Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-0321 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 March 21, 2017 Council Chambers 1175 E. Main Street Note: Items on the Agenda not considered due to time constraints are automatically continued to the next regularly scheduled Council meeting [AMC 2.04.030.E.] 7:00 p.m. Regular Meeting 1. CALL TO ORDER II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. ROLL CALL IV. MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Study Session of March 6, 2017 2. Business Meeting of March 7, 2017 VI. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS 1. Annual presentation by the Mt. Ashland Association 2. Annual presentation by the Tree Commission 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. Approval of minutes of boards, commissions, and committees 2. Liquor license application for Gill Anderson dba Platt Anderson Cellars 3. Liquor license application for Andrew Meyer dba Hold Fast Wine Company 4. Liquor license application for Efstratio Efstratiadis dba Plancha 5. Approval of a special procurement for Fregonese Associates 6. Adoption of a resolution titled, "A resolution modifying solid waste franchise rates and fees" 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 7. Award of a professional services contract in excess of $75,000 for design of a 2.5 MGD water treatment plant and a 2.6 MG potable water reservoir IX. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Persons wishing to speak are to submit a "speaker request form" prior to the commencement of the public hearing. Public hearings shall conclude at 9:00 p.m. and be continued to a future date to be set by the Council, unless the Council, by a two-thirds vote of those present, extends the hearing(s) until up to 10:30 p.m. at which time the Council shall set a date for continuance and shall proceed with the balance of the agenda.) 1. Public hearing and Rogue Credit Union appeal [Please note: only the appellants have provided written arguments at least ten days in advance of this meeting, this only the appellants will be able to speak at this hearing.] X. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Results of the Downtown Business Survey XI. NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS 1. Downtown parking management strategy 2. Modification of existing Jefferson Avenue loan/grant contracts 3. Approval of contract for Plaza tree enhancement project XII. ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS 1. Approval of first reading by title only of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance amending AMC 9.30.020 to extend the current smoking ban to include 175 Lithia Way and any space within 20 feet of pathways for smoke to enter places of employment or enclosed spaces open to the public" and move on to second reading 2. Approval of first reading by title only of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance amending Chapter 11.26 to limit the use of public parking lots for purposes other than parking vehicles" and move onto second reading 3. Approval of first reading by title only of an ordinance titled, "An ordinance amending Chapter 10.120.010 to include City of Ashland's 175 Lithia Way parking lot within the Enhanced Law Enforcement Area" and move on to second reading 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 180. VISIT THE CITY OF ASHLAND'S WEB SITE AT WWW.ASHLAND.OR.US City Council Study Session Meeting March 6, 2017 Page 1 of') MINUTES FOR THE STUDY SESSION ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL Monday, March 6, 2017 Siskiyou Room, 51 Winburn Way Mayor Stromberg called the meeting to order at 5:32 p.m. in the Siskiyou Room. Councilor Morris, Rosenthal, Seffinger, Slattery, and Darrow were present. Councilor Lemhouse arrived at 5:34 p.m. 1. Public Input Huelz Gutcheon/2253 HWY 99/Supported passing the Climate Energy Action Plan, hiring a new staff position, and forming a commission. He explained the carbons in the atmosphere stayed there for hundreds of years and the 8% average reduction per year might need to change. He went to address the 10x20 ordinance and appreciated how Council handled the discussion. Brent Thompson/582 Allison/Explained when the Downtown Beautification Committee addressed the Plaza, they approved low fencing, landscape upgrades, and settled on three planters but preferred more. Some planters could accommodate trees, not just bushes. Work on the Plaza was an ongoing process. He thought the discussion on the trees was good. Planters would punctuate areas for sitting. Regarding extending water outside the city limits, he had never been able to find a good reason to extend City services outside city limits. 2. Look Ahead review Interim City Administrator John Karns reviewed items on the Look Ahead. 3. City Recorder/Treasurer appointment process City Recorder Barbara Christensen explained she would retire April 30, 2017. She put together some options for Council to consider regarding her replacement. Council needed to determine whether they wanted to appoint someone prior to her leaving for training purposes or within the 60 days following her retirement. The two requirements for placement were being registered to vote and living within the city limits. However, there were certain qualifications for filling the position. Ms. Christensen shifted a portion of banking tasks to the Finance Department over the past year and now managed minimal financial duties. The City Treasurer along with the Finance Director managed City investments. After she left, the Finance Director could take the lead as the investment officer. City Attorney Dave Lohman explained some of the Recorder/Treasurer duties could shift within the Ashland Municipal Code (AMC) and City Charter but not all. Council could set any criteria they wanted for the interim position. The elected position did not have required skills or qualifications. Councilor Seffinger noted the City Recorder ad hoc Committee had devised a list of duties and a potential job description for the Recorder/Treasurer position. Councilor Rosenthal commented the job description from the ad hoc Committee was for an appointed position and not elected. Mr. Lohman clarified the Charter did not specify work hours for an elected position. The elected Recorder could work a couple days a week as long as he or she was able to fulfill their duties. Changing the Charter required a vote to the citizenry. I City Council Study Session Meeting March 6, 2017 Page 2 of 3 Council approved proceeding with hiring an interim replacement for the position with the Assistant to the City Recorder as a possible 60-day or less back up if the position was still open May 1, 2017. Ms. Christensen would provide Council with a short list of the most important duties and qualifications at the Council meeting the next night. The qualifications would appear in an ad that would run in both newspapers. Ms. Christensen would keep Council apprised of the applications received. If there were many, Council would select a small pool of candidates to interview during a special meeting. Ms. Christensen would train the new Interim City Recorder/Treasurer late April. 4. Plaza tree donation Greg Trunnell, the spokesperson for the proposal explained the project would remove and repurpose three existing trees on the Plaza and replace them with larger, more sustainable trees. They would replant the three existing trees in City parks and Southern Oregon University. The trees would come from Plant Oregon, and Solid Ground Landscape, through a zero-sum contract would maintain the trees for eighteen months. The project was time sensitive and the trees needed to be planted no later than the middle of April or they would have to wait until late fall in October or November. Tree Commissioner Mike Oxendine reviewed the proposal, met twice with the Tree Commission, and inspected the quality of trees at Plant Oregon. The selected trees were high quality and raised in a unique manner that would minimize transplant shock and stimulate growth. Councilor Seffinger talked to the Parks Commission, Interim Superintendent Jeff McFarland, and Arborist Peter Baughman from the Parks and Recreation Department. They would meet the next morning to review the project. Their concerns were mostly if the trees would need support ropes and cable. Commissioner Oxendine explained the trees would not require cable support. Stakes inhibited the trees ability to grow and root properly or establish the stress woods needed while growing. The root base for the selected trees was substantial enough to hold the tree in place. They could correct a tree that started to lean. Commissioner Oxendine also addressed the prior limitation of planting mature trees during the Plaza Redesign due to an asphalt road and bricks buried in the location. He explained even with large trees, 95% of tree roots were in the top 26-inches of soil. Engineering Services Manager Scott Fleury had reviewed city utility lines with Mr. Trunnell and confirmed they were three to four feet deep and would not interfere with the roots. Council noted in addition to that limitation, they were informed at the time that smaller trees took root faster and outgrew larger trees over time. The Plaza Redesign encountered asphalt during excavation and dug up a pit of bricks. Commissioner Oxendine was confident planting the large trees where the current trees were would work. Council was interested in moving forward with the project. They would add it to the agenda at the Council meeting the next night. Council directed staff to develop and research a policy regarding gifts of donor- chosen civic features. Councilor Lemhouse stepped out of the meeting 6:58 p.m. and returned at 7:05 p.m. 5. Continued discussion of water connections outside city limits City Attorney Dave Lohman provided the background on water connections outside city limits. Currently, there were 57 users of water outside the City, most grandfathered in. The ordinance had specific requirements for extending water outside city limits. Public Works Director Mike Faught explained the issue first arose regarding a property owner who was using City water for a marijuana grow on property outside the city limits. This lead to a discussion concerning properties situated within city limits and on Jackson County land. There were 1,900 acres of properties bordering county land or half county, half city. There were five steps in Resolution 1997-27 City Council Study Session Meeting March 6, 2017 Page 3 of 3 regarding extending water beyond city limits. Mr. Faught did not recommend changing the rules and thought the City should continue reviewing requests on a case-by-case basis. Mayor Stromberg wanted the resolution clarified that meeting the conditions in the resolution, Council still had to decide whether it was in the best interest of the community to grant the connection. Mr. Lohman proposed clarifying the current criteria in Ashland Municipal Code (AMC) 14.04.060 for obtaining permission to use City water outside city limits. It would have to come back for first and second reading. He noted representatives from the Benson family testified at an earlier Council meeting, they cut off water to their marijuana grow and was still interested in using City water outside the urban growth boundary (UBG) for their shrubbery. The City responded to the Benson's use of water due to complaints received. David Lemmett/1090 South Mountain/Explained he lived next door to the Benson's who used City water for a use not allowed city limits. Mr. Benson was growing 40 marijuana plants on county property. The public interest was not allowing someone to use City water for a use that would be illegal within city limits. A Jackson County enforcement hearing resulted in the Benson's potentially facing a $10,000 fine. They reached an agreement where in exchange for a reduced fine they would never grow marijuana on county property again. Council directed staff to clarify the ordinance further, maintain the existing regulatory structure, and bring it to Council at a future meeting for first reading. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 7:20 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Dana Smith Assistant to the City Recorder City Council Business Meeting March 7, 2017 Page 1 of 9 MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL March 7, 2017 Council Chambers 1175 E. Main Street CALL TO ORDER Mayor Stromberg called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers. ROLL CALL Councilor Slattery, Morris, Lemhouse, Seffinger, Rosenthal, and Darrow were present. MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS Councilor Lemhouse/Rosenthal m/s move to place the advertisement for the City Recorder position on the agenda under New and Miscellaneous Business at the top due its time sensitive nature. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. Councilor Slattery/Darrow m/s to place the replacement of trees on the Plaza under New and Miscellaneous Business and place it at the top due to the sensitivity of the issue. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. Mayor Stromberg announced the City was accepting applications for annual appointments to the various Commissions, Committees, and Boards. The deadline for applications was March 17, 2017. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Councilor Seffinger made a clarification to the minutes of the Business Meeting of February 21, 2017 on the first page, last sentence under Special Presentations & Awards. She clarified the sentence should read, "Councilor Seffinger wanted staff to clarify if the Nevada Bridge Street was important because of the fact that neighborhood above it had only one entrance." The minutes of the Business Meeting of February 21, 2017 were approved as amended. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS - None PUBLIC FORUM Jeff Sharpe/557 Fordyce/Spoke regarding two items discussed during the staff update on the 10x20 ordinance at the last Council meeting. The first was the project's financial viability. The reports from the Bonneville Environmental Foundation (BEF) and OS Engineering indicated the cost of the electricity would produce at a long-term fixed cost of under $0.09 per kilowatt-hour with no additional transmission fees. The "take or pay" provisions in the Bonneville Power Administration contract would not be an issue. The second was the environmental impact review. The BEF recommended using the Imperatrice property. Even if the assessment precluded the project from consideration, the information would be valuable for the Parks and Recreation Department, Public Works, the Land Conservancy and other interested parties. Byron Carrier/362 Oxford/Lived in Quiet Village and suggested the City purchase a piece of property overlooking the Helman Elementary School and convert it into community a center that had a grocery store, and a teahouse during the day that became a tavern/smokehouse/playroom at night. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approval of minutes of boards, commissions, and committees 2. Liquor license application for Michael Szelong dba O'Ryans Irish Pub City Council Business Meeting March 7, 2017 Page 2 of 9 3. Appointment of Ron Cue to the Transportation Commission 4. Confirmation of Mayoral appointment of Mark Welsh as Administrative Services/ Finance Director 5. Approval of a special procurement for Police Department Personnel Uniforms 6. Approval of Public Art Commission recommendation for mural at 1668 Siskiyou Blvd. 7. Endorsement of the SOU Film Club for the purpose of hanging a banner 8. Adoption of a resolution titled, "A resolution adopting a supplemental budget for changes to the 2015-17 Biennial budget" Councilor Lemhouse pulled Consent Agenda item #4, and Councilor Rosenthal pulled 42 and #8 for discussion. Police Chief Tighe O'Meara addressed the liquor license application for O'Ryans Irish Pub and explained the venue had a greater number of cases associated with it than other establishments downtown but nothing alarming. It was a standalone bar with live music and typically, those venues had a higher call for service volume. City Recorder Barbara Christensen added the Oregon Liquor Control Commission (OLCC) had final approval on all applications, even if a municipality did not approve an application. Revoking a liquor license was a long and involved process. Chief O'Meara would meet with the new owners to discuss the venue's history and moving forward. Mayor Stromberg and Interim City Administrator John Karns addressed Consent Agenda item #4 and shared background information on Mark Welch, the City's new Administrative Services/Finance Director who would start in May. Interim Administrative Services/Finance Director Bev Adams addressed Consent Agenda item #8 and explained the payments that came out of the Health Benefits Fund fluctuated because they were health benefit reimbursements or the payments for healthcare. At the end of January, the materials and services in the health benefits fund was at 82%. The final payments would not clear until August and it would be too late to make any changes to the budget. This was a safeguard to keep the City within budget constraints. Councilor Rosenthal/Morris m/s to approve the Consent Agenda Items. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. PUBLIC IIEARINGS - None UNFINISIIED BUSINESS - None NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS 1. Place Tree Replacement Proposal Councilor Slattery/Seffinger m/s to direct staff to work out the details necessary to implement the tree removal and replanting on the Plaza. DISCUSSION: Mayor Stromberg provided background on a community driven proposal that would remove 4 to 5 trees and replace them with larger trees. The trees removed would go to the Parks and Recreation Department and Southern Oregon University for replanting. Planting needed to occur soon or the project would have to wait until late fall. Councilor Slattery supported the donation and wanted Council to give it serious consideration. Mr. Lohman suggested Council give the Interim City Administrator the authority to sign a contract similar to the one presented last night by Greg Trunnell. Councilor Seffinger explained the current trees would take 10 to 15 years to reach the same degree of growth the proposed trees would provide. She talked with Parks and Recreation Department Arborist Peter Baughman and Interim Superintendent Jeff McFarland. Mr. City Council Business Meeting March 7, 2017 Page 3 of 9 Baughman would work with Solid Ground on how they maintained the trees and what supports might be appropriate. She supported a donation policy as well. Councilor Lemhouse wanted additional measures added to the contract to cover the trees in the event they failed two years after planting. He also wanted to review the contract prior to the City signing. Councilor Slattery confirmed his motion did not include bringing the contract back to Council for review. Councilor Seffinger noted the contract guarantee to replace the trees if they failed within 18 months. Mr. Baughman had explained ensuring the trees survived the second summer was critical and the extended maintenance covered that period. Mr. Trunnell explained the best time to plant the trees was the end of March, no later than April 15, 2017. The City would be the project manager and select the trees. The willows they proposed to use were approximately 30 feet tall. The Zelkovas were fifteen feet tall with a 16-foot span for the drip line. The mature trees had a diminished lifespan of 10 years. Alternately, there were Willow Oaks that had lived 600 years. Zelkovas could live ninety to 100 years. Councilor Morris noted the contract indicated 30-foot Zelkovas. Mr. Trunnell clarified they were 15 feet to 20 feet. Councilor Lemhouse/Slattery m/s to amend the motion and have the proposed contract come back to Council for final approval at the next City Council business meeting and the trees removed from the Plaza replanted on City property. DISCUSSION: Councilor Lemhouse thought it was important that the trees citizens paid for remained on City property. Councilor Seffinger confirmed the Parks and Recreation Department would take the trees. Roll Call on Amended motion: Councilor Slattery, Rosenthal, Seffinger, Morris, Lemhouse, and Darrow, YES. Motion passed. Roll Call on amended main motion: Councilor Seffinger, Morris, Slattery, Darrow, Lemhouse, and Rosenthal, YES. Motion passed. Councilor Darrow/Lemhouse m/s to direct staff to bring back to Council some policy wording on how the City would respond to generously proffered donor chosen civic features. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. 2. City Recorder replacement process City Recorder Barbara Christensen explained Council decided on the process to fill the City Recorder/Treasurer vacancy and wanted criteria and qualifications noted in the advertisement. The notice showed the most important qualifications for the position as municipal government experience, office and records management experience, public relations experience, treasury and cash management experience along with the ability to be bonded. City Charter requirements for placement were being registered to vote and living within the city limits. Council discussed removing the word "municipal" and agreed to move it to the fourth bullet as, "Municipal government experience, desired but not required." It was not necessary to be a notary. The selected candidate could take the notary course after their appointment. The application deadline was March 22, 2017. Based on the number of responses, Council could consider forming a Council subcommittee to review applications at the April 3, 2017 Study Session. Councilor Lemhouse/Seffinger m/s approval of the Ashland City Recorder/Treasurer vacancy listing as amended by Council and staff. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. 3. Results of Downtown Businesses Survey Item postponed to next Council meeting. City Council Business Meeting March 7, 2017 Page 4 of 9 4. Climate and Energy Action Plan acceptance/approval Assistant to the City Administrator Adam Hanks introduced Andrea Martin and Jeff Golden who were the project consultants for the Climate Energy Action Plan (LEAP). The primary objective was Council review and adoption of the CEAP. Additionally, staff sought Council direction on two draft ordinances. One ordinance contained goals and targets for the plan, and the other ordinance created a Climate Energy Action Plan Commission. Councilor Rosenthal noted this was the CEAP ad hoc Committees thirty-third public meeting September since 2015. He read the names of the Committee and staff involved and thanked them for their efforts. They provided a presentation that included: Why a Climate and Energy Action Plan? • Heavy rainfall and drought risk • Changes to snowpack and water availability • Wildfire risk • Temperature increase and extreme heat Ashland has a role - Consumption, Transportation and Energy - Chart Goals • Mitigation - Reduce Ashland's contribution of carbon greenhouse gas emissions • Adaptation - Prepare for projected climate change impact regardless of emissions Goals for the community: • Reduce overall Ashland community greenhouse gas emissions by 8% per year, on average Goals for City of Ashland operations: • Reach carbon neutrality by 2030 • Reduce fossil fuel consumption by 50% by 2030 and 100% by 2050 Ashland's Targeted GHG Emissions - Chart The draft plan you see today is the culmination of a yearlong engagement process • Over 240 community members who attended at least one of three public open houses • Over 135 individuals who responded to an online survey • Representatives from over 15 local organizations, businesses, and institutions who participated in presentations and interviews • Over 30 city staff members who participated in two facilitated workshops Characterize climate progress to-date and scope of impacts • Ashland Greenhouse Gas Inventory • Ashland Climate Trends Summary • Climate Vulnerability Assessment Identify vision, goals, priorities, and challenges • Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats (SWOT) assessment • Public survey and open house inputs • Identify, prioritize, and evaluate strategies and actions: Review of peer city climate actions and industry best practices and Expert evaluation of prioritized strategies and actions • Draft action Plan - Compilation of vetted vision, goals, priorities, strategies, and actions • Finalize action plan and implementation strategy: Final open house and plan revisions Overarching Strategic Initiations • Clean & Renewable Energy Sources: Solar, Wind, Hydro Electric, Local Generation, Geotherm AL • Efficient and Equitable Management & Consumption: Demand Management, Operations, Mode Shifting, Smart Technology • Vehicles & Equipment that run on Cleaner Fuels: Electric Motors, Electric Cars & Fleets, Electric City Council Business Meeting March 7, 2017 Page 5 of 9 Heat Pumps City of Ashland's Clean Energy Future • Transition to clean energy • Maximize water and energy efficiency and reuse • Support climate-friendly land use and management • Reduce consumption of carbon-intensive goods and services • Inform and work with residents, organizations, and government • Lead by example Focus Areas\Buildings & Energy • Urban Form, Land Use & Transportation • Consumption & Materials Management • Natural Systems • Public Health, Safety & Security • Cross-Cutting Strategies Strategies & Actions • Focus Area • Strategies: Thematic groupings of actions that work toward a specific goal • Priority Actions: Actions within a strategy that were prioritized or shortlisted and underwent criteria-based assessment • Other Actions: Opportunities identified but not considered high priority through engagement process • Role of the Community: Actions people, businesses, and organizations can take to address climate goals The CEAP as a living document • Planning • Implementation • Analysis and Reporting • Using Evaluation Results for Action & Improvement Mr. Hanks confirmed hiring a full time employee would go to the Budget Committee as an ad package. The plan referenced carbon offsets annually as a strategy to fill the gap if they failed to meet reduction percentages. They added sun inventories to the greenhouse gas inventory. One for City operations aside from the community inventory, and the third was the electric utility. The hydro element to the purchase power in the electric utility made the carbon emissions number low. For the community inventory, staff used the international accepted protocol required using the regional grid number for calculating carbon emissions in the energy area. Ms. Martin added greenhouse gas protocols changed frequently and there was a trend allowing utility specific emission factors that had some requirements of verification by a third party organization, namely the Climate Registry. Melanie Mindlin/1248 Calypso Court/Spoke as a citizen and not the Chair of the Planning Commission. Climate change was the most pressing issue of the times. Affordable housing, healthcare, and other social equity concerns were issues of allocation of resources and society had sought solutions as long as there was inequality. Climate change was different. Everyone was on a course towards a planet not habitable for humans, massive population displacement, sea level rise, crop failures, and weather events. The CEAP was a nod in the direction of social responsibility. People wanted to save the planet but not if it meant changing their lifestyles that much. She noted conflicting goals in the community. Claire Pryor/1221 Orchid Street/ Was a member of the CEAP ad hoc committee and Ashland Climate Youth Action. Climate change was the biggest threat humanity had ever faced and had the very real City Council Business Meeting March 7, 2017 Page 6 of 9 potential to destroy everything people cared for. The plan was one of the most comprehensive and science based in the nation. Ashland Youth Climate Action started based on the ordinance passed in the City of Eugene. Christopher Buckley/71 Dewey Street/Was a senior High School student. He spent lot of time outdoors and noted the changes he had witnessed due to climate change. Last year he lost hope in his future. The federal government was currently denying science and rolling back regulations that once protected the environment. The national government was ignoring its duty by saying the US cannot control China's emissions. Ashland could lead other cities with this plan and more. It was everyone's responsibility to leave more of a legacy than dried lakes, dead forests, and poisoned oceans. He urged Council to pass the plan and ordinances. Allie Rosenbluth/40 North Mountain Ave/Was a community organizer at Rogue Climate. She commented on the hundreds of people that had come forward over the past 18 months for climate change. She urged council to approve the CEAP unanimously. The City along with the community must stay diligent to ensure the outcomes of the plan would not disproportionately affect low-income communities, young people, and communities of color, the elderly, and disabled. These groups needed a voice and representation on the CEAP Commission. She supported Ashland adopting an ordinance similar to the City of Eugene. Nikolas Lindauer/320 Oxford Street/As concentrations of Co2 continued to increase in the atmosphere, the rate of Co2 dissolving in the ocean increased, creating higher levels of carbonic acid in the water. Carbonic acid caused coral reefs that held 82% of marine diversity, to disintegrate making the water uninhabitable for many creatures and causing distinction throughout the ocean. Millennials had less confidence in government than any other generation in US history. When half the politicians ignored 90% of scientists, every change mattered. Kayla Fennell/1350 E Nevada Street/Supported the CEAP and ordinances. She shared her experiences traveling through Indonesia, Greece, Italy, and Morocco, documenting the effects of climate change in those regions, and sharing results at the UN Climate Change Summit. Society had a moral obligation to act. The US was responsible for most of the emissions. Not taking action because it was an inconvenience was not an option. Everyone must do his or her part on behalf of others around the world paying the price for US consumption. She urged Council to pass the plan unanimously and support the ordinances to follow. Katie Crocker/134 Nutley Street/The realization of the catastrophic effects of climate change prompted her to join the Ashland Youth Climate Action and fight to pass the ordinance in the CEAP. Today, the global temperature was 1.3 degrees Celsius warmer than pre-industrial times. The world would experience a multi-meter sea level rise within fifty to 150 years if the current rate of fossil fuel emissions continued. According to "Young People's Burden" by Dr. James Hanson, carbon emissions needed to be reduced by 350 parts per million if society wanted to preserve the planet. Currently, the level was 400 parts per million with two parts per million each year. To reach 350 parts per million, carbon emissions needed to be reduced 8% yearly. Carson Barry/134 Church Street/The CEAP would fulfill Ashland's obligation to protect the citizens and take responsibility for the role everyone played in the national and global community. People needed to take the strongest action possible. She feared the impact climate change had in her future. She supported passing the ordinances along with the CEAP. Without an ordinance, the conditions in the CEAP did not guarantee full execution of the plan. She did not think anyone should take any chance when it came to an issue of this magnitude and importance. The ordinance established a commission that would ensure execution of the plan. City Council Business Meeting March 7, 2017 Page 7 of 9 Annika Larson/795 Ellendale Drive/Spoke on the CEAP the City of Eugene passed in 2010. She thought Ashland should pass their CEAP and ordinances to hold everyone accountable to these values. She noted the City of Eugene's successes. The community could no longer count on the national government to further policy objectives. She supported passing the plan and ordinances. Erin Finklea/545 Grandview Drive/Submitted written testimony into the record from her husband Ed Finklea, an energy attorney for 35 years. Jennifer Jones/134 Church Street/Loved the community and town and wanted to be proud of the Ashland. One of the ways to do that was approving the CEAP and passing the ordinances. The testimony from the young people present moved her. She hoped Council would pass the plan and the ordinances. Dan Wahdedah/PO Box 1211/Phoenix, OR/Thanked the ad hoc Committee for their work for the benefit of future generations. Tribal prophecies indicated this was point in time where everyone had to prove they were worthy of moving forward to the "Eighth Fire," shedding colonial ways and returning to the earth. The way energy was currently harvested harmed future generations. We were all relatives, in the same boat together. He urged Council to adopt the plan and ordinances. James McGinnis/629 Altamont Street/Quoted Russell Brand and noted the CEAP was a moonshot. He talked about the power of standing up, and being present. He was grateful for the new generation and young people who spoke earlier. Climate change will affect them, their children, and grandchildren. The CEAP was a work in progress and the beginning of a process. Councilor Seffinger/Slattery m/s to accept and approve the Climate and Energy Action Plan as presented. DISCUSSION: Councilor Seffinger talked to Claire Pryor the week before and her dedication to climate change moved the Councilor. The plan was very important to the future generations. Councilor Slattery thought the CEAP was a good beginning and foundation. However, the ordinances had to be carefully constructed and he did not think they were at that point. An ordinance would not lock a process down and a future council could change them. It was essential to have the community committed to making the plan work. Councilor Lemhouse stressed the importance of implementing the plan correctly and asked the speakers to remain patient with the process. There were things in the plan Council needed to review. The plan was a work in progress. Regarding social equity, establishing minimum energy efficiency standards for affordable housing could actually reduce the number of units built. Ms. Mindlin summed it up well on conflicting priorities. He had some concerns the plan was overreaching in terms of policy. He liked the adaption part of the plan. The most he could do as an elected official was prepare the city to adapt to what was coming. He appreciated the hard work and the young people's testimony. Councilor Seffinger added her sister in-law was the ambassador to Fiji and Tonga who currently were losing their homes due to the effects of climate change. Councilor Rosenthal would support the ordinance and appreciated the comments. It was motivating to see the young people involved in the public process. The plan was not perfect and required more comprehensive vetting. The strategies often were conflicting. The commission and a full time staff person would help review and resolve conflicts within the plan. Councilor Darrow observed the real movement in the plan was community action, education, and behavior changes in transportation and consumption. That would create the biggest impact. Creating a commission was the logical next step. This needed to be a community project. Councilor Morris would support the plan but thought it focused more on City actions than community participation. Mandating change was difficult. The real issue of the commission was getting people to change what they were doing to achieve the goals. He did not think the technology was there to achieve the goals, not even in 30 years. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Rosenthal, Darrow, Morris, Slattery, Lemhouse, and Seffinger, YES. City Council Business Meeting March 7, 2017 Page 8 of 9 Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. Councilor Slattery volunteered to work with City Attorney Dave Lohman on draft ordinances. Councilor Rosenthal understood the ordinance adopting the climate goals and targets would take time to review and wanted the second ordinance establishing a commission fast tracked. Councilor Seffinger wanted to know how the commission would interface with A-L in the climate goals and targets ordinance as well as how it affected the business community and the economic life of Ashland. Mr. Lohman would bring back a discussion with arguments for or against having an ordinance along with particular wording for an ordinance or resolution. 3. City Hall seismic project Interim City Administrator John Karns explained the matter stemmed from an earlier discussion with the Public Works Department and ORW on options to replace or retrofit City Hall. The City since then had identified other opportunities as well. He recommended implementing an ad hoc committee similar to the Public Safety Bond Committee established in 2010. The ad hoc committee would review recommendations from ORW and City staff. The committee would have a recommendation and justification to Council by September 1, 2017. In addition, the funding option would include $1,000,000 to complete Phase 11 construction of the Police Department and Emergency Operations Center facility. Council wanted a recommendation on both City and the Police Department and Emergency Operations facility and a separate recommendation for City Hall. Pioneer Hall, the Community Center, or other facilities that needed retrofitting were not included in the ad hoc committee's purview. The committee would consider possibly moving central staff outside of the downtown area. Another option the committee would look at was leasing space. Councilor Lemhouse/Morris m/s to approve the creation of a City Hall ad hoc Committee and the charge of the committee as presented in the memo from the City Administrator with clarifications from Council and staff. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Darrow, Rosenthal, Seffinger, Lemhouse, Morris, and Slattery, YES. Motion passed. 4. Citizen Budget Committee appointment City Recorder Barbara Christensen distributed ballots to Council and the Mayor that resulted in the following: • Saladin Amery received 6 votes from Councilor Slattery, Morris, Lemhouse, Seffinger, Rosenthal, and Mayor Stromberg • Sharon Harris received 1 vote from Councilor Darrow Councilor Slattery/Seffinger m/s to appoint Saladin Amery to the Citizen Budget Committee for a term ending December 31, 2017. DISCUSSION: Councilor Seffinger thought Mr. Amery would be a real asset to the Budget Committee. Councilor Lemhouse noted Mr. Amery had lost to the last appointee by one vote. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS 1. Adoption of a resolution titled, "A resolution of the City Council of the City of Ashland allocating anticipated revenues from the Transient Occupancy Tax for the biennium 2017-19 budget and repealing Resolution 2015-04." Councilor Slattery declared a potential conflict of interest, and asked to recuse himself from the discussion. City Attorney Dave Lohman clarified Councilor Slattery did not have an actual conflict of interest, and could choose to participate in the discussion but chose to treat it as if it were a conflict of interest. Councilor Lemhouse/Seffinger m/s to allow Councilor Slattery to recuse himself from this item's City Council Business Meeting March 7, 2017 Page 9 of 9 discussion. DISCUSSION: Councilor Lemhouse knew Councilor Slattery could make an objective decision on this but out of an abundance of caution and transparency, this was the best move. