Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-1004 Council Agenda PACKET CITY OF ASHLAND Important: Any citizen may orally address the Council on non-agenda items during the Public Forum. Any citizen may submit written comments to the Council on any item on the Agenda, unless it is the subject of a public hearing and the record is closed. Time permitting, the Presiding Officer may allow oral testimony. If you wish to speak, please fill out the Speaker Request form located near the entrance to the Council Chambers. The chair will recognize you and inform you as to the amount of time allotted to you, if any. The time granted will be dependent to some extent on the nature of the item under discussion, the number of people who wish to speak, and the length of the agenda. AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL October 4, 2016 Council Chambers 1175 E. Main Street Note: Items on the Agenda not considered due to time constraints are automatically continued to the next regularly scheduled Council meeting [AMC 2.04.030.E.] 7:00 p.m. Regular Meeting 1. CALL TO ORDER II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. ROLL CALL IV. MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Study Session of September 19, 2016 2. Business Meeting of September 20, 2016 3. Executive Session of September 20 , 2016 VI. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS 1. Presentation by Mt. Ashland regarding their future plans 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] VIII. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Minutes of boards, commissions, and committees 2. Liquor license application for Brian Dunagan dba Ashland Wine Cellar 3. Appointment of Piper Von Chamier to the Historic Commission 4. Adoption of Denial Findings for 150 North Pioneer Street zone change request 5. Award of Bid to Vitus Construction for Improvements to Garfield Park 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 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 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 None XI. NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS 1. Downtown Beautification Project Update X1 1. ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS None XIII. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS/REPORTS FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS XIV. ADJOURNMENT OF BUSINESS MEETING In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Administrator's office at (541) 488-6002 (TTY phone number 1-800-735-2900). Notification 72 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting (28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title I). COUNCIL MEETINGS ARE BROADCAST LIVE ON CHANNEL 9. OR ON CHARTER CABLE CHANNEL ISO. VISIT THE CITY OF ASHLAND'S WEB SITE AT ~V W.ASHLAND.OR.US City Council Study Session September 19, 2016 Page I 1 MINUTES OF STUDY SESSION CITY COUNCIL Monday, September 19, 2016 Siskiyou Room, 51 Winburn Way Mayor Stromberg called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. Councilor Voisin, Morris, Rosenthal and Marsh were present. Councilor Lemhouse arrived at 5:55 p.m. Councilor Seffinger was absent. Public Input Huelz Gutcheon/2253 Hwy 99/Spoke regarding the need for energy audits and upgraded energy audits. He explained that energy would be less expensive if upgraded. Discussion of modifications to emergency shelter resolution (request of Mayor Stromberg) Volunteer community members that included Heidi Parker, Sharon Harris and John Wieczorek joined in the discussion regarding modifications to the emergency shelter. It was noted that agreement had been made on increasing the number of individuals using the shelter and that there would be exceptions to ratio of male and female volunteers. The only issues remaining involved allowing dogs into the shelter. Parks & Recreation Director Michael Black stated that having dogs in Pioneer Hall was not a problem but that the floor of The Grove could be damaged if dogs were allowed. He stated that the use of The Grove would be limited and that plastic on the floor would be required. Discussion on the difference between the current processes for volunteers managing shelters versus the need for volunteers to manage the emergency shelter brought out many challenges. It was determined that City Emergency Response Team (CERT) members are trained primarily for "disaster response events" and not for the emergency shelter need. It was suggested that staff explore the option of paying the current city minimum hourly rate for individuals to manage the emergency shelter. It was also suggested that a floor size vinyl covering, be purchased to cover the floor of The Grove. Councilor Lemhouse arrived at 5:55 p.m. After further discussion it was determined that staff would explore providing a vinyl cover for The Grove; providing more advanced notice (24 hours) for decision on opening the emergency shelter and contracting with a non-profit organization for managing the emergency shelter. Discussion of Ashland Police Department staffing needs Police Chief Tighe O'Meara provided the staff report and noted his appreciation to the council for their support of the Police Department. He stated that the department has currently 28 full-time staff and shared the difficulty on hiring staff due to the length of time it takes to get them onboard. He explained that his department would like to get back on track with their regional partnerships. He noted the difficulties the department was having due to the lack of officers and their reliance on their partnerships. He explained that it is their responsibility to provide coverage in our own city, although they greatly appreciate the assistance they get from the other agencies. He pointed out that other agencies have different ways of operating and training that may not always be a good match for our community. Councilor Marsh left at 6:23 p.m. City Council Study Session September 19, 2016 Page 12 Chief O'Meara provided statistical information that indicated the department was understaffed and that the objective was to meet the needs of the community. He explained that all numbers of calls and cases were increasing but not the staff that is needed to handle this increase. He stated that it was important that five new officers be hired as quickly as possible and believed that this could be done in a biennial budget. Chief O'Meara noted that the Emergency Communication of Southern Oregon (ECSO) was considering a funding change that would involve creating a Special District. Staff was examining budget implications and revenue sources. Examples of these may include a Public Safety Serial Levy, Utility Bill Surcharge and the possibility of the Special District. Discussion was made on the difficulty on hiring new officers and the possibility of re-introducing the Reserve Officer program. Chief O'Meara stated that he was confident that there are good candidates to be found. He also clarified that Community Policing requires additional staffing and more time spent on calls by officers. Look Ahead review City Administrator Dave Kanner reviewed the Look Ahead and noted that the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) would be conducting a public information meeting on the railroad property November 14. He also noted that staff was bringing forward an ordinance for consideration on the use of water outside the city limits. Mayor Stromberg noted that he intended to bring forward discussion on the possibility of an Ad-Hoc committee to explore the creation of a commission on aging. Meeting was adjourned at 6:51 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Barbara Christensen City Recorder City Council Business Meeting September 20, 2016 Page 1 of 5 MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL September 20, 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, and Marsh were present. Councilor Rosenthal arrived at 7:25 p.m. Councilor Seffinger was absent. MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS - None APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the Executive Session of August 15, 2016, Study Session of September 6, 2016, Executive Session of September 6, 2016 and Business Meeting of September 7, 2016 were approved as presented. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS 1. Annual Presentation by the Airport Commission Airport Commission vice Chair Alan DeBoer and Commissioner Bill Skillman provided the annual presentation for the Airport Commission. Vice Chair DeBoer commented on the success of the 2016 Airport Day and the recent approval of the airport overlay. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) required a new master plan this year. The FAA would reimburse the City for the cost of the master plan after completion. Hangars previously rented were reverting to the airport and increased airport revenue dramatically. In 2019, it would increase another $28,000. He noted a vacancy on the commission and encouraged citizens to apply. Mr. Skillman explained the airport provided a base for wildfire fighting, search and rescue, and disaster relief distribution if needed. The airport offered avionic radio repair and occasionally served as a weather relief airport for Medford. On September 21, 2016, World War II PT 17 warplanes would be available for public viewing and remembrance flights for veterans. Inquiries regarding the airport went through Skinner Aviation at 541-482-7675. 2. Presentation by ODOT Rail regarding the creation of quiet zones City Administrator Dave Kanner introduced Rick Shankle, Oregon Department of Transportation Rail and Public Transit Division, and Bob Colvin, general manager for the Central Oregon and Pacific Railroad (CORP) to speak on the formation of a "quiet zone" for train noise. Mr. Shankle provided the following information: • Railroad companies are required to sound their horns at crossings • Quiet Zones (QZ) is a Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) law that provides for an exemption that allows trains to not "routinely" sound their horn • QZ is at least one public crossing • QZ are 24 hours and provide an option for a limited quiet zone (which means only at night 10 p.m. to 7 a.m.) • Regardless of zones all safety requirements have to be in place • City would have to initiate the process and contact FRA and apply for the quiet zone which identified the crossings and determine any of these crossings had been involved in pre-quiet City Council Business Meeting September 20, 2016 Page 2 of 5 zones - can be complicated • Supplemental Safety Measure (SSM) would satisfy the requirement for a QZ • Is not aware of any grants available for QZ • Safety measure requirements vary depending on the crossing • Alternative Safety Measures (ASM) can be determined but have to be determined by FAA • QZ can be formed without approval by FAA • Wayside horns cannot be installed in lieu of crossing gates • At-grade crossings with crossing gates do not automatically qualify for a QZ • If the crossings meet or exceed FAA standards then a diagnostic study is not required but application process is still required • Provided some of the factors that are used by the FRA when determining the risk of vehicle/train collision risk • 11 QZ currently in place and several in the process for approval • Improvements are paid for by the community and provided examples from other communities Mr. Colvin explained changing train schedules might not always hinge on fire risks. CORP worked with the Federal Forest Lands who had asked them to move the schedule to night to reduce the risk of fire. The Federal Forest Lands were suffering from limited resources due to fire-fighting efforts in other areas. Mr. Shankle explained that creating a quiet zone might require closing a street. Mr. Kanner added the City currently had grant monies available to improve the crossing at Hersey Street and Laurel Street and noted that it might not be feasible to supplement safety measures due to encroachment on private property. Mr. Colvin further explained there was no formal policy but they were willing to work with the City on a diagnostic study. Mr. Shankle added ODOT could work with the City if the improvement required closing a street. Mark Decker/998 Clear Creek/Thought Council needed to determine if this was a problem that needed solving and if the City could actually solve the issue. He lived near the tracks and it was a problem for him. He submitted information into the record and noted that over 1,000 people were affected by train noise. Chris Peterson/1056 East Main Street/Explained that although he did not live close to the railroad tracks, the noise affected him. He shared his frustration that there was no set schedule and felt there was nothing he could do. He requested Council consider a study on a quiet zone and at least determine the cost. Council directed staff to conduct a diagnostic study. PUBLIC FORUM - None CONSENT AGENDA 1. Minutes of boards, commissions, and committees 2. Appointment of Michelle Linley to the Housing and Human Services Commission 3. Sole source procurement - National Research Center for the Citizen Survey 4. Confirmation of Mayoral appointment of Interim Finance Director City Administrator Dave Kanner introduced Beverly Adams as the Interim Finance Director when Finance and Administrative Services Director Lee Tuneberg retired at the end of the month. Councilor Voisin pulled Consent Agenda item 43 for discussion. Mr. Kanner clarified the only item Council would discuss at the October 3, 2016 Study Session regarding the survey were the content of three additional custom questions the City was allowed to ask. Management Analyst Ann Seltzer added the City needed the contract to initiate the work with the National Research Center to conduct the survey and City Council Business Meeting September 20, 2016 Page 3 of 5 described the timeline. Councilor Rosenthal/Marsh m/s to approve Consent Agenda items. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion approved. 1. Public hearing and first reading by title only of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance amending the City of Ashland Comprehensive Plan and zoning map designations for 150 North Pioneer Street from low-density multi-family residential (R-2) to commercial (C-1)" Community Development Director Bill Molnar explained in February Council directed staff to evaluate the zoning located adjacent and north of the City's public parking lot north of Pioneer Street. City Council in 1992 denied a similar request. The property line between the parking lot and the parcel was also the boundary between two of the City's four nationally recognized historic districts. Staff reviewed the site and noted changes that had and would occur. Traffic generation had increased 50% since 1992 on Pioneer Street. The Planning Commission and Historic Commission conducted advisory hearings and both recommended by unanimous vote to deny the application to avoid gradual creep of commercial zoning into the historic residential railroad district. Associate Planner Derek Severson provided a slide show depicting public parking lots in the downtown area, the subject property, and proximity to the parking. The zoning was currently R-2 and the applicant was requesting a change to C-1 commercial. The existing home was a primary contributing resource in the district. Currently there was a five-foot landscape buffer between the fence and the parked cars. People tended to congregate in the buffer with their dogs and guitars. The other side of Pioneer Street had intensified with a future art gallery, Ruby's Restaurant and Gils. The Plaza West building was the first phase of development in the parking lot. Eventually 89 more parking spaces would go in the area as well. Staff suggested reviewing zoning for 162 Pioneer as well although the Planning Commission and Historic Commission recommended denying the application. Mr. Molnar explained changing the zoning to C-1 would allow the property to create an eating and drinking establishment. Retail in an R-2 zone was limited to 600 square feet through a conditional use permit. In a commercial zone, the owner could request more than 600 square feet of retail. If the property wanted to do overnight accommodations, they were not required to have an onsite manager in a C-1 zone. He clarified staff was not in disagreement with the Commissions' recommendation to deny the applicant. Both Commissions thought many of the impacts the applicant raised would not be resolved through rezoning the property and the City could propose other mitigation actions. Alternately, there were safeguards in the City process to retain the value of residential properties when adjacent to a rezone. Public Hearing Open: 8:20 p.m. Stan Potocki/150 North Pioneer/Noted a letter he sent to the Mayor September 15, 2016 and stressed the daily impact incurred from being so close to barking dogs left in cars for hours, car alarms, and people jumping the fence into his property to do drugs. When he purchased his home there was another house next door. Had he known the outcome with the parking lot, he would have rethought the agreement. There was nothing residential about his property at this time. He had asked the City for help regarding vehicles blocking his driveway. Diamond Parking and the Ashland Police Department did not have enough staff to deal with these issues. A tall fence would make the property too enclosed. Changing the zoning and converting the property to a traveler's accommodation would lessen the impact of surrounding noise and other issues. Marilyn Stewart/142 B Street/Did not think the commercial zoning line should change. There was enough commercial property to meet the Comprehensive Plan. Increasing parking lot surveillance, more patrols, cameras, repainting yellow curb borders, larger signs, more Diamond Parking patrol, could solve the City Council Business Meeting September 20, 2016 Page 4 of 5 applicant's complaints. She doubted people would want to stay in a traveler's accommodation if the other issues were not resolved. The zone change would also remove needed residential housing. Joe Collonge/111 B Street/Could not understand what good would come from the proposed zone change. He noted properties for Ruby's and Gils had not been residential for many years. The applicant's house had historical value. Although the issues were real, he questioned why Council was considering a zone change. Jerry Brooks/136 B Street/Noted everyone was interested in maintaining the integrity of the railroad district and avoiding commercial creep into the neighborhood. It was good for the City, residents, and tourists. The neighbors he spoke to were not in favor of changing the zoning. The Planning Commission and the Historic Commission opposed the application. There were others ways to deal with the issues. He encouraged retaining the current zoning. Joseph Lusa/135 B Street/Agreed with stopping commercial creep into the area. He had witnessed the impacts of the commercial operations occurring at Ruby's and Gils. Rezoning to commercial might exasperate it further for local residents. Events at the Ashland Armory added to parking problems and public carrying on in the early hours of the night. Although residents were able to live with that as well as the walking tours in the neighborhood, he did not support rezoning the property. Dorothy Brooks/136 B Street/Explained the neighborhood had noticed an increase in noise and activity since Ruby's and Gils started serving liquor and food with outdoor seating. Both businesses effected parking. She could not imagine what changing the zone to commercial would do to solve the problems the applicant was experiencing. She did not think the City patrolled the parking lot as well as it could. She did not support the zone change. Jeffery Jones/79 Pine Street/Represented his 100-year-old mother-in-law who resided at 162 Pioneer Street. She wanted the property kept in the family and never sold. There was also a short-term vacation rental. The only benefit the zone change would have on the property was removing the requirement that someone live onsite. He thought Pioneer Street was already commercial and supported rezoning the property. Larry Cooper/259 B Street/Did not support the zone change. He shared what he experienced and lived with in the neighborhood that included people entering his property or people parking recreational vehicles in front of his house and living there for extended periods. However, positives outweighed the negatives of living in the area. He supported residential zoning. People needed to realize the neighborhood was noisy, had train noise, horrible traffic, and that people did odd things. It was just what it was and neighbors accepted that. Mayor Stromberg provided the history on the applicant's request for a zone change. Public Hearing Closed: 8:50 p.m. Councilor MarshNoisin m/s to deny first reading by title only of the ordinance titled, "An Ordinance Amending the City of Ashland Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Designations for 150 North Pioneer Street from Low-Density Multi-Family Residential (R-2) to Commercial (C-1)." DISCUSSION: Councilor Marsh apologized that Mr. Potocki had experienced a promise in 1992 that was later revoked. It was important to retain neighborhoods bordering the downtown area. There was enough variety in an R-2 zone to make a good transition from a more commercial area to residential. Changing the zoning would not alleviate any of the problems Mr. Potocki was experiencing. Ashland had a housing crisis and removing even one residential unit was unsupportable. The City needed to take care of what was City Council Business Meeting September 20, 2016 Page 5 of 5 happening in the parking lot. Councilor Voisin added that in 1992 the City Council and the Planning Commission denied a request for rezoning based on a need for a buffer between the downtown and Railroad district, to avoid commercial creep and preserve the character of the neighborhood. She did not think much had changed since then. Both the Historic Commission and Planning Commission unanimously denied the request. Changing the zone would affect the neighborhood. She would support the motion to deny the request. Councilor Lemhouse agreed with Councilor Marsh. He would support the motion but noted it was more than just a zoning issue for that property. He agreed with the Planning Commission and the Historic Commission and appreciated the Mayor bringing the issue forward. Councilor Morris would not support the motion. A buffer was needed and presently it was this residential property. It would make a better buffer as a commercial property. He shared his own experience of walking through the parking lot in the evening, no one wanted to live next to that kind of activity in a residential area. The Railroad district was not a uniform district. What saved the area were the commercial Bed and Breakfasts. Making the property commercial would not change the character. Councilor Rosenthal had empathy for what the owner had experienced and appreciated the Mayor's responsiveness. He agreed with Councilor Marsh and wanted the City to mitigate the issues and concerns plaguing the property. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Rosenthal, Marsh, Voisin, and Lemhouse, YES; Councilor Morris, NO. Motion passed 4-1. UNFINISHED BUSINESS - None NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS - None ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS - None OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS/REPORTS FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS Councilor Lemhouse announced the Ashland High School Volley Ball Dig Pink Breast Cancer Awareness night as a fundraiser for a local schoolteacher battling breast cancer. The event would take place Tuesday, October 4, 2016 at 6:30 p.m. Councilor Rosenthal noted the second of three public open houses for the Climate and Energy Action Plan was Sunday, September 25, 2016 from 3:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. at the Southern Oregon University (SOU) Stevenson Union. City Recorder Barbara Christensen announced the Oregon Association of Municipal Recorders (OAMR) conference was occurring September 21 through the 22 with 100 Recorders attending. OAMR would host a Breast Cancer Awareness walk through Lithia Park on Thursday, September 22, 2016 at 5:30 p.m. ADJOURNMENT OF BUSINESS MEETING Meeting adjourned at 9:05 p.m. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder John Stromberg, Mayor Minutes for the Conservation Commission August 24, 2016 Page 1 of 3 MINUTES FOR THE ASHLAND CONSERVATION COMMISSION Wednesday, August 24, 2016 Siskiyou Room, 51 Winburn Way 1. Call to Order Chair Bryan Sohl called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Commissioners Mark Weir, Marni Koopman, and Roxanne Beigel-Coryell were present. Councilor Rich Rosenthal was present. Staff member Adam Hanks was present. Commissioner Cara Cruickshank arrived late. Commissioners James McGinnis, Risa Buck, and Jaime Rosenthal were absent. 2. Announcements The next commission meeting will be September 28, 2016. 3. Reports/ Presentations/ Updates Recap of annual report to City Council - Sohl stated that at last week's Council meeting he gave the annual report to Council. It went well, but there were no questions from Council. Council Update - Councilor Rosenthal stated that at the last meeting Council agreed to move forward on the ordinance requiring that the City of Ashland create 10% of its electricity locally by 2020 (aka the I Ox20 ordinance). The first and second reading of that ordinance is expected to occur on September 6th. Group discussed what the next steps would be after the ordinance passes. Rosenthal also informed the group that at the recent Study Session there was an interesting presentation regarding the future of the electric utility. He reminded the group that on August 28th there is a volunteer appreciation event hosted by Ashland's elected officials and he hopes the commissioners can attend. Commissioner Cruickshank arrived 6: 07 p.m. 4. Consent Agenda Weir/Koopman m/s to approve the minutes of July 27, 2016 as presented. Voice Vote: one Abstention, the rest Ayes, Motion Passes. 5. Continuation of Announcements Group requested that a discussion of next year's Earth Bowl be added to the September agenda. Beigel-Coryell stated that SOU starts on the 26th of September, and students begin moving in on the Thursday prior. Group discussed the status of the appointment of the Ashland School District Representative to the commission. They agreed that it was appropriate for Chair Sohl to talk to Mayor Stromberg and request that Mayor Stromberg have a discussion with the new Ashland School District Administrator regarding appointment of a representative. 