Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-0906 Council Agenda PACKET . CITY OF ASHLAND Important: Any citizen may orally address the Council on non-agenda items during the Public Forum. Any citizen may submit written comments to the Council on any item on the Agenda, unless it is the subject of a public hearing and the record is closed. Time permitting, the Presiding Officer may allow oral testimony. If you wish to speak, please fill out the Speaker Request form located near the entrance to the Council Chambers. The chair will recognize you and inform you as to the amount of time allotted to you, if any. The time granted will be dependent to some extent on the nature of the item under discussion, the number of people who wish to speak, and the length of the agenda. CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION AGENDA Tuesday, September 6, 2016 Council Chambers 1175 E. Main Street 7: 00 p.m. Study Session 1. Discussion of modifications to Pioneer Hall winter shelter program Immediately following the Study Session: AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL 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.] 1. CALL TO ORDER II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. ROLL CALL IV. MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Study Session of August 15, 2016 2. Business Meeting of August 16, 2016 VI. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS None VII. 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] COUNCIL MEETINGS ARE BROADCAST LIVE ON CHANNEL 9. OR ON CHARTER CABLE CHANNEL 180. VISIT THE CITY OF ASHLAND'S WEB SITE AT WWW.ASHLAND.OR.US VIII. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Minutes of boards, commissions, and committees 2. Approval of a liquor license application for David Jesser dba The Culinarium at 270 E Main Street 3. Approval of a resolution titled, "A resolution revising the financial management policies and accounting methodologies and repealing Resolution No. 2016-024" 4. Change order exceeding 25% - North Mountain Culvert Repair project No. 85 IX. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Persons wishing to speak are to submit a "speaker request form" prior to the commencement of the public hearing. Public hearings shall conclude at 9:00 p.m. and be continued to a future date to be set by the Council, unless the Council, by a two-thirds vote of those present, extends the hearing(s) until up to 10:30 p.m. at which time the Council shall set a date for continuance and shall proceed with the balance of the agenda.) None X. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Continuation of Grandview Drive discussion XI. NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS None XII. ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS 1. Approval of first and second reading by title only of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance requiring the City of Ashland to produce 10 percent of the electricity used in the city from new, local, and clean resource by the year 2020 and declared to take effect on its passage" XIII. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS/REPORTS FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS 1. Look Ahead review XIV. ADJOURNMENT OF BUSINESS MEETING Immediately following the Regular Meeting. AGENDA FOR EXECUTIVE SESSION 1. Discussion of real property transaction, pursuant to ORS 190.660(2)(e) 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 7.2 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 vIEETINGS ARE BROADCAST LIVE ON CHANNEL 9. OR ON CHARTER CABLE CHANNEL I SO. VISIT THE CITY OF ASHLAND'S W'EB SITE AT WWW.ASHLAND.OR.US City Council Study Session August 15, 2016 Page 1 of 3 MINUTES FOR THE STUDY SESSION ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL Monday, August 15, 2016 Siskiyou Room, 51 Winburn Way Mayor Strornberg called the meeting to order at 5:32 p.m. in the Siskiyou Room. Councilor Morris, Rosenthal, Seffinger, Marsh, and Voisin were present. Councilor Lemhouse was absent. 1. Public Input Louise Shawkat/870 Cambridge Street/Commented and made points on the Council Communication and attachment to agenda item #3. Discussion on the future of the Electric Utility. She explained natural gas was not a clean energy due to the fugitive emissions of methane and the topic should be included in the Ashland utility discussion. Jeff Sharpe/553 Fordyce Street/Explained 95% of the energy produced was not renewable. Every electron Ashland produced renewably displaced one coming from coal or other generation plants and further reduced the need for coal-fired electricity. He would forward Council information showing every power plant in the northwest power region, what each produced, and an overlay. Joseph Kauth/482 Walker Street/Microwaves were still an unproven science and an unknown on how it affected someone's ability to function. Photons combined with microwaves could affect a person's functionality as well. He thought the effects of the Ashland Forest Resiliency (AFR) project were unknown and had caused climate change on Mt. Ashland. Huelz Gutcheon/2253 Hwy 99/Energy efficiency involved people using less. People would reduce only 10% before it affected their quality of life and they stopped. He suggested a carbon tax priced to change behavior and referred to other countries that had the tax as an example. James Stephens/640 Oak Street/The northwest was composed of a large grid interconnected in seven states. Statistically, Ashland purchased energy through Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) and generated 3% through the City. He wanted the City to generate more local energy using solar. Ashland needed a local resource for emergency backup power. 2. Look Ahead review City Administrator Dave Kanner reviewed items on the Look Ahead. 3. Discussion of the future of the Electric Utility IT/Electric Utility Director Mark Holden explained they were projecting what would occur to the electric utility over the next 20-30 years. Every utility in the country was looking at how to integrate renewable resources and maintain low cost reliable energy sources. The City's utility was a power delivery system from the substation to the distribution lines to the customer. The main power supplier was Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) and they dealt with generation, transmission, and integrated power sources from all over the region. BPA operated most of the resources they distributed. The Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) and the Army Corp of Engineers owned those resources. In 2015, the BPA mix included 83.6% hydro, 9.9% nuclear, and 6.5% mixed resources that consisted of 4.8% non-specified purchases, 0.9% small hydro, 0.6% wind, 0.1% Biomass, and 0.1% Natural Gas. City Council Study Session August 15, 2016 Page 2 of 3 The drive behind renewable energy started in 1978 when the federal government established the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act (PURPA). The Obama administration's Clean Power Plan to enforce all states to pursue renewable energy was currently in litigation. Oregon passed Senate Bill (SB) 1547 spring 2016. SB 5147 was similar to California's model and required all coal production in Oregon to cease by 2022. Oregon also had the Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS). Other trends supporting the move were conservation efforts. Energy efficiency was one of the premier resources along with demand response initiatives that lowered capacity requirements. BPA measured peak every minute in five-minute intervals. Ashland tended to peak between 5:00 p.m. and 8:00 p.1r►. Shifting time of use contributed to conservation. The City had a full requirements contract with BPA. This meant BPA fulfilled all demand and supply with the exception of the hydro plan. Rooftop solar reduced what the City received from BPA. As long as rooftop solar stayed under 200 kilowatts (KW) per installation, BPA did not mind. This was a take and pay contract with BPA that would renew in 2028. Ashland had not exceeded Tier 1 due to energy efficiency and local solar. He went on to describe changes to Tier 2 that would allow municipalities to generate their own power if they reached Tier 2 rates. Contract negotiations with BPA would start two years prior to the end of the contract. Renewable energy had created a new curve called the duck curve. The California Independent System Operator (CISO) brought together disparate generators and transmission companies to produce a unified energy market. Currently, BPA did not belong but Pacific Power was integrating with CISO. The downside to CISO was learning to negotiate a California priority for a regional independent system operator to integrate resources from around the region. The advantage is that it was easier to integrate renewables. The issue with renewables was that it was intermittent. The duck curve showed the effect of renewable energy, particularly solar, on the production of energy sources and the ability to meet demand. Storage was the solution to intermittency and currently pumped hydro was the biggest storable energy. The industry was working on battery storage but that would not be commercially viable until 2022 to 2024. The future of the electric utility was integrated energy. Staff was monitoring community solar and timing. The Northwest Power and Conservation Council developed a plan that ensured the reliability, availability, and affordability along with the conservation and green power aspects of the Northwest system. Advanced metering infrastructure (AMI) allowed the utility and the individual to have a granular look at their energy use so they can adjust their own behavior by tracking usage demand and hourly consumption. AMI could reduce power usage 15%-25%. Mr. Holden thought storage would be developed and available 12 years or sooner. Technology changed quickly and the industry was developing grid level storage. A projected decrease in the price of solar would occur 2022-2024 and would most likely not decrease afterwards. Technology needed to match reliability. The City should advocate conservation for the next 5-10 year interim until solar and storage technology had advanced. 4. Update from AFN Governance Structure ad hoc Committee Councilor Marsh explained the Committee formed in May 2015 and identified strengths and weaknesses the committee's charge, and AFN organizational models. The Committee determined through the list of models that many would not work for AFN. The utility model was susceptible to legal challenge. State law preempted models requiring significant subcontracting. The Committee contracted with an outside attorney to see the feasibility of moving to a single internet service provider (ISP) or having no ISP but there were legal and financial obstacles that made it impossible. City Council Study Session August 15, 2016 Page 3 of 3 The Committee was looking into three issues. One was creating an AFN Commission to guide AFN operations. The second was conflict regarding AFN serving as a wholesaler and retailer. Third was the challenge of marketing internet services to the community with an organizational structure that lacked cohesion and clarity. AFN engaged Susan Unger who was working on a marketing plan. Councilor Rosenthal added having more time provided an opportunity to determine the effectiveness of an earlier strategy regarding wholesale and retail, assessing the upgrade, and reviewing the marketing plan. City Administrator Dave Kanner explained the City paid $1,150,000 in debt service a year with $408,000 coming from AFN. The City refinanced the debt in the past. There were eight more years of debt service until the debt was paid. Commercial customers were more profitable than residential. However, there were more residential customers in Ashland than business customers. AFN needed a unified marketing scheme to be competitive. Currently Charter had 60% and AFN had 40% of approximately 9,000 services. Marketing funds had increased from $26,000 to $45,000 per year. To date, there had not been a joint effort between the ISPs and the City to market the product. AFN will measure success on the number of customers. City Attorney Dave Lohman noted Council was analyzing this as business proposition. The City initially got involved to attract and provide support for businesses in Ashland. Council may need to take that into account as well as the business dynamics when considering the future. Councilor Rosenthal had read minutes from the 1990s that stated one rationale for AFN was smart metering. AFN was still a major opportunity for the community. The debt was a present problem but it was still a great asset to address other issues. Councilor Marsh added one of the Committee's goals was keeping AFN functioning through the years to pay off the debt but also become a viable system that moved into the future once the debt was retired. 5. Review space in front of City Recorder's Office Council further discussed a decision made at the August 1, 2016 Study Session meeting that would allow Martolli's Hand-tossed Pizza to set up chairs and tables outside the City Recorder's office. The City would install a railing to differentiate the borders of the sidewalk dining with a small rail behind the planters to deter people from storing their belongings or sleeping. City Recorder Barbara Christensen had expressed concern it would be distracting. Council decided to move forward with the project for a one-year trial. Other Council comment did not think a railing behind the planters would be an effective deterrent. Meeting adjourned at 7:48 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Dana Smith Assistant to the City Recorder City Council Business Meeting August 16, 2016 Page 1 of 7 MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL August 16, 2016 Council Chambers 1175 E. Main Street CALL TO ORDER Mayor Stromberg called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers. ROLL CALL Councilor Voisin, Morris, Lemhouse, Seffinger, and Marsh were present. Councilor Rosenthal arrived at 7:07 p.m. MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS Councilor Marsh announced the City Volunteer event Sunday, August 28, 2016. Mayor Stromberg moved agenda item #7. A Resolution of the City of Ashland, Oregon, declaring support for the provisions of the convention of the elimination of all forms of discrimination against women (CEDAW), under Ordinances, Resolutions, and Contracts to item #1 under New and Miscellaneous Business. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the Study Session of August 1, 2016 and Business Meeting of August 2, 2016 were approved as presented. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS 1. Annual presentation from the Conservation Commission Conservation Commission Chair Bryan Sohl noted the Commission's accomplishments that included a pilot project for collecting redeemables, and recyclables in the downtown area. The Commission also updated and expanded the scope of commission-sponsored classes to the public, published monthly articles in the Sneak Peak Preview, and was working with staff on the Climate and Energy Action Plan. He thanked City staff Adam Hanks and Diana Shiplet for their efforts, Council Rosenthal as the Commission's council liaison, and the citizenry for their participation and input. Councilor Rosenthal arrived at 7:07 p.m. PUBLIC FORUM Huelz Gutcheon/2253 Hwy 99/Criticized City staff on the content of a topic discussed at the Study Session the night before regarding the future of the electric utility. Nancy Parker/456 Euclid/Read from a document submitted into the record responding to an article published in the Ashland Tidings in the Council Corner and shared her concern regarding citizen input on the Normal Neighborhood Project. Kristina Lefever/2359 Blue Sky Lane/Provided an update on the Bee City USA Subcommittee and its programs. Councilor Marsh noted Ms. Lefever's efforts developing a pollinator garden at the Food Bank and invited the public to stop by to learn more about bee friendly plants. Ann Barton/361 Patterson Street/Represented the Unity of Ashland Climate Action, Rogue Climate, and the Climate Action Team group and supported an ordinance adopting the Climate Energy and Action Plan prior to City Council Business Meeting August 16, 2016 Page 2 of 7 the plan's completion. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Minutes of boards, commissions, and committees 2. Annual renewal of liquor licenses 3. Special Procurement for the purchase of Polymer for the WWTP 4. Siskiyou Boulevard and Tolman Creek Road four-way stop controlled improvements 5. Intergovernmental Agreement with Jackson County to perform crack seal at Ashland Municipal Airport Councilor RosenthaUSeffinger m/s to approve Consent Agenda items. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Public Hearing and Resolution Adopting a Supplemental Budget Establishing Appropriations within the Biennium 2015-17 Budget Administrative Services and Finance Director Lee Tuneberg explained there were two adjustments to the Biennium 2015-17 Budget. One was a set of changes that increased the budget due to grants for the Ashland Forest Resiliency (AFR) program totaling $229,580. The other one separated two system development charges (SDC) erroneously combined at $3,600,000 moving from one category to create new one. This correction would not increase the overall appropriations. Forestry Division Chief Chris Chambers provided further information on the grants proposed in the supplemental budget. Public Hearing Open: 7:34 p.m. Public Hearing Closed: 7:34 p.m. Councilor RosenthaUSeffinger m/s to approve Resolution #2016-22. DISCUSSION: Councilor Rosenthal thanked staff for their efforts. Councilor Seffinger thanked Mayor Stromberg for his role acquiring funds for the AFR project. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Voisin, Morris, Lemhouse, Seffinger, Rosenthal, and Marsh, YES. Motion passed. UNFINISHED BUSINESS (None) NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS 1. A Resolution of the City of Ashland, Oregon, declaring support for the provisions of the convention of the elimination of all forms of discrimination against women (CEDAW). Regina Ayars represented the Ashland Branch of the American Association of University Women (AAUW) who wanted Council to pass a resolution in support of the convention of the elimination of all forms of discrimination against women (CEDAW). She introduced Sara Brown, the former president of Soroptimist International and member of AAUW, and Patricia Garner, the chair of the state/national AAUW public policy committee. Discrimination based on gender was an unconscious, bias that both women and men brought to daily conversations and decisions. Women still did not have equal protection under the law. CEDAW came from the Women's International Treaty adopted by the United Nations in 1979 and ratified by 187 countries. The United States was one of the few countries who had not ratified the treaty. The CEDAW coalition of Oregon consisted of seventeen organizations and the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom. It was a grass roots effort actively engaged with local municipalities to adopt resolutions across the state. After a majority of the states passed CEDAW legislation, the hope was Congress would finally ratify CEDAW. Ms. Brown and Ms. Garner added their support for CEDAW and thanked the Council for considering the resolution. City Council Business Meeting August 16, 2016 Page 3 of 7 Councilor Marsh/Seffinger m/s to approve Resolution #2016-21. DISCUSSION: Councilor Marsh commented this was an obvious step and if Council could provide support and energy for the resolution as it went to the legislature it should. Councilor Seffinger added women were not paid as much as men. Women needed more representation in government and she hoped more women applied to City commissions as a start to a political career. Councilor Lemhouse noted his grandmother was a captain in the army during World War II and his mother who attended college late in life was the smartest and most accomplished person he knew. Both went through a lot to achieve what they did and he hoped his daughter never experienced that struggle herself. Councilor Voisin was proud of the women in the community for bringing forward CEDAW. It was an important piece of legislation. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Voisin, Seffinger, Marsh, Morris, Lemhouse, and Rosenthal, YES. Motion passed. 2. Certification of City Measure by City Governing Body City Recorder Barbara Christensen provided the background on the citizen initiative that would have the City produce 10% of electricity using new, clean, and local sources by 2020. Council had three options. One, they could adopt the initiative and bypass the election process. In the second option, Council could reject the initiative by taking no action and it would go before city voters in the November 2016 election. For the third option, Council could reject the initiative and refer a competing measure. Once Council chose an option, they had thirty days to complete the action due to the deadlines for putting a measure on the ballot. City Attorney Dave Lohman clarified there was not enough time to put a competing measure on the ballot. Adopting the initiative may require a special meeting for first reading with second reading at the September 6, 2016 Council meeting. This would also require an emergency clause in order for the ordinance to take effect within the 30-day timeframe. An emergency clause required a vote of at least five members. Another alternative would have first and second reading occur at the September 6, 2016 meeting without a special meeting. That would require a unanimous vote or the initiative would automatically go on the ballot. Dave Helmich/468 Williamson Way/Explained he was one of the chief petitioners and urged Council to adopt the initiative without an election. Circulators gathered over 1,700 signatures over two months. He surveyed people's attitudes about the City's level of proactive steps with regard to the great transition. The most frequent comments received questioned why only 10% and displeasure at the perceived lack of true action on the City's part. He went on to explain why they decided on 10%. Barbara Comnes/444 Park Ridge Place/Explained why she wanted Council to adopt the initiative. Andrew Kubik/1251 Munson Drive/Quoted Margaret Thatcher in a 1989 speech on climate issues. He was confident in the Electric Department's ability of working with the provisions in the ballot measure. Brian Comnes/444 Park Ridge Place/Explained he was a net zero customer and supported Council adopting the initiative. He commented on the Study Session the night before regarding the future of the electric utility and the lack of a sense of urgency he perceived. Tom Marvin/245 Timberlake Drive/Shared his background, credentials, and that he had used solar power since 1980. He commented on the Study Session discussion on the future of the electric utility from the night before. Councilor Rosenthal/Voisin m/s to adopt the initiative titled "An ordinance requiring the City of Ashland to produce 10% of the electricity used in the City from new, local, and clean resources by the year 2020," and direct staff to bring the ordinance to a special meeting for first reading by emergency." DISCUSSION: Councilor Rosenthal was impressed with the efforts of the petitioners. He did not share Mr. Helmich's cynicism regarding the Climate and Energy Action Plan and doubted the committee members would appreciate their hard work as "kicking the can down the road." There was a January 2017 due date for a perspective plan. The initiative was best incorporated into a proposal to the Council within the Climate and City Council Business Meeting August 16, 2016 Page 4 of 7 Energy Action Plan process. City staff has not had the chance to prepare a fiscal impact statement. He agreed the sooner staff could start working on the issue the better considering the deadline. Councilor Voisin was impressed the circulators were able to attain over 1,700 signatures within two months. Councilor Lemhouse agreed the initiative would pass in November. Adopting it now provided staff time to analyze how it would fit into the plan going forward. He appreciated the citizen effort. Councilor Marsh commented on all the lost years due to the country taking a different turn after a promising start in the 1970s. She would support the motion. Councilor Morris supported the motion but kept going back to the Imperatrice property numbers of $30,000,000 for 5%. If the City did 10%, it would most likely cost $50,000,000. The citizenry needed to understand what this would cost. It was good to take it back to the Climate Energy and Action Plan ad Hoc Committee to get logistics. Councilor Seffinger looked at it from the standpoint of the future generation. There was an obligation to the planet and to the youth. She would support the motion. Councilor Marsh/Voisin m/s to amend the motion to bring the ordinance for first and second reading on an emergency basis with emergency adoption clause to the September 6, 2016 Council Meeting. DISCUSSION: Councilor Lemhouse raised a point of clarification and asked if a unanimous vote meant unanimous of the members present that day. City Attorney Dave Lohman confirmed that was correct. Councilor Seffinger would not be present at the September 6, 2016 meeting but was comfortable knowing a unanimous vote would occur. Ms. Christensen explained due to election law, Council could not amend the ordinance at the September 6, 2016. Roll Call Vote on amendment: Councilor Voisin, Rosenthal, Lemhouse, Morris, Marsh, and Seffinger, YES. Motion approved. Roll Call Vote on amended main motion: Councilor Voisin, Rosenthal, Lemhouse, Morris, Marsh, and Seffinger, YES. Motion approved. 3. Approval of the 2016 Water Supply Strategy Public Works Director Mike Faught explained staff was asking Council to reconsider their June 26, 2015 direction to use Talent Irrigation District (TID) water before using Talent Ashland Phoenix (TAP) water. After three years of severe drought staff was able to "fine tune" the drought response. During last year, there was an increase in taste and odor issues using TID. The bigger issue was the small City crew frequently adjusting plant operations to meet temperature fluctuations and the overtime incurred. TAP was already treated and it was a matter of turning on the pumps. It would cost the City an additional $16,800 for fees. Staff thought the benefit outweighed the cost. Due to lead pigtail issues in the City of Medford's water, staff would not do the annual month long TAP run this year. Otherwise, Mr. Faught strongly recommended running TAP annually in preparation for an emergency. Staff would revise the current water agreement with the Medford Water Commission changing the word "emergency use" to "any use the Council determined." They could take the agreement to the Ashland Water Advisory ad hoc Committee (AWAC) as well if Council directed. Councilor Voisin raised a point of clarification to confirm the motion was a long-term change to the policy. Councilor Voisin motioned to approve the use of TAP water as the first option to supplement Ashland's water supply, if needed in 2016 and send the policy to AWAC for feedback. Motion died for lack of second. Councilor Morris/Lemhouse m/s to approve the use of TAP water as the first option to supplement Ashland's water supply as needed. DISCUSSION: Councilor Morris thought it was a good move and could be altered if necessary. Councilor Lemhouse thought it was the right move for now and could be adjusted. Councilor Marsh would oppose the motion. Given the current turmoil in Medford and the potential for rate increases, she thought Council should review the change in spring. Councilor Voisin agreed with Councilor Marsh, wanted input from AWAC, and would not support the motion. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Lemhouse, Morris, and Rosenthal, YES; Councilor Marsh, Seffinger, and Voisin, NO. Mayor Stromberg broke the tie with a NO vote. Motion failed 3-4. City Council Business Meeting August 16, 2016 Page 5 of 7 City Administrator Dave Kanner explained staff would the matter back in the spring. Currently, the reservoir was 93 % full. Ashland citizens had done a remarkable job changing their water use, habits over the last three summers to reduce water use. It was highly unlikely the City would have to go to a supplemental water supply this year. ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS 1. Second reading by title only of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance amending the citizen participation and involvement chapter of the Ashland Comprehensive Plan to establish the Ashland Planning Commission as the committee for citizen involvement" City Attorney Dave Lohman explained there were no changes from the first reading that passed at the last meeting. It did include the provision that Council could establish additional advisory committees. Councilor Lemhouse/Morris m/s to approve Ordinance #3132. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Morris, Marsh, Voisin, Lemhouse, Rosenthal, and Seffinger, YES. Motion approved. 2. Second reading by title only of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance amending AMC Chapter 4.34, Food and Beverage Tax, and referring the ordinance to the voters of Ashland in the November 8, 2016 General Election" City Administrator Dave Kanner explained the ordinance would redirect a portion of the food and beverage (F&B) Tax revenue to a pavement management program. There were no changes from first reading. Mr. Kanner requested an amendment to Section 4.34.020(C)(3)(a) changing the amount of F&B tax revenue going into the wastewater fund in fiscal year 2017 from $2,037,150 to $1,868,290 and explained why. Brian Comnes/Supported anything that would repair Ashland streets. He looked forward to having Hersey Street reconstructed. Councilor Marsh/Seffinger m/s to approve Ordinance #3133 with an amendment to Section 4.34.020(C)(3)(a) deleting $2,037,150 and replacing it with $1,868,290. DISCUSSION: Councilor Marsh commented the good news was F&B proceeds increasing to the extent that it allowed the City to invest more money into the street program and quickly. Councilor Seffinger added Council had heard enough from the citizens to understand this was an important issue. Mr. Kanner read the amendment in its entirety. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Lemhouse, Morris, Rosenthal, Seffinger, Marsh, and Voisin, YES. Motion approved. 3. Approval of a resolution titled, "Resolution to the City of Ashland to submit to the voters at the November 8, 2016, General Election an ordinance amending AMC 4.34, Food and Beverage Tax" Councilor Lemhouse/Rosenthal m/s to approve Resolution #2016-23. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Marsh, Rosenthal, Voisin, Lemhouse, Morris, and Seffinger, YES. Motion approved. 