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. Councilor Slattery left the meeting at 9:50 p.m. Assistant to the City Administrator Adam Hanks explained the resolution was consistent with the previous methodologies with a portion allocated to tourism activities and another for the General Fund with further allocations for each. One difference from the previous resolution was this one restored allocating two items in the General Fund, the economic development program funding and the unrestricted portion of the economic cultural and sustainability grants. The resolution appropriated the amount totals, and detailed the economic development program that was broken down in the budget process. The City had an agreement for services contract with the Chamber of Commerce. After the Economic Development Strategy, staff had a Council approved, economic development document that provided structure on what to ask the Chamber of Commerce to focus and work on in addition to their historical work. The contract included specific deliverables and reporting categories. The Oregon Shakespeare Festival (OSF) followed the small grants contract template and was not as prescriptive in terms of reporting requirements. Council could amend the template and use something similar to the Chamber of Commerce instead. Council agreed and directed staff to create an agreement for services contract with OSF. Councilor Rosenthal/Lemhouse m/s to approve the resolution titled, "A resolution of the City Council of the City of Ashland allocating anticipated revenues from the Transient Occupancy Tax for the biennium 2017-19 budget and repealing Resolution 2015-04." DISCUSSION: Councilor Rosenthal commented the allocation provided a great value for the community. Councilor Lemhouse supported the resolution. The Chamber of Commerce was active in the community, worked hard to promote local businesses and did it well. The City's partnership with OSF was also critical. Councilor Seffinger added the Chamber of Commerce contributed to the Climate and Energy Action Plan, the Healthy City Initiative, the watershed map, and efforts to support the Ashland Resiliency Project (AFR). Roll Call Vote: Councilor Morris, Lemhouse, Seffinger, Rosenthal, and Darrow, YES. Motion passed. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS/REPORTS FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS Councilor Rosenthal announced the Sister City Classic, a youth baseball cultural exchange with Guanajuato March 26, 2017. Councilor Lemhouse announced the Ashland High School football exchange with Japan that would occur this summer. To help fund the trip, the public could hire the team through their "Rent-A-Griz" program. ADJOURNMENT OF BUSINESS MEETING Meeting adjourned at 10:08 p.m. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder John Stromberg, Mayor City Council Business Meeting March 7, 2017 Page 9 of 9 discussion. DISCUSSION: Councilor Lemhouse knew Councilor Slattery could make an objective decision on this but out of an abundance of caution and transparency, this was the best move. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. Councilor Slattery left the meeting at 9:50 p.m. Assistant to the City Administrator Adam Hanks explained the resolution was consistent with the previous methodologies with a portion allocated to tourism activities and another for the General Fund with further allocations for each. One difference from the previous resolution was this one restored allocating two items in the General Fund, the economic development program funding and the unrestricted portion of the economic cultural and sustainability grants. The resolution appropriated the amount totals, and detailed the economic development program that was broken down in the budget process. The City had an agreement for services contract with the Chamber of Commerce. After the Economic Development Strategy, staff had a Council approved, economic development document that provided structure on what to ask the Chamber of Commerce to focus and work on in addition to their historical work. The contract included specific deliverables and reporting categories. The Oregon Shakespeare Festival (OSF) followed the small grants contract template and was not as prescriptive in terms of reporting requirements. Council could amend the template and use something similar to the Chamber of Commerce instead. Council agreed and directed staff to create an agreement for services contract with OSF. Councilor Rosenthal/Lemhouse m/s to approve the resolution titled, "A resolution of the City Council of the City of Ashland allocating anticipated revenues from the Transient Occupancy Tax for the biennium 2017-19 budget and repealing Resolution 2015-04." DISCUSSION: Councilor Rosenthal commented the allocation provided a great value for the community. Councilor Lemhouse supported the resolution. The Chamber of Commerce was active in the community, worked hard to promote local businesses and did it well. The City's partnership with OSF was also critical. Councilor Seffinger added the Chamber of Commerce contributed to the Climate and Energy Action Plan, the Healthy City Initiative, the watershed map, and efforts to support the Ashland Resiliency Project (AFR). Roll Call Vote: Councilor Morris, Lemhouse, Seffinger, Rosenthal, and Darrow, YES. Motion passed. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS/REPORTS FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS Councilor Rosenthal announced the Sister City Classic, a youth baseball cultural exchange with Guanajuato March 26, 2017. Councilor Lemhouse announced the Ashland High School football exchange with Japan that would occur this summer. To help fund the trip, the public could hire the team through their "Rent-A-Griz" program. ADJOURNMENT OF BUSINESS MEETING Meeting adjourned at 10:08 p.m. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder J n Stromberg, Mayor ASHLAND HISTORIC COMMISSION Meeting Minutes February 8, 2017 Community Development/Engineering Services Building - 51 Winburn Way - Siskiyou Room CALL TO ORDER: Commission Chair, Shostrom called the meeting to order at 6:02pm in the Siskiyou Room at the Community Development and Engineering Offices located at 51 Winburn Way, Ashland OR 97520. Commissioners Present: Council Liaison: Shostrom Not yet assigned Skibby Whitford Staff Present: Emery Mark Schexnayder; Staff Liaison Swink Regan Trapp; Secretary Von Chamier Leonard Giordano Commissioners Absent: APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Leonard motioned to approve minutes from January 11, 2017. Whitford seconded. Voice vote; All AYES. Motion passed PUBLIC FORUM: There was no one in the audience wishing to speak. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORT: A Council Liaison has not been appointed. PLANNING ACTION REVIEW PLANNING ACTION: PA-2016-02095 (Continued) SUBJECT PROPERTY: 563 Rock Street APPLICANT: Advantage Building & Design OWNER: Michael & Maxine McNab DESCRIPTION: A request for a Site Design Review to allow for the construction of a 990 square foot second dwelling unit at 563 Rock Street. The project involves restoring the existing historic contributing residence and the construction of a new second dwelling unit located off of Maple Street. The proposal also requests an Exception to Site Development and Design Standards to allow for a parking buffer less than eight feet from a residential structure. Seven non-hazardous trees are proposed for removal from the subject property as part of the application. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Low Density Multiple- Family Residential; ZONING: R-2; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 39 1 E 05 DA; TAX LOT: 5200. Emery and Giordano stated that they have been working with Ms. Gunter on unrelated projects but will not affect their decision on this project. Schexnayder gave the staff report for PA-2016-02095. Shostrom opened the public hearing to the applicants. Amy Gunter, Rogue Planning and Development, 1424 S. Ivy St, Medford, OR and Melanie Smith, Contractor, of Advantage Building and Design, addressed the Commission regarding the project. Shostrom closed the public hearing and opened to the Commission for comments. After a discussion regarding windows, siding, plate heights of the garage, and dormers, the Commission came to an agreement on some recommendations. They expressed their appreciation to the applicants, for the work they have put into the plans and stated that it's a great improvement from the previous month's application. Shostrom motioned to approve PA-2016-02095 with recommendations. Whitford seconded. Voice vote; All AYES. Motion passed. Recommendations: North Elevation - Windows should be single hung with no divided lights. East Elevation - Double casement windows with 3 inches in between (2nd story of house). Single hung windows (1St floor of house). Lower the garage plate height to 8 feet with a 7 foot garage door (Garage). Single hung windows with 3 inches in between (Garage). Dormer should be setback 3 feet from the exterior garage wall (Garage). Carriage style door should be used (Garage). South Elevation - Single hung windows (Garage). All Elevations - 4 to 6 inch smooth textured siding should be used for the garage and second dwelling unit. PLANNING ACTION: PA-2016-02114 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 556 B Street OWNER/APPLICANT: Jamie & David Kaufman DESCRIPTION: A request for a Site Design Review to allow for the construction of a 485.5 square foot detached accessory resident unit (ARU) on the subject property. The proposed structure will also include a two vehicle garage. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Low Density Multiple-Family Residential; ZONING: R-2; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 391 E 09 AB; TAX LOT: 7500. Skibby stated that he sold the applicants some historic photos. Shostrom stated that he did some design work for the applicants about 14 years ago but will not affect his decision making. Emery stated that he has a conflict of interest as he has been working with the applicants on this project. He recused himself and went to the lobby. Schexnayder gave the staff report for PA-2016-02114 Shostrom opened the public hearing to the applicants. Jamie Kaufman, owner, 556 B Street, and Amy Gunter, applicant's representative, 1424 S. Ivy, Medford, OR, addressed the Commission regarding the project. Shostrom closed the public hearing and opened to the Commission for comments. After a brief discussion on the project, the Commission came up with a recommendation for approval. Giordano motioned to approve PA-2016-02114 with recommendation. Von Chamier seconded. Voice vote; All AYES. Motion passed. Recommendations: Elevation # 1 - Gable above door and small window with a 3 foot deep porch. PLANNING ACTION: PA-2017-00013 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 15, 35, 44 & 51 South Pioneer Street OWNER/APPLICANT: City of Ashland/Oregon Shakespeare Festival DESCRIPTION: A request to approve a campus signage and way finding plan for the Oregon Shakespeare Festival's campus at 15 South Pioneer Street as a Conditional Use Permit under the provisions of AMC 18.4.7.120. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Commercial Downtown; ZONING: C-1-D; ASSESSOR'S MAP & TAX LOT: 39 1 E 09 Tax Lot #100; 39 1 E 09BB Tax Lots #14200, #14300 & #14700; and 39 1 E 09BC Tax Lot #1000 There was no conflict of interest or ex-parte contact indicated by the Commission. Schexnayder gave the staff report for PA-2017-00013. Shostrom opened the public hearing to the applicants. Chelsea McCann, project manager at Walker Macy, 111 SW Oak in Portland, OR and Ted DeLong, manager of OSF at 15 S. Pioneer, Ashland, addressed the Commission regarding the project. Ms. McCann stated they wanted to create a clean and easy to spot comprehensive sign package. Mr. DeLong impressed upon the fact that the Shakespeare Festival is more about the experience than the look and wants to reflect the fact that they are contemporary and diverse. He feels the look is consistent with who they are. Mr. DeLong went on to say that they have a long standing problem with people not being able to find the venues and really needs an effective way to show the correct way to different theaters. Shostrom closed the public hearing and opened to the Commission for comments. After a discussion regarding design, placement of signs, and colors of the project, the Commission agreed that the timber wolf (silver) is too much color for the signs. They would like to see a color that is more muted in tone. Shostrom motioned to PA-2017-00013 as presented. Swink seconded. Voice vote; All AYES. Motion passed. Recommendations: Changing the proposed silver colors to a color that is darker or one that is more muted in tone. DISCUSSION ITEMS: There were no items to discuss. COMMISSION ITEMS NOT ON AGENDA: Shostrom discussed the events of the relationship of the Public Arts Commission and the Historic Commission. Shostrom talked about the possibility of a goal setting meeting in April. Schexnayder spoke about the presentation to City Council in April. He encouraged someone new to take the reins and give the presentation to the City Council this year. NEW ITEMS: • Review board schedule • Project assignments for planning actions • HPW - Nominations & Schedule of Events. o Historic Pres. Awards to be held on Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at the Community Center. ■ A time of 12 noon was decided for the awards ceremony. Possible dates and times for the Mausoleum tour and walking tours were also discussed but Commissioners needed to get back to Ms. Trapp on specific dates. OLD BUSINESS: There were no items to discuss. Review Board Schedule February 16th Terry, Bill, Dale February 23rd Terry, Taylor, Sam March 2nd Terry, Taylor, Piper March 9th Terry, Keith, Tom Project Assignments for Planning Actions PA-2014-00710 143 Nutley Swink & Whitford PA-2014-02206 485 A Street Whitford PA-2015-00878 35 S. Pioneer Leonard PA-2015-01695 399 Beach Skibby PA-2015-01517 209 Oak Shostrom PA-2016-00387 95 N. Main Shostrom PA-2016-00209 25 N. Main Giordano PA-2016-00818 175 Pioneer Shostrom & Skibby PA-2016-00847 252 B Street Whitford PA-2016-01027 276 B Street Shostrom & Leonard PA-2016-01641 221 Oak Street Shostrom PA-2016-01947 549 Fairview Emery PA-2016-02103 133 Alida Swink PA-2016-02095 563 Rock St. Whitford PA-2016-02114 556 B Von Chamier PA-2017-00013 15, 35, 44 & 51 S. Pioneer Street ALL ANNOUNCEMENTS & INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: Next meeting is scheduled March 8, 2017 at 6:00 pm There being no other items to discuss, the meeting adjourned at 8:45pm Respectfully submitted by Regan Trapp Council Business Meetinq March 21, 2017 Title: Liquor License Application for Gill Anderson dba Platt Anderson Cellars From: Barbara Christensen City Recorder Barbara,christensen@ashland.or.us Summary: Approval of a Liquor License Application from Gill Anderson dba Platt Anderson Cellars at 357 E Main Street # 14 Actions, Options, or Potential Motions: Under Consent agenda item, a motion to approve new liquor license for Gill Anderson dba Platt Anderson Cellars Staff Recommendation: 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. Resource Requirements: N/A Policies, Plans and Goals Supported: N/A Backizround and Additional Information: Application is for 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. Attachments: Application Page Iof I CITY OF ASHLAND OREGON LIQUOR CONTROL COMMISSION LIQUOR LICENSE APPLICATION Application is being made for: CITY AND COUNTY USE ONLY LICENSE TYPES ACTIONS Date application received: ® Full On-Premises Sales ($402.60/yr) [3 Change Ownership 0 Commercial Establishment Q New Outlet The City Council or County Commission: 13 Caterer Q Greater Privilege E3 Passenger Carrier Additional Privilege (name of city or county) El Other Public Location Other recommends that this license be: Private Club ibff-Premises imited On-Premises Sales ($202.60/yr) ❑ Granted ❑ Denied Sales ($100/yr) By: ® with Fuel Pumps (signature) (date) E3 Brewery Public House ($252.60) Name: ® Winery ($250/yr) Other: Title: 90-DAY AUTHORITY OLCC US 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 ec b Sales license and are requesting a 90-Day Temporary Authority ~j APPLYING AS: Date: Limited El Corporation )!kompany nited Liability Q Individuals Partnership 90-day authority: ❑ Yes XNo 1. Entity or Individuals applying for the license: [See SECTION 1 of the Guide] o 2. Trade Name (dba): u1, 3. Business Location: (numbe , treet, rural route) (city) (coup (state) (ZIP code) 4. Business Mailing Address: W 6 tl ~ (AZA&L16 ' (PO box, number, street, rural route) (city) (state) (ZIP code) 5. Business Numbers: 10P - 114C (phone) (fax) 6. Is the business at this location currently licensed by OLCC? E]Yes )(No 7. If yes to whom: Type of License: 8. Former Business Name: N& 9. Will you have a manager? Yes []No Name: ~1 LL-,1:-:' (mana er must fill out n Individual History form) 10. What is the local governing body where your business is located? ku*j (name I'*- M ?A:7coun 11. Contact person for this application: k6j~w k"--L t-01 ACI ame) (hone number(s L.A', (address} {fax number} -mail address) I understand that if my answers are not true and complete, the OLCC may deny my license application. Appli nt s) Si ature(s) and Date: Q Date 3* ® Date O Date ® Date 1-800-452-OLCC (6522) • www.oregon.gov/olcc (rev. 0812011) Council Business Meeting March 21,20171 Title: Liquor License Application for Andrew Meyer dba Hold Fast Wine Company From: Barbara Christensen City Recorder Barbara.christensen@ashland.or.us Summary: Approval of a liquor license application from Andrew Meyer dba Hold Fast Wine Company at 880 Cambridge Street. Actions, Options, or Potential Motions: I move to approve a new liquor license Andrew Meyer dba Hold Fast Wine Company. Staff Recommendation: 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. Resource Requirements: N/A Policies, Plans and Goals Supported: N/A BacklZround and Additional Information: Application is for a new liquor license for wine pressing. No alcohol will he consumed or sold from the premises. 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. Attachments: Application Page 1 of 1 CITY OF ASHLAND j OREGON LIQUOR CONTROL COMMISSION LIQUOR LICENSE APPLICATION Application is being made for: CITY AND COUNTY USE ONLY LICENSE TYPES ACTIONS Date application received: ® Full On-Premises Sales ($402.60/yr) Q Change Ownership ® Commercial Establishment New Outlet The City Council or County Commission: Q Caterer ® Greater Privilege ® Passenger Carrier Q Additional Privilege (name of city or county) ® Other Public Location ® Other. 7 '1 that this license be: Q Private Club recomme ®Limited On-Premises Sales ($202.60lyr) L` ❑ Granted ❑ Denied Q Off-Premises Sales ($100/yr) By.- []with Fuel Pumps (signature) (date) ® Brewery Public House ($252.60) Name: Winery ($250/yr) wyxt Q Other: Title: 90-DAY AUTHORITY ® Check here if you are applying for a change of ownership at a business OLCC U g(`~ that has a current liquor license, or if you are applying for an Off-Premises Application ec d Sales license and are requesting a 90-Day Temporary Authority Date: APPLYING AS: QLimited Q Corporation P Limited Liability ® Individuals ,es No Partnership Company gp_daY Lhority: C T 1. Entity or Individuals applying for the license: [See SECTION 1 of the Guide] o ash WA (om l.- L 2. Trade Name (dba): ep ros~ agxG 60 A 3. Business Location: 4U J~rk4w 0~ (number, street, rural route) (city) (county) (state) (ZIP code) 4. Business Mailing Address: 1?*0 Al ~p e, S f 14oO~ OR ~zr2.4' O box, number, s'treet, r ral route)+ (city) (state) (ZIP code) 5. Business Numbers: 0 f~ 40 13 j (phone) (fax) 6. Is the business at this location currently licensed by OLCC? [)Yes to 7. If yes to whom. _Type of License: 8. Former Business Name: 9. Will you have a manager? ®Yes QNo Name:_An&L~ ze, (ma ager must fill out an Individual History form) 10. What is the local governing body where your business is located? AWRIIJ 1aC 4-S Atn (name of city or county) 11. Contact person for this application: i^ i++/ Mote- rv l & 2 -0717- name, (phone number(s)) $ d err 0 g ~3'2t1 OWytt- q7 7-3 4r%Gswy (address) (fax number) (e-mail address I understand that if my answers are not true and complete, the OLCC may de I' ti Appli Sign ure(s) and Date: r - r"AW urw*L ® Date V1 3/ ►7 (,3) Date FE- ' 20 Date 40 Date 1-800-452-OLCC (6522) • www.oregon.gov/olcc MEDFORD REGIONAL. OFFICE OREGON LIC 10F', (rev. 0812011) CONTROL COP0MIISSION Council Business Meetina March 21, 2017 Title: Liquor License Application for Efstratio Efstratiadis dba Plancha From: Barbara Christensen City Recorder Barbara.christensen@ashland.or.us Summary: Approval of a liquor license application from Efstratio Efstratiadis dba Plancha at 165 E Main Street. Actions, Options, or Potential Motions: I move to approve a new liquor license for Efstratio Efstratiadis dba Plancha at 165 E Main Street. Staff Recommendation: 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. Resource Requirements: N/A Policies, Plans and Goals Supported: N/A BacklZround and Additional Information: This is an application is for a new liquor license. The City has determined that the license application review by the City is set forth in AMC Chapter 6.32 which requires that a determination be made to determine if the applicant complies with the City's land use, business license and restaurant registration requirements (AMC Chapter 6.32) and has been reviewed by the Police Department. In May 1999, the Council decided it would make the above recommendations on all liquor license applications. Attachments: Application Page 1 of 1 CITY OF ASHLAND F t i ' OREGON LIQUOR CONTROL COMMISSION LIQUOR LICENSE APPLICATION f r CITY AND COUNTY USE ONLY LICENSE TYPES ACTIONS Date application received: _ ull On-Premises Sales ($402.60/yr)`] Change Ownership Commercial Establishment New Outlet The City Council or County Commission: Q Caterer Q Greater Privilege ❑ Passenger Carrier Q Additional Privilege (name of city or county) Q Other Public Location ❑ Other recommends that this license be: ❑ Private Club Q Limited On-Premises Sales ($202.60/yr) D Granted Q Denied [30ffi-Premises Sales ($100/yr) Sy {date) r] with Fuel Pumps (signature) Brewery Public House ($252.60) Name: E] Winery ($250tyr) Q Title: Other. 