6. Public Forum Louise Shawkat - Stated that last year she had talked to the previous Ashland School District Minutes for the Conservation Commission August 24, 2016 Page 2 of 3 Administrator about the missing school representative and he showed no interest in appointing anyone. This week she e-mailed the new Administrator, who replied back that she supported finding a representative. Huelz Gutchen - Stated that at the last Council Study Session Mark Holden stated he was not interested in adding solar to the Electric Department operations. Huelz stated that this makes him think there should be a full-time Electric Director, rather than the current combination of Electric/Information Technology Director, in order achieve the requirements of the upcoming 10x20 ordinance. He stated that he has talked with the I Ox20 proposers and understands now that the ordinance is vague on details for a reason. Our current climate is so bad we need to do what the ordinance is proposing now. He would like to see a project where the City rents rooftops for solar panel installation. He thinks that this project would take two full-time employees to handle. He stated that we need to consider measuring all the carbon issues for buildings in order understand where our 'biggest bang for the buck' would come in project ideas. He also stated that he recently talked to Bonneville about where Ashland's electricity is from and how the map of electricity changes based on who is President and what they want. 7. Reports/ Presentations/ Updates, Continued City Conservation Programs and Operations - Hanks stated that the Conservation Division is currently in the process of updating forms and handouts for all reimbursement programs based on new BPA requirements. He stated that BPA also has a new solar taskforce, which is currently reviewing changes to their small-scale solar project requirements. As most projects done in the City fit into this category it is good to keep an eye on this process. Group discussed some of the rules/requirements from BPA on potential projects coming out of the CEAP process. Downtown Redeem ables/Recycling- Hanks stated this project is going well. The new signage has helped people to understand what can or can't be placed in the baskets. Also helpful has been the Master Recycler who has been assisting with the project. He hopes to bring to the Council a request to expand the program sometime in the Winter. Expansion is additionally timely due to redeemable rates going from 5 cents to 10 cents in April of 2017 and an expansion of what is considered redeemable in 2018. 8. Old Business Sneak Preview Column - Group made minor edits to the Living with Wildlife article written by Weir and then approved it. They agreed that the following would be upcoming topics: October - Get to Know Your Commissioner November - Limiting Holiday waste, written by J. Rosenthal Group agreed they would determine December and January topics at the next meeting. Climate & Energy Action Plan - Sohl stated that at the last committee meeting the group voted to request that the Council approve an ordinance prior to the Action Plan being finalized or approved. The current Eugene ordinance is likely to the template for the ordinance the group will propose. The committee is still struggling with how to use or incorporate consumption into the plan. Committee members were also assigned to work in specific focus areas in order to review/prioritize potential strategies and actions for the upcoming Open House on September 25. Minutes for the Conservation Commission August 24, 2016 Page 3 of 3 9. New Business None. 10. Wrap Up Group requested that on the next agenda there be the SOU quarterly update, and the Earth Bowl discussion. Meeting adjourned at 7:05 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Diana Shiplet Executive Assistant CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication October 4, 2016, Business Meeting Liquor License Application for Brian Dunagan dba Ashland Wine Cellar FROM: Barbara Christensen, City Recorder, christeb@ashland.or.us SUMMARY Approval of a Liquor License Application from Brian Dunagan dba Ashland Wine Cellar at 38 Lithia Way BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: Application is for a new license - Additional Privilege 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 Brian Dunagan dba Ashland Wine Cellar ATTACHMENTS: Liquor license application Page 1 of 1 ILAII OREGON LIQUOR CONTROL COMMISSION LIQUOR LICENSE APPLICATION Application is being made for: FTheCfty Y AND COUNTY USE ONLY LICENSE TYPES ACTIONS lication received: ❑ Full On-Premises Sales ($402.60/yr) ❑ Change Ownership ❑ Commercial Establishment ❑ New Outlet Council or C ounty Commission: ❑ Caterer ❑ Greater Privilege ❑ Passenger Carrier ® Additional Privilege (name of city or county) ❑ Other Public Location ® Other' dillited-o" recommends that this license be: ❑ Private Club Q Limited On-Premises Sales ($202.60/yr) El Granted ❑ Denied ❑ Off-Premises Sales ($100/yr) By: with Fuel Pumps (signature) (date) ❑ Brewery Public House ($252.60) Name: ❑ Winery ($250/yr) ❑ Other: Title: 90-DAY AUTHORITY OLCC USE O LY [3 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 a Date: 1 APPLYING AS: [3Limited ❑ Corporation E] Limited Liability ❑ individuals Partnership Company 90-day authority: 13 Yes j~No 1. Entity or Individuals applying for the license: [See SECTION 1 of the Guide] (D Ashland Wine & Spirits, LLC Q 2. Trade Name (dba): Ashland Wine Cellar 3. Business Location: 38 Lithia Way Ashland Jackson OR 97520 (number, street, rural route) (city) (county) (state) (ZIP code) 4. Business Mailing Address: 38 Lithia Way Ashland OR 97520 (PO box, number, street, rural route) (city) (state) (ZIP code) 5. Business Numbers: 541-488-2111 (phone) (fax) 6. Is the business at this location currently licensed by OLCC? QYes []lo 7. If yes to whom:Ashland Wine Cellar/Brian Dunagan Type of License:Off Premesis Sales 8. Former Business Name: t-4/A 9. Will you have a manager? ❑Yes EjNo Name: (manager must fill out an Individual History form) 10. What is the local governing body where your business is located? C 1"f of-' D (name of city or county) 11. Contact person for this application: Brian Dunagan 541-488-2111 (name) (phone number(s)) 38 Lithia Way 888-873-0790 bran@ashlandwinecellar.com (address) (fax number) I understand that if my answers are not true and complete, the OLCC may d i IZ=lVitiE App n) Si a re(s)) and Date: J U L 14 ~016 Date O ae ® Date ® MEDFORD REGIOP06WFFICE OR 1-800-452-OLCC (6522) • www.oregon.gov/oicc CONTROL COMMISSION (rev. 0812011) CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication October 4, 2016, Business Meeting Appointment to Historic Commission FROM: Barbara Christensen, City Recorder, christebaashland.or.us SUMMARY Confirm Mayor's appointment of Piper Von Chamier to the Historic Commission with a term to expire April 30, 2019. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: This is confirmation by the City Council on the Mayor's appointment to the Historic Commission. COUNCIL GOALS SUPPORTED: Ashland Municipal Code (AMC) Chapter 2.13 FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: n/a STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Motion to approve appointment of Piper Von Chamier to the Historic Commission with a term to expire April 30, 2019. SUGGESTED MOTION: Motion to approve Piper Von Chamier to the Historic Commission with a term to expire April 30, 2019. ATTACHMENTS: Application Page 1 of 1 Lll CITY OF ASHLAND APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO CITY COMMISSION/COMMITTEE Please type or print answers to the following questions and submit to the City Recorder at City Hall, 20 E Main Street, or email cliristeb cnr ashland.or.us. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact the City Recorder at 488-5307. Attach additional sheets if necessary. Name T[ P rxr. \Q N C t~A YVI 1 X Requesting to serve on: k l s 710 tktc... (Commission/Committee) Address 115 CqL 144 c37 ~3 Occupation 0.riCL%. Phone: lxrt~ 5'03 /a(, o, gbc 8 Work 541 Email t.nta~r++l~gi` Fax 1. Education Background What schools have you attended? ' -1 What degrees do you hold? -re.. ~ L- 4v---A • a vzA ~ What additional training or educatio have you had that would apply to this,position? L 60 fif 2. Related Experience What prior work experience have you had that would help you if you were appointed to this position? P+o aa.. c On ~ 51? 41c.i AL. c7-CP IN fi.f'A c- Y~y, h$ IL Do you feel it would be advantageous for you to have further training in thig fie , such as attending conferences or seminars? Why? ~►i rrr 3. Interests Why are you applying for this position? CA S tat C nL I C) tiv. C.A.0 AV-1 I/ Cd Ly Y t t t , AJ ,'r"4L QW: 4. Availability Are you available to attend special meetings, in addition to the regular[ sch doled meetings? Do you prefer day or evening meetings? 5. Additional Information How long have you lived in this community? Please use the space below to summarize any additional qualifications you have for this position (]nn A-0 r -I C. C'. veto 13 rr~ V-C. VA~V-O' r,., rti•. © %.I ]fr=& cc 07 A Date gnature I LAO CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication October 4, 2016, Business Meeting Adoption of Denial Findings for 150 North Pioneer Street Zone Change Request. FROM: ,ashland.or.us Bill Molnar, Director of Community Development, bill.molnarqc SUMMARY The denial findings presented for adoption will formalize the Council's decision not to change the zoning of the property at 150 North Pioneer Street from R-2 (low-density multi-family) to C-1 (commercial) and complete the land use process. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS At the September 20, 2016 regular meeting, the Council conducted a public hearing and considered the first reading of an ordinance to change the zoning of the property at 150 North Pioneer Street. Following the conclusion of testimony and closing of the hearing, the Council decided to deny the request. The findings presented for adoption formalize that decision and complete the land use process. COUNCIL GOALS SUPPORTED N/A FISCAL IMPLICATIONS N/A RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION Planning staff recommends that the Council adopt the findings as presented. SUGGESTED MOTION Move to adopt the findings to deny Planning Action 42016-00309, a request for Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment and Zone Change for 150 North Pioneer Street, as presented. ATTACHMENTS Proposed Written Findings Page 1 of 1 ~r BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL October 4, 2016 IN THE MATTER OF PLANNING ACTION #2016-00309, A REQUEST FOR A ) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP AMENDMENT AND ZONE CHANGE FOR ) THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 150 NORTH PIONEER STREET. THE CURRENT ) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION IS LOW DENSITY MULTI- ) FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND THE ZONING IS R-2. WITH THE CURRENT ) FINDINGS, PROPOSAL, THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION WOULD BE ) CONCLUSIONS, & CHANGED TO COMMERCIAL AND THE ZONING TO C-1. NO CHANGES TO ) ORDERS TO THE EXISTING SITE IMPROVEMENTS OR THEIR APPROVED USES ARE ) PROPOSED. ) OWNER/APPLICANT: Stan Potocki/City of Ashland ) RECITALS: 1) Tax lot #11800 of Map 39 1 E 09BA is located at 150 North Pioneer Street and is zoned R-2 (Low Density Multi-Family Residential). 2) The applicants are requesting a Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment and Zone Change for the property located at 150 North Pioneer Street. The current Comprehensive Plan Map designation is Low Density Multi-Family Residential and the Zoning is R-2. With the current request, the Comprehensive Plan Map designation would be changed to Commercial and the Zoning to C-1. No changes to the existing site improvements or them approved uses are proposed. 3) Amendments of the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Maps are addressed in AMC 18.5.9.020 "Applicability and Review Procedure" as follows: B. Type 111. It may be necessary from time to time to make legislative amendments in order to conform with the Comprehensive Plan or to meet other changes in circumstances or conditions. The Type 111 procedure applies to the creation, revision, or large-scale implementation of public policy requiring City Council approval and enactment of on ordinance; this includes adoption of regulations, zone changes for large areas, zone changes requiring comprehensive plan amendment, comprehensive plan map or text amendment, annexations (see chapter 18.5.8 for annexation information), and urban growth boundary amendments. The following planning actions shall be subject to the Type 111 procedure. 1. Zone changes or amendments to the Zoning Map or other official maps, except where minor amendments or corrections may be processed through the Type II procedure pursuant to subsection 18.5.9.020.A, above. PA #2016-00309 October 4, 2016 Page 1 2. Comprehensive Plan changes, including text and map changes or changes to other official maps. 3. Land Use Ordinance amendments. 