4. Approval of a resolution titled, "A resolution accepting changes to the financial management policies and accounting methodologies and repealing Resolution No. 2014-01" Administrative Services and Finance Director Lee Tuneberg addressed agenda items #4, 5, and 6. All three items related. The proposed changes were not substantial and mostly "housekeeping" updates. In the financial policies, the insurance service fund introduced language that explained how staff calculated the Ending Fund Balance (EFB) for the insurance fund based on a study conducted in 1993. The resolution relating to proposed EFB showed a goal of attaining $1,000,000 in the insurance fund. This goal would take several biennia to achieve. He made a change to the Financial Management Policies document to the Component Unit, striking "Discrete." He replaced Parks (Blended Component Unit) with "Ashland Parks & Recreation Commission." At June 30, 2016, the City was at $1,170,000 in the EFB. Councilor Marsh suggested growing a minimum balance in the health benefits fund. Mr. Tuneberg cautioned in the insurance fund or any of the internal service City Council Business Meeting August 16, 2016 Page 6 of 7 funds that the growth of the Ending Fund Balance had many variables. City Administrator Dave Kanner supported growing the EFB in the health benefits fund. Councilor Marsh/Seffinger m/s to approve Resolution #2016-24 with amendment under the Insurance Services Fund: increased annually by CPI and under Component Unit: change "Parks" (Blended Component Unit) to "Ashland Parks & Recreation Commission." DISCUSSION: Councilor Marsh thought they were good guidelines and it was important to review them. Councilor Seffinger added the proposed policy made it clearer. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Rosenthal, Lemhouse, Seffinger, Morris, Voisin, and Marsh, YES. Motion approved. 5. Approval of a resolution titled, "A resolution updating the City of Ashland's implementation of Governmental Accounting Standards Board Statement 54 = Fund Balance Reporting and Governmental Fund Type Definitions and repealing Resolution No. 2011-17" Administrative Services and Finance Director Lee Tuneberg explained the auditors suggested some changes to the airport fund. Staff identified more items to be committed to the General Fund. The Airport was moved from committed to restricted. Councilor Rosenthal/Voisin m/s to approve Resolution 42016-25. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Seffinger, Marsh, Voisin, Rosenthal, Morris, and Lemhouse, YES. Motion passed. 6. Approval of a resolution titled, "A resolution establishing Target Ending Fund Balances and Repealing Resolution No. 2010-05" Administrative Services and Finance Director Lee Tuneberg explained the targets were minimums. Both Moody's and Standard and Poor's stated the City had a strong financial management program. They also identified that the Ending Fund Balances were slightly low. There was not a policy on amounts in the Parks and Recreation Commission under the Component Unit because funds were restricted or reimbursed by the General Fund. The City needed to maintain 12% in the General Fund to ensure adequate funds. If Council wanted to incorporate the CPI into the health benefits, staff could add an asterisk next to the word "new" and under default add, "Adjusted annually for CPIU." Councilor Lemhouse/Voisin m/s to approve Resolution #2016-26 as amended by staff. DISCUSSION: Councilor Voisin/Rosenthal m/s to amend the motion under the insurance fund, "to increase the 1993 minimum amount of $668,000 to $1,000,000 to be accomplished within the next two biennium's." DISCUSSION: Councilor Voisin thought the City should consider a minimum higher than $668,000 in the insurance fund. Councilor Marsh raised a point of clarification and noted the proposed Ending Fund Balances specified $1,000,000 for insurance services. Council Voisin wanted a minimum of $1,000,000 achieved within the next two biennium's. City Administrator Dave Kanner clarified the change Councilor Voisin was proposing was actually in the Financial Management Policies Council just adopted and not in the Ending Fund Balance policy. Mr. Tuneberg thought they could remove the 1993 reference in the policies just adopted, put in $1,000,000, and not do the calculation based on that study. Councilor Voisin agreed and wanted the reference removed. City Recorder Barbara Christensen explained the amendment for a different resolution already passed and did not pertain to the current resolution under discussion. Councilor Voisin could made an amendment to that resolution once this resolution passed or failed. Her amendment to that resolution would have come back to a future Council meeting. Councilor Voisin withdrew her motion. Roll Call Vote on Main Motion: Councilor Voisin, Morris, Lemhouse, Seffinger, Rosenthal, and Marsh, YES. Motion approved. City Council Business Meeting August 16, 2016 Page 7 of 7 City Attorney Dave Lohman clarified that no further action could occur on the resolution regarding the Financial Management Policies at this meeting. The item would have to come back to a future meeting. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS/REPORTS FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS Councilor Marsh invited everyone to attend the annual Pie Social at Ashland Emergency Food Bank Sunday, August 21, 2016 at 3:00 p.m. On Wednesday, August 24, 2016 from 4:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. also at the Ashland Emergency Food Bank, the Ashland Community Resource Center, the Maslow Project, and Rogue Community Health would host the third annual Family Fest. The Volunteer Celebration would occur August 28, 2016. Councilor Voisin announced August 20, 2016, a Housing and Homeless Forum Action Groups and Fundraiser would occur from 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. at the Southern Oregon University Meese Auditorium. Councilor Lemhouse encouraged the public to attend Public Arts Commissioner Richard Newman's exhibit Thursday, August 18, 2016, 5:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. at Southern Oregon University Thorndike Gallery. Councilor Seffinger announced the Oregon Honey and Mead Festival Saturday August 20, 2016 from 10:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. at the Elks Lodge. Councilor Rosenthal announced the Climate and Energy Action Plan ad hoc Committee would meet August 17, 2016 at 5:30 p.m. in the Siskiyou Room. The next public open house was scheduled Sunday, September 25, 2016 in the Rogue River Room at Southern Oregon University. ADJOURNMENT OF BUSINESS MEETING Meeting adjourned at 9:29 p.m. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder John Stromberg, Mayor Minutes for the Climate and Energy Action Plan ad hoc Committee July 6, 2016 Page 1 of 5 MINUTES FOR THE CLIMATE & ENERGY ACTION PLAN ad hoc COMMITTEE Wednesday, July 6, 2016 Siskiyou Room, 51 Winburn Way 1. Call to Order Councilor Rich Rosenthal called the meeting to order at 3:30 p.m. Committee members Cindy Bernard, Bryan Sohl, Jim Hartman, James McGinnis, Roxane Beigel-Coryell, Sarah Lasoff, Cluadia Alick, and Stuart Green were present. Staff member Adam Hanks was present. Consultants Andrea Martin and Kendra White were present via speakerphone. 2. Around the Room Group did an around the room team building regarding something joyful they did on the 0' of July holiday. 3. Public Input Huelz Gutchen: Stated that there are many kinds of renewable energy - solar is the most effective here. Solar created near or very near residences, businesses, and overall community is the most effective, particularly solar created on-site, because it eliminates the need for wires. Another model for solar production is corporate-owned. This is a relatively- new model where the utility aquires, finances, and maintains the solar panels installed on residences or businesses. If utility and planning departments work together, with good outreach, this is the most promising market for solar. If it's done wrong though it could be undersubscribed and have too high of a cost. We need to have people pre-educated on this possibility. Ray Molett: Stated he was happy to see at the last meeting that the group approved consumption- based reductions. He is working with SOCAN to find a way to calculate those emmissions. There is a Berkeley calculator he hopes can be used by City residents. Hannah Sohl: Stated that she sent a draft ordinance to members of the group and staff and got great feedback. She would love to be able to share the updated version of the ordinance. She gave information about Eugene and the update they have recently approved to their ordinance in order to meet goals. She stated that she is concerned that the group is considering waiting until the plan is finished to propose the ordinance. There is currently lots of excitement and momentum regarding the ordinance and she is worried that we will lose the political will, especially with the holidays. The current Council seems to be good at pushing climate actions forward and she thinks the group should do the ordinance while they can. Ken Crocker: Stated the he recently traveled in Europe and to the city of Davis, California. He found it neat seeing how other communities have embraced pedestrians, alternative energy, etc. He recently read an article about the proposal to narrow East Main Street to two lanes and wondered how much of that decision was made in consideration of climate change. Is the group Minutes for the Climate and Energy Action Plan ad hoc Committee July 6, 2016 Page 2 of 5 setting this plan up so that all decisions are made with climate action as the most important factor? He hopes that the group has been talking about making a cultural shift and not just a metrics tracking plan. He wanted to know how the group, he, and others can help make that cultural change. 4. Review of Goals & Targets Group discussed the bullet points in the draft Council Communication included in the packet. • Be more than carbon neutral by 2050. • Goal/target should include community consumption (GHG from purchased goods and services). Several members of the group stated that after leaving last meeting they became concerned with the decisions made. Partly they felt, "more than carbon neutral," is too ill-defined (how much "more"?) and partly they worried these goals the plan too `kooky' for Council and the community to accept. However, group members were also concerned that the goal might get too watered-down while trying to please everyone. Group discussed the possibility of having the goal be slightly lower (carbon-nuetral, not more than carbon nuetral) but by an earlier deadline so that it's still a highly aggressive target. Some group members raised concerns that, with the possibility of having the goals and targets in ordinance form, they can't be entirely aspirational - they need to be based on what we can actually achieve. McGinnis/Hartman m/s that the plan have a goal of 100% carbon neutral by 2050. Discussion: McGinnis stated that after hearing the conversation it's clear we need to have a realistic goal. Hartman stated the hard part of this, or any, goal is the cost. Based on his estimates this could cost as much as I% of every Ashland resident's annual income. Alick raised concerns that with this goal we are doing what is easy for the community rather that what is necessary (you shoot for the moon, not for only going part-way). Sohl stated that Seattle's plan is carbon neutral by 2050. With our limited growth and small city size we should be able to do better. He would prefer an end date of 2045. Beigel-Coryell stated that in her experience working on SOU's action plan, carbon neutral is a very difficult goal and possibly not achievable, no matter the end year target. Green stated he agrees with Beigel- Coryell. Having a lower goal doesn't mean that we can't make achievements that go beyond the stated goal. There are other ways to be a leader than just having the most aggressive goal. Vote: 4 Ayes, 4 Nays, Motion Fails. Bern ard/Beigel-Coryell m/s that the plan have a goal of 85% reduction by 2050, with the understanding that five-years from plan adoption the goal will be reassessed. Discussion: Bernard stated we need to make sure the plan is realistic and understandable for the average layperson (this includes most of the Councilors). This seems to be a more affordable and attainable goal. She feels it is worse to set a higher goal and fail than to succeed fully on a more Minutes for the Climate and Energy Action Plan ad hoc Committee July 6, 2016 Page 3 of 5 realistic goal. Beigel-Coryell stated it will be easier to get the plan adopted if the goal is achievable. The goal can always be changed or moved higher with new technology, data or community will. Group discussed whether the goal needs to be achievable or should be our "shot at the moon." Alick raised concerns that the group is lowering the goal only because they are afraid of other people's reactions. She doesn't think that it's the role of the committee to be afraid. Hartman stated that he hopes the goal will inspire others, which seems to require a more aggressive goal than 85%. Beigel-Coryell stated that if the goal doesn't contain consumption she would be okay with a higher target but including consumption means we can never reach 100%, even 85% is probably beyond our ability. Rosenthal stated he can't support this target because it wouldn't be inspiring to the community or others. Vote: 3 Ayes, 5 Nays, Motion Fails. Group discussed inclusion of consumption in the target. No other community currently has consumption in their targets because plans need to be focused on things communities can influence or control. Most of consumption is outside of a local community's sphere of control. Hartman stated that consumption can be included and reduction achieved, but only through offsets. Some of the group had concerns about use of offsets. Group mostly agreed that consumption reduction is important but don't know if/how it's possible to control or set a reduction goal. Sohl/Bernard m/s that the plan have 100% reduction in sector-based emissions by 2047, with interval goals occurring every five years, starting in 2022. Discussion: Sohl stated that he is proposing this but is still interested in how we can engage the citizenry in consumption reduction. Vote: 8 ayes, 0 Nays, Motion Passes. Alick/Sohl m/s to have the plan include a goal of reducing consumption-based emissions by 50% by the same dates and interval review years as the sector-based targets. Discussion: Sohl stated he is concerned about how to get these reductions with out fully understanding how to track them or how much is within our control. McGinnis stated it's premature to determine reduction numbers without full understanding of the issue. It would be better to determine this goal later in the process after further study. Alick/Sohl both agreed to withdraw the motion, so long as the topic is addressed later in the process. Group agreed further discussion is necessary. Motion withdrawn. Hanks stated that Cascadia is working to get better consumption-related numbers and reminded the group that just because there is no specific goal doesn't mean there can't be consumption- related actions in the final plan. Minutes for the Climate and Energy Action Plan ad hoc Committee July 6, 2016 Page 4 of 5 • Retain the option to include the purchase of carbon offsets as a contributing solution. Group discussed the desire to focus on local offsets. Hanks stated that most local offsets can't really qualify because you can't count the reduction twice in a single community (no "double- dipping" on reduction calculations). Group generally agreed to, "retain the option to include carbon offsets, if we can't achieve goals/targets by any other means." • Include specific City operations goals/targets - both in overall GHG form and fossil-fuel specific. Group all agreed to this goal. • Base year for the plan is 2015. Group all agreed to this goal. • Intermediate targets in five-year increments, starting in 2020. Group agreed that, based on previous discussion related to the overall goal, this should start in 2022. Additionally, they mostly agreed that these intermediate targets don't have to necessarily line up perfectly with the budget cycles as the City should always be pre-planning for upcoming targets. • Plan should include action for goals/targets to be adopted by ordinance (no recommendation yet on whether the ordinance adoption should come before or after the plan approval). Group discussed the timeline for the ordinance. Some thought the timeline should be determined based on Council's reaction to the goals and targets (i.e. if they are fully supportive of the draft goals, the ordinance can come before, if they raise concerns it probably should come along-side or after the plan). Some felt that the group needs to be very clear with what is involved in an ordinance (what are the specific details? what are the penalties for failure to achieve the ordinance? how challenging is the ordinance to update? etc.) Hanks stated that, despite the repeated statement of it being, "legally-binding" there is no way to legal bind a community to an action plan. An ordinance does mean, however, that Council has to acknowledge the ordinance with regard to how decisions are made. McGinnis stated that the next open house is in September, it might be good to have this as part of the discussion related to that open house. Group agreed to continue discussing the ordinance possibility and potential timeline at future meetings. • Goals/targets ordinance should match the plan goals/targets is/tares (even with the fact that the goals will include consumption). Minutes for the Climate and Energy Action Plan ad hoc Committee July 6, 2016 Page 5 of 5 Based on the previous discussions the group agreed to continue to discuss the ordinance, and asked that the part of the statement in parenthesis should be deleted. 5. Review of Cascadia's Goals/Targets Document Group discussed with Cascadia (via speaker phone) that there was confusion with the labeling of figure 1 as presented. They requested that it be labeled better, or have further explaination. 6. Next Meeting The next meeting will be August 17, 2016, at 5:30 p.m. in the Siskiyou Room. Group requested that the following topics be on the agenda: • Discussion of the next open house • Discussion of ordinance possibility and timeline • Discussion of how to deal with consumption-based emissions • Discussion of how Council reacted to the goals and targets at their update 7. Adjournment Meeting adjourned at 5:33 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Diana Shiplet, Executive Assistant Minutes for the Conservation Commission July 27, 2016 Pagel of 3 MINUTES FOR THE ASHLAND CONSERVATION COMMISSION Wednesday, July 27, 2016 Siskiyou Room, 51 Winburn Way 1. Call to Order Chair Bryan Sohl called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. in the Siskiyou Room. Commissioners Mark Weir, Marni Koopman, Cara Cruickshank, Jamie Rosenthal, and James McGinnis were present. Councilor Rich Rosenthal was present. Staff member Adam Hanks was present. Commissioner Roxane Beigel-Coryell was absent. 2. Consent Agenda Weir/Cruickshank m/s to approve the minutes of May 25, 2016, as presented. Voice Vote: All Ayes. Motion Passes. 3. Announcements The next commission meeting will be August 24, 2016. J. Rosenthal informed the group that Recology is working with both the Talent Harvest Festival and the Bear Creek Salmon Festival, both of which will occur on October 1, 2016. 4. Public Forum Jeff Sharpe: Donated two copies of the book, "The Great Transition," to the commission. He handed out to the commissioners an information sheet regarding the 10% locally-produced electricity by 2020 ballot initiative. He read aloud some of the details of the initiative. He requested that the Commission encourage the Council to skip sending the initiative to the ballot and instead agree to adopt the ordinance. Group discussed the typical ballot initiative process and why they are hesitant to request Council not send the initiative to the ballot, particularly in light of the current Climate and Energy Action Plan (CEAP) process, which will likely have actions similar to the proposed initiative. 5. Reports/ Presentations/ Updates City Council Update - Councilor Rosenthal stated that at the August 16"' Council meeting there will be a discussion of the 2016 water supply strategy. This item has to do with the order in which staff selects TAP vs. TID water to supplement the City's water supply. He also informed the group that currently scheduled for the September 19th study session, is a discussion of the in- process Electric Cost of Service study. This study may be interesting in light of the CEAP process and how those two processes need to work together to determine rate structures. City Conservation Programs and Operations - Hanks gave an update regarding new BPA information on how to implement energy efficiency programs. About 70% of the funding we use for our efficiency programs comes from BPA, which we supplement with City funds (particularly to reach frequently under-served multi-family units). BPA's new programs include a reduction in residential programs but an increase in commercial programs. Additionally, there have been changes in the NW Energy Star programs implemented recently regarding new construction and the Conservation Division has updated its new construction program, called Minutes for the Conservation Commission July 27, 2016 Page 2 of 3 Smartbuild, to address these changes. Lastly, Avista is now a part of Energy Trust which may confuse Ashland residents, as City of Ashland electric customers aren't able to use Energy Trust programs (though City programs are equal or better) but now gas customers can for natural gas efficiency/conservation projects. Group asked questions regarding the recent alteration to the Verde Village development agreement and how that may have changed their energy efficiency requirements. Hanks gave an overview of the requirements in the agreement. Staff is pleased with the high level of efficiency requirements in the approved agreement. 7. Old Business Sneak Preview Column - The group discussed upcoming month topics: September - Living With Wildlife, written by Cruickshank October - Get to Know Your Commissioner, Hanks will send all commissioners a list of 5 questions to be answered and will use that for the article. November - Limiting Holiday waste, written by J. Rosenthal December - CEAP update. Climate & Energy Action Plan - Sohl stated that the presentation at the July 19th City Council meeting went well. He was glad that most of the committee were present for the presentation and got the impression that Council received the information well. He gave an overview of the seven recommendations for the plan that were presented. Group discussed how they came to using sector-based emissions reduction, rather than sector-based and consumption-based. Group discussed the continued desire of many to have an ordinance approved by Council prior to the completion of the action plan. Group also discussed the possible desire to have representatives from Eugene attend an upcoming CEAP meeting to discuss their ordinance. Councilor Rosenthal departed the meeting at 7:20 p.m. 7. New Business Discussion of Commission Charter - Cruickshank stated that she was curious if the group had recently reviewed the charter and if they still felt that it is both appropriate and reflective of what the commission is actively working on. She raised concerns that nowhere in the charter does it state anything about climate change. McGinnis agreed that the charter was old and it probably should state in some way climate change. He ultimately hopes that all commissions and committees have climate change reflected in their charters. Weir stated that there was a previous effort by the commission to update the chatter but the Council at that time was not receptive to the change. He feels that the current charter ultimately reflects everything the commission could want to do, as climate change is a part of all the topics named in the charter. Group determined that it should do a goal setting session soon to establish updated goals and projects. They recognize that lots of the actions coming from the CEAP process will likely require the Commission to have a new charter, goals and projects list once the action plan is approved. Group decided to hold off on any further discussion until early next year to tie in with the CEAP process. Minutes for the Conservation Commission July 27, 2016 Page 3 of 3 Coniniission Annual Report to Council - Hanks agreed to put together a list of all the Commission's accomplishments from the past year. Sohl and Cruickshank will determine which of those to highlight at the meeting and will present it together at the August 16th Council meeting. 8. Wrap Up Meeting adjourned at 7:48 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Diana Shiplet Executive Assistant ASHLAND HISTORIC COMMISSION Meeting Minutes July 6, 2016 Community Development/Engineering Services Building - 51 Winburn Way - Siskiyou Room CALL TO ORDER: Commission Chair, Shostrom called the meeting to order at 6:04 pm in the Siskiyou Room at the Community Development and Engineering Offices located at 51 Winburn Way, Ashland OR 97520. Commissioners Present: Council Liaison: Shostrom Carol Voisin Skibby Leonard Staff Present: Ladygo Mark Schexnayder; Staff Liaison Emery Regan Trapp; Secretary Swink Giordano Commissioners Absent: Whitford (E) APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Ladygo motioned to approve minutes from June 8, 2016. Leonard seconded. No one opposed. PUBLIC FORUM: Allan Sandler, of 1260 Prospect, Ashland, OR addressed the Commission. He spoke about the corbels for the balcony at 23 N. Main. Mr. Sandler would like the Commission to choose 2 corbels so that he can engineer the drawings and give them some choices. He discussed this idea with the Commission and they are to get back to Mr. Sandler on the choices they select. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORT: Voisin gave the Council Liaison report. Items discussed were: • At the June 21st meeting, "Threshold" was selected for the Gateway Island project. It should be ready in a year for dedication. • Verde Village was approved. • During the Council goal setting session the parking plan was discussed and deemed a very important issue. The road diet is on hold because of cost. • The wastewater treatment plan loan has been renegotiated and the City has 600,000 to put towards some projects. They are looking at putting some things on the ballot in May of 2017. • The possible amendment to Chapter 18 was discussed. PLANNING ACTION REVIEW: PLANNING ACTION: PA-2016-00587 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 872 Siskiyou Boulevard OWNER: John Shrode APPLICANT: Suncrest Homes, LLC DESCRIPTION: A request for a Variance to allow for the construction of a new driveway at 872 Siskiyou Boulevard. The Variance is required to construct a new driveway that is proposed to be less than 100 feet from an existing driveway on Siskiyou Boulevard. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Low Density Multiple Family Residential; ZONING: R-2; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 391 E 09DA; TAX LOT 6900. There was no ex parte contact or conflict of interest indicated by the Commission. Schexnayder gave the staff report for PA-2016-00587. Shostrom opened the public hearing to the applicants. Charlie Hamilton, Suncrest Homes, residing at 328 Talent Ave, Talent, OR and John Shrode, property owner, residing at 872 Siskiyou Blvd, addressed the Commission. Mr. Hamilton explained that they were here the month prior and had made the changes the Commission had requested. Shostrom closed the public hearing and opened to the Commission for comments. Shostrom motioned to approve PA-2016-00587 as presented. Skibby seconded. No one opposed. Giordano abstained. PLANNING ACTION: PA-2016-01027 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 276 B Street (Tax lot 5800 & 5900) OWNERIAPPLICANT: Kimberlynn Locklin DESCRIPTION: A request for Site Design Review approval for the construction of two detached Accessory Residential Unit's less than 500 square feet, one on each of the subject properties. The project will also involve the removal of trees and the construction of one single-family dwelling per tax lot as well. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Low Density Multiple Family Residential; ZONING: R-2; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 39 1 E 09BA; TAX LOT: 5800 & 5900. There was no ex parte contact or conflict of interest indicated by the Commission. Schexnayder gave the staff report for PA-2016-01027. Shostrom opened the public hearing to the applicant. Kim Locklin and Vadim Agakhanov, property owners, residing at, 521 Schofield Street in Ashland, OR, addressed the Commission. Ms. Locklin gave a history on the project and stated that she is looking to the Commission for some feedback. They would like to live on site in the 3rd home with their family. Mr. Agakhanov spoke about the design and stated that he wanted each one to look different. He pointed out that the garages will not be visible from the street and there will be plenty of room for tenants to park and turn around. He wanted to replicate the neighborhood feel from the past. They will be removing 2 evergreen trees and a plum tree (that is lifting the sidewalk) and re-planting 12 trees once work is complete. The driveways will be done with permeable pavers and he would like to re-pave the alley since it is in such poor shape. He spoke about the floor plans, square footage and the differences between all the buildings. Shostrom closed the public hearing and opened to the Commission for comments. Shostrom motioned to approve PA-2016-01027 with the below recommendations. Skibby seconded. No one opposed. • Include the following revisions in the building permit submittals: • Vinyl windows with no simulated divided grids. • When windows are molded together there should be 3 inches of frame (each double hung frame). • Belly bands on garage on lot #3 to break up massing. • Garage doors will be steel that have vertical orientation (craftsman like) of the frame and panels in contrast to what is drawn on the original plan. • Consistency of windows - Should be proportioned 2 to 1 and proportioned in width. Lot #3 bay window (north elevation) should match the lower story window in width. • Lot #2 (north elevation) upstairs should match the lower story window in width. Suggestions for lot 1: • Windows will have trim that have aprons, sills, and head trim that have added details. • Belly bands on garage to break up massing. • 2 foot 10 wide windows. Minimized egress size. • Bucking the windows is suggested on all lots. NEW ITEMS: • Review board schedule • Project assignments for planning actions OLD BUSINESS: • Pioneer Mike Celebration Schexnayder welcomed Leonard to the Commission and thanked her for her contribution to the Pioneer Mike Ceremony. DISCUSSION ITEMS: The reorganization of City Hall was discussed. Shostrom stated that the Commission needs to be advocates to the approach. Shostrom went on to say that the Commission should draft a letter to the City council and ORW in regards to the options. Shostrom stated that he will draft a letter to the City Council but send to all Commissioners to be approved beforehand. Skibby motioned to approve Shostrom writing a letter in regards to the City re-organization plan (seismic retrofitting of City Hall) that will go to the City Council. Giordano seconded. No one opposed COMMISSION ITEMS NOT ON AGENDA: 135 Nutley was discussed in depth. Review Board Schedule Jul 14th Terry, Andrew, Tom Jul 21St Terry, Sam, Taylor July 28th Terry, Ta lor, Dale August 4th Terry, Keith, Bill Project Assignments for Planning Actions PA-2014-01956 Lithia & First All PA-2014-00710/711 143/135 Nutley Swink & Whitford PA-2014-01283 172 Skidmore _ Shostrom PA-2014-02206 485 A Street Ladygo_ _ PA-2015-00178 156 Van Ness Ave Shostrom PA -2015-00374 160 Lithia Way _ Emery PA-2015-00878 35 S. Pioneer _ Ladygo _ PA-2015-01496 35 S. Second-Winchester Inn Shostrom PA-2015-01695 _ 399 Beach _ Skibby PA-2015-01769 860 C Ladygo PA-2015-01517 209 Oak Shostrom PA-2015-02203 868 A Street Whitford PA-2016-00073 151 Pioneer Swink PA-2016-00275 574 Allison Emery PA-2016-00387 95 N. Main Shostrom PA-2016-00763 5 N. Main Swink PA-2016-00209 25 N. Main Ladygo PA-2016-00818 175 Pioneer _ _ Shostrom & Skibby PA-2016-00847 252 B Street Whitford PA-2016-00587 872 Siskiyou Blvd _ Skibby PA-2016-01027 276 B Street Shostrom & Leonard ANNOUNCEMENTS & INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: Next meeting is scheduled August 3, 2016 at 6:00 pm. There being no other items to discuss, the meeting adjourned at 8:30pm Respectfully submitted by Regan Trapp CITY OF ASHLAND Ashland Housing and Human Services Commission Minutes June 23, 2016 CALL TO ORDER Vice Chair Rhode called the meeting to order at 4:32 pm in the Siskiyou Room at the Community Development and Engineering Offices located at 51 Winburn Way, Ashland OR 97520. Commissioners Present: Council Liaison Tom Gunderson Pam Marsh Rich Rhode Heidi Parker SOU Liaison Gina DuQuenne Megan Mercier Sharon Harris Commissioners Absent: Staff Present: Tom Buechele Linda Reid, Housing Specialist Josh Boetti er Carolyn Schwendener, Staff secretary Sue Crader APPROVAL OF MINUTES Parker/Gunderson m/s to approve the minutes of the May 26, 2016 Housing and Human Services Commission. Voice Vote: All ayes, minutes were approved as presented. PUBLIC FORUM No one spoke. LAUNDRY LOVE PRESENTATION Christina Kukuk, Senior Minister of the United Church of Christ located on the corner of Siskiyou and Morton Street introduced the volunteers and thanked the Commissioners for inviting them to come and speak. The Laundry Love program is a program that provides quarters and laundry detergent to everyone who comes to the Laundromat between 5:00 pm and 8:00 pm. The Laundromat being used is Henry's located at the Ashland Shopping Center. During this time the volunteers get to know the people, share conversation, good food and sometimes music. This service makes a world of difference in the lives of those that are in need. Wendy, one of the volunteers reported that the church has spent approximately $2,000 in quarters. They estimate it costs about $15 to $20 a family to do their laundry. Mike, another volunteer said looking forward they are interested in inviting other faith groups to help so they could offer the laundry service once a week rather than once a month. They are also looking at fundraising and perhaps doing some grant writing. Reid shared with the group the grant opportunities that the City offers. This program would likely qualify for a social service grant, the next cycle starts in January of 2017. Another grant funding source would be Community Development Block Grant Funds which does offer a small amount for social services. ROGUE VALLEY TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT (RVTD) PRESENTATION Paige Townsend, Senior Planner and Support Services Manager for Rogue Valley Transit gave a presentation. With the passing of the five year temporary levy in May RVTD will be able to provide some additional services. The service expansion includes increased frequencies in Route 10, which serves Medford, Phoenix, Talent and Ashland. It's currently at 30 minute frequency but will bump it back up to 20 minute frequency. RVTD will also be adding Saturday service starting on July 91h as well as adding a route in the Southwest Medford area and a route to the Table Rock Campus in White City. RVTD buses tally a weekly ridership of more than 30,000 people. In addition to providing community members with access to jobs, education, health care and shopping, public transit gives mobility to disabled and senior citizens. Ms. Townsend said it is her job to look at the RVTD vision for the local cities transportation needs. Now is the time to look at what the current needs are, prioritize the projects and when the funding becomes available what do we do first, second, third, stated Ms. Townsend. The Commissioners discussed the need for a bus stop at the south end of town because Ashland Hills Hotel has re-opened providing employment. The Oak Knoll Community is located at the south end of town as well as the Resource Center and the Ashland Community Food Bank. HOUSING CRISIS FORUM DISCUSSION/PLANNING Rhode gave an update from the Housing Crisis Forum Planning Committee meeting. The Committee includes Oregon Action, Interfaith Coalition and the Housing and Human Services Commission. The date for the forum is set for Wednesday August 10, 2016 from 6:00 pm to 8:00 pm in the Gresham Room at the Ashland Public Library. Included along with the forum is a Housing survey inquiring about rental experiences in Ashland. The goals for the forum are; bringing together issues about homelessness and rental issues with a theme of "Looking at Positive Solutions" to these issues. The committee would also like to address the funding for the Housing Trust Fund. Rhode acknowledged they could use moderators for the breakout sessions if anyone in the Commission is interested in volunteering. The next meeting is scheduled for June 30th at 1:00 pm at the Pony Espresso located at Washington Federal Bank on Lithia Way. PORTA POTTY SUB-COMMITTEE UPDATE Harris reported that the sub-committee (Harris, Boettiger, Buechele) met on June 14. The committee is researching the cost for the funding of a porta potty and looking at possible locations. Some suggestions for locations were: A Street close to town, possibly by the bike trail, Ace Hardware, The Grange Co-op, by Fourth and A Street, on the south end of town by Bi-Mart and Shop-n-Kart. Harris commented it might be easier to place the porta potty on private property rather than City owned property. It was also mentioned of the possibility of leaving the bathrooms open at the Railroad Park and Lithia Park after dark, however the cost of that might be too much. Harris also suggested that it might be a good idea to put the porta potties at businesses on a temporary basis maybe for thirty days and see how it works out. DONATION/RESOURCE COIN UPDATE Reid said that Brandon Goldman, City Senior Planner, spoke with Sandra Slattery at the Chamber to discuss their program called "Change with a Purpose." The fourth of July is such a busy time for the Chamber Goldman and Reid will need to wait and meet with Ms. Slattery after the Fourth. The idea is that the Chamber might be interested in incorporating the two programs together. Reid will meet in the early part of July and get back with the commission at the next meeting. The commission would like someone from the chamber to come and talk about the program "Change with a Purpose." UPDATE ON THE DOWNTOWN SITUATION The Commissioners discussed the downtown situation regarding the homeless population. Gunderson commented that he has heard from business people that there have been less issues and fewer homeless or travelers' in the downtown area. They attribute this to the new police presence and the Chamber actively saying "Don't donate to the pan handlers." Reid has heard that the smoking ban has also discouraged the presence of the unhoused. Parker acknowledged that Uncle Foods numbers has dropped significantly as it appears the amount of traveler's have dramatically dropped. LIAISON REPORTS DISCUSSION Council - Marsh reported that the Council has started their goal setting process. Affordable housing and the Housing Trust Fund is on that goal list. The Council is looking to match up funding sources with the most appropriate functions. The Verde Village project located at the old Ashland Greenhouses on Nevada is moving forward. The development includes a mix of single family homes, affordable housing and cottages totaling 68 housing units. Fifteen affordable units have already been developed. Fair Housing Ordinance is going to the Council at their July 19th meeting. Planning Commission is working on a cottage ordinance which might be of interest to the Commission. On August 28th at 3:00 P.M. the City is hosting a volunteer appreciation event at Oak Knoll. Commissioners are invited and are welcome to bring a guest. SOU - Mercier excited about the Fair Housing ordinance going to city council. ASSOU student government has a new president, his name is Collin Davis. Mercier is no longer part of ASSOU, but will continue in her role as commission liaison and is still interested in collaborating on developing a rental reference website. Staff - Reid said that next week she will be attending the Geos Institute Climate Change Vulnerability Accessibility workshop. Will report back. The Tiny House village in Medford is going to the City Council at the noon study session, the development is still being considered but having some opposition with the location. GENERAL ANNOUNCEMENTS MAY 26th 2016 METTING AGENDA ITEMS Quorum Check - Gina DuQuenne will be gone UPCOMING EVENTS AND MEETINGS Next Housing Commission Meeting - 4:30-6:30 PM; July 28, 2016 4:30-6:30 in the Siskiyou Room at the Community Development & Engineering Department located at 51 Winburn Way. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 6:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted by Carolyn Schwendener CITY OF ASHLAND Ashland Housing and Human Services Commission Minutes July 28, 2016 CALL TO ORDER Chair Boettiger called the meeting to order at 4:30 pm in the Siskiyou Room at the Community Development and Engineering Offices located at 51 Winburn Way, Ashland OR 97520. Commissioners Present: Council Liaison Tom Gunderson Pam Marsh, absent Rich Rohde Heidi Parker SOU Liaison Tom Buechele Megan Mercier, absent Sharon Harris Sue Crader Staff Present: Joshua Boetti er Linda Reid, Housing Specialist Commissioners Absent: Carolyn Schwendener, Staff Secretary Gina DuQuenne APPROVAL OF MINUTES Parker/Rohde m/s to approve the minutes of the June 23, 2016 Housing and Human Services Commission with a correction (Buechele was not on the Porta-Potty sub-committee). Voice Vote: All ayes, minutes were approved with correction. PUBLIC FORUM No one spoke. The audience members introduced themselves but were present to speak on this evening's up- coming agenda items. ROOTS Jason and Vanessa Hauck shared how their organization helps in our community. Mr. Hauck explained they are a residential outreach options team with a focus on organizing the Community to primarily provide shelter for those in poverty. Outreach activities range from making safe places for those that camp all the way up to transitional housing. The group meets every Sunday at the Pony Espresso located in Washington Federal Bank with the primary focus on housing. Other topics include homelessness, assisting with court watch on Tuesday's, plaza watch and nighttime checks at our local parks to be sure bathrooms are not being abused. The organization also provides a Community meal on Fridays at the Railroad Park. As winter approaches one of the things they would like to focus on is a safe place for woman and children. Often women and children are parking and sleeping in their cars at night. The group is looking at partnerships with local churches. Mrs. Hauck conveyed they welcome any help and ideas the Commission might have. They consider themselves to be the bridge that works together with others in the Community because they hear firsthand from the homeless Community and those who suffer most from instability. They have been successful building relationships with Community groups, the Ashland Culture of Peace Commission, City Council and the Mayor. The face book page for the group is Ashland Village Community Effort. CULTURE OF PEACE COMMISSION Those present from the Culture of Peace Commission were Sky, Joyce Segers and David Wick. This is a Citizens Commission that was launched last September. Prior to that they worked with the City Council and the Mayor to develop the idea and what the Commission would look like. The Commission is supported by the related United Nations Culture of Peace Initiative, to begin the work of developing a community that promotes and supports a Culture of Peace at all levels. The focus is looking at all aspects of the community and how we move from a culture of violence to a culture of peace. Ms. Segers involvement is in the aspect of humanity, how we treat each other and our willingness to have the conscience and forwardness to see what is going on around the world. Though we can't fix the world we can do a lot in our own town, remarked Ms. Segers. We need the Commissions help and strength to take the next step to help the people in need. Sky is predominately involved in the circling of the square, talking and sharing at the listening circle on Fridays at the peace meals offered at the Railroad Park. This committee helps to serve a bridge in our community and invites dialogs from all segments of our Community. Sky feels very encouraged by the great dialog that has taken place. Debbie Neiswander, audience member, is also very involved in the Culture of Peace Commission. She participates in the Tuesday Courts observing those who are there and offers her assistance informally. The Commission is working with Chief O'Meara looking to bridge communication and relieve tensions. This Commission is also concerned about having a safe place for people to park and sleep over night. They had a meeting with Parks and Recreation Director Michael Black to discuss the possibility of using a parking lot in the park. A meeting with Community Development Director Bill Molnar is scheduled to discuss this possibility with the consideration to land use. Commissioner Harris informed the group of the Jackson County Task Force meetings and encouraged them to attend. The meetings are held once a month on the third Tuesday of the month at 10:30. There is an overwhelming number of people in this community who are doing good things stated Harris. The Culture of Peace Commission meets every Wednesday from 4:00 pm to 6:00 pm at 33 First Street across from the Post Office. Everyone is welcome to attend. Commissioners Rohde acknowledged they are doing amazing work. HOUSING CRISIS FORUM DISCUSSION/PLANNING Commissioner Rohde explained the purpose of this forum is to arrive at positive solutions for affordable housing. A group of people will be acting as facilitators and leaders during that forum. The collaboration has been between Unite Oregon, the Interfaith Coalition and this Commission. The forum will take place in the Gresham Room at the Ashland Public Library on August 10, 2016 from 6PM to 8PM. Reverend Ann White from the Unitarian Church will be the overall moderator. Three break out session topics will be discussed; housing trust fund (solutions), policy solutions, (renters' rights to exclusionary zoning and what new policies will be proposed in the upcoming legislative session) and positive solutions around homeless issues. PORTA POTTY SUB-COMMITTEE UPDATE Harris has been working on contacting Eric Chaddick the General Manger at Shop-n-Kart. He has been difficult to reach but there is a definite need to have a porta-potty on the south end of town. Ms. Neiswander mentioned that sleeping in the open air at the Trinity Episcopal Church is allowed but not having a porta-potty there is obviously a problem. Ms. Neiswander stated that everybody who sleeps there is very grateful and is concerned that one or two individuals could ruin it for everyone. Neiswander parks her bike out front and allows the people to use her bike to ride down to the porta-potty outside of the Community Development building. Is it possible to have a porta potty in that area, could one be placed on a trailer? Buechele will check with members of the church to get their thoughts and ideas. DONATION/RESOURCE COIN UPDATE Reid reported that she and Goldman met with Sandra Slattery from the Chamber and invited them to the Housing and Human Services Commission meeting to discuss the Change with a Purpose program. Ms. Slattery asked to come to a meeting after the end of the tourist season maybe late October or early November. They would like to get some measurable outcomes first? Harris inquired as to how the Chamber chose the two organizations to donate the Change with Purpose money to. Harris went on to say there are four City Councilor's who are on the Chamber. The Chamber is given about $400,000 by the City of Ashland which pays mostly salaries and basically funds the Chamber, added Harris. She commented that City Councilor Pam Marsh is the Executive Director of the Ashland Emergency Food Bank and St. Vincent DePaul isn't even based in Ashland. Though Harris acknowledged they are both wonderful organizations there is also a lot of other good organizations in Ashland that might have been overlooked. The Commissioners agreed there should be more transparency of the process. Reid will speak with the Chamber and ask how they arrived at the organizations to donate to. LIAISON REPORTS DISCUSSION Council - Councilor Marsh was out of town and sent an email to Reid with her Liaison Report. Reid read her email to the Commission. Marsh invited the Commissioners to the second annual Volunteer Celebration on Sunday August 28 at 3:00 pm at the Oak Knoll golf course. The Council has concluded their series of goal setting meetings and Housing emerged as an area of strong focus. The Council discussed the Housing Trust Fund focusing on identifying new sources of funding. The marijuana tax has not been allocated yet. Marsh said that the Council approved the Fair Housing changes at their last meeting and shared their appreciation for the work the Commission and SOU representatives did on the ordinance. The Council approved placing a resolution regarding health care options on the November ballot for consideration by City voters. Regina Ayars and the AAUW are encouraging the Council to adopt a resolution supporting a UN effort called CEDAW (the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women) the resolution is tentatively scheduled for the August 14 meeting. Staff - Reid reported the Geos meeting was really good. Everyone had concerns about different special needs populations and in the case of a region wide emergency we would like to find ways to have more resources for these vulnerable populations not less. GENERAL ANNOUNCEMENTS MAY 26th 2016 METTING AGENDA ITEMS Quorum Check - Agenda item: A follow up from the Housing Crisis Forum and include a more in depth look at what the construction excise tax possibilities are and specific options could be. UPCOMING EVENTS AND MEETINGS Next Housing Commission Meeting - 4:30-6:30 PM; July 28, 2016 in the Siskiyou Room at the Community Development & Engineering Department located at 51 Winburn Way. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 6:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted by Carolyn Schwendener CITY of -ASHLAND ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES JULY 12, 2016 CALL TO ORDER Vice Chair Roger Pearce 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 Brandon Goldman, Senior Planner Debbie Miller Derek Severson, Associate Planner Haywood Norton April Lucas, Administrative Supervisor Roger Pearce Lynn Thompson Absent Members: Council Liaison: Melanie Mindlin Greg Lemhouse, absent ANNOUCEMENTS Community Development Director Bill Molnar announced the second reading of the Verde Village development agreement ordinance is schedule for next Tuesday, July 19. He also commented on the city hall feasibility study that is looking a different alternatives, including remodeling city hall, adding a second story to the Community Development building at 51 Winburn Way, or building a new city hall on the corner of Pioneer and Lithia. AD-HOC COMMITTEE UPDATES Commissioner Dawkins provided a brief update on the Downtown Parking Management and Circulation Committee. He noted he is the new interim chair of the committee and commented on their request to use Fregonese Associates to help guide the group through the remainder of the process. CONSENT AGENDA A. Approval of Minutes. 1. June 14, 2016 Regular Meeting. 2. June 28, 2016 Special Meeting. Commissioners Dawkins/Thompson m/s to approve the minutes of June 14, 2016. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed 6-0. Commissioners Dawkins/Thompson m/s to approve the minutes of June 28, 2016. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed 5-0. Commissioner Miller abstained. PUBLIC FORUM No one came forward to speak. UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Adoption of Findings for PA-2016-00617, 601 Fair Oaks. No ex parte contact was reported. Ashland Planning Commission July 12, 2016 Page 1 of 4 Commissioners Thompson/Brown m/s to approve the Findings for PA-2016-00617. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed 6-0. B. Adoption of Findings for PA-2016-00847, 252 B Street. No ex parte contact was reported. Commissioners Brown/Miller m/s to approve the Findings for PA-2016-00847. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed 6-0. TYPE II PUBLIC HEARINGS A. PLANNING ACTION PA-2016-01029 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 1365 Tolman Creek Road OWNER/APPLICANT: Ronald Rezek/Clason Company LLC DESCRIPTION: A request for Outline and Final Plan approval under the Performance Standards Options Chapter (AMC 18.3.9) for a three-lot subdivision for the property located at 1365 Tolman Creek Road. Also included are requests for a Physical and Environmental Constraints Review Permit for Floodplain Development to allow widening of the existing driveway entrance by two to five feet and the installation of utilities including stormwater drainage facilities within the floodplain; a Limited Use Permit to allow grading for utility installation and restoration of the buffer area of a small wetland on the property; and an Exception to Street Standards to not install city standard street improvements along the property's Tolman Creek Road street frontage. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Single Family Residential; ZONING: R-1-7.5; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 391E 23BA; TAX LOT 201. Commissioner Pearce read aloud the public hearing procedures for land use hearings. Ex Parte Contact Commissioners Brown, Norton, Pearce, Dawkins, and Miller declared site visits. No ex parte contact was reported. Staff Report Associate Planner Derek Severson presented the project details and approval criteria. He reviewed the applications four component requests and commented on why using the performance standards options is appropriate and results in a better project. Mr. Severson stated the minimum number of homes that can be placed on the site is three, which is what the applicant's propose; although they could have requested as many as 5. He explained all three homes will take access from the existing driveway, which will be improved to the city's flagdrive standards. He stated the man- made pond on the site will be removed, but the wetland area will be preserved and enhanced. Of the 55 trees on the property five will be removed, however the removals are not subject to a tree removal permit and the applicants will mitigate those removals with new plantings. Mr. Severson noted the Tree Commission reviewed the application and issued two recommended conditions: 1) that tree protection fencing be provided for tree #15, and 2) that trees #39 and #40 be skirted (or limbed-up) to a height of 13 ft. from the base of the tree. Mr. Severson said the final element of the proposal is the exception to the street standards. He explained instead of piecemeal sidewalk improvements that would be difficult to transition at either end, it is appropriate and would result in a better pedestrian facility to grant the exception and require the applicants to sign in favor of a future local improvement district. Applicant's Presentation Amy Gunter/Rogue Planning Development Services and John Clason/Clason Company LLC. Ms. Gunter stated the site is accessed via a meandering drive that is currently 12 ft. wide and will be widened to meet the flagdrive standards. She stated there is a concrete pipe that feeds the wetland and pond, and the pond is estimated to have been built between 1950-1980. Ms. Gunter stated a wetland delineation was performed and the removal of the pond will require a fill removal permit and a limited activity use permit, and noted the pond is not a wetland protected by local land use law. She commented on the Migratory Bird Act, which prohibits vegetation removal between May 1 and July 31, and clarified they will not be doing any work during this time and will still be working through the land use process. Ms. Gunter explained the property has a potential density of 5.7 units and they initially Ashland Planning Commission July 12, 2016 Page 2 of 4 considered building 4, but this would have required the removal of the tree grove and a new road installation which would have changed the character of the neighborhood. She stated the proposal complies with the performance standards options, is below density, meets the parking standards, and they are requesting the commission's approval. Questions of the Applicant Commissioner Pearce stated the pond seems to meet the city's criteria for a wetland and asked the applicant to respond to this. Ms. Gunter stated the pond has those characteristics because of the settlement of the water and stated according to the wetland biologist the wetland is a true wetland, but the pond only has those characteristics because it is fed by the wetland. She clarified there is no standing water in the wetland and it is not a creek. She added during high water events the soil will get sloppy and wet, but there will not be water flowing across the property. Public Testimony Zach Brombacher/1370 Tolman Creek/Stated he lives across the street from the property and voiced his opposition to the city's position on infill. Mr. Brombacher stated the roads are inadequate and could pose an issue during an emergency and voiced his concerns with the city's water resources protection ordinance. He questioned how the city could allow the applicant to remove the pond when he is prohibited from doing work on his property because of the limitations in the ordinance. He stated the pond does overflow and he will be impacted. He requested the city not allow the applicant to direct water onto his property and stated the city needs to figure out a way to keep it from flooding. Applicant's Rebuttal Amy Gunter/Stated she sympathizes with Mr. Brombacher but the proposal complies with the city's stormwater master plan and limits post develop flows to predevelopment levels. She added their engineer has designed their system accordingly and has been working with the city's Public Works Department to ensure it meets the standards. Public Testimony Peck Yee/Stated there are two large trees on the site (#22 and #48) that appear to be encroached on by the proposed building envelopes, She requested the trees have adequate protection during construction. Applicant's Rebuttal Amy Gunter/Stated unlike the depiction on the plan submittal, the tree canopies are not a perfect circle. She stated the building footprint encroaches a minimal amount into the dripline however the trees will not be harmed. She added each type of tree has a different tolerance to construction and they are fine with having a certified arborist on site during excavation. Questions of Staff Staff was asked what would trigger improvements to Tolman Creek for storm drainage and sidewalks. Mr. Molnar explained unless it is a public safety issue, sidewalk improvements would typically be triggered by the neighborhood coming forward and requesting enhancements. In terms of storm drainage, the city evaluates plans to ensure the system mimics predevelopment levels and can withstand a 25 year storm event. Commissioner Pearce closed the hearing and the record at 8: 70 p. m. Deliberations and Decision Commissioners Dawkins/Brown m/s to approve PA-2016-01029. DISCUSSION: Dawkins stated he sympathizes with Mr. Brombacher but when looking at the development potential for the property the applicants are doing the minimum possible. He stated the removal of the pond will help the hydrology for the area and stated this is a straight forward proposal that meets the criteria. Brown expressed support for the applicant's proposal and stated it maintains the residential country feel. He stated it is a good solution and keeps with the city's ordinances and goals. Thompson Ashland Planning Commission July 12, 2016 Page 3 of 4 stated she is prepared to support the motion and stated she has trust that the professionals will design the swale and stormwater detention facility appropriately. Miller voiced support for the design and that the applicants are not proposing maximum density, but stated she is very concerned about the drainage issues. She stated she will vote in favor of the motion but would like this to be monitored. Pearce disagreed that the pond is not a wetland but acknowledged that its removal is permissible. He agreed that stormwater is a concern, but stated the newly constructed system will work better than what is there now. Roll Call Vote: Commissioners Thompson, Norton, Miller, Dawkins, Brown, and Pearce, YES. Motion passed 6-0. LEGISLATIVE AMENDMENT PUBLIC HEARING A. PLANNING ACTION PL-2016-00682 APPLICANT: City of Ashland DESCRIPTION: A legislative amendment is proposed to amend the City of Ashland Comprehensive Plan's Introduction and Definitions Chapter (Chapter II), and Citizen Involvement Element Chapter (Chapter III), to designate the Planning Commission as the City's Committee for Citizen Involvement, and to replace references to the Citizen's Planning Advisory Committee with references to the Committee for Citizen Involvement. Senior Planner Brandon Goldman noted the commission has previously reviewed this amendment and tonight is for the public to provide input and the commission to make a recommendation to the City Council. He explained the ordinance amends the comprehensive plan to reflect how the city conducts public involvement and addresses the recent ordinance amendments that were approved by the City Council that designate the Planning Commission as the committee for citizen involvement. Mr. Goldman stated the change is consistent with the statewide planning goals and staff is recommending the commission forward a recommendation of approval. Deliberations & Decision Commissioner Miller commented that the CPAC was broader based than the Planning Commission and if they are now acting in this role, questioned how to involve citizens and the other commissions early on and ensure their voices are heard. Mr. Goldman stated at onset of any proposal, prior to initiating any ordinance amendment, staff will outline a public involvement plan and bring that forward for review and approval before the process begins. He noted this is the current process and the ordinance amendment will codify current practices. Mr. Molnar noted the Mayor's encouragement of ad hoc committees to greater support the citizen involvement process and stated the city will continue to seek out groups and people that should be engaged in decisions. Commissioner Norton stated it is appropriate for a city of Ashland's size to have the Planning Commission take on this role and stated if they need assistance they have the ability to ask for it. Pearce agreed; he approved of how the ordinance is written and stated their duty is to assist the City Council with the program, not do it all alone. Commissioners Brown/Thompson m/s to recommend approval to the City Council of an ordinance amending comprehensive Ashland Planning Commission July 12, 2016 Page 4 of 4 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication September 6, 2016, Business Meeting Liquor License Application for David Jesser dba The Culinarium FROM: Barbara Christensen, City Recorder, christeb@ashland.or.us SUMMARY Approval of a Liquor License Application from David Jesser dba The Culinarium at 270 E Main Street. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: Application is for a new license - New License The City has determined that the license application review by the city is set forth in AMC Chapter 6.32 which requires that a determination be made to determine if the applicant complies with the city's land use, business license and restaurant registration requirements (AMC Chapter 6.32) and has been reviewed by the Police Department. In May 1999, the council decided it would make the above recommendations on all liquor license applications. COUNCIL GOALS SUPPORTED N/A 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 David Jesser dba The Culinarium. ATTACHMENTS: Liquor License Application Page 1 of 1 Irr FIVI OREGON LIQUOR CONTROL COMMISSION LIQUOR LICENSE APPLICATION Application is being made for: CITY AND COUNTY USE ONLY LICENSE TYPES ACTIONS Date application received: O Full On-Premises Sales ($402.60/yr) ❑ Change Ownership 11 1 ❑ Commercial Establishment ONew Outlet The City Council or County Commission: ❑ Caterer ❑ Greater Privilege Passenger Carrier © Additional Privilege (name of city or county) ❑ Other Public Location ❑ Other _ recommends that this license be: © Private Club Limited On-Premises Sales ($202.60/yr) ❑ Granted ❑ Denied 18Off-Premises Sales ($100/yr) By: ❑ with Fuel Pumps (signature) (date) 13 Brewery Public House ($252.60) Name: ❑ Winery ($250/yr) ❑ Other: Title: 90-DAY AUTHORITY OLCC USE ONLY ❑ Check here if you are applying for a change of ownership at a business that has a current liquor license, or if you are applying for an Off-Premises Application Recd by: Sales license and are requesting a 90-Day Temporary Authority APPLYING AS: Date: BIZI lie 0Limited Corporation ❑Limited Liability ©lndividuals Partnership Company 90-day authority: ❑ Yes ❑ No 1. Entity or Individu I applyin for the It nse: [See SECTION 1 of the Guide] byr o O O 2. Trade Name (dba): 3. Business Location: (number, l route) city(cou ty) (sta ) (ZIP code) 4. Business Mailing Address: et, rura IR 51e_ ~aAJU ( O-K "-5-3() -91 (PO box, number, street, rural route) (city) (state) (ZIP code) 5. Business Numbers: 70 o 2_!~ z (phone) (fax) 6. Is the business at this location currently licensed by OLCC? ❑Yes jIo 7. If yes to whom: Type of License: 8. Former Business Name: 9. Will you have a manager? ❑Yes Po Name: (mana r must fill out an Individu History rm) 10. What is the local governing body where your business is located? r ,f) fiN C --~r (name of city or county) 1 . C 'f ~ I ( -5 1 ontact person for this a lication: Z ~Z 5 5 41 (nam) r (phone number(s)) (address) (fax number) (e-mail address I un tan ~!atif hanswers are not true and complete, the OLCC may de Ap li nt( S' e(s) and Date: Date o *V/ a2 f6ZUI b Q Dated ® ---1►eCncppm Rr.Q.UN 1-800-452-OLCC 6522 • www.ore9on.9ov/olcc MEnFi~bil~Eu( lldl AJ OFF AE ( ) CONTMOI9N (rev. 08/2011) CONTROL COMMISSION CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication September 6, 2016, Business Meeting A Resolution Making Changes to the Financial Management Policies and Accounting Methodologies and Repealing Resolution No. 2016-24 FROM: Lee Tuneberg, Finance Director, lee. tunebergL&ashland.or.us SUMMARY The City of Ashland has a set of written policies and procedures that apply to the fiscal activities of the City. The policies and procedures were updated on August 16, 2016, by Resolution No. 2016-24. Subsequent to the approval a revision to the calculation of ending fund balance for the Insurance Fund was agreed upon. This proposed resolution repeals and replaces the prior resolution with only the agreed upon change. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: On August 16, 2016, Councilor Voisin proposed a change in the amount and calculation of the target fund balance for the Insurance Fund going away from the calculation method approved in 1993 and establishing $1,000,000 as the minimum. This change is in keeping with staff recommendations and better aligns the language in Financial Policies with Resolution No. 2016-26 Establishing Target Ending Fund Balances. COUNCIL GOALS SUPPORTED: Administration and Governance Goal Provide high quality, effective, and efficient city services and governance in an accessible, collaborative, and fiscally responsible manner. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: There is no direct fiscal impact with updating the policies. This change is likely to impact the total budget as presented but should have a positive influence on operations over the long term. STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends that Council approve the attached resolution. SUGGESTED MOTION: I move to approve the resolution titled, "A resolution making changes to the financial management policies and accounting methodologies and repealing Resolution No. 2016-024." ATTACHMENTS: Draft Resolution Financial Management Policies Page 1 of 2 CITY OF ASHLAND Accounting Methodologies Resolution 42016-24 Page 2 of 2 P. ~r RESOLUTION NO.2016- A RESOLUTION REVISING THE FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT POLICIES AND ACCOUNTING METHODOLOGIES AND REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 2016-024 RECITALS: The City of Ashland prepares the budget and financial reports in keeping with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) as established by national and state guidelines. The Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) is the primary organization that provides financial reporting requirements through their statements on accounting standards. Preparation of these documents is supported by policies and guidelines established for consistency between years and compliance with over-sight authorities. Changes in laws and industry standards require updating of these policies on a regular basis. Updating policies also supports the annual audit and helps to provide comparability with peer agencies. Subsequent to acceptance of the policies and methodologies by Resolution No. 2016-024 Council discussed a change to the calculation of the minimum fund balance for the Insurance Fund, transitioning from a calculated amount based upon a 1993 study to a target minimum of $1,000.000. In order to keep internal policies consistent with GAAP and GASB requirements and with Oregon Budget Law; THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Council accepts the proposed changes to the Financial Management Policy. SECTION 2. Council accepts the Accounting Methodologies with no changes. SECTION 3. Resolution No. 2016-024 is repealed effective with approval of this resolution. This resolution was duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of , 2016, and takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of , 2016. Page 1 of 2 John Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: David H. Lohman, City Attorney Page 2 of 2 Financial Management Policies The Financial Management Policies apply to fiscal activities of the City of Ashland and applicable component units. Objectives Tile objectives of Ashland's financial policies are as follows: 1. To enhance the City Council's decision-making ability by providing accurate information on program and operating costs. 2. To employ revenue policies that prevent undue or unbalanced reliance on any one source, distribute the cost of municipal services fairly. and provide adequate funds to operate desired programs. 3. To provide and maintain essential public programs, services, facilities, utilities, infrastructure, and capital equipment. 4. To protect and enhance the City's credit rating. 5. To ensure the legal use of all City funds through efficient systems of financial security and internal control. Investments All City funds shall be invested to provide-in order of importance-safety of principal, a sufficient level of liquidity to meet cash flow needs, and the maximum yield possible. All idle cash will be continuously invested. Accounting 1. The City will maintain an accounting and financial reporting system that conforms to Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) and Oregon Local Budget Law. 2. The City will issue a Comprehensive Annual Financial Report each fiscal year. The Comprehensive Annual Financial Report will show fund expenditures and revenues on both a GAAP and budget basis for comparison purposes. 3. An independent annual audit will be performed by a certified public accounting firm licensed to perform municipal audits. The auditor will issue an official opinion on the annual financial statements and will issue a management letter, as needed or required, detailing areas that need improvement. 4. Full disclosure will be provided in financial statements and bond representations. 5. The accounting systems will be maintained to monitor expenditures and revenues on a monthly basis with thorough analysis and adjustment of the biennium budget as appropriate. 6. The accounting system will provide monthly information about cash position and investment performance. 7. Annually, the City will submit documentation to obtain the Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in financial reporting from the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA). Operating Budgetary Policies 1. The budget committee will be appointed in conformance with state statutes. The budget committee's chief purpose is to review the City Administrator's (budget officer's) 1 proposed budget and approve a budget and maximum tax levy for City council consideration. The budget committee may consider and make recommendations on other financial issues to the City council. 2. The City will finance all current expenditures with current revenues. The City will avoid budgetary practices that balance current expenditures through the obligation of future resources. 3. The City budget will support City council goals and priorities and the long-range needs of the community. 4. In contrast to the line-item budget that focuses exclusively on items to be purchased (such as supplies and equipment), the City will use a program/objectives format that is designed to: a. Structure budget choices and information in terms of programs and their related work activities, b. Provide information on what each program is committed to accomplish in long- term goals and in short-term objectives, and c. Measure the degree of achievement of program objectives (performance measures). 5. The City will include multi-year projections in the budget document. 6. To maintain fund integrity, the City will manage each fund as an independent entity in accordance with applicable statutes and with generally accepted accounting principles. 7. The City will allocate direct and administrative costs to each fund based upon the cost of providing these services. The City will recalculate the cost of administrative services regularly to identify the impact of inflation and other cost increases. 8. The City will submit documentation for each adopted budget to obtain the Award for Distinguished Budget Presentation from the Government Finance Officers Association. Fund Balance and Operational Policies The City has established minimum ending fund balances in most funds by resolution. Establishing and adhering to these policies are an integral part of maintaining the City's fiscal stability and credit rating. The current resolution is 2014-01. From time to time the City will update the resolution as needed. By resolution 2011-17 the City standardized presentations of funds and fund balances consistent with GASB Statement 54. From time to time the City will update the resolution as needed. The governing body has approved the following order of spending regarding fund balance categories: restricted resources are spent first when both restricted and unrestricted (committed, assigned or unassigned) resources are available for expenditures. When restricted resources are spent, the order of spending is: committed (if applicable), assigned (if applicable) and unassigned. General Fund The General Fund accounts for all financial resources: working capital carryover, taxes, licenses and permits, intergovernmental revenue, fines and forfeitures, charges for services, miscellaneous revenues, inter-fund transfers and other resources except those accounted for in another fund. 2 Expenditures are for Administration, Social Services, Economic and Cultural Development, Police Department, Municipal Court Department, Fire and Rescue Department, City Band, Cemeteries, Community Development and others as required. • The General Fund will maintain an unrestricted and undesignated balance of annual revenue of at least 12 percent. This is considered the minimum needed to maintain the City's credit worthiness and to adequately provide for economic uncertainties and cash flow needs. • The City will budget a contingency appropriation to provide for unanticipated non- recurring expenditures. The minimum contingency will be maintained at not less than 3 percent of annual operating expenditures. Special Revenue Funds Special revenue funds account for the proceeds of specific sources that are legally restricted to expenditures for specified purposes. Reserve Fund. This fund is used to set aside funds to protect services, to stabilize the budget, and to meet any costs that may arise in the future from unexpected events as established by resolution 2010-18. Because no ongoing revenue stream has been established for this fund it is reported as a part of the General Fund for financial reporting. • There is no minimum fiend balance identified. • This fund ends or must be renewed by.1une, 2022, per Oregon Budget Law. Community Development Block Grant Fund This fund was established in 1994-95. The fund accounts for the Block Grant and related expenditures. • A minimum operating fund balance is not needed since this fund works on a reimbursement basis. Any ending fund balance is restricted. • The City may budget a contingency appropriation to provide for unanticipated non- recurring expenditures or shortfalls in projected revenues but it is not required. Street Fund. Revenues are from the state road tax, grants, franchise fees, charges for services and miscellaneous sources. Expenditures are for the maintenance, repair, and surfacing of streets, as well as the maintenance, repair and construction of storm drains. • The Street Fund will maintain an ending fund balance of annual operating revenue of at least 15 percent. This is the minimum needed to maintain the City's credit worthiness and to adequately provide for economic uncertainties and cash flow needs. This balance is committed. • Gas tax balances are restricted. • The System Development Charges for Transportation and Storm Drains are included in the Street Fund balance. This portion of the Street Fund balance is restricted and shall not be used in determining the minimum fund balance. • The City will budget a contingency appropriation to provide for unanticipated expenditures of a nonrecurring nature or shortfalls in projected revenues. The minimum contingency will be maintained at not less than 3 percent of annual operating expenditures. Airport Fund. Revenues are from airport leases, fuel sales and grants. Expenditures are for airport operations and improvements. • The Airport Fund will maintain an ending balance of annual revenue of at least 10 percent. This is the minimum needed to maintain the city's credit worthiness and to adequately provide for economic uncertainties and cash flow needs. • All of the Airport ending fund balance is restricted due to the acceptance of federal grants. • Many of the airport assets have restrictions placed on them by the Federal Aviation Administration. None of the current revenues are pledged to outside lenders. • The City will budget a contingency appropriation to provide for unanticipated non- recurring expenditures. The minimum contingency will be maintained at not less than 3 percent of annual operating expenditures. Capital Projects Funds Capital improvement funds are established to account for financial resources that are used for the acquisition or construction of major capital facilities (other than those financed by Enterprise Funds, Internal Service Funds, Special Assessment Funds and Trust Funds). Capital Improvements Fund This fund accounts for revenues from grants, unbonded assessment payments, and other sources, and will account for the construction of special local improvements, usually streets, with revenues from short-term borrowing and unbonded assessments. Expenditures are for construction, property and equipment acquisition and replacement, improvements and related purposes including facility maintenance, and the repayment of short-term debt principal and interest incurred in financing improvements. • The purpose is to accumulate funds prior to a large construction project; therefore, there is no minimum fund balance requirement but a $500,000 goal for operational purposes has been identified. • Food & Beverage Tax proceeds committed to the parks system are receipted in this fiend and transferred to the Parks CIP Fund as needed. This portion of the Capital Improvements fund balance is committed by voter approval and shall not be used in determining the minimum fund balance. • The System Development Charges (SDCs) for the parks system are included in the Capital Improvement fund balance. This portion of the Capital Improvements fund balance is legally restricted and shall not be used in determining the minimum fund balance. • The City will budget a contingency appropriation to provide for unanticipated non- recurring expenditures. The minimum contingency will be maintained at not less than 3 percent of annual operating expenditures. Debt Service Fund • The Debt Service Fund accounts for the accumulation of resources for, and the payment of, general long-term debt principal and interest. • The ending fund balance goal is to have an amount equal to one year's payments on hand. • All of the monies within the Debt Service fund are restricted for debt service until the specific debt is repaid in full. Oregon Revised Statutes prohibit cities from borrowing this money for any other purpose. 4 • All bond issues and notes are separated in the accounting system. Enterprise Funds Enterprise funds account for the following operations: (a) those that are financed and operated in a manner similar to private business enterprise, where the intent of the governing body is that the costs (expenses, including depreciation) of providing goods and services to the general public on a continuing basis be financed or recovered primarily through user charges; or (b) those where the governing body has decided that periodic determination of revenues earned, expenses incurred, and/or net income is appropriated for capital maintenance, public policy, management control, accountability, or other purposes. Water Fund. This fund accounts for water operations. Revenues are from sales of water, other charges for services, and miscellaneous sources. Expenditures are for operations, franchise tax, conservation programs, capital construction, and retirement of debt. • The Water Fund will maintain an unrestricted and undesignated balance of annual revenue of at least 20 percent in addition to any amounts held for repayment of debt. This is the minimum needed to maintain the City's credit worthiness and to adequately provide for economic uncertainties and cash flow needs. • The Water System Development Charges and reserved debt service fund balances are included in the Water Fund balance. These portions of the Water Fund balance are restricted and shall not be used in determining the minimum fiend balance. • The City will budget a contingency appropriation to provide for unanticipated non- recurring expenditures. The minimum contingency will be maintained at not less than 3 percent of annual operating expenditures. Wastewater Fund This fund accounts for wastewater treatment and collection. Revenues are from charges for services and taxes. Expenditures are for operations, franchise tax, capital construction, and retirement of debt. • The Wastewater Fund will maintain an unrestricted and undesignated balance of annual revenue of at least 15 percent in addition to any amount required by debt financing. This is the minimum needed to maintain the City's credit worthiness and to adequately provide for economic uncertainties and cash flow needs. • The Wastewater System Development Charges and reserved debt service fund balances are included in the Wastewater Fund balance. These portions of the Wastewater Fund balance are restricted and shall not be used in determining the minimum fund balance. • The City will budget a contingency appropriation to provide for unanticipated non- recurring expenditures. The minimum contingency will be maintained at not less than 3 percent of annual operating expenditures. Electric Fund The Electric Fund accounts for the distribution of purchased electricity according to standards set forth by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Revenues are from sale of electricity and other charges for services and intergovernmental revenues. Expenditures are for related operations. Utility operations include wholesale power purchases, operating expenses, energy conservation incentives, capital outlay, retirement of debt, franchise tax, and related purposes. 5 • The Electric Fund will maintain an unrestricted and undesignated balance of annual revenue of at least 12 percent. This is the minimum needed to maintain the City's credit worthiness and to adequately provide for economic uncertainties and cash flow needs. • No portion of the Electric fund balance is restricted for specific uses. • The City will budget a contingency appropriation to provide for unanticipated non- recurring expenditures. The minimum contingency will be maintained at not less than 3 percent of annual operating expenditures. Telecommunications Fund The Telecommunications Fund accounts for the revenues and expenditures of the Ashland Fiber Network. • The Telecommunications Fund will maintain a minimum balance of at least 20 percent of annual revenue as was established in FY 2006-07. • The City will budget a contingency appropriation to provide for unanticipated no- recurring expenditure. The minimum contingency will be maintained at not less than 3 percent of annual operating expenditures. Internal Service Funds Internal service funds account for the financing of goods or services provided by one department or agency to other departments or agencies of the governmental unit, or to other governmental units, on a cost reimbursement basis. Central Services Fund. This fund is divided into Administration, Information Technology, Administrative Services, City Recorder, and Public Works Administration/Engineering. Expenditures are for personnel, materials and services and capital outlay for these departments. These functions are funded by internal charges for services to benefitted departments and divisions and by some revenues from the public. • The Central Services Fund will maintain an unrestricted and undesignated balance of annual revenue of at least 3 percent. This is the minimum needed to maintain the City's credit worthiness and to adequately provide for economic uncertainties and cash flow needs. • No portion of the Central Services fund balance is legally restricted for specific purposes. • The City will budget a contingency appropriation to provide for unanticipated non- recurring expenditures. The minimum contingency will be maintained at not less than 3 percent of annual operating expenditures. Insurance Services Fund Revenues in this fund are from service charges to other departments, investment income, and insurance retrospective rating adjustments. Expenditures are for insurance premiums, self-insurance direct claims, and administration. • The Insurance Services Fund will maintain an unrestricted and undesignated balance of $400,000 (1993 Dellafs) as feeemmeHded in the june 1993 Risk Finaneing Study. -$668,000). $1.000.000. This is the minimum needed to maintain the City's insurance programs and provide for uninsured exposures. • No portion of the Insurance Services Fund balance is legally restricted for specific uses. • The City will budget a contingency appropriation to provide for unanticipated non- 6 recurring expenditures. The minimum contingency will be maintained at not less than 3 percent of annual operating expenditures. Health Benefits Fund. Revenues in this fund are primarily from service charges to other departments, investment income and interfund loans as needed. Expenditures are for insurance premiums, self-insurance direct claims, and administration. • The Health Benefits Fund will maintain a balance of $500,000 as recommended for self- insurance programs. The balance will be adjusted each year by CPI-U. • The Health Benefits Fund balance is legally restricted for the employee health benefits program. • The City will budget a contingency appropriation to provide for unanticipated non- recurring expenditures. The minimum contingency will be maintained at not less than 3 percent of annual operating expenditures. Equipment Fund. This fund is used to account for the maintenance and replacement of the City fleet of vehicles and specified equipment. Revenues are from equipment rental and replacement charges to other departments and divisions. Expenditures are for personnel, materials and services, and capital outlay. This fiend is divided into two divisions: equipment maintenance and purchasing and acquisition. The purpose of the equipment replacement function is to accumulate adequate funds to replace equipment on a timely basis. This replacement schedule is updated annually. • No minimum fund balance is recommended beyond the amount calculated to sufficiently fund equipment replacement; however, a $200,000 goal for operational purposes should be considered. • No portion of the Equipment fund balance is legally restricted for specific uses. The City has a policy of renting equipment at rates that include the replacement cost of the specific piece of equipment. • The City will budget a contingency appropriation to provide for unanticipated non- recurring expenditures. The minimum contingency will be maintained at not less than 3 percent of annual operating expenditures. Trust and Agency Funds Trust and agency funds account for assets held by a governmental unit in a trustee capacity or as an agent for individuals, private organizations, or governmental units, and/or other funds. These include (a) expendable trust funds, (b) non-expendable trust funds, (c) pension trust funds, and (d) agency fiends. Cemetery Trust Fund The Cemetery Trust Fund is a non-expendable trust fund that accumulates revenue from interest income and perpetual care service charges on cemetery operations. Expenditures are for the repurchase of plots and transfers of earnings to the cemetery fund for operations. • No minimum fund balance policy is recommended. Component Unit Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission Parks and Recreation Fund. (Parks General Fund) Revenues are from charges for services and miscellaneous sources. Expenditures are for parks administrative, recreational, and golf course operations. • A fund balance policy is not needed since this fiend works on a reimbursement basis. • The City will budget a contingency appropriation to provide for unanticipated non- recurring expenditures. The minimum contingency will be maintained at not less than 3 percent of annual operating expenditures. Parks Capital Improvements Fund. (Capital Projects Fund) This fund is used to account for resources from grants, payments for services, and inter-fund transfers that are to be expended for equipment purchases and major park renovations. The purpose is to accumulate funds prior to a large construction project; therefore, there is no minimum fund balance. Parks Equipment Fund. (Parks Internal Service Fund) This fund is used to account for resources from grants, payments for services, and inter-fund transfers that are to be expended for equipment purchases and major park renovations. The purpose is to accumulate funds prior to a large construction project; therefore, there is no minimum fund balance. Revenues • The City will estimate its annual revenues by an objective, analytical process. Because most revenues are sensitive to conditions outside the City's control, estimates will be conservative. • The City will make every effort to maintain a diversified and stable revenue base to protect its operation from short-term fluctuations in any one revenue source. • With the exception of legally restricted portions of a fund balance, Council action equivalent to that taken to commit or assign fund balance can be done to remove the commitment or assignment. • The City will establish charges for enterprise funds that fully support the total cost of the enterprise. Utility rates will be reviewed annually. Rates will be adjusted as needed to account for major changes in consumption and cost increases. • The City will charge user fees to the direct beneficiaries of City services to recover some or all of the full cost of providing that service. All user fees will be reviewed biannually to insure that direct and overhead costs are recovered in the percentage approved by City Council. • To the extent practicable, new development shall pay necessary fees to meet all identified costs associated with that development. • The City will work aggressively to collect all delinquent accounts receivable. When necessary, collection procedures will include termination of service, submission to collection agencies, foreclosure, and other available legal remedies. 8 Expenditures • The City will provide employee compensation that is competitive with comparable public jurisdictions within the relative recruitment area. • Estimated wage increases and changes in employee benefits will be included in the proposed budget under Personal Services. • The City is committed to maintaining and improving the productivity of its staff by providing a proper working environment, adequate equipment and supplies, and appropriate training and supervision. • A Social Service appropriation will be included in the proposed General Fund budget. This appropriation will increase or decrease relative to the overall General Fund revenues. • An Economic, Cultural Development, Tourism and Sustainability appropriation will be included in the proposed General Fund budget. This appropriation will increase or decrease relative to the overall Transient Occupancy (Lodging) Tax Revenues. Purchasing • The City will purchase materials, supplies, and equipment through a competitive process that provides the best product for the least cost. Capital • The City will provide for adequate maintenance of equipment and capital assets. The City will make regular contributions to the Equipment Replacement Fund and the Facilities budget to ensure that monies will be available as needed to replace City vehicles and facilities. • Future operating costs associated with new capital improvements will be projected and included in the long-term budget forecast. • The City will determine and use the most appropriate method for financing all new capital projects. • Special accounts dedicated for capital improvements will be segregated in the accounting system and used only for the intended capital purposes. • The Capital Improvement Plan will encourage a level capital replacement schedule. Debts • The City will not use long-term borrowing to finance current operations. • Capital projects, financed through bond proceeds, will be financed for a period not to exceed the useful life of the project. • Whenever possible, enterprise debt will be self-supporting. Regardless of the type of debt issued, the City will establish a one-year reserve for all self-supporting debt as required by any bond covenant. • The City will seek to maintain and improve its bond rating to minimize borrowing costs and to ensure its access to credit markets. • The City will keep the final maturity of general obligation bonds at or below 20 years, with the exception of water supply and land acquisition that will be limited to 30 years. • The City will maintain good communications with bond rating agencies about its financial condition. 