Council deliberation shall be characterized either as "general discussion" or as "debate." "General discussion" as used in this section 2.04.040C 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 before seeking a specific decision on the matter either by means of a motion or by means of informal consent by a majority of Council members. The meaning of "debate" as used in this section 2.04.0400 is argumentation for or against a specific decision which has been proposed by means of a formal motion or by means of a request for informal consent by a majority of Council members. "Deliberation towards a decision" as that term is used in Oregon Public Meetings statutes is included in the definition of "debate" and excluded from the definition of "general discussion" herein. (Page 21 of 28) (Addition suggested by Councilor Lemhouse.) 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.