4. Urban Growth Boundary amendments. A change in the zoning designation for a property that also entails changing the property's underlying Comprehensive Plan designation, as proposed here, is considered a legislative amendment through the Type III procedure discussed in AMC 18.5.9.020.13 above. A Type III procedure requires a hearing before the Planning Commission to yield a recommendation. to Council and final approval through a hearing before the Council with adoption by ordinance. The Land Use Ordinance generally permits zone changes when it is found to be necessary in order to conform to the Comprehensive Plan or to meet other changes in circumstances or conditions, however Type III procedures are legislative decisions dealing with broader policy issues at Council discretion. While a change to the Comprehensive Plan Map is a legislative matter, the proposal here involves changes to the zoning of a single property and as such notice was provided to surrounding property owners in keeping with the noticing requirements for a quasi-judicial land use hearing. 4) The City Council, following proper public notice, held a public hearing on September 20, 2016 at which time testimony was received and exhibits were presented. Subsequent to the closing of the hearing, the City Council denied the application. Now, therefore, the City Council of the City of Ashland finds, concludes and orders as follows: SECTION 1. EXHIBITS For the purposes of reference to these Findings, the attached index of exhibits, data, and testimony will be used. Staff Exhibits lettered with an "S" Proponent's Exhibits, lettered with a "P" Opponent's Exhibits, lettered with an "O" Hearing Minutes, Notices, Miscellaneous Exhibits lettered with an "M" SECTION 2. CONCLUSORY FINDINGS 2.1 The City Council finds that it has received all information necessary to make a decision based on the Staff Report, public hearing testimony and the exhibits received. 2.2 The City Council finds that the proposal for a Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment and Zone Change fails to meet the criteria of necessity in AMC 18.5.9.020.13. and further finds that there is no public need or benefit as described in the Ashland Comprehensive Plan that would be addressed in PA 42016-00309 October 4, 2016 Page 2 approving the request. 2.3 The City Council finds that in considering a similar request in 1992, the Council ultimately determined that the existing R-2 zoning provided an important buffer between the more intense C-1 uses to the south and the National Register of Historic Places-listed Railroad Addition Historic District residential neighborhood a short distance to the north, and that the Conditional Use Permit process provided adequate options for some measure of commercial use for the R-2 zoned property. In addition, the Council in 1992 determined that traffic increases from 1988 to 1992 were insufficient to warrant the zone change and that any change to the zoning should be looked at more comprehensively. 2.4 The City Council finds that the City of Ashland Historic Commission considered the proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan Map designation and Zoning Map at their regular meeting on August 3, 2016 and following their deliberations, unanimously recommended that the City Council deny the proposal. The Historic Commission's recommendation indicated that the proposal represented a step in the gradual encroachment of commercial zoning into the historic residential neighborhood which could result in additional pressure to re-develop the property. Historic Commissioners suggested that such redevelopment pressure could ultimately result in significant changes to and/or the possible demolition of this historic contributing resource, the 'James W. Losher House.' The Historic Commission suggested that the concerns raised by the property owner would be better addressed with efforts targeted to mitigate the impacts of the parking lot, and that changing the underlying zoning from R-2 to C- I would do little to alleviate the problems. 2.5 The City Council further finds that the City of Ashland Planning Commission considered the proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan Map designation and Zoning Map at their regular meeting on September 13, 2016 and following their deliberations, unanimously recommended that the City Council deny the proposal. The Planning Commission noted that testimony from neighbors raised concerns that a change to commercial zoning would exacerbate existing traffic and parking issues, increase noise, and chip away at the residential character of the historic neighborhood by moving commercial uses closer to existing residences. Neighbors emphasized that re-zoning was not the solution, and suggested that a taller, denser, sound-proof fence adjacent to the parking lot would help. The Planning Commission further found that the proposed amendments of to the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map designations could lead to the need for improved access to serve newly allowed commercial use of the site, and that this could result in pressure to widen the driveway to accommodate parking and circulation requirements and necessitate the removal of parts of the existing historic home. The Planning Commission believed that the proposed amendments would adversely impact the character of the surrounding neighborhood by allowing commercial uses with greater intensity, larger structures, increased lot coverage, and by removing a continuing residential presence from the property. The Commission found that the property would be better suited to limited commercial uses permitted under the existing R-2 zoning through the Conditional Use Permit process which provides a greater measure of control while allowing for careful consideration of the neighborhood context. The Planning Commission further found that while there has been an informal policy for some time that commercial uses allowed conditionally in residential neighborhoods should maintain a residential presence for neighborhood compatibility, this site would be uniquely suited to considering an PA 42016-00309 October 4, 2016 Page 3 appropriate commercial use through the Conditional Use Permit process without a required residential component. 2.6 The City Council finds that, as was the case when this issue was previously considered by the Council in 1992, the R-2 zoning provides a necessary buffer between the more intense commercial zoning around the downtown and the historic Railroad District residential neighborhood to the north, and that protecting this neighborhood's character from the impacts of "commercial creep" raised by neighbors and both advisory commissions is of continued importance. The Council further finds that the Conditional Use Permit process provides the property owner with options for flexible use of the property. The City Council finds that given the current rental crisis and housing inventories, any loss of residential units or residentially-zoned land would not be in the public interest. The Council further finds that changing the zoning as requested would not address the underlying issues identified with the intensifying use of the parking lot in close proximity to the residence at 150 North Pioneer Street, and that these could be better addressed with specifically targeted mitigation measures. SECTION 3. ORDER 3.1 Based on the record of the Public Hearing on this matter, the City Council denies Planning Action #2016-00309, the proposed Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment and Zone Change for the property located at 150 North Pioneer Street. October 4, 2016 John Stromberg, Mayor Date PA 42016-00309 October 4, 2016 Page 4 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication October 4, 2016, Business Meeting Award of Bid to Vitus Construction for Improvements to Garfield Park FROM: Jason Minica, Project Manager, Parks and Recreation, Jason.minica@ashland.or.us SUMMARY This is a bid award to Vitus Construction for improvements to Garfield Park. The bid has been reviewed by the Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission, which voted unanimously at its September 26 meeting to recommend its approval by the Council. This project is a renovation of many aspects of the park, including a new splash pad, improved volleyball court, new basketball court, three new shade shelters, new site amenities, sidewalk extensions and enhancements, and various landscape improvements. Vitus Construction was the only bidder on the project and the total bid is $817,564.00. Funds for the project are budgeted and available. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: The Garfield Park Master Plan includes improvements to existing park uses in addition to a few new uses. The 2015 - 2017 budget for capital improvements included replacing the existing splash pad, at an estimated cost of approximately $550,000. The volleyball court was also slated for refurbishment with a budget of $10,000. After careful consideration the decision was made to include the volleyball upgrades into the splash pad project. Consideration was then given to upgrading or refurbishing other elements in the Park to achieve economies of scale and funding efficiencies. Below is a list of items to be installed or refurbished. The approved master plan includes: • Refurbishment of the basketball court to convert the court to a regulation-sized arena with five- foot boundaries, new breakaway baskets and acrylic backboards. • Refurbishment of the volleyball court while extending the sand area and replacing the existing wooden retaining wall with a concrete seating wall for participants and spectators. • Development of a new Cascade-Siskiyou Scenic Bikeway shelter that would include a water station, a bike fix-it station and a kiosk with maps and brochures designed to showcase Ashland to out-of-town cyclists. • Three picnic shelters. • An improved and enlarged splash pad for interactive play among children. • Infrastructure repairs, enlarged tree planters and other miscellaneous improvements. The new bikeway shelter was initiated in response to a State-sanctioned scenic bike route promoted by Travel Oregon, with Garfield Park serving as the starting and ending point for the route. Page 1 of 3 CITY OF ASHLAND Garfield Park is heavily used, not only locally but regionally. People come to enjoy the facilities, gather for birthday parties and picnics and participate in family activities. The park currently has few picnic tables and no shelters; therefore, the two proposed shelters and picnic tables could be a welcome addition. g Oar " "A" PLAY AREA V) "VW +rriwu i" i^~ ~i+ Yt ° s"°' b1iCiYirl9FlR? U- jj ix r y f r f < Garfield Park Approved Master Plan EXISTING CONDITIONS Existing conditions at Garfield Park are in dire need of refurbishing. Garfield Park was constructed in the early `90s and with the exception of new playground equipment and painting of the restrooms, has not had much attention since its inception. The volleyball and basketball courts are in need of major repair. Cracking and unlevel playing surfaces on the basketball court have become a major safety issue for the Park staff and users alike. Issues with the volleyball courts are just as concerning. The current wooden walls are splintering and starting to buckle under the pressure of the sand that has blown up against them over the years, and has become unsafe and unsightly. The water play has served its purpose and has become a staple for Ashland citizens over the years. Unfortunately, this water play has become very old and outdated and can no longer serve its purpose. Safety concerns and maintenance issues have started to add up, making it an easy decision to replace it with a new modern splash pad that can accommodate the continued heavy use of Garfield Park. Other existing conditions at Garfield Park include sidewalk and irrigation repair; issues that will also be addressed during the renovation of the park. Page 2 of 3 ,%V4611 CITY OF ASHLAND Planned Improvements Included in the Contract o Full splash pad replacement o Hardscape picnic areas associated with the splash pad, as well as park seating and tables o Full volleyball concrete enclosure replacement o Full basketball court replacement o Replacement of basketball posts and standards o Three new shade/picnic structures o Sidewalk extension for enhanced pedestrian circulation o Various minor landscape enhancements, including irrigation o New shower/foot wash/drinking fountains APRC Findings Staff has found that future improvements to Garfield Park will greatly enhance the experience of its users, and will lessen the constant maintenance needed from park staff. PARKS COMMISSION GOALS SUPPORTED: Planning and Development 1. Continue to build a relevant and functional parks and rec. infrastructure through master planning and implementation strategies. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: The complete budget for this project is $890,458. The full funds for the project are currently available in the Capital Improvements Fund. Of the total project budget, $850,000 has been approved and issued as a bond and the remainder is available through Food and Beverage Tax revenues. The bid award to Vitus Construction is $817,564.60. STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Staff recommends that Council approve proposed bid from Vitus Construction and give authorization for APRC to enter into the attached contract for the full construction of the project. SUGGESTED MOTION: I move to approve the bid for the Garfield Park improvements and the award of contract to Vitus Construction in the amount of $ 817,564.60. ATTACHMENTS: • Approved Master Plan for Garfield Park • Bid Schedule from Vitus Construction Page 3 of 3 ~°~y~yd~ S~c~ ` ~ yu ? p 1 ~ s ~ k 3 B~ 1 yw", 4 ~ ~,4 q ~ t. ~a r ~ •W. .z 5 ~ ~ J ~ d 1 A s i. n ~ j p ? a q av r %w'~;~ r.