The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2014-0715 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 er cord 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, mid the length of the agenda. AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL July 15, 2014 Council Chambers 1175 E. Main Street Note: Items on the Agenda not considered due to time constraints are automatically continued to the next regularly scheduled Council meeting [AMC 2.04.030.E.] 7:00 p.m. Regular Meeting 1. CALL TO ORDER II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. ROLL CALL IV. MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Study Session of June 30, 2014 2. Business Meeting of July 1, 2014 VI. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS 1. Annual presentation from the Forest Lands Commission VII. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approval of commission, committee, and board minutes 2. Authorization to Proceed with a Contract Exceeding $100,000 for the Construction of Ashland Creek Park 3. Approval of Contract Amendment with KOGAP for Reservoir Sediment Removal 4. Plaza Information Booth Paint Colors 5. Liquor license application for Scott Giossi dba The Playwright VII[. 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}) None. 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 WWW.ASHLAND.OR.US 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 None XI. NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS 1. Appointment to Citizen Budget Committee 2. Discussion and direction to staff regarding the plaza kiosk XII. ORDINANCES. RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS 1. Second reading by title only of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance amending the Ashland Municipal Code Title 6 Business Licenses and Regulations to add Chapter 6.50 establishing time, place, and manner regulations and a permitting process for medical marijuana dispensaries" 2. Second reading by title only of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance establishing a tax on the sale of marijuana and marijuana-infused products in the City of Ashland" 3. First reading by title only of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance amending Ashland Municipal Code Chapter 1.08 General Penalty, Sections 1.08.010, 1.08.020 and 1.08.030 compliant with current state statues" 4. First reading by title only of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance relating to adoption of the Oregon Fire Code and amending AMC Chapter 15.28" 5. First reading by title only of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance repealing temporary moratorium on establishment of medical marijuana dispensaries" 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 I). 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 WW W.ASHLAND.OR.US Minutes for the City Council Study Session June 30, 2014 Page I of 2 MINUTES FOR THE STUDY SESSION ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL Monday, June 30, 2014 Siskiyou Room, 51 Winburn Way Council Chair Slattery called the meeting to order at 5:32 p.m, in the Siskiyou Room. Councilor Morris, Voisin, Rosenthal, and Marsh were present. Mayor Stromberg and Councilor Lemhouse were absent. 1. Look Ahead review City Administrator Dave Kanner reviewed items on the Look Ahead. 2. Discussion of Electric User Tax and Electric Franchise Fee City Administrator Dave Kanner explained the 25% Electric User Tax (EUT) went into the General Fund. Council discussed the need to make the EUT more transparent and suggested changing the name. Staff clarified typically a tax was named after where it came from. One Council suggestion would make electric rates progressive and based on usage to reward conservation efforts. Other comments would make the EUT negotiable like property taxes. Mr. Kanner further explained government municipalities did not pay the EUT and paid higher electric rates than users. The Cost of Service Study indicated the government municipal rate should come down 12% and the other rates increase to create a balance. Incentivizing conservation occurred in Tier 1 rates that were lower than Tier 2 rates. People who took advantage of weatherization and efficiency gain programs typically owned their homes and had the money to participate. The Cost of Service Study would provide support for lower income households by increasing and distributing the base rates through all incomes since low-income tended to use more energy. Residential service did not pay a demand charge while other services did because they placed higher demands on the system. Residential also did not pay for the first 15-kilowatts of demand. Management Analyst Adam Hanks explained demand versus consumption, and that larger cities had conservations program for demand response. Mr. Kanner would make it clearer in the budget process how much more money was generated in EUT when rates were raised. The Budget Committee or Council could discuss whether to earmark funds for a specific purpose. Council also wanted an outline explaining the rate increase and the impact. Staff clarified the franchise fee was an interfund transfer from the Electric Fund to the General Fund at 10% of the gross revenue and considered the cost of doing business. Ratepayers did not pay the franchise fee directly, only the Electric Fund paid. The expense was ultimately built into the rate and not an assessment on individual ratepayers. 3. Discussion of workforce development (request of Councilor Slattery) Councilor Slattery did not think The Job Council was the appropriate agency and explained the Workforce Training program at Rogue Community College (RCC) might suit Ashland better. Management Analyst Adam Hanks confirmed that The Job Council agreed Ashland's workforce needs were not a good fit for their program. Mr. Hanks explained elements of RCC's program that worked with local industries on workforce development for existing employees or employers requiring specific skill sets. Council saw two potential directions, one was the employer driven project with RCC assessing local Minutes for the City Council Study Session June A 2014 Page 2 of 2 employers on what their needs were. The other direction was working with people wanting employment. Council was concerned regarding RCC's focus on trade sector employment when Ashland was more tourism and healthcare based. One suggestion would have someone at the Resource Center once a week providing practical assistance on worker development skills or employment. Council suggested meeting with Lee Madsen at the Resource Center on what would be useful as well as look into the resources offered through ACCESS and possibly utilize services from RCC and ACCESS to cover more options. Councilor Slattery would talk to Mr. Madsen. Staff would work with RCC on employment programs. Council would discuss goal setting for a long-term strategy. Meeting adjourned at 6:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Dana Smith Assistant to the City Recorder Regular City Council Meeting July I, 2014 Page 1 of 10 MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL July 1, 2014 Council Chambers 1175 E. Main Street CALL TO ORDER Council Chair Slattery called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers. ROLL CALL Councilor Morris, Slattery, Rosenthal, and Marsh were present. Mayor Stromberg, Councilor Lemhouse and Voisin were absent. MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS Council Chair Slattery announced vacancies on the Airport, Conservation, Forest Lands, Historic, Public Arts, Tree, and Wildfire Mitigation Commissions, and two vacancies on the Citizen Budget Committee. Councilor Rosenthal introduced Guanajuato Mexico City Councilor Clarissa Arrache. Councilor Arrache expressed gratitude for the City's donation of a fire truck and presented old Mexican silver coins as gifts for the Mayor and staff involved in the donation. She introduced Queen Natalia Dominguez of the City of Guanajuato, and Princess Sabrina Scroggins, and Princess Quinn Blackwolf from the City of Ashland who each expressed gratitude to Ashland and Guanajuato. This was the 45`h year of the sister city relationship. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the Study Session June 16, 2014, and Business Meeting of June 17, 2014 were approved as presented. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS 1. Presentation by Oregon Shakespeare Festival regarding Green Show stage redesign Cynthia Rider, the executive director of the Oregon Shakespeare Festival (OSF) explained changes OSF wanted to make to Chautauqua Square located at the Black Swan Theatre and the courtyard area between the Angus Bowmer Theatre and the Allen Elizabethan Theatre commonly known as The Bricks. The Chautauqua Square redesign would involve the City removing the defunct fountain outside the theatre as well as cement planter boxes to utilize the space better. OSF would improve the function of The Bricks as a performance and working space. Construction on The Bricks would begin November 2015. OSF was currently working on Chautauqua Square. City Administrator Dave Kanner explained the City owned the fountain and the planter box Ms. Rider referenced. The fountain had not functioned for 23 years and repair estimates ranged from $15,000420,000. OSF had leasehold to the property and the City did not have the right to have a fountain in that space. The Street Department could demolish and remove the fountain or the City could hire someone to remove it in one piece. 2. 2014 Drought update Public Works Director Mike Faught expressed appreciation to the citizen's for using water wisely and averaging approximately 4,000,000 gallons per day (mgd). He explained the area was experiencing the lowest snow pack ever setting a new record. The goal was keeping Reeder Reservoir as full as possible starting with adding 1 mgd of Talent Irrigation District (TID) water daily to retain levels. The City would divert TID water from 94 city customers from Park and Terrace to Winner Street starting July 2, 2014 that would increase TID flow up to 2 mgd possibly higher. This created a severe impact to the 94 customers but in terms of a drought year staff thought it was more important to treat that TID for drinking water. If that Regular City Council Meeting July 1, 2014 Page 2 of 10 was not enough the City would shut down city owned TID customers from Walker Street to Terrace Street and divert that water for drinking water as well. If that failed, the City would initiate curtailment stages. The City Administrator had the authority to implement water curtailment at any time deemed necessary and have it ratified at the next Council meeting. The TAP (Talent Ashland Phoenix) construction project was on time. The City decided not to plant vegetation this season and encouraged the community to do the same. Staff also posted Use Water Wisely signs throughout the city. Mr. Faught and Conservation Specialist Julie Smitherman were meeting with the public discussing the drought and ways to conserve water. The Parks and Recreation Department put together a comprehensive water curtailment procedures document. Ms. Smitherman offered citizens several ways to reduce water use long term from evaluating irrigation, toilet rebates, water efficient showerheads, soil moisture meters, and recently the Lawn Replacement Program. TID water would be available until September 15, 2014 and TAP would produce 2 mgd starting mid August or early September. The City would cosponsor with the Chamber of Commerce on a Drought Seminar August 12, 2014 at Southern Oregon University in Stevenson Hall. The Public Works crews would also use reclaimed water when possible. Staff was working with SOU on their water usage and sprinkler system. Mandatory curtailment measures needed to coincide with utility billing cycles. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Request to modify existing Hamilton Creek Conservation Easement 2. Approval of an Intergovernmental Agreement for the Oregon Department of Aviation Pavement Maintenance Program 3. A resolution titled, "A resolution authorizing a loan from the Safe Drinking Water Revolving Loan Fund by entering into a financing contract with the Oregon Infrastructure Finance Authority" 4. Contract with Pathway Enterprises to provide janitorial services Council pulled Consent Agenda items #1 and #3 for further discussion. Senior Engineer Pieter Smeenk clarified the Hamilton Creek Conservation easement encompassed the entire property. Mr. Smeenk went on to address the Safe Drinking Water Revolving Loan Fund and thanked the IFA (Infrastructure Finance Authority) and Jackson County Commissioner Don Skundrick for their efforts. Councilor Rosenthal/Morris m/s to approve the Consent Agenda items. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. PUBLIC HEARINGS - None PUBLIC FORUM Bill Harris/853 Pavilion Place/Spoke regarding Council's decision to table the gun ordinance at the previous Council meeting. He proposed a non-binding resolution supporting a gun ban of open carry that encouraged the state representatives and senators to change current laws and give cities authority to ban open carry in public business. Guns did not belong in a City Council meeting. He also suggested an ordinance giving private businesses the authority to ban guns on their premises. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. First reading by title only of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance amending the Ashland Municipal Code Title 6 Business Licenses and Regulations to add Chapter 6.50 establishing time, place, and manner regulations and a permitting process for medical marijuana dispensaries" City Attorney Dave Lohman explained Council needed to decide whether to have a special permit for medical marijuana dispensaries, and fees that he suggested setting by resolution. He went through proposed changes that included changing the word "giver" in 6.50.020 Definitions (I) Medical Marijuana Qualifying Patient to "caregiver." Section 6.50.040 Initial Permit Application and Fee (A) added a Regular City Council Meeting July I, 2014 Page 3 of 10 provision clarifying the permit application was initially picked up at the Community Development Department. Added (A) (2) requiring the application to include the true names and addresses of persons or legal entities that had an ownership interest in the dispensary, loaned or gave money or property to the applicant within the preceding year or leased property to the applicant for use by the dispensary. Section 6.50.050 Permit Termination - Renewal - Fee (A) would clarify a permit could be terminated automatically if state or federal enforcement officials changed direction and prohibited dispensary operations. Section 0.50.060 Permit Conditions would (A) require a current City business license and (E) clarify retail sales hours and (G) not allow dispensaries to co-locate with a marijuana social or smoking club on the same property or in the same building. Mr. Lohman suggested substituting the wording in Section 0.50.060 Permit Conditions (I) regarding prior convictions with language taken from the OLCC (Oregon Liquor Control Commission). Section 6.50.020 (D) would define "Company Principal" and Section 6.50.020 (F) would define "Financial Interest" If Council approved the language suggestions, he would clarify 30-day invoice scenarios. Similar felony conviction standards applied to restaurants with stricter requirements for liquor stores. The state did not have a standard with respect to people with a financial interest in dispensaries and did not conduct background checks or requirements for employees. Some legislators were looking into adding background checks for employees to the state requirements. Section 6.50.060 Permit Conditions (N) addressed sales or transfers of marijuana products outside of the dispensary by third parties. Section 6.50.065 Background Checks would ensure background checks were kept confidential as much as possible with the Ashland Police Department only reporting whether the person passed or did not. Police Chief Terry Holdemess explained other agencies had issues with customers purchasing medical marijuana and selling it to another person in the parking lot as well as shoulder tap situations. The provision addressed transfers on the property. Council comments ranged from supporting the additions, using the same conditions the state used versus OLCC's conditions, and having a nominal fee for the permit process. Concerns included the accounting detail, background checks on investors, and operator standards. One comment preferred a list of investors instead of background checks and using the state language on prior convictions. Councilor Morris/Rosenthal m/s to approve first reading of an ordinance entitled "An Ordinance Amending the Ashland Municipal Code Title 6 Business Licenses and Regulations to Add a Chapter Establishing Time, Place and Manner Regulations and a Permitting Process for Medical Marijuana Dispensaries as listed in the agenda packet and with amendments from staff." DISCUSSION: Councilor Morris thought the prior convictions provision was onerous but marijuana was a federally controlled substance and supported the background checks. Councilor Marsh/Slattery m/s amend the motion to eliminate background checks on investors but still require the operator to list who the investors are as noted in Section 6.050.060 Permit Conditions (L). DISCUSSION: Councilor Marsh clarified the motion also related to Section 6.50.060 Permit Conditions (I) and would strike language after (2), (3), and (4). It would retain in the application process in Section 6.050.060 Permit Conditions (L) the requirement for records listing all the names and aliases of persons who have ownership interest. Staff confirmed the motion would apply to Section 6.50.040 Initial Permit Application and Fee (A) (2) and limit background checks. Mr. Lohman proposed incorporating Councilor Marsh's changes for second reading without passing an amendment. Councilor Marsh withdrew her amendment with Councilor Slattery's consent and directed staff to make the Regular City Council Meeting July 1, 2014 Page 4 of 10 changes for second reading. Councilor Marsh/Slattery m/s to the amend the motion Section 6.50.060 Permit Conditions (1) and keep the state standards convicted once in 5 years or twice ever. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Marsh, Morris, Slattery, and Rosenthal, YES. Motion passed. Councilor Marsh motioned to amend the motion and eliminate (K) under Section 6.50.060 Permit Conditions (K) and eliminate the first sentence in (L) regarding accounting in the books. Motion died for lack of a second. Roll Call Vote on amended motion: Councilor Slattery, Rosenthal, Marsh, and Morris, YES. Motion passed. NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS 1. Planning Commission's Report on considering a limited type of short term traveler's accommodation in residential zones Community Development Director Bill Molnar explained the Planning Commission and staff recommendation focused on primary elements of the zoning code and standards if Council decided to pass a limited form of short-term rentals (STR), and if it was desirable to have them. Planning Commission vice Chair Michael Dawkins further explained the Planning Commission looked for an accommodation type and rules. The Commission did not consider accessory units because they were potentially long term affordable rentals. They defined long-term rentals as a unit with a kitchen and did not recommend short-term rentals of an entire house. Another discussion was whether the rental was a Bed and Breakfast or a room in a house. They looked at specific one car per visit scenarios. Mr. Molnar added the Planning Commission recommended an owner occupied set up where the primary residence was on the property. Eligible locations were similar to traveler's accommodations in multifamily zones, on a property within 200-feet of a major street. One of the primary standards was having the accommodation within the footprint of an existing residence excluding out buildings. There was not clear consensus on maximum size or occupant number. The Commission recommended not allowing units with kitchen facilities to discourage converting an accessory unit within the building to a STR or an on sight space that had potential for a kitchen facility. The Commission suggested using a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) with a reduced fee since the STR was smaller than a Bed and Breakfast or multiuse accommodation. A Type I procedure involved a pre- application where a property owner submitted a conceptual idea to the Community Development Department that led to a meeting with staff. Neighbors within 200-feet of the property received a land use request to operate as a STR. Staff would send another notice regarding approval to the same residents that could subsequently initiate an appeal process. Dr. Ruth Resch/1000 Terra Avenue/Lived in an R-1 zone, was a handicapped senior citizen renting one bedroom in her house in order to retain her home. Her home was located a block and a half from Siskiyou Boulevard. The one bedroom she rented did not create congestion, cars parked in her driveway. It was important for the community to maintain economic community diversity so Ashland was not just home for the rich and people could maintain homes with small businesses like short-term rentals. Larry Chaser/1271 Munson Drive/Encouraged Council to allow host occupied STRs in all neighborhoods and provided examples of consistent use with small home businesses currently allowed in R-1 zones. Creating reasonable regulations to guide host occupied STRs, as a use already consistent with current use would maintain a suitable and sustainable R-1 housing environment. He urged Council to support sharing Regular City Council Meeting