9 Risk Management • The City will provide an active risk management program that reduces human suffering and protects City assets through adequate internal controls, loss prevention, insurance, and self-insurance. 10 Accounting Methods General Funds This fund accounts for all financial resources except those accounted for in another fund. Resources include working capital carryover, taxes, licenses and permits, intergovernmental revenue, fines and forfeitures, charges for services, miscellaneous revenues, and inter-fund transfers. Expenditures are for general service activities such as police, fire, municipal court and community development departments and other administrative programs as needed. • This fund uses the modified accrual method of accounting. Special Revenue Funds Special Revenue Funds account for the proceeds of specific revenue sources that are legally restricted to expenditures for specified purposes. • Special revenue funds account for transactions on the modified accrual method of accounting. Reserve Fund. This fund is used to set aside funds to protect services and to stabilize the budget, and to meet any costs that may arise in the future from unexpected events as established by Resolution 2010-18. Community Development Block Grant Fund. This fund was created in 1994-95. The fiend accounts for the Block Grant and related expenditures. Street Fund. Revenues are from the state road tax, franchise fees, charges for services and miscellaneous sources. Expenditures are for the maintenance, repair, and surfacing of streets, as well as maintenance and construction of the storm water runoff infrastructure. Airport Fund. Revenues are from airport leases. Expenditures are for maintenance of airport facilities. Capital Projects Funds Capital improvement funds are established to account for financial resources that are used for the acquisition or construction of major capital facilities (other than those financed by enterprise funds, internal service funds, special assessment funds, and trust funds). • Capital projects funds use the modified accrual method of accounting. Capital Improvements Fund. This fiend accounts for revenues from grants, non-bonded assessment payments, bond proceeds, and other sources, and will account for the construction of special local improvements, usually streets, with revenues from short-term borrowing and non- bonded assessments. Expenditures are for construction, property and equipment acquisition and maintenance, improvements and related purposes, and the repayment of short-term debt principal and interest incurred in financing improvements. Debt Service Fund The Debt Service Fund accounts for the accumulation of resources to be used for payment of the debt incurred for the acquisition or construction of major capital facilities (other than those financed by proprietary funds, and trust funds). • Expenditures and revenues are accounted for on the modified accrual method of accounting. Bancroft Bonds revenues are from Bancroft (Local Improvement District) bonded assessments. These are expended for the retirement of local improvement district bonded debt principal and interest until such debts have been fulfilled. General Bonds revenues are from property taxes that are expended for the retirement of general obligation debt principal and interest. Notes, Contracts, and Liens revenues derived from operating transfers from other funds are used to repay long-term contracts that are not bonded. Enterprise Funds Enterprise funds account for the following operations: (1) those that are financed and operated in a manner similar to private business enterprise, where the intent of the governing body is that the costs (expenses, including depreciation) of providing goods and services to the general public on a continuing basis be financed or recovered primarily through user charges; or (2) those where the governing body has decided that periodic determination of revenues earned, expenses incurred, and/or net income is appropriated for capital maintenance, public policy, management control, accountability, or other purposes. • Enterprise funds use full accrual basis of accounting for financial statement presentations. However, the enterprise activities use a modified accrual basis of accounting for budgetary purposes. This assures budgetary compliance with such expenditures as capital construction and acquisition, as well as debt principal transactions. Water Fund. This fund accounts for water operations. Revenues are from sales of water and other charges for services. Expenditures are for operations, conservation programs, capital construction, and retirement of debt. Wastewater Fund. This fund accounts for wastewater treatment and collection. Revenues are from charges for services and taxes. Expenditures are for operations, capital construction, and retirement of debt. Electric Fund. This fund accounts for the distribution of purchased electricity according to standards set forth by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Revenues are from sale of electricity and other charges for services and intergovernmental grants. Expenditures are for 2 related operations. Utility operations include wholesale power purchases, operating expenses, energy conservation incentives, capital outlay, retirement of debt, and franchise tax. Telecommunications Fund. This fund accounts for telecommunications operations. Revenues are from cable TV, internet connections, and high-speed data. Expenses are for operations maintenance, capital construction, and debt service. Internal Service Funds Internal service funds account for the financing of goods or services provided by one department or agency to other departments or agencies of the governmental unit, or to other governmental units, on a cost reimbursement basis. • Internal service funds use full accrual accounting methods for financial statement presentations. However, the internal service funds use a modified accrual basis of accounting for budgetary purposes. This assures budgetary compliance with such expenditures as capital construction and acquisition as well as debt principal transactions. Central Services. This fund is divided into the following Divisions: Elected Officials, Administration, Administrative Services, Legal, Customer Services, Accounting, Purchasing, Public Works Administration, Engineering, Maintenance, Computer Services, and the City Recorder. These Divisions fall under the umbrellas of the Administration, Administrative Services, Public Works, Telecommunications and the Electric Departments. These functions are supported by charges for services by all direct service divisions and departments. Insurance Services Fund. Revenues in this fund are from service charges to other departments, investment income, and insurance retrospective rating adjustments. Expenditures are for insurance premiums, self-insurance direct claims, and administration. Health Benefits Fund. Revenues in this fiend are from service charges to other funds, investment income, and internal loans. Expenditures are for insurance premiums, self-insurance direct claims, and administration. Equipment Fund. This fund is used to account for the replacement and maintenance of the city's fleet of vehicles. Revenues are from equipment rental and replacement charges. Expenditures are for personal services, materials and services, and capital outlay. Trust and Agency Funds Trust and agency funds account for assets held by a governmental unit in a trustee capacity or as an agent for individuals, private organizations, or governmental units, and/or other funds. These include (a) expendable trust funds, (b) non-expendable trust funds, (c) pension trust funds, and (d) agency funds. Cemetery Trust Fund. The Cemetery Trust Fund is a non-expendable trust fund. Revenues are from interest income and perpetual care service charges on cemetery operations. Expenditures are for the repurchase of plots and transfers of earnings to the general fund for operations. 3 • This fund uses the accrual basis of accounting. Component Unit Parks Parks and Recreation Fund. (Parks General Fund, a special revenue fund to the City) Revenues are from the parks and recreation charges for services, and miscellaneous sources. Expenditures are for parks and recreational purposes as well as department operations. • This fund uses the modified accrual method of accounting. Parks Capital Improvements Fund. (Capital Projects Fund) This fund is used to account for resources from grants and inter-fund transfers that are to be expended for equipment purchases and major park renovations. • This fund uses the modified accrual method of accounting. Parks Equipment Fund. (Internal Service Fund) This fund is used to account for resources and payments from other Parks funds to be held and expended for equipment purchases. • Internal service funds use full accrual accounting methods for financial statement presentations. However, the internal service hinds use a modified accrual basis of accounting for budgetary purposes. This assures budgetary compliance with such expenditures as capital construction and acquisition as well as debt principal transactions. 4 RESOLUTION N 0.2016- c c~ A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING CHANGES TO THE FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT POLICIES AND ACCOUNTING METHODOLOGIES AND REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 2014-01 RECITALS: The City of Ashland prepares the budget and financial reports in keeping with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) as established by national and state guidelines. The Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) is the primary organization that provides financial reporting requirements through their statements on accounting standards. Preparation of these documents is supported by policies and guidelines established for consistency between years and compliance with over-sight authorities. Changes in laws and industry standards require updating of these policies on a regular basis. Updating policies also supports the annual audit and helps to provide comparability with peer agencies. In order to keep internal policies consistent with GAAP and GASB requirements and with Oregon Budget Law; THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Council accepts the proposed changes to the Financial Management Policy SECTION 2. Council accepts the proposed changes to the Accounting Methodologies SECTION 3. Resolution No. 2014-01 is repealed effective with approval of this resolution. This resolution was duly PASSED and ADOPTED this A/ day of ; 2016, and takes e ct upon signing by t Mayor. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this /?day of , 2016. yJntro berg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: 1 David H. Lo an, City Attorney Page 1 of 1 Financial Management Policies The Financial Management Policies apply to fiscal activities of the City of Ashland and applicable component units. Objectives The objectives of Ashland's financial policies are as follows: 1. To enhance the City Council's decision-making ability by providing accurate information on program and operating costs. 2. To employ revenue policies that prevent undue or unbalanced reliance on any one source, distribute the cost of municipal services fairly, and provide adequate funds to operate desired programs. 3. To provide and maintain essential public programs, services, facilities, utilities, infrastructure, and capital equipment. 4. To protect and enhance the City's credit rating. 5. To ensure the legal use of all City funds through efficient systems of financial security and internal control. Investments All City funds shall be invested to provide--in order of importance-safety of principal, a sufficient level of liquidity to meet cash flow needs, and the maximum yield possible. All idle cash will be continuously invested. Accounting 1. The City will maintain an accounting and financial reporting system that conforms to Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) and Oregon Local Budget Law. 2. The City will issue a Comprehensive Annual Financial Report each fiscal year. The Comprehensive Annual Financial Report will show fund expenditures and revenues on both a GAAP and budget basis for comparison purposes. 3. An independent annual audit will be performed by a certified public accounting firm licensed to perform municipal audits. The auditor will issue an official opinion on the annual financial statements and will issue a management letter, as needed or required, detailing areas that need improvement. 4. Full disclosure will be provided in financial statements and bond representations. 5. The accounting systems will be maintained to monitor expenditures and revenues on a monthly basis with thorough analysis and adjustment of the biennium budget as appropriate. 6. The accounting system will provide monthly information about cash position and investment performance. 7. Annually, the City will submit documentation to obtain the Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in financial reporting from the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA). Operating Budgetary Policies 1. The budget committee will be appointed in conformance with state statutes. The budget committee's chief purpose is to review the City Administrator's (budget officer's) 1 proposed budget and approve a budget and maximum tax levy for City council consideration. The budget committee may consider and make recommendations on other financial issues to the City council. 2. The City will finance all current expenditures with current revenues. The City will avoid budgetary practices that balance current expenditures through the obligation of future resources. I The City budget will support City council goals and priorities and the long-range needs of the community. 4. In contrast to the line-item budget that focuses exclusively on items to be purchased (such as supplies and equipment), the City will use a program/objectives format that is designed to: a. Structure budget choices and information in terms of programs and their related work activities, b. Provide information on what each program is committed to accomplish in long- term goals and in short-term objectives, and c. Measure the degree of achievement of program objectives (performance measures). 5. The City will include multi-year projections in the budget document. 6. To maintain fund integrity, the City will manage each fund as an independent entity in accordance with applicable statutes and with generally accepted accounting principles. 7. The City will allocate direct and administrative costs to each fund based upon the cost of providing these services. The City will recalculate the cost of administrative services regularly to identify the impact of inflation and other cost increases. 8. The City will submit documentation for each adopted budget to obtain the Award for Distinguished Budget Presentation from the Government Finance Officers Association. Fund Balance and Operational Policies The City has established minimum ending fund balances in most funds by resolution. Establishing and adhering to these policies are an integral part of maintaining the City's fiscal stability and credit rating. The current resolution is 2014-01. From time to time the City will update the resolution as needed. By resolution 2011-17 the City standardized presentations of funds and fund balances consistent with GASB Statement 54. From time to time the City will update the resolution as needed. The governing body has approved the following order of spending regarding fund balance categories: restricted resources are spent first when both restricted and unrestricted (committed, assigned or unassigned) resources are available for expenditures. When restricted resources are spent, the order of spending is: committed (if applicable), assigned (if applicable) and unassigned. General Fund The General Fund accounts for all financial resources: working capital carryover, taxes, licenses and permits, intergovernmental revenue, fines and forfeitures, charges for services, miscellaneous revenues, inter-fiend transfers and other resources except those accounted for in another fund. 2 Expenditures are for Administration, Social Services, Economic and Cultural Development. Police Department, Municipal Court Department, Fire and Rescue Department, City Band, Cemeteries, Community Development and others as required. • The General Fund will maintain an unrestricted and undesignated balance of annual revenue of at least 12 percent. This is considered the minimum needed to maintain the City's credit worthiness and to adequately provide for economic uncertainties and cash flow needs. • The City will budget a contingency appropriation to provide for unanticipated non- recurring expenditures. The minimum contingency will be maintained at not less than 3 percent of annual operating expenditures. Special Revenue Funds Special revenue funds account for the proceeds of specific sources that are legally restricted to expenditures for specified purposes. Reserve Fund. This fund is used to set aside funds to protect services, to stabilize the budget, and to meet any costs that may arise in the future from unexpected events as established by resolution 2010-18. Because no ongoing revenue stream has been established for this fund it is reported as a part of the General Fund for financial reporting. • There is no minimum fund balance identified. • This fund ends or must be renewed by June, 2022, per Oregon Budget Law. Community Development Block Grant Fund. This fund was established in 1994-95. The fund accounts for the Block Grant and related expenditures. • A minimum operating fund balance is not needed since this fund works on a reimbursement basis. Any ending fund balance is restricted. • The City may budget a contingency appropriation to provide for unanticipated non- recurring expenditures or shortfalls in projected revenues but it is not required. Street Fund Revenues are from the state road tax, grants, franchise fees, charges for services and miscellaneous sources. Expenditures are for the maintenance, repair, and surfacing of streets, as well as the maintenance, repair and construction of storm drains. • The Street Fund will maintain an ending fund balance of annual operating revenue of at least 15 percent. This is the minimum needed to maintain the City's credit worthiness and to adequately provide for economic uncertainties and cash flow needs. This balance is committed. • Gas tax balances are restricted. • The System Development Charges for Transportation and Storm Drains are included in the Street Fund balance. This portion of the Street Fund balance is restricted and shall not be used in determining the minimum fund balance. • The City will budget a contingency appropriation to provide for unanticipated expenditures of a nonrecurring nature or shortfalls in projected revenues. The minimum contingency will be maintained at not less than 3 percent of annual operating expenditures. Airport Fund. Revenues are from airport leases, fuel sales and grants. Expenditures are for airport operations and improvements. • The Airport Fund will maintain an ending balance of annual revenue of at least 10 percent. This is the minimum needed to maintain the city's credit worthiness and to adequately provide for economic uncertainties and cash flow needs. • All of the Airport ending fund balance is restricted due to the acceptance of federal grants. • Many of the airport assets have restrictions placed on them by the Federal Aviation Administration. None of the current revenues are pledged to outside lenders. • The City will budget a contingency appropriation to provide for unanticipated non- recurring expenditures. The minimum contingency will be maintained at not less than 3 percent of annual operating expenditures. Capital Projects Funds Capital improvement funds are established to account for financial resources that are used for the acquisition or construction of major capital facilities (other than those financed by Enterprise Funds, Internal Service Funds, Special Assessment Funds and Trust Funds). Capital Improvements Fund. This fund accounts for revenues from grants, unbonded assessment payments, and other sources, and will account for the construction of special local improvements, usually streets, with revenues from short-term borrowing and unbonded assessments. Expenditures are for construction, property and equipment acquisition and replacement, improvements and related purposes including facility maintenance, and the repayment of short-term debt principal and interest incurred in financing improvements. • The purpose is to accumulate funds prior to a large construction project; therefore, there is no minimum fund balance requirement but a 5500,000 goal for operational purposes has been identified. • Food & Beverage Tax proceeds committed to the parks system are receipted in this fund and transferred to the Parks CIP Fund as needed. This portion of the Capital Improvements fund balance is committed by voter approval and shall not be used in determining the minimum fund balance. The System Development Charges (SDCs) for the parks system are included in the Capital Improvement fund balance. This portion of the Capital Improvements fund balance is legally restricted and shall not be used in determining the minimum fund balance. • The City will budget a contingency appropriation to provide for unanticipated non- recurring expenditures. The minimum contingency will be maintained at not less than 3 percent of annual operating expenditures. Debt Service Fund • The Debt Service Fund accounts for the accumulation of resources for, and the payment of, general long-term debt principal and interest. • The ending fund balance goal is to have an amount equal to one year's payments on hand. • All of the monies within the Debt Service fund are restricted for debt service until the specific debt is repaid in full. Oregon Revised Statutes prohibit cities from borrowing this 4 money for any other purpose. • All bond issues and notes are separated in the accounting system. Enterprise Funds Enterprise funds account for the following operations: (a) those that are financed and operated in a manner similar to private business enterprise, where the intent of the governing body is that the costs (expenses, including depreciation) of providing goods and services to the general public on a continuing basis be financed or recovered primarily through user charges; or (b) those where the governing body has decided that periodic determination of revenues earned, expenses incurred, and/or net income is appropriated for capital maintenance, public policy, management control, accountability, or other purposes. Water Fund. This fund accounts for water operations. Revenues are from sales of water, other charges for services, and miscellaneous sources. Expenditures are for operations, franchise tax, conservation programs, capital construction, and retirement of debt. • The Water Fund will maintain an unrestricted and undesignated balance of annual revenue of at least 20 percent in addition to any amounts held for repayment of debt. This is the minimurn needed to maintain the City's credit worthiness and to adequately provide for economic uncertainties and cash flow needs. • The Water System Development Charges and reserved debt service fund balances are included in the Water Fund balance. These portions of the Water Fund balance are restricted and shall not be used in determining the minimum fund balance. • The City will budget a contingency appropriation to provide for unanticipated non- recurring expenditures. The minimum contingency will be maintained at not less than 3 percent of annual operating expenditures. Wastewater Fund. This fund accounts for wastewater treatment and collection. Revenues are from charges for services and taxes. Expenditures are for operations, franchise tax, capital construction, and retirement of debt. • The Wastewater Fund will maintain an unrestricted and undesignated balance of annual revenue of at least 15 percent in addition to any amount required by debt financing. This is the minimum needed to maintain the City's credit worthiness and to adequately provide for economic uncertainties and cash flow needs. • The Wastewater System Development Charges and reserved debt service fund balances are included in the Wastewater Fund balance. These portions of the Wastewater Fund balance are restricted and shall not be used in determining the minimum fund balance. • The City will budget a contingency appropriation to provide for unanticipated non- recurring expenditures. The minimum contingency will be maintained at not less than 3 percent of annual operating expenditures. Electric Fund The Electric Fund accounts for the distribution of purchased electricity according to standards set forth by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Revenues are from sale of electricity and other charges for services and intergovernmental revenues. Expenditures are for related operations. Utility operations include wholesale power purchases, operating expenses, 5 energy conservation incentives, capital outlay, retirement of debt, franchise tax, and related purposes. • The Electric Fund will maintain an unrestricted and undesignated balance of annual revenue of at least 12 percent. This is the minimum needed to maintain the City's credit worthiness and to adequately provide for economic uncertainties and cash flow needs. • No portion of the Electric fund balance is restricted for specific uses. • The City will budget a contingency appropriation to provide for unanticipated non- recurring expenditures. The minimum contingency will be maintained at not less than 3 percent of annual operating expenditures. Telecommunications Fund The Telecommunications Fund accounts for the revenues and expenditures of the Ashland Fiber Network. • The Telecommunications Fund will maintain a minimum balance of at least 20 percent of annual revenue as was established in FY 2006-07. • The City will budget a contingency appropriation to provide for unanticipated no- recurring expenditure. The minimum contingency will be maintained at not less than 3 percent of annual operating expenditures. Internal Service Funds Internal. service funds account for the financing of goods or services provided by one department or agency to other departments or agencies of the governmental unit, or to other governmental units, on a cost reimbursement basis. Central Services Fund This fund is divided into Administration, Information Technology, Administrative Services, City Recorder, and Public Works Administration/Engineering. Expenditures are for personnel, materials and services and capital outlay for these departments. These functions are funded by internal charges for services to benefitted departments and divisions and by some revenues from the public. • The Central Services Fund will maintain an unrestricted and undesignated balance of annual revenue of at least 3 percent. This is the minimum needed to maintain the City's credit worthiness and to adequately provide for economic uncertainties and cash flow needs. • No portion of the Central Services fund balance is legally restricted for specific purposes. • The City will budget a contingency appropriation to provide for unanticipated non- recurring expenditures. The minimum contingency will be maintained at not less than 3 percent of annual operating expenditures. Insurance Services Fund. Revenues in this fiend are from service charges to other departments, investment income, and insurance retrospective rating adjustments. Expenditures are for insurance premiums, self-insurance direct claims, and administration. • The Insurance Services Fund will maintain an unrestricted and undesignated balance of $400,000 (1993 Dollars) as recommended in the June 1993 Risk Financing Study. This balance will be increased annually by the Consumer Price Index (CPI) to account for inflation. (Calculated at 6/30/2016: take CPI-U 241.38 / 144.4 x $400,000 =$668,000). This is the minimum needed to maintain the City's insurance programs and provide for uninsured exposures. 6 • No portion of the Insurance Services Fund balance is legally restricted for specific uses. • The City will budget a contingency appropriation to provide for unanticipated non- recurring expenditures. The minimum contingency will be maintained at not less than 3 percent of annual operating expenditures. Health Benefits Fund. Revenues in this fund are primarily from service charges to other departments, investment income and interfund loans as needed. Expenditures are for insurance premiums, self-insurance direct claims, and administration. • The Health Benefits Fund will maintain a balance of $500,000 as recommended for self- insurance programs. The balance will be adjusted each year by CPI-U. • The Health Benefits Fund balance is legally restricted for the employee health benefits program. • The City will budget a contingency appropriation to provide for unanticipated non- recurring expenditures. The minimum contingency will be maintained at not less than 3 percent of annual operating expenditures. Equipment Fund This fund is used to account for the maintenance and replacement of the City fleet of vehicles and specified equipment. Revenues are from equipment rental and replacement charges to other departments and divisions. Expenditures are for personnel, materials and services, and capital outlay. This fund is divided into two divisions: equipment maintenance and purchasing and acquisition. The purpose of the equipment replacement function is to accumulate adequate funds to replace equipment on a timely basis. This replacement schedule is updated annually. • No minimum fund balance is recommended beyond the amount calculated to sufficiently fund equipment replacement; however, a $200.000 goal for operational purposes should be considered. • No portion of the Equipment fund balance is legally restricted for specific uses. The City has a policy of renting equipment at rates that include the replacement cost of the specific piece of equipment. • The City will budget a contingency appropriation to provide for unanticipated non- recurring expenditures. The minimum contingency will be maintained at not less than 3 percent of annual operating expenditures. Trust and Agency Funds Trust and agency funds account for assets held by a governmental unit in a trustee capacity or as an agent for individuals, private organizations, or governmental units, and/or other funds. These include (a) expendable trust funds, (b) non-expendable trust funds, (c) pension trust funds, and (d) agency fiends. Cemetery Trust Fund. The Cemetery Trust Fund is a non-expendable trust fund that accumulates revenue from interest income and perpetual care service charges on cemetery operations. Expenditures are for the repurchase of plots and transfers of earnings to the cemetery fund for operations. • No minimum fund balance policy is recommended. 