~ rv t 1~Y'n, 1 x e ~ ~ i'?~' ~ 6 `p~, v la r n s~ j n n,v ~ ~ ~ + M. z - 1, u ~ v„ ~ ~ ~ .tea-~~~«~.; ~ ~ ~ H ~ ~ OC ~ W Q ~gg ~ ~u . W "~k F R d' ~`a R ~ a f ~ fi a r. w ax: ~ ~ . , ~ U ~ * x Q 1 ^e ® b + ~ v., ~ ~ ~ H 1 e n 5 f , v a~ . g~. ~ H . ~ y a wY ' ' ~ ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ 1 h v n E ya n , Ifi~ y F~ i "I ' ~ _ f n ~ - ~ r \ ~ •$a d \ } ~ y ~ i ~ nx, i 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ` ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I s . , % ~w ~ ~'~r 1 ! ~ ~ i o,,.' e / , ~ . , ~ ~ _ A ~ ~ ~ ~ 'fir a t a ~L /O/ 7[ ~ In 6I.. r~n ~a. f ~ < v / ~ V H ~Z Q X Q r W JU ~ Z R ~e E Q i n~sd {0 ~ O , + , d it ~ ~ ~ ~ / ~ 0 ~ a~~ 4 s ~ LU ,4 {K r of ~ Z ~ ~ .ce jj~ r 4 x q3' 1 ~ ~ ~ I' v p r i r~ + T y ~ a [ pq p; h ~ d~ t , ~ ~ ~ OD ..u d~ ~ ~ F +t(~ ~ ' ~ ~ i { 'fir ~i ~ ~ ~x ~ P ~ ~ 4 T xx rc 'reav~~we . 1 ~ ~t , ~ .tee ~ n Y x° ~ ~f ~ , ~ xbS t.a m ~ j w, ~ ~ ~ h A x,: ~ .v w Y+ ~ { i ~ nw y ~ 1 } ~ ° a„ a n. ~ t 4 ~H ` ATM, A ~  5 A 'i Bid Schedule GARFIELD WATER PARK PROJECT City of Ashland Parks & Recreation 6/28/2016 U nan 71temQuantity Unit Unit Price (Fig.) Extended Amount Mobilization, move in of equipment and materials per 1 APWA/ODOT Sec 00210. Installed, complete. 1 LS $12,000.00 $ 92,000.00 Work Zone Traffic Control, provide materials, equipment and labor per Special Provisions Sec. 225, 2 installed complete 1 LS $4,790.00 $4,790.00 Temporary Fencing, Install materials, labor and all incidentals for all temporary construction fencing and 3 tree protection fencing as shown on plans 1400 LF $ 5.00 $7,000.00 Temporary Restrooms, Install and maintain handicap accessible restrooms and hand wash station for the 4 duration of the construction 2 EA $ 3,235.00 $ 3,235.00 ~a d oa ;k Removal of Structures and obstructions, per approved plans and APWA/ODOT Sec. 003101 including but not limited to all pathways, existing splash pad, equipment, 5 basketball posts, courts, walls, etc. 1 L5 $8,955.00 $8,955.00 Clearing and Grubbing, per approved plans and APWA/ODOT Sec. 00320, including but not limited to all trees marked for removal, stump grinding where necessary, and removal of all loose softened/organic 6 materials 1 LS $2,600.00 $2,600.00 General Excavation, APWA/ODOT Sec. 00330 and including but not limited to grading as shown on 7 approved plans 1 LS $ 5,115.00 $5,115.00 Page 1 Garfield ParkBid.xlsx .1 Yl .rrJr' _ - MIME .,0 Ot}=Dra raga e e ==r ;,i - i Trench Drain, install materials, labor and all incidentals per approved plans, including connection to existing S storm drain LS $58,575.00 $58,575.00 Area Drain For Foot Wash, install materials, labor and all incidentals per approved plans, including connection 9 to existing sanitary sewer 2 EA $3,295.00 $6,590.00 Irrigation Sleeves, provide materials, equipment and labor to install 3" PVC 3034 sleeves as shown on 10 approved plans 350 LF $ 8.75 _ $3,062.50 Retaining Wall for Volleyball court, Cast-in-place concrete footing and 8" stem wall per Ace Engineering detail 1/S2, as shown on approved plans, including 11 Structural Excavation and Backfill. 345 LF $162.00 $ 55,890.00 - a ~p = ~ lea S r#' ee - F4- thick Concrete Patio/Pathways, (Including, but not limited to minimum leveling base course of 6" of 3/4"-0" gravel and 6" beyond edge) per Detail 4 L-5.0, approved 12 plans and APWA/ODOT Sec. 00759. Installed complete. 6000 SF $7.00 $"42,000.00 Concrete Thickened Edge, per Detail 1 L-5.0, approved plans and APWA/ODOT Sec. 00759. Installed along 13 existing playground, complete 42 LF $15.00 $ 630.00 Concrete Sfairs, Cast-in-place concrete stairs-pee Ace Engineering detail 2/S2, as shown on approved plans, 14 including Structural Excavation and Backfill. 1 CA $4,905.00 $4,905.00 Concrete Ramp, Cast-in-place concrete ramp per Ace Engineering detail 3/S2, as shown on approved plans, 15 Including Structural Excavation and Backfill. z FA $ 3,645. 00 $3,645.00 4" thick Splash Pad Concrete, Including, but not limited to minimum leveling base course of 6" of 3/4"-0" . crushed rock, wire mesh, per Detail 5/L-5.0, approved 16 plans and APWA/ODOTSec. 00759. Installed complete. 1630 SF $10.50 $17,115.00 Page 2 GarfieldParkBid.xisx 4" thick Splash Pad Concrete Border, Including, but not limited to minimum leveling base course of 6" of 3/4"-0" crushed rock, per Detail S/L-5.0, approved plans and 17 APWA/ODOT Sec. 00759. Installed complete. 1400 SF $10.25 $14,350.00 Splash pad Concrete Seat Wall, Including, but not limited to 6" base course of 3/4"-0" crushed rock, footing drain, drain rock, etc., per Detail 3/L-5.0, approved plans and 18 APWA/ODOT Sec 00759. Installed complete. 175 LF $125.00 $21,875.00 P ~ fl0~1~-= i t~ D Ea etrt~and~ontroi: ~ - - Seeding, lawn, approved plans, and APWA/ODOT Sec. 19 01030. Installed, complete. 1 LS $6,760.00 $6,760.00 Shrubs/Ground Covers, 5 Gallon Container, per Detail 1/L 6.0, Per approved plans and APWA/ODOT Sec. 1040. 20 Installed, complete. 47 EA $ 42.00 $1,974.00 Shrubs/Ground Covers, I Gallon Container, per Detail 111- 6.0, Per approved plans and APWA/ODOT Sec. 1040. 21 Installed, complete. 204 EA $15.65 $3,192.60 Shrubs/Ground Covers, Flats @2' OC, per Detail 1/1- 6.0, Per approved plans and APWA/ODOT Sec. 1040. 22 Installed, complete. 625 SF $3.50 $2,187.50 Topsoil, per approved plans, and APWA/ODOT Sec. 23 01040. Installed, complete. 1 LS $24,265.00 $ 24,265.00 Planting bed prep, per notes on L6.0 approved plans, 24 and APWA/ODOT Sec. 01040. Installed, complete. 1 LS $15, 900.00 $15'!900-00 Bark Mulch, approved plans, and APWA/ODOT Sec. 25- 01040. Installed, complete. 1 LS $2,900.00 $ 2,900.00 Bike Repair Station, per approved plans, and Special 26 Provisions Sec. 01095.10. Installed, complete. 1 EA $2,508.00 $2,508.00 Page 3 GarfieidParkBid.xlsx Splash Pad, per approved plans, and Special Provisions Sec. 01095.20. Including, but not limited to all excavation, concrete footings, backfill, hardware, fittings, nozzles, piping, wiring, accessories, splash pad water management, water containment system and finishes 27 required. installed, complete. 1 LS $ 260,300.00' $260,300.00 Basketball Court Asphalt Pavement, per approved plans and Special Provisions Sec. 01095.30. Including, but not limited to installation of curbing, 3/4"-0" aggregate base course, 2 lifts of 1-1/2" asphalt concrete. installed, 28 complete. 1 LS $20,510.00 $20,510.00 Basketball Court Surfacing, per approved plans and Special Provisions Sec. 01095.40, Including, but not limited to, patch binder, court surface and paint. 29 installed, complete. 1 LS $55,000.00 $55,000.00 Basketball Hoops and Poles, per approved plans. Including, but not limited to, footings, poles, back boards 30 and hoops. Installed, complete. 2 EA $4,800.00 $9,600.00 20'x20' Shade Structure, per approved plans and Special Provisions Sec. 01095.50. Including, but not limited to, labor and materials for footings, columns, frame, roofing 31 and paint. Structure complete. 2 EA $14,360.00 $28,720.00 15'x20' Shade Structure, per approved plans and Special Provisions Sec. 01095.50. Including, but not limited to, labor and materials for footings, columns, frame, roofing 32 and paint. Structure complete. 1 EA $10,925.00 $10,925.00 10' Fixed Shade Structure, per approved plans and Special Provisions Sec. 01095.50. Including, but not limited to, labor and materials for footings, Fiji model 10' (or approved equal), brown roof, and yellow poles. 33 Structure complete. 3 EA $12,445.00 $ 37,335.00 Volleyball systems, per approved plans. Including, but 34 not limited to, footings, poles, nets. Installed, complete. 2 EA $2,825.00 $ 5,560.00 4" Volleyball Sand, per approved plans. Installed, 35 complete. 100 Cv $ 39.00 $ 3,900.00 Bottle Filler, per approved plans. Installed with drain, 36 complete. Page 4 GarfieldParkBid.xlsx 2 EA $6,335.00 $12,670.00 Foot Wash, per approved plans (MDF 525SM or equal). 37 Installed, complete. 1 EA $4,660.00 $4,660.00 Foot Wash H/C, per approved plans (MDF 5645M or 38 equal). Installed, complete. 1 EA $6,875.00 $6,875.00 46" Square Tables, Perforated Pedestal SM, per approved plans (Site Amenities T46PERFPEDSM or 39 equal). Installed, complete. 8 EA $1,305.00 $10,440.00 oun a es, Regal Pedestal , per approve pans (Site Amenities T46RACSPEDSM or equal). Installed, 40 complete. 6 EA $1,445.00 $ 8,670.00 8' Table, Regal Web SM, per approved plans (Site 41 Amenities T8WEBHDCP or equal). Installed, complete. 1 EA $ 2,470.00 $ 2,470.00 8' Benches, Perforated 4" SQ Legs SM with back, per approved plans (Site Amenities 38WBPERF4-4SM or 42 equal), Installed, complete. 4 EA $ 990.00 $3,960.00 =10• a e~ 't e - 1/2" Supply Llne, per approved plans, local plumbing 43 code and APWA/ODOT Sec. 01100. Installed, complete. 400 LF $11.00 $ 4,400.00 Q 4 T~norary;Featuaiti~ Appilrenances ~~w:-~ra.pt,`',;,? a.y lt.:. :;:5 ._r,; ~;3'-Y•..-.., _ .S}' '•f' 5if~r.:~-;t.:.-: ' 27,025.00 y`"i~.`.'F~!:.ti"i;<'.:~~"}.'t?i'..:~''-'.+-.•~":X w~.:.C•;:',f','- KTf:,S,.:Y 1•rW:'w ` nyu't•/.tic::-'."r4iar'4i~h~%+S.j!`Y.e%'.t:.~i✓.:';v. 4'= ~vy~~ ~`;Y'•e:'"•'%~^-C;~;,~'-~»•.r+'•'3's,•-„~'''~,''Z3.xY""':•~~_..~..} ~[`~?i~S''~.'r.f ~~w.'`^•iix~-~ w-r ;r1r. ,*1~~{-fir .,ti. .'r•' ..X'.y~ii:;ti.~.;:-rw>': ,._;fi ~,1~.• y'~'~••e\s~..~-+:'•Iy"F~`!'" part.003Qx "R_oacl~irark ~ ~f" - - :'ir,Y~ `"Z~'~ a.-tt•.~..ic,e~v.,,~ +L'a~r.u+.ti <'::;; r 1:'::;:<.,.:'.: 16,670.00 'yi~~ .r!is.r.C.;qq•',E7!.•'.:v.'Z':e,+T~%.%a::~.ri`.':~~::'Q<.'.i:!?:;+%?J':`=•:~:;:~.r~,:.~r'.~c~:-v'-K _i.:k . -'C : '~:'_.`..1,;:a,'. '%s' ~ w<~i+i"'v..v':-1,>`•r-,,"ti):L;rlA'~_ti. X~~^+~ ..fjr y~3-~%,1'.,~•:•; 3' -'•,;";ti'"~> wC~:y~.,~F7~r.'YF••:.'i!:-':yV+"~C~~C',y."v♦ti~:•. '.tlrtn'kti::;~r:...,...,•:i' 67,687.50 G: ' .e -:.,..:..s rla• hr ..~~.T:.'r :.n.: - 1=*:' S:y'k.•`.".:. ..'k1e:.,'.sx...~ - ".~:z! v.. ~`'i. r , F''?rw' _:.i~:',`•'J zryA:O~?i:~ c^c+r ~~r!Y•~n~ R ~.xf.•.~;.u~ kjf-~-~t~uy,;.:+~~"%}`~. Q 005 r ,}f a'` ~z"t`x. - .'~~ir' Vk - ~ 7~_ f'3~ > ,.shy„' •~.r: <i i{,.} l 0 OR rt UgeJr 1r~~•r r~ `xrr c`r, F' .µki .v F~-1+C~• $ 55,890.00 Swlr,•••°: •j: ;r~.'_w,:~r ~.•>;S:f++we• wt+~: i.L•`. h 1.+; Ci r• vu,^.. .a.•.a~~^ R'1 y~•M J~! •S 4tia •7Cu.?Gw .=:ti': =:.c!-:eY,---~=~: '/iu~%;•+: i ••c _'Titt!::s•,:3' ;•O?~-,~'~"Yi~.'.-.f,;ti+~.~>,n:,~~~sii~'.';"tii~;tir~' - ;Y- ':t.:;•.. ~::1: r^'_'~~r.;t ~d'e`?µ.`. ° w ~S', sT ~•L _~+1•"~y;.,,~ :,,L; y.--.ri: ca. ~e+ Palt.Y00706`` ea ng Surfaces:~t~ ' $ 104 520.00 ~:ea'.a,•:.+=.r *:w. ~ ~'.':.7~"I•}•~: 7~i~:T?:iy'+~•r=~;}„~~\;._:;r•5ti.;-..-,~=3L'x"',.:4'.-.wh.•::q. .i_1: S ~.f^-: 3:v'•<a i:r~ i'y i ~I~•s. ..ye:^,,. . ^i ~~tjt;~" ~'+c .a~. ~'.•+~:r>~r,~ ;~V'Q:'.w~.i. i.4'i ,+.~.Y ~fiJvrv!i .~.'~v S~ti._• ~ l7 w'4 ~.ffi YF:wV K 1 Y ~i.. Aar 0100.0- ight 0fWa-ybeveId Pment-and Control=: $ 57,179.10 lA'~ '~~f i:Cx'=~;~csrs'r~ y r'.3• YY ~t ~l~y'~ ~ ~ j,,., +r •1 ~;g.• - >,•~q4'{r~:.'.1:rK:.Y>-<'f?.i^.•' rte'-~% .:l r iva t~ v!::'rt`'..'.,~.'~.1•rt~w~;!~-.F_;r~C•~n:.s;.S=.,i.•w~^y;:~.:: e_-., j:`i.: ;yam=.:':"<''.•c ~~.-:'^=~=R. - 1~'.:~%~~~~~ ~ •ct"'~"` i`-: }t~C•'.. :Part'01095 ;r Site., urnist i rte.. 484 193.00 t• ,may Part Q1101.'-:Wa~ep.u 1 S Stems; r' 1-~~'..~'~_...'•.~~'~~~`•~.~:: Y` 4,400.00 SUM OF EXTENED TOTALS $ 817,564.60 Page 5 Garfield ParkBid.xlsx ; tai:; Contractor Signature: Date: Page 6 GarfieldParkBid.xtsx CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication October 4, 2016, Business Meeting Downtown Beautification Project Update FROM: Scott A. Fleury, Engineering Services Manager, Public Works/Engineering, fleurys@ashland.or.us SUMMARY At the October 20, 2015, Council meeting, Council requested a peer review/second opinion of Kerry KenCairn's design with respect to the beautification project at the corner of Pioneer St. and Lithia Way. The project design called for the removal of mature trees. Staff contacted two local professional landscape architects to perform a peer review of the design work/conditions. One turned down the request and the second, Sager & Associates Landscape Architects, performed the design review. Sager and Associates agrees with the tree removal recommendation as necessary to implement the design developed by KenCairn BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: In 2015, landscape architect Kerry KenCairn presented plans for a beautification project at the southeast corner of Lithia Way and Pioneer Street. The project, which had been identified in the Downtown Beautification Plan created by ad hoc Downtown Beautification Committee in 2014, called for the removal of three trees due to poor health and the replacement of two of the trees, along with construction of concrete retaining walls, pavers around the public art, handrail for the walkway and stairs along with ground based plantings in the beds. KenCairn, at the request of Council, subsequently provided a conceptual alternate design and narrative that kept two of the three trees in place while still providing for pavers around the public art, a new tree grate for the maple planted in the sidewalk area, a small curb/concrete seat wall to retain soil and handrail for the walkway and stairs. Council after discussion requested a second opinion peer review of the design and tree health by a different landscape architect. Following this request, staff contacted two local professional landscape architects to perform a peer review of KenCairn's original proposed design. Staff first contacted John Galbraith and Associates, who declined to perform a review. Staff then contacted Laurie Sager and Associates. Laurie Sager performed the peer review of the original design for the corner project. The review concurs that the removal and replacement of trees is necessary to support the original design parameters. The primary design and alternative designs developed by KenCairn are attached for reference. In addition to the primary design, public works staff recommends removal of the adjacent driveway and replacement with accessible sidewalk. There have been numerous trip/fall complaints due to the grade changes along this section of sidewalk. Page 1 of 2 CITY OF ASHLAND Downtown Beautification Proiect Status: Plaza: The free standing planters have been installed and additional plants were added as per the approved design. As requested by Council the perimeter fence was not installed. Parking lot at Lithia Way and Pioneer Street: Landscape Architect Kerry KenCairn presented a comprehensive design for the parking lot landscaping. The original design was not approved by Council as it required removal of a majority of trees throughout the parking lot boundary. Council did recommend implementing the plan with focusing on ground based plantings without tree removal. Without the tree removal, the replacement of the irrigation system to support new ground based planting is problematic. The Parks Department has trimmed tree limbs and vegetation as part of the general maintenance for the parking lot. Corner of Winburn Way and North Main: The seat wall, concrete and landscape improvements have been completed per KenCairn's original design. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: KenCairn Landscape Architects estimated the Lithia Way and Pioneer project will cost $50,490.75, including a 15% construction contingency. Money budgeted and available from transient occupancy tax funds that are set aside for downtown beautification projects can be used to fund the construction phase of the Lithia Way and Pioneer corner project. STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUESTED ACTION: Move to approve original Lithia Way/Pioneer corner design by KenCairn Landscape Architects. SUGGESTED MOTIONS: I move approval of the original Lithia Way/Pioneer corner design created by KenCairn Landscape Architects. ATTACHMENTS: • Laurie Sager and Associates Landscape Architects Review Memo • Tree Commission Letter Dated 8-4-2016 • Lithia Way/Pioneer Corner Triangle Design • Alternative Design Lithia Way/Pioneer Corner Triangle Design • Lithia Way/Pioneer Corner Triangle Alternative Narrative • Canopy Arborists Report Page 2of2 1 LAC 13 LAURIE SAGER AND AsSOCIATEs LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS INC. 700 tJ ISTLETOE ROAD, SUITE 201 ASHLAND, OREGON 975'20 JULY 11, 2 O 16 ,JULIE, PER OUR MEETING AND QUICK REVIEW OF THE PIONEER AT LITHIA DESIGN BY KENCAIRN, I WOULD RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE ORIGINAL DESIGN, PER PLAN, FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1. PER THE TREE INVENTORY, KENCAIRN STATES THAT THE EXISTING RED MAPLES HAVE POOR TOLERANCE TO CONSTRUCTION AND THAT THE WESTERLY MOST MAPLE IS IN POOR HEALTH. WITH THIS INFORMATION AND REVIEW OF THE PROPOSED DESIGN, I AGREE THAT ALL 3 MAPLES SHOULD BE REMOVED AND REPLACED PER PROPOSED PLAN. 2. THE EXISTING GRADE CHANGES IN THIS AREA AND THE GOALS OF THE REDESIGN, MAKE THE PROPOSED WALLS IMPORTANT TO THE FUTURE OVERALL USE OF THIS SPACE. REMOVAL OF THE MAPLES TO ALLOW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THESE WALLS AND REQUIRED EXCAVATION AND FOOTINGS APPEARS TO BE MANDATORY DUE TO THE PROXIMITY OF THE TREES TO THE CONSTRUCTION. 3. WARRENS RED MAPLES AS REPLACEMENT TREES WILL PROVIDE QUICK GROWTH AND ARE READILY AVAILABLE IN LARGE SIZES, UP TO 4" CALIPER FROM NORTHWEST SHADE TREES. LET ME KNOW IF YOU NEED ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. THANKS. LAURIE THORNTON PHONE 541 488 1446 FAx 541 488 o636 WWW.LAURIESAGER.COM August 4, 2016 Dear Council Members, On Thursday, August 4th, 2016 the City of Ashland Tree Commission met and discussed the reiteration of the Pioneer and Lithia Way project which Laurie Thorton (Laurie Sager and Associates Landscape Architects Inc.) has written a recommendation, drafted July 11th. We would like to formally address the council with an updated recommendation. After hosting the world's foremost expert in urban trees Mr. James Urban, and participating in his workshop it was clear to all us that alternatives to the design of this project exist and need to be further explored. The Tree Commission carefully considered public comment provided by Kathryn Thalden, a retired landscape architect. Her recommendation is a tree-centric design with preservation of trees as one of the main objectives of the project. Another aspect of her recommendation would be to use this project as a showcase for alternatives such as rubber or pervious sidewalks as a way to get more natural water to these existing trees in order to improve their environment. The City of Ashland Street Tree Guide recommends these species of Maple trees as drought resistant and good urban street trees. These existing trees are valuable for numerous reasons including their current size, location, shading, air filtration, canopy coverage, and tolerance to the urban environment. New trees in this location will struggle to establish due to the stressful urban environment of this location. The existing trees have already survived the hardest part of an urban trees life, the establishment period. The Zelkova trees on the north side of Lithia Way near the intersection of 1st and Lithia are a great example of hardy, urban tolerant, fast growing trees and their lack of ability to establish in this same microclimate environment (many of these trees have either died or are currently unhealthy). We are requesting that the City Council works to preserve these valuable trees. The Tree Commission would appreciate your consideration of contracting a landscape designer to redesign this landscape. We understand the desire to redesign the current landscape and believe that the goals of the current project can still be met with the preservation of the trees. Thank you for your consideration, The City of Ashland Tree Commission 1 g U 4i rc5 c.> - - DBH Height Crown Protection Tolerance to , 4 # Species (inches) in Feet Radius Zone Construction Condition Notes 6 ~ CV ~ i LL' ~ Z.} i 2 12" 30' 0' N!A oor ood remove ~ 1 Acer rubrum 2 p g ~ Y G <L co b 8" 26' 20' NlA oor ood remove 2 Acer ru rum p g ~ - 3 , L>l 3 Acer rubrum 9 26 16 NIA oor oor remove P P rn Ln 04 Ln 1 min CO cv co u o `i ~J ~ ifs iD c i to U-) i ~ ~ - 7C ~ _ ~ ~ ~ i ~ Canopy of trees ~ Trees to be Tree / ~ o \ s „e _ - to remain removed protection ~ to ~ ~ ~ i . ~ - ~ ~ ~ 4 fencing l ~ ~ ~ \ , ~ % ~ i , , ~ ~ ~ - RA~t \ ~ \ 6 ~ ~ ~y~I, r- - \ ~ 1 ~ ~ \ \ ~ f _ ~ ~ / 1 ~ L TY TO REMAIN. PROTECT IN PLACE. sEATwAi_~ ~ EXISTING UTI I ~ ~ / r . ~ A ~ (2; REMOVE EXISTING STONE PAVING AROUND STONE ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ 1 , c SCULPTURE ~ / m Y Y / ' ~ ~ st. lig~t fcoting ~ ~ ~ ~3 PROTECT EXISTING STONE SCULPTURE IN PLACE ~ ~ i higher trap sidewalk ~ ~ ~ I i; ~ - , ~ \ r3 e ~G ~ 5 4 REMOVE EXISTING CONCRETE PAVING PROVIDE SAWCUT NEAR THIS I ; 7 ~ ~ NG ~ ~ ~ LOCATION AT THE EXISTI o,, / ~ V '9 ~ 5 REMOVE EXISTING DRIVEWAY CURB CUT. REPLACE SCORELINE rq'1 ; \ ER CITY OF ASHLAND DETAIL CD702 / WITH CURB P ~ ~ 6~ REMOVE EXISTING TREE \ 4 ~ Revisior Revision Date: \ / ~ ~ 4 % - Drawr Drawn By: STA STAFF CyU,~ ~ SCALE 1' r SCALE 1" = 10'-0" WHEN PR 1. TAG ALL TREES TO BE REMOVED. VERIFY ON-SITE WITH THE LANDSCAPE PROVIDE SAWCUT NEAR THIS X bike rack WHEN PRINTED ON 11 X 17 PAPER ARCHITECT PRIOR TO BEGINNING DEMOLITION WORK LOCATION AT THE EXISTING ~ -water meter SCORELINE 2. ROOT WADS OF THE REMOVED EXISTING TRESS AND SHRUBS ARE TO BE REMOVED FROM THE SITE. Q 3, REMOVE ALL SHRUBS AND GROUNDCOVER FROM THE SITE. ~ -bike ra Z Q - 7 r~C, _ ~ <C z 4, ALL LIGHT FIXTURES AND SIGNS ARE TO REMAIN IN PLACE. PROTECT J J O DURING THE DEMOLITION PERIOD, F- ~ F- w 'boo ~ Q SHEET KEY TECT ALL EXISTING CURBS AND SIDEWALKS UNLESS OTHERWISE ~r ~ Q O 5. PRO ~ L 1.0 TREE REMOVAL AND DEMOLITION PLAN DIRECTED IN WRITING BY THE CITY OF ASHLAND, W~ W L 2.0 HARDSCAPE LAYOUT PLAN W~ W z L 2.1 GRADING PLAN saney marker PROTECT EXTERIOR WALLS, DOORS, AND WINDOWS OF THE EXISTING (Fr~t~~~tl Z _ 6. L 2.2 HARDSCAPE DETAILS - Z BUILDING. L 3.0 IRRIGATION PLAN O= - cn IRRIGATION NOTES 0. ` L 3.1 a. a 7. THE PORTIONS OF EXISTING SIDEWALK AND OTHER HARDSCAPE L 3.2 IRRIGATION DETAILS 0 5' 10' 20' - SURFACES TO BE REMOVED SHALL BESAW-CUT CLEANLY ATTHE L 4.0 PLANTING PLAN JULY 27, 2015 scale: 1 "=10'-0" JULY. LOCATIONS INDICATED ON THE PLAN. L 4.1 PLANTING DETAILS ~Rr ~ OV ND DEMOLITION PLAN TREE REM AL A 8. EXISTING CURB TO REMAIN SHALL BE PROTECTED IN PLACE, L 1.0 E 0 a~ SHEET KEY CX5 L 1,0 TREE REMOVAL AND DEMOLITION PLAN o-0 N C t7 ~ f` C cn .i L 2.0 HARDSCAPE LAYOUT PLAN L 2.1 GRADING PLAN ~ U C) ARDSCAPE DETAILS / L 2.2 H Q cz L 3.0 IRRIGATION PLAN ' Ln C a:' U7 Q Y ~ L 3.1 IRRIGATION NOTES V N cy) M cn L 3.2 IRRIGATION DETAILS L 4.0 PLANTING PLAN ` c7 a?U? CO N 00 if) ~ ~ _ ~ , - CONCRETE PAVERS: AQUA BRIC 60mm PAVERS L 4.1 PLANTING DETAILS VA LABLE WILLAMETTE NATURAL GREY. A I @ - X Ll- GRAYSTONE 541 773-4575 ti RUN PAVERS PARALLEL TO EDGE OF SIDEWALK 1 SEAT l RETAINING ~a L 2.2 WALL 00/ 1L~ 9~ , ~ , 6.4,. ro p ~ ~ 2 CONCRETE STEPS ~ L 2.2 ° ~ / a o , ~ w ~ ~ p 8'-0" _ p ~ 1 SEAT 1 RETAINING i ~ ~ - a 4 L 2.2 WALL (SIMILAR COND.) r~ ~ 1 ~ 9:4., ~ ~.y„ , d Y ~ ~ , ~ t ~ { ALIGN PAVING TO - i . ~ ~ HANDRAIL SEE DETAIL #31L FACE OF BUILDING 1~, „ _ ~ g ~ r U ~ 2.2 FOR SIMILAR CONDITION. MEASURED PARALLEL TO 0 ~ FACE OF WALL 4 -11 112 ' pp 1 t ,4 _ RAMP -SEE DTL. #31L 2.2 V FOR RAILS 1,34,- ro p ~ Revision Revision Date: WRAP HANDRAILS @ CORNERS X4'2 ~ Drawn 1/2„ ~ Drawn By: STA STAFF LAYOUT NOTES sca~E SCALE V = 10'-0" WHEN PRI 11 X 17 1. ALL DIMENSIONS ARE PERPENDICULAR TO EDGE OF AN WHEN PRINTED ON 11 X 17 PAPER ENT UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED ON THE PLAN. ELEM 2. THE DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE BASED ON TRUE HORIZONTAL O DISTANCE AND DO NOT COMPENSATE FOR SLOPE. Q ALIZING FORMWORK. ~V Q 3. VERIFY FIELD CONDITIONS PRIOR TO FIN IF IN FIELD DISCREPENCIES ARE DISCOVERED CONTACT THE _ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT FOR RESOLUTION. L z \ J 4. FIELD CUT CONCRETE PAVERS AS NECESSARY AT WALLS, J 0 ULPTURE AND EDGES OF CONCRETE. ~ ~ L STONE SC , w QC C Q O W~ I.L W 0 W~ W z Z`_ Z 0= _c O= cn a~ Q 0 5' ~ o' 20' JULY 27, 2015 scale: 1 "=10'-0" JULY 7 oRrH ~ DSCAPE LAYOUT PLAN HAR L 2.0 E -1-112" O.D. STEEL PIPE POST 0 a NOTE: CENTER POST 1. PERFORATED DRAIN PIPE @ WALL SHALL BE ~/e" EXP. JOINT W( FILLER @ C) U O -0 ENCLOSED WITH A FILTER FABRIC DRAIN ROCK ° WALL ENVELOPE. SLOPE DRAIN PIPE & TIE INTO RAMP FINISH SURFACE EXISTING DRAIN INLET. 1-112" O.D. POWDER N C hI-- ~ - C 2PROVIDE SAND FINISH TEXTURE TO ALL VISIBLE COATED HANDRAIL - I. PORTIONS OF THE WALL. SEE SPEC'S FOR COLOR i-314" DIA. SLEEVE FOR q) ~ CS w FINISH 12„ o HANDRAIL POST. SECURE _ ~ _ WINON-SHRINK GROUT 1' O" N cz CJ 1"CHAMFER ALL iDP EOGtS ?e" EXP. JOINT WI FILLER @ AD.IACFNT RETAINING @ - WALL 2" WALL ADJACENT PAVING BEHIND WALL BEYOND - 6" 6" - 1-112" O.D. STEEL PIPE, LO A TOOLED wALL EDGE FRONT ELEVATION CENTERED ON POST. COPE a C 2 t~Cf r tf) Lr) _ - POST TO FIT RAIL AND WELD 12" , ~ ~ - see plan ~ ~ CONTINUOUS -GRIND WELD 4'7 Q? to CO N 00 u') z, B„ SMOOTH -POWDER COAT ~ ~ o ( 2% min. ~ - _ - ~ N FLAT BLACK - ~ 1" rad, f slope ~ ~ STEPS BEYOND a d Q d th {f} LO l~C) ROUND DRAIN ROCK - ~ -ADJACENT SURFACE @ _ ~ a ~ 1-314" DIA, SLEEVE FOR - I FACE OFWALL-SEE PLAN XX~ e' rad, ~ n 1 a - 4"DIA. ESCUTCHEON Z F = X FLU ro Q / HANDRAIL POST. SECURE _ 1"WEEP HOLE @ 48" O.C. ~ ~ \ ~ ~ a o PLATE @ EACH POST 2„ WINON-SHRINK GROUT 0 = 1 0 - a ~ - 1'-0" ~ U w - 1-112" O.D. STEEL POST -TYP 'a ~ ADJACENT VERTICAL 7 _ M Z d ~ - d~ Q ALL POSTS 3' PVC PERF. PIPE (SEE ~ q4 rebar a 4 / , c - 2„ HARDSCAPE SURFACE ~ NOTEgi) / - i Z zx4 KEY _ J- ~a _ I ~ FRONT ELEVATION ~ 2" DIA.x6"DEEP STEEL SLEEVE i - - a ~ ~ III-III FINISH ~ ~ ~ SETl1i! NON-SHRINK GROUT ' ~ ~ III=~=~ -sxs,1-0wwmoR#4 ® SURFACE CONCRETE FOOTING Wl (2) T~ a a d o =III-III- ~p ~ PLAN spfo~ 4v #4 BARS CONT. EA. WAY _ ° a 4 -III REBAR @ 12" O.C. SLOPE PER I _ ~ III- BOTH WAYS 4° p4 BARS @ 12° O.C. EA. WAY ° > >~s~ w L-318" EXPANSION JOINT MATERIAL, MIN. 6" 8" TOP AND BOTTOM OF STEPS, TYP. 6~4°MlNUSCOMPAGTED - LANDI G RAMP RAMP LANDING SUB-BASE, MIN. 90% 2'-~~~ _ - - - _ _ 1-3/4"DIA. SLEEVE FOR HANDRAIL POST. NOTE: SECURE W!NON-SHRINK GROUT, TYP. PROVIDE (3) EQUAL RISER HEIGHTS @ STEPS. DO NOT EXCEED 6"PER RISER 2 CONCRETE STEPS vvl HANDRAIL _ _ 3 SECTION -HANDRAIL @ RAMP u 1 ON -SEAT 1 RETAINING WALL SE _ Scale. 1"= 1'-B" x_HaNOw~u~wac~?dw~ -r- x.ar-,~rnmc Scale: 1"=1'D" Scale. 1 "=1'-0" ~ G C S r Rt vt NOTES: 01 6i i. SEE LAYOUT PLAN FOR PAVER AREAS. 2. H3 STONE MAY BE SUBSTITUTED WITH ~3 OR YW STONE. VERTY WITH OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. Y 3. INSTALL PER MANUFACTURER'S REQUIREMENTS. ' r. TYP. t!8 OR q9 AGGREGATE IN OPENINGS ' I,- --CONCRETE PAVERS AS NOTED ON PLAN 1" _L._-~.~_..._ ._..---..u-....