July I, 2014 Page 5 of 10 economy and allow host occupied STRs. Ellen Campbell/120 Gresham/Ashland had a strong tourist industry and a local vibrant community due to zoning laws. Council needed to look for ways to broaden business space and not rely on tourism. Housing needed to be affordable and available to long-term residents not tourists. She encouraged Council not to move forward and change the ordinance. Allowing STRs in R-1 would be difficult to enforce. If STRs were allowed in the R-1 zone the requirements should be the same as R-2 and R3 zones with a Conditional Use Permit, 200-foot buffer, owner occupied, no subletting, require user street fees, taxes, registered with the state, fire and county health inspections, water rates, and provide off street parking for each unit. Corinne Lombardi/1685 Old Hwy 99 South/Explained she was surprised the Planning Commission ordinance referenced all residential zones. "fire term sharing economy was just a name change. San Francisco had 5,000 Air B&B rentals and over 66% were not one bedroom as indicated but multiple bedrooms and entire units. A third of the owners had multiple units and managed it as a property manager. The Ashland Compliance Officer removed 95 people who were operating illegally in Ashland. Abby Hogge/1700 Parker Street/Described the difference from renting to a long-tern tenant to when she used her accessory unit as an STR. She supported regulating STRs in R-I zone and suggested Council conduct a one-year trial like the one the City did for Bed and Breakfasts in the 1970s. According to the City code enforcement division there were zero complaints regarding host occupied STRs. She encouraged Council to explore shared economy and facilitate peer-to-peer networking and commerce. Tom Dubois/690 South Mountain Avenue/Noted 20 years prior Council approved residents in all residential zones to operate businesses from homes. STRs owners were neighbors and friends. People staying at STRs were visitors to Ashland and welcome guests. Allowing hosted micro stays in the R-I was a seamless, natural addition. He supported reasonable regulations for host occupied micro stays in R-I zones. Melody Jones/79 Pine Street/Agreed with Ms. Hogge and Mr. Dubois and hoped the Council approved owner occupied STRs and did not exclude accessory dwelling units (ADU). Her ADU was 375 square feet and two small for someone to live in long term. She wanted to rent it short term during the summer and long term during winter. With owners receiving cease and desist letters there were fewer places for visitors to stay. The City would be able to collect TOT (Transient Occupancy Tax) and Food and Beverage Tax. Her property was more beautiful as an STR than it would be if she were not having guests. Laura Westerman/252 Timberlake Drive/Encouraged Council to pass the STR requirement. She had vacation rentals on her property with room to park six cars if needed. Her home was more beautiful now that it was an STR. She had her home as an STR for the past two years with no complaints from the neighbors. Councilor Rosenthal/Marsh m/s to direct staff to prepare an ordinance to consider this type of home occupation and traveler's accommodation in the R-1 zone. DISCUSSION: Councilor Marsh supported the motion, expected to vote yes on the ordinance when it came back and wanted background information. There were three critical questions. The first was whether STRs in R-I neighborhood provided tourists with positive and safe experiences. The second question was allowing STRs without undermining R-1 neighborhoods. The third question was if allowing STRs in R-1 could happen in a way that created a level playing field. She would limit STRs in R-I to one bedroom, exclude accessory units, address the parking issue, and retain the same fee structure in the CUP. Councilor Morris would support the motion. His concern was impact to housing stock and rentals. He wanted the Planning Commission to look into parking and square footage instead of one bedroom. Councilor Slattery was not in favor of moving it forward or supporting visitor accommodations in R-1 zones. Overnight guests in neighborhoods changed the dynamic in that neighborhood. He was not comfortable allowing STRs in the entire R-I zone even with a CUP. Regular City Council Meeting July 1, 2014 Page 6 of 10 Councilor Rosenthal withdrew motion with Councilor Marsh's consent. Councilor Rosenthal/Marsh m/s to direct staff to craft an ordinance to permit a single traveler accommodation in the R-1 zone. Councilor Marsh/Morris m/s to amend the motion to specifically exclude accessory residential units. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Marsh, Slattery, Morris, and Rosenthal, YES. Motion passed. Councilor Morris/Marsh m/s to amend the motion and require it is owner occupied. DISCUSSION: Councilor Morris clarified the owner needed to be present when the STR was rented. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Slattery, Marsh, Morris, and Rosenthal, YES. Motion passed. Continued Discussion on Main Motion: Councilor Marsh requested the Planning Commission provide specific guidance on the 200-foot limit and that staff provide information on enforcement. She also wanted the equivalent requirements imposed on lodging to apply to STRs. Councilor Morris wanted an evaluation of which R-I may or may not work. Roll Call Vote on amended main motion: Councilor Marsh, Morris, and Rosenthal, YES; Councilor Slattery NO. Motion passed 3-1. ORDINANCES. RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS 1. Second reading by title only of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance amending 18.08, 18.32.025, 18.40.030, and 18.52.020 of the Ashland Municipal Code establishing medical marijuana dispensaries as a special permitted use in the Commercial (C-1), Employment (E-1) and Industrial (M-1) zoning districts" Planning Manager Maria Harris explained changes since first reading included adding dispensaries as a conditional use in the C-I and E-1 zone if the location was at least 200-feet from a residential zones and not adjacent to a boulevard. Another change added dispensaries to the list of prohibited home occupations and the final change deleted language regarding hours of operation. Dave Helmich/468 Williamson Way/Asked Council to reconsider and amend the acceptable locations for medical marijuana dispensaries (MMD) and increase the buffer around residential property from 200 to 300 feet. He submitted a petition into the record not to allow significant business traffic on their narrow streets. A 1,000 square foot dispensary would bring 80-200 additional auto transits through their neighborhood daily. Council needed to protect their neighborhood from the impact traffic would have. Linda Stickle/492 Rogue Place/Expressed concern regarding the traffic impact on her neighborhood. Williamson Way was not designed to handle traffic and a dispensary could possibly generate several 100 trips daily. Increasing the buffer from 200 feet to 300 feet would solve the issue and have no affect on the current dispensary at Clear Creek. Mary Canfield/465 Williamson Way/During the last meeting Council discarded the Planning Commission recommendations. She asked Council to delay the vote until there was a full Council. Other neighborhoods in E-I zones were just becoming aware of the impact MMDs would have on them, and they needed time to educate community. Ronda Barker/459 Williamson Way/Noted that during the last meeting, the Planning Commission recommended putting MMDs on the boulevards and she supported that recommendation. Then Council went a different direction and established the 200-foot buffer zone. A 200-foot buffer zone was too small to address Williamson Way concerns. She asked Council to adopt a 300-foot buffer zone and to delay a decision until all of Council was present. Community Development Director Bill Molnar explained dispensaries 200-feet or more from a residential Regular City Council Meeting July 1, 2014 Page 7 of 10 zone required a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) that entailed two notices and posting of the property. A dispensary going into an existing building would need administrative approval. If appealed, the Planning Commission was the final decision maker for the City before it went to the Land Use Board of Appeals. The CUP required that adequate transportation was available, evaluated surrounding traffic on streets and level of service at intersections. Given the Williamson Way area, a high traffic generator would be a medical office that was an outright permitted use and not a CUP. If a request came through to locate a medical office on Williamson Way, staff would evaluate traffic and building design. It was a permitted use as long as it met the City's design standards and traffic generation within the thresholds established by the code. The City's transportation plan for the remainder of the railroad property integrated into the existing transportation system in the Williamson Way and Rogue Place area. The Williamson Way neighborhood was a peninsula at the edge of one of the largest employment areas in Ashland. The 200-foot buffer was standard and Mr. Molnar was unaware of an employment zone with a buffer larger than 200 feet. He confirmed that 100 car trips a day in an E-1 zone was not as high as the zone allowed and the focus was typically on peak hour generation. Staff specifically designed the street in the Williamson Way neighborhood with 20-foot wide two-way lanes and bays to calm traffic and discourage fast cut through traffic. Councilor Marsh/Morris m/s to approve second reading of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance amending 18.08, 18.32.025, 18.32.030, 18.40.030, 18.40.040, 18.52.020, and 18.94.120 of the Ashland Municipal Code allowing medical marijuana dispensaries in specified portions of the commercial (C- 1), employment (E-1), and industrial (M-1) zoning districts." DISCUSSION: Councilor Marsh thought the areas Council decided were appropriate for dispensaries on boulevards and designated employment zones with a CUP was a good first effort. Councilor Morris did not think a 300-foot buffer would make a difference. Additionally, he did not think traffic would go through the Williamson Way neighborhood since it was not convenient and would go out to Hersey instead. Councilor Slattery would support the motion. Councilor Marsh added that Council was applying something across the community, could not add specific exclusions or inclusions to a corner of a neighborhood, and had to do what was best for community as a whole. Council could also not write a land use code that excluded or included a specific business. Another important principle was following the lessons of the land use code and remaining consistent. Ms. Harris read the changes to the ordinance. Section 318.32.025 (G) Medical Marijuana dispensaries meeting all of the follow requirements (1), would read: The dispensary must be located on a property with a boundary line adjacent to a boulevard, except that dispensaries are not permitted in the Downtown Design Standards zone. Section 318.32.025 (G) Medical Marijuana dispensaries meeting all of the follow requirements (2) Operating Hours - stricken. Added SECTION 18.32.030 Conditional Uses. The following uses and their accessory uses are permitted when authorized in accordance with the chapter on Conditional Use Permits: A. Electrical substations. B. Automobile fuel sales, and automobile and truck repair facilities, except as allowed as a special permitted use in 18.32.025. C. New and used car sales, boat, trailer, and recreational vehicles sales and storage areas, except within the Historic Interest Area as defined in the Comprehensive Plan. D. Hotels and motels. E. Temporary uses. F. Outdoor storage of commodities associated with a permitted, special permitted or conditional use. G. Hostels, provided that the facility be subject to an annual Type I review for at least the first three Regular City Council Meeting July I, 2014 Page 8 of 10 years, after which time the Planning Commission may approve, under a Type II procedure, a permanent permit for the facility. H. Building material sales yards, but not including concrete or asphalt batch or mixing plants. 1. Churches or similar religious institutions. J. Wireless Communication Facilities not permitted outright and authorized pursuant to Section 18.72.180. K. Structures which are greater than forty. (40) feet in height, but less than fifty-five (55) feet, in the "D" Downtown Overlay District. L. Medical marijuana dispensaries, except as allowed as a special permitted use in 18.32.025, and meeting all of the following requirements: 1. The dispensary must be located 200 feet or more from a residential zone, except that dispensaries are not permitted in the Downtown Design Standards zone. 2. The dispensary must be located in a permanent building and may not locate in a trailer, cargo container, or motor vehicle. Outdoor storage of merchandise, raw materials, or other material associated with the dispensary is prohibited. 3. Any modifications to the subject site or exterior of a building housing the dispensary must be consistent with the Site Design Use Standards, and obtain Site Review approval if required by section 18.72.030. Security bars or grates on windows and doors are prohibited. 4. The dispensary most not have a drive-up use. 5. The dispensary must provide for secure disposal of marijuana remnants or by-products; such remnants or by-products shall not be placed within the dispensary's exterior refuse containers. 6. The dispensary is registered with the Oregon Health Authority under the state of Oregon's medical marijuana facility registration system under ORS 475.300 - ORS 475.346, and meets the requirements of OAR Chapter 333 Division 8 Medical Marijuana Facilities. Amended SECTION 5 18.40.030 Special Permitted Uses (J) Medical marijuana dispensaries meeting all of the following requirements - Operating Hours - stricken. Added SECTION 6 18.40.040 Conditional Uses. The following uses and their accessory uses are permitted when authorized in accordance with the chapter on Conditional Use Permits: A. Electrical substations. B. Mini-warehouses and similar storage areas. C. Contractor equipment storage yards or storage and rental of equipment commonly used by a contractor. D. Automobile fuel sales. E. New and used car sales, boat, trailer and recreational vehicles sales and storage areas, provided that the use is not located within the Historic Interest Area as defined in the Comprehensive Plan. F. Hotels and motels. G. Any use which involves outside storage of merchandise, raw materials, or other material associated with the primary use on the site. H. Private college, trade school, technical school, or similar school. 1. Cabinet, carpentry, machine, and heating shops, if such uses are located less than or equal to 200' from the nearest residential district. J. Cold storage plants, if such uses are located less than or equal to 200' from the nearest residential district. K. Automotive body repair and painting, including paint booths. 1. The use shall not be located within 200' of the nearest residentially zoned property. 2. All objectionable odors associated with the use shall be confined to the lot, to the greatest extent feasible. For the purposes of this provision, the standard for judging "objectionable odors" shall be that of an average, reasonable person with ordinary sensibilities after taking Regular City Council Meeting July I, 2014 Page 9 of 10 into consideration the character of the neighborhood in which the odor is made and the odor is detected. 3. The use shall comply with all requirements of the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. L. Churches and similar religious institutions. M. Nightclubs and Bars. N. Theaters (excluding drive-in) and similar entertainment uses. 0. Temporary uses. P. Wireless Communication Facilities not permitted outright and authorized pursuant to Section 18.72.180. Q. Medical marijuana dispensaries, except as allowed as a special permitted use in 18.40.030, and meeting all of the following requirements: 1. The dispensary must be located 200 feet or more from a residential zone. 2. The dispensary must be located in a permanent building and may not locate in a trailer, cargo container, or motor vehicle. Outdoor storage of merchandise, raw materials, or other material associated with the dispensary is prohibited. 3. Any modifications to the subject site or exterior of a building housing the dispensary must be consistent with the Site Design Use Standards, and obtain Site Review approval if required by section 18.72.030. Security bars or grates on windows and doors are prohibited. 4. The dispensary must not have a drive-up use. 5. The dispensary must provide for secure disposal of marijuana remnants or by-products; such remnants or by-products shall not be placed within the dispensary's exterior, refuse containers. 6. The dispensary is registered with the Oregon Health Authority under the state of Oregon's medical marijuana facility registration system under ORS 475.300 - ORS 475.346, and meets the requirements of OAR Chapter 333 Division 8 Medical Marijuana Facilities. Added SECTION 18.94.120 Prohibited Uses. The following uses are prohibited as home occupations: A. Any activity that produces radio or TV interference, noise, glare, vibration, smoke or odor beyond allowable levels as determined by local, state or federal standards. B. Any activity involving on-site retail sales, except as allowed in the Historic Railroad District or items that are incidental to the occupational use, such as the sale of beauty products from salons, lesson books or sheet music for music teachers, or computer software for computer consultants. C. Any uses described in this section or uses with similar objectionable impacts because of automobile traffic, noise, glare, odor, dust, smoke or vibration: 1. Ambulance service; 2. Ammunition or firearm sales; 3. Ammunition reloading business; 4. Animal hospital, veterinary services, kennels or animal boarding; 5. Auto and other vehicle repair, including auto painting; 6. Repair, reconditioning or storage of motorized vehicles, boats, recreational vehicles or large equipment on-site; and 7. Medical marijuana dispensaries. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Morris, Marsh, Slattery, and Rosenthal, YES. Motion passed. 2. First reading by title only of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance establishing a tax on the sale of marijuana and marijuana-infused products in the City of Ashland" City Administrator Dave Kanner explained it was highly probable the measure to legalize marijuana in the state would pass in November. The measure stated no city or county could impose a tax. However, there was a possibility a city with a tax already in place would not be affected but it could. The ordinance was a gross receipts tax ordinance based on Food and Beverage tax that would impose a 5% gross receipts tax on Regular City Council Meeting July 1, 2014 Page 10 of 10 medical marijuana and a 10% gross receipts tax on recreational marijuana as well as marijuana infused products. Medical marijuana was a controlled substance and not prescribed by doctors. Instead, doctors made referrals to the Oregon Health Authority who determined who was eligible to receive a medical marijuana card. Marijuana was an herbal remedy and there was no proscription against taxing herbal remedies. Collected taxes would go into the General Fund. Council could change Section 4.38.030 Levy of Tax (B) to read the amount of tax levied shall be established by Council resolution tip to 5% for medical marijuana and up to 10% for recreational marijuana. Councilor Marsh/Rosenthal m/s approval of first reading by title only of an ordinance titled, "An Ordinance Establishing a Tax on the Sale of Marijuana and Marijuana-infused Products in the City of Ashland." And amend to change 4.38.030 Levy of Tax and section B up to 5% gross sale of the amount paid to the seller for item #1 and up to 10 % gross sale of amount of item #2." DISCUSSION: Councilor Marsh thought it was appropriate to have something that related to legal marijuana. She was less convinced on taxing medical marijuana. Councilor Rosenthal thought it was a smart move to position the City by establishing the tax. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Rosenthal, Slattery, Morris, and Marsh, YES. Motion passed. 3. First reading by title only of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance amending Ashland Municipal Code Chapter 1.08 General Penalty, Sections 1.08.010, 1.08.020 and 1.08.030 compliant with current state statues" Item delayed due to time constraints. 4. Second reading by title only of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance amending AMC Chapter 2; Rules of City Council, Uniform Policies and Operating Procedures for advisory commissions and boards, Recreation Commission, Conservation Commission; and certain administrative and operating departments" Item delayed due to time constraints. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS/REPORTS FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 10:29 p.m. Dana Smith, Assistant to the City Recorder Dennis Slattery, Council Chair ASHLAND DOWNTOWN PARKING MANAGEMENT & CIRCULATION AD HOC ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES June 4, 2014 CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 3:30 p.m. in Pioneer Hall, 73 Winbum Way Regular members present: Lisa Beam, Michael Dawkins, Rich Kaplan, Dave Young, Craig Anderson, John Williams, Emile Amarotico, Joe Collonge, Liz Murphy and John Fields Regular members absent: Marie Donovan, Pam Hammond and Cynthia Rider Ex officio (non-voting) members present: Sandra Slattery, Katharine Flanagan, Mike Gardiner, Bill Molnar (left at 4:45), Mike Faught (left at 4:30), Rich Rosenthal (left at 4:45) and Lee Tuneberg Ex officio (non-voting) members absent: Dennis Slattery University of Oregon members present: Nicholas Meltzer and Robert Parker City of Ashland Staff members present: Tami De Mille-Campos and Kristi Blackman APPROVAL OF MINUTES Minutes of April 2, 2014 - Minutes were approved by unanimous consent. PUBLIC FORUM Colin Swales, 95 Coolidge Street He stated that there has been discussion in previous years regarding the idea of removing the couplet. He stated Kad Johnson just did new traffic counts. Right up until Bush Street there is only 1 lane and he thinks that would be sufficient to carry the traffic downtown. He would like everyone to keep this in mind & allow more commercial friendly pedestrian traffic. DISCUSSION OF RECENT CPW WORK April 911 parking monitoring (see attached). They divided the downtown up into 3 zones and monitored parking every 2 hours between 8:00 am and 6:00 pm. Parking generation research: CPW conducted research using the Institute of Transportation Engineer's Parking Generation Handbook ITE CODE Hotel, Urban UNITS Occupied Rooms EXPECTED UNITS 180 PARKING STALLS (Weekday) 115 PARKING STALLS (Saturday) 162 .assumptions inherent *does not separate private versus public Parking generation findings: *Deficiency of parking spaces during the week -Supported by perceptions survey *Problem not as bad as ITE suggests -alternative transportation and variability *Data further supports project issues Difference in ITE estimate versus Actual Parkin Stalls Weekday -950 Saturday -850 Sunda +2100 ASHLAND DOWNTOWN PARKING MANAGEMENT & CIRCULATION AD HOC ADVISORY COMMITTEE April 2, 2014 Page 1014 Key City Interviews: City Population (visitors per ear Reason for Tourism Bend, 0 79,000 2,000,000 Outdoor recreational activities/ski resorts Boone, NC 17,000 College town Myrtle Beach, SC 27,000 14,000,000 Beaches Park City, UT 8,000 3,000,000 Ski resorts South Lake Tahoe, CA 21,000 3,000,000 Lake Tahoe/Ski resorts Steamboat Springs, CO 12,000 100,000 Ski resorts Ashland, OR 20,000 410,000 OSF/outdoor recreation Key City Interview findings: *Specific peak season policies *Employee permit systems *Voucher programs for patrons *Varying degrees of parking information 'Convenience is emphasized for paid parking Revisit problem definition: Issue review - Introduction: *Extensive research and analysis conducted over the past 6 months *Before moving forward with policy options, wanted to revisit original problems definition *Validate existing issues and identify new ones Issue review: *Concern that the existing supply is "at capacity" during peak days and seasons "At capacity" is defined as 85% or greater -Key findings: *At capacity beyond peak season *At capacity in certain areas of downtown -Research: Monitoring, Survey, Parking Generation Analysis *A desire to balance short-term "retail" parking, theater patron and employee parking demand in a manner that continues to support downtown vitality. -Imbalance of short-term use -Research: Monitoring & OSF survey -Are time regulated parking spaces located in the right places? *Suspicion that employees are using core area short-term parking, thereby reducing "capacity" for customers and visitors -Not as severe as previously thought -Research: Monitoring, parking perceptions survey *Loading zones are not efficiently used to balance the needs of all downtown users -Loading zones underutilized throughout the day -Lowest use from 4-6pm -Deliveries made in undesignated areas *A desire to make the best use of off-street facilities both in and outside of the core areas -Monitoring: Public parking lot occupancy rates are varied throughout the day -Private lots: Opportunities to develop partnerships to meet parking demand *Residential/core downtown interface areas -Opportunity to distribute parking demand with careful consideration of residents' needs -Parking perceptions survey *64% would be willing to park farther away *Half of employees already park in residential areas -Monitoring: Occupancy imbalance 'Potential to increase use of multi-modal transportation to access downtown -Parking perceptions survey ASHLAND DOWNTOWN PARKING MANAGEMENT & CIRCULATION AD HOC ADVISORY COMMITTEE April 2, 2014 Page 2 of 4 *76% say bicycle access within downtown could be improved *56% say bicycle access to downtown could be improved *Pedestrian facilities are adequate -Monitoring *Only 36% of bicycle parking was used during peak hours *Is bicycle parking in the right spots? *The need for a better system/plan for communicating parking to users (e.g. signage, marketing) -Clearly identifiable -Research: Survey & monitoring *Concern that "pricing" parking will have a negative effect on customer traffic -Don't know the answer at this point -Research: Key City interviews & policy options survey -Wait 3-5 years then revisit this idea *Issues identified in the Scope of Work are valid *New findings -Parking at capacity beyond just peak season -Occupancy issues specific to certain areas of downtown -Employees occupying time regulated spaces less problematic than originally thought -Loading zones don't balance all user needs -Potential to increase multi-modal transportation use STRAW POLL (see attached results) CPW conducted a straw poll. The goal of the straw poll was to measure preliminary opinions of committee members (voting & non-voting) on future policy decisions. Each question was asked independently, and responses were collected anonymously. MOVING FORWARDINEXT STEPS Jul Moving forward High level programmatic decisions Policy options survey results Policy options survey analysis OSIF survey Policy packages Policy options matrix (see attached) *Research & public engagement inform policy options *Proven success elsewhere *Matrix includes: -7 Management Elements -18 Policy options -64 Policy variations -Evaluation Criteria for each 'Management Element: Information Resources *Policy Option: Develop navigation tools with a consistent branding strategy *Policy variations: -Map -Website -Smartphone app. -Outreach/coordination with organizations *Interim Project Report -Summary of research -CPW policy recommendations package -Suggested guidelines and timeline The Committee agreed to change the date of the August meeting from August 60 to August 13th from 3:30-5:30. ASHLAND DOWNTOWN PARKING MANAGEMENT& CIRCULATION AD HOC ADVISORY COMMITTEE April 2, 2014 Page 3 of 4 ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 5:23 pm Respectfully submitted, Tami De Mille-Campos, Administrative Assistant ASHLAND DOWNTOWN PARKING MANAGEMENT & CIRCULATION AD HOC ADVISORY COMMITTEE April 2, 2014 Page 4 o/4 ASHLAND HISTORIC COMMISSION Meeting Minutes June 4, 2014 Community Development/Engineering Services Building - 51 Winburn Way - Siskiyou Room REGULAR MEETING - CALL TO ORDER: 6:07 p.m. - SISKIYOU ROOM in the Community Development/Engineering Services Building, located at 51 Winburn Way Historic Commissioners Present: Mr. Skibby, Mr. Shostrom, Ms. Renwick, Mr. Whitford, Mr. Giordano, Ms. Law Commission Members Absent: Mr. Swink, Ms. KenCairn Council Liaison : Mike Morris, Absent Staff Present: Staff Liaison: Amy Gunter, Assistant Planner APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Historic Commission regular meeting of May 7, 2014. Mr. Whitford motioned that minutes be approved and Mr. Giordano seconded. Motion passed unanimously. PUBLIC FORUM: Ray Kistler, from Kistler, Small & White, at 545 A St, spoke on behalf of the Plexis building on A Street. It is part of the old shop of Oak Street, Tank and Steel. The owner would like to demolish the 2 story space and make it a 3 story space inside. Mr. Kistler stated that somehow the project has come through without complying with the 10% rule for open space. Mr. Kistler explained that because it's a large scale building, in order for it to comply you have to setback an additional 12 feet the length of the building to make up the plaza space for the whole site. The commissioners agreed that a 3 story building may not fit in to the scale of the railroad district. Presently, there are no 3 story buildings within the railroad district. Mr. Kistler asked some questions that the commission could not address at this time. It was suggested by Mr. Skibby and Ms. Gunter that Mr. Kistler submit for a pre-application conference to better answer their questions. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORT: No council liason was present to give the report. PUBLIC HEARING: Mr. Skibby gave the requirements for public hearings. PLANNING ACTION: PA-2014-00729 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 182 Scenic Drive APPLICANT: Jon Bauer Ms. Gunter gave a presentation on the proposed land partition. Mr. John Bauer, homeowner, explained the proposal and the ensuing conditional use permit. No changes to the exterior building or property would be made. He explained that the structure is not visible from Scenic Drive. With no other comments or questions to be made, Mr. Skibby closed the public hearing for staff comments. Mr. Whitford motioned to approve PA-2014-00729, Ms. Renwick seconded. Motion passed unanimously. PLANNING ACTION: PA-2014-00725 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 121 Manzanita APPLICANT: Northwest Design and Build OWNERS: Laura Westerman Ms. Gunter gave a presentation on the proposed conditional use permit for an accessory residential unit. A man door has been proposed at the residence per the state code. This man door would be in place of french doors. No changes will be made to the main residence. Ms. Gunter reported that one elevation change will be made, and one landscaped area (courtyard)has been added. Ms. Laura Westerman, explained how they will use the residence. The parking will not be covered but eventually they would like some sort of carport. She added, all parking will be head in only. Ms. Gunter explained that they have not addressed the bike parking as of yet, and that one space would be required for bicycles. Ms. Gunter said that she has received no comments from neighbors. With no other comments or questions to be made, Mr. Skibby closed the public hearing Mr. Giordano motioned for approval of PA-2014-00725, and Ms. Renwick seconded. Motion passed unanimously. PLANNING ACTION: PA-2014-00753 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 469 Allison Street APPLICANT: Ben Treiger OWNERS: Kirt VanDerZee and Lane Price Ms. Gunter gave a presentation on the proposed conditional use permit to expand/enlarge an existing non conforming residence. No applicant or owner was present for representation. Neighbor, Colin Swales of 95 Coolidge St, spoke about his concerns regarding the drawings and setbacks of the proposal. He stated that the proposal steps up against the grade and the egress windows are too large. Mr. Swales said the structure looks too large and massive and is proportionally out of character. Mr. Skibby closed the public hearing. Mr. Skibby stated that the scale of the roof is too large, and that the 41 x 60 window is not blending with the rest of the structure. The commission agreed that the plans are inaccurate and out of proportion to the reality of the structure/windows. Mr Shostrom stated that they cannot evaluate the proposal accurately because of the scale of the plans. Ms. Renwick suggested that they get accurate drawings to scale for better evaluation. Ms. Gunter suggested that they request an extension on the planning action and ask for accurate drawings. Mr. Giordano motioned for continuance to allow the applicant to return with accurate drawings, depicting topography, existing roof line, window conditions and wall heights and to demonstrate accurate siding. This is also to include the applicants addressing the historic commission standards. Ms. Renwick seconded. Motion passed unanimously. PLANNING ACTION: PA-2014-00793 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 56 Third Street APPLICANTS: Murray & Yoko Huggins OWNER: Barbara Allen Ms. Gunter gave a presentation on the proposed conditional use permit to operate a two unit hotel/motel. No changes have been proposed for the structure and this is strictly a reactivation of an old conditional use permit. The applicant was not present for the public hearing. Mr. Skibby closed the public hearing and opened for staff comments. No staff comments were made. Mr. Shostrom motioned to approve PA-2014-00793 and Ms. Renwick seconded. Motion passed unanimously. OLD BUSINESS: There was no old business to discuss. NEW ITEMS: Historic Preservation Presentation month activities review: Mr. Skibby reported that there were 18 people that went on the neighborhood tour. He reported that they may re-do the tour in the fall and this was the biggest turnout they have ever had. Ms. Gunter said that she advertised historic week through a local radio station and also said the Ashland Springs Hotel is interested in advertising historic week next year. Ms. Gunter said that she had a request from award winners for more pictures, and Mr. Skibby said that he would email them to Ms. Gunter for distribution. Ms. Gunter suggested that next year they go without coffee, and provide lemonade and water instead. Review Board Schedule: June 5 Dale, Allison June 12 Victoria, Sam, Dale June 19 Keith, Terry, Dale June 26 Terry, Keith, Kerry Jul 3 Allison, Tom, Sam Project Assignments for Planning Actions: PLANNING ACTION: PA-2014-00725 SUBJECT PROPERTY:121 Manzanita COMMISSION MEMBER ASSIGNED: Mr. Whitford DISCUSSION ITEMS: Ms. Gunter gave a report on the Downtown Design Committee and stated they have discussed adding historic markers and changing out pennants, planter boxes, and the ledge outside Earthly Goods. The Downtown Design Committee is also tearing out asphalt near the Exxon station, planting some street trees, and cleaning off the sidewalks and awnings downtown. Mr. Giordano reported about the conference he attended. One of the classes that he attended was a barn preservation workshop. He stated that out of 25 barns in the Willamette Valley, there are only 17 left. The history of the Hersey Street barn was discussed and ways that it could have been refurbished. Mr. Giordano discussed the different workshops he sat in on and stated he greatly enjoyed his time in Albany, Oregon. COMMISSION ITEMS NOT ON AGENDA: Ms. Law stated that she is working on a historic project at the Walter A. Phillips Football Field at Ashland High School. Ashland Kiwanis is taking over the project and George Kramer is designing a plaque to go on the football field that has a photo of Walter A. Phillips and some information about his life. An Ashland High School senior is doing this as her senior project and Ashland Kiwanis will be presenting the award on September 12, 2014, the first home game of the season. Ms. Law stated that it would be nice if the Historic Commission could attend. Ms. Gunter discussed the Oregon grant for historical markers that she has applied for through Southern Oregon Visitors Association. She talked about how Travel Oregon could assist the City of Ashland and stated she has submitted an application. There are 12 group submittals from the Rogue Valley, but we are the only historic preservation grant that has applied. Ms. Gunter stated she applied for $8,000 which would pay for 3 historical plaques for the historical markers program. ANNOUNCEMENTS & INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: Next meeting is scheduled for July 2, 2014, 6:00 pm. There being no other items to discuss, the meeting adjourned at 7:55 pm. Respectfully submitted by Regan Trapp CITY OF ASHLAND Ashland Housing and Human Services Commission Draft Minutes May 22, 2014 CALL TO ORDER Chair Joshua Boettiger called the meeting to order at 4:33 in the Siskiyou Room at the Community Development and Engineering Offices located at 51 Winburn Way, Ashland OR 97520. Boettiger made a change to the agenda eliminating item #3 Rules for Commissions and Committees. Commissioners Present: Council Liaison Joshua Boettiger Pam Marsh Heidi Parker Connie Saldana SOU Liaison Michael Gutman Andrew Ensslin Regina Ayars Rich Rohde, left at 5:30 Staff Present: Coriann Matthews, absent Brandon Goldman, Housing Specialist Sue Crader Carolyn Schwendener, Admin Clerk Gina DuQuenne Approval of Minutes Gutman/Crader m/s to approve the minutes of the April 24, 2014 Housing and Human Services Commission meeting. Voice Vote: All Ayes, minutes were approved as presented. PUBLIC FORUM Kathy Kennedy was present and interested in agenda item #5, Ashland Land Use Ordinance Provisions for Affordable Housing. STUDENT REPORT: PARKING AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMPLEXES Pat Acklin, Southern Oregon University Professor was present with the students from her ES/Geog 440/540 class to give a presentation on the Parking availability at Affordable Housing complexes within the City of Ashland. Three student work teams were formed and the following housing units were assigned to the students. o Ashley Garden o Ashley Senior Center o Donald E. Lewis Retirement Center o Stratford Apartments o Parkview Apartments o Snowberry Brook o Hyde Park o Star Thistle The general conclusions that the students arrived at were; o Some residents preferred on-street parking when it was available, particularly Snowberry Brook residents. o On-street parking feels more like a traditional home setting o Generally the supply of parking exceeds the demand o If there were issues with space availability, the survey may have attracted more respondents After the study was completed the recommendations from the students were as follows. o In general we recommend less on-site parking, especially if on-street parking is available. o Use this data to create future parking policy for affordable housing o Repeat the parking inventory for standard multi-family developments o Conduct the survey with the questionnaire using other data collection methods. ASHLAND LAND USE ORDINANCE PROVISIONS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING Goldman reviewed the Land Use Ordinances that include provisions for affordable housing. Annexation - The City requires all residential annexations to provide approximately 15-13% of the units as affordable or dedicate adequate land to meet this standard to an affordable housing provider (non-profit) there is a sixty year minimum period of affordability. This only applies to land outside the City Limits that request to come into the City. Zone Changes - Though this rarely happens Goldman recalled a zone change request for the Fordyce Co-Housing project. The applicant requested to change the zone from a single family to a multifamily zone ultimately requiring them to provide two affordable units (15%) sold to low income households (earning less than 60% AMI). These two units required deep subsidy on behalf of the developers as even with the City waiving all system development charges the cost of construction alone exceeded the price they had to sell for to not overburden the 60% AMI households. Density Bonuses - The zoning sets the "base density" however in cases where a developer wants to increase the total number of units provided on site they can obtain "bonuses" to effectively increase the density allowed. This essentially means a developer need not decrease the number of market rate units built if they want to include affordable units. Accessory Residential Units - These are small secondary units on a single family zoned property. Generally they are stand alone cottage like buildings in back yards; some are above garages, some in daylight basements. All have their own entrances and their own kitchen which distinguishes them from a simple room rental within a primary house. Condominium Conversions -Essentially apartment building owners could have each individual units surveyed as a 3-d interior space and "condominimized" to then be sold individually. This became very popular to do in Ashland in the 2000's. A positive outcome of this practice included investments into the maintenance of these complexes (building improvements) and the creation of lower market rate housing for sale. Goldman said the Planning Commission is currently discussing ordinance changes and will provide recommendations to the City Council for the following; • Relaxed requirements for ARUs (outright permitted as opposed to a Conditional Use Permit • Cottage Housing Standards would allow small cottages around common greens to be permitted in place of larger single family homes. • Density Bonus for affordable housing - change to 2 for 1 to incentivize the provision of affordable units. • Relaxed manufactured dwelling standards and park standards STRATEGIC PLAN PROPOSAL ADDITION DISCUSSION AND APPROVAL Reid will present the Strategic Plan Proposal to the City Council at their June 3rd meeting. Saldana/Crader m/s to approve the proposed addition to the social services grant proposal. Voice Vote: All ayes motion passed unanimously. LIAISON REPORTS DISCUSSION Council - Marsh reported that City Council passed a package of five utility increases. The increases will cost the average household $10.00 a month. The City still offers an electrical subsidy program for those that qualify with a 60% of AMI or less. The Normal Plan has been to the Council for public input and will be discussed further at a special meeting at 7:30 on May 29'n in Council Chambers. Anyone that has not spoken yet will have an opportunity to do so at that meeting. The R-1 issue is scheduled to come back to the Council either mid June or early July. At this time the Planning Commission is not recommending that ARU's be allowed to be used as short term rentals but rather see bedrooms within homes. Council has requested a report from the new Resource Center with an update on how its working, how many people they are serving and if there are any new programs are on the horizons. SOU - SOU Liaison Ennslin and Christy Wright are working on developing a forum reaching out to landlords. They would like to gather feedback from landlords regarding Student Fair Housing. Ennslin asked if this Commission would be interested in hosting that forum. They are interested in having the forum either at the Ashland Public library, Council Chambers or this Community Development building. It was suggested to invite the Real Estate Association and the Southern Oregon Rental Association. Put this topic on the June agenda. The Commissioners discussed when to have their goal setting meeting and it was determined that it would work best for everyone at the August meeting. JUNE 26. 