7 Component Unit Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission Parks and Recreation Fund (Parks General Fund) Revenues are from charges for services and miscellaneous sources. Expenditures are for parks administrative, recreational, and golf course operations. • A fiend balance policy is not needed since this fund works on a reimbursement basis. • The City will budget a contingency appropriation to provide for unanticipated non- recurring expenditures. The minimum contingency will be maintained at not less than 3 percent of annual operating expenditures. Parks Capital Improvements Fund (Capital Projects Fund) This fund is used to account for resources from grants, payments for services, and inter-fund transfers that are to be expended for equipment purchases and maior park renovations. The purpose is to accumulate funds prior to a large construction project; therefore, there is no minimum fund balance. Parks Equipment Fund. (Parks Internal Service Fund) This fund is used to account for resources from grants, payments for services, and inter-fund transfers that are to be expended for equipment purchases and maior park renovations. The purpose is to accumulate funds prior to a large construction project, therefore, there is no minimum fund balance. Revenues • The City will estimate its annual revenues by an objective, analytical process. Because most revenues are sensitive to conditions outside the City's control, estimates will be conservative. • The City will make every effort to maintain a diversified and stable revenue base to protect its operation from short-term fluctuations in any one revenue source. • With the exception of legally restricted portions of a fund balance, Council action equivalent to that taken to commit or assign fund balance can be done to remove the commitment or assignment. • The City will establish charges for enterprise funds that fully support the total cost of the enterprise. Utility rates will be reviewed annually. Rates will be adjusted as needed to account for major changes in consumption and cost increases. • The City will charge user fees to the direct beneficiaries of City services to recover some or all of the full cost of providing that service. All user fees will be reviewed biannually to insure that direct and overhead costs are recovered in the percentage approved by City Council. • To the extent practicable, new development shall pay necessary fees to meet all identified costs associated with that development. • The City will work aggressively to collect all delinquent accounts receivable. When necessary, collection procedures will include termination of service, submission to collection agencies, foreclosure, and other available legal remedies. Expenditures • The City will provide employee compensation that is competitive with comparable public 8 jurisdictions within the relative recruitment area. • Estimated wage increases and changes in employee benefits will be included in the proposed budget under Personal Services. • The City is committed to maintaining and improving the productivity of its staff by providing a proper working environment, adequate equipment and supplies, and appropriate training and supervision. • A Social Service appropriation will be included in the proposed General Fund budget. This appropriation will increase or decrease relative to the overall General Fund revenues. • An Economic, Cultural Development, Tourism and Sustainability appropriation will be included in the proposed General Fund budget. This appropriation will increase or decrease relative to the overall Transient Occupancy (Lodging) Tax Revenues. Purchasing • The City will purchase materials, supplies, and equipment through a competitive process that provides the best product for the least cost. Capital • The City will provide for adequate maintenance of equipment and capital assets. The City will make regular contributions to the Equipment Replacement Fund and the Facilities budget to ensure that monies will be available as needed to replace City vehicles and facilities. • Future operating costs associated with new capital improvements will be projected and included in the long-term budget forecast. • The City will determine and use the most appropriate method for financing all new capital projects. • Special accounts dedicated for capital improvements will be segregated in the accounting system and used only for the intended capital purposes. • The Capital Improvement Plan will encourage a level capital replacement schedule. Debts • The City will not use long-term borrowing to finance current operations. • Capital projects, financed through bond proceeds, will be financed for a period not to exceed the useful life of the project. • Whenever possible, enterprise debt will be self-supporting. Regardless of the type of debt issued, the City will establish a one-year reserve for all self-supporting debt as required by any bond covenant. • The City will seek to maintain and improve its bond rating to minimize borrowing costs and to ensure its access to credit markets. • The City will keep the final maturity of general obligation bonds at or below 20 years, with the exception of water supply and land acquisition that will be limited to 30 years. • The City will maintain good communications with bond rating agencies about its financial condition. Risk Management 9 • The City will provide an active risk management program that reduces human suffering and protects City assets through adequate internal controls, loss prevention, insurance, and self-insurance. 10 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication September 6, 2016, Business Meeting Change Order Exceeding 25% - North Mountain Culvert Repair Project No. 85 FROM: Jeffrey McFarland, Open Space and Outer Parks Supervisor, Parks and Recreation Department, j eff. mcfarland@ ashland. or. us SUMMARY The North Mountain Park culvert repair project is underway and much of the project work has been performed. The Contractor, Roxy Ann Rock, is working to accomplish completion of the in-channel part of the project before the Sept. 15, 2016 deadline (end of this year's in-water work period). The contracted engineering firm, the Galli Group, is requiring changes due to new information for the culvert repair in Beach Creek. This is for two reasons: 1) previously unforeseeable safety concerns with degraded conditions within the culvert pipe making it unsafe to work in; and 2) unstable soil conditions requiring over-excavation and additional materials to stabilize subsurface layer and creek embankments. The original bid for the work was $79,179.50. The change order for $35,428.98, a 45% increase over the original price. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: During the spring of 2016, there was partial culvert failure and slope failure along Beach Creek at upper North Mountain Park. Parks contracted with the Galli Group, to provide a solution to embankment and culvert failure. Due to previously unforeseeable safety concerns within the culvert pipe the project engineer has determined that it is unsafe for workmen to perform repairs inside the existing culvert pipe. Therefore, the Galli Group is requiring replacement of the entire culvert pipe rather than the repair of the existing culvert. The additional costs for labor and materials to replace the culvert mean the project costs will exceed 25% of the original bid amount. Approval of this change order by the City Council, will enable the contractor to proceed with the work required by the Project Engineer, and complete the permitted part of the work in the Beach Creek channel by the deadline of Sept. 15, 2016 (during the in-water work period for this year). COUNCIL GOALS SUPPORTED: NA FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: The cost of the project will exceed 25% of original contract bid due to an increase in materials and labor to complete the project as designed by the Galli Group Engineering. As a result of either cancelled, postponed or reprioritized projects in the 2015-127 CIP Plan, Parks will be able to cover the increase in cost within the current CIP budget. A total of $115,000 has been allocated to this project from the CIP fund. Original contract bid amount = $79,179.50 Page 1 of 2 rr CITY OF ^ASHLAND Additional requested amount for change orders = $35,428.98 Percentage of increased change order above original contract amount = 45% STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends approval of this change order. In-water work permit deadline for completion of project work in the stream channel is September 15, 2016. SUGGESTED MOTION: I move approval of a change order in excess of 25% for the Beach Creek culvert replacement project. ATTACHMENTS: • Memo outlining changes due to new information dated August 29, 2016 from Bill Galli, The Galli Group. • Email from Bill Galli, dated August 31, 2016 requiring installation of new deadman at upstream end of pipe and headwall. • Letter from Roxy Ann Rock dated August 31, 2016 referencing Galli Memo and cost proposal 01. • Estimate sheet showing verbal estimates (per conversation with RAR on 8-31-16) for (1) Engineer Memo Item No. 11 for extra rip-rap to armor outflow for $5,530.00 (2) installation of new concrete deadman at upstream end of pipe and headwall for $2,058.00) Page 2 of 2 N G G M situ 6109 02-5154-01 Geotechnical Consulting August 29, 2016 MEMO TO: Bruce Dickens/Ashland Parks FROM: Bill Galli, P.E., G.E. CC: Jeffrey McFarland/Ashland Parks SUBJECT: PROPOSED CHANGE DUE TO NEW INFORMATION NORTH MOUNTAIN PARK SLIDE/CULVERT REPAIR ASHLAND, OREGON Repair of a slope and culvert failure at the south end of North Mountain Park is currently underway. As part of this work the contractor sealed off and diverted water away that was flowing through the culvert. As a result our Project Engineer (along with Parks staff and the Contractor) were able to get a very good view inside the culvert. What was found was that much of the existing culvert's invert was rotted away. Portions of the culvert invert on one side were raised and rotated slightly inward. This is significantly different than what was assumed prior to the mitigation design when water was still flowing through the culvert obscuring this large amount of damage. Safety. In its current condition the culvert is not safe for entrance by workmen. Therefore, the interior repairs shown on the current mitigation plan must be changed. In our professional opinion, personnel must not be allowed to enter this rotted out culvert. Alternate Mitigation. The current mitigation plan calls for removal of the damaged end portion of the culvert and replacement and extension of the culvert with new sections. At this point, with the new information, we recommend the portion of the existing culvert to be removed and replaced encompass the entire culvert. This is best accomplished utilizing open cut methods to remove the failed culvert, prepare the subgrade and install the new culvert. Hydraulics. It appears that a 30-inch diameter High Density Polyethylene (HDPE) culvert would be cheaper to use as the replacement than the current 36-inch diameter Corrugated Metal Pipe (CMP). Computations for flow through pipes, discounting entrance and exit losses (which both will have to contend with), are as follows: 36" CMP Full Flow Capacity; 62.9cfs 30: HDPE Full Flow Capacity; 76.9cfs 612 NW Third Street, Grants Pass, Oregon 97526 - Phone (541) 955-1611- Fax (541) 955-8150 .no 02-5154-01 Page 2 The reason the HDPE capacity is higher is due to the much lower roughness value that is used in the flow equation (smooth interior versus corrugated interior). Therefore, utilizing a 30-inch diameter HDPE culvert will actually increase the carrying capacity of the culvert. This meets the requirements of the City of Ashland, ODFW and the CORPS for such culvert replacements. All current permits still apply. Culvert Installation. In order to install the new culvert sections and not adversely impact the pedestrian bridge, the following course of action should be taken. 1. Place false work beneath the west end of the bridge just east of the west abutment. Wedge tight to help relieve full load on the current abutment. Install sway bracing on the false work to keep it stable. 2. Excavate down to pipe subgrade removing the old pipe and the disturbed soil beneath (1 foot maximum). 3. Slope excavations in a manner to keep them stable. This would normally be at l H:1 V or flatter. 4. Bottom of excavation to be 3 feet wider than the new pipe to allow for compaction beside the pipe. 5. Install pipe bedding and pipe on slightly new alignment to the west. 6. Backfill alongside the pipe and to 18 inches above the pipe with 3/4-inch or f - inch minus crushed rock compacted to 95% of ASTM D-698 (Standard Proctor). 7. Install a full "seepage collar" around upstream end of pipe, 6 to 8 feet downstream of the current head wall. 8. Seepage collar to be a 8-inch wide concrete collar extending at least 24 inches above and below the pipe and to 24 inches on each side of the pipe. Use No. 4 reinforcing steel at 8 inches on center on all sides (minimum 3 bars) including 45° angle bars at all 4 corners (sketch to follow). 9. Backfill remainder of excavation with spoils taken from the excavation to place the pipe. Compact to 98% of ASTM D-698. 10. New culvert may extend to slightly longer length 5 to 10 feet) due to its new orientation (slightly west). 11. Shape west stream bank to accommodate pipe and rip rap protection on channel bottom and channel sides. 5154mem Proposed Change Due to New Info.docx The Galli Group 02-5 l 54-01 Page 3 Note: Care must be taken to protect workmen at all times in this deep excavation. These old fill materials may not be compacted as well as they would be on newer embankments. This can make them more susceptible to sloughing and failure. Trench boxes will likely be needed to protect workmen. The engineer and the City of Ashland, while providing comments on excavation safety, are not responsible for any portion of the construction site safety, including excavation safety. This is at all times the general contractor's responsibility, who must follow all local, state and federal safety regulations. This Memo shall be considered as an integral part of our Remedial Construction Plans and Specifications, submitted to the City of Ashland Parks Department, dated July 6, 2016. Respectfully Submitted, THE GALLI GROUP PR GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTING XGIN . ~O 12 r William F. Galli, P.E., G.E., v~~y 15 Senior ' Principal Engineer t/AM F. EXPIRES: j, 5154mem Proposed Change Due to New Info.doex The Galli Group Jeff McFarland From: Bill Galli <bgalli@galligroup.com> Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2016 1:50 PM To: Jeff McFarland Cc: Bruce Dickens; Andy George; Mel Galli III Subject: Additional items, North Mountain Park Culvert Repair 5154 A couple items that were in my memo or discussed early on the 30th, that the contractor had no knowledge of when he submitted his revised costs, are as follows: 1. Need a water stop around the pipe about 6 to 8 feet downstream of the headwall, as described in the Memo. 2. Need a concrete deadman about 12" thick upstream of the headwall. The end of the pipe would be cast into this for added longitudinal restraint of the pipe. 3. Realigning the pipe somewhat to the west allows the pipe to be longer and its outfall end aligns better with the stream channel (45° instead of 75°). However, this extends it farther downstream. Therefore, this area will need added rip rap to protect a larger portion of the channel. Respectfully, Bill Galli, P.E., G.E. Senior Principal The Galli Group Geotechnical Consulting 612 NW Third Street Grants Pass, OR Ph: (541) 955-1611 FX: (541) 955-8150 1 PO Box 4488 Medford, OR. 97501 31-Aug-16 Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission 1195 East Main Street Ashland, OR 97520 REF: North Mountain Culvert Repair Project #000085 (L-4) Cost Proposal #01 ATTN: Jeff McFarland Mr. McFarland: Please find enclosed a copy of our cost proposal work sheet per the Galli letter 02-5154-01 of 29 August 2016 with the exception of Item No. 11 which is an unknown quantity and will need to be addressed on a time and material bases per the engineer's direction. Upon the 'City's' signing of the change order, please contact me and I can schedule the required equipment and material deliveries. Thank you "r shepherding the approval and signing of the required documents for an accelerated contract performance perms -An rge Co ct' Manager 541- ' 4-5507-Phone 541-535-6051-Fax a better way(c)-ieffnet.org OR Lic #203142 CA Lic #426558 Confidential Cost Proposal 01 (RG) 8/31/2016 A Better Way Consulting 4:44 PM Labor St. Rate St. Hours Sts W/Mark-up unit price BID Unit Price TOTAL BID BI Description Quan unit Class PRICE :Remove existing CMP an 1A fireplace with 30" dia HDPE55.0 LF $-183 $ 24,394.95 $ 443.54 $443.54 $ 24,394.70 ;Exc. (60k) 1.0 ea . - $ - - - - Oper - - 1.0 OP4 $ 59.85 _ 30.0 , $ - - Skid Steer 1.0 $ - - - Oper - - $ -58.36 ----------1 1=~ OP5 $ 58.36 -----10=0-~-s---- 'Grade Checker 1.0 LB2 $ 49.79 40.0 $ - Laborer - - 1.0 LB1 $ 48.56 40.0 $ - r-- ,Crew Tr. 1 0 - - - dely. ;Structural Fill 40.0 cy $ - $ - - - - - - - - - - - - 30" dia. HDPE 60.0 If $ $ _-''Project Manager 1.0 PM1 $ 53.10 - 40.0 I $ - - - - - :Project Manager's Truck------- - -1_0 $ - $ - dely. 314"-0 Cr. Rk. Pipe Bedding 75.0 tns $ $ - - - _ - - $ . - Concrete cut off wall 1.0 cy - - - ,Rebar 10 Is $ $ False work 1.0 Is $ $ - - RENT Bridge Jacks & Pump/wk 1 0 Is $ $ - - - - RENT Trench Shield/wk 1 0 $ - $ $ - Relace Sidewalk removed 2A for Access ----120.0 SF- - $___-22 $ 2,822.84 - --23.52 $23.52 $ - 2,822.40 ----w-_-------------- - - Cement Mason 2.0 ea CM1 i$ 58.30 8.0 $ Laborer LB1 $ 48.56 8.0 i $ Crew Tr. 1.0 ! $ i-------, $ - - - - - - - - Concrete 1 - $ . - - - $ 'Form Mat'I 1.0 Is $ $ - - - - - - - $ - $ Deduct Bid Item No. 10 & 17 ! I - - - - - (Note: CMP is not ;returnable due to special :order) 1.0 (8,26553) ($8,265.50)-$ ---(8,265.50) ~S- ------T----------- - $ (339 $----(8,265_53) Mini Exc (1.0) ea $ $ - - - - - - - - - - 'Skid Steer - -(-0) $ $ - i (1.0) OP5 j $ 58.36 8.0 I 'Oper $ - - - - - Laborer (1.0) LB1 $ 48.56 8.0 $ Crew Tr (1 0) $ - $ TMt. Manhole shield (1.0) ea $ $ - Skid Steer (1.0) ea $ $ - - j O per 0) O P 5 $ 5836 160 $ - - - - - Laborer (2.0) LB1 $ 48.56 16.0 $ (1 - - - Crew Tr. (t0) $ - $ FWS Rebar (500.0) If $ $ - - - - - - - - FWS 10x10x6 Mesh 0 3 shts . $ - $ - - - - . - - Slurry (2 0) cy $ ' $ - - - - ! Grout (1.0) $ , $ - - - - - - Pump (1.0) $ $ $ $ 224.0 $ t7 $ 18,952.26 $ 18,951.60 _ _ 67 - - - mark up 19.44 C:\Users\Andy\Documents\A Better Way\Roxy Ann RocklActive Projects\Ashland N. Mt Park Culvert) t 1 boo 00co0 O zroMONOC O W o oocoooo cat o 0 000 T rn 40 00 i )IOCE z O co © N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0© O N N o C) ~ ~ (D 619. 6'3 6 EFL ~ 6F? Eft b0)} ff~ 6,9- ~ f!? ~4 0 to (7) w w 0 \ I W O z z tp w VIW 0 o o x w L ~ I r, y O ~ LO cr) et o LO CU to C14 0 LU .tJ 2 -a C) o ca Lc) Ca > cf) 00 .r 0 U 0 Y 1 Q a D .C2 N V Q. ,i^1 N M L!! 6LO 14T Ict R} 4~} Efl 60- Q 0 T- IX ~W E> 0 0 0 0 o ) U N T °0 H ~ C-.:; N N N J ~ Q 0 a) ~ F zn ~ Lm F ~ ~ O {Q) wo~oWo~oczo <In(L)0 o cfl C o ~ c C:) 0 c) 04 0 N 04 C4 m 4 Y O N N N Q) d= N c co v Q =3 CU cc 0 > c < =3 =3 0 cc E cu ~n Q Q E ° 'Q m co 0 ca .0 cu 2 ca -j w 0) Ll- (D 7p c: c c: c: LL o 0 0 0 0 CD T a A a r- ~ z p` Y Y_ Y Y r L `p O Q it m U _ m to m N a) 0 (D '75 o a 0000000000 0 0 CO O 00 zy M~ o00o0000oo0 1-: o0o00CD co m o o C o ocioooor`cooo Q0 oci o 00 LO LO Q m w~ T ~ ~ 69- to W- - 6c> 64 609, 6-1' ~64 64 e y} c°o cov v °z 6 > U) ~w- 0 ~w~•-- LM # CL' ¢ LX d Q i U p O O 0 L m V Z X v aCc < 0 LO C> 06 .4- (Y N o G o w o .4- CN 00 r- v U- Z X 3 T-~~ 69)- VD- ~ 70 o . 0 0 0 = o Q z U) a ~ Z U o o C = U O O O O c+3 cu co O O O O E L tll V L.~? W cu > cu N N N CL v M M ~5 - co LO U Q X CO W J Z o a~ C co .J co N >Y Q U LL U - -n m ° ° 0 O 3 N a ~-0 n .n m tW- o < z a: CL d 0 IZ CL Z Q N a' w m cn cn cn o ~ c L U F- rj) L "C f ~ C U) (L s~ Q3 (D x v Y a r~ O w U c6 0 L c 0 ca CL LL z w c: Q o J00M CJ 'o o O z h W o = O O N v U w w y i ~ Y N N r 0 *Q Z Q v ° o 0 0 ` co Q m 0 o ~ 6Z w U LL l N cv coOOOOooc~oo 0) sr o 000 P- CD i N 0') FCO0MC1- ooo , O O o o p co Ce) LO C) O ZOOCG.OOOOO "T O 66 O 06 C6 ~a r O CO 6M. Nr 6c"- Nr 60), r- 69 6,133.64 Q) CO 6Q 6f} ff} " O CO if} t L}: cy g N {'V CV O N N 6% U CV z 619- 69 69 69 't a. W o p G ! ~ Z U w i- O C < w U 0 o "0 (D >1 a) LL Cl) a r C) Lt') C7 r Q N 70 :B N r r O t!) O W ~ co P C:) LO Q U W C14 0 ca < x Q ~ N m a. N U) cn Q > O C) O O -0 to N t` t` ob J Z 0 O cfl cfl C7 C- N r r fl- Z) i,l CY O LY O 0 Q m C3 t7 C 3 d ix O 02 O CD co C) C) CN r ~ ! 0 O CN _ C t M O N Q1 _ F' Q C/) U m c CL LO a) a- J , 0 ` E ~ U CO 4a Q m -0 O U w _3 W co ttX .Q a 0 CD (n CL QL CL CL E Q p C U = U `m co m m c^y z U- 0 cr .C Z(D o V 000000000 O OC) to U.) O O oo N v OOOOOOto 00 W) F- N t- N O O m a; Q OOOCD CD OU')00 L6 Q to C3) O O ui U) to O cu p - r 69- N 60% 0% It 64 Cy 00 00 60- 69 co U') to u- U') ~r T- p 69 609- 6% r (D N > Cl) la) N w 0 i Q = a 0 O 0 O LYi w 0 O D P„? o Q 0~ w Q O O O F- C3? a) O Z v .0 LO U O. cu to ° N ( O O LO 00 (U N Z w o 69- 69)- r (09, cv) E- ~ c d) p C LL m Z OU O p CL 0 C) U) U) U g a C: 00 O Q q c v t3 to co O cis O c~ E CL 0 cu cu .5 2 -0 c N ~ f-- O co w Z Z) CO N ~ v CV) v = OOd J F- 0~0 Q = J LL M C . U ii u. X LC) F- 4-1 D ~ V- N- o 4) ° o N d U v a Imo- z Co C) o K L1C~CLQ tt~ Z~CLI tm],-) Cn U 1 v ,71 `o > L H cu L H a o c ` 25 Y X d? E Z cU to U F- E CL W o m ra © L) W U ~ to v G X O m ca C1) r r ' 3 Z O 0_ z (L p N p v U Z W F- Cl O O O cC: .L d w Y Y N I Q v O d _ ` 0 > (1) F- Q U O O O T- n a m o U) d °zw F- Y 1iL F~- Q ° It It oocr) o00o00o c) N o 0 0 o a-) o 0o CO Co z O O N 0 O o 0 0 O O N O O O O O N- O O O C3 Q Q 00 Q O Q O O Q O d Q O O® N 0 Q O CN CN O 69 ~ V9 V9, W- 69 V% 6, tf} to m v)- 69- 60- "It L 69- W- o bg 6H Co 2 Q 64 ) N CO CL ~ i_- n N O Y a Q x u, L O U) a~ > u o c~ Q U- v M O N p 4 C) 0 0 LO 06 Q , Lo i U IWT i3C ~ Of w ~ 619Q C~v i Q a w OQ :3 cu o X u, z O~ < p 9 cu C) U) 64 F- F- F- U) C%4 C14 O ® d 0 as N t3 O O O O m 0 a ~ co Co as r r C O C) O 7C3O N N Y T- U) 00 N C%4 O Q c N co cn 3 13- E cn a co 0- - U) co 0 ca .5 0) M co Q 4- a k a- < d O O w -j w 2 U) CQ L P C C C C 0 O O G O O CD O•• Q Q Q o 'E .O N O Q Y s Y Y r-. Z o c~ 0) C 0 ZZ o 00000000000 0 000 0 0 d cu 00000000000 0000 00 m~ 006ocsi6U,)000 2 co 666 0 CU c: p o o ° 69- r. 69- N 69} N 69 6% 6 M ¢ 64 6c* 69- 69, 69 44 0 O p ~ N4f~ 69 69 69 7 > v o 3 w F- LO Cf) V O ca w¢ w H T LO z tt5 v) LO d a.+ Of :3 o Lf) ~ N r 0 C) O W u io, Co r 2 Of w 6 69 Eg 6F} O F- Q o L ~ 6+9 < :31 c CD LLoz°O O a) :D U) ~U IT CN a) " O O o o ° v o O `r? (D a) a) W coo N N Q w ` U) C: :3 cu CO (D cu U) c y" C m u, J ¢ U W D vii ii ILI Q LL Q F L U cc x ~ O O QU? N O m U 0 0 T- (D Q° d~ Q r, CL z rr o OE u Cy- U-) n Cy- (-J) v ~ o L i= c U) m c m (1) CV fl3 3r Y } d U) a Q U L z v Q It U i O ~ 0 E ~ z W o CL 0 Q T ca U - c • E U) 3 U- 0 :5 E N o 0 o O O O O a) Q O a w Y Y LL C) d) LO CL O d w O p O f u U O S~ D Z w U LL w N 'cr 00N oocoorCD 0CD 0o f.. Lr) 0 0 0o r, U-) pro ap CD or, z0ob-CD r.00ooo t- r o o O ® N Lr) C.0 CD oU ai Z oa~ioq ©o40Cq a; C) C) C) co - ro N f!} t~? " o N o 04 V* 0 64 d 64 64 693 64 69} ~p 0 60- 6g 6% 6R N U') O 0 69~ cvCO Q~ 64)- 6a C4 CL 69 69. o p N z °z o It F o CL < CD af L) `o U) N c 70 0 O 16N Cr} °O UL.L c ) 4- 0 W~ ~ j- O J Li? 06 (6 LO L U tr.1 c to 6~3 ~ s N ~ fl. Q ~ D x U) LLt 0 o O o 0 Q o :3 o° _ a) U) N tf) a N ca O 6) Cb L O U O w 0 w O (Y O x O O Q CG U p C4 co N r. r r ~ o o O tai Co O N N p cn cn (D C: a > o E cu Q 0~ o c O 0 a a CO ¢ d N w E L c J v v = O (D W m o ` 0 0 0 0 0 Q !L O E- ~ LM a- 0- 0- OL i CD i = 7 D >Z ~o Y Y Y Y _ L- - v o a- z > U CA J 2 2 2 22 . o ~ U o O 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 tC> O F- (D ce) C14 LO C W) C CL Z 3 .0 (D N N 0 Lt) m m ❑ o 0 o c0 0 0 o 0 co o Q 6 oo co a n c~ t- O i~ p W N 69. v 64 U') 69 U) 69 ca 69. N co o a; N bF} O d U) ° Z ° Z) 89 64 69 64 69 ~ z ~ 69- 6s ~ ~ c~ > w O w wQ 5. ~.U m 0 0 0 o O m o 000 c U o o < 0 0 0 LO LO a) LO LO o z U') CN 00 J) ca 6 L, Ln W), ca j Y .~.i ~ ~i J C) O N r ~t O 6g r r r- O w U w W z LY r 619- E!} 60'+ Eft 6+3 ffl C7 Q c ~ E !i t- EL' O I- 6~ ~ 6~ o G ` o Z O O ~,r to CL N C \j * a) W o 0) 0 0 O o LO co cu a L9 ~ W ZP' N N 4 tfJ E ~ N 5 w_ E a- to co (D F- O D- Z c - 00 LO o LO rl- C w _l cc) ¢ ~ W JLLU-) M U O U I- LL .i.. R7 U = s x co C U 0 a V 'a '0 ~ _0 F 0 0 O O C3) c -b c a; c 6) c C~ C Q tY d O Q . Z Ol of CL [ cn cn cr cn u; v v o N CD L F-" ~ 00 00 c a (D cn Y U ) v z° x r a) m 0 n- to L O cD U U Q i d) w r X Y c (n ,a D- LO 0 0 = v U- w W C W a) m O LO (N LO _0 o -C LO LO LO z O z cn o E U- 0 0 0 0 ~ o o L f-- O a a ° Y Y U- f 0 Y r N r O O cz c O U- 0 r' W 1- CL . t Q Q Q W d 0 W o U CII) 0 w z Y Y Y ii ' v, I m 0 J 0 Clq NU') 0000000000 0~ 0000 o BOO ty r.6')CD Z O OOOOOOOOO 0000 N 00 Srioco ~;roo 0'0* 0'0'9(6 fag ~oo~ o C*4 M O 2 N 60- 64 Ef3 tf} 69 tf} ~ 'Tr ~ 03~ a N C6 69 C N ¢ tfY ° fR W w z Z ca Y. o o 0 :3 w O 0 Q~ N a c~ T w O < LL N L,7 0 to O l1.1 In Lo C) Cfj t 0 -t o r O Q Q W -0 N U w O Q cu c 0. o o L c o O Q O o o o = J Q ~ CN F- I` F- F. z ca O F T- 0 O C c C F-: m v U O O O O O Q m U o co to N ~ r r C OOO t!) o cy CN Y CU Co r.0 CO `v o N CN O 0 N ~ _ c cu i>> CL 0 N a, cm E v Q :3 =3 N V M a Q Q O a; w co co m o a c c c c It < = 0 0 0 0 m a Q a n. D =3 M =3 0 .0- LL E C) U O co c` +s m cu m a) M L 0 t1 z Q 2 2 2 2 a) 0 (D 0OOOOOOOOOO 0 00 0 C) zz a v m UnoUnoooOOOOO 0 00 0 00 m 41) - m C,5 ° m 9- N 0 u°g 0 tf3 649. 0O- V Q °E!}- 0En- o~ 0 0 ~ - V~ 64 55- LO .C O ° C: Q Z if. 6ek > m Wo w m 3 Otf xQ x LLI cc O O ® Uz° no U O LO U) 0 L6 0 ~ O o a iu 0 Co -0 C) CV T z c CD Ofw so~f CY) O Q cu O Q z CO T O z c) 00 N: 0 o a) cu O D a) ca to © E v LO a) LL' LO N J F- U) O N M L a co co LO H O r- cr Q D U tt ti a ~ LO F- o ~ o cu w o o Q x m c U v c '0 Q d Q CL d. z fL y-- tY cn = cn C!J fY U3 U) c o t4 > a c co CL 0 ca O E 0 fy W tit 7 F- m ~ J(D z z d m w 0 o a a OC N C) F- a_ O O O W ( O L- LL W z S° r r r( O O N O O O N O M O r.. ('O 000 Q CO N 1- O r Co 00 f Z O O O O w O LO O O O 0) O O 00 p O r N O co CV CV O N 6 r C? O C5 CO' O CV ci 6 O® - M O O ` F- UM) LO O r 64 0) epq~ CD to)- Co Wg 1-- 64 r cti 69)- 69- 6c)- ~ r N ~ 69 M M 2 N r r r 69} r N r~ 0 N N d £f} 6% 6% Ef3 a. V9. D z 4 O Q C) z O H CL 0 ~ w o M o ~ N ~ r V? a°04 can o LLi y~ (16 00 1~ CY) v Fo- J t 'Od' N o C3i 0 cu L-J 6c = J~ 69. 69. 64 69. .0 < x =3 cu W O Q L 0 W o N C: .Q E> O O O O O 0 0 0 0 = N f r z CL o o a' o o o o ¢ m is a - cfl ~ r r C= g o o N N Y (D C6 O N N M Q CL' N 4.r 4, -j L- Q C) c N a d 43 ? O E ca t Q Q o L o -j w U) tCJ L c LL Q G Q ? El a a a CL o Ny O O i iie Y d p f~ U U cu M to cv L p a- z a U LL G J `2 TL ~ 0 E 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 'o 0 0 0 O r- 00 O O 1~ CL Z a, o_ 0 0 0 O O O O O Ltd O W F w N w O O w 0 0o0oC)o~060 (7; Q® co M o® w O o o W~ M 6% qlT cg~ O Vy CGF). qt6')-CN v- 69. 69. M I- T- 64~ p ? ZZ ~ d9 Ef> 6 z ~ C%j !il W CC") U 75 a Lu d w ~ C= O O O O O m 0 0 0 C? o o a Q O O O LO Lf) Lf) O 00 Z ca ca s- LO O LO 00 00 »-o r O O Oo r- N 6R IT 4- U r- 1`- C3) p W v V Z C O 4 bg V3- ffi b4 z N 69- o U ~I Ll- I U) (n a t`a~ Q Z C) 00 V z~ 0 O Q o c 0 O a co ca ? Can w cv d' N M a O O u LO C: -j ~O v U) Z r CO L2'_ M ~ to J i- 0 0 0 Q C: U) W J Lf) r U lL LL Q ~ * ~ O Q LL Ca O X U 0 d C v Q (u Q) O cL z C o' sn ire cn o= uj ` > > C: U L ~ ~ C C Y U N can y X * . (13 Q O Cn C ( r 1 i o LL ~ W fY LO us Q: O (D M Ul z o z o o w o U- 0 E- Z o o N a o ~ a Q O w a w° Y Y LL (L 5 ca > ~ Y N N r 0 0 LL 0 Z CQj 0 o O N N 0 W~ ILL, cy Z W J U Y iL Z IL- cu U 0 Q d o ~1 v Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission North Mountain park Culvert Repair Project No. 000085 Additional Costs Estimates (Verbal estimates per conversation Parks Staff had with Roxy Ann Rock on 8-31-2016 addressing: Prepared by Jeffrey McFarland, Open Space and Outer Parks Supervisor 9-1-2016 (1) Galli Memo item No. 11 calling for extra rip-rap to armor outflow for $5,530.00 (2) Galli Email item No. 2 calling for installation of new concrete deadman at upstream end of pipe and headwall for $2,058.00 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication September 6, 2016, Business Meeting Continuation of Grandview Drive Discussion FROM: Michael R. Faught, Public Works Director, michael.faught(?ashland.or.us SUMMARY This is a continuation of the June 21, 2016, July 19, 2016 and August 2, 2016 Council business meetings. As directed by Council, staff has developed a cost estimate to construct phase one of the proposed interim Grandview Drive shared road project. That estimate, including a 30% contingency, is $127,200. If approved, staff will hold a second public meeting with residents, finalize engineering plans and attempt to construct the project by December, 2016. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: The Grandview Drive guardrail has been on the Council's agenda three times: June 21, 2016, July 19, 2016 and August 2, 2016 (see attached Council Communications). At the August 2, 2016, Council meeting staff presented an interim solution for that section of Grandview where the non-permitted guardrail was installed that includes the following: • a 3' refuge on the guardrail side; • an 18' paved section; • a 3' refuge on the uphill side; • reduced speed limit to 15 mph; • installation of two speed indicator signs; • make the Skycrest Drive and Grandview Drive intersection a 4-way stop; • leave the non-permitted guardrail in place as recommended by both the traffic engineer and Construction Engineering Consultants Inc. (CEC). As directed by Council at the August 2, 2016 meeting, staff had CEC provide cost estimates to construct the proposed interim solution that includes the four-way stop sign at Skycrest and Grandview. CEC's cost estimate based on contracting all of the work out (see attached) for the interim solution is $127,200. That figure includes a $29,000 contingency, but does not include an estimated cost of $20,000 for the Electric Department to move two of its power poles. The interim project does not include costs to level the existing road or to widen the refuge areas to 5 feet which reduced the cost down from $240,000. If Council were to approve phase one at this meeting and staff is able to get the two other utilities on our power poles to move their facilities within our timelines, staff believes we can construct the interim phase one project by December 1, 2016. On the other hand, if the other utilities are unable to Page 1 of 3 ~r CITY OF ASHLAND move their utilities in time to meet our accelerated schedule, then the project will have to be delayed until next spring. If that occurs, staff will install the new stop signs at Skycrest Drive and Grandview Drive and place two "Share the Road" signs on Grandview in the fall of 2016. Additionally, if the interim option is approved, staff will require the property owner to submit a right- of-way permit application for the non-permitted guardrail. Phase II Update Staff should have the survey work on the lower half of Grandview completed within the next couple of weeks. After the survey work is completed CEC will complete the engineering and design component of the project. CEC estimates they can provide conceptual drawings within three months and if approved, another three to six months to complete construction drawings for the second phase of the proj ect. New Information There have been five reported crashes on this stretch of Grandview, none of them in the last ten years (see attached map). Our traffic engineer's review of the five reported crashes is as follows: "Four of the five crashes were in the westbound or southwest direction and resulted from drivers not being able to maneuver through the 90 degree bend on Grandview before reaching the stop controlled intersection at Skycrest & Grandview. All were single car collisions with fixed objects and resulted in vehicles running into either fences or trees when leaving the roadway. The remaining crash was heading eastbound in the vicinity of Ditch Road and involved a single car collision with a fixed object. The vehicle went over the embankment and was stopped by a tree. The stated cause for the crash was fog and the driver being distracted (reaching down to adjust the heat). "It states on all five crash reports that Dick's Towing was contacted. None involved injury, but no further detail was provided. Attached is a map showing roughly where the crashes occurred based on crash descriptions and diagrams from the crash reports." Options: 1. The Council could decide to leave the guardrail in place and take no further action. Staff and the traffic engineer could support this option. 