-~ - -BEDDINGCOURSE,1"THICKti6AGGREGATE ~ I ~E. 1' ? c v If57 STONE OPEN GRADE BASE . '„'-t 't f~ t~ ty ~t ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ p2 STONE SUB-BASE , III-III -III ~SOILSUBGRADE III-I Revisio Revision Date: ' 4 `SECTION -CONCRETE PAVERS (PERMEABLE) I~ - %soaMa6.~1Axg Scale: 1 112"= 1'-0" DfaW Drawn By: $L STAFF SCALE 1 WHEN PF SCALE 1" =10'-0" WHEN PRINTED ON 11 X 17 11 X 17 PAPER Q Q SHEET KEY _ - 2 L 1.0 LANDSCAPE SITE PLAN ~ ; L 1.1 TREE PROTECTION AND DEMOLITION PLAN - I J L 1.2 TREE DEMOLITION NOTES I J 0 N ~I L 2.0 LANDSCAPE LAYOUT PLA F- w Q~ L 2.1 LANDSCAPE GRADING PLAN I Q O L 2.2 HARDSCAPE DETAILS ~ L 3.0 IRRIGATION PLAN W W L 3.1 IRRIGATION NOTES W ' Wz L 3.2 I TION DETAILS Z RRIGA Z 0 L 4.0 PLANTING PLAN L 4.1 PLANTING DETAILS Q„ O= - cn a. a JULY JULY 27, 2015 ARDSCAPE DETAILS H I L 2.2 E 0 U v c a- IRRI TION HEAD LEGEND GA 2 U W 70 d _ - - - _ SYMBOL - DESCRIPTION MODEL * NOZZLE _ RAD. FLOW RATE~GPM~ _ N C L H c: m , - EC M U W C1 ~ END, CENTER Hunter PRS40 MP-Rotator Strip Strip 0.19, 0.38 C/J -C7 .~L <t cz - - - _ ~ O 114, 112 Hunter PRS30 Rainbird SO - i 4' 0.12, 0.23 - _ _ - T-- LO N Ln Lr) Hunter RZWS-18-25-CV 0.25 00 h/ w 00 V) i' d- tf5 CAD 0.5 1 - ~ iC LL Rzws ~ ~ IRRIGATION LEGEND SYM. ITEM 1,41 / 2 r ~ 1" ~ HUNTER ICV-101G Sp ay , _ .Z MAIN LINE: SCH. 40 PVC (1 ) _ _ 2j LATERAL LINES SHALL BE SCHEDULE 40 PVC (1 ) \irf 'v c. ' SLEEVES - SCH. 40, 4" DRIP LINE TUBING: HUNTER PLD-04-18 (SPACE @ 18" O.C.) ~ ~ t !Z c a; ~ ~ ISOLATION GATE VALVE -LINE SIZE H Y QUICK COUPLING VALVE: HUNTER 44RC ; ❑ x C CONTROLLER: HUNTER NODE-100 r _ ~ °i fK ZONE LD. ,1 f ~s~ \J- ~ t=, ~ 1 15.0 G.P.M - 1.5 S r APPLICATION Revisi pay Revision Date: 0 VALVE SIZE Drai Drawn By: Sl STAFF SCALE WHEN P SCALE 1" =10'-0" WHEN PRINTED ON 11X1 11 X 17 PAPER O a Q -T J J 0 SHEET KEY F- w - - - Q 0 L 1.0 TREE REMOVAL AND DEMOLITION PLAN ao L 2.0 HARDSCAPE LAYOUT PLAN W wo L 2.1 GRADING PLAN W W z L 2,2 HARDSCAPE DETAILS Z Z Q L 3.0 IRRIGATION PLAN _ Q L 3.1 IRRIGATION NOTES O= - cn L 3,2 IRRIGATION DETAILS aQ L 4,0 PLANTING PLAN 0 10' 20' 40' JULY 27, 2015 L 4.1 PLANTING DETAILS scale: 1 "=10'-0° JUL` °RTH IRRIGATION PLAN L10 Q Q o ~ N C .r, H t77 LL co IRRIGATION NOTES WITH THE IRRIGATION SPECIFICATIONS I RIGATION LEGEND ONTRACTOR SHALL REVIEW AND BE FAMILIAR R 1. THE INSTALLING C _ t~PS Q Y 32 84 00 FOR ALL ASPECTS OF IRRIGATION MATERIALS, INSTALLATION, AND ADMINISTRATIVE ( ) ITEM SYM. _ PROCEDURES. I N cy) tf5 U7 Y F DRAWIN S SPECIFICATIONS ADDENDA, AND APPROVED SHOP 2. MAINTAIN AT JOB SITE ONE (1) COP 0 G ~ HUNTER ICV-101G L D N 00 E ORDERS AND OTHER PROJECT DOCUMENTS. 'ti DRAWINGS, CHANG , d th f~tS LO t1r) 3. RECORD ACTUAL LOCATION OF ALL CONCEALED COMPONENTS, PIPING SYSTEM, CONDUITAND SLEEVE MAIN LINE: SCH. 40 PVC 1" LOCATIONS. KEEP THIS DOCUMENT CURRENT. DO NOT PERMANENTLY CONCEAL ANY WORK UNTIL ~ 47 Fa' LT C REQUIRED INFORMATION HAS BEEN RECORDED, FURNISH TWO (2) COPIES OF RECORD DRAWINGS TOTHE LATERAL LINES SHALL BE SCHEDULE 40 PVC (1") OWNER. REDUCE ONE COPY OF RECORD DRAWING TO FIT INSIDE CONTROLLER LID. LAMINATE REDUCED COPY. SLEEVES - SCH. 40, 4" 4, ALL WORK SHALL BE INSTALLED BY COMPETENT WORKMEN EXPERIENCED IN TRADE IN A NEAT AND P y i~ ORDERLY MANNER ACCEPTABLE TO THE OWNER AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. DRIP LINE TUBING: HUNTER PLD-04-18 (SPACE @ 18" O.C.) 5. CONFORM TO ALL PERTINENT CODES AND REGULATIONS. COMPLY WITH THE LATEST RULES OF THE _ AL CODE AND THE AMERICAN MASTER PLUMBERS CODE. ISOLATION GATE VALVE -LINE SIZE NATIONAL ELECTRIC H 6, VERIFY FIELD MEASUREMENTS ARE AS INDICATED ON DRAWINGS, Vrr r"--- 7. NOTIFY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE OF ALL SITE OBSERVATION VISITS REQUIRED QUICK COUPLING VALVE: HUNTER 44RC BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE PRESENT AT EACH SITE OBSERVATION VISIT. REFER TO THE SPECIFICATIONS FOR REQUIRED SITE OBSERVATIONS. ~i. CONTROLLER: HUNTER NODE-100 8. IRRIGATION PIPE, HEADS, VALVES, BACKFLOW DEVICE AS NOTED ON LEGEND AND SPECIFICATIONS. fr a ~ I N OF EXISTING UTILITIES. 9. VERIFY LOCAT 0 E TO NO MORE THAN 40 PSI ATTHE - ZONE LD. "c Y J 6i 10. INSTALL PRESSURE REDUCING VALVE TO REDUCE PRESSOR AD ON ANY ZONE ON THE SYSTEM. VERIFY PRESSURE AT P.O.C. BEFORE INSTALLATION. FURTHEST HE Y G.P.M MAXIMUM ZONE -19.15 GPM. _ 1 15.Q ATIC ONLY. ROUTE PIPING IN PLANTING AREAS AND AVOID PLANTS, 1.5", 11. PIPING LAYOUT IS DIAGRAMM Spray APPLICATION FALLOW AS CLOSELY AS PRACTICAL THE SCHEMATIC TILITIES AND STRUCTURES. LAYOUT SHALL . _ ' U , THOUT PRIOR APPROVAL FROM THE ~ VALVE SIZE ~ ' DESIGN ON THE DRAWINGS. MAKE NO SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES WI LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. ~r, f ~ ~t 12. ALL LATERAL PIPE SIZES ARE SPECIFIED BY LINE TYPE. REFER TO PLAN FOR PIPE SIZING. REFER TO RRIGATION HEAD LEGEND Jr ' IRRIGATION LEGEND FOR PIPE TYPE. - - - 1;. R CONTRACTORS. SYMBOL DESCRIPTION MODEL NOZZLE -~RAD. ,FLOW RATE (GPM = 13, COORDINATE ALL IRRIGATION EQUIPMENT LOCATIONS WITH OTHE _ 14. LAYOUT SPRINKLER HEADS AND MAKE ANY MINOR ADJUSTMENTS REQUIRED DUE TODIFFERENCES - - Revisic Revision Date: H DEVIATIONS IN LAYOUT SHALL BE WITHIN THE INTENT OF THE 8 END, CENTER Hunter PRS40 MP-Rotator Strip Strip _0.19, 0.38 BETWEEN SITE AND DRAWINGS. ANY SUC - - _ ORIGINAL DRAWINGS, AND WITHOUT ADDITIONAL COST TO THE OWNER. LAYOUT SHALL BE APPROVED BY PE ARCHITECT. ~ G 114, 112 _ Hunter PRS30 Rainbird SQ _ _4' _ 0.12, 0.23 _ THE LANDSCA _ _ Draw Drawn By: IDEWALKS SHALL BE TWO INCHES FROM SIDEWALKS. i 15. ALL SPRINKLER HEADS ALONG S 5T STAFF 16. PIPE DEPTH -LATERAL LINES -12 INCH MINIMUM; MAINLINE -18 INCH MINIMUM. ~ Hunter RZWS-18-25-CV 0.25 BE FREE OF ROCKS CLODS AND OTHER SHARP - - - _ - ~ scaLE ~ 17. BOTTOM OF TRENCHES AND BACKFILL MATERIAL SHALL _ _ SCALE 1" = 10'-0" WHEN PRINTED ON _ WHEN PF OBJECTS. SNAKE PIPE FROM SIDE TO SIDE AT TRENCH BOTTOM TO ALLOW EXPANSION. x ~r 11 X 17 PAPER 18. DO NOT INSTALL HEADS UNTIL LINES HAVE BEEN THOROUGHLY TESTED AND FLUSHED CLEAN. 19. SHUT OFF VALVES ARE REQUIRED AT EACH POINT OF CONNECTION, VALVE BOX, AND AT EVERY LOCATION WHERE THE MAINLINE PASSES UNDER 20 FEET OF PAVEMENT. 20. A MANUAL DRAIN MUST BE INSTALLED AT THE LOW SPOT OF EACH ZONE.THE DRAIN SHOULD BE A BRASS MANUAL ANGLE VALVE WITH "T" STEM. DRAINS LOCATED ON LATERAL LINES SHALL BE 1"SIZE, Q ' PSI AT THE FURTHEST HEAD ON EACH ZONE. Q 21. INSTALLER MUST VERIFY EACH ZONE S SPECIFIED D THE ELECTRIC SHEET KEY 22. COORDINATE WIRE AND CONDUIT LOCATIONS BETWEEN ELECTRIC CONTROL VALVES AN = - CONTROLLER. L 1.0 TREE REMOVAL AND DEMOLITION PLAN ~ z 23. UPON COMPLETION OF ALL SYSTEMS, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PERFORM A COVERAGE TEST TO L 2.0 HARDSCAPE LAYOUT PLAN J~ J 0 DETERMINE THAT WATER IS BEING APPLIED CORRECTLY AND ADEQUATELY TO ALL PLANTINGS. CHANGE L 2.1 GRADING PLAN F' ANY HEADS, NOZZLES, OR ORIFICES AS MAYBE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE COVERAGE AS INDICATED ON THE L 2.2 HARDSCAPE DETAILS w Q DRAWINGS. PROMPTLY ADJUST HEADS TO KEEP WATER OFF BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES WITH MINIMAL L 3.0 IRRIGATION PLAN NQ O SPRAY ON PAVED SURFACES. L 3.1 IRRIGATION NOTES W {.i.. W c) L 3.2 IRRIGATION DETAILS W SLEEVING: W Q L 4,0 PLANTING PLAN Z 24, CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY SLEEVING LOCATIONS AND COORDINATE WITH THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR. L 4.1 PLANTING DETAILS ~ Z J SLEEVES ARE TO BE PROVIDED BY GENERAL CONTRACTOR. THE INSTALLING CONTRACTOR SHALL _ GENERAL CONTRACTOR AND LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR (IF O= - cn COORDINATE SLEEVE DEPTHS WITH THE O. DIFFERENT). aQ JULY JULY 27, 2015 IRRIG TI N N TES A 0 0 LL 3.1 HEET KEY L 1.0 LANDSCAPE SITE PLAN n f L L 1.1 TREE PROTECTION AND DEMOLITION PLAN L 1.2 TREE DEMOLITION NOTES r L 2.0 LANDSCAPE LAYOUT PLAN L 2.1 LANDSCAPE GRADING PLAN L 3.0 IRRIGATION PLAN L 3.1 IRRIGATION NOTES L 3.2 IRRIGATION DETAILS L 4.0 PLANTING PLAN - vr'wLAWNAREAS L4.1 PLANTING DETAILS 1" IN PLANT AREAS - ROUND PLASTIC VALVE BOX a a a a a a a a a a a act FINISH GRADE I 1 2 I~~ (4 ~ - HARDSCAPE SURFACE ,O I i~ 4-INCH GRATE (INCLUDED) _ _ ~ 3 ~l N ~ MIN. V N m ff} td7 ~ l BUBBLER (INCLUDED) ~ _ _ - - CLEAN BACKFILL AS REQ'D C J Qom] Ln CO M m in i 3~ ROOT WATERING SYSTEM: =i ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ HUNTER RZWS-18.25 ~ - rl NON-PRESSURE LATERAL LINE V tf7 (D INCLUDES 025 GPM BUBBLER) ISOLATION VALVC, 5 ( l ) - WITH RISER, GRATE, SWING ASSEMBLY, Z LINE SIZE (SEE - -PRESSURE SUPPLY LINE X ~ U 6 112" MALE NPT INLET, AND BASKET ~ SPECIFICATIONS) CANISTER) ~ _ SCH. 80 PVC MALE SOIL FINISH GRADE r I ADAPTORS ~ DIRECT BURIAL, LOW VOLTAGE CONTROL WIRES i b~ 1(2-INCH PVC SCH 80 NIPPLE (INCLUDED) _ ` / r~ i~ 112-INCH 90-DEGREE ELBOW (INCLUDED) L ~ _ 7 12-INCH SWING ASSEMBLY I PVC SLEEVE OR e~ s/~/~+y! ` v - ~ - 314 AGGREGATE APPROVED EQUAL ~ (INCLUDED) BASE l 8l IRRIGATION PVC LATERAL LINE NOTES J - 4 4 a a 4 g~ g ; RZWS CANISTER Z f ~ ~ o ~ ~ 0 1. COORDINATE INSTALLATION OF PIPING AND WIRES UNDER ~ a a a a a a VEHICULAR PAVEMENT AREAS WITH OTHER TRADES - 2. ALL SLEEVES TO BE 4" SCH 40 PVC Z E :4< Y 3. ALL SLEEVES TO BE RUN lt" NiIN. PAST HARDSCAr"E , ECTION -ISOLATION VALVE 3~ SECTION - SLEEVING @ PAVING 1 `SECTION -ROOT WATERING SYSTEM 2 S - - x$iee~e awy - - - _ X-ISaVLV.OWG x-aws-o,.aw9 Scale: N.T.S. Scale: N.T.S. , m Y Scale: N.T.S. Revisit j . r` 0 FINISH GRADE 0 CONTROL VALVE AS NOTED IN LEGEND NOTE: Draw 3 HUNTER NODE BATTERY CONTROLLER ALL SPRAY HEADS TO BE KEPT $T O A MIN. OF 1 112" OFF ALL - O PLASTIC VALVE 80X WITH COVER HARDSCAPE EDGES AND 36" SCALE 1 FROM FADE OF ALL BUILDINGS. WHEN PF 1 2 3 4 0 ANGLE VALVE WITH UNION 11 X 1 l C Revision Date: O BRICK SUPPORTS (AS REQUIRED) 1 112" Drawn By: .MULCH ~ , HARDSCAPE SURFACE STAFF -III-III - - /j~/~~ ~~/j: - - - - - I ' SCALE 1" = 10'-0" -III-- -III-III ~ ~~/j III _ - POP-UP SPRAY HEAD WHEN PRINTED ON 11 X 17 PAPER C~/~~lw,, w III-III--III a i i- ~ a E 0 ~ i 5 ~ o_ ~ 112" FLEXIBLE SWING PIPE: ~ (install only pre-assembled Ua assemblies-See Specifications) a _ ~ ~ _ - w Q - ~O~ ~ ~ NIPPLE W 00o O ELL TERAL 0 oOoO 00 PVC LA 'J F- TEE (SST) ON SIDE ` 10 0 ~ MAIN SUPPLY LINE ~ 6 a F- w ao wo i ~ ON -IRRIGATION CONTROLLER 5 SECTION -POP-UP SPRAY HEAD - JULY a , SECTI x-SPaK~R-,owc ~ - _ - /Scale: N.T.S. /Scale: N.T.S. wQ z~ IRRIG TI DETAILS NDSC E A ON LA AP O= -U) aQ JULY 27, 2015 L12 E 4 v 4i Q- 70 70 O N c r! L1W a`a O SYMBOL BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME SIZE TREES - - - - - - - AceW Acer'Warrenred' PACIFIC SUNSET MAPLE 2" cal. M N ['7Oi CO h1 SHRUBS & GRASSES t~fi 4~f7 uxG Buxus x'Green Gem' GREEN GEM BOXWOOD 5 gal B a> h°-3 u _ _ 4 Cart Carex testacea _ NEW ZEALAND SEDGE 5 ga Cart ELLA DE ORO DAYLILY 1 gal Acew -1 Hems Hemerocallis x_Stella de Oro ST _ _ ' D RIBBONS ROSE 1 gal Rosr - 2 RosR Rosa Red Ribbons RE 1 BuxG - 5 ',o' y - % -Hems -15 r 0 ~ r Fr~l . 3 ~ -Hems - 6 BuxG - 5 m i / ~ ~ SF.,~ d % s Acew -1 , r :Jr. Revisio Revision Date: Draw Drawn By: ST1 STAFF SCALE1 SCALE 1" = 10'-0" WHEN PRINTED ON TS OF PLANTING WHEN PF 1. REVIEW SPECIFICATION SECTIONS 32 90 00 AND 32 92 00 FOR ALL ASPEC x 17 11 X 17 PAPER INSTALLATION AND IMPORTED TOPSOIL REQUIREMENTS. 2. ALL PLANTING AREAS SHALL RECEIVE 3" OF BARK MULCH PER THE SPECIFICATIONS, ALL PROPOSED SHRUB PLANTING IN NEW CONSTRUCTION AREAS SHALL RECEIVE A MIN.18" 3 Q Q OF IMPORTED TOPSOIL INCLUDING 4" OF AGED COMPOST) UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. - ( _ - T SEE SPECIFICATIONS. PROVIDE SLOPE IN ISOLATED PLANTING AREAS PER THE DETAIL ~ ; _I SHEET. J I J O SHEET KEY O F- w 4. PRE-EMERGENT HERBICIDE SHALL BE APPLIED TO ALL SHRUB PLANTING AREAS PER THE _ I Q SPECIFICATIONS. L 1.0 TREE REMOVAL AND DEMOLITION PLAN ~ Q O L 2.0 HARDSCAPE LAYOUT PLAN W ~ W NUMERICAL TEXT QUANTITIES OF PLANTS SHOWN ON THE PLAN ARE FOR THE L 2.1 GRADING PLAN W 5. THE , W Q R'S CONVENIENCE ONLY. THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING L 2.2 HARDSCAPE DETAILS Z CONTRALTO Z HOWN GRAPHICALLY ON THE PLAN. QUANTITIES AND L 3.0 IRRIGATION PLAN Q THE QUANTITY OF PLANT MATERIAL S L 3.1 IRRIGATION NOTES - ~ O= - cn aQ SIZES OF PLANTS SHALL NOT BE ALTERED WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM THE a L 3.2 IRRIGATION DETAILS OWNER S REPRESENTATIVE. L 4.0 PLANTING PLAN JULY 27, 2015 L 4.1 PLANTING DETAILS JULY 6. ALL PROPOSED PLANT MATERIAL SHALL BE WARRANTED FOR ONE (1) YEAR FROM THE TIME OF SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION. P NTING PLAN LA L 4.0 0 U W d. C, U f/I d 'CS N c to n L N cn -~c < REINFORCED RUBBER TIE IN FIGURE EIGHT try .c tL? ~ Y NAILED TO STAKE (TYP.) T tI5 U-) 07 to CO N T 00 tn - REINFORCED RUBBER TIE IN FIGURE EIGHT d- t15 fD V if S to ~ . ~ NAILED TO STAKE (TYP.) (3) 2"x2"x8'-0" STAKE SET PLUMB (3) 2"x2"x8'-0" STAKE SET PLUMB NOTE: NOTE 1. TREE SHALL BE SECURED WITH 3 DO NO PRUNING TO THE TREE UNLESS COMMERCIAL TIES SPACED 120 DIRECTED BY AND UNDER THE DEGREES APART, TREE SHALL STAND SUPERVISION OF THE LANDSCAPE PLUMB. ARCHITECT. j ~ SET PLANT SO THAT THE TRUNK FLARE IS i - VISIBLE AT THE TOP OF THE ROOT BALL N AND THE ROOT BALL IS FLUSH TO ADJACENT GRADE. DO NOT PLACE SOIL OVER THE ROOT BALL. - 3" DEPTH OF MULCH IN ALL AREAS. TAPER FROM 0 1✓ r ~ BERM TO A 2"CLEAR ZONE @ THE TRUNK 4" COMPACTED BERM @ EDGE OF PLANTING HOLE _ ,r _~--ate.. - BACKFILL MIX PER THE SPECIFICATIONS III -i_ w - -i I I-i ~ III---1 I I- , I -1 = _ _ I_II=i}'--~ 1:1 SLOPE ON SIDES OF PLANTING HOLE ~-i~ , - _ - i i_i i i_-i - - - = H III= = l _ FERTILIZER AND MYCORRHIZAE PLACED AT E ~ III= I III- ~ =III- = ~ H =III = ~ ~ =III 1 ROOT BALL PER PLANTING SPECIFICATIONS I I-1 I I I H I I-1 I I-I I -1 I I-1 I I I i =IIIIII=IIIIII- ~ 11' NOTE: REMOVE ALL TWINE, ROPE, AND i-i I ~I I iiii=I I ~=III-I I WIRE FROM THE TOP HALF OF THE ROOT APPROX. 