90-DAY AUTHORITY OLCC USE ONLY 0 Check here if you are applying for a change of ownership at a business that has a current liquor License, or if you are applying for an Off-Premises Application Recd by: Sales license and are requesting a 90-Day Temporary Authority APPLYING AS: Dam` f []Limited [ Corporation Limited Liability Individuals Partnership Company gray authority_ D Yes Sao R -A 1. Entity or Individuals applying for the license: (See SECTION 1 of the Guide) 0 @ 2. Trade Name (dba):~ L,- 3, Business Location: (number. street; rural route) (city) ((runty) (state) (ZIP cue) &ICLj Cno 4. Business Mailing Address: hgk{l -1 ~ ` (PO blot, number, street, rural route) (City) {state} (ZIP code) a 5. Business Numbers: (phone) (fait) 6. Is the business at this location currently licensed by OLCC? [3Yes &o 7, if yes to whom: Type of License: 8. Former Business Name: 9. Will you have a manager? Yes 2g-Name: ~C, (manager must fill out an IrAvidual History form) 10. What is the local governing body where your business is located? (nadw of qty ~counY) 11. Contact person for this application: name) ~ • Gnaw, S} Kwkf rAlo-) . AW- ( 4-" et 0 1A- (address) 9-IS-40 (tax nuinber) (e-malt address I understand that if my answers are not true and complete, the OLCC may deny m license a l Applicant i ature(s and Date. -E - EtD ate' Date 2-11 "''1-1 Date FEB 17 1-800-452-OLCC (6522) a www.oregon.gov/olec MEDFORD REGIONAL OFa,q OREGON UOUOR Ct}WROL COMMISSION I Council Business Meeting March 21, 2017 Title: Approval of Special Procurement for Fregonese Associates From: Maria Harris Planning Manager maria.harris@ashland.or.us Summary This item is to seek permission to directly award a professional services contract for an infill implementation strategy for the Ashland Transit Triangle (see attached map). The infill implementation strategy aims to create incentives for additional housing and business development adjacent to the bus route which in turn, may result in increased transit ridership. Actions, Options, or Potential Motions: I move to approve a special procurement contract with Fregonese Associates for $38,320.00. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the special procurement contract with Fregonese Associates to develop a package of land use strategies and incentives to implement the recommendations of the previous development feasibility analysis and create incentives for business and housing development in the Ashland Transit Triangle. The Ashland Transit Triangle is the area in the southeast part of the city comprised of the property adjacent to the bus route on Ashland St., Tolman Creek Rd. and Siskiyou Boulevard. Fregonese Associates developed Envision Tomorrow, which is a suite of urban and regional planning tools for development/market feasibility analysis and scenario planning. Envision Tomorrow is a unique land use modeling tool because the software can analyze financial feasibility at a site-by-site and building level. The ability to analyze at the individual parcel and building level is critical in the Ashland Transit Triangle project because the opportunities for development and redevelopment are comprised of scattered sites throughout the area. In the previous project work, Fregonese Associates customized the Envision Tomorrow tool for Ashland with the assistance of planning staff. Envision Tomorrow is an open-access scenario planning package that planning staff can use in future projects. The original Ashland Transit Triangle analysis was performed by Fregonese Associates using Envision Tomorrow. As a result, Fregonese Associates has inherent knowledge of the previous analyses and model, as well as the City's land use ordinance and adopted plans, which will provide continuity and efficiency in developing the infill implementation strategy. Resource Requirements: The resources required for this project are budgeted within the current biennium. However, the project timeline overlaps two fiscal years and a portion of the project funding would be in fiscal year 2018. Page Iof3 CITY OF ASHLAND I Policies, Plans and Goals Supported: The project addresses a variety of City Council goals and strategies as well as adopted City plans. The Draft Guiding Principles document included in the October 11 Planning Commission ap cket details the applicable Council goals and policies including the following City Council goals for people and the environment. People Seek opportunities to enable all citizens to meet basic needs. (5) 5.2.a Pursue affordable housing opportunities, especially workforce housing. Identify specific incentives for developers to build more affordable housing. • Adjust infill strategies in order to promote housing development along major transportation corridors. Environment Develop and support land use and transportation policies to achieve sustainable development. (13) 13.2 Develop infill and compact urban form policies. • Update infill strategy along major transportation corridors to promote housing and business development, as well as alternative transportation choices. The Transportation System Plan includes four projects in the transit triangle related to improving sidewalks, bus shelters and intersections enhancements for pedestrians including two projects for Ashland Street Streetscape Enhancements (R38 for Siskiyou Blvd. to Walker Ave. and R-39 for Walker Ave. to Normal Ave.), Ashland Street/Tolman Creek Road (R41) and the Walker Ave. festival street (R40). The infill strategy project relates to policies included in the draft Climate and Energy Action Plan (CEAP). Specifically, the draft plan includes strategies to address residential travel and the emissions associated with passenger cars and trucks. Common strategies for replacing residential travel trips in passenger cars and trucks include promoting land use development patterns that utilize existing public infrastructure, and make using transit and alternate modes of transportation possible and even desirable. Backl4round and Additional Information: Fregonese Associates and planning staff provided the City Council information about the findings of the development feasibility analysis of the Ashland Transit Triangle at the December 19, 2016 City Council study session (meeting minutes). Council directed staff to move forward with the next steps and bring back a package of options for implementation. Despite an allowance in the commercial and employment zones (C-1 and E-1) for 15 to 30 housing units per acre, past developments in the Ashland Transit Triangle were primarily Page 2of3 CITY OF ASHLAND I comprised of single-use, one story commercial buildings that did not include a residential component. The previous development feasibility analysis recommended removing existing housing density maximums to provide an incentive for the private market to build at a higher density with a focus on smaller units sizes. The transit triangle is served by Rogue Valley Transportation District (RVTD) Route 10 with 20 minute service from 7am-5pm (Monday-Friday) and 30 minute service for the remainder of the day (5am-7am and 5pm-7pm, Monday - Friday). Route 10 also includes service on Saturdays at hour intervals. Route 10 provides the highest ridership in the RVTD system (50 percent of all RVTD riders) and the Bi-Mart stop on Tolman Creek Rd. is one of the most used stops system wide. Other opportunities in the transit triangle include a sizeable amount of vacant and redevelopable land, well-established public facilities, and shopping, services and neighborhoods within walking distance. A challenge in the transit triangle is the transition between new development and existing residential neighborhoods. The first phase of the project involved identifying the factors that limit commercial and residential development in the transit triangle. Fregonese Associates performed a return on investment (ROI) analysis to examine the market feasibility of a variety of building types using the Envision Tomorrow (ET) model. The model incorporates land, construction and permitting costs and the physical attributes of buildings allowed by the zoning and land use standards (e.g., height and size of building, number of residential units, required parking, required landscaping) to produce achievable rents and sales prices for commercial space and residential units. Interviews with development industry professionals were used to verify the construction costs and rents used in the model. The ROI analysis determined that under the current zoning and land use standards, the projected commercial rents are too low to make new construction feasible and that the residential rental rates are also unfeasible because the rental rates exceed those of the current rental market. In addition, the current market conditions and existing zoning of the area promotes building larger housing unit sizes, 1,000 square feet and larger, and the projected rental rates exceed the amount a two-person household at median income can afford by 30 percent or more. The Community Development Department wishes to use a special procurement process in order to directly award Fregonese Associates with the project to develop the implementation strategy for the Ashland Transit Triangle. In order to process a special procurement the City Council must approve the process and a public notice of the procurement must be posted on the City's web site to provide an opportunity to protest the award. Attachments: Map of Ashland Transit Triangle Special Procurement Request for Approval Form #9 Fregonese Associates Proposal Page 3 of 3 CITY OF ASHLAND \ \ ~ M ~ ~ ~ _ ~ i } V~\V~ ~ b~ ~`C-`_~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~.~.~~~A ~ ~ ~ ~ r ~ t \ ~ . N s 7 ~ p ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 - ~ _ ~ , _ u~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ t i '"j j' rw ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ G~ ~ ~ f f c.~ , $ ,o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t,. ~ i~ x b ~ . T q ~ r~` ! ~ } T ~ ~ t 1 n F .ark ~ .WJ ~ r` _ 9i ~ i u a i ~ a ~ t i ajzry~ ~ ~^rv~ ~ ~ nl,~ ~ i / tii I. r" i . 3 ~ I j r " ' F= q-. ,~r~ ~ i ~ ~ _ ~~,ir` f l M~ x~ I " eft ~r~ ~ ` ~ 1 ~ t S r i ~ ~ i ~ l i ~ ~ _ ~ n I n , T. ~r~~ ~ r_ r ~4. ~C r it ' ~ ~ ~,'r ~ _ ~ y ~ r- ~R ~ A~ r ~ s~, i _b i ra l ! ~ 1 r 1~ i ~ J ~ ".i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ tic., Y \ ~ ~ oe ~ ~ ~ ~ _ ~3 - ~ r r ~ ~ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~1 ~I ~I. ~i,.~ `~i t~ ~ iii ` f t ~ i v, ~ "z~7 I~1 ~ ~ ti ~ ~ _ ~ ~ ~A~~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ - is r r ~ ~ ~ E L ~ r t rs j~.t Y' ~~1 \ ~ ~ ~ 1' i r J l`. ~ y~ ' t. ~ i ~ ~ _ v / L 0 L L. ~ ~ O N ~ LL ~ p o _ ~ ~ f~ o ~ ~ ~ U W ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 z ~ Z ~ o ~ N ~ 1 ~ o  Q 0 i CITY OF FORM #9 ASHLAND SPECIAL PROCUREMENT REQUEST FOR APPROVAL To: City Council, Local Contract Review Board From: Bill Molnar, Community Development Director Date: March 14, 2017 Subject: REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A SPECIAL PROCUREMENT In accordance with ORS27913.085, this request for approval of a Special Procurement is being presented to the City Council for approval. This written request for approval describes the proposed contracting procedure and the goods or services or the class of goods or services to be acquired through the special procurement and the circumstances that justify the use of a special procurement under the standards set forth ORS 279B.085(4). 1. Requesting Department Name: Community Development 2. Department Contact Name: Maria Harris 3. Type of Request: Class Special Procurement X Contract-specific Special Procurement 4. Time Period Requested: From: April 1, 2017 To: December 29, 2017 5. Total Estimated Cost: $38,320.00 6. Short title of the Procurement: Infill Implementation Strategy for the Ashland Transit Triangle Supplies and/or Services or class of Supplies and/or Services to be acquired: The services to be obtained include professional planning and urban design services to develop a package of d land use strategies and incentives to implement the findings of the previous development feasibility analysis an create incentives for business and housing d_evelopment in the Ashland Transit Triangle. 7. Background and Proposed Contracting Procedure: Provide a description of what has been done in the past and the proposed procedure. The Agency may, but is not required to, also include the following types of documents: Notice/Advertising, Solicitation(s), Bid/Proposal Forms(s), Contract Form(s), and any other documents or forms to be used in the proposed contracting procedure. Attach additional sheets as needed. Background: The City previously contracted with Fregonese Associates to conduct a return on investment analysis of development and redevelopment in the Ashland Transit Triangle to identify factors that limit the amount and type of development in the area. The analysis found that: 1 a building with a mix of business and residential uses based on current land, construction and permitting costs and under current zoning and land use standards isn't feasible because projected commercial rents are low and the residential rental rates are high compared to the existing market prices and 2 the projected dwelling units are primarily 1,000 square feet and larger because of maximum density requirements and the rental rates exceed the amount a two-person household at median income can afford by 30 percent or more The recommendations included: 1) changes in requirements Form #9 - Special Procurement - Request for Approval, Page 1 of 3, 311512017 for building height, number of stories. parking spaces, landscaping coverage and the maximum number of residential dwelling units allowed per acre, 2) accelerating street frontage improvement projects included in existing adopted plans and 3) updating the inclusionary zoning policies based on new state laws. 8. Justification for use of Special Procurement: Describe the circumstances that justify the use of a Special Procurement. Attach relevant documentation. Fre onese Associates developed Envision Tomorrow which is a suite of urban and regional planning tools for development/market feasibili analysis and scenario planning. Envision Tomorrow is a unique land use modeling tool because the software can analyze financial feasibility at a site-by-site and building level. The ability to analyze at the individual parcel and building level is critical in the Ashland Transit Triangle project because the opportunities for development and redevelopment are comprised of scattered sites throughout the area. The original Ashland Transit Triangle analysis was performed by Fregonese Associates using Envision Tomorrow. As a result, Fregonese Associates has inherent knowledge of the previous analyses and model, as well as the City's land use ordinance and adopted plans, which will provide continuity and efficiency in developing the infill implementation strategy. 9. Findings to Satisfy the Required Standards: This proposed special procurement: X (a) will be unlikely to encourage favoritism in the awarding of public contracts or to substantially diminish competition for public contracts because: This award will not substantially diminish competition because there are few planning firms that use the Envision Tomorrow suite of tools for development and market feasibility analysis and scenario planning. (Please provide specific information that demonstrates how the proposed Special Procurement meets this requirement.); and X (b)(i) will result in substantial cost savings to the contracting agency or to the public because: Selection of Fregonese Associates will result in cost savings because Fregoonese Associates is familiar with the previous analysis results and Ashland's land use ordinance and adopted plans because of the firms' previous work on the project. A new firm would require as a first task time covered to review the previous work as well as Ashland's standards and adopted plans in addition to developing an implementation strategy. Staff time and resources are saved by not having two through a formal selection process. The reduction in City staff time includes development of an RFP and scope of services, internal review, proposal scoring, negotiations with selected consultant, and working with new consultant to review previous work and Ashland's standards and adopted plans. (Please provide the total estimate cost savings to be gained and the rationale for determining the cost savings); or (b)(ii) will otherwise substantially promote the public interest in a manner that could not practicably be realized by complying with the requirements of ORS 27913.055, 27913.060, 27913.065, or 27913.070, or any rules adopted thereunder because: (Please provide specific information that demonstrates how the proposed Special Procurement meets this requirement.) Form #9 - Special Procurement - Request for Approval, Page 2 of 3, 3/15/2017 i Public Notice: Pursuant to ORS 279B.085(5) and OAR 137-047-0285(2), a Contracting Agency shall give public notice of the Contract Review Authority's approval of a Special Procurement in the same manner as a public notice of competitive sealed Bids under ORS 279B.055(4) and OAR 137-047-0300. The public notice shall describe the Goods or Services or class of Goods or Services to be acquired through the Special Procurement and shall give such public notice of the approval of a Special Procurement at least seven (7) Days before Award of the Contract. After the Special Procurement has been approved by the City Council, the following public notice will be posted on the City's website to allow for the seven (7) day protest period. Date Public Notice first appeared on www.ashland.or.us - March 22, 2017 PUBLIC NOTICE Approval of a Special Procurement First date of publication: March 22, 2017 A request for approval of a Special Procurement was presented to and approved by the City Council, acting as the Local Contract Review Board, on March 21, 2017. Fregonese Associates will develop an infill implementation strategy including land use strategies and incentives to implement recommendations of the previous development feasibility analysis for the Ashland Transit Triangle, an area in the southeast part of the city comprised of the property adjacent to the bus route on Ashland St., Tolman Creek Rd. and Siskiyou Boulevard. The project is a contract-specific special procurement for planning and urban design services. It has been determined based on written findings that the Special Procurement will be unlikely to encourage favoritism in the awarding of public contracts or to substantially diminish competition for public contracts, and result in substantial cost savings or substantially promote the public interest in a manner that could not be realized by complying with the requirements that are applicable in ORS 279B.055, 279B.060, 279B.065, or 279B.070. An affected person may protest the request for approval of a Special Procurement in accordance with ORS 279B.400 and OAR 137-047-0300. A written protest shall be delivered to the following address: City of Ashland, Bill Molnar, Community Development Department, 20 E. Main St., Ashland, OR 97520. The seven (7) day protest period will expire at 5:00pm on March 28, 2017. This public notice is being published on the City's Internet World Wide Web site at least seven days prior to the award of a public contract resulting from this request for approval of a Special Procurement. Form #9 - Special Procurement- Request for Approval, Page 3 of 3, 3/15/2017 Ashland Transit Triangle - Implementation Strategy Task 1: Confirm Public Involvement Strategy Discuss citizen involvement approach with the Planning Commission and make adjustments as necessary. Deliverable: • Planning Commission packet and meeting minutes (City) Task 2: Model Refinements Refine model to address previously raised comments from the Developers forum and City staff about revenue and cost assumptions for the building prototypes. Review average costs and determine if updates needed. Conduct brief phone interviews with local developers and brokers to better understand any changes in market or prices. • Schedule conference call to review model changes with City staff (FA) Deliverable: • Call meeting notes (FA) • Updated building prototype models (FA) Task 3: Draft Zoning Amendments for the Transit Triangle The Consultant will work with City of Ashland staff to develop a revised zoning language for the C1, E-1, R-2 and R-3 zones. Fregonese Associates will develop draft zoning language, graphics and an explanatory document. The team will also update the zoning map. The proposed amendments may include: • Develop a Zoning Overlay for the C1 and E-1 that lift the density cap, and implement other small changes in the zoning changes. • Evaluate changes for the R-2 and R-3 zones when property fronts one of the Triangle arterials. • Develop improved Site Design Standards for this area and for the new zoning standards. • Clean up and consolidation of all the previous overlays. • Develop Recommendations for an accelerated street frontage improvement strategy of the existing adopted plans. • Develop inclusionary zoning strategy to comply with the new state law. • Investigate other incentives and regulations that will encourage affordable units. 