2. The Council could decide to leave the guardrail in place and authorize staff to construct the interim shared road project this fall. This is the preferred option by the Public Works staff and traffic engineer. 3. The Council could direct staff to require the contractor to remove the guardrail. This option is not recommended by Public Works staff or any of the contracted engineering firms. COUNCIL GOALS SUPPORTED: N/A FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: The engineer's estimate for the interim solution, which includes a 30% contingency, is $127,200. This first phase of the project could be funded this year as proposed in the Street Fund budget by reducing planned slurry seals by $130,000. Page 2 of 3 1. ~r CITY OF ASHLAND The Street Fund budget allocated $200,000 per year for slurry seal work in the 2016/17 biennium budget. This project is dependent on our Street crew completing crack sealing and base repair in order for the roads to be slurry sealed. In 2016 City crews were only able to prep $140,000 worth of slurry seal work. Based on that, staff feels reducing the anticipated 2017 slurry seal project costs to $130,000 more accurately reflects the amount of slurry seal work that can actually be accomplished. STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends Council leave the existing non-permitted guardrail in place and authorize staff to construct the shared road project this fall. SUGGESTED MOTION: 1) Move to leave the non-permitted guard rail in place. 2) Move to approve the interim plan for improving Grandview Dr. to the shared road standard with final approved engineering drawings. ATTACHMENTS: CEC Engineering Drawings CEC Preliminary Cost Estimates Traffic Engineering Memo Street Classification-Shared Roadway ACE engineering LLC - Guardrail Engineer Observation Report June 21, 2016 Grandview Council Communication July 19, 2016 Grandview Council Communication August 2, 2016 Grandview Council Communication Grandview Shared Road Questions - Ashland City Council Code Complaint Response to Mr. Rostykus Legal Department Code Deferral Explanation Grandview Crash Data 1997-2016 Letter from Hathaway Koback Conners, LLP dated September 1, 2016 Page 3 of 3 ~r ENTER J~ 6EIE-6Ld (I Y5) Ytl,~ ~ 89z9-G~~, (I~~) 'Hd I 31 Y0 03/~~OadaV ~ ~ ~i o N p T09L6 U09990 `QHOd991N • 1~Z.,i X09 '0'd ~ ~ ~ p z ~~d~ ~p i our ~ ~31V0 ~03/~~Occ'dt'~ ~ irG r V ~ ~ ~I w ~ O 0 ~ ~W m '~m 03/iObNoV~ ~ d- ~ ~ ~i~a~~~hl~ ~314'0 ~ f i ~ ~ ' c~ ~ m ~ ~ 1,~ ~ ~~0 i ~~/zo X31 va svdy `xmw ;~e a~,+~~h~' i ~ ~ ~ r o e' ll ?I Z ~ I ~0~aeo 5~0 ~ yi/~ o ro Nr~~w ~~9 NNi ✓~o~ Z ~ w i ~ I g G° ~ ~g J C ' ! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~I ~ > U ~ w ~ ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ ilk 2 y d~~~ -Q V p J ~ ~ c a~ i~ai ~~xE d3\~~ / ~ ~ Z ~ 1 \ D ~ I~I iy U w ~ n ~1 ~.®~~j' _ V rr M ~ I Fo ~ ~ Q ~i }tit r LL ~ i ~ W Q ~ l1 ~ - w z F J ~~~~I°zo / a z ~ ~ 0 ~ ~i ~ ti Z D 5 w _ i ~ w ~ ~ F- F W ~ ~ U w U 2~ ~ ~ w w ~o z Z Yti d ~ ~ ~~"lo~ pN = :a ~ ~ K? ~ i•~ O w~,Q N z ~>~z~ U ~ p •0 i~ ~L~~~~ ~ ~ ~ G~~~ ~ J JS / ~ ~4 U1 W Q ~~WWQ IF C,4~~2 w U ~ w ~>Z ~ X u u ~y ~ 'W z ~ w z Hera U~ ~ Q w - m a ~~~=~z ti ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ C~ V 3 1 ti ti W i a U1r~;~~ ill' / m ~ ~ c~ ~ n~ u _ ~ a~ N,~~ ~~~I~ Z z d Q w o ~ e , 2 ~ ~ n ~ 3 ~ Q w~ > ~ ~ W W ~ ~a ~ ~Z t~~/~ ~ h~0 ~ J 2 Z ~ 7 2 Y Z Q J ~f /l~ k \ ZC j e j ; ~ ~ ~ ti ~ Q Z L ~ W ~f W' Z ~ U ' t li 3 ~ C~ ~S QZ - ~ ~~J W~ ~ J p ~ ~ 's ~ W ~ 0 \ ~ ~ r L ~ ~ I "f'' f ~ ~ ~i Q c~0 ~ ^ E~ 2 W 2 2 ~ 3 IW W II O ~ Q Z ~ ~ QJ~U~~ ~ p3 ~(n30 ~ V'1 W tit ` ~ r 0 O ~ ~ U ~ ~ Qo ~~_~QT wM ;~3~aa~a~°'o~ UO LL ~ ~ lL p ~ ~C i ~ o~'~~o~ W ~ + ~ ~~~~~c~~ ~ u ~ coo ~iC'~ 2222222 2 2 2 22 p <C ~ ' G[;j~l,<~ W k`kkkkkk k k k kk Q W W W W W W W W W W W W J~~ r ~ ~ I ~ ° Q u_ p , ds ~,~~s o~~ w I I I I I I~ iii ~ w ~ J U to o~c Z ~ ~ ~ III "Ix o Z U Q ~ T ~ J Z > o p I I I I I I I I iii I' 1 1 ~ Q I I J ti s. ~ W W W W W W W~ ii ~ J Q - iii ~ w f_ ~ ~ - I I I I I I I ~ F V ~ ~ I W I- r Z ~ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ W Q ~ ~ `w Z 0 v~ :n ~n 3 l~ u C ~ W W ~i W W W ~ Q Q 1 \ [n ~ n ,'J ~ ~ n rn i ,y / \ U 0 0 0 0 0 W l,i b l~ jf IM O i ~ 0 ~ OOG30Z O C \ ~c 4 2~7~!Y iy ,n, 'L Q O \ R a R R 4 ~c 4 U ~ d S r N` Z C7 ~ ~ ~ ~ pi i I ` ~ \ ~ ~ ~ `I ~ ~ ~1 / i r = ~~I 133~1S _M31n,~NNnS ~Q ~aU o w ~~~c ~?J Q22 a ~ ww~,~ c~ Zz\ f ~ ~ ~ r a ~~d o s:°c w ~ o ~ ~ c ~ m w~~ Q z a Q c,?z Q ~ e~° z ~ o `~c i ~'w J G az~ Q w~ ~ ~ V~`4r ~ C U,?~^ 3 Y v ~ W T~;c Q ~ Z w W 2~ C~~~, ~ h~ luCz.  adnod~dde o m I o N ~TeR ~ ~ sETS-sc~. (T~s) xv3 • eszs-sr.~ (T~e) •xa Leo ti ~ ~ ~ g ~ ~ GE bip T09L6 NOJ3i10 `0803Q31Y~ ~ZLT XOH •0'd 03~OdddV \ W w 3 ~ ~ d0 ^`J b r J ~ v by j~ aw I ~03/iOdddV a c~ ,i U db~ Q ~ 0 a ti''°~ ~ ~ ISM Z 7Il S~ al eo ~ ~ ~ n ~ ~a~ ° e ~ '~ti n W i Cj1'~ 03~021~IdV • ~ ~ w czw ~ Ww~ ,,p m ~ ONI2I~~~iI~i~i~ 3CV0 ~ a~~ a ~ ,~4Y ~ v i 'l' 0 Q~ 9WV 'NMW ~.19 03N03H0 ~ ~ ~ o c3 I ~IS~Il~I~51~ si/ro aleo J`~~rl ~ Q~ ~ ~~~~b3d0 5t~ ~I 91~C0 31V0 NMW ~,(8 NM'✓da ~ ~ V ~ Z J gw ~ l ~I~ Q p Qw W~ W ~ ~W ~ J _ > U~ Z g - - - v z 0 U ~ W~ I ' _ _ m ~ ~ ~ ~ / i , l 2220-- o ~ o Q / ~ a ~ a j ~ > $ a f / I~F~ ~ i~ ~ ~ z 9P t ~ w ~ OF ~ gbh ~~i i ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ iii o o y4~~ ii%; } r ii ii ~ ~ J ~ iii ~ q5 ~ cWc ( i i %~~qti Q~ ` ~ , r w~ W JJ c~ ; ~ jV o ~ w ~ 1/l ~ z~ ? cn 1 " ~ 0 ~ / +l'r, ~ I (ll~,/ I U ~ i;j U z ~ i~~% 1~1111J ~ ~ r' r ; i l z V' ~ U k E- x ~7, . ' / ' / w i ~ iir~, + ~ / elf ~ ,,..~~`/i~ ~ j i iiii sir// o i/ i 1 i ti ~ ~ ~ / it . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~,~P J; ii ~i ~ U w / p~~ ~ ill ~ ,iii ~~~i ~ l ~ ~ W 2 ~~5 ~i r, , ~ / tiW ti~ rv i ~ I / / ~,O 'n ~ \ / i / ~ ~ ~ ~ Q w3v ~ ~ ~ , /„~i~~//! ~b ~ ow A ro / ~ °i Q R V A ~~J/a ~ 1 ' 4Y~~ oQ 2 ' ,(w'1r 1 / / ~ %S~ Q nl 2 / J / i /1f ~ ?j!/ '1111ir~1~ Jf~ ~ QH p ter r 1; Im ~l/t W Q i(1J6 ~ rjii','l//p (7ri wv~i ijr fl J~~ i r ,J(( as ZO + , ~ ~ Iii ~ l _ alI j lJ(( ~ Q Z ~ ~~°,+li~l~I'' ~ \ ~ h1b I~ l~ rJ' ~ ww ~ ll~ I I; ~ ~I Af i ~ ~lilil! i~~ Z~ Q d' d +Ijll(Jil` ~,I: ,1 P li~il• 1, w° Z Oz I ~ 1 ~ - ltl~`i1lj/ J \ !t` ~ I ~ Z all J I ! t ~ IM+ + ~ ; p _ 0 w 0 J t J/ ~ \ i t Q Q oC / U i z QU 1+1111/i~/,/ ? ` ii'Ir~j.,Ol J(+k U' Zd I 1 1 1 1 1 1 i~ I',~~' ~ l~t ~ Z w I+ li j ri I ++I+~ `fJ l Z a 0 pw~ ~I1~I,Ir li it II+ p- Z F-I- Q Q 11 I I i 11 ~ + ~ ~ w ~ f- 0 a 1 VVVVV ~ '.i, 60f#l = Jd ~ p ~ p~ ~ Z ' I I dpW it I ` II I ! WM W W U~Q 11111111 ~j o \ I`~``Vil !1 ~ ~i 0w ~Q QOF i ll,il,' ~ r,~'wh ! I I roc Z_ 0„ ~~d Illill~l~, r~~ V~~ilj; I aQ m~ aQ II ! ~ g I ! ~ ~ , I ; w ~ z + ill,hhll~,ll ~ I ' U ` 1 ~ ~ L.L. I _ ~ ~ ~z +111;+,1+, ~ ~ I I . Z~ ~ Z m I r ll l ill lr'~ 1 ' N 1„ ' I ~ Y1 I I~ y i N ~ i i I- Q 2 )C ~l ~ 11,``11 ~ { Il.j I ' , I~ ILL 3 cn ~ Wo ,11111 +111 ~ W ~ liii'I 1 it7 m~ 1' 11r 1~ I~ W I, I I ~ l 1~ o y . ~ ~ is ,1 ~ I ti 4 II 111' ~ ~ Ili i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 11 a J 1111+1,+ E' ~ ~ I t11~ > ~ ~ ` ~ " ~ W Q I. 'I ~ ~ i 1aQ Ld q'll=1d C9 Q II 1111' ~IhII II ; o ~ I jllli, ivy, v v k ~ I,IIj ,I I li' W Ipji . vv~ w U I U I''ll!~III; \ 1 w o I a ~ I' ~l o ~ II~I'I!i III r, 1 ~ w ~ i , a i ! r I Ii ~ k I II' I. i' w 1 1 w Illlil lll~l 11111 ' ^ \ ICI Ijl I i I I} ~ ~ 11111111111~11111~'~ i~ 1 :~IIi~ F U illlii~liill~n~l ~r ~ I Ir ~ 11' I r w a ~jill',11I~I li c~ 1 Iili 1 Q W +ilil+!' i II~'I ii ~ ~ I!~!!' ~ I o p ' w VIII VIII I t~ 1 +1111' I I 1 a u. ~ ICI ~ lilii lil~l ~i . a +,111j ! i 1 ! ~ 0 0 Ilil'+lllil I 1 ='~jiljlil I~ J~ a Jr++rtlll'll~l~'I ~1 ~ ° Ihi IIi ~ p 0 +ry"'r(i(li;!(I ri~l w Ijill I I! I U U~ ~ If' INlydiril ii1 r i r! i I ~ ! ? ~ p lih,,li ~+I J l~l,;i1~ m 0> d + ~1j11111~ ,lrl; i I 1 W a~ ~ i r !I+il'~11il11 ' ri; J ; ~ - a co Q ',II„"ail F,v ~ li~` ~ r 0 III i L11ri11 i III wi I. , ! i ~ } IWI11 (I1li II III+, X111!! IIi ~Fer~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~6( ~'~fZ~ _ ~d OZ Qv O lii1 '1+11++1 llorr i-1 I 0 ~ c r/ +11+1+11 (1''I+ I u (rye ' I ~ - a 0 w ~ i~llir+li;~ll~hll+r i ry~ l o Q~ Q ~ ti , ; 1,`;iil!I;illiri"I,' i! , ~ ! ry 3 zF 111 Ili,~li,r!!ll,r ; - I I ~ o~ ~ ~ , r I~llii,l,, , ' ~ o Q w ~ 1 ' ~ rl1}l l ~ I 1 11 1 9L ?Z+~l = ld ~ dS~ ~ o ~ m N wU' did 1(ll i ,'itl~llllll~ J 111 r ~ i~o~i~~n F- Z JiJ llll~illlllirlli ' ~ ! 1+ 1 i,~ ~ o ~ ~ o, o ~ q ~ l7 U ~ Ilia+l,l~il~?ril r r o ~ i !t ~ ~ ~Z Z~ 'J 1111'(111 \ ~ v'~ ~ 2v~~r~o iW-1 1 I'I ~ I R ~ ~ ~ ~ m~ro ~ ¢ o ~vQi~ llal'1, J rf ~^I i ~I i~ _ w ~ ~U ~~P~~/~ ~ ~N°~vN I U w ~i+lil \t i I 6L Z6-rl! = Odd Qa p/// ~ J 2,~ ^ v h r7 r m ~ J ~ ~~+t llf~lll ll 1( 'I C i ~~Il ~ I ~ ~ VIO /r1Q~N~ Q ~JJ ~ ti ~ til N ~ Z t- \ 7 J~ ~ 0 ~ / ~ ~ fa. u / ( 11111 I / \W 111 n l ~ <4 / ~ ~ z a ~ ~ 111i~1~~1~J ~ ~l~l I +i. ~r ,225o~`k/ ~ ~ ~ ~ c"N~o~ ~ 0., U o ~ 1 ~ J ~ r~ AV ~ A ~ V / ~ F' ro ~ ^ t ~ ~iJl'JJ'r I~1111~1111 J i~v\ 1\w 1 ~~I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I \ ~ \ ~ ~ I I 1 1 i,l - P ~ \ ask ~ U p~ 0 0 0 0 "''mac 11 + \ \ ~µV, ~ ~ ~ ~ III (J 'hoop o ~ ~ `\I ~Nn^~ of I i'1 O N h _ y  Ao - 133a1S M31iU NN(1S c" " W hoc Ms JNIIS _ X; Srx3 w° a3ilns v saran nNU SAP III ~n - P.O. BOX 1724 • MEDFORD, OR 97501 • PH (541) 779-5268 • FAX (541) 779-3139 GRANDVIEW DRIVE PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE AUGUST 31, 2016 Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Total Price General Work 1 Mobilization 1 LS $9,800.00 $9,800.00 2 Install/Maint Erosion Control 1 LS $2,500.00 $2,500.00 3 Clearing and Grubbing 1 LS $2,500.00 $2,500.00 4 Traffic Control 1 LS $7,500.00 $7,500.00 5 Construction Survey Staking 1 LS $4,000.00 $4,000.00 Sub-Total $26,300.00 Street Work/Site Work 6 General Excavation and Haul-off (Cut) 500 CY $20.00 $10,000.00 7 General Embankment (Fill) 10 CY $25.00 $250.00 8 AC, Level 2,1/2" Dense HMAC (Widening) 25 TON $100.00 _ $2,500.00 9 Base, 3/4"-0" Crushed Rock 125 CY $32.00 $4,000.00 10 Decomposed Granite 55 CY $25.00 $1,375.00 11 Geotextile Fabric, Woven 275 SY $1.50 $412.50 12 Pavement Removal & Haul-off 15 CY $30.00 $450.00 13 Sawcut Existing Asphalt 820 LF $2.50 $2,050.00 14 Retaining Wall 475 SF $30.00 $14,250.00 15 Striping & Signing 1 LS $8,500.00 $8,500.00 16 Speed Indicator Sign (Cost to be verified) 2 EA $6,000.00 $12,000.00 Sub-Total $55,787.50 Utility Work 17 Drainage Inlet 1 EA $1,800.00 $1,800.00 18 Curtain Drain 110 LF $45.00 $4,950.00 19 12" RCP Storm Drain 100 SF $75.00 $7,500.00 20 Rip Rap Outfall 1 LS $1,500.00 $1,500.00 Sub-Total $15,750.00 Total $97,837.50 30% Contigency $29,351.25 Grand-Total $127,188.75 Quantities/Cost to be determined from Utility Company plans This preliminary estimate is based on concepts and not engineered plans. This estimate is intended to give a general range of the costs associated with the type and scope of work involved. Notes: 1. Unit prices based on recent construction costs and do not reflect actual contractor bids. Actual Contractor bids may vary significantly 2. This estimate was prepared prior to engineered documents and is based on the preliminary conceptual layouts 3. A detailed cost estimate should be completed after engineered documents are completed and approved. 4. Estimates for required Utility Company work should be obtained from the respective utility providers. 5. This estimate does not include costs associated with landscaping / irrigation 6. Volumes and quantities listed here are approximate. 7. There are additional costs associated with the project not included in this estimate such as building permit fees, Page 1 of 1 utitlity company fees, etc. It is the owners responsibility to determine all cost of the project. T~tANSDO~TATlOE! NWN RltIG, LK Memorandum S.O. Transportation Engineering, LLC 112 Monterey Drive To: Mike Faught, Ashland Public Works Director Medford, OR 97504 Date: 06/14/2016 Telephone 541.941.4148 Fax 541.535.6873 Subject: Grandview Drive Guardrail Review Kwkp1@Q.com Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering, LLC evaluated a guardrail that was installed on Grandview Drive along the upper section of roadway north of its intersection with Skycrest Drive. The analysis was prepared to address citizen concerns and determine whether it would be safer to remove it or leave it. Background Grandview Drive is a two-lane Neighborhood Collector under existing conditions, which means it distributes traffic from higher order streets such as Boulevards and Avenues to neighborhood streets. It has a posted speed of 25 miles per hour (mph) with a warning sign within the curves of 15 mph. The City's Transportation System Plan (TSP) recommends changing the functional classification of Grandview Drive to a Shared Street, which is a classification designated for streets with right-of-way constraints by topography. The constrained right-of-way prevents typical bicycle and pedestrian facilities such as sidewalks and bike lanes. The entire width of the street, therefore, is collectively shared by pedestrians, cyclists, and vehicles. The recommended speed of a Shared Street in the TSP is 15 mph. Field Data Grandview Drive was measured in the field to be approximately 19 feet in paved width with sections through the curve as narrow as 17 feet. There is a consistent gravel shoulder of at least 2 feet the entire length of the guardrail, which widens out at the upper portion to over 4 feet. There's a steep drop off along the north side of Grandview Drive. F. x P ;r , Ni b Other field observations included low vehicular volumes and speeds. The pedestrian activity was also fairly low while out there with only one jogger observed in the hour. There were no cyclists observed. We were out taking field measurements in late September on a weekday between 1:00-2:15 pm. Grandview Drive may get more pedestrian and bicycle activity later in the day after work. Evaluation and Recommendations The goal of roadside safety devices is to protect motorists from potentially serious hazards located near the travel way. Severe embankments are a hazard that, if encountered, can be deadly, and this is one of the reasons that guardrails are used. In looking at the guardrail on Grandview Drive, it meets design requirements and was installed correctly. There is no official crash history to date, but City staff remember one vehicular crash in the area of the guardrail many years ago when a vehicle went over the edge. From our standpoint, many factors contribute to this not having a high crash occurrence, which include low traffic volumes, low traffic speeds through the curve, and limited sight distance which makes drivers and pedestrians more cautious when on Grandview Drive, but this doesn't mean that a crash won't ever occur. In the event of a crash, the guardrail reduces the severity. If a vehicle or pedestrian is forced over the edge then the result is severe. It is our opinion that Grandview Drive is safer with the guardrail than without it based on these reasons. We hope this addresses citizen concerns and provides the background necessary for the City to move forward. Please feel free to contact us with any further questions or concerns. Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering, LLC ,z-, t PAD, , Kimberly Parducci, PE PTOE 53PD PE Firm Principal REGt)N ~z y PAg4 16 Memorandum Page 2 Shared Street Provides access to residential uses in an area in which right-of-way is constrained by natural features, topography or historically significant structures. Shared Streets may additionally be used in circumstances where a slower speed street, collectively shared by pedestrians, bicycles, and autos, is a functional and preferred design alternative. The design of the street should emphasize a slower speed environment and provide clear physical and visual indications the space is shared across modes. See Figure 18.4.6.040.6.8. Prototypical Section: Shared Street 18' 25' Figure 18.4.6.040.6.8 Shared Street Street Function. Provide vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle neighborhood circulation and access to individual residential and commercial properties designed to encourage socializing with neighbors, outdoor play for children, and creating comfortable spaces for walking and biking. Connectivity: Connects to all types of streets. Average Daily Traffic. 1,500 or less motor vehicle trips per day. Managed Speed: Motor vehicle travel speeds should be below 15 mph. Right-of-Way Width: 25' Pavement width: 18' minimum, maintaining full fire truck access and minimum turning paths at all changes in alignment and intersections. Motor Vehicle Travel Minimum 12' clear width. Lanes: Bike Lanes: Not applicable. Bicyclists can share the travel lane and easily negotiate these low use areas. Parking: Parking and loading areas may be provided within the right of way with careful consideration to ensure parked vehicles do not obstruct pedestrian, bicycles, or emergency vehicle access. Parkrow. Not applicable. Sidewalks: Not applicable. Pedestrians can share the travel lane and easily negotiate these low use areas. Refuge areas are to be provided within the right of way to allow pedestrians to step out of the travel lane when necessary. Allan Goffe, Professional Structural Engineer ACE engineering LLC P. 0. Box 231, Ashland, Oregon 97520 Telephone (541) 552-1417 ace-engineeri ngllc.com ENGINEER OBSERVATION REPORT PROJECT: Vehicular Shoulder Guardrail, Grandview Drive, Ashland, Oregon DATE: 07-07-2016 DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE: On 06-20-2016 the existing vehicular shoulder guardrail installed on the north side of the roadway near the uphill portion of the street was observed. Measurements were taken of the existing post sizes, spacing, rail size and bolt size. The posts are embedded in soil so length was not able to be verified. No disruption to the site or structure was performed. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: On 07-07-2016 information about the guardrail materials were received via email from Scott Fleury of the City of Ashland (COA). This information was forwarded from Brian Bowman of Gage It Construction the apparent installer of the existing guardrail. CONCLUSION: The size, spacing and gage of the guardrail materials measured at the site match the requirements of ODOT Standard Roadway Drawings series 400 and the information provided by the apparent installing contractor. The existing vehicular shoulder guardrail appears to complywith Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) standards. PERFORMED BY: Allan Goffe, P.E.,S.E. PRt~F 64 QR a do Y go tqN T~ EXPIRES 613012017 DISTRIBUTION: (email) Mark Kamrath (CEC), Scott Fleury (COA), Mike Faught (COA), Karl Johnson (COA), Robin Warren (AGEGC) CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication June 21, 2016, Business Meeting Grandview Drive Shared Road Project Proposal FROM: Michael R. Faught, Public Works Director, michael.faug_ht(?ashland.or.us SUMMARY This item is an update to Council regarding the conversion of Grandview Dr. to a shared road and the installation of a non-permitted guardrail barrier. In addition, staff is asking for authorization to spend up to $240,000 of street funds to convert Grandview Dr. into a shared roadway. If approved staff will finalize engineering plans, hold a second and final public meeting with residents and construct the project. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: On March 18, 2010 the Transportation Commission heard testimony from Grandview residents who petitioned the City to install sidewalks. Because of the topography challenges on Grandview, staff estimated the cost of installing sidewalks at $1.4 million. As a result, the Transportation Commission recommended designating Grandview as a Shared Road where all modes of transportation share the space. Grandview Drive was designated as a shared road with the adoption of the 2012 Transportation System Plan (TSP). When the City's consultant traffic engineer determined a non-permitted guardrail installed on Grandview Drive represented a vehicular safety improvement, staff hired an engineering firm to develop a shared road solution that includes leaving the guardrail in place while maximizing pedestrian refuge in the adjacent area. The new street classification was eventually incorporated into the 2012 TSP, where several roads with similar topographic challenges were designated as shared roads (see attached street classification). Following that, a standard shared road cross section was approved and codified during the Normal Neighborhood master planning process. The shared road cross section includes an 18-foot paved travel way that is shared by all modes of travel. The cross section also includes, at a minimum, 3' shoulders adjacent to the travel way as refuges for pedestrians. This refuge creates a safe spot for pedestrians while vehicles pass each other on the road. The most critical aspect of a shared road is a speed limit posting of 15 mph. The reduction in posted speed limit allows all users to safely use and occupy the shared way. A contractor building a home on Grandview Drive installed a guardrail in the public right of way adjacent to the tax lot boundary in the spring of 2016. The contractor had requested information about the City's guardrail standards prior to the installation of the Guardrail; however no permit was ever submitted. The new house is located at the bottom of a steep drop-off and the contractor installed the Page 1 of 3 ~r CITY OF ASHLAND guardrail without a permit to protect the home in the event cars were to drive off the road at that location. Current language in AMC 13.05.020 exempts guardrail installation to protect a driveway approach even when it extends into the right-of-way. When Public Works staff learned that the guardrail had been installed on the right-of-way without a permit they contacted both the City Attorney and a traffic engineer for guidance. Based on AMC 13.05.020, the City Attorney initially determined the guardrail installation was exempt and did not require a permit. However, after Legal learned the extent of the guardrail, they determined that a case could be made for a code violation. In addition, Kim Parducci, PE PTOE of Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering, determined the guardrail should stay as it would reduce the severity of a vehicular crash and that the road is safer with the guardrail (see attached report). The installation of the guardrail created several complaints from residents in the Grandview Drive area. Given the findings of the traffic engineer, the Public Works staff hired Construction Engineering Consultants, Inc., to look at shared road engineering solutions. Initially, the engineering firm provided five alternatives, but staff narrowed it down to two option that were presented in a public meeting (see attached engineering drawings). The primary option: • uses existing right-of-way, • provides an 18 foot travel lane as required in the recently adopted shared road cross section, • provides a five-foot pedestrian refuge on the south side or inside the curve and a six foot refuge area on the north side or by the steep drop-off where the guardrail is, • cuts into the existing bank, • constructs a retaining wall and gutter to improve drainage, • places two new chip seal coats on the 18 foot roadway, • places gravel in the pedestrian refuge areas (see attached drawings), • sets the speed at 15 miles per hour, and • installs two automated speed display signs and two "Shared Road" signs. The estimated cost for the proposed project is $240,000 (this cost includes a 30% contingency and some of the work could be completed by staff). On June 2, 2016, Public Works staff held a Grandview Drive neighborhood group meeting to discuss the proposed project and staffs recommendation to leave the guardrail in place on Grandview. While not everyone supported the project, a majority of the residents in attendance indicated that they would support the project. Given the amount of concern about the limited space for pedestrians with the guardrail in the street's current configuration, staff recommends constructing the project this summer. As to the guardrail, staff has informed both the property owner and the contractor we will likely require some modifications to the existing guardrail. The two options our engineering firm is evaluating require the installation of either a cable or wood guardrail (see photos). In addition, there are areas where staff will require the contractor (subject to geotechnical review) to relocate the Page 2 of 3 ~r CITY OF ASHLAND guardrail closer to the edge of the bank. The contractor has indicated a willingness to comply with the City's final guardrail placement requirement. COUNCIL GOALS SUPPORTED: N/A FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: The engineer's estimate, which includes a 30% contingency is $240,000. This project could be funded this year as proposed in the Street fund budget by reducing planned slurry seals by $160,000 and delaying the $112,000 A Street sidewalk improvement project. The Street Fund budget allocated $400,000 for slurry seal in the 2016/17 biennium budget. The 2016 slurry seal project is only $140,000 and the 2017 slurry seal project can be reduced to $100,000. Final design of the A Street project needs to wait until the Downtown Parking and Multi-modal committee completes their work which will push this project out to the 2017/2018 biennium budget. STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends the Council authorize staff to construct the shared road project once final engineering occurs and require the contractor who installed the non-permitted guardrail to either install a cable or wood guardrail as specified by the City's contract engineer. SUGGESTED MOTION: Move to approve the reallocation of funding for improving Grandview Dr. to the shared road standard with final approved engineering drawings. ATTACHMENTS: CEC Engineering Drawings Traffic Engineering Memo Street Classification-Shared Roadway Guardrail figures (Timber & Cable) Page 3 of') Ir. Ir CITY of ASHLAND Council Communication July 19, 2016, Business Meeting Continuation of Grandview Drive Discussion FROM: Michael R. Faught, Public Works Director, michael.faughtAashland.or.us SUMMARY Staff is asking for authorization to leave a non-permitted guardrail in place and spend up to $240,000 of budgeted street funds in order to construct phase one of the proposed Grandview Drive shared road project. If approved, staff will hold a second public meeting with residents, finalize engineering plans and construct the project. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: This item is a continuation of the discussion that began at the June 21, 2016 Council meeting (see attached June 21, 2016 Council Communication). The Council asked to conduct a site visit of Grandview Drive in order to see the guardrail and site constraints. The Council site visit, moderated by the City Attorney occurred on July 7, 2016. The following is a brief history of the project: • On March 18, 2010 Grandview residents petitioned the City to install sidewalks. Topography challenges on Grandview led the Transportation Commission to recommend designating Grandview as a shared road. • Grandview Drive was designated as a shared road with the adoption of the 2012 Transportation System Plan (TSP). • A contractor building a home on Grandview Drive installed a non-permitted guardrail in the public right of way adjacent to the tax lot boundary in the spring of 2015. • Staff became aware of the guardrail installation in September, 2015 and the City's consultant traffic engineer determined that the guardrail should not be removed as it represented a safety improvement. • The City of Ashland's Legal Department initially determined the guardrail was exempt based on AMC 13.02.050 Encroachment Permits, which requires a permit for all work in the public right-of-way. However, Section 2.c, Exemptions, lists as a use not requiring a permit: Guard/handrails along edges of driveway approaches, walks, stairs, etc. that encroach in public right-of-way. Page 1 of 3 ,74 AM, I CITY OF ASHLAND • Kim Parducci PE PTOE, Traffic Engineer with Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering, determined the guardrail represents a safety improvement and should not be removed. • On February 2, 2016 the Public Works Director responded to an email complaint from Paul Rostykus regarding the guardrail. The explanation pointed out that a resolution to the Grandview Drive guardrail question is complex, making it important to take the time necessary to develop the best possible long term solution (see attachment). • The City of Ashland's Legal Department provided a more detailed discussion of why code enforcement was deferred (see attachment). • Staff hired Civil Engineering Consultants Inc. (CEC) to develop a shared road solution that includes leaving the guardrail in place. o Developed a plan that includes 5 foot refuge areas on both sides of an 18' travel lane at an estimated cost of $240,000 (including a 30% project contingency). The actual costs of the project may be lower as some of the work can be accomplished by City staff. o Determined that the guardrail had been constructed to City/0J)0T Standards. o Determined that any improvement project would require the installation of a guardrail. • Details of the proposed Share Road Project are as follows: o Uses existing right-of-way, o Provides an 18 foot travel lane as required in the recently adopted shared road cross section, o Provides a five-foot pedestrian refuge on the south side or inside the curve and a five foot refuge area on the north side or by the steep drop-off where the guardrail is, o Cuts into the existing bank, o Constructs a retaining wall and gutter to improve drainage, o Places two new chip seal coats on the 18 foot roadway, o Places gravel in the pedestrian refuge areas (see attached drawings), o Sets the speed at 15 miles per hour, and o Installs two automated speed display signs and two "Shared Road" signs. • On June 2, 2016, Public Works staff held a Grandview Drive neighborhood group meeting to discuss the proposed project and staff's recommendation to leave the guardrail in place on Grandview Drive. While not everyone supported the project, a majority of the residents in attendance indicated that they would support the project. • On July 7, 2016, the City Council conducted a site visit on Grandview Drive near the guardrail (see attached questions and answers). Options: 1. The Council could decide to follow the engineer's recommendation to leave the guardrail in place and take no further action. Staff could support this option. Page 2 of') ~r CITY OF ASHLAND 2. The Council could decide to follow the engineer's recommendation to leave the guardrail in place and authorize staff to construct the shared road project this summer or fall. This is the preferred option by the Public Works staff. 