2014 AGENDA ITEMS Quorum Check - Ayars may not be able to attend but will let Reid know asap. Fair Housing discussion, next step with the strategic plan, business license and rental registry. UPCOMING EVENTS AND MEETINGS Housing and Human Services Commission regular meeting - June 26, 2014, 4:30 pm in the Siskiyou Room of the Community Development Building located at 51 Winburn Way ADJOURNMENT - The meeting was adjourned at 6:15p.m. respectfully submitted by Carolyn Schwendener CITY OF ASHLAND ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES June 10, 2014 CALL TO ORDER Chair Richard Kaplan called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street. Commissioners Present: Staff Present: Troy J. Brown, Jr. Bill Molnar, Community Development Director Michael Dawkins Derek Severson, Associate Planner Richard Kaplan Amy Gunter, Assistant Planner Debbie Miller April Lucas, Administrative Supervisor Melanie Mindlin Tracy Peddicord Absent Members: Council Liaison: Lynn Thompson Mike Morris, absent ANNOUCEMENTS Mr. Molnar announced the first meeting of the Normal Neighborhood Plan working group will be June 19 at 3 pm and the group will meet every other Thursday and report back to the City Council on August 5. The working group members include Mayor Stromberg, Councilor Marsh, Councilor Morris, Commissioner Kaplan, and Commissioner Dawkins. Mr. Molnar stated some of the issues to be discussed are density, the transportation system, open space, how the improvements will be paid for, and maximum building height. Mr. Molnar also announced the City Council public hearing on medical marijuana facilities is scheduled for June 17; and on July 1 the Council will hear the Planning Commission's recommendation on short term home rentals. AD-HOC COMMITTEE UPDATES Commissioner Brown stated the SDC Review Committee is working on the fee structure and their next meeting will be July 8. Commissioner Kaplan provided an update on the Downtown Parking Management and Circulation Ad Hoc Advisory Committee meeting and encouraged citizens to complete the online parking survey. CONSENT AGENDA A. Approval of Minutes. 1. May 13, 2014 Regular Meeting. 2. May 27, 2014 Special Meeting. Commissioners Miller/Mindlin m/s to approve the Consent Agenda. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed unanimously. PUBLIC FORUM No one came forward to speak. Ashland Planning Commission June 10, 2014 Page 1 of 8 TYPE II PUBLIC HEARINGS A. PLANNING ACTION: 2014-00737 SUBJECT PROPERTY: Oak Street right-of-way, between Lithia and Main OWNERS: Rogue Valley Growers and Crafters Market DESCRIPTION: A request to modify the existing Conditional Use Permit approval (PA #2011.153) for the Rogue Valley Growers and Crafters Market's closure of one block of Oak Street in the downtown, between Lithia Way and East Main Street, for the weekly Saturday Market. The specific modifications requested are: 1) To allow vendors to sell the same goods as are sold at their other markets in the Rogue Valley, with the exception of hot prepared foods. This would allow the sale of goods grown, produced, prepared or crafted by RVG&CM members who are farmers, ranchers, food processors and crafters. The vendors are currently limited to fresh fruit, vegetables, flowers, bedding plants, meat, eggs, cheese, bread, pasta, dog bones, and jam, and are not to sell prepared food; 2) To allow the market's season and hours to mirror their other markets in the Rogue Valley, which run from March through November, and to begin the street closure at 6:30 a.m. The market is currently limited to a May through November season, and the Saturday closure is from 7:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. 3) Alter the market booth configuration to create a sidewalk access point between vendor booths at the entrance to the alleyway on the west side of Oak Street in order to better accommodate pedestrian and wheelchair traffic to adjacent businesses. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Commercial Downtown; ZONING: C-1-13; ASSESSOR'S MAP: NIA - Right-of-Way; TAX LOT: NIA - Right-of-Way. Commissioner Kaplan read aloud the public hearing procedures for land use hearings. Ex Parte Contact No ex parte contact was reported. Staff Report Associate Planner Derek Severson provided an overview of the applicant's request. He explained the Rogue Valley Growers and Crafters Market (RVGCM) currently operates from May to November, 7 am to 2 pm, and under their current approval are limited on the types of products they can sell. The RVGCM has requested a modification to their existing conditional use permit to: 1) allow vendors to sell a wider variety of foods with the exception of hot prepared foods, 2) to begin the street closure at 6:30 and run from March through November, and 3) alter the booth configuration to create a sidewalk access point between vendor booths at the entrance to the alleyway on the west side of Oak Street. Mr._ Severson displayed a photo of the booth configuration that allows access to the sidewalk and explained the RVGCM have been setting up in this manner and staff supports it. He added this modification memorializes what they are currently doing. Regarding their second request to operate from March through November and to begin the street closure at 6:30 am, Mr. Severson stated staff has no issues with this, however staff did receive a letter from a resident who lives in the apartment above Art FX who objected to the earlier start time. Mr. Severson stated the item that will likely get most of the discussion tonight is what products the vendors are permitted to sell. Currently the RVGCM is limited to fresh fruit, vegetables, flowers, bedding plants, meats, eggs, cheeses, breads, pastas, dog bones, and jams. The RVGCM has requested vendors be allowed to sell the same goods as in their other markets, with the exception of hot prepared foods, which would equate to up to 40% of their offerings being crafts and prepared foods. Mr. Severson commented on the potential impacts to existing businesses and stated staff is recommending the market be limited to no more than 25% of booths that sell crafts and prepared foods. Applicant's Presentation Lori Hopkinson) RVGCM General Manager/4444 W Griffin Creek Rd, Medford/Provided an overview of the RVGCM organization and cited their bylaws, market guidelines, and mission statement. Ms. Hopkinson stated the RVGCM would like to establish an additional sidewalk access point at the entrance of the alley. She stated the proposed wheelchair accessible entrance would easily accommodate pedestrian traffic to adjacent business and would encourage cross over sales. She stated the market is also requesting to modify their season of operation to mirror that of the other RVGCM locations, which would allow for a more coordinated season. Lastly, they are requesting the language in the conditional use permit be changed to allow the same composition of diversity of goods Ashland Planning Commission June 10, 2014 Page 2 of 8 as in their other markets. Ms. Hopkinson stated there is room for all and competition is part of doing business. She explained the market imposes its own rules and policies and stated limiting the market's goods is based on unfounded fears. Ms. Hopkinson stated 25% is an arbitrary number and remarked that the charm of the market comes from its diversity. She provided a list of the types of products that are restricted under their current approval, and commented that the market brings a lot of foot traffic to the area and draws shoppers to downtown merchants. Questions of the Applicant Ms. Hopkinson was asked why the market is requesting a 6:30 am start time and she explained that this would allow vendors more time to set up their product displays. Ms. Hopkinson stated for the record that she is a part-time clerk for the City of Ashland Municipal Court. Ms. Hopkinson clarified the market's bylaws state 60% of the goods are agriculturally related items and 40% are crafts and processed foods, and therefore of their 30 spaces at the Oak Street location 18 booths would be grower spaces and 12 would be crafters and food processors. She clarified food processors include krauts, hummus, ciders, coffee, tea, nuts, and cooking oils. Ms. Hopkinson requested the RVGCM be allowed to operate under their own guidelines and stated it would hurt the diversity of the market if these limitations were imposed. Public Testimony Bill Francis/40 Van Ness/Stated he has a small business selling pottery and sells at the downtown market. He stated this business has become his sole source of income and he could not have done this without the RVGCM. He noted he is also a member of the artisans market, however he earns the same selling for four hours on Oak Street as an entire weekend on the Calle. Mr. Francis stated the market is an attraction for both locals and visitors and urged the Commission to support the diversity the market is requesting. Abby Hogge11700 Parker/Stated she was last year's downtown market manager and stated diversity is critical for its success. She stated they need to appeal to a wide customer base and it is a delicate balance of serving both locals and tourists. Ms. Hogge noted the market is required to maintain a 60% ratio of growers and 40% non-growers. She stated hummus, salsas, salts, teas, and sauerkraut vendors are classified as non-growers and under the current conditional use permit are not permitted. She stated of the 30 booth spaces typically only 5 or less consist of crafts and urged the Commission to approve the modifications being requested. Monica Rey/12310 Ramsay Rd, Gold Hill/Stated she is the current president of the RVGCM and commented that outdoor markets allow the public to connect with their local food sources and create a positive atmosphere. She stated the market brings in large numbers of people, some of whom spread out into neighboring businesses. Ms. Rey stated the market has been an incubator for many local businesses who have used this venue as a springboard to bigger and better things and encouraged the Commission to approve their request. Roy Laird/419 Willow/Stated he is the co-owner of the Book Exchange across the parking lot from Oak Street and stated he supports RVGCM; however the current location of the market has had an impact on his business. He explained business is down 10% on Saturdays and expressed concern with how the expanded season will impact his business. Mr. Laird stated the market should be located in a more suitable location that won't have an impact on the downtown brick and mortar businesses. Ken Silverman/25 E Main/Stated he is the owner of Nimbus and agreed with the previous speaker. Mr. Silverman stated he supports crafters and attends the Tuesday market regularly, however this is an issue of fairness. He stated the market takes up parking and blocks the Oak Street businesses and it is difficult to get to their stores because it is so crowded. He recommended the market be moved to a different location and noted the difficulties in being a successful retailer in this town. Jeffrey Compton/1770 AcornlStated he is the owner of Rocky Mountain Chocolate Factory and while he supports the growers market, their numbers are down 30% on the days the market operates. He stated they have had to lay off one of their Saturday employees because of the market and recommended the market be moved to a more Ashland Planning Commission June 10, 2014 Page 3 of 8 suitable location, such as the high school or middle school. Stacy VanVoorhees1514 Laurel/Stated she is the manager of the Saturday Ashland market and read aloud a scenario depicting a mother shopping with her three children. She stated the market serves the entire community and stated they aim to offer a wide diversity of goods that provide for people's needs, both nutritional and otherwise. Lanita Witt/658 Shale City Rd/Stated she represents Willow Witt Ranch and stated they have been selling their meat products at the market for six years. She stated she supports buying and eating local and does not understand why other businesses oppose the market. Elizabeth Bretko1103 SW Fourth, Grants Pass/Stated she is a tea brewer and also farmer and seasonal food processor. Ms. Bretko stated the Ashland Saturday market is a crucial part of her business and accounts for 60% of her total sales. She stated the market has been a springboard for her to open a brick and mortar business in Grants Pass and voiced her support for the market's downtown location. David French/176 Meadow View, Phoenix/Stated he owns Griffin Creek Roasters and understands the challenges that brick and mortar retailers have. He stated it is a symbiotic relationship between the City, vendors, and patrons and stated the Ashland community supports the market incredibly well. He stated the market brings people into the downtown core and stated the market's request to create sidewalk access to the local businesses is a sign that they want to be good partners. He added from a marketing standpoint, it makes sense to have the same starting and ending dates as the other markets. Jo Cullumbine1837 Tyler Creek/Voiced her disappointment to hear that this market is in jeopardy and that certain crafters may be excluded even though those that are permitted also compete with nearby businesses. She stated the market draws visitors to town and they explore streets and shops that they may have otherwise never seen, and asked the Commission to do the right thing and accept the modifications. Jerry Painter/940 SW Sixth/Staled he is a food vendor with the RVGCM and is unable to participate in the Ashland Saturday market. He questioned the downtown businesses' resistance and stated the City of Medford requested that the market set up downtown. Mr. Painter stated studies have shown that markets downtown help the businesses, and while business may be down, the general poor economy is to blame not the location of the market. Ruby Painter/940 SW Sixth/Voiced support for the market and noted the importance of having diversity so that young people can get ideas of what is possible. Angelika Curtis/14356 Highway 62, Eagle Point/Stated she is the owner of the Oregon Bistro and Wildbee Honey Farm, and they are growers, farmers, beekeepers and crafters. Ms. Curtis stated she has been full time with the market for 17 years and is one of the vendors prohibited from selling at the Saturday market. She stated they have an eight acre farm, country store, hundreds of beehives and bottling facility, and have lots of expenses just like brick and mortar businesses. She stated the vendors act as greeters and direct a lot of people to local businesses and services, and she does not believe there is any direct competition between her beeswax candles and the other nearby businesses. Alex Amarotico/101 Oak Street/State he is the owner of Standing Stone Brewery and fully supports the market on Oak Street and their requests to modify their conditional use permit. He stated the market gives them a direct link to local products and adds great vitality. He agreed that this comes with inconvenience to some, but the benefits outweigh this. He added he would welcome prepared foods and craft beers, even though this would be in direct competition with his business. Laruel Alexander/2862 Griffin Creek, Medford/Sated this is her twentieth year with the market and she sells bedding plants. Ms. Alexander stated she has been to many markets and the most vibrant ones are located downtown. She stated she sells to both locals and tourists and often holds plants for people while them shop and eat downtown. She agreed that parking in Ashland can be difficult, but hopes they can continue to be good neighbors Ashland Planning Commission June 10, 2014 Page 4 of 8 with the downtown businesses. Applicant's Rebuttal Lori Hopkinson/Stated the market only operates 26 Saturdays a year and they are only there a fraction of the time compared to the existing businesses. She stated they bring a lot of foot traffic and business to the area and believes this is a great walkable location for patrons. Ms. Hopkinson stated the majority of their products are related to agriculture and are made by farmers, and only a small percentage are crafts. Questions of Staff Staff was asked how they arrived at the 25% to 75% ratio for goods. Mr. Molnar stated 25% was used as a starting point for discussion. He stated the City has been a longtime supporter of the market, however staff has received several calls and letters expressing concern and stating sales have gone down since the market started operating at this location. He stated the City is essentially the landlord because of the market's location in the right of way, and so staff felt they had an obligation to take those issues seriously. Staff was asked whether the Commission has the ability to change the market's location or day of operation. Mr. Molnar stated this is not under their purview this evening and would need to be dealt with through a different hearing. Mr. Severson highlighted the eleven items that were clearly articulated in the market's original application. He added at that time there were a lot of assurances made by RVGCM to the downtown merchants when that application was first approved. Commissioner Kaplan closed the record and the hearing at 8:35 p.m. Deliberations and Decision Commissioner Dawkins shared his concerns with the market selling items that are not food based and selling goods that compete with the businesses that are already there. Commissioner Peddicord commented that some of the most prominent businesses downtown are restaurants and questioned why they would prohibit crafts when food would remain. Dawkins pointed out that no hot food would be allowed. Commissioner Brown remarked that when the RVGCM first came to downtown there were negotiations made with the City and the businesses, and he sees no reason to change the conditions of their original approval. Commissioner Miller voiced support for modifying the other elements of their request (the months of operation, 6:30 am street closure, and pedestrian sidewalk access). Commissioner Mindlin commented that this is a complex issue and they need to find a solution that works for everyone. She stated the market wanted to be in that location and it has worked out very well for them, but it seems that it is having a negative impact on the surrounding businesses. She suggested that perhaps there is a better location that should be considered, but noted that this is not under their purview. Mindlin agreed with Miller and supports the approval of the other requested modifications and stated she would be comfortable with a compromise that permitted the sale of food items but keeps out the crafts. Commissioner Peddicord stated if the Commission is concerned with competition then they should be concerned about extending the market's season. Commissioner Brown agreed and added that an earlier start time would be an inconvenience to apartment renters. Commissioner Kaplan stated it is not clear whether the applicants and the City were on the same page when the original list of items was approved. Mr. Severson commented that he is not sure if the current board and management are aware of all the outreach that was done by the previous RVGCM manager. He clarified that list of items was intended to be a definitive list of the goods that would be sold and was offered as assurance to the neighboring businesses. Commissioner Dawkins noted his desire to find an appropriate balance and suggested limiting the market to goods that are food/agriculturally based. It was suggested that the group separate out the requested modifications and handle each item individually. Commissioners Miller/Dawkins m/s to approve the alteration of the market booth configuration to create a sidewalk access point between the vendor booths to allow easier access. Roll Call Vote: Commissioners Brown, Mindlin, Peddicord, Miller, Dawkins and Kaplan, YES. Motion passed unanimously. Commissioners Miller/Dawkins m/s to allow the market's season to mirror their other markets in the Rogue Ashland Planning Commission June 10, 2014 Page 5 of 8 Valley, which run from March through November. DISCUSSION: Commissioner Miller commented that this would bring more people to the downtown earlier in the season. Commissioner. Dawkins agreed and stated a consistent season would help the market with their advertising and felt this was a reasonable request. He added the market typically starts slow at the beginning of the season and he does not believe this will be a big impact. Commissioner Brown disagreed and stated this would be a huge impact to the current businesses. Roll Call Vote: Commissioners Dawkins, Miller, Peddicord, Mindlin and Kaplan, YES. Commissioner Brown, NO. Motion passed 5-1. Commissioner Miller motioned to allow the street closure to begin at 6:30 am. Motion died due to lack of a second. Commissioner MindlinlDawkins m/s to allow vendors to sell the same variety of goods sold at their other markets in the Rogue Valley, with the exception of hot prepared foods and crafted goods. This would allow the sale of goods grown, produced, or prepared by RVGCM members who are farmers, ranchers, and food processors. DISCUSSION: Commissioner Mindlin stated her intent is to strike a balance and stated she would be open to an amendment that would include more agricultural products. Commissioner MindlinlDawkins m/s to amend previous motion to state "This would allow the sale of goods grown, produced, prepared or crafted from locally grown agricultural products by RVGCM members who are farmers, ranchers, food processors and crafters. The prohibition on hot prepared foods will not be modified." Roll Call Vote on motion as amended: Commissioners Peddicord, Dawkins, Miller, Mindlin, and Kaplan, YES. Commissioner Brown, NO. Motion passed 5-1. Commissioners MindlinlDawkins m/s to approve Planning Action 2014-00737 with the modifications to the conditional use permit with the parametersjust adopted and to not include the change of the opening time from 7:00 am to 6:30 am. Roll Call Vote: Commissioners Brown, Dawkins, Miller, Mindlin, Peddicord, and Kaplan, YES. Motion passed unanimously. B. PLANNING ACTION: 2014-00734 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 1163 Iowa Street APPLICANT: Ayala Properties, LLC DESCRIPTION: A request for Site Review and Outline Plan approval under the Performance Standards Options Chapter 18.88 for a four unit, five lot multi-family developments for the property located at 1163 Iowa Street. A Tree Removal Permit is requested to remove three trees greater than six-inches in diameter at breast height on the site. The existing single family residence on the site will be incorporated into the development as Lot #1. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: High Density Multi-Family Residential; ZONING: R-3; ASSESSOR'S MAP 391E 10 CB; TAX LOT: 5500. Ex Parte Contact Commissioners Miller, Kaplan, Dawkins and Brown performed site visits; no ex parte contact was reported. Commissioners Peddicord/Dawkins m/s to extend the meeting to 1000 pm. Voice Vote.- affAYES. Staff Report Assistant PlannerAmy Gunter provided a summary of the application. She explained this is a single family townhome development with each home on its own individual tax lot, but they will have attached wall construction. Ms. Gunter provided an overview of the project site, existing residence, and surrounding area. She noted there are three trees proposed for removal and clarified the existing single family residence will be incorporated into the development of Lot 1. She stated the new units will face east and each will have an attached vehicle garage and a rear yard patio area; and the applicants have proposed a pedestrian walkway to connect the development to the public sidewalk system on Iowa Street. Ms. Gunter stated the application meets the criteria and staff is recommending approval. Ms. Gunter highlighted a proposed condition that requires the garages to be for vehicular parking and not for storage. Ashland Planning Commission June 10, 2014 Page 6 of 8 Applicant's Presentation Mark Knox/485 W Nevada/Slated this in an infill project in the R-3 zone and noted their desire to maintain a consistent pattern and be sensitive to the existing homes. He stated they will utilize the existing driveway in order to mitigate disturbance to the trees, and clarified that Lot 1 is likely to remain as it is today for some time. He acknowledged this is a contemporary design and stated the intent was to have varying roof heights to break up the mass and give each townhome some individuality. Questions of the Applicant Commissioner Brown stated the solar angle depicted on the applicant's rear elevation diagram is to not to scale. Ms. Gunter indicated staff would draft a condition that addresses this concern. Public Testimony Kathleen Taylor/1163 Iowa/Stated she currently rents the home at 1163 Iowa and had several questions about the proposed development including: When will construction begin? Will there be any more meetings on this project? Can the neighbors obtain copies of the plans? Will she receive notice before construction begins? Is there any compensation for relocation? Ms. Taylor slated she was looking for a stable, long term residence when she entered into a lease four months ago and would not have rented this house had she known about these plans. Applicant's Rebuttal Mark Knox/Acknowledged Ms. Taylor's concerns and offered to speak with her after the meeting. He clarified there is no start date yet and they will continue to speak with the homeowners on the corner lot to develop a plan for this area and hopefully create an even better project. He stated the building plans are public record and are available to Ms. Taylor, and clarified she will receive notice prior to construction. Mr. Knox stated the intent is to keep this property intact as it is now for the foreseeable year and noted that this is a great location for this development as it is close to schools and will be affordable. Commissioner Kaplan closed the record and the public hearing at 9:55 p. in. Questions of Staff Ms. Gunter suggested a conditional of approval that states "Solar setback calculations demonstrating that the solar performance standard allowing a shadow of no more than four feet above the finished floor of the proposed residence on Lot 2 shall be provided with the building permit submittals." Deliberations and Decision Commissioners DawkinslPeddicord mis to approve Planning Action 2014-00734 with the additional condition proposed by staff. Roll Call Vote: Commissioners Miller, Dawkins, Mindlin, Peddicord, Brown, and Kaplan, YES. Motion passed unanimously. NEW BUSINESS A. Review of Planning Commission's recommendation to Council on the Medical Marijuana Dispensaries Ordinance. Mr. Molnar stated the public hearing on the medical marijuana facilities ordinance is scheduled for next Tuesday and what is before the Commission tonight is a summary of their recommendation that will be included in the Council's packet materials. He noted the City Attorney has researched other communities with similar ordinances and has recommended the City explicitly prohibit dispensaries as a home occupation, and asked whether the Commission would support this inclusion in the ordinance. Comment was made that the last paragraph of the Planning Commission Report does not read correctly and recommendation was made for each sentence in the paragraph to be listed as an individual bullet point instead. General support was voiced for this edit. Commissioners MindlinlMiller m/s to approve the Planning Commission's Report with the modification of the last paragraph to list each sentence as a separate bullet item, and to recommend the Council modify the Ashland Planning Commission June 10, 2014 Page 7 of 8 home occupation ordinance to list medical marijuana dispensaries as a prohibited use. Roll Call Vote: Commissioners Mindlin, Dawkins, Brown, Miller, Peddicord, and Kaplan, YES. Motion passed unanimously. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 10:10 p.m. Submitted by, April Lucas Administrative Supervisor Ashland Planning Commission June 10, 2014 Page 8 of 8 ASHLAND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MINUTES MAY 22, 2014 CALL TO ORDER: Chair David Young called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 E. Main Street. Commissioners Present: Joe Graf, Craig Anderson, Corinne Vi6ville, Alan Bender, Shawn Kampmann, David Chapman and David Young Commissioners Absent: None Staff Present: Scott Fleury, Mike Faught and Tami De Mille-Campos Council Liaison Present: Carol Voisin ANNOUNCEMENTS None CONSENT AGENDA Approval of Minutes - March/April 2014 Approved as corrected. March 2014/page 3: Anderson does not recall saying "the City of Ashland's SDC's are quite a bit lower than any other community". Faught stated that staff would review the audio file and correct the minutes as per the recording. The audio file (50:41-50:43) states "our SDC's are low relative to other communities". March 2014/page 5: Anderson said he didn't request for Legal to come to a future meeting. Staff reviewed the audio file and the audio file (2:09) states "Anderson would like to have a future discussion regarding the "powers and duties specifically" of the commission (Voisin commented that Legal could come). PUBLIC FORUM Lauren Morris; 724 Iowa St. They moved to Iowa Street in August and since then they have noticed there are a lot of speeding issues. She spoke to Officer MacLennan. He was at the corner of Iowa/Morton last week and within about a 45 minute period and he was able to cite quite a few people. She wonders if a stop sign could be put at Sherman/Iowa to slow people down. MacLennan stated that he was out there and wrote several citations. He's received 3 complaints just this week regarding the speeding problem in that area. He does think a stop sign may help with this issue so he recommends the Commission take a look at doing a study to look into it further. Chair Young requested that they move the Traffic Crash Summary to the beginning of the meeting in case Officer MacLennan needs to leave. The Commission noted that all of the traffic crashes went un-cited even though some of them maybe warranted a citation. Officer MacLennan stated that generally speaking he does issue a citation, although it is up to the discretion of the Officer. However, typically if the accident was reported after the fact then a citation may not be issued. Anderson asked about the accident that occurred on April 10, 2014 resulting in a fatality. MacLennan stated they are still wrapping up the investigation and it should be done next week. Once the investigation is completed he can discuss it. Voisin received an email regarding large trucks (semi's) going down North Main onto Siskiyou and then they get back on the freeway. Dan Dorrell (ODOT) mentioned the Mountain Street Bridge on 15 is a low bridge so it may be due to that; in order to get the truck around the bridge. Transporraum Comr Won May 22, 2014 Page 1 of 5 NEW BUSINESS Bicycle Safety Training Class Egon thanked the commission for their ongoing support of the program. The program is managed by the Ashland Parks and Recreation Department and prior to that it was managed by a nonprofit out of Portland called the BTA. He has been an instructor in this program since 2004. It is a traffic education program dedicated to elementary & middle schools in town. He constantly receives feedback from parents, teachers, neighbors and he has even witnessed for himself better behavior and the children navigate the street better. This program is vital for child's awareness and sense of traffic. There are approximately 2,000 students enrolled within Ashland each year of those 1,600 are exposed to this program (2 schools do not participate). Approximately 300 students (280-360 students) complete the program each year with students ranging between 4U and 6th grade. Most of the children go through the program two times, once in 3rd or 4t^ grade and then again in 51^ or 61^ grade. He sees a huge change between the first and second time they go through the program. This program has existed in Ashland since 1998. The program is only taught in Ashland, Portland, Bend and Eugene. It used to be instructed in Albany, Corvallis, and Salem but due to lack of funding via the BTA they seize to exist in those cities now. Egon thanked the City for their continued support of the program. Chapman pointed out that another way to support the program is via volunteering. Egon echoed that volunteers are always welcomed. The commission had discussion regarding this being a recurring budget item. Some of the commissioners thought they remembered this being motioned as an ongoing budget item. Faught stated that staff has gone through the minutes and the last request was made in July, 2012 but staff will look into it again to be sure. The commission and staff discussed the budget line item and what would be a feasible amount VievillelKampmann mis to direct the PIN Director to increase the Transportation Commission budget for fiscal year 13114 to $4,000 and increase the total budget to $5,000 for future budgets years. All ayes. Motion passes. ChapmanNieville m/s to approve $3,000 to fund the bicycle safety program for fiscal year 13114 and revisit it for future years. All ayes. Motion passes. Signal Timing Discussion Dan Dorrell, Traffic Engineer with Oregon Department of Transportation Dan spoke regarding some of the things that he has been involved in. During the Road Diet there were very few Traffic Engineers or management that supported the road diet due to the traffic volumes being high. They were afraid that it would fail right away. He supported it and pushed for it to be done. He attained another $30,000 to modify the bike signal at exit 14. ODOT is going to be meeting next week to discuss $250,000 that they have available to make some changes to the complete streets plan on the 99 corridor. He is trying to get 99 restriped from the trestle down to Valley View Road. He talked about the complete streets plan they are planning through Talent. They just approved a plan to do a complete streets plan through Cave Junction. Anderson pointed out that some people who feel that the complete streets plan is just for cyclists is missing the other benefits of the plan. Dan agreed that there are huge safety benefits not just for cyclists. Dan stated he is also trying to attain funding for a pedestrian activated flasher between Maple and Laurel. He is working with Kim Parducci on where to put this. He was originally thinking of putting it at HerseylWimer but Kim thinks due to interference with certain things and thinks it might be better near the minute market. He said he would probably make that one an audible pedestrian crossing. He has put the Laurel Street signal on top of the list for replacement. When they do that he would like to put APS buttons there for the blind community. Faught asked if once that is done all of the signals could be tied together. Dan stated he could try but that can be very expensive. Chapman asked what triggers the signal at Laurel. Dan stated it is actuated by side street loops. Chapman said that is the one that backs up traffic downtown. Dan said it actually doesn't even meet the Transportation Comnssion May 22, 2014 Page 2 of 5 warrant criteria. He went out there during first Friday last year (busy time) and it still didn't meet warrants. He said they are going to leave it there so people have a way to get off of the side streets. Bender said it was probably originally put in there due to the elementary school. He has also attained funds and has been working with Fleury on fixing the access point to Puck's donuts and the liquor store. Dan has been working with the property owner. He just wants to make sure that the delivery truck has access to the liquor store. Dan has already modeled it and knows that it will work. To make it work they would change the 2 hour timed spots to 30 minute. Chapman asked if he looked at Third Street while looking at Oak (driveway through the crosswalk on Third). Dan staled that he has looked at it but that one is a little harder to solve. He offered to meet Chapman out there and he can show him why but they will try to do something about that one too. Dan moved on to talk about a proposed new merge design by the City which would provide one dedicated through lane going northbound and a dedicated lane going to the left at the Heiman signal. The Commission had not seen the plan yet. Dan handed it out to the commission. Dan actually likes this idea and he was trying to convince his manager and signal timer to help him make it work but they brought up some key issues which is why they have declined to do it at this time. The roadway is at maximum capacity. Dan pointed out that he met with Kim Parducci on this. Lithia Way through traffic going north is 900 vehicles per hour and the left to come back around the couplet or go up Church Street is 250 vehicles per hour (during the peak hour). The total cycle length right now at Heiman is 75 seconds. Heiman is the master controller for all of the signals in the couplet. It is on a timed sequence, which is a very simple signal, gauged at 20 mph trying to get cars in platoons through the city. Dan stated that going southbound the platoons are broken up anyways because of all of the pedestrians crossing so he was thinking that it could be detached from the downtown and coordinate it with Laurel and Maple and have the downtown signals run on their own, but that costs money. When a pedestrian wants to cross the street, the crosswalks are on an automatic pedestrian recall. Right now the maximum time you would have to wait at a crosswalk is 41 seconds. If they went with this proposal the total cycle length would go from 75 seconds to 120 seconds which would cause the wait time to increase to a maximum of 85 seconds which is just not common for a downtown area. They are afraid that pedestrians won't wait for the signal and would dart into traffic causing a safety hazard. He stated there are some benefits of this plan and he is thinking about doing some things that could help. Right now when people are going north on Lithia Way people dart to the left as the right lane ends (as they see the arrow) and then they dart back to the right, so they could stripe that better. He pointed out that there is also a lane imbalance there. They could pull the "right lane ends" sign to see if that helps. Having the 2 lanes going through the signal at the same time allows a higher capacity through that intersection. He pointed out the queuing length right now on a bad day with two thorough lanes can back up 975 feet (Pioneer). If they were to go to this single lane proposal and do not change the timing the commuter model predicts it could back up as much as 2,000 feet. If they do change the timing to the 120 cycle length (which is what Kim said needs to be done for it to work) then the backup is about 975 feet, which is the same as now, but then they are impacting the pedestrians. He said he could talk to William Fitzgerald (signal timer) about maybe running a test for a while during the pm peak period. There was a brief discussion regarding jurisdictions taking over ODOT right of way. The commission pointed out that they would like to have Dan on the agenda more frequently. Allison St. and Union St. request for a traffic control device Request for a stop or yield sign at intersection Fleury has begun the research on this intersection based on a request to investigate the intersection with the possible intent to install a traffic control device at this intersection. He pulled the traffic crash data on this intersection at Allison/Union. There has only been 2 accidents, both have been angle crashes from someone making a left hand turn from Allison onto Union. The traffic count was done in 2004 which shows 500+ average daily trips multi- direction. He pointed out they can look at counting peaks, refreshing the traffic count. It does meet warrants for a yield sign at Allison. Fleury stated the ORS vehicle code requires 20 feet of striping back from a crosswalk and only one of those corners actually has any no parking striping. He has talked to the Street department about getting these intersections striped back from the handicap ramps in order to help make the pedestrians more visible and also to allow for more sight distance for drivers. Transportation (`AnIn WOn May 22, 2014 Page 3 of 5 Anderson would be interested to know which intersections do not meet the statute. Fleury stated there are a lot that do not meet the requirements. Kampmann stated he is very familiar with that neighborhood. Because of the configuration it is pretty much all local traffic. He has been out there during days when there is very low traffic. He doesn't think they need to do a traffic study now unless they receive more complaints about this intersection and if they did he thinks a yield sign would be sufficient. Chapman said there are some people that believe that every intersection in the City should be controlled; he is not in that group. He pointed out he thinks as an uncontrolled intersection it is pretty ideal; low volume, low speed, most of the intersection has good visibility. He thinks it is a pretty safe intersection and thinks it should be left alone. However, he does think a yield sign may be helpful to warn drivers. Chair Young thinks any unmarked intersection is asking for trouble. He thinks a yield sign is a soft sense of warning drivers without forcing a stop. Graf said most of his experience in that area is on Fairview and he's almost never had to stop for traffic coming up Union. Gresham St. and Siskiyou Blvd. Pedestrian Safety Concern Fleury wanted to bring this up as the City is reviewing the downtown corridor. He received a letter from the friends of the library regarding this. They had issues with pedestrian safety. There have been 11 accidents in that location. Kim Parducci is going to be involved with this one. Most of the accidents included a vehicle hitting another vehicle while stopping for pedestrians in the crosswalk. He is going to pull the crash reports so Kim has that data to review in making her recommendation. Downtown System Plan Concept Maps Discussion Faughl presented and discussed the concept maps (see attached) with the commission. He pointed out they were previously given to the Downtown Parking Management and Circulation Ad Hoc Advisory Committee. He pointed out the downtown committee is working on these. Anderson stated that during the first downtown meeting he had asked whether they would have any potential to discuss the idea of having a couplet and potentially eliminating the couplet. He said he can understand the concerns with going down that path but he thinks it is a discussion that is worthy of having. Faught said they did look at that as part of the TSP and he had a traffic engineer look at the impact and intersections start failing when that is done. He offered to bring that report back to the committee. The commission shared concerns regarding the angled parking options. Faught recommended the commission give themselves some more time to think about these plans and if they want to make a recommendation to the downtown parking committee at future meeting they could. Voisin left at 8:10 Vieville left at 8:13 FOLLOW UP ITEMS N. Main restriping Faught state he spoke to Jerry Marmon (District Manager) today and they would like to put thermoplastic down and begin restriping within the next 2-3 weeks. They are on the approving the changes at Maple and Glenn/Coolidge; they are not approving the Bush Street change. Fleury spoke to making the left turn from Main onto North Main where there is no refuge. Staff is getting a topographical survey done out there, in order to properly design this turn movement refuge area. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS Trwspodacon Com scion May 22, 2014 Page 4 o/5 Action Summary Oregon Impact May Newsletter COMMISSION OPEN DISCUSSION FUTURE AGENDA TOPICS Transportation Safety Public Outreach SOU Multi-Modal Future Commission Duties and Responsibility discussion APS Buttons ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 8:29 pm Respectfully submitted, Tami De Mille-Campos, Administrative Assistant Transportation Corn ssion May 22, 2014 Page 5 of5 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication July 15, 2014, Business Meeting Authorization to Proceed with a Contract Exceeding $100,000 for the Construction of Ashland Creek Park 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 a contract exceeding $100,000 with Roxy Ann Rock, Inc. for the construction of Ashland Creek Park. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS The Parks Department plans to construct a seven-acre parcel of park land located at 27 E. Hersey Street in Ashland, Oregon. Roxy Ann Rock, Inc., a local contractor, submitted the lowest bid and was preliminarily awarded the project. Funds for this project have been budgeted within the CIP portion of the Parks budget. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS The preliminary cost estimate is $749,754 minus a State of Oregon Parks and Recreation grant in the amount of $309,000. STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION Staff recommends funding approval for Ashland Creek Park construction so the contract can be awarded and construction can begin. SUGGESTED MOTION I move that Council, acting as the Local Contract Review Board, approve funding for the Ashland Creek Park construction in the amount of $749,754 minus the State of Oregon grant in the amount of $309,000. ATTACHMENTS Contract for the construction of Ashland Creek Park Page I of I C I T Y F CITY OF ASHLAND ASHLAND! PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT CONTRACT ASHLAND CREEK PARK Project No. 000054.999 This Contract is between the CITY OF ASHLAND, a municipal corporation of the State of Oregon (hereinafter "City") and Roxy Ann Rock, Inc. (Hereinafter "Contractor"). The City's Project Manager for this Contract is Steve Ennis City ofAshland Ashland Parks and Recreation. WHEREAS, City caused to be prepared a certain bound Project Manual or Bid Package (including but not limited to Invitation to Bid, Bid Schedule, Bid forms, Bid, Performance and Payment Bonds, as applicable, Public Improvement Contract, Contract Standard Terms and Conditions, Conditions, General Provisions, Technical Specifications, Drawings, and Addenda, more particularly described in Standard Condition 5, (hereinafter referred to as "Contract Documents") for its project entitled "Ashland Creek Park" and WHEREAS, Contractor did on the 10'" day of June, 2014, file with City a bid to furnish equipment, labor, material, and appurtenances for construction of said project as set forth in the Contract Documents and agreed to accept as payment therefore the sums fully stated and set forth in the bid; and WHEREAS, the Contract Documents and bid fully and accurately set forth and describe the terms and conditions upon which the Contractor proposes to furnish said equipment, labor, material and appurtenances and perform said work, together with the manner and time of furnishing same; and NOW THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration the parties mutually covenant and agree as follows: 1. Recitals. The recitals set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference. 2. Effective Date and Duration This contract is effective on the date at which every party has signed this contract. The work under this contract shall, unless otherwise terminated or extended, be completed on or before 152 calendar days following Contractor's receipt of the Notice to Proceed. 3. Statement of Work The work under this contract is for Ashland Creek Park and more fully described in the Contract Documents, incorporated herein and made a part hereof by this reference. The statement of work, including the delivery schedule for the work, is contained in the Contract Documents. Contractor acknowledges receipt of all Contract Documents in existence at the date the Contract is signed and further acknowledges Contractor has read and fully understands the Contract Documents, and understands that in signing this Agreement contractor waives all rights to plead misunderstandings regarding the same. Contractor shall, at its own risk and expense, perform the work described in the Contract Documents and furnish all permits, labor, tools, machinery, materials, transportation, equipment and services of all kinds required for, necessary for, or reasonable incidental to, performance of the work, that is, the construction of this Ashland Creek Park Project for the City of Ashland, Oregon, as shown in the Contract Documents. Contractor shall secure all Municipal, County, State, or Federal Permits or licenses including payment of permit fees, license fees and royalties necessary or incident to performance of the work on this contract. The risk of loss for such work shall not shift to the City until written acceptance of the work by the City. 4. Consideration a. City agrees to pay, Contractor, at the times and in the manner provided in the Contract Documents, a sum of. $477,509 for accomplishing the work required by this contract, including allowable expenses. This sum cannot be modified except by Change Order approved in writing by City. Any progress payments to Contractor shall be made only in accordance with the schedule and requirements in Section 21, Standard Terms and Conditions. b. City certifies that sufficient funds have been appropriated to make payments required by this contract during the current fiscal year. Contractor understands and agrees that City's payment of amounts under this contract attributable to work performed after the last day of the current fiscal year is contingent on City appropriations, or other expenditure authority sufficient to allow City in the exercise of its reasonable administrative discretion, to continue to make payments under this contract. In the event City has insufficient appropriations, limitations or other expenditure authority, City may terminate this contract without penalty or liability to City, effective upon the delivery of written notice to Contractor, with no further liability to Contractor. CONTRACTOR DATA, CERTIFICATION, AND SIGNATURE Business Name (please print): Contact Name: Phone: Fax: Address Do Not Write Federal and State Tax ID Numbers on this Agreement: One copy of W-9 is to be submitted with the signed contract to be kept on file in the City ofAshland Finance Department. Ashland Business License # Construction Contractors Board # Citizenship: Nonresident alien Yes No Business Designation (check one): Individual Sole Proprietorship Partnership Corporation Government/Nonprofit The above information must be provided prior to contract approval. Payment information will be reported to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) under the name and taxpayer I.D. number provided above. (See IRS 1099 for additional instructions regarding taxpayer ID numbers.) Information not matching IRS records could subject you to 31 percent backup withholding. 1, the undersigned, understand that the Standard Terns and Conditions For Public Improvement Contracts (Exhibit A) together with Exhibits B through J together with all other Contract Documents as described in Standard Terns and Conditions Section 5 below, and the separately bound Oregon 2008 Standard Specifications for Construction, as amended by the City of Ashland's most recent Addenda to the 2008 Standard Specifications are an integral part of this contract and agree to perform the work described in the Contract Documents, including Exhibit A, in accordance with the terms and conditions of this contract. I further understand the City is prohibited from entering into a contract when the contractor has neglected or refused to file any return, pay any tax, or properly contest a tax, pursuant to ORS 305.385; I hereby certify, under penalty of perjury and false swearing, that 1/my business am/is not in violation of any Oregon tax laws; I further certify that the certification and representations in Standard Term and Condition # 16 [CCB Registration Requirements] are true and correct, and further I certify that I am an independent contractor as defined in ORS 670.600. Signed by Contractor: Signature/Title Date Printed Name: NOTICE TO CONTRACTOR: This contract does not bind the City of Ashland unless and until it has been executed by the Public Contracting Officer or designee as well as City Finance and Legal Department representatives. CITY OF ASHLAND SIGNATURE Approved: Director of Ashland Parks and Recreation, City of Ashland Date - Authorized by Ordinance 3013 and Delegation Order dated, Coding: Reviewed: City Attorney (approved as to legal form) Date ATTACHMENTS: Certificate of Representation Exhibit A, Std. Conditions Exhibit B, Bid Schedule Exhibit C, Insurance requirements CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication July 15, 2014, Business Meeting Approval of Contract Amendment with KOGAP for Reservoir Sediment Removal FROM: Scott A. Fleury, Engineering Services Manager, Public Works/Engineering, fleurys@ashland.or.us SUMMARY This is a contract amendment with KOGAP in excess of 25% to remove an additional 400 cubic yards of sediment from the West Fork Reservoir, upstream of Reeder Reservoir on the west fork of Ashland Creek. Proper sediment management of reservoir impoundments is essential to maintaining water quality. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: In 2013, the Engineering Division acquired the necessary permits from the US Forest Service and Division of State Lands (DSL) to remove accumulated sediment from the East and West Fork Reservoirs. These reservoirs currently act as impoundments to capture sediment before entering Reeder Reservoir. The calculated total maximum daily load (TMDL) for sediment in Reeder Reservoir, as defined by the City's TMDL permit, administered by the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ), is approximately 6.4 cubic feet per day. The City has a responsibility to mitigate this accumulation by periodically removing sediment from the reservoirs to maintain water quality and storage capacity in Reeder Reservoir. This project is budgeted every two years to allow the City to effectively manage the reservoirs. A request for proposal for the sediment removal was issued in October of 2013. KOGAP was the responsive low bidder and was awarded the contract. KOGAP removed 1,700 cubic yards of sediment from the West Fork Reservoir before time ran out last fall, and approximately 400 yards of materials are left to be removed. DEQ and DSL regulate when "in water work" may occur. As of June 15, the City is allowed by permit to complete "in water work" and the remaining sediment must be removed before September 15, 2014. The original contract amount with KOGAP for the sediment removal was $70,172.50. A change order was approved in the amount of $9,389.72 (13%) last fall. In order to complete the work, an additional contract amendment of $9,379.50 (13%) is required, pushing the total percentage of amendments to 26%. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: A total of $104,559.72 has been spent to date on the project and includes engineering, permitting and construction. Along with the previously approved change order of $9,389.72, the Engineering Division is requesting a change order of $9,329.50 to complete the project. It is also anticipated that an additional $2,433 will be required for permitting, biologic assessment and oversight. These tasks will Page I of 2 ~r, CITY OF -ASHLAND bring the total estimated project budget to $120,792.72, an additional $792.72 over the budgeted amount of $120,000. STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends approving the contract amendment with KOGAP to complete the sediment removal project. SUGGESTED MOTION: Move to approve a contract amendment with KOGAP for $9,379.50 for sediment removal. ATTACHMENTS: KOGAP Contract Amendment Form #10 Page 2 of 2 ~r, I FORM #10 CITY OF CONTRACT AMENDMENT APPROVAL REQUEST FORM ~S H LAN D Request for a Change Order Name of Supplier 1 Contractor I Consultant: KOGAP Enterprises, Inc. Total amount'of this r Purchase Order Number: 11928 corit`ract amendment ; f: Title/ Description: Reeder Reservoir Sediment Removal -A-379 50 d Y }L,. ❑ Per attached contract amendment Contract Amendment Original contract amount $ 70.172.50 100 % of original contract Total amount of red vious contract amendments 9.389.72 13 % of original contract Amount of this contract amendment 9.379.50 13% of original contract TOTAL AMOUNT OF CONTRACT $ 88.941.72 26 % of original contract In accordance with OAR 137-047A00:1) Tire amendment is within the sane of procurement as described In the solicitation documents, Sde Source notice or approval of Spada] Procurement. 2) The amendment Is necessary to amply with a change in law that affects performance of the anima 3) The amendment results from renegotiation of the temps and andithns, Including the contract price, of a contract and the amendment Is advantageous to the Ctty of Ashland, subJectto all of the following conditions: a) goods and services to be provided under the amended contract are the same as the goods and services to be provided under the unamended contract; b) The City determines that, with all ihtrgs considered, the amended contend Is at least as favorable to the city as the unamanded contract c) The amended contract does not have a total tern greater than allowed in the solicitation document, contract or approval of a Special Procurement An amendment Is at within the scope of the procurement if the City determines that if It had described the charges to be made by the amendment In the procurement documents, it would Wely have Increased competition or effected award of contract Contract amendment is within the scope of procurement: YES X NO' Of "NO", requires council approval l Attach copy of CC.) Sourcing Method: SMALL PROCUREMENT - Less than $5.000 INVITATION TO BID or COOPERATIVE PROCUREMENT. ORF or ❑ *YES', the total amountof contract and cumulative REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL EXEMPTION PURSUANT TO AMC 2.50 amendments! s$6.1)(10. ❑ YES, the total amount of cumulative amendments ❑ YES, the Wlel amount of original contract and ❑If'NO', amount exceeding authority requires s25% of original contract amount or $250,000 cumulative amendments s$1ooK for Goods &Servlces,s Coundl approval. Attach copy of Coundl whichever is less. $75K for Personal Services, <$50K for Attorney Fees. Communication. ® If'NO', amount exceeding authority requires ❑ II'ND', amount exceeding autiwdry requires Council ❑ Exempt-Reason: Council approved. Attach corn of Council approval. Attach way of Council Communication. PERSONAL SERVICES Communiation. ❑ Exempt-Reasai ❑ YES', Direct appointment s$35,000 ❑ Exempt- Reason:-0 IPNO', uiresa royal. INTERMEDIATE PROCUREMENT SOLESOURCE EMERGENCY PROCUREMENT Goods & Services - $5.000 to $100.00 0 ❑ YES, the total amount of cumulative amendments ❑ Written Findings: Document the nature of the Personal Services •$5.000to$75.000 s25%otodginalconlmdamounta$250,000 emergency, Induding necessity and circumstances ❑ 'YES, the total amount of cumulative whichever is less. requiring ore ountrad amendment arcendmentss 25%of or[ginal mtmci mount ❑ ff ❑ K'NO', amount exceeding authority requires ❑ Obtain direction and written approval from City 'NO', amount exceeding authority requires (cunc0 Council approval. Attach copy of Coundl Administrator approval. Attach copy of Council Communlcftl Communication. ❑ If applicable, attach copy of Council Communication ❑ Exem t-Reason: ❑ Exam t-Reason: ❑ Exemot- Reason SPECIAL PROCUREMENT INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT ❑ YES', the total amount of original contract and cumulative amendments are ❑ *YES*. the original contmd was approved by City Coundl. within the amount and forms initially approved by Council as a Special Provide data approved by City Council: (Date) Procurement. If 'NO', Council approval is mgdred. Attach copy of Council Communication. ❑ If'NO% amountexceeding authority requires Coundlapproval. ❑ Contract amendment approved and signed by City Administrator. Council Attach oppy of Co mimkallon. Project Number 2010-12 Account Number 670 -08.15.00- 704200 (25%), Account Number 670.08.38.00 - 704200 (75%) 'Expenditure must be charged to the appropriate account numbers for the financials to reflect the actual expenditures accurately. Attach extra pages ffneeded. Employee Signature~~~ Department Head Signature: (Totalamountotantmcfz $5,000) City Administrator: (Equal to orgresterthan $25,000 or10%) Funds appropriated for current fiscal year., YES / NO Finance Director (Equal to orgreater then $5,000) _ Date Comments: Form #10- Contract Amendment Approval Request Form, Request for a Change Order, Page 1 of 1, 71912014 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication July 15, 2014, Business Meeting Plaza Information Booth Paint Colors FROM: Ann Seltzer, Management Analyst, seltzera@ashland.or.us SUMMARY At the meeting in September 2013, the Council approved the recommended paint colors for the Plaza information booth and asked that the colors be evaluated again once the new roof was in place. After reviewing the color scheme with the new roof, the committee recommends a slight change: remove the gray stripe and have a single white stripe to separate the blue from the yellow. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: In early July 2013, the Council agreed to repaint the Plaza information booth and asked Sue Springer (Plaza artist), Margaret Garrington (Public Art Commission) and Sandra Slattery (Ashland Chamber of Commerce) to select up to four possible color combinations. The Council reviewed four paint options for the Plaza information booth as submitted by the committee. The Council approved the request to display the color options at the Plaza booth in order to assess the colors in natural light. After viewing the options in natural light, the team eliminated two. Of the two remaining options, the team placed on display at the Plaza Booth and after receiving public input, narrowed its selection to a single recommendation for Council approval. The Council approved the recommendation and requested that the committee review the colors again once the copper colored roof was installed. On Monday, July 7, the Committee met to review the colors and recommends a slight change to the original selection: removing the gray stripe and reducing the two white stripes to a single white stripe. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: Staff estimates the cost of painting the booth and the trim of the kiosk will be $1000. STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends approval of the selected color scheme. SUGGESTED MOTIONS: I move the City proceed with painting the booth and kiosk with the recommended color scheme. ATTACHMENTS: Image of revised color combination for the Plaza information booth Image of previous color combination for the Plaza information booth Page I of I 11Fin, v. }tY Ytt ~,tr 9 F r y/~?}A~s tiNU>rr { \l lytx r `Y n r 111 Y ~ I Y= , ~je r ~'1f t ~ YV.. O n .t If~ MAJ gg t Plaza Booth Paint Yellow = Com Chowder 0876 (paint 57" down from the base fascia/eaves) White = Bonaire 0020 (paint 4" stripe) Blue = Queen of the Night 0655 (paint below white and all trim including door, windows and fascia/eaves) rw / 1 11+t~ n~AA, y - . 1 ~5 'k tip, tl E t_t~-\ Q 14 1 b• 'sl 1 1 kWf 91/~ ~yyjy~~ a. P r' e s ; f ~ a, { 4~ T~ µ4 f r i ~ _ vv ~q~ JsF !Z^ a INFORMATION INFORMATION. - , WORD LLMly:.. + INK, SS' i 1. 1 1. 11 1 - ` 11 1 ' 1' 1 1. ~ CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication July 15, 2014, Business Meeting Liquor License Application for Scott Giossi dba The Playwright FROM: Barbara Christensen, City Recorder, christeb@ashland.or.us SUMMARY Approval of a Liquor License Application from Scott Giossi dba The Playwright at 258 A Street 43 BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: Application is for a change in ownership. 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 Ryan Bottano dba Granite Taphouse. ATTACHMENTS: None Page I of I INFAWA CITY OF -ASH LAN D Council Communication July 15, 2014, Business Meeting Discussion and direction to staff regarding the plaza kiosk FROM Dave Kanner, City Administrator, dave.kannergashland.or.us SUMMARY At its May 19, 2014 study session, the Council directed staff to develop alternatives for the information kiosk on the plaza, post the topic on Open City Hall (on the City web site) for discussion and to then schedule this topic for further Council deliberation. Staff now seeks direction from the Council as to how to proceed. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: The notion of removing and relocating the information kiosk from the plaza first arose during a Council discussion of the roofing project for the plaza information booth. Although the roof of the plaza kiosk still has several years of life left, Public Works staff sought a bid for replacing it at this time, in the belief that doing so now, in conjunction with the information booth project, would save money. The bid for replacing the kiosk roof with copper-colored stainless steel (to match the information booth) was $4,000. Given that, Council requested a recommendation from the Downtown Beautification Committee as to removing or refurbishing the existing kiosk. The Committee recommended removing the kiosk but made no recommendation as to where it should go or whether it should be replaced at all. After receiving that recommendation at its May 19 study session, Council directed staff to develop alternatives for the information kiosk on the plaza and to post the topic on Open City Hall (on the City web site) for discussion. The alternative locations identified by staff are shown on the attached map of the downtown plaza area. (Location 41 is the existing kiosk.) • Location #2: The back side of the plaza information booth. • Location #3: The southeast corner of Granite Street and North Main. • Location #4: The park row near the bike rack on East Main, directly across from the plaza • Location #5: The park row on Winbum Way, just past the south side of City Hall and the Shakespeare stairs. None of these alternatives were favored in the Open City Hall comments, which are attached. Most of those responding on Open City Hall favored leaving the kiosk where it is. Page I of 2 ~r, CITY OF ASHLAND FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: Removing and replacing the kiosk could cost as much as $4,000, depending on the design of what replaces it. A flat board on the back side of the plaza information booth would obviously be less expensive than a multi-sided kiosk that requires a new concrete base. There will also be some expense involved in removing the existing kiosk, which sits on a concrete pedestal that is believed to be about three feet deep. The roof of the kiosk does not need to be replaced at this time. When the time comes to replace it, the work can be done with composite shingles rather than custom-made metal panels and, if the substructure is still in good shape, the work could almost certainly be done for under $1,000. If the substructure needs to be re-built, the cost would probably increase to the $2,000 range. This would be paid for with funds that are set aside for general roofing projects in the Public Works Facilities Division budget. STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: This item is presented for discussion and direction to staff. SUGGESTED MOTION: N/A ATTACHMENTS: Plaza kiosk alternative location map Open City Hall comments Page 2 of 2 -Ok 0 0 % Lu~ _ - - - ~II~IIIIIVII`~ 1g lollll D O N 2 1111916111~I011101 _ BURN WY °oo. ri 5 0 30 ^^1 60 120 Feed 1 K-- -~r ----7~ - w O v a T i. FT, '°~^O Y 00 ~ C s L 3 v v~ m o on E ~ i, ~ v 0 0 0 0 a s c on ~ 3 3 ~ .N ro v 'O ~ ~ •o ° z o c 'd 3 0 v - c c c Y L~ v N v> O O C .N+ ~C .L.+ L ~C O 0➢ V ~ ttl 48 v aci s aNi ° 5cv. c N v ro a a E v v ° 0 3 .N m N v y° c ~ o c 0 3 .Y 3 y a w.. o ~ c° v m N c N c c E o p E v by O F N o L C - U N u Vi y L-' ~ 3 'O N L N E w N 0 0 - T tG L i N W O p 'O N L O O 3 d c o^. on F Y° v° o o E b N v s c ca ~ E v ~ s 3 E e o N ~ E y o m ~ N c ° °N' F~ c c~ 3 E L Y vo o v ° o E .o v p c a v N c •p d C v m O O O O O c O E j ' Y y 'cC N O t <C L L E ~C G i L m O R N ro C Q ° X d C G« N .7. w > YO .G w y 0 of R= y., y 0A iy R N O V O O U y C V •y~ Y A ~ 0. V ° V V 3 O Q V uu ° w N cVtl O C O_ T S O«> N 00 10. p v m on c' w o ° 'c ;o L o o R c c m v °c0. y~ 0Xa~ccEEoocn0N S, p i O 0 v> N Y H Y •E v v s v ~e o' v' ,c .Z •y ro rn o v ~a Y v a~ ° .c v L c c .c .n v_ c o s E vT E Y °N' E F' N °c 3 ~ ctl a°i E o c o g ~ 5 E p F s o .E ro c Nom, L 0 CL 6$ .k O tOC > iy C b i V ~ b ~n O .n N V O N ° N t1c N u y s m°~ ~L-. a~ v 3~ ccd o aEi m ~ c N ~ c c°d o " t Q ~ o a>i ° v ti E ~ ~ ~ o ~ 3 ~ `c' ro s v n. •c ~ c m L~ a. ' = o N 3 ~ 3 c v 3 'E c E o~ ~ w ° E E u v v o v v ~c., 0 9_' a° o~ Y o~ Y a o E ~ ro o v> a 0.N vo Y" v N E Y ra c y eR L v c c` v 3 _o N o N E c v v i 3 v F o° 0 3° o x av x o o s c X 3 a v c o °x" ai ~ .o ~ N N > v > ~ c s -o v " c 3 _o R ~ s ~ c 'E w .E o f Y o 'o d F v v o` v F s X L2 N F E w0 °o N osv. m o n o aroi ~ a ~ h~ ~ v v v m ro o o> E ro o c - o v Q° o_ o_ c N c p o a. o ~ u `L' v icy t> awi v e m s ~ y 5 X x ~ n. v X E •y G v wE $ Y > u o c Y a o o° w v> o o N FL v a° w E a c a L z a o s F F v N F v E o r C ~ C C C G O Q y Q Q Q Q N •O N N ° N C O C C G c C X iC V G y N ro X Y E ~ O y ° n s ~ O = y ~ vVi tLa T C c o c ~ E p s ' 3 LLI w O N U ro a v ai s 'o ~ mss. t E v x L s x v o v O U w rU, O N C O E C ~ ti ro ~ Y P ro ro ti t cd u O ro y0 O U N N ro L- •roa c o°_ ro E ro 3 o s_ v' o s v o 3 s v nc r c o s~ ai s ,c c F-' t T L N ba N ur O L' O .C '~bA T U h L C O s itl N 'O - c R O- N W O S c O ro R c v E o a.. ro O w v C i v d C p ro .L. n v~ CQ al i t O o v, m w ro _ c7 E bB n Y U s o v v a v v v v s o c o~ 4., F o >3 ~ ° c ~ p ° y 3 L o E. O ~ s Y p ~ '~.y Nis _ s c•o >,N z Y ro ~ c c c o n v v = w~ E c x ,v, p ° v o aci c .n° v cs' a y .E o r-i' o ~ Y .ro Y N °L' a c v .o i; o x v E CL 0 E o L' ro ~ c avi c ~ a E °c° ° 'v s ~ ~ A ~ p`p ur ur Y L j itl C G G ti p ro O 0 N y v OA to s- x v o ~ ro ro v w° 3 x c c i`a .E ro E ro u. v sv, v 3 'N o= m v v o P_' O v 'o N E v y c = o ro m s c o v x .2 E c Y s °o v - ° u7 E o on a a- i; 3 c >i O F L C c Q v' ~ O ro L O W ur C O L O U O ro vi 7k [1] W <C ~ C L O O C U . ~p 3 v N 4. _ C 47 .O bA U O O 'D E N v E 3 c E w v s .c s •o o 'v ~ ~ v y v c v A Y b E L oq E c 3- v v o v 'D v 3 o v ti w c c c Q x o ro Y o L CID 'O L O v H L O p O O h 3 °a v H o°u r D 3 a m Fs as v N° w v F' ro H ro •°-Lo sv..~ -vo y E vc ° 0 0 T O ~ U v p N tR -C p C Y N L N ro 0 v N L p N m o ro s .n s s ro o o>. c 3 y ~ s v m x •on • .d w ~ 3 ? 3 F" L, v ~ s° axi id v v ~ o i, v, 3 ro o Y v ro `v' o a~i aroi p aroi aroi a~i a~ v v aroi ` wr p t c o c aroi u y •o v ,.v.7 Y u a v..~.-7s K.~s Q vF- o? v rod' .~aU nro ° v v c o o v o o o •v c o o o z ro ~ ro n~ z ~ cca m ~ Q Q Q Q Q Q Q~ Q Q Q a v v v v v v v v v v v ur •O b •O •O •D 9 •O 'y •O 'D 'O .N w 'ur .N ur 'y .N .N ur (n c C c c C C c p c C C N VcJ E y E C ° > U G _ C ran jG N N V G Q v v, v ~ v w ° M v b0 N a v N L N w T v v o_ ~ v -p ~ id ~ o s s c > s o ro ro c E 3 o v° _ o v~ c~ v n .E v~ U U E 3~ v o y ~ ° S E E= mo o o° ro o N~ o s' o Y-. L b L C N y N p N C .D Y~ L s, ttl U O C p = s. .L-. p E o~~ = to c° w .D o v 5 os t°n' ow = o av c s«•L 3 O N s ~y o m G. ro~ m p W aci ~ L v v c E c v N >L'r N o .D s~ •E p R E o U `v s E~ -o ~ `p a v v ~ cd O v N to to o a p N i c y a c .~s~ c ~~n p v o o~ .vp -t=uw OLvN .°-o aN ti oq~ 'v' ro ~ ro s 3 y •o n c m== c .E x U to p c a o o °o E 'O ~ p v N L 'Q o w ° U N itl - ° O C_ s w P. O L d = O C 7 C L A O L >10 v C v v ~ ~ Y0 v O> w ~ •o c n 3 w E ~ E .ti N E N~ to p v L .L... ycd ~ L L e0 p ti at .N ^ ~ n v 'O OD U U O C. U V t n H .O .3 3= N y T L p o N to y c o to v c o L o y p =o w v>= R =tb c c c ro s r ~ N N Q Q v v N N N ~ ~ v Y U ~l v ~ N ~ 'c o ~ U V w O a p a 'C O O ro ~ U ro OD ro ~ > W ~ N y ,O O O ~ N tC L ~ O L E C `y N C U ~ ro U ~ U W F W N G N U C-®, C, G O E N O y w -p ~y U L 3 ` ro c 0 .C w a~ w 'O lOC N U 0 N N Uj ~ G ^ 'Y 'O Y~ Y L O wt~ v .o W ° ctl N L^ ~ U .D > O_ ~ T d c N N ro N ~ O > « O O _ 'II U U .G' ~ cUy .G O O O N° ~ W C ° ro NN 3 - ~ ro U E 0 O N 'D ~ ro vi ro~ O y T a+ N ro C O Q. C C N L ~ 'O .L ^ N N cCtl N 9 vU. ~ O L 'O '7 ~ Y N VNI .D L ~ CL N L t_ (C ~ t c o N ro w~ c _ c °1 o s C N ° N v O ~ ° N y u y N t ° c c ro v w C 'D o o~~ 'O .L.. 0 0 'D ro U° N O L L U ro v L E ~ ° o~ L E o o ~ ro c ~ .Y o .E o 0 ~ X Es v4°. ~-DCw°L'c s E o c o v= roia 3 a v = N N c o~ 3° E ro~ 3° p N y ~ ❑ nq a; 75 u V. N N ^ N N N Y b> > Gl N° <3 X v L G X N° y tJ N N D o t N o 0 0 o c .c aroi w Q ro c c o o o 7 7- F'5: zzzz0 3 a E °c °zamzFm.E'~~a ro a~ a-~ ~v vo o ov c o o o C ro C C C C ro C C C C C G c ro G' G' C c ro s ro ro ro ro s ro ro ro ro ro ro ro s ro ro ro L N .L L .C N t .G L L L L N L L L V N Q N N N N Q N N N N N N N¢ N N N p. Q p Q Q Q Q p Q Q Q Q Q Q Q~ Q Q Q N 'D N N 4l U 'D N N N N N N N 'O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N G ~ C C C C p C C C C C C C D C C C Lu C G V1 E ~ G i t Xi. ro E b y° ~`o o ro 3 o o Q o aroi T o R m O X E ro O S L N D N O N U W U C N L .G. '~-r ° U To ro F o$ Q c 3 ro m y coU L ttl x N X N C Q N ,0 3 L.L ro G U E d o c 7 L ro ro o m~ ~ z W ro p N ro N o ro c° F ° ° ><3ml~e w2 W 0C)PaI7 -3U cGaGQ w 0 R a c v ~ ro o L ~ v b Y o ro 3 O T U L v u ro L o L v v v ~ E ~ s o Y o c o ~ o O U ~ L = ro x O Y U ~ O y ~ 3 c 3 .n Q o T ro c ~ ~ . o ~ O .U A ro a S o O O ro O ~ L p ~y ~ w v C U N L ~ •O O YO U ~ U U O 3 L C O T .D ~ C O V y R bD v tUd C O W O X 'O N U U C R G C x_ zm °•~zz G C ro ro s s N N N U b ~ .N .N G G N L d N ro ~ U .a o ro c o ~ U (7 0 v ro a v~ ro ~ N o ~ os U id O ti ~ ro c 5 = = r ~ H 3 3 ~ E Y °o E c L - $ ~ v v p~ Y C 0. v c c _ v o p T~ L N ro h C 1 ~ C C C N Y y O p'' 03 y a W m v y p o •o L N •.o^,. cva o m O N ro ro a u. 0.~ c p c ~ c -6b > a Y N " 'N G O Nl itl o -p v v ~ 4- _ E L c ro E a p p~ o o p v o ~ a~ a~i ro p ~ ~ m p O v ~ L .T ro « « L r. h v 0 C w ro > ro E C N O 'N N p N O v O .E C ro O O L O O O O N O O p p 6 G, O .N O p p 0 •O 0 0 0 0 zzF ZzZ7>--zz C Cz 3 Cz z C CzzzZZZ C b C 'O b 'D b C 'O •O 'D 'O •O •O 'D C •D 'O 'D 'O 'O C ro C C C C ro C C C C C C C ro C C C C C o ro r ro ro ro ro s ro ro ro ro ro L'ro s y ro ro ro ro ~"'L N t t t L N L L L L L L N L L L L L u N Q N N N N Q N N N N N N N Q N N N N N Q Q Q Q p Q Q Q Q Q Q Q p Q Q Q Q Q v 'O v v v v •C v v v v v v v 'O v v v v v b 'y 9 'O L 9 'y b b b b b b '6 'y 'D 'D b b b N N N N N Vi N N N N N N N N N N N C C C C C C C C C C C C O C C C C C C _ C ~ E y G L' ~1 ~ ro V C ~ C W > a. N p o. o a c 3 0 ° p Q o c a"i 1,08 °'C2< UC7 F 0 v R a T ~ to N N U 'fl ro s R p m ~ b`q > W c w L~ W v o T ro _ c ~ 3 s O ti vi CO N N t O T U C y bo U ro A U .D O ° CWl 7 .C .N N c o •N ro v o 3 z N a o N N N U T L R N U ~ ~ +U- c~C Y R U R R U N R N o N ccn N> 3 U L o _v .D p v~ o :o o s O N J ~ L O C O n C U1 L N C O U N 'O C ¢ C R ~ E boo v v❑ L N o ° o aroi o ro a aNi Y c 3 c Q 7m u 33 a L E N ro v o y v o p 0 w C C N ° N N T jE C C v u .o .N v o_ ~ 'd -0 3 y v .E E v F 3~ ° N o- € °o > a>i ~ .E x o N `c° " o c r ° u •°o K C~ o c ~ o~ v° v c - y r 3 •c v ro o f v v c a o s c~ N o c n Q, v v a z 'O 'fl O > O .N. ~ C y _ O" ' N .L. ° c`tl O itl A R o u c y z 3 _y E; O v _ °N x v O O '3 O v, U y O C U O R > F N h C N .E E' O N V. s c n N v Y 9 3 s ° c R -v 3 = c O L a v> u~ R G o o F' c o E o c 3 N w N y o c v o'er , o s s so •c •v 2 E o v E c F~ D v o o r X LaU' C W C O 4~ R .b CJ N O N U U O T C* N° N Ev'i 7 asn LY R O O❑ 7 X 0.` 'p bb G v O id tC .~C 'RO `n C U O O' ° E o R s N v o ❑ u s v a v v s o c o O R R U U U 'O tCC ro O O U U t bo a: ro R R ro 'O i Y n' 'O t U m o o cGa 'E v .N R t `m F' c u v s ti r .N. U C i' O R 0. C O N E ro Y L O9 R 0. N 3 U E ro d tr- N c °R' m y 'Y r° v c 'N aci L E w p v i 'y ° Q R R v 'O m r s N E Y :°_R. ro v c v°_ o L y L v o c a v ro c c s v u Z, 'v _ c L> bq s N n c N n n F Y N Y N o °c o o N 0 0 3£° s ° N .N o Y v ctl b :x y v bq C7 s R v ,v„ c n bn •o v y s c °o u~ m c -v N s u c o 3 v v ro c ai c E v v L iN, R v o v R _ v a v o L v, o R v ~ 3 u °v° ~ o ° ro E0 O y S1- 03 O` d° L C T Y .N p t U t .L 'E p t cd wT+ N p u 0 ~ F Rs.Es 3F °'c FsFF E cF 3U ° cF~U- EF ~ o c •v •o •o •c c •v •o •o •o ro SStl tCd tCtl R zN 2 N L N s s s z N s s s .a v •a v v v v •v v v v v -o .N •o •o v •o •o o •o •o C O .C C C C O C C C G' L co, 'O X Y itl C C O 7 n R R A F C N O_ O N C o E _ O c U O ~ iC ~ VJ O y Q 'ND 3 ~ y R S N = ro c C CL u T ° 0.l V1 L U N N L T Q R G C U C Q Q LL C C, E ~ ~ cro c L 3 z w w ° ro a L _ .L T ro c v E 3 s o 3 •ti o c y a F- G o •°c a y v° 'o T c 0 to ° N> _ U 0. ro ro 'D ro ro U N ro On a V .O N L O O V U y C to.- N y U w YO N b0 'O U c3 r-. C U - O p N_ ro C •O_ y .O C1 vG, > t ~ ° > U ro ~ Q N G ~ > ~ L bD G Y O~ v N U m y.. O D U N C ° N L U Y U G N ro .`p1 C U '1°- C O~~ F• ~ y N A O .°O L T O N G o L o o 'N N o s °o ocu ~ c ~ ro ro Q ~ c c j °o. X 0 3 " F -EE o W L y N Q N L p v G N L LU t a U L N O O a Y ~ a, a. J o. c o ~ ° FL- E ° c ~ ~s°. ~ 5 o c c 3 E° T ro ° E °c ° o 0 o c o 0 .o F ro ro o. c O o p s ro ro o c on°•~ croi aNi U N O°'. g U ro~ p y E c o = ~ a N' ~ L~ 'v Y 3 3 ro ai c E °a y o ro a° s 'E v ro z o L j p p «°ro ro U_ E U O t6 1 9 U O 3 L G E Em y E ro ° 3 ° nn U G Y '°V iC T Q S °U a N «~tl N 3 L G N ~ °U X ro ~ icl E G ono ° Y ~ 0 3 F ro E o •c N p p w p_ ° E " y N ~n v z N v ° Y c Y n s C t o v son I U p U o N o N ro F. o f 'o ro p G y U O L U_ 4. L` a/ N a` v> i' 'G ro i <tl1 _N N u. U On p j O° O r 4- O U L_ U G U L -O Y Y v .o ~ a tsp. ~ ~ ~ o ~ a -o aNi N ro ~ ro .N E ~°n Q w~°. L ro ° o N 3 ro 's o~ o Y E a N on N N G 4. o w ro y .c E ,o X a" s° ° .5 L ro c ro Y " o °o 0 Q p 0 L; N N G G i p O G _ 3 j U y ro 'D Lpn p ro w° 'ro on Go aoi c ai n x o o 3 E n L L Y Y .Y 0. 0 0 N N U N= L .C 0.. Y1 L O G- C G p. € ro ro bn ro U s%. N L O O O y ro t E ro O D U O L S L N O N O` o O i ro F--<«. 3 was 3 N oF..~F m `ro z=~.-. 'oZFrn c=C ~ ~ ro m ~ ro R ~ s rL/i N N N tL/i LVI y N H Q Q Q v Q Q Q Q Q •N G G C ° G G G C ° E > L y p w U G ~ 5 E" ro ro e V a ° U N L y y ~ U N bn T L U T p T G ~ ro O v F ° C4 ~4 ¢ u, CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication July 15, 2014, Business Meeting An Ordinance amending Ashland Municipal Code Chapter 1.08 General Penalties, Sections 1.08.010, 1.08.020 and 1.08.030 FROM: David H. Lohman, Ashland City Attorney, lohmand@ashland.or.us SUMMARY This agenda item seeks Council's consideration and first reading of a proposed Ordinance amending Ashland Municipal Code Chapter 1.08 General Penalties, which would clarify the Municipal Court's jurisdiction, revise the penalties associated with criminal and violation offenses and clarify that the fine and incarceration limits established in City Charter apply only to penalties for violations and crimes . established by City ordinances and resolutions. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: The Oregon State Legislature revised ORS 153, Violations and Fines, published by the Office of the State Administrator, Oregon Department of Justice, making it necessary to modify AMC Chapter 1.08. The proposed revisions to AMC 1.08 are necessary and useful to law enforcement, code compliance officers, and the general public's understanding of the minimum and maximum amounts of general penalties. Additional informational tables have been added to clarify classifications of violations between State and AMC designation. The proposed revisions also make clear that the Municipal Court has jurisdiction over specified crimes under Oregon revised statutes, as well as the authority to impose appropriate penalties for commission of those crimes. Finally, the proposed revisions clear up a possible misunderstanding about limits on fines and incarcerations contained in the Article 9, Section 1 of the Ashland City Charter. That section prevents the Council from imposing fines in excess of $500 and imprisonment at hard labor in excess of 60 days for violation of any City ordinances, resolutions or charter provisions. The revised ordinance makes explicit the fact that this limitation does not apply to fines or sentences imposed as a result of the violations of state law. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: N/A STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends Council approve first reading of the ordinance and move it on to second reading. Page I of 2 11, CITY OF ASHLAND SUGGESTED MOTION: I move approval of first reading by title only of an ordinance titled, "An Ordinance amending Ashland Municipal Code Chapter 1.08 General Penalties, Sections 1.08.010, 1.08.020 and 1.08.030." ATTACHMENTS: Proposed Ordinance Amending AMC Chapter 1.08 Page 2 of 2 ~r, ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ASHLAND MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 1.08 GENERAL PENALTY, SECTIONS 1.08.010, 1.08.020 AND 1.08.030 COMPLIANT WITH CURRENT STATE STATUTES 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 Oregon State Legislature has amended ORS 153 Violations and Fines, effectuating changes to the Ashland Municipal Code Chapter 1.08 General Penalties. THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Chapter 1.08, GENERAL PENALTY, Section 1.08.010 Misdemeanor Penalties and Procedures, Section 1.08.020 Violation Penalties and Procedures, and Section 1.08.030 Base Fines, Schedule of Violation Penalties, are hereby amended to read as follows: Chapter 1.08 GENERAL PENALTVIES Section 1.08.010 Municipal Court Jurisdiction, Misdemeanor Penalties and Procedures A. The municipal court shall have jurisdiction over all offenses made punishable under the ordinances of the City of Ashland; all misdemeanor crimes made punishable under ORS Chapters 161 through 167 and 471 through 480; all violations, as defined by ORS 153.005(3); and all traffic offenses, as defined by ORS 801.555, that are made punishable under Title 59 of the Oregon Revised Statutes, other than felony traffic crimes. 1) When jurisdiction on a matter is conferred on the municipal court, all the means to carry such iurisdiction into effect is also given to the municipal fudge; and in the exercise of such iurisdiction, if the rules of procedure are not specifically identified or made applicable to the municipal court under this Chapter, any suitable process or mode of proceeding may be adopted by the municipal fudge which may appear most conformable to the exercise of such iurisdiction. 2) Rules of Procedure. The municipal judge may adopt and publish rules necessary for the prompt and orderly conduct of the business of the municipal court. Rules adopted by the municipal fudge pursuant to this section shall be consistent with the provisions of Ordinance No. Page 1 of 6 ORS Chapter 153, ORS Chapter 156, and any rules adopted by the Oregon Supreme Court pursuant to ORS 153.033. AB. Unless otherwise specifically provided, when the Ashland Municipal Code identifies violation of its provisions as a misdemeanor or as subject to this section, any person violating any provisions or failing to comply with any of the mandatory requirements of this code is guilty of a Class B misdemeanor- offense 1maximum $2500 fine and one hundr-ed eighty (180) days in jaill; provided heiwever-,while criminal offense having a maximum fine and incarceration not exceeding the limitations of Article 9, Section 1 of the Ashland City Charter are operative, on), per-son eonvieted of a misdemeanor under this eode shall be punished-by ♦ine of not more than Five hundred dollars ($500 .00), or by i nt not to a ed sixty (60) days, or by both sueh fine and imprisonment. 1) Notwithstanding the above, according to ORS 221.339, municipal courts have concurrent jurisdiction with circuit courts and iustice courts over misdemeanors committed or triable in the city. The Ashland municipal court is subject to the state laws it enforces and is not subiect to the fine and incarceration limitations of the Ashland Citv Charter. 42) In addition to a fine and incarceration, the municipal court may impose any additional punishment, probation, remedial measure (e.g. restitution), or expulsion as provided under AMC 10.120 et sec., that is appropriate for the offense. C. Adoption of State Criminal Laws and Pr-oeedures 1) All er-iminal proeedures, provisions and requirements appReable to violations and :adomeanorsf 7nel..ding but not limited to Oregon Eyidenee Coda> (ORS Chapters- and 41), ORS Chapter 153 violations, defenses, bur-den of proof, general 40 liability, ' and general prineiples of justifleation , ..tained in Oregon Revised Statutes Chapters 111 through and inel .d:ng 167well as Chapters 471 through 480 are hereby adopted in full and made applieftble to 2) All misdemeanor nnd violation offenses and penalties deseribed ill ORS Chapters- 161f 162, 163, 164f 165>166 and 167, a swell as offenses deseribed in the Oregon Alehiele Coda and ORS Chapters 33> 1171f153f 471f 475f 476f and AQnf are hereby :alertion of an n°e adopted by referenee When eited as a eity or-dina°aa violat:a.f section adopted by r-efer-enee is an offense against this ei", and shall be punishable to the same extent as p yidad in the Cado Not...:thstan ding the al oyef nothing herein prohibits o estriets the Cb, pahee or City Att....ney from eleeting to pursue eha"aa and p ..ter defendants with state l..°, of mans in the name of the State of Oregon pursuant to /ADC 22 119 3) Exeept where the eontext elearly indieates a different meaning, definitions appearing in the general definitional and other- par-tieular seetie"s of ehapters adopted by subseetions (1) and (2) of this seetion are appheable throughout this ehapter. Where cc state" fa ff app r-eferenees to and state statute shall be deemed to also iflellude f u n "eity ff and Ordinance No. Page 2 of 6 4171.. The city police, city attorney, assistant city attorney, and municipal court, including the municipal courtjudge, judges pro tem, court supervisor and deputy court clerks, shall have all the powers, duties, and responsibilities provided under Oregon Revised Statutes, applicable to investigation, prosecution, administration, and adjudication of criminal offenses and violations within the city of Ashland and on city-owned property as applicable. 