1 Deliverable: • Updated language, graphics and explanatory document for site design standards in the Transit Triangle. We will use the current code format, which has the site design standards incorporated in the land use ordinance. o FA will produce draft materials; city staff will review and provide comments. • PowerPoint presentation explaining and illustrating the updates (FA) • Two photorealistic visualizations demonstrating the effect of the zoning modifications and street frontage improvements (FA) Task 4: Preparation for Study Session City staff will schedule study sessions with the Planning Commission and FA will prepare meeting materials. • Schedule PC study sessions (City staff) • Prepare PC packet including project background, goals for implementation Strategy (FA - City staff) Deliverable: • Packet Materials and PowerPoint (FA - City staff) • Develop list of implementation goals that the zoning changes will accomplish (FA) Task 5: Study Session - Intro to recommended zoning changes City staff, with assistance from FA will hold study sessions with the Planning Commission to revisit original project and purpose, present preliminary changes to the C1, E-1, R-2 and R-3 zones. Deliverables: • PowerPoint for the meeting (FA) • Draft changes to the C1, E-1, R-2 and R-3 zones memo (FA - City staff) • Attend and participate in one meeting/Planning Commission study session (FA) Task 6: Preparation for Council Briefing City staff will schedule Council briefing and FA will prepare meeting materials. • Schedule Council briefing (City staff) • Prepare Council packet including project background, goals for Implementation Strategy and preliminary changes to the C1, E-1, R-2 and R-3 zones. This packet will be refined based on input from the Planning Commission (FA - City staff) 2 Deliverable: • Packet Materials and PowerPoint (FA - City staff) • Develop list of implementation goals that the zoning changes will accomplish (FA) Task 7: Council Briefing City staff, with assistance from FA will update the City Council on the project with condensed version of the PC study session. Deliverables: • PowerPoint for the meeting (FA) • Draft changes to the C1, E-1, R-2 and R-3 zones memo (FA - City staff) • Attend and participate in one meeting/City Council meeting (FA) Task 8: Public Open House & Stakeholder Meeting (Preparation and Events) Hold open house and a stakeholder meeting to present and obtain input on potential zoning changes in the Transit Triangle; obtain input on potential strategies and create preferred action plan for implementing the zoning amendments. • Prepare graphic presentation that captures the residents' and stakeholders' consensus about the future of the Transit Triangle base on the previous project work; • Describe the future of the Transit Triangle area in both words and images; • Clearly depict what the future could look like if recommended zoning changes and other implementation measures are adopted; • Depict the potential buildout of the area in an area-wide design of infill/probable redevelopment sites; and • Use illustrations/visualizations and character imagery to support recommended changes to zoning Deliverables: • Promote and invite residents/stakeholders to the Open House (City staff) • Secure venue and equipment necessary for the event (City staff) • Meeting Materials and PowerPoint (FA) • Attend and participate in two meetings including open house and stakeholder meetings (FA) • Meetings summary memo including identification of issues and concerns (FA) 3 Task 9: Planning Commission and Council Adoption City staff, with assistance from FA will prepare materials for Planning Commission and City Council and attend the Planning Commission and City Council public hearings. • Schedule and hold meeting or conference call to prep for council meeting (FA - City staff) Deliverable: • Prepare public hearing packet including project background, goals for Implementation Strategy and preliminary changes to the C1, E-1, R-2 and R-3 zones. This packet will be refined based on input from the previous meetings (FA - City staff) • PowerPoint for Council adoption (FA) • Attend two meetings including Planning Commission and City Council public hearings (FA) 4 L L-43O L ~-&S L ~-6nV L~-Inf LL-unr LVKew 14-jdy r N M ef' ~ = p p a~ a~ O b4 Q 73 C cc sn. U) ou U U U'U O U O U U ~ p bq c~3 a U O p E O S= 73 U ~ G, U bA O .O L L. C an ° o°~ T o 0 o v~ - o C~j _ a Q. 73 73 U~U U~L at L. _ N M ~t ~n ~D oo &; U C ~C/~~n~ncn CA cn 'A un man by Q a o ° L ~ le}old=l 0OOOOOOOCD o I` I` d' 0 T 0 r- N LO N M ~ ~ M d• M I` d' M M NCflMMqT CO CO ~-00 M E9- 69- Ei4 64 6F} 6F} 69 69- 60- 60- 6g a~Sl~ 0 ~ 0 co co co d- ~r 0000 d- pine4 aoAor xa1y u~ asauo6aaj ~ Od'NCfl000000ON IlooS ~ 09CD asauo6aa~,°- N O N co ~ co (D 00 Q uuo~ 619- L m > 0 w M bA A-. Cl) to C • ~ by ~ ~ 0 0 a~ • N = tQ "TO N N ~ u N _O bA 7d sZ v1 0 o 0 ~-C~ o~ VD r C) > U O v U ~ ~ a~ ~ A.• U bA 0 ' ~ cu c > N Ate, t;,- 0 'cn co i O N v N O u= u O N m ri cri ~o ~ oo c N -0 ~~~-~4 ,1-s4~-,4 x Q a~ cd m cd cd c cd cd cd CL .(D L- L- o a a. i Council Business Meeting March 21, 2017' Title: Resolution Modifying Solid Waste Franchise Rates and Fees From: Adam Hanks Interim Assistant to the City Administrator Adam. Hanks@ashland. or. us Summary: Consistent with the 2013 solid waste franchise agreement, Recology Ashland is requesting a consumer price index (CPI) based rate increase for solid waste collection service fees. The CPI increase of 2.1 % would become effective April 1, 2017 and amounts to an increase of $.40 (40 cents) on a standard residential customer account. Actions, Options, or Potential Motions: I move to approve the resolution titled, "A resolution modifying solid waste franchise rates and fees" Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the CPI rate adjustment as proposed as it is consistent with the process and calculation prescribed in the October 2013 franchise agreement (Ord 3090) Resource Requirements: Recology Ashland estimates that the CPI adjustment will result in a monthly solid waste and recycling bill increase of $.40 (40 cents) for a typical residential customer, with total bill increases for commercial rate varying by size and frequency of service. The CPI adjustment does not impact the existing surcharge fee for the Recycle Center, which has been and continues to be $1.60 per month per account. Policies, Plans and Goals Supported: N/A BacklZround and Additional Information: A component of the 2013 Solid Waste franchise agreement with Recology Ashland was a rate adjustment methodology intended to provide the Franchisee an annual operating margin range of between eight and twelve percent. Recology Ashland has provided documentation (attached) that the projected 2017-18 rate year operating margin will fall below the eight percent operating margin range which triggers the Consumer Price Index (CPI) based rate increase to restore the franchise approved operating margin range. To meet the franchise agreement service rates and fees requirements set forth in Section 5.8 of Ordinance 3090 and Administrative Operations and Rules Resolution 2014-23, the attached Page 1 of 2 CITY OF ASHLAND resolution implements a 2.1 % rate increase based upon the CPI-U Portland-Salem index which returns the operating margin to 8.1 Attachments: Recology Ashland Rate Adjustment Request Packet Draft Solid Waste Rate Adjustment Resolution Page 2 of 2 C I T Y OF ASHLAND RESOLUTION NO. 2016- A RESOLUTION MODIFYING SOLID WASTE FRANCHISE RATES AND FEES RECITALS: A. The Solid Waste and Collections franchise agreement adopted by City Council as ordinance 3090 and associated Administrative Operations Standards and Rules most recently adopted by resolution 2014-23 provide a methodology for annual service rates adjustments. B. The City concurs with the documentation provided by Recology Ashland (Franchisee) that the rate increase provision of the ordinance and resolution dictates the approval of a service rate increase of 2.1 % based on the franchise established Consumer Price Index - All Urban Consumers (Portland-Salem) THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Effective April 1, 2017, Resolution 2016-01 is repealed in its entirety. SECTION 2. Effective April 1, 2017, solid waste and collection service rates increase by ~10 as detailed in the attached service rate table. S l io a, .1 Y6 This resolution was duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of , 2016, and takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of , 2016. John Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: David H. Lohman, City Attorney Resolution No. 2017- Page 1 of 1 ecol gy Ashland WASTE ZERO John Karns, Interim City Administrator City of Ashland 20 East Main Street Ashland, OR 97520 February 22, 2017 Dear Mr. Karns: Pursuant to Paragraph C (1) of Attachment A, City of Ashland Resolution No. 2013-32, we are formally submitting our request for a CPI rate increase of 2.1%, to be applied equally across all rate structures. This request is based on the most recent Consumer Price Index-All Urban Consumers--All Items- Portland-Salem (CPI-U). A copy of the most recent report, along with our accompanying financial statement and projections for 2017, is enclosed with this letter. The proposed CPI increase would become effective April 1, 2017. This rate increase amounts to an increase of $.40 (40 cents) per month for the typical residential customer. Please let us know if you have any questions. Sincerely, ~f 7-5-51 Gary Blake, General Manager Recology Ashland Inc. Encl. Cc: Tom Norris, Derek Ruckman, Adam Hanks U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS Western Information Office, 90 7th St., Suite 14-100, San Francisco, CA 94103 Information Staff (415) 625-2270 / Fax (415) 625-2351 PORTLAND-SALEM 01/19/17 Consumer Price Index, All Items, 1982-84=100 for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) SEMI-ANNUAL AVERAGE OVER-THE-YEAR PERCENT CHANGE ANNUAL ANNUAL YEAR 1st Half 2nd Half AVERAGE YEAR 1st Half 2nd Half AVERAGE 1989 119.3 121.6 120.4 1989 5.0 4.9 5.0 1990 124.9 129.8 127.4 1990 4.7 6.7 5.8 1991 132.8 135.1 133.9 1991 6.3 4.1 5.1 1992 138.8 140.9 139.8 1992 4.5 4.3 4.4 1993 143.6 145.8 144.7 1993 3.5 3.5 3.5 1994 147.7 150.1 148.9 1994 2.9 2.9 2.9 1995 152.5 153.9 153.2 1995 3.2 2.5 2.9 1996 157.2 160.0 158.6 1996 3.1 4.0 3.5 1997 162.6 165.5 164.0 1997 3.4 3.4 3.4 1998 166.1 168.1 167.1 1998 2.2 1.6 1.9 1999 170.8 174.4 172.6 1999 2.8 3.7 3.3 2000 176.4 179.5 178.0 2000 3.3 2.9 3.1 2001 181.2 183.6 182.4 2001 2.7 2.3 2.5 2002 183.5 184.0 183.8 2002 1.3 0.2 0.8 2003 186.0 186.5 186.3 2003 1.4 1.4 1.4 2004 189.8 192.5 191.1 2004 2.0 3.2 2.6 2005 194.5 197.5 196.0 2005 2.5 2.6 2.6 2006 199.8 202.5 201.1 2006 2.7 2.5 2.6 2007 206.653 210.460 208.556 2007 3.4 3.9 3.7 2008 214.619 216.159 215.389 2008 3.9 2.7 3.3 2009 214.102 217.191 215.647 2009 -0.2 0.5 0.1 2010 217.508 219.179 218.344 2010 1.6 0.9 1.3 2011 223.105 226.077 224.590 2011 2.6 3.1 2.9 2012 228.746 230.811 229.779 2012 2.5 2.1 2.3 2013 233.735 237.322 235.528 2013 2.2 2.8 2.5 2014 239.751 242.679 241.215 2014 2.6 2.3 2.4 2015 242.976 245.405 244.190 2015 1.3 1.1 1.2 2016 247.143 251.710 249.426 2016 1.7 2.6 2.1 Table of over-the-year percent increases. An entry for 2nd Half 2005 indicates the percentage increase from 2ndHalf 2004 to 2ndHalf 2005 (in this example 2.6 percent). City of Ashland Rate Application Rate Year 4-1-17 to 3-1-18 All Jurisdictions Ashland Actual Adjustments & Adjusted Adjusted Projected Projected Fiscal Unallowable Fiscal Allocation Fiscal Changes for Rate Year 2015-16 Expenses 2015-16 Type 2015-16 Rate Year 2017-18 Revenues Rate Adj% 2.1% Refuse collection 5,217,040 5,217,040 Actual 3,664,541 79,670 3,744,211 Rate Increase 37,957 37,957 Recycling 78,238 78,238 Yards 56,108 56,108 Other Operating Revenues 0 0 Yards 0 0 Revenue 5,295,279 5,295,279 31720,649 3,838,276 Expenses Labor and Related 1,974,519 1,974,519 Route Hours 1,474,337 (93,204) 1,381,133 Temp Labors & Subs 18,440 18,440 Route Hours 13,313 13,313 Insurance 144,788 144,788 Other 101,641 2,134 103,776 Disposal 1,257,430 1,257,430 Yards 879,811 32,943 912,753 Rent and Lease 42,986 42,986 Other 30,176 634 30,810 Supplies 64,308 64,308 Route Hours 461430 975 47,405 Franchise Fees & Surcharge 265,054 265,054 Actual 186,244 3,984 190,227 Repairs and Maint 109,045 109,045 Route Hours 78,731 (15,733) 62,998 Fuel and Oil 147,419 147,419 Route Hours 108,267 19,344 127,611 Building and Facility 4,421 4,421 Other 3,104 65 3,169 Licenses and permits 16,348 16,348 Route Hours 11,803 11,803 Utilities 4,913 4,913 Other 3,630 76 3,706 Freight 1,522 1,522 Route Hours 1,099 23 1,122 Cost of Goods Sold 10,445 10,445 Other 7,332 (7,332) 0 Professional Services 12,132 12,132 Other 8,517 (3,900) 4,617 Bad Debts 14,642 14,642 Other 10,278 10,278 Travel and Entertainment 34,821 34,821 Other 24,445 24,445 Office Expenses 101,241 (6,345) 94,896 Other 66,617 1,399 68,016 Taxes 18,096 18,096 Route Hours/Other 12,966 272 13,238 Regional/Local Allocations 72,691 72,691 Other 51,029 1,072 52,101 Other Operating 51,498 51,498 Other 36,151 759 36,911 Corporate Services 244,504 244,504 Other 171,642 3,604 175,246 Depreciation/Amortization 120,743 (119,055) 1,688 Other 1,185 744 1,929 (Gain)/Loss on Sale (2,989) 2,989 0 Other 0 0 I/C Equipment & Property 356,031 (55,047) 300,984 Route Hours 218,451 33,024 251,475 Interest 0 0 Other 0 0 Total Expenses 5,085,046 4,907,587 3,547,198 3,528,083 Net Income before Tax 210,233 387,691 173,450 310,194 Operating Margin 8.1% Rate Application 2017-18 Ashland 1 of 1 2/21/2017 12:32 PM Q rn Ln r\ m (.o Ln r~ c lO oo N (.0 lD M M M v m + O ri M O O o ° ° lfl ri oo ri m m rn oo r-i M N oq N rn u~ oo m oo lz~ O O O -p Ln Ln 00 to N lzl- -I O u1 ri lD Ln to N O lD ri M ri -zt O O O -O tom/) r-I a) O oo lD lzl- N M M M M M N rA to r, O M lD 00 O 00 t/) V) V) v O ri r-I N M Cr Cr ri r4 M LO lD r\ r-i M -zt Ln lD CO M N N O V) V) V) V) V) V) t/} tR t/) V) V) V) V} V) V) V) V) V) V) V) O \ CL O_ O O N L L \ O_ O_ N O N M M M M Ln m m Ql - .D O m Ln ri Ln O N 00 O O O O Ln M M O lD ri N ri N V' CF ri L.O lO r- lD N N M ri q O O m ~-i M Ol M ,T Ql lO 00 N Ln M O OO d' r,- O ri Ln d' O O O C O 00 lD M r-I 00 N N N N ri O 'IT LO rn N Ln rl 00 (.0 V) V) V) C V? Q) ri ri N M zt j- ri N M -zt Ln lO r- ri r,4 V Ln lO r, 0) Q) i V} V} t/} V,T V? to v)- t/) to tn to tn V) V) tn t4 tn to v} V} i U U ~ Y Y N a) X X X m ri r4 M C v w v v a) aj >N > NN dJ >N >N >4J N w w w w w w cD CO > Q)N QJ N QJ Q1 > > > > > > >N >4J N >QJ 4J >N >N O O O Q1 m x x X x x X X>> C 'U x x X x x x ri N M z' Ln lD r~ X X X X X X X - - - a) a y' ri r4 M 'It Ln lD -0 -O -0 -0 -0 -0 "0 e-1 N m lzt Ln lD r, u U U L L L L L L L L m ro co o a a } } } } } } } 0 ra ro co a 0 ra a ra o u O Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln } } } } } } v U e--I rl ri -i ri c i r-1 r-i c4 c-1 ri r4 r4 N N N N N N N N N N i= cn N N N M M M N M M M Ln Ln N m G♦" Ln l0 LD ri am 00 rl Ql 00 r- 'It O'zt M Ql O O O cn r'n M m On M M m Om M M m m M M m m~ N v) 00 N Ln 00 M r- O W Q) O ri O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x 0) 0 ri N rn v O N Kt lD oo O r-+ v r, o M lO r, Ln O Ln Ln O In LD N D) -p M Ln N 0) O Q) r-1 Kt lD 00 O N 00 N lD O Ln 1,0 N 00 Ln ri r, V} V) r-I rl V) r-I ri V) ri ri (1) r, ri lO r~ V) cn V) V) tn. V) ri r-1 V) V) r-1 ri (N N V) e i c-i (,q M M V) V) V)- t,)- V) th to ri N M Ln O V). V) V) V) V) V) V) V) V) V) V) O tn• V) tn• tn• O_ 0- 2 O N Ol In K4' O r,, a) Kt r- ri lD O lD r- M O r-I N lD OO lD Kt oO lD ~ ri Ln Ln LO Ln Ql 0, Kl- O lD N r- 'It lO r- Ol O N O r- ~t N Ol l0 N ri M Ln r-I M Ln N It L,D N Ln Ln e-i +-06 m O O ri ri rn O ri N Ln O ri m Ln lO oo r-~ Ln O Ln Ln O Ln lD N oo +O ri 4 r-~ O C ri m LD 0o O N m w N l0 O 1:11 (.0 N oo 1:T O l0 V). V) c-i r-i V) ri V) ri ri C r, ri Ln Co O V) if)- V) V) ri r-I t/) V? ri ri r14 N V) ri r-, N m M V) V) V) V? V} V) i1 ri N M Ln O i, V) V) t/) V) V) V) t/)- t/) V) V) V) L V) V} V) V) tn. U U U ~ O v N Ln N N r-I Y L SZ Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y ~ C o Q (U Q) v v aj as v v v C as 2a 2a 2a 2a 2a a 2(1) 2a V) N / ! J / J / l l iQ c a) x x x x x x x x x Q u ri r4 M ri N M r-I N M m Q O L- L L i L L L i i L + a7 V U U U U U U U U U 0D U cn w a ? a tY O 0 ~ C C C C C C C C C u o --Y ~ -',e ~e -~-e - f6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -Se v a) v v v v v v w w w v v v v v v v u v o v v v a) 7- v v v v i a) 41 41 O 0 aJ O O 4J 4J O Q) 41 C U U u U u u U u U U X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X J J J (Q ri r,4 M -z Ln lD ri r,4 M V Ln lO ri r,4 m -zt u) <D (7 K cc tY LY U.: LY U LY LY X L (1) Q1 a, a, u C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C O Q, a O- CL lY O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O _O O _O O CO i3. n -Q L L L L m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m O N N N N N N It IZT K:t V ct ":T lD CD lO lO lD lD lO N N N '~T cf d' lD lD lO } O Ln O Ln U M M M m M M lO lfl 1,0 CD l0 ID Ql Ol M a) M M M M M M (,D lO ID Q) Q) C D r~ e-I N N N N N N N CO ri c-i M Ql V CO ri O M N Kzr O N Ch 00 r-I 110 O ri 00 co O m m O M m r~ lz~ -i N N M ri ri O M L.D rl N M O O r* N 'ZI: rl~ D) Q) V ri O) 00 -Q M I~t r,4 O r1 CO r, N Ln Ln lD T N O -O v 0) r-I 00 -O lO r, ~t to 'O t 00 N W M O r, M O QJ ri N N lD V) V) V) V) V) V) V)- N Q) N N M Ln a) V) r-4 M Ln Q1 M lD O m r, r-I O O O 0 V) V) V) V? V) to n V) to V) +.R n V) V) V) n V) V) r-I ri N 1:T Ln LO r~ O O O O t!) t/) V) t/) t/) V') V) OL L1 L1 Q. O O O O N N r- 0) l0 O lO r- 00 00 ri a, r- O M r-I Ol O rt r- O 't r~ r~ Ln O Ol GL o0 Ln d' O lD N O ri r-I N O O O 00 O O O ^ LY) Ln q lD ri N 0) r- Ln M y oo m r-i m o 0o r, Lti Ln Ln to V Lei o m ai ~-i r, N lD m Ln +m r, o ct M r-i la r-i In C r-I N N M lD V) V) V) V) V) V) V) V) N C N N m Ln C lD (Y1 Ln C m l0 O m to O Ql Ql 00 a) V) V) V) t,) t,) t/) Q) in. V) ih V) QJ lD r-i m Ln Q) ri rH N ~t ~t Ln lp L L L V) V) V) V) L V) t/) 'V {I) 'V) V)' V). U U U U O ~ N U (n Ln Y L L (Q L L L (U N m u m O c9 ro (0 SZ U U U U a) a) L V) r0 C C C 0 C: a1 QJ le -le i m c O O O Q v ri L / Q1 (O a) ci U~ O C C U U U f0 u 4 m m u u O a s aj 'IT L -0 -O -0 -0 -0 m m m m Q) U ai Li :E C'4 N 1 ~ -O Q) N O\~ N 41 c0 ~ c0 0 m O O O O y m m _O ra v- u u u U Q) cj~ C) - L7 0 i ai w~ tz LA a, a) ~ 2i a ri r-I c n o 0 0 0 0 m co m O u O O ~ G O L L L L L Q) Q) Q) N y_, 76 -Fu C C C C C C C C C L10 G G C C Q) a) a) a) a) Q c- Q CL ~ C O O N O O O O O O O C Q m c C O O v u O_ a Q. Lz CL O Q O a Lu t0 f6 M M M M M M M M U , v U O O m m C 7 c0 C -a -a -6 -O -Q rLo cL0 rL0 r'o Q1 (7 C7 a (7 (7 (7 C7 C7 (7 C7 u a v (D (D L7 N E ra rn ra m ra Q) N N O'q lD N tO -0 N v tD a) -0 M Ln V O O\ O O } r r } Ln O Ln O m m Q lD m m m Q m lD m Q U ri N ri m (7 O-zt r-i m U -1 N c'n '~t oo ri N N M ~ c ra m Q Council Business Meeting March 21,2017 Award of a Professional Services Contract in excess of $75,000 for Title: Design of a 2.5 MGD Water Treatment Plant and a 2.6 MG Potable Water Reservoir From: Scott A. Fleury Engineering Services Manager Scott.fleuryC@-ashland.or.us Summary: Before the Council is award of contracts for professional engineering services with Keller Associates and RI-12 Engineering. The contracts are for preliminary engineering and analysis of a new 2.5 million gallon a day (MGD) water treatment plant and a 2.6 MG water treatment reservoir (tank) commonly known as Crowson II; Park Estates and Terrace St. pump station improvements; and peer review. The Council acts as the local contract review and approval board for formally solicited consultant services. Approval of the contracts will authorize staff to move forward with engineering per the approved scope of services. Actions, Options, or Potential Motions: • Move to approve a professional services contract with Keller Associates in the amount of $342,334 for the water treatment plant and Crowson 11 storage tank preliminary engineering phase 1. • Move to approve a professional services contract with Keller Associates in the amount of $48,703 for predesign engineering associated with Park Estates pump station improvements. • Move to approve a professional services contract with Keller Associates in the amount of $35,163 for predesign engineering associated with Terrace St. • Move to approve a professional services contract with RH2 in the amount of $68,380 to act as an owner's representative during preliminary engineering phase 1. Note: Staff has separated the Keller Associates contracts per project for improved tracking of invoicing in order to facilitate the loan reimbursement process with the IFA. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends the Council approve a professional services contract with Keller Associates for stage 1 preliminary engineering, Park Estates Pump Station Improvements and Terrace St. Pump Station Improvements. Staff recommends the Council approve a professional services contract with RH2 for the peer review of Keller Associates stage 1 preliminary engineering. Page 1 of 5 CITY OF ASHLAND i Resource Requirements: Funds to support the complete project are allocated in the current biennium and will be budgeted accordingly in the FYI 8/19 biennium. The negotiated costs for the Keller Associates preliminary contracts are as follows: 1. Preliminary engineering WTP/Crowson II $342,334* 2. Preliminary engineering Park Estates Pump Station $48,703* 3. Preliminary engineering Terrace St. Pump Station $35!1163* Total $426,200 The negotiated costs for RH2 peer review of all tasks for Keller Associates are as follows: 1. R112 68,380* *If approved all contracts will be on a time and materials not to exceed amount, per task as authorized by the City. The City of Ashland has obtained a low interest loan from the IFA for $14,811,865 at 1.79% to fund the engineering and construction of the water treatment plant. The City will seek a general obligation bond to fund the Crowson II storage tank project at a future date. The Council previously approved a funding resolution, on December 6, 2016, associated with the Crowson II storage tank project, reference attachment 5. Public Works staff will seek a bond obligation to cover costs associated with the Crowson II storage tank project. In addition, the City has a low interest loan from the IFA for $3,511,027 with $1,078,026 remaining to fund improvements to Terrace St. and Park Estates pump stations. This funding must be expensed by January of 2018 in order to stay in compliance with the loan requirements. The project will be managed and supported throughout the process by numerous public works staff representing a technical advisory group. Staff members include, Kevin Caldwell (project manager, Greg Hunter (treatment plant supervisor), Steve Walker (distribution supervisor), Michael Morrison (public works superintendent), Scott Fleury (engineering services manager) and other staff as needed. Keller Associates and Public Works staff will present information and technical documents regarding the water quality and treatment process selection along with the sitting evaluation to AWAC for review and recommendations that will then be presented before City Council before proceeding forward with final design engineering. Policies, Plans and Goals Supported: The projects presented above represent the development and subsequent Council approval of the 2012 Comprehensive Water Master Plan Update. The water master plan update was the culmination of a multiyear effort between Carollo Engineers, AWAC and city staff. Council Goals: 22. Prepare for the impact of climate change on the community. Page 2of5 C I T Y OF ASHLAND Administrative Goals: 30. Deliver timely life-cycle capital improvements. Background and Additional Information: Request for Proposal Process On August 9, 2016 a Qualifications Based Selection (QBS) Proposal for professional services for the water plant and storage tank design was advertised on the Oregon Procurement Information Network (ORPIN), in the Daily Journal of Commerce, the Mail Tribune, and posted on the City's website. A qualifications selection process entails selecting a consultant solely on their qualifications to perform the proposed scope of work. Once a consultant is selected a final scope and associated fee is developed. The QBS breaks the scope of work into three distinct phases for the water treatment plant and storage tank. • Contract Phase One - Preliminary Engineering • Contract Phase Two - Final Engineering, Permitting and Bidding Services • Contract Phase Three - Construction Engineering Services On September 27, 2016 the City of Ashland received four (4) proposals to provide engineering services for the development of the water treatment plant and storage tank. An approval team of Scott Fleury, Engineering Services Manager; Steve Walker, Water Distribution Supervisor; Greg Hunter, Water Treatment Plant Supervisor; Michael Morrison, Public Works Superintendent and Kevin Caldwell, Senior Project Manager completed a comprehensive review of the proposal. Each proposal was scored in accordance with the criteria listed in the Request for Proposal document. Scoring was conducted individually and independently by each team member with the scores totaled to determine the top ranked firm. The results of the scoring are as follows: CONSULTANT TOTAL SCORE RANK Keller Associates 458 1 Kennedy Jenks 456 2 RH2 Engineers 451 3 Carollo 441 4 Criteria Maximum Score Project Approach 20 Project Experience 20 Project Team Experience 20 Demonstrated Ability to Successfully Complete Projects On Time & Within Budget 20 Preliminary Design Project Sample 20 TOTAL 100 Points Page 3 of 5 CITY OF ASHLAND i After initial scoring was completed staff decided it was best to move forward with an interview of all four consultant firms as allowed in the selection process. Interviews were scheduled with consultant teams on November 8th and 9th, 2016. The staff interview team was identical to the team that graded the paper proposals from all consultants. Each interview lasted approximately two and a half hours and each consultant team was provided discussion topics in advance of the interview. The results of the interview scoring are as follows: CONSULTANT TOTAL SCORE RANK Keller Associates 467 1 RI-12 Engineers 451 2 Kennedy Jenks 437 3 Carollo 409 4 After determining the highest ranked proposer staff sent notice of intent to award a professional services contract to all proposers stating Keller Associates was the selected firm. Staff then entered into scope and fee negotiations with Keller Associates for the preliminary design of the treatment plant and Crowson II storage tank. Staff met with Keller and critical team members on December 7, 2016 to begin preliminary scope and fee negotiations for the project. Staff determined the best course of action to begin the preliminary engineering phase one, was to focus first on selection of a water plant treatment train and site evaluation. Through several discussions between staff and Keller, a final scope and fee was developed, reference attachment #1. The scope and fee includes engineering work associated with the water treatment plant and Crowson II storage tank. Major scope items for the Water Treatment Plant and Crowson II storage tank preliminary engineering design stage 1 include: • Evaluate existing Talent Irrigation Supply line for re-purposing as a raw water transmission line to new plant • Analyze two sites for location of treatment plant and Crowson II storage tank (Concrete Pit and Granite Pit) • Analyze offsite piping connections to distribution system • Evaluate sizing need of Crowson II storage tank • Water Quality Analysis and Treatment Process Selection • Public meetings with Ashland Water Advisory Committee (AWAC) and City Council In addition to the Keller and Associates scope and fee, the proposal documents made allowance for the second ranked proposer if they accepted, the ability to act as the owners (City) representative to assist in peer review of all documents generated as part of the preliminary and final engineering phases. Page 4of5 CITY OF ASHLAND i RH2 has agreed to support the City in this role and has provide their own scope and fee to act as the City's representative for an additional level of formal document/process review. Their scope and fee for preliminary engineering stage 1 and pump station improvement is referenced as attachment #4. Additional Enizineerin In addition, through the QBS negotiation process staff tasked Keller Associates with providing a scope of service for the preliminary design engineering for improvements to the Park Estates and Terrace St. pump stations. Engineering for these projects in conjunction with the water treatment plant and Crowson 11 reservoir is important as critical decisions for the projects moving forward are inherently linked. These pump stations were identified for improvement in the previously adopted master plan. These two pump stations are critical pieces of infrastructure within the distribution system and improvements to them have direct links with the engineering decision making process associated with development of the new plant and storage tank. Reference attachments 2 and 3 for the scope and fee breakdown for Park Estate and Terrace St. The QBS process and the City's request for proposal allow for flexibility in creating a final project scope through negotiation with the selected consultant and thus staff requests Council approve them as well. As required by the Infrastructure Financing Authority Loan (IFA) staff has forwarded all contract and scope documents to the City's regional loan coordinator for review and approval. The regional coordinator has approved all contract and scope documents referenced as attachments to this staff report. Attachments: 1. Keller Associates Stage 1 Preliminary Engineering Scope and Fee 2. Keller Associates Park Estates Pump Station Improvements Scope and Fee 3. Keller Associates Terrace St. Pump Station Improvements Scope and Fee 4. RI-12 Peer Review and Owners Representative Scope and Fee 5. Resolution #2016-31 Page 5of5 CITY OF ASHLAND i K ELL E R y associates 4 Exhibit D - SCOPE OF WORK WATER TREATMENT PLANT AND RESERVOIR PROJECT STAGE 1, PART 1 - WTP TREATMENT TRAIN SELECTION, SITE SELECTION, AND TID PIPELINE EVALUATION Date: March 14, 2017 Project Number: 2015-31 (KA#217002) Project Name: Ashland Water Treatment Plant and Reservoir PROJECT DESCRIPTION The City of Ashland (City) intends to construct a new 2.5 MGD water treatment plant (WTP) that can be expandable to 12 MGD in the future. The new WTP will treat water from two sources. The primary raw water source will be water from the City-owned Reeder Reservoir. The secondary source will be water from the Talent Irrigation District (TID). The City also desires to construct a new storage reservoir that would service the Crowson pressure zone and serve as the clearwell to the new WTP. The size and phasing of this new reservoir (Crowson II) will need to be determined. This project is anticipated to move forward in three stages, with Stage 1 including two parts. For Stage 1, the first part includes treatment train selection for the new WTP, conceptual site selection, and an evaluation for repurposing the TID supply pipeline; the second part includes additional predesign services for the new WTP. Stage 2 includes final engineering, permitting, and bidding services for the WTP and reservoir. Stage 3 will include construction phase engineering services for the WTP and reservoir. Services beyond Part 1 of Stage 1 will be procured through an amendment to this contract or through a separate contract. The project is funded in part through the Safe Drinking Water Revolving Loan Fund (SDWRLF) which is co- administered by the Oregon Business Development Department, Infrastructure Finance Authority (IFA), and the Oregon Health Authority Drinking Water Program (DWP). The portion of Stage I services to be completed by the Consultant are described in the following tasks. These services will be completed in coordination and with prior authorization by City staff. Task 1- Project Management, Meetings, Peer Review Consultant Responsibilities: 1.1 Provide general project administration services including contract administration, monthly invoicing, progress reports, and internal project administration. Progress reports will describe services completed for each task, and identify needs for additional information, reviews, or changes to the 217002 Engineering Solutions, Satisfied Clients Bend • Clarkston • Idaho Falls • Meridian • Pocatello • Rock Springs • Roseville • Salem Exhibit D - Scope of Work scope, schedule, and budget (if applicable). 1.2 Prepare project management plan including quality control plan. 1.3 Develop and manage project schedule. 1.4 Develop and manage project budget. 1.5 Establish and maintain a web-based document sharing system. 1.6 Participate in weekly coordination phone calls with the City's project manager. 1.7 Consultant shall attend up to three project meetings. These are anticipated to include a kickoff meeting and two progress meetings. Purpose of the meetings will be to develop and screen alternatives, evaluate alternatives against selection criteria, develop consensus of the preferred alternative, and receive input on draft documents. Consultant will prepare meeting agendas and produce meeting minutes. 1.8 Peer Review and Water Master Plan (WMP) Coordination. Consultant will coordinate with City staff and members of the peer review and WMP team. Coordination efforts are anticipated to be limited to 16 hours of coordination on reservoir sizing alternatives, plus responding to peer review comments on draft deliverables. No onsite meetings are anticipated. 1.9 Participate in up to two Ashland Water Advisory Committee (AWAC) meetings. The timing and content of these meetings will be determined by City staff and are anticipated to be coordinated with progress meetings where practical. 1.10 Prepare for and participate in up to one Ashland City Council meeting and one land use preapplication meeting. Consultant will provide appropriate presentation materials. City Responsibilities: 1.11 Coordinate with Peer Review and WMP team. 1.12 Provide notice and advertisement (if needed) and venue for meetings. Assumptions: 1.13 Project management budget assumes a predesign schedule of three months. 1.14 Should additional meetings be required, these will be provided as part of Task 6.1, Management Reserve. 1.15 Peer review comments will be provided at appropriate stages in the evaluation process so as not to require rework. To address master plan coordination requirements and peer review comments that are out of scope, the Management Reserve task will be utilized. 1.16 Funding administration services are being provided by others. 217002-000/a_ADMIN_CONTRACT Page 2 i Exhibit D - Scope of Work Deliverables: 1.17 Monthly progress reports and invoices. 1.18 Project management plan, quality control plan, and project schedule. 1.19 Web-based document sharing system. 1.20 Meeting agendas and meeting minutes. 1.21 Public meeting presentation materials. Task 2 - Data Collection/Review Consultant Responsibilities: 2.1 Consult with City to define and clarify City's requirements for the project and available data. 2.2 Prepare requests for information. Review existing information. Prepare recommendations for additional data collection. 2.3 Tour existing City facilities (anticipated to be coordinated with the kickoff meeting). 2.4 Provide direction on fieldwork to be completed by the City (e.g. potholing, sampling, and testing). 2.5 Review available LIDAR data and identify topographic and boundary surveying needs. 2.6 Geotechnical services will be provided by Applied Geotechnical Engineering and Geologic Consulting. This task includes review of available data and reports for proposed sites, complete site visit, and provide general observations and direction for subsequent geotechnical evaluations. City Responsibilities: 2.7 Provide information requested in a timely manner (generally within seven business days of request). 2.8 Assist with field testing as necessary (if available). Assumptions: 2.9 Consultant will rely on available record drawings, data, and field information provided by the City and subconsultants in completing predesign. Consultant will complete work within the engineering standard of care, making reasonable efforts to compare and check data provided by others, identifying where additional field work or investigations may be warranted, and identifying items that should be field verified in subsequent phases of the project. 2.10 Budget excludes surveying and geotechnical investigation services. 217002-000/a_ADMIN_CONTRACT Page 3 Exhibit D - Scope of Work Task 3 - Evaluate TID Supply and Plant Effluent Pipelines for Use as Raw Water Transmission to New WTP Consultant Responsibilities: 3.1 Evaluate existing pipeline conditions: a. Review City provided information on pipe construction record drawings, material, age, and condition. b. For the TID pipeline only, employ services of corrosion specialist to evaluate the condition of the pipeline at three locations to be exposed by the City. Findings will be summarized in a brief technical memorandum. c. For the TID pipeline only, coordinate with City who will collect two or three pipeline samples. Coordinate with testing lab to complete material testing and review findings. Tests to include mechanical/destructive tests. d. Assist the City by providing field test guidance to test the existing pipeline at higher pressures and quantify leakage. Also assist the City by providing guidance on how to check if there is thrust restraint at existing pipe bends. Review data provided by the City. e. Identify potential mitigation measures that could be taken for repurposing the pipelines and reduce the likelihood and consequence of failure. 3.2 Coordinate with City to check with Federal Energy Regulation Commission (FERC) licensing contact to see what (if any) requirements they may have to connect into the raw water line located upstream of the existing power generation facility. Prepare a draft memo that City can edit and forward to FERC to clarify FERC requirements. Purpose of the outreach will be to inquire if there are additional requirements to install a micro-hydro power generation facility on the flow that may be diverted upstream of the power plant to the new treatment plant, or if this permitting can be streamlined using the in-conduit exemption process. Another purpose of the outreach will be to inquire whether tapping the penstock or installing micro-hydro power would trigger an Oregon Water Resources Department (OWRD) water right or Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) fish screen/fish passage process. Incorporate FERC responses into technical memorandum. 