3. The Council could direct staff to require the contractor to remove the guardrail. This option is not recommended by Public Works staff or the contracted engineering firms. COUNCIL GOALS SUPPORTED: N/A FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: The engineer's estimate, which includes a 30% contingency, is $240,000. This first phase of the project could be funded this year as proposed in the Street Fund budget by reducing planned slurry seals by $130,000 and delaying the $112,000 A Street sidewalk improvement project. The Street Fund budget allocated $200,000 per year for slurry seal work in the 2016/17 biennium budget. This project is dependent on our Street crew completing crack sealing and base repair in order for the roads to be slurry sealed. In 2016 City crews were only able to prep $140,000 worth of slurry seal work. Based on that, staff feels reducing the anticipated 2017 slurry seal project costs to $130,000 more accurately reflects the amount of slurry seal work that can actually be accomplished. Final design of the A Street project needs to wait until the Downtown Parking and Multi-modal ad hoc committee completes their work which will push this project out to the 2017/2018 biennium budget. This is important as the improvement needs to match future urban design concepts. STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends Council leave the existing non-permitted guardrail in place and authorize staff to construct the shared road project this summer or fall. SUGGESTED MOTION: 1) Move to leave the non-permitted guard rail in place. 2) Move to approve the plan for improving Grandview Dr. to the shared road standard with final approved engineering drawings. ATTACHMENTS: CEC Engineering Drawings Traffic Engineering Memo Street Classification-Shared Roadway ACE engineering LLC - Guardrail Engineer Observation Report June 21, 2016 Grandview Council Communication Grandview Shared Road Questions - Ashland City Council Code Complaint Response to Mr. Rostykus Legal Department Code Deferral Explanation Page 3 -of 3 CITY of ASHLAND Council Communication August 2, 2016, Business Meeting Continuation of Grandview Drive Discussion FROM: Michael R. Faught, Public Works Director, michael.faght a)a.shland_.or.us SUMMARY This is a continuation of the June 21, 2016 and the July 19, 2016 Council business meetings where staff requested authorization to leave a non-permitted guardrail in place and spend up to $240,000 of budgeted street funds in order to construct phase one of the proposed Grandview Drive shared road project. If approved, staff will hold a second public meeting with residents, finalize engineering plans and construct the project. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: The Grandview Drive Guardrail has been on the Council's agenda twice, June 21, 2016 and July 19, 2016 (see attached Council Communications). This agenda item has been continued to the August 2, 2016 Council business meeting to consider staff's request for authorization to leave a non-permitted guardrail in place and spend up to $240,000 of budgeted street funds in order to construct phase one of the proposed Grandview Drive shared road project. In addition, on July 7, 2016 the Council conducted a site visit of Grandview Drive in order to see the guardrail and site constraints. The following is a brief history of the project: • On March 18, 2010 Grandview residents petitioned the City to install sidewalks. Topography challenges on Grandview led the Transportation Commission to recommend designating Grandview as a shared road. • Grandview Drive was designated as a shared road with the adoption of the 2012 Transportation System Plan (TSP). • A contractor building a home on Grandview Drive installed a non-permitted guardrail in the public right of way adjacent to the tax lot boundary in the spring of 2015. • Staff became aware of the guardrail installation in September, 2015 and the City's consultant traffic engineer determined that the guardrail should not be removed as it represented a safety improvement. Page 1 of 4 CITY of ASHLAND • The City of Ashland's Legal Department initially determined the guardrail was exempt based on AMC 13.02.050 Encroachment Permits, which requires a permit for all work in the public right-of-way. However, Section 2.c, Exemptions, lists as a use not requiring a permit: Guard/handrails along edges of driveway approaches, walks, stairs, etc. that encroach in public right-of-way. • Kim Parducci PE PTOE, Traffic Engineer with Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering, determined the guardrail represents a safety improvement and should not be removed. • On February 2, 2016 the Public Works Director responded to an email complaint from Paul Rostykus regarding the guardrail. The explanation pointed out that a resolution to the Grandview Drive guardrail question is complex, making it important to take the time necessary to develop the best possible long term solution (see attachment). • The City of Ashland's Legal Department provided a more detailed discussion of why code enforcement was deferred (see attachment). • Staff hired Civil Engineering Consultants Inc. (CEC) to develop a shared road solution that includes leaving the guardrail in place. o Developed a plan that includes 5 foot refuge areas on both sides of an 18' travel lane at an estimated cost of $240,000 (including a 30% project contingency). The actual costs of the project may be lower as some of the work can be accomplished by City staff. o Determined that the guardrail had been constructed to City/ODOT Standards. o Determined that any improvement project would require the installation of a guardrail. • Details of the proposed Share Road Project are as follows: o Uses existing right-of-way, o Provides an 18 foot travel lane as required in the recently adopted shared road cross section, o Provides a five-foot pedestrian refuge on the south side or inside the curve and a five foot refuge area on the north side or by the steep drop-off where the guardrail is, o Cuts into the existing bank, o Constructs a retaining wall and gutter to improve drainage, o Places two new chip seal coats on the 18 foot roadway, o Places gravel in the pedestrian refuge areas (see attached drawings), o Sets the speed at 15 miles per hour, and o Installs two automated speed display signs and two "Shared Road" signs. • On June 2, 2016, Public Works staff held a Grandview Drive neighborhood group meeting to discuss the proposed project and staff s recommendation to leave the guardrail in place on Grandview Drive. While not everyone supported the project, a majority of the residents in attendance indicated that they would support the project. • On July 7, 2016, the City Council conducted a site visit on Grandview Drive near the guardrail (see attached questions and answers). Page 2 of 4 CITY OF ASHLAND options: 1. The Council could decide to follow the engineer's recommendation to leave the guardrail in place and take no further action. Staff could support this option. 2. The Council could decide to follow the engineer's recommendation to leave the guardrail in place and authorize staff to construct the shared road project this summer or fall. This is the preferred option by the Public Works staff. 3. The Council could direct staff to require the contractor to remove the guardrail. This option is not recommended by Public Works staff or the contracted engineering firms. COUNCIL GOALS SUPPORTED: N/A FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: The engineer's estimate, which includes a 30% contingency, is $240,000. This first phase of the project could be funded this year as proposed in the Street Fund budget by reducing planned slurry seals by $130,000 and delaying the $112,000 A Street sidewalk improvement project. The Street Fund budget allocated $200,000 per year for slurry seal work in the 2016/17 biennium budget. This project is dependent on our Street crew completing crack sealing and base repair in order for the roads to be slurry sealed. In 2016 City crews were only able to prep $140,000 worth of slurry seal work. Based on that, staff feels reducing the anticipated 2017 slurry seal project costs to $130,000 more accurately reflects the amount of slurry seal work that can actually be accomplished. Final design of the A Street project needs to wait until the Downtown Parking and Multi-modal ad hoc committee completes their work which will push this project out to the 2017/2018 biennium budget. This is important as the improvement needs to match future urban design concepts. STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends Council leave the existing non-permitted guardrail in place and authorize staff to construct the shared road project this summer or fall. SUGGESTED MOTION: 1) Move to leave the non-permitted guard rail in place. 2) Move to approve the plan for improving Grandview Dr. to the shared road standard with final approved engineering drawings. ATTACHMENTS: CEC Engineering Drawings Traffic Engineering Memo Street Classification-Shared Roadway ACE engineering LLC - Guardrail Engineer Observation Report June 21, 2016 Grandview Council Communication July 19, 2016 Grandview Council Communication Page 3 of 4 pi'll CITY OF ASHLAND Grandview Shared Road Questions - Ashland City Council Code Complaint Response to Mr. Rostykus Legal Department Code Deferral Lxplanation Page 4 of 4 ,vr PWA Grandview Shared Road Questions - Ashland City Council On July 7, 2016 at 12:30 pm the Ashland City Council and the residences of Grandview Drive visited the location of the proposed shared road project for Grandview Drive. Mike Faught, Public Works Director, provided the following background information: • 2010 Citizen request Sidewalk on Grandview • TC recommends shared road • 2012 TSP designates Grandview and many other roads as shared roads • roads with physical and topography constraints (not sufficient room to construct a standard residential road) • Spring 2015 Guard rail installed w/o permit • Traffic Engineer said is should stay as she determined it would be safer with the guardrail considering all users. • Staff hired Construction Engineering Consultants (CEC) to develop a shared road project solution. • The proposed shared road provides safety for all modes, rail for vehicular, refuge areas for bike and ped, and 18 travel lane for cars and trucks, with a posted speed of 15mph. • The recommended street improvements would be the same with or without the guardrail; however, the stamped engineer will require the guard rail with the improvement project. Staff has confirmed that the guard rail was constructed to ODOT or our standards. Upgraded with Corten Steel. • Final recommended design has 5 foot refuge each side with an 18 travel want (using chip seal) and a guard rail (guard required by the stamped engineer • It is important to note that road has been functioning as a shared road all along, the proposed project will make it safer for all modes, by adding guardrail, refuge area and slowing speed down. The following questions were asked pertaining to the shared road project and the unpermitted guardrail in the proposed area. Public discussion did not take place. • Will only this section (where guardrail is) of Grandview be a shared road? o No the expectation is to convert the whole section of Grandview down to Scenic into a shared roadway. This will be phase one of the project. • Has an engineer looked at adding a guardrail to extend further down the road? o Not yet, this will be evaluated with the engineering done as part of the next phase. • Is the curve further down the road any safer than the one that has the guardrail? o This will be evaluated as part of the engineering work done with respect to the next phase. • Designating this shared road is not necessarily in a hierarchy, is the traffic higher than a typical shared road? o The most recent average daily traffic for Grandview was 565 cars per day. A shared road per the standard allows up to 1500 cars per day. • Is the guardrail built to standard? o Yes, the guardrail is built to ODOT standards as verified by an engineer. • How deep are the pylons holding the guardrail? o Per the installer the posts are 6' and 8' deep, depending on their location in the embankment. • Six of the support structures are timber, did the engineer take that into consideration? o The timber posts are part of the specifications and required as breakaway posts for when a vehicle strikes the end terminal. • Is the only place that shared roads are authorized and conceptualized are the in the Normal Neighborhood plan that meet the criteria for a shared road? o No, there are numerous streets identified in the 2012 TSP that classified as shared roads. • Are refuge areas required on both sides? o Yes • Where does the 5 ft. of refuge start? o The 5' refuge starts at the beginning of the project at the start of the guardrail. • Will there be a speed study done? o There have been numerous speed studies done. The most recent develop an 85% speed of 26.x mph near the guardrail. • Will the company who installed the guardrail have to retroactively apply and pay for a permit? o This will be determined by the attorney. • Has a geotechnical report been done and if not, when will it be done? o A geotechnical engineer is developing a final technical memo on the guardrail. • What are the differences for a fill and a solid bank? • How will the City address the other dangerous blind spots? o This will be evaluated as part of the engineering work done with respect to the next phase. • Where the does project start and stop? o The current project starts at the beginning of the guardrail section and ends just west of Ditch Rd. Please refer to the drawings in the Council Communication from June 21, 2016. • Is this in the current CIP? o No. Staff had planned on moving forward with this project in the next budget cycle, but the installation of the guardrail has speed up the project. Staff believes this shared roadway project is important. • Will there be parking along the proposed area? o No. . • Has the City looked at budgeting to find money to fix other parts of the road that need work? How do we know this is the worst part? o This is phase 1 of the project and the City is working on the engineering design of the rest of the project which will assist in the budget development. • How was this chosen over other projects? o Staff had planned on moving forward with this project in the next budget cycle, but the installation of the guardrail has speed up the project. Staff believes this shared roadway project is important. • Why not speed bumps? o Speed bumps have not been analyzed for the project. • Has there been discussions for building a wall up where the guardrail is now? o Yes, but based on the geotechnical analysis a large portion of the roadway would need to be excavated and reconstructed to allow for shifting the guardrail. The general engineers consensus is the cost for this would be 3-4 times what is current proposed. • Where would the legal guardrail be? o Per the engineers analysis the guardrail would be placed in the same position. • Is it legal to have a guardrail this close to a driveway? Are there standards on how far away a guardrail needs to be from a driveway? o Per the engineers analysis the guardrail would be placed in the same position. • What will the refuge area be? o The refuge area will be constructed with decomposed granite and will represent a visual difference between the chip seal. • Why does the guardrail have double posts? o It has double posts as required by the construction standards. • Since the guardrail was installed unpermitted, who is responsible for replacing if it is damaged? o Typically when something is damaged such as a guardrail, the owner's car insurance will cover the costs. • Will the refuge area be marked? o The refuge area will be decomposed granite and the edge of the chip seal will be marked with a white "fog" stripe to delineate the two areas. • What will happen to the bank? o The bank will be excavated to widen the roads cross section. • Is the project in our right of way? o Yes. • How tall will the retaining wall be? o The retaining wall will between 4 and 12 feet in height depending on the location along the embankment. • Will the refuge areas be a specified length? What is the consistency of length for the refuge areas? o Please refer to the set of plans provided in the Council Communications from June 21, 2016. • How will the refuge areas transition into the existing road? o The refuge areas are meant to continue through the whole length of Grandview. The current phase of the project will terminate to the west of Ditch Rd. • How far will the bank be cut into? o The bank will be excavated according to the detached plans which specify the distance of the refuge areas. • Why is the guardrail sharp to touch? o These are standard materials used in guardrail construction. • What about speed bumps at the beginning of the road to slow down traffic approaching the area? o We have not evaluated speed bumps, but the traffic engineer is looking into the installation of a 4-way stop at the start of the project. • What purpose do the 8" blocks along the guardrail serve? o The purpose of guardrail blockouts is to reduce the possibility of "wheel snag" on a guardrail post when a vehicle interacts with the guardrail. These are typically made of wood or recyclable plastic. Tami Campos From: Tami Campos Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2016 2:58 PM To: Tami Campos Subject: FW: Guardrail on Grandview From: Mike Faught Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2016 1:34 PM To: Rostykus Paul Cc: Scott Fleury; Kevin Flynn Subject: RE: Guardrail on Grandview Hi Paul... Thanks for taking the time to follow up on your municipal code violation complaint regarding the guardrail on Grandview. In general, city staff responds to code complaints are subject to overall priorities. As you know we have limited resources and must tackle what seems to be the most urgent problems first. We acknowledge that's not very satisfactory to a complainant, however there is no realistic alternative. Having said that, I want you to know that your complaint has not been overlooked and as you know Public Works has been working on a resolution to the issue but has not yet reached a conclusion. It is equally important to note that a Resolution of the Grandview Drive issues requires more than simple immediate steps. There are public costs or risks no matter what action is taken. Therefore, it's important for us to take the time necessary to develop the best possible long-term solution and avoid taking immediate steps that could make such a preferred outcome harder to effect. Michael R. Faught Public Works Director City of Ashland 51 Winburn Way Ashland, OR 97520 mike.faught@ashland.or.us 541/552-2411 541/488-6006 Fax 800/735-2900 TTY This email is official business of the City of Ashland, and it is subject to Oregon public records law for disclosure and retention. If you have received this message in error, please let me know. From: Rostykus Paul [mailto:prostykus@gmail.com] Sent: Sunday, January 31, 2016 7:26 PM To: Mike Faught Cc: Scott Fleury; Kevin Flynn Subject: Re: Guardrail on Grandview It has now been over 2 months since the city the received my municipal code violation complaint form regarding the guardrail on Grandview Drive. As noted on the city website: "Due to the large volume of complaints processed, it is difficult to maintain up to date status reports to complainants. Please feel free to check in with the Compliance staff if you would like to find out the current status of a complaint". I would like to hear an update on what is happening with this issue. Thank you. Paul Rostykus 541-601-9709 On Nov 24, 2015, at 5:53 PM, Kevin Flynn <kevin.flynn@ashland.or.us> wrote: Mike, Please find attached the signed municipal code violation complaint form submitted today by Mr. Paul Rostykus regarding the guardrail on Grandview Drive. As we spoke about, you directed that you would be the point of contact for the city regarding this matter. Paul, Mike Faught the City of Ashland Director of Public Works is reviewing this matter and will advise you as to how it is to be resolved. In speaking with Mr. Faught he related the Public Works Department is reviewing the matter and pursuing a resolution with all due diligence. Kind regards, Kevin Kevin Flynn, Code Compliance City- of Ashland Community Development 51 Winburn Way, Ashland OR 97520 (541) 552-2424, TTY: 1-800-735-2900 FAX: (541) 552-2050 kevin.flynn (-vashlan d.or.us 'l'ids c mail tr, ,sic n is offic°i<d Inisiness of the C'ity ()I 'A $-Lrncl, sip d - is sutjec=t to Oregon Public Records law fffl° disclw: ure an retention. fvou have ret : ~ I'-.isn__, -i ,ate in error, please coil LacL 111c at 2--2o 76. ''hank Vnu. (541),- 33 <2015.11.24-Grandview Drive-340-Guardrail installed without permit-Complaint Form.pdf> 2 REASONS FOR DEFERRING ENFORCEMENT OF ENCROACHMENT PERMIT REQUIREMENT ON GRANDVIEW • As long as the City is taking reasonable steps towards enforcement of its ordinances and/or the City has a reasonable basis for refraining from immediate enforcement, the City is not required to undertake immediate enforcement in any particular situation. o First, city officials have discretion as to when and whether to undertake enforcement actions. Universal immediate enforcement of every ordinance requirement, even including permit requirements, is not feasible for any city from either workload or financial perspectives. o Second, in this particular case, the City has had good reasons for postponing enforcement: ■ Preliminary determination (now modified in response to those opposed to the guardrail) that the installed guardrail fully satisfied existing exemptions from encroachment permit requirements (AMC 13.02.050A.2 and 3). ■ Determination by traffic engineer that some type of guardrail is the safest outcome for both pedestrians, vehicles, and adjacent structures along at least portions of the street edge where the guardrail has been installed. ■ Newly created "Shared Road" designation expanded the options for improving safety along Grandview. ■ Requiring removal of the entire guardrail as penalty for failure to obtain a permit is premature until the best course of action can be decided upon: If the guardrail were to be entirely removed and best course of action turns out to be having a guardrail along a portion of the roadway, the City would needlessly have to bear the cost of installing new guardrail. • If someone disagrees that the City's lack of enforcement in this case has been reasonable, their appropriate course of action is to bring the matter to the attention of the Transportation Commission, the Public Works Department, the City Administrator, and the City Council. It appears that all of these steps have been and are being taken by those who argue for immediate enforcement. o If still not satisfied, complainants could file a mandamus action in Jackson County Circuit Court, claiming that the City's lack of enforcement has been unreasonable. ■ Whether such a claim would be likely to succeed and whether the matter is likely to be resolved administratively before any court could require action, is for the complainants to consider. 5 03 yam- t_ C x'~ sir 0 . It - ~ k n IPA A I INA Oki 0 at 1 A # c VIOLA-, some- con cu lam V Y, { e~ U "M, ~j ism x^ Q r n x uite 235 Hathaway Koback 520 SW SYamhill St. Suite 35 Connors LLP Portland, OR 97204 Gregory S. Hathaway 503-205-8400 main 503-205-8403 direct greghathawayAhkcllp.com September 1, 2016 VIA EMAIL John Stromberg, Mayor Michael Morris, Councilor Rich Rosenthal, Councilor Stefani Seffinger, Councilor Greg Lemhouse, Councilor Carol Voisin, Councilor Pam Marsh, Councilor Ashland City Hall 20 East Main St. Ashland, OR 97520 Re: Grandview Drive Guard Rail/Shared Road Issue Dear Mayor Stromberg and Members of the Council, I represent Dr. and Mrs. Ali, the owners of the new home located below the guard rail that was recently installed on Grandview Drive. I am writing this correspondence to assist the Council in its consideration whether to move forward with an interim plan converting Grandview Drive to a Shared Road. As you know, from your prior proceedings regarding this issue, it was never my client's intention to violate any City Code requirement regarding the installation of the guard rail. The guard rail was installed for the general safety of their home and they were not personally aware that an encroachment permit was required. It was never their intention to create any controversy whether Grandview Drive should become a Shared Road or not. Fortunately, the guard rail was installed in compliance with ODOT's specifications and your Traffic Engineer experts have determined that the guard rail provides vehicle safety on Grandview Drive and should stay. It appears that the concept of converting Grandview Drive to a Shared Road was officially recognized by the City in the adoption of the City's Transportation System Plan ("TSP") in 2012. It also appears that the installation of the guard rail has accelerated Page Two September 1, 2016 the City's consideration of converting Grandview Drive to a Shared Road and spending City resources. It is our understanding that your Public Works Director has prepared alternatives for your Council to consider at your meeting on September 6th whether it makes sense for the City to proceed now with implementing the City's TSP. My clients are prepared to cooperatively work and assist the City in any way they can. If your Council decides to proceed with converting Grandview Drive to a Shared Road, my clients are willing to make a contribution to that project since the guard rail will continue to protect their home as well as promote safety on Grandview Drive. Any contribution would be in addition to the cost they have already expended in the installation of the guard rail. If your Council chooses not to proceed with converting Grandview Drive, my clients are prepared to apply for an encroachment permit. They are willing to pay for any modifications to the guard rail that the City may deem necessary. My clients respectfully request your consideration regarding these issues and once again wants your Council to understand that they did not intend to cause any inconvenience to the City or those that use Grandview Drive. Very truly yours, HATHAWAY KOBACK CONNORS LLP 14--at- Gregory S. Hathaway GSH/pl cc: Dave Lohman, City Attorney (via email) Dr. & Mrs. Ali CITY OF ^ASH LAN D Council Communication September 6, 2016, Business Meeting Approval of an Ordinance Requiring the City of Ashland to Produce 10 Percent of the Electricity Used in the City from New, Local, and Clean Resource by the Year 2020 and Declaring adoption by Emergency Clause FROM: Barbara Christensen, City Recorder, christeb(.-t.~ashland.onus SUMMARY This is an ordinance brought forward through a citizen initiative titled, "Shall Ashland produce 10% of electricity used in the City by year 2020 from new, local. and clean sources?" The Council has chosen to accept the ordinance proposed by the petitioners. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: A citizen initiative petition for a local ballot measure was submitted to the City Council on August 16. The Council had the option to adopt the proposed ordinance , submit the measure to voters or submit a competing measure. Oregon State Election Law allows the governing body 30 days to take action. Council chose to adopt the ordinance through first and second reading with adoption through an emergency clause at the September 6 meeting,. COUNCIL GOALS SUPPORTED N/A FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: Staff has not prepared a fiscal impact statement to determine the cost of implementing this ordinance and the potential attendant impact on electric rates. STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Approve first reading and second reading with the emergency clause to adopt ordinance effective immediately. SUGGESTED MOTION: Motion to approve first reading of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance requiring the City of Ashland to produce 10 percent of the electricity used in the city from new, local, and clean resource by the year 2020 and declared to take effect on its passage". and Page 1 of 2 ~r CITY OF ^ASHLAND Motion to approve second reading with emergency clause to adopt ordinance effective immediately of, "An ordinance requiring the City of Ashland to produce 10 percent of the electricity used in the city from new, local, and clean resource by the year 2020 and declared to take effect on its passage". ATTACHMENTS: Proposed Ordinance Page 2 of 2 ~r ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE REQUIRING THE CITY OF ASHLAND TO PRODUCE 10 PERCENT OF THE ELECTRICITY USED IN THE CITY FROM NEW, LOCAL AND CLEAN RESOURCE BY THE YEAR 2020 AND AN EMERGENCY IS DECLARED TO TAKE EFFECT ON ITS PASSAGE RECITALS: WHEREAS climate change is caused in large part by human action. WHEREAS Ashland citizens have a responsibility to contribute to slowing of climate change. WHEREAS Ashland owns its own electric utility. SECTION 1. The City of Ashland shall cause at least 10 percent of the electricity used in the City to be produced from new, local and clean resources from and after the year 2020. SECTION 2. The City of Ashland shall enact such ordinances and resolutions, and appropriate such funds and take necessary actions as are necessary to implement the requirements of Section 1 above. SECTION 3. This Ordinance being necessary to meet the requirements set by Oregon State Elections Law, an emergency is declared to exist, and this Ordinance takes effect on its passage. 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 2016, and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of , 2016. Barbara M. Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of , 2016. John Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: David H. Lohman, City Attorney Ordinance No. Page 1 of 1 „a .a ~ p C.O SO t0 CL~ N N N N = ..s O 1 O o O p CO --A O W cn -g, w to : N .".a co N Co CO W W W Ui - A W N O ~w p: 8 c0 Ui m 00 cn -N 00 --j DW D C m ~vD O -0>C: ~ o 0 '0 U n = O 0 U) CD cn (D ~ ~ LT Q_ T ~ v (D O - 07 -C3 cn D -n_ - (D C C: cn (D O O C 5• O-" M) (D o a (D (D (j' O CD (D M COD 5. :3 3 _0 O 0 O v (D (p O (D v 73 0 (D ~ C7 ~ O O CD (n w p ~ p ~ CU O (D n (D (n O CD (n o (n (D M. ---h D. --h Q O O --h O (n O c 0 0 .0 (D 0 r r (D ra (D O (D r+ (n (D D n w O G O O Qn D Q (D _ (D (1) O "._r+ :3 (D (D Q m o u, U) Q cn 7 7 m 3 _ (D o C) N 73 CD - (D 73 :0 w CL (C) l< ' CD h o (D -U L t!> v D ► _ tip O c ro CD cD (D v (D D o c~ Q (D o o <u ° LO .0 -0 CD r C C .(A r Q N C U) N C C7 to N -s Q.+ (n fj (D (n • X ,N N h p~ (A O C7 O 7 0) ~ V! O (D p 0 =y O ~ N ~ C R o -t ~O- ,13rn ~(D~ -tp a a~ ncD n n0v 0 ~ ~o ~_v ~ (o C ° cn o (D n o r.. sv O (D C: ° O Cn o x CD 3 cn cn CD Q Q (D 3 co fD = n. x CD t1Y 0 fn _ T). C7 t1> w o m O n Vi cn' 0 o - :3 B :3 cn (p a) n :3 CC X m' x o '"I o (D n m C1 m v~ " mo o n 0 ic -0 M (D CD cD (n _ o o h o c (D 0 (D o cD 7 o X00 DcnM o -3 O nA' (D Z) ooz o zD° o(D - n o 0 0 0 3 3 --1 D cz (D 0- (n C: X s 0 (D CD m CD (n v a p oo ~ Q? (D (n C7 cn v = _ (DD 2 O o (D 0 c N 5 O m n D D v m DAD DD c~DD~ r D N v v ' 3 3 3 n 3 3 3 3 3 0 v (n (D `D ° (D > Q. D z= o v3 N~ O 00 C= N C- (D M (D : Ut Cn --Ito m i~ c(J) 0 O 0~ nX- o C-) -u --a D D ~m O X X o= z m m o; _ Z (p C() Co U) C M Q. cn C/) C8, - C/) (f) w omm m o N Cl) ::E z 1' rv cn o j cn z m m co cn cn co ~ o - co w c/mom cn cn t cn cn 1 -F Z -u m m cn N O W 0 N) N) cn ~ rn cN~n p;U pm 0 ozOcn DC-C-~D0 ~JDD m m, 3 6,' cn (D o o CD c CD 0 (D m co c c rn o n (nn p cn0~3~W ~~m 3 (D-'4 ° v O O n O O i 1 - CC Ul N - v 0 0 (D CD CD 07 W G= O (D CF) Q O_ w O_ O 00 0 O O. O_ CD v o O cD v n Cn o p CDC)- Q o D cD v cD n m cn v C :3 cD ::3 m cn 2 D cn r o m n v '0 (D . cQ U) ~ ID v w C7 o :3 m U) Z v m 90 (n o `n N 3 O o (D G) o m o (cn 3 3 o CD o cn° c_ U) m n (n C7 0 n 3 w v s 3 U) . CD -0 cn cn o o- m O o O 3 C7 3 ° N o ' ai CD LD. 073 3 233,E o: n= CD a7 N ~n C: D c 3 N o Z~ S11 N_ °nmaC0 o'vcn.o'N O 3 3 s o(n~'' O CD 3 m o =3 o o. =3 (n 3 m C7 3 2. 0 N Q U) o cn (n T N v cD Z3 C O N O O fi C(D .r N m N m n m O O NoU) o m cn cD 03 3 (D (D w m p a o o m 0 m (D , 3 m L m e O O d (D a 3 o' O 0 0 - o o C) m x 0 m < 0 3 CD o cn CD r m (D cD C7 (D v ~ v (D Fn 0+ D -n c-) D w 3 3 0 0 o ;u < o. -n D o z c v~ (D C7 N (n O_ N L CD m~ 0 --I co -I r- 00 n x" = D D z(D C) 0 M a N s m o N m z m Cl) cl)