2X BALL. TBALL DIAMETER ~ PLACE ROOT BALL ON UNEXCAVATED OR ~ ` R00 TAMPED SOIL r R.. ~ 'SECTION -TREE PLANTING ~ i+Revision Date: I _ _ X-TREE-0B.OWG ~ rScale: 112"=1'-0" - f3~: Revisit PLANT SPACING MULTIPLICATION TABLE SPACING X FACTOR Draw Drawn By: ST 12" O.C. 1.156 (X AREA) ~ _ STAFF 18" O.C. 0.513 CLEANLY REMOVE ANY BROKEN 24" O.C. 0.288 ~ ~ ~L ; ~ OR DAMAGED BRANCHES TO THE SCALE 1 SCALE 1" = 10'-0" WHEN Pf 30" O.C. 0.184 ~ 1 NEAREST BkANCH NODE 36" O.C. 0.128 11X1r WHEN PRINTED ON 11 X 17 PAPER 4S" O.C. 0.072 --~1V~ SHRUBS SHALL BE SLIGHTLY HIGHER 1!2 OF DISTANCE ~ IN RELATION TO FINISHED GRADE SPACING AS NOTED NOTED 3" UNSETTLED BARK MULCH ~ ---PRUNE DAMAGED OR DISSECTED ROOTS _ ~ - , n, ~ m , NITRIFIED ORGANIC AMENDMENT Q _ _ _ ~ /3 IMPORTED LOAM TOPSOIL L r / / ~ / ~ '/a CLEAN NATIVE TOPSOIL 0 ~ i ~ - - - - -vx, J 0 U Q ' Qe~ - ADJACDENT TOPSOIL I Q rL ~ \ / ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 2 UNDISTURBED NATIVE SOIL F- w 1 wz I Q UO / z p ~ - SCARIFY PIT BOTTOM AND SIDES Q O ~ w ~ ~ LL ~ ~ ~ ? _p o z 2X THE SIZE W W OF THE ROOTBALL W W Q NOTE: Z EDGE OF PLANTING 1. PRUNE ALL DAMAGED, DISEASED, OR WEAK LIMBS Z AREA AND ROOTS. O 2. CLEANLY PRUNE ALL DAMAGED ROOT ENDS O= _cf) Lei ~2 SECTION: GROUNDCOVER PLANTING LAYOUT 3 SECTION; SHRUB PLANTING ~Q F - -t - _ x-GRND-o~owc Scale: N.T.S. x-sHRUeo3,ows Scale: N.T.S. - JULY JULY 27, 2015 PLANTING DETAILS L 4.1 1= 0 U Q U S!) d T3 N C to ~ f~- C U ~i d 'KTi Q ~ ~ vctiarn rn co REPLACED EXISTING MAPLE ch rn ~ CO N co in THATWAS ROOTBOUND WI NEW ~ tLnUa TREE \ X Q7 Cfj LL C, ~ 1 I ~ - REPLACED EXISTING MAPLE 'Q WITH NEW TREE d `l r CTZ j REMOVE EXISTING TREE DUE r \irl ~ ° ~ ~ TO SITE WORK r i ~ U c a. e Y J•- N _ s NER DESIG ~ , ,1 NAL COR ORIGI A, ..'.1 - ~ . ;,3~ t Revisit Revision Date: PROVIDE STRUCTURAL SOIL ~ PERVIOUS PAVERS AROUND THROUGHOUT THIS AREA EXISTING PUBLIC ART DISPLAY Drav Drawn By: ~ si ~ - STAFF - P.LP. SEATWALL SCALE SCALE 1" =10'-0" WHEN PRINTED ON PROVIDE NEW TREE GRATE AND _ WHEN PI T NG ~ ~ REPLACE EXISTING SEGMENTAL 11 X 1 TREE IN PLACE OF EXIS I , WALL SYSTEM WITH P.LP. 11 X 17 PAPER COMPARTMENTALIZED MAPLE i CONCRETE CURB(WALL _ ~ _ SHRUB PLANTING BED , i ; RETAIN EXISTING MAPLE AND ~ SOIL GRF~DE AROUND TREE Q p, r N~~ 2 m~~~: r \ ~ ~ H z T NG TREE ~ ~ REMOVE EXIS I J ~ ~ ~ J O ~ ~ ~ ~ RETAINING WALL I CURB H w Q Q O W W r-) ' ~ W W Q Z r 0 Z a 2 co aQ MAINTAIN EXISTING RAMP AND STAIRS PER PREVIOUS DESIGN 0 10' 20' 40' NOTE: JULY 27, 2015 scale: 1 "=10'-0" JULI SIGN WALL FOOTINGS TO BE LOCATED NER DE I ED COR REV S UNDER PROPOSED PAVED AREAS oRT T DY ERNATE PLANS U AT L j 01' LL 1 .0 p Tel: 541.488.3194 545 A Street KenCairn Fax: 541.552.9512 Ashland, OR 97520 Landscape Architecture Cell: 541.601.5559 kerry@kencairnlandscape.com www. KenCairnLandscape.com Date: September 22, 2015 Revised Landscape @ Pioneer & Lithia Corner Original Project Goals The "odd" shaped piece of city owned property had several issues including raised sidewalks due to tree roots, ADA access concerns, irrigation challenges, inconsistent materials, and awkward elevation changes. The original design goal as stated in the RFP was to create a cohesive look while incorporating the public art piece found on the corner. Current Direction Following the request of the Ashland City Council, KenCairn Landscape Architecture obtained an Arborist Assessment from Canopy LLC. The assessment is for the existing trees at both Lithia & Pioneer Parking Lot and for the corner of Pioneer & Lithia (convenience store). The assessment concurs with the tree inventory originally prepared by KenCairn. Per the city council's request, KLA has prepared a design alternate for each site with the primary goal of saving as many trees on the two sites as is feasible. The following is a narrative that reflects the revised landscape design at the Pioneer & Lithia Corner: • The arborist's assessment of the existing red maple tree east of the proposed steps (Tree #1) notes the tree as being "in a very restricted root zone and has likely reached its potential growth" and in "moderate health". Currently the tree's roots are beginning to impact the public sidewalk (sidewalk cracks and lifting) just east of the tree. This is viewed as a hazard to pedestrians and should be corrected by removal and replacement of the public and private sidewalks in that vicinity to provide a safe pedestrian zone. Based on our professional experience, the necessary construction in that area will have a negative impact to the tree that will ultimately expedite the tree's decline. The alternate design reflects the original design with this tree being removed. • The arborist's assessment of Tree #2 (Red Maple tree) along Lithia Way notes the tree as being in good health although it points out that the soil appears compacted and devoid of organic materials. In its current state, the finish grade of the planter around the tree is elevated +/-6" above the adjacent public sidewalk. Per the original design, the tree was removed and the planting area lowered to the sidewalk grade. The alternate design retains the existing red maple (Tree #2) and the grade of the planter around the tree. We propose that an application of myccorhizal inoculant be added to the soil. The existing modular block wall/curb adjacent to the sidewalk is removed and replaced with a poured in place concrete curb to retain the grade. The area of the planter will be slightly decreased from the west to allow for a low seatwall to be installed near the public art display. The proposed steps and ramp adjacent to the building will be retained by a 6" wide poured in place concrete wall. To reduce the impacts to the tree's roots, the wall's footing will be designed so that any spread portion of the footing will be located underneath the paved areas. • The area around the public art display will remain in permeable pavers although will be slightly smaller than the original design. In order to reduce impacts to the existing planter, the seatwall from the original design was relocated closer to the existing edge of the planter (to the west) and thus the reduction in the area of permeable pavers. • The arborist's assessment of the existing red maple tree adjacent to Pioneer Street (Tree #3) notes the tree as being "in a severely restricted root zone" and being in "moderate health". Currently the root flare is growing out of the cutout for the tree. Based on our professional experience, we believe this tree has not only reached its maximum potential but is also in decline based on the condition bark on the west side. The alternate design reflects the original design with the removal of this tree. However, KLA is proposing the addition of a tree grate and frame along with the use of structural soils at this location. We believe that the addition of the structural soil will not only aid this new tree in reaching its urban potential but will also allow for the existing tree to remain (Tree #2) to increase its rooting area. • The tree that was selected for the replacement of Tree #3 is an Quercus frainetto 'Schmidt' (Forest Green Oak). This tree has been proven to do well in urban conditions (limited moisture, reflected heat, and compacted soils). With the use of structural soils under the replaced paved areas and the introduction of irrigation at the tree well this tree should develop into a nice sized street tree. CANOPY L« The Care of Trees 157 Max Loop Talent, OR 97540 (541) 631.8000 f September 4, 2015 City of Ashland Planning Division 51 Winburn Way Ashland, OR 97520 Arborist Assessment Project ID Pioneer Parking Lot Pioneer at Lithia Overview The following is an assessment of the existing trees for the proposed projects at the parking lot on Pioneer Rd, and the corner of Pioneer and Lithia Way. The tree numbering designation used here coincides with the plan drawings labeled "Pioneer Parking Lot L 1.0" and "Pioneer at Lithia L 1.0." We found the tree legend on these plans to be accurate and so have not here replicated the list of species, their sizes, etc. The assessment has been grouped into smaller sections by location within the project area. Pioneer Parking Lot Trees #1 - #4 Cupressrrs sempervirens (Italian cypress) of good to moderate health growing in restricted root zone. Recommend removal and replacement by a more suitable shade-giving tree such as the Zelcovas proposed in the planting plan. Trees #5 - #8 #5: Acer platanoides (Norway maple). Limited root zone may not allow for full growth potential, but otherwise healthy. #6: Note that L 1.0 designates this to be a FrrLrinu oxycatpet (Raywood ash), indeed there is a plaque at the base of the tree stating as much, but the tree is a Norway maple. Except for some girdling roots, the tree appears healthy. There is a small Raywood ash between Trees 5 and 6 which is of poor form and vigor for which removal is recommended. #7 and #8: Raywood ash. Both trees of poor form and limited root zones. Recommend removal and replacement. Trees #9 - #18 #9, #10: Raywood ash. Poor form. #9 has limited root zone. 410 has a co-dominate leader growing over road. These leaders are at greater risk of failure. Recommend removal and replacement. # 1 I , #12) # 13: Norway maples. Some minor human-related damage on bark (#13) and a girdling root (#11). Overall of good health. # 14, # 15, # 16: Pistachia chinensis (Chinese pistache). Beginning to interlock canopies with adjacent maples, but overall of good health. # 16 appears to be of slightly less heath and may be a candidate for removal if needed from a design perspective. #17,#18: Raywood ash. Poor form. Limited growth potential and root zone. Slight lean of main trunk (#17). Recommend remove and replace. Trees #19422 #19, #20, #21: Cotin us coggygria (Smoketree). All of good size and health. These are nice small tree specimens. A downside being they do not have as great of shade-giving potential as a full sized tree species. The small boxelder trees (not labeled on plans) of poor form and health existing between the smoketrees are unlikely to fill this role. #22: Qrerctus ilex (evergreen oak). Appears healthy. Perhaps a bit out of place from a design perspective. Trees #23 - #27 Recommend removing over-crowded Raywood ash (#26) in favor of retaining 4 Ca pinus betithis (hornbeams). Trees #28 - #30 Recommend removing badly damaged red maple (429) and retaining hombeams (#28, #30) Trees #31 - #33 Recommend removing 2 Raywood ash (#31, #32) and replacing with a more suitable species. Pioneer at Lithia Trees #1-3 Overall these 3 trees are of good to moderate health. Their biggest limiting factor is lack of a good growing medium. They all are existing in very restrictive root zones and are most likely reaching, or have reached, the end of their growth potential, which may limit their long-term ecologic and aesthetic value. Replacement done in such a way as to allow for full tree growth potential (ie access to larger root zone) is worth considering. #1: Acer iwbra (red maple). Overall of good health. Contains co-dominate stems characteristic of this species. This tree is growing in a very restricted root zone and has likely reached its growth potential. #2: Red maple. Good health. Soil appears compacted and devoid of organic materials. Some minor damage to bark. #3: Red maple. Moderate health. Severely restricted root zone. Very little growth exhibited over the last year (approximately 1"). Discussion on Raywood Ash Fra-vinus ocycarpa are characterized by weak wood, poor structure, and relatively common occurrence of failure. Failure occurs from either co-dominate stems or by uprooting when constricted root zones cannot support the weight of the crowns. In operating a tree service in the area, this species is one of the most common trees we are called upon to remove after they have failed. The Rayood ash in this project area are likewise of poor structure and have reached the limit in size of what I would consider safe given their available viable root zones and that they are in a highly trafficked areas. Recommendations Specific recommendations were provided above regarding the removal of the Raywood ash and Italian cypress trees. Few recommendations were given for healthy trees. Most notably the Norway maples and Chinese pistache (#11 - #16). Given that that the trees are healthy, the decision to remove or retain should ultimately be made on through the lens of a design perspective in keeping with the long-term goals the City has for the location. We would suggest however, that options be explored to leave some healthy trees and/or phase-in some removals and replanting over time. Doing so would ;greatly soften the visual impact of the transition period as well as allowing the current benefits to continue. The replacement trees proposed in the plan documents are excellent choices. They make good use of the available space, species selection is suitable for the area, and should provide a net benefit gain over time. Taken as a whole, or in part, they have the potential to provide very good canopy cover, aesthetic enjoyment, and long- term benefits.