3.3 Discuss potential risks of relying on the TID or plant effluent pipelines for greater than five to ten years as the long-term raw water delivery strategy. Develop concept that would allow the existing WTP's finish water transmission pipeline to be converted into the future raw water transmission pipeline for the new WTP. This evaluation will not include any field testing of the existing finish water pipeline beyond pressure testing described above. 3.4 Prepare a technical memorandum documenting findings and recommendations for repurposing of the TID and plant effluent pipelines. City Responsibilities: 3.5 Provide available information on TID and plant effluent pipeline construction, material, usage, failure history, and any known issues/concerns. 3.6 Field support, including exposing of water main, collecting soil and pipe samples (e.g. pipe coring), locating City utilities, and completing pressure and leak testing of TID pipeline. 217002-000/a_ADMIN_CONTRACT Page 4 Exhibit D - Scope of Work 3.7 Pay for transport and testing of samples. 3.8 Correspond with FERC contact. Assumptions:, 3.9 Scope assumes no permitting efforts, surveying, geotechnical, or micro-hydro power evaluations during this phase of the project. Deliverables: 3.10 Technical memorandum for repurposing the TID and plant effluent pipelines (draft and final). 3.11 Draft technical memorandum for potential FERC involvement. Task 4 Siting Study Consultant Responsibilities: 4.1 Document known potential restrictions or constraints that affect the plant and reservoir design. This includes a review of the previous 2006 siting study for Crowson II Reservoir. 4.2 Provide general information on site boundaries, ownership, geologic conditions, mapped wetlands, mapped flood zones, existing infrastructure, and access constraints. 4.3 Evaluate Granite and Concrete Pit Treatment Plant sites for the proposed WTP and Crowson II Reservoir. For both sites, consider two site layouts: 1) Low plant, and 2) high plant (gravity only) alternative. 4.4 Consider remediation requirements (identified by others) for the Concrete Pit Treatment Plant site. Consider geotechnical items identified in the preliminary geotechnical evaluation. 4.5 Identify offsite piping requirements needed to convey raw water to the proposed site and finish water and wastewater from the proposed site. 4.6 Consider site access, and develop conceptual site layouts. 4.7 Estimate the amount of earthwork at the Granite and Concrete Pit Treatment Plant sites, including the new water treatment plant and reservoir. 4.8 Evaluate space for expansion up to 12 MGD. 4.9 Identify benefits, drawbacks, and relative costs for each alternative. 4.10 Assist the City in evaluation and final selection of preferred site(s). Document results in a technical memorandum. 217002-000/a_ADMIN_CONTRACT Page 5 Exhibit D - Scope of Work City Responsibilities: 4.11 Provide input on known restrictions/constraints, as well as input on site selection criteria. 4.12 Provide input on acceptable rock excavation methods (e.g. blasting). Assumptions: 4.13 In evaluating comparative costs, estimates will assume representative tank and treatment approach based on City input (e.g. Type I prestressed tank and treatment plant with microfiltration, granular activated carbon (GAC), and chlorine disinfection). Cost estimates are AACE Class 5 estimates. Deliverables: 4.14 Technical memorandum (draft and final). Task 5 - Water Quality Analysis and Treatment Process Selection Consultant Responsibilities: 5.1 Review and summarize existing raw and finished water quality: a. Discuss with City the potential water quality changes associated with wholesale supplier, Medford. b. Develop recommendations for continued water quality sampling (especially TID source water). c. Document, with City input, the water quality challenges from Ashland Creek water supply (e.g. low alkalinity from snow melt, high turbidity from storm runoff, and algae in late summer). 5.2 Regulatory review and treated water quality goals: a. Review and document existing and anticipated regulations, objectives and critical design elements related to water quality, regulatory compliance, operations, longevity, and risks. b. Review existing treatability reports, historical water quality, regulatory compliance, and existing plant operational data for the last three years. c. Summarize historical plant performance including water quality, regulatory compliance, and plant performance parameters. d. Define plant operating and water quality goals for the new WTP. 5.3 Summarize design criteria and performance objectives for new WTP. 5.4 Discuss City preferences identified from City tours of operating facilities. 5.5 Discuss and evaluate individual treatment components: a. Pre-oxidation. i. Evaluate the need for pre-oxidation. ii. Evaluate alternative oxidants including chlorine dioxide, potassium permanganate, and ozone. b. Taste and odor control. i. Document taste and odor events. 217002-000/a_ADMIN_CONTRACT Page 6 Exhibit D - Scope of Work ii. Summarize HDR report on historical performance of powdered activated carbon (PAC) and make recommendations regarding use of PAC in new WTP. iii. For new plant, evaluate ozone oxidation, oxidation by ultraviolet lights coupled with hydrogen peroxide, and adsorption by GAC. c. Disinfection and disinfection byproduct control. i. Evaluate alternative forms of disinfection including chlorine, ozone, and ultraviolet light. ii. Compare the costs and benefits of options including compliance with the D/DBP Rule. iii. Review regulatory compliance and long-term compliance with LT2ESWTR. e. Rapid mixing and flocculation. i. Evaluate options. ii. Evaluate hydraulics. f Type of filtration. i. Evaluate four alternatives: 1) membrane filtration, 2) direct filtration with standard rates, 3) direct filtration with high loading rates, and 4) biological filtration. P_ Residuals handling and disposal. h. Wash water and plant drains. i. Cleaning wastes if membrane filtration is selected. j. Evaluate two alternative approaches for increasing plant recovery. k. Chemical options, storage and feed systems: i. Preoxidant. ii. Corrosion control. iii. Coagulant and polymer. iv. Chlorine (bulk). V. Ozone. vi. Dechlorination. vii. For membrane filtration, also consider chemical cleaning and neutralization systems and additional potential chemicals including citric acid and sodium hydroxide. 5.6 Describe and evaluate up to three complete treatment process train alternatives: a. Prepare class 5 cost comparisons. b. Consider relative carbon footprint and sustainability of each alternative (qualitative analysis). c. Evaluate potential impacts to water quality in the distribution system, and compatibility with Medford wholesale water, with each process train. d. Collaborate with City staff to evaluate alternatives and select the preferred alternative. e. Document the selection results in a decision matrix and narrative discussion. The selection matrix will be developed with City input and include elements such as capital costs, operations and maintenance, carbon footprint/sustainability, distribution water quality impacts, and reliability. 5.7 Evaluate the potential for an expanded initial capacity for 5 MGD, 7.5 MGD, and 12 MGD. Identify approximate footprints and associated potential siting implications. Site layouts are not required. City Responsibilities: 5.8 Provide available water quality data and previous reports documenting water quality and treatment evaluations. Provide additional water quality sampling and testing as needed. 5.9 City will arrange and participate in tours of other WTP plants as needed. 5.10 Provide input on design criteria and performance criteria. 5.11 Provide input on selection criteria and participate in decision-making process. 217002-000/a_ADMIN_CONTRACT Page 7 Exhibit D - Scope of Work Assumptions: 5.12 No planning, design, or construction work is anticipated within Reeder Reservoir, at the dam, or with the existing intake as part of this project. Variable depth sampling and evaluation of Reeder Reservoir as well as evaluation of Reeder Reservoir treatment strategies are not included in this Scope of Work. 5.13 No sampling from the existing distribution system or TAP point-of-entry will be conducted as City's existing datasets are assumed to be adequate and comprehensive. 5.14 A review of distribution system water quality impacts will not be completed as part of this scope of work. 5.15 Bench testing and pilot testing is not included as part of this task. 5.16 The City has standardized around bulk chlorination and alternative forms of chlorination (e.g. onsite generation and gas chlorination) will not be evaluated. 5.17 Because of site constraints, solids will be discharged to sewer, and solids handling facilities will not be constructed at the new WTP site. 5.18 Carbon footprint calculations will not be completed for the alternatives, but the relative impact in terms of carbon footprint and consistency with City sustainability goals will be considered. 5.19 Provisions for adding fluoride to the water will not be considered. 5.20 Cost estimates will be AACE Class 5 estimates. Deliverables: 5.21 Technical memorandum (draft and final). Task 6 -Additional Services Consultant shall complete other additional services listed below only as authorized by City staff: 6.1 Additional services as required by the City of Ashland in performance of approved scope of services. SCHEDULE Consultant intends on completing Stage 1, Part 1 as outlined above within three months of Notice to Proceed. This schedule assumes timely City review, data collection, and coordination for AWAC and City meetings. Refer to Exhibit D.1 for a preliminary project schedule. 217002-000/a_ADMIN_CONTRACT Page 8 Exhibit D - Scope of Work COMPENSATION SCHEDULE Consultant will complete the services on a time and materials basis per the current title code billing rates (Refer to Exhibit D.2 for the 2017 rates). While the individual task amounts may be exceeded, the total authorized amount will not be exceeded without written approval from the City. Task Description Compensation 1 Project Management, Meetings, Peer $65,206 Review 2 Data Collection/Review $12,805 3 Evaluate TID Supply and Plant Effluent $38,035 Pipelines for Use as Raw Water Transmission to New WTP 4 Siting Study $56,575 5 Water Quality Analysis and Treatment $139,713 Process Selection 6 Additional Services $30,000 TOTAL $342,334 217002-000/a_ADMIN_CONTRACT Page 9 i ID Task Name Duration Start Finish June 5/28 6L4 6/11 6/18 1 Notice to Proceed 0 days Wed 3/22/17 Wed 3/22/17 2 Council Authorization 0 days Tue 3/21/17 Tue 3/21/17 1 wk Wed 3/22/17 Tue 3/28/17 3 'Execute Subcontracts 4 1 Proj Mgmt, Meetings, Review 64 days Wed 3/22/17 Tue 6/20/17 3 mons Wed 3/22/17 Tue 6/13/17 5 1.1 Proj Mgmt (ongoing) 6 1.2 Proj Mgmt Plan 2 wks Wed 3/22/17 Tue 4/4/17 7 1.3 Schedule (ongoing) 3 mons Wed 3/22/17 Tue 6/13/17 8 1.4 Budget (ongoing) 3 mons Wed 3/22/17 Tue 6/13/17 9 1.5 Web based document system 2 wks Wed 3/22/17 Tue 4/4/17 10 1.6 Weekly coordination calls 3 mons Wed 3/22/17 Tue 6/13/17 11 1.7 First Project Meeting (Kickoff) 0 days Tue 4/4/17 Tue 4/4/17 12 1.7 Second Project Meeting 0 days Tue 4/25/17 Tue 4/25/17 13 1.7 Third Project Meeting 0 days Tue 5/23/17 Tue 5/23/17 14 1.8 Peer review coordination meeting 0 days Tue 6/6/17 Tue 6/6/17 6/6 15 1.8 Peer review / owner review 1 wk Wed 5/31/17 Tue 6/6/17 16 1.9 First AWAC meeting 0 days Tue 4/25/17 True 4/25/17 17 1.9 Second AWAC meeting 0 days Tue 5/23/17 Tue 5/23/17 18 1.10 One council meeting 0 days Tue 6/20/17 Tue 6/20/17 6/20 19 1.10 One land use pre-app mtg 0 days Tue 4/4/17 Tue 4/4/17 20 2 Data Collection / Review 15 days Wed 3/22/17 Tue 4/11/17 21 2.1 Clarify requirements 1 wk Wed 3/22/17 Tue 3/28/17 22 2.2 Request for information 1 wk Wed 3/22/17 Tue 3/28/17 23 2.3 Tour Facilities 0 days Tue 4/4/17 Tue 4/4/17 24 2.4 Guide field work 1 wk Wed 4/5/17 Tue 4/11/17 25 2.5 Lidar data 1 wk Wed 4/5/17 Tue 4/11/17 26 2.6 Geotech review 1 wk Wed 4/5/17 Tue 4/11/17 27 '3 Evaluate TID and Plant Eff pipelines 40 days Wed 3/22/17 Tue 5/16/17 28 3.1 Evaluate existing Conditions 4 wks Wed 3/22/17 Tue 4/18/17 29 3.2 Coordinate with FERC / Permitting 1 wk Wed 4/19/17 Tue 4/25/17 30 3.3 Describe risks, connection concepts 1 wk Wed 4/26/17 Tue 5/2/17 31 3.4 Prepare tech memo 2 wks Wed 5/3/17 Tue 5/16/17 59 days Wed 3/22/17 Mon 6/12/17 32 4 Siting study 33 4.1 Document constraints 1 wk Wed 3/22/17 Tue 3/28/17 34 4.2 Research / map site conditions 2 wks Wed 3/22/17 Tue 4/4/17 35 4.3 Evaluate two elevations at each site 1 wk Wed 4/5/17 Tue 4/11/17 36 4.4 Coordinate site contamination / 1 wk Wed 4/12/17 Tue 4/18/17 geotech 37 4.5 Identify off-site piping 1 wk Wed 4/12/17 Tue 4/18/17 38 4.6 Develop example layouts 2 wks Wed 4/19/17 Tue 5/2/17 39 4.7 Estimate earthwork 1 wk Wed 5/3/17 Tue 5/9/17 40 4.8 Evaluate expansion potential 1 wk Wed 5/3/17 Tue 5/9/17 41 4.9 Evaluate alternatives 1 wk Wed 5/10/17 Tue 5/16/17 42 4.10 Assist city in selection; prepare Draft 2 wks Wed 5/17/17 Tue 5/30/17 TM 43 4.10 Prepare Final TM 1 wk Tue 6/6/17 Mon 6/12/17 44 5 Water Quality and Treatment 59 days Wed 3/22/17 Mon 6/12/17 45 5.1 Review exist water quality 1 wk Wed 3/29/17 Tue 4/4/17 46 5.2 Regulatory review, treatment goals 1 wk Wed 4/5/17 Tue 4/11/17 47 5.3 Design criteria / objectives 1 wk Wed 4/12/17 Tue 4/18/17 48 5.4 Input from tours 1 wk Wed 4/12/17 Tue 4/18/17 49 5.5 Evaluate treatment components 5 wks Wed 3/22/17 Tue 4/25/17 50 5.6 Develop / evaluate process trains 3 wks Wed 4/26/17 Tue 5/16/17 51 5.7 Evaluate expanded capacities 2 wks Wed 5/17/17 Tue 5/30/17 52 5.7 Prepare Draft TM 1 wk Wed 5/24/17 Tue 5/30/17 53 5.7 Prepare Final TM 1 wk Tue 6/6/17 Mon 6/12/17 54 6 Additional Services TBD 3 mons Wed 3/22/17 Tue 6/13/17 55 Prepare Preliminary Design Scope / Budget 1 wk Mon 5/1/17 Fri 5/5/17 56 Review / Revise with City 4 wks Mon 5/8/17 Fri 6/2/17 57 Scope / Budget to Council Packet 0 days Fri 6/9/17 Fri 6/9/17 6/9 58 Council Authorization - Pre Design 0 days Tue 6/20/17 Tue 6/20/17 6/20 Project: 2017.01.20 Ashland_W Task Milestone gress Date: Tue 3/14/17 Split Summary Deadline Manual Pro Progress Exhibit D.2 KELLER ASSOCIATES, Inc. 2017 TITLE CODE BILLING RATES 2017 Personnel Classification Hourly Rate Project Engineer - I (El) $85.00 - $100.00 Project Manager - I (PE) $120.00 - $155.00 Project Engineer - II (PE) $110.00 - $185.00 Project Manager - II (PE) $160.00 - $190.00 CAD -1 $80.00 - $100.00 CAD -11 $110.00 - $145.00 Engineering Student $65.00 Principal (PE) $210.00 - $225.00 Chief Engineer/Structural Engineer (PE, SE, PLS) $225.00 Senior Water Treatment Engineering $210.00 Structural Engineer - I (PE, SE) $155.00 Electrical Engineer - I (PE) $150.00 Electrical Technician $75.00 Professional Surveyor (PLS) $145.00 Surveyor $75.00 - $100.00 Field Representative $75.00 - $120.00 Clerical & Administration $65.00 - $85.00 Other Billing Terms Mileage: Billed at Federal Rate (currently $0.535 per mile) Per Diem: $60.00 per day Subconsultants at Cost x 1.10 Reimbursable Expenses at Cost x 1.05 The Title Code Billing Rates are effective January 1, 2017 and will be adjusted each January of subsequent years New employees may be added throughout the year CONFIDENTIAL KELLASS-01 NWEISER ATE (MM/DD/YYYY) ACORD E02/02/2017 CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AFFIRMATIVELY OR NEGATIVELY AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. THIS CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE ISSUING INSURER(S), AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OR PRODUCER, AND THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. IMPORTANT: If the certificate holder is an ADDITIONAL INSURED, the policy(ies) must have ADDITIONAL INSURED provisions or be endorsed. If SUBROGATION IS WAIVED, subject to the terms and conditions of the policy, certain policies may require an endorsement. A statement on this certificate does not confer rights to the certificate holder in lieu of such endorsement(s). PRODUCER CONTACT NAME: The Hartwell Corporation PHONE FAX PO Box 400 (A/C, No, Ext): (208) 459-1678 (A/C, No):(208) 454-1114 Caldwell, ID 83606 ADDRESS: nancy@thehartwelicorp.com I INSURERS AFFORDING COVERAGE NAIC # INSURER A: Travelers Indemnity Co of Am. 25658 INSURED INSURER B : Travelers Indemnity Co 25666 Keller Associates, Inc. INSURER C : Travelers Casualty and Surety 31194 131 SW 5th Ave, Ste A INSURER D : XL Specialty Insurance Co. 37885 Meridian, ID 83642 INSURER E INSURER F : COVERAGES CERTIFICATE NUMBER: REVISION NUMBER: THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. INSR TYPE OF INSURANCE ADDL SUBR POLICY NUMBER POLICY EFF POLICY EXP LIMITS LTR IN SD WVD MM/DD/YYYY MM/DD/YYYY A X COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY EACH OCCURRENCE $ 1,000,000 I 11 CLAIMS-MADE X OCCUR 680-4H953952 12101/2016 12/01/2017 DAMAGE TO RENTED 1,000,000 X PREMISES Ea occurrence $ X CGD381 MED EXP An one person) $ 10,000 PERSONAL & ADV INJURY $ 1,000,000 1 2,000,000 GEN'L AGGREGATE LIMIT APPLIES PER: GENERAL AGGREGATE 1 $ POLICY JE~ E LOC PRODUCTS - COMP/OP AGG $ 2,000,000 OTHER: $ B AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY (Ea acccidentSINGLE LIMIT $ 1 000,000 X ANY AUTO X BA-78771_468 12/0112016 12/01/2017 BODILY INJURY Per person) $ _ OWNED SCHEDULED AUTOS ONLY AUTOS BODILY INJURY Per accident $ HIRED NON-OWNED PROPERTY DAMAGE AUTOS ONLY AUTOS ONLY Per accident $ X CAT353 $ 4,000,000 C X UMBRELLA LIAB X OCCUR EACH OCCURRENCE $ EXCESS LIAB CLAIMS-MADE CUP-8961X179 12/01/2016 12101/2017 AGGREGATE $ 4,000,000 DED X RETENTION $ 10,000 $ C WORKERS COMPENSATION X PER H- AND EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY STATUTE ER Y/ N UB-9722YO81 12/01/2016 12101/2017 1,000,000 ANY PROPRIETOR/PARTNE:R/EXECUTIVE N N / A E.L. EACH ACCIDENT $ OFFICER/MEMBER EXCLUDED? (Mandatory in NH) E.L. DISEASE - EA EMPLOYE $ 1'000'000 If yes, describe under 1,000,000 DESCRIPTION OF OPERA--IONS below E.L. DISEASE - POLICY LIMIT $ D Professional Liabili DPR9909212 12/01/2016 12101/2017 Each Claim 2,000,000 D $100,000 deductible DPR9909212 12/01/2016 12/01/2017 Aggregate 2,000,000 DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS / LOCATIONS / VEHICLES (ACORD 101, Additional Remarks Schedule, may be attached if more space is required) CERTIFICATE HOLDER CANCELLATION SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE City of Ashland, Public Works THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, NOTICE WILL BE DELIVERED IN Y ACCORDANCE WITH THE POLICY PROVISIONS. 