1517D. The statutes, codes and procedures adopted herein are expressly made applicable within the city limits of the city of Ashland as well as outside the city limits when eoneerning for offenses occurring on city-owned or controlled property located outside the city limits of the city of Ashland, Oregon. BE. Each such person is guilty of a separate offense for each and every day during any portion of which any violation of this code is committed, continued or permitted by any such person, and shall be punished accordingly. The costs of prosecution, including but not limited to court costs, assessments, fees, surcharges, restitution, and the like, shall not be included within the $500 fine limitation. The prosecution in Ashland municipal court of state law misdemeanors and violations pursuant to ORS 221.339 is not limited by the fine and incarceration limitations of the city charter. Section 1.08.020 Violation Penalties and Procedures. A. Vielatien effenses iH the Ashland Munieipal Gode shall be elassified as a Class 1, Class H-, Gass M ar Cleo W . 'Jet:,..... Exeept for the Fninifnu... fifte provisions of ORS 153.021, violations deseribed in the Ashland Munieipal Code as Class 1, 11, M & Al shall be applied 153. Parking vielatiens are exeluded ffefn Classifiealien and Base fine fequifements. When n mot ethe.wise s ei fied in the Ashland T, anieipal Cede er in other ineerp «ete.J .....J e.. tl.e 11, a ethe_Wise s e:aven.. designated in the n shlana n unieipal Code o_,...ided howevef, while the $500 dollar lifnitation of AFtiele 9, Seetien 1 ef the Ashland City Chartef a City Ordinance offense, shall not exeeed $500. in addition, eaeh and ever), day during any person et: entity shall eeftstitute a sepafate N,ielatien subjeet te a sepaFate fine and stteh pefseft eests, assessments, fees, eharges, sureharges, restitatien, and the like, shall not be ineluded Mthin !he $500 liwitatiAn 1) The proseetition in Ashland Munieipal Getift ef state law fflisdemeaners and violations pursuant te ORS -221. 339 is fiet lifliked by the fine and ineafeeratian lifflitations ef the Ashland City Gharter. n) See n NK; 10. 120, et s Persistent Vielat:en f " addifienal penalties and p eedures f . violation of Class 1 13.1 V:- elatiens-. . Mtitiieipal Code, the Getineil hereby establishes a speeial earper-ate fine of twiee the afnetift of fine speei€ied fef anger elass of offense , AMC C 108.030 T.-able 1. "S te" Ordinance No. Page 3 of 6 , Limited Liability ^e"'pan of tither entity, not a feat In Addit:eM t,... F.«.. Munieipal Gatti4 may impose additional punishment of remedial measure (e.g. restitution) appropfiate fef the violation offense. A. The violations referenced in Ashland Municipal Code as Class I, II, III and IVcoincide respectively with provisions identified as Class A, B, C, and D violations in ORS chanter 153, as follows: (1) Class I - Class A; (2) Class II - Class B; (3) Class III - Class C; (4) Class IV - Class D; (5) Unclassified - An offense that is designated as a violation but does not specify the classification of the violation is an unclassified violation and is treated as a Class 11 (Class B) violation. B. Parking violations are excluded from Classification and Presumptive Fine requirements. C. A separate violation shall be deemed committed each day during or on which a violation or noncompliance occurs or continues. D. Persistent Violation has additional penalties and procedures for Class I - IV violations, as set forth in AMC 10.120, et sec. Section 1.08.030 BaseMaximum and Presumptive Fines, Schedules of Violation Penalties. A. Base Fine. Pufstiant to ORS 153.142, base fine ealettlatians shall be eensistentwith state law f r all ,.:ty ardinaflee . eletions and other viol .tions subjeet to the : :..A:,.ti,.., of the munieipal eouFt, exeept that City assessment, if any, shall hp. addp'd tR thp, f'qu"datisn amount and ineerperated into the base fine. Sta4e, eount), and leeal assessments an' fstireharges, :fe"., a added to fines not dedueted ffem them A «'.dueti,... Of niisdeY"eanef assess ffient.. B Cehedule of Violation Penalties City ordinaftees offenses afid ether City vielatien fines, within the jefisdietion ef the Munieipal Ceun shall have the elassifieations and base noted on Table 1 belaw! nV:,.1L_ T nlwdmurn QB^assee fine R....,. i ......,.L..~..., t,. 7 1 2011 CIf1~'t Q~Ln~nn $42- W $297.00 Quffe6i~ $360.00 $242.00 $360.00 0 /'0ass-4 4 $ i 80.00 $145.00 V90.00 Class-I V W97--09 a l8 * Subject to Chatter firnit..tion on fine noted in A MG 1.08.020 the m m fine must be lowered to $500.00 fine..1..,..,pplie able state, a nt. and eit., assessments afid sureharges, if awA These p s do not apply g «..11. to Parking Off nses • "less „ ei fie.7 in th Ordinance No. Page 4 of 6 A. Fines: The penalty for committing a violation is a fine. The law creating a violation may impose other penalties in addition to a fine. 1. The maximum fine for a violation committed by an individual is set forth in Section B, Table 1 below. 2. The presumptive fine for a violation committed by an individual is set forth in Section B, Table 1 below. A. The presumptive fine is defined as a set fine imposed against the defendant who mails or delivers to the court a plea of no contest and the dollar amount in lieu of a court appearance. 3. City surcharge assessment, if any, shall be added to any fine imposed by the court upon the defendant's entry of plea or finding of guilt. 4. A reduction of a misdemeanor to a violation retains the respective state, county, and/or city misdemeanor assessments. B. Schedules of Violation Penalties. Table 1 Schedule of Ashland Municipal Code (AMC) Violation Penalties* Ashland Violation Class Maximum Presum tive** Class1 $500.00*** $435.00 Class II $325.00 $260.00 Unclassified 325.00 $260.00 Class 111 $200.00 $160.00 Class IV $138.00 $110.00 Table 2 Schedule of Adopted State Violation Penalties, adopted from state law:**** State Violation Class Ashland Violation Class Maximum Presum tive** Class A Class 1 $2000.00 $435.00 Class B Class 11 $1000.00 $260.00 Class B Unclassified $1000.00 $260.00 Class C Class III $ 500.00 $160.00 Class D Class IV $ 250.00 $110.00 * These provisions do not apply generally to Parking Offenses unless specified in the AMC. The presumptive fine imposed against the defendant who pleads no contest and delivers the amount of the presumptive fine to the court. _ Subject to Charter limitation the maximum fine may not exceed $500.00, plus applicable state, county fees. ****The Ashland municipal court is subject to the state laws it enforces and is not subject to the fine and incarceration limitations of the Ashland City Charter. C. Business Fine: A sentence to pay a fine for a violation committed by a corporation, partnership, limited liability company or other type business entity shall be in an amount Ordinance No. Page 5 of 6 not to exceed twice the fine established under this section, subject to limits of the City Charter. D. In addition to a fine, the municipal court may impose additional punishment or remedial measure (e.g. restitution, expulsion, treatment) appropriate for the violation offense. SECTION 2. Savings. Nothing in this ordinance shall affect the validity of or the procedures and penalties applicable to criminal or civil enforcement actions commenced and continued under the laws in effect at the time the charges were originally filed. 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. 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 No.24) 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 6 of 6 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication July 15, 2014, Business Meeting An Ordinance Relating to Adoption of the Oregon Fire Code and Amending AMC Chapter 15.28 FROM: Margueritte Hickman, Division Chief, Fire Department, hickmanm@ashland.or.us SUMMARY This is an ordinance that adopts the 2014 Oregon Fire Code. Council approval is required to allow the city of Ashland to enforce the Oregon Fire Code as part of the Ashland Municipal Code. The adoption of the Oregon Fire Code results in a safer community. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: The Oregon Fire Code is part of a family of codes adopted by the city of Ashland and includes the Oregon Structural Specialty Code which is used by the building department. The Oregon Fire Code is adopted by Oregon from a set of model codes. Local jurisdictions are permitted to amend the code providing amendments are not less restrictive. During this code cycle, the contents of the model code experienced significant organizational changes beginning with chapter 11. Because of this, there are several clerical amendments in this code that reference a change in the location of the amendment. There are also two content changes in the Ashland amendments. The first content change is the addition of AMC 15.28.050 Fire Protection System Maintenance. This section allows the fire code official to hold the fire protection system service providers responsible for the services that they render. It has been found by fire agencies throughout the state that there are a few service providers who are not following the maintenance requirements for fire sprinklers, fire extinguishers, fire alarms and hood suppression systems. The fire code currently only provides an avenue for the fire code official to hold the business owner responsible. This amendment will allow the fire code official to hold the service provider responsible when they fail to provide the stated service. The Oregon Fire Code and NFPA standards provide the required maintenance for each of these systems. The second amendment in 15.28.070 E requires service contractors to send a copy of the maintenance reports to Ashland Fire & Rescue. The fire code has a provision for the service report to be provided to the local jurisdiction, but it's required of the business receiving the service. It will be more efficient and expedient to requiring the fire protection service company to provide that. Many companies are currently providing this document, but some have been less than cooperative. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: None Page 1 of 2 OWWAN, CITY OF ASHLAND STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff is requesting approval of the adoption of the 2014 Oregon Fire Code. SUGGESTED MOTION: I move first reading by title only of an ordinance titled, "An Ordinance relating to adoption of the Oregon Fire Code and amending AMC chapter 15.28." ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance Page 2 of 2 ~r, ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO ADOPTION OF THE OREGON FIRE CODE AND AMENDING AMC CHAPTER 15.28 Annotated to show deletions and additions to the code sections being modified. Deletions are bold lined-thfouo and additions are bold underlined. WHEREAS, Article 2. Section 1 of the Ashland City Charter provides: Powers of the City The City shall have all powers which the constitutions, statutes, and common law of the United States and of this State expressly or impliedly grant or allow municipalities, as fully as though this Charter specifically enumerated each of those powers, as well as all powers not inconsistent with the foregoing; and, in addition thereto, shall possess all powers hereinafter specifically granted. All the authority thereof shall have perpetual succession; WHEREAS, the above referenced grant of power has been interpreted as affording all legislative powers home rule constitutional provisions reserved to Oregon Cities. City of Beaverton v. International Ass'n of Firefighters, Local 1660, Beaverton Shop, 20 Or. App. 293, 531 P 2d 730, 734 (1975); WHEREAS, the State of Oregon has adopted the 2012 edition of the International Fire Code, as amended by the Office of State Fire Marshal, as the 2014 Oregon Fire Code; WHEREAS, the City wishes to adopt the new code and make additional amendments to its Fire Code. THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Section 15.28.010 [Adoption of Oregon Fire Code] is hereby amended to read as follows: 15.28.010 Adoption of Oregon Fire Code The 24W 2014 Oregon Fire Code and appendices A through D, F, H, I, J, K-N I SR are hereby adopted, except where specifically excluded or modified by this section, will be referred to in the Ashland Municipal Code as the Oregon Fire Code. One copy of the Oregon Fire Code and appendices shall be filed in the office of the City Recorder. SECTION 2. 15.28.050 Fire Protection System Maintenance Fire protection systems service providers providing inspections, tests, and maintenance required by OFC 901.6 and the referenced standards shall be qualified and shall provide the inspections, tests, and maintenance in Ordinance No. Page 1 of 4 accordance with the referenced standards: Failure by a company or individual service provider to follow the referenced standards is a Class I violation. 15.28.070 Amendments to the Oregon Fire Code The Oregon Fire Code is amended in the following respects: A. Section 105.6.30 Open Burning. Delete and replace with the following: See Ashland Municipal Code 10.30. B.-Ar Section 506.1 Add the following sentence: The key box shall be installed and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions, and shall contain keys to gain necessary access as required by the fire code official. C. B. Section 507.5.1 Delete and replace with the following: Where required. Where a portion of the facility or building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction is more than 300 feet from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility or building, on-site fire hydrants and mains shall be provided where required by the fire code official. Exceptions: 1. For Group R-3 and Group U occupancies, the distance requirement shall be 300 feet. 2. For buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1, 903.3.1.2, or 903.3.1.3, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (183 m). D. Section 307 Delete and replace with the following: Refer to AMC 10.30. E. Section 901.6 Records. Records of all system inspections, tests, and maintenance required by the referenced standards shall be maintained on the premises for a minimum of three years and service contractors shall send reports of tests to the City of Ashland Fire & Life Safety Division within 30 days of performing the inspection and test. request. be eopied to the fire eode offiein! upon F. C-. Section 330 5601.1.3: Notwithstanding ORS 480.110 through ORS 480.165 and OAR 837-012-0600 through OAR 837-012-0675, the sale of retail fireworks as defined in OAR 837-012-0610 is prohibited within the City of Ashland. 1. The sale and/or use of retail fireworks as defined in OAR 837-012-0610 is prohibited at all times; 2. The sale and/or use of sparklers as defined in ORS 480.110 is prohibited at all times; 3. The use of retail fireworks within the City is prohibited at all times; and 4. The advertising of retail fireworks or sparklers is prohibited within the City of Ashland in accordance with ORS 480.152 and OAR 837-012-0665. Ordinance No. Page 2 of 4 G. D. Section 330-1- 5601 Storage of Explosives - Prohibited. The scope referred to in Chapter 3301.1 5601 of the Oregon Fire Code which references the Oregon Revised Statutes and Oregon Administrative Rules related to explosives is amended as follows. The sale, manufacture, possession, transfer and storage of explosives as defined by ORS 480.200 (3) are-prohibited in all areas within the City of Ashland except as specifically permitted in writing by the Fire Code Official. H. Above-ground Storage of Flammable or Combustible Liquids The limits referred to in Section 3404.2.9.6.15704.2.9.6.1 of the Oregon Fire Code in which the storage of flammable or combustible Class I and II liquids in above- ground tanks outside of buildings is restricted are established as follows: All City of Ashland residential and historical district areas as defined in the Comprehensive Plan. L F. Storage of Liquefied Petroleum Gases - Restricted. The limits referred to in Section 38043 6104.2 of the Oregon Fire Code, in which storage of liquefied petroleum gas is restricted, are established as follows: All City of Ashland residential and historical district areas as defined in the Comprehensive Plan are limited to the aggregate capacity of anyone installation shall not exceed a water capacity of 500 gallons. 1. Exception: In particular installations, this capacity limit shall be determined by the Fire Code Official, after consideration of special features such as topographical conditions, nature of occupancy, and proximity to buildings, capacity of proposed containers, degree of fire protection to be provided and capabilities of the City of Ashland Fire & Rescue Department. Life Safety Division. J. IF Appendix Al010.11 - If the complainant or appellant is aggrieved by the final order of the Ashland Board of Appeals, the complainant may file an appeal to the Oregon State Fire Marshal's Office within 10 days of the Board's final order. K. G, Appendix D 105 - Aerial Fire Apparatus Access Roads Remove and replace D105.1 with the following: Where required. Buildings or portions of buildings or facilities exceeding 24 feet in height above the lowest level of fire department vehicle access shall be provided with approved fire apparatus access roads capable of accommodating fire department aerial apparatus. Overhead utility and power lines shall not be located within the aerial fire apparatus access roadway. L. Remove and replace D105.2 with the following: Width. Fire apparatus access roads shall have a minimum unobstructed width of 26 feet in the immediate vicinity of any building or portion of building more than 24 feet in height. 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. Ordinance No. _ Page 3 of 4 SECTION 4. Savings. Notwithstanding this amendment/repeal, the City ordinances in existence at the time any criminal or civil enforcement actions were commenced, shall remain valid and in full force and effect for purposes of all cases filed or commenced during the times said ordinance(s) or portions thereof were operative. This section simply clarifies the existing situation that nothing in this Ordinance affects the validity of prosecutions commenced and continued under the laws in effect at the time the matters were originally filed. SECTION 5. 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 3-5) 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 Ordinance No. Page 4 of 4 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication July 15, 2014, Business Meeting First Reading of an Ordinance Repealing Temporary Moratorium on Establishment of Medical Marijuana Dispensaries FROM: David H. Lohman, City Attorney, lohmand@ashland.or.us SUMMARY This agenda item is the first reading of an ordinance requesting Council repeal of the temporary moratorium on establishment of medical marijuana dispensaries passed on April 16, 2014. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: The geographically-limited moratorium was intended to last only from March 1, 2014, until ordinances concerning the siting and operations of medical marijuana dispensaries could be carefully considered and enacted. As of the July 15, 2014 regular meeting, the Council is expected to have completed hearings and enacted ordinances designed to minimize the impact of medical marijuana dispensaries within the City of Ashland. Repeal of Ordinance no. 3093 is now timely. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: None. STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff requests Council approve first reading of the Ordinance Repealing Ordinance 3093, a temporary moratorium on establishment of medical marijuana dispensaries. SUGGESTED MOTION: I move approval of an ordinance titled, "Ordinance Repealing Temporary Moratorium on Establishment of Medical Marijuana Dispensaries". ATTACHMENTS: Proposed Ordinance LINKS: MMD Moratorium (April 15, 2014 Council Meeting): http://www.ashland.or.us/Page.asp?Nav1D=16194 Page 1 of I 11FAWA ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE REPEALING TEMPORARY MORATORIUM ON ESTABLISHMENT OF MEDICAL MARIJUANA DISPENSARIES 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 Ashland City Council adopted Ordinance No. 3093 on April 16, 2014, declaring a moratorium on the operation of medical marijuana dispensaries in designated areas of the City of Ashland for a limited period of time from March 1, 2014, until rescinded. WHEREAS, under Oregon law, local governments may regulate the operation and location of certain types of businesses within their jurisdictional limits. WHEREAS, the Ashland City Council, having duly advertised and conducted public hearings, and now having established rules and regulations for medical marijuana dispensaries within the City of Ashland. THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Ordinance No. 3093 imposing a Moratorium on Marijuana Dispensaries in the City of Ashland is repealed. SECTION 2. Emergency. This Ordinance being necessary to avoid inconsistencies with recently-adopted ordinances establishing rules and regulations for medical marijuana dispensaries, an emergency is declared to exist, and this Ordinance takes effect on its passage. SECTION 3. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence or word in this ordinance is deemed to be invalid or beyond the authority of the City, either on its face or is applied, the invalidity of such provision shall not affect the other sections, subsections, paragraphs, sentences, or words of this ordinance, and the application thereof, and to that end sections, subsections, paragraphs, sentences and words of this chapter shall be deemed severable. 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", or another word, and the sections of this ordinance may be renumbered, or re-lettered, provided however that any Whereas clauses and Ordinance No. Page 1 of 2 boilerplate provisions, and text descriptions of amendments (i.e. Sections 3-4) 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 July, 2014, and duly PASSED and ADOPTED on the day of July, 2014. Barbara M. Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of July, 2014. John Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: David H. Lohman, City Attorney Ordinance No. Page 2 of 2