20 E Main Street Ashland, OR 97520 AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE ACORD 25 (2016/03) © 1988-2015 ACORD CORPORATION. All rights reserved. The ACORD name and logo are registered marks of ACORD COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY THIS ENDORSEMENT CHANGES THE POLICY. PLEASE READ IT CAREFULLY. BLANKET ADDITIONAL INSURED (ARCHITECTS, ENGINEERS AND SURVEYORS) This endorsement modifies insurance provided under the following: COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY COVERAGE PART 1. The following is added to SECTION II - WHO IS h. This insurance does not apply to "bodily AN INSURED: injury" or "property damage" caused by "your Any person or organization that you agree in a work" and included in the "products- "written contract requiring insurance" to include as completed operations hazard" unless the an additional insured on this Coverage Part, but: "written contract requiring insurance" specifically requires you to provide such a. Only with respect to liability for "bodily injury", coverage for that additional insured, and then "property damage" or "personal injury"; and the insurance provided to the additional b. If, and only to the extent that, the injury or insured applies only to such "bodily injury" or damage is caused by acts or omissions of "property damage" that occurs before the end you or your subcontractor in the performance of the period of time for which the "written of "your work" to which the "written contract contract requiring insurance" requires you to requiring insurance" applies, or in connection provide such coverage or the end of the with premises owned by or rented to you. policy period, whichever is earlier. The person or organization does not qualify as an 2. The following is added to Paragraph 4.a. of additional insured: SECTION IV - COMMERCIAL GENERAL c. With respect to the independent acts or LIABILITY CONDITIONS: omissions of such person or organization; or The insurance provided to the additional insured d. For "bodily injury", "property damage" or is excess over any valid and collectible other "personal injury" for which such person or insurance, whether primary, excess, contingent or organization has assumed liability in a on any other basis, that is available to the additional insured for a loss we cover. However, if contract or agreement. you specifically agree in the "written contract The insurance provided to such additional insured requiring insurance" that this insurance provided is limited as follows: to the additional insured under this Coverage Part must apply on a primary basis or a primary and e. This insurance does not apply on any basis to non-contributory basis, this insurance is primary any person or organization for which to other insurance available to the additional coverage as an additional insured specifically insured which covers that person or organizations is added by another endorsement to this as a named insured for such loss, and we will not Coverage Part. share with the other insurance, provided that: f. This insurance does not apply to the (1) The "bodily injury" or "property damage" for rendering of or failure to render any which coverage is sought occurs; and "professional services". (2) The "personal injury" for which coverage is g. In the event that the Limits of Insurance of the sought arises out of an offense committed; Coverage Part shown in the Declarations exceed the limits of liability required by the after you have signed that "written contract "written contract requiring insurance", the requiring insurance". But this insurance provided insurance provided to the additional insured to the additional insured still is excess over valid shall be limited to the limits of liability required and collectible other insurance, whether primary, by that "written contract requiring insurance". excess, contingent or on any other basis, that is This endorsement does not increase the available to the additional insured when that limits of insurance described in Section III - person or organization is an additional insured Limits Of Insurance. under any other insurance. CG D3 81 09 15 © 2015 The Travelers Indemnity Company. All rights reserved. Page 1 of 2 Includes the copyrighted material of Insurance Services Office, Inc., with its permission i COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY 3. The following is added to Paragraph 8., Transfer 4. The following definition is added to the Of Rights Of Recovery Against Others To Us, DEFINITIONS Section: of SECTION IV - COMMERCIAL GENERAL "Written contract requiring insurance" means that LIABILITY CONDITIONS: part of any written contract under which you are We waive any right of recovery we may have required to include a person or organization as an against any person or organization because of additional insured on this Coverage Part, payments we make for "bodily injury", "property provided that the "bodily injury" and "property damage" or "personal injury" arising out of "your damage" occurs and the "personal injury" is work" performed by you, or on your behalf, done caused b an offense committed: under a "written contract requiring insurance" with by that person or organization. We waive this right a. After you have signed that written contract; only where you have agreed to do so as part of b. While that part of the written contract is in the "written contract requiring insurance" with effect; and such person or organization signed by you before, and in effect when, the "bodily injury" or c. Before the end of the policy period. "property damage" occurs, or the "personal injury" offense is committed. Page 2 of 2 © 2015 The Travelers Indemnity Company. All rights reserved. CG D3 81 09 15 Includes the copyrighted material of Insurance Services Office, Inc., with its permission COMMERCIAL AUTO THIS ENDORSEMENT CHANGES THE POLICY. PLEASE READ IT CAREFULLY. BUSINESS AUTO EXTENSION ENDORSEMENT This endorsement modifies insurance provided under the following: BUSINESS AUTO COVERAGE FORM GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF COVERAGE - This endorsement broadens coverage. However, coverage for any injury, damage or medical expenses described in any of the provisions of this endorsement may be excluded or limited by another endorsement to the Coverage Part, and these coverage broadening provisions do not apply to the extent that coverage is excluded or limited by such an endorsement. The following listing is a general cover- age description only. Limitations and exclusions may apply to these coverages. Read all the provisions of this en- dorsement and the rest of your policy carefully to determine rights, duties, and what is and is not covered. A. BROAD FORM NAMED INSURED H. HIRED AUTO PHYSICAL DAMAGE - LOSS OF B. BLANKET ADDITIONAL INSURED USE - INCREASED LIMIT 1. PHYSICAL DAMAGE - TRANSPORTATION C. EMPLOYEE HIRED AUTO EXPENSES - INCREASED LIMIT D. EMPLOYEES AS INSURED J. PERSONAL PROPERTY E. SUPPLEMENTARY PAYMENTS - INCREASED K. AIRBAGS LIMITS L. NOTICE AND KNOWLEDGE OF ACCIDENT OR F. HIRED AUTO - LIMITED WORLDWIDE COV- LOSS ERAGE - INDEMNITY BASIS M. BLANKET WAIVER OF SUBROGATION G. WAIVER OF DEDUCTIBLE - GLASS N. UNINTENTIONAL ERRORS OR OMISSIONS PROVISIONS A. BROAD FORM NAMED INSURED this insurance applies and only to the extent that The following is added to Paragraph A.1., Who Is person or organization qualifies as an "insured" An Insured, of SECTION II - COVERED AUTOS under the Who Is An Insured provision contained LIABILITY COVERAGE: in Section II. Any organization you newly acquire or form dur- C. EMPLOYEE HIRED AUTO ing the policy period over which you maintain 1. The following is added to Paragraph A.1., 50% or more ownership interest and that is not Who Is An Insured, of SECTION II - COV- separately insured for Business Auto Coverage. ERED AUTOS LIABILITY COVERAGE: ° Coverage under this provision is afforded only un- An "employee" of yours is an "insured" while til the 180th day after you acquire or form the or- operating an "auto" hired or rented under a ganization or the end of the policy period, which- contract or agreement in an "employee's" ever is earlier. name, with your permission, while performing duties related to the conduct of your busi- B. BLANKET ADDITIONAL INSURED ness. m The following is added to Paragraph c. in A.1., 2. The following replaces Paragraph b. in 8.5., Who Is An Insured, of SECTION II - COVERED Other Insurance, of SECTION IV - BUSI- AUTOS LIABILITY COVERAGE: NESS AUTO CONDITIONS: Any person or organization who is required under b. For Hired Auto Physical Damage Cover- a written contract or agreement between you and age, the following are deemed to be cov- that person or organization, that is signed and ered "autos" you own: executed by you before the "bodily injury" or (1) Any covered "auto" you lease, hire, "property damage" occurs and that is in effect rent or borrow; and during the policy period, to be named as an addi- (2) Any covered "auto" hired or rented by tional insured is an "insured" for Covered Autos your "employee" under a contract in Liability Coverage, but only for damages to which an "employee's" name, with your CA T3 53 02 15 n 2015 The Travelers Indemnity company. All rights reserved. Page 1 of 4 Includes copyrighted material of Insurance Services Office, Inc. with its permission. 002192 COMMERCIAL AUTO permission. while performing duties (a) With respect to any claim made or "suit" related to the conduct of your busi- brought outside the United States of ness. America, the territories and possessions However. any "auto" that is leased, hired. of the United States of America. Puerto rented or borrowed with a driver is not a Rico and Canada: covered "auto". (i) You must arrange to defend the "in- D. EMPLOYEES AS INSURED sured" against, and investigate or set- tle any such claim or "suit" and keep The following is added to Paragraph A.1.. Who Is us advised of all proceedings and An Insured, of SECTION II - COVERED AUTOS ac- tions. LIABILITY COVERAGE: (ii) Neither you nor any other involved Any "employee" of yours is an "insured" while us- "insured" will make any settlement ing a covered "auto" you don't own, hire or borrow without our consent. in your business or your personal affairs. E. SUPPLEMENTARY PAYMENTS -INCREASED (iii) We may, at our discretion, participate in defending the "insured" against, or LIMITS in the settlement of, any claim or 1. The following replaces Paragraph A.2.a.(2), "suit". of SECTION II - COVERED AUTOS LIABIL- (iv) We will reimburse the "insured" for ITY COVERAGE: sums that the "insured" legally must (2) Up to $3,000 for cost of bail bonds (in- pay as damages because of "bodily cluding bonds for related traffic law viola- injury" or "property damage" to which tions) required because of an "accident" this insurance applies, that the "in- we cover. We do not have to furnish sured" pays with our consent, but these bonds. only up to the limit described in Para- 2. The following replaces Paragraph A.2.a.(4), graph C.. Limits Of Insurance, of of SECTION II - COVERED AUTOS LIABIL- SECTION II - COVERED AUTOS ITY COVERAGE: LIABILITY COVERAGE. (4) All reasonable expenses incurred by the (v) We will reimburse the "insured" for "insured" at our request, including actual the reasonable expenses incurred loss of earnings up to $500 a day be- with our consent for your investiga- cause of time off from work. tion of such claims and your defense of the "insured" against any such F. HIRED AUTO - LIMITED WORLDWIDE COV- "suit but only up to and included ERAGE - INDEMNITY BASIS within the limit described in Para- The following replaces Subparagraph (5) in Para- graph C., Limits Of Insurance, of graph B.7., Policy Period, Coverage Territory, SECTION II - COVERED AUTOS of SECTION IV - BUSINESS AUTO CONDI- LIABILITY COVERAGE, and not in TIONS: addition to such limit. Our duty to (5) Anywhere in the world, except any country or make such payments ends when we jurisdiction while any trade sanction, em- have used up the applicable limit of bargo, or similar regulation imposed by the insurance in payments for damages, United States of America applies to and pro- settlements or defense expenses. hibits the transaction of business with or (b) This insurance is excess over any valid within such country or jurisdiction. for Cov- and collectible other insurance available ered Autos Liability Coverage for any covered to the "insured" whether primary, excess. "auto" that you lease, hire, rent or borrow contingent or on any other basis. without a driver for a period of 30 days or less (c) This insurance is not a substitute for re- and that is not an "auto" you lease, hire, rent or barrow from any of your "employees", quired or compulsory insurance in any country outside the United States. its ter- partners (if you are a partnership), members ritories and possessions, Puerto Rico and (if you are a limited liability company) or Canada. members of their households. Page 2 of 4 U 2015 The Travelers Indemnity Company All rights reserved. CA T3 53 02 15 Includes copyrighted material of Insurance Services Office, Inc with its permission COMMERCIAL AUTO You agree to maintain all required or (2) In or on your covered "auto". compulsory insurance in any such coun- This coverage applies only in the event of a total try up to the minimum limits required by theft of your covered "auto". local law. Your failure to comply with No deductibles apply to this Personal Property compulsory insurance requirements will not invalidate the coverage afforded by coverage. this policy, but we will only be liable to the K. AIRBAGS same extent we would have been liable The following is added to Paragraph B.3., Exclu- had you complied with the compulsory in- sions, of SECTION III - PHYSICAL DAMAGE surance requirements. COVERAGE: (d) it is understood that we are not an admit- Exclusion 3.a. does not apply to "loss" to one or ted or authorized insurer outside the more airbags in a covered "auto" you own that in- United States of America, its territories flate due to a cause other than a cause of "loss" and possessions, Puerto Rico and Can- set forth in Paragraphs A.1.b. and A.1.c., but ada. We assume no responsibility for the only: furnishing of certificates of insurance, or a. If that "auto" is a covered "auto" for Compre- for compliance in any way with the laws hensive Coverage under this policy; of other countries relating to insurance. b. The airbags are not covered under any war- G. WAIVER OF DEDUCTIBLE - GLASS ranty; and The following is added to Paragraph D., Deducti- c. The airbags were not intentionally inflated. ble, of SECTION III - PHYSICAL DAMAGE We will pay up to a maximum of $1,000 for any COVERAGE: one "loss". No deductible for a covered "auto" will apply to L. NOTICE AND KNOWLEDGE OF ACCIDENT OR glass damage if the glass is repaired rather than LOSS replaced. The following is added to Paragraph A.2.a., of H. HIRED AUTO PHYSICAL DAMAGE LOSS OF SECTION IV - BUSINESS AUTO CONDITIONS: USE - INCREASED LIMIT Your duty to give us or our authorized representa- The following replaces the last sentence of Para- tive prompt notice of the "accident" or "loss" ap- graph A.4.b., Loss Of Use Expenses, of SEC- plies only when the "accident" or "loss" is known TION III - PHYSICAL DAMAGE COVERAGE: to: However, the most we will pay for any expenses (a) You (if you are an individual); for loss of use is $65 per day, to a maximum of (b) A partner (if you are a partnership); $750 for any one "accident". (c) A member (if you are a limited liability com- I. PHYSICAL DAMAGE - TRANSPORTATION pang); EXPENSES - INCREASED LIMIT (d) An executive officer, director or insurance ° The following replaces the first sentence in Para- manager (if you are a corporation or other or- graph A.4.a., Transportation Expenses, of ganization); or SECTION III PHYSICAL DAMAGE COVER- (e) Any "employee" authorized by you to give no- AGE: tice of the "accident" or "loss". We will pay up to $50 per day to a maximum of M. BLANKET WAIVER OF SUBROGATION $1,500 for temporary transportation expense in- The following replaces Paragraph A.5., Transfer curred by you because of the total theft of a cov- Of Rights Of Recovery Against Others To Us, ered "auto" of the private passenger type. of SECTION IV - BUSINESS AUTO CONDI- J. PERSONAL PROPERTY TIONS: The following is added to Paragraph A.4., Cover- 5. Transfer Of Rights Of Recovery Against age Extensions, of SECTION III - PHYSICAL Others To Us DAMAGE COVERAGE: We waive any right of recovery we may have Personal Property against any person or organization to the ex- tent required of you by a written contract We will pay up to $400 for "loss" to wearing ap- signed and executed prior to any "accident" parel and other personal property which is: or "loss", provided that the "accident" or "loss" (1) Owned by an "insured"; and arises out of operations contemplated by CA T3 53 02 15 © 2015 The Travelers Indemnity company. All rights reserved. Page 3 of 4 Includes copyrighted material of Insurance Services Office, Inc. with its permission 002193 i COMMERCIAL AUTO such contract. The waiver applies only to the The unintentional omission of, or unintentional person or organization designated in such error in, any information given by you shall not contract. prejudice your rights under this insurance. How- N. UNINTENTIONAL ERRORS OR OMISSIONS ever this provision does not affect our right to col- The following is added to Paragraph B.2., Con- lect additional premium or exercise our right of cealment, Misrepresentation, Or Fraud, of cancellation or non-renewal. SECTION IV - BUSINESS AUTO CONDITIONS: Page 4 of 4 '2015 The Travelers ~ndemn+ty company All rights reserved. CA T3 53 02 15 Includes copyrighted material of Insurance Services Office. Inc with its permission. i vow'` K E L L E R associates EXHIBIT D - SCOPE OF WORK PARK ESTATES PUMP STATION PREDESIGN Date: March 14, 2017 Project Number: 2015-31 (KA# 217003-000) Project Name: Park Estates Pump Station Replacement PROJECT DESCRIPTION The existing Park Estates Pump Station limits the usable storage in the Crowson I Reservoir. The pump station needs to be replaced to provide the future domestic and fire demands of the service pressure zone. The City intends to replace the existing pump station before December 31, 2017. Services to be completed by the Consultant are described below in the Scope of Work. These services will be will be completed in coordination and with prior authorization by City staff. Task 1- Proiect Management and Meetings Consultant Responsibilities: 1.1 Provide general project management for this task, including contract administration, invoicing, progress reports, and internal project administration. 1.2 Consultant shall attend one project meeting and participate in up to two conference calls with City staff during the predesign phase. Assumptions: 1.3 City to provide forum for meetings. 1.4 Project will be funded with Infrastructure Finance Authority (IFA) funding. Funding administration services will be provided by others. Task 2 - Predesign Consultant Responsibilities: 2.1 Review firm capacity requirements, and existing and future fire, average summer, average winter, peak day and peak hour water demands (provided by others). 2.2 Evaluate possible relocation of pump station to three alternative sites. These sites include adjacent to existing generator pad across the street from Crowson I, adjacent to the existing Crowson I site, and on top of the Crowson I tank. 2.3 Review the previous two years of available pump run time and available flow meter data and compare to modeled data for the pressure zone. Engineering Solutions, Satisfied Clients Bend • Clarkston • Idaho Falls • Meridian • Pocatello • Rock Springs • Roseville • Salem Exhibit D - Scope of Work 2.4 Evaluate alternative pump sizes and types and make a recommendation for the pump selection. Evaluation includes an initial review of two pump types of similar size, followed by a refined sizing of the selected pump type. As part of pump evaluation, consider capital costs and ongoing power requirements, recognizing the City's desire for high-efficiency systems. 2.5 Develop concept plans. 2.6 Complete topographic surveying for the proposed site after final site selection. 2.7 Complete a geotechnical investigation for the proposed site after final site selection. 2.8 Evaluate the consolidation of the first user station, generator, and electrical components with the Park Estates Pump Station. 2.9 Evaluate benefits and drawbacks of grouping project with Terrace Street Pump Station for final design and construction. 2.10 Prepare Class 5 opinion of probable cost for the alternatives considered. Refine estimate to Class 4 estimate for preferred alternative. 2.11 Prepare a draft predesign report. Respond to City comments, and prepare final predesign report. City Responsibilities: 2.12 Provide timely review of predesign report. 2.13 Provide existing and future design pressures and flows for average winter, average summer, max day, and peak hour conditions. 2.14 Provide available record drawings for Crowson I Reservoir, pipeline connecting Crowson I Reservoir to Park Estates Pump Station, and pump station. 2.15 Provide information on existing electrical, generator and pumps, including existing pump curves. 2.16 Provide supplemental fieldwork as needed (if available). Assumptions: 2.17 City intends on moving forward with Alternative 2 identified in the Hydraulic Analysis for Upper Crowson Pressure Zone Improvements dated November 15, 2016 (prepared by RH2). This identifies the new Park Estates Pump Station servicing the existing Park Estates service area and the South Mountain Pump Station. 2.18 Existing and future pressure zone demands, firm capacity requirements, and target design pressure to be provided by others. 2.19 No environmental, land use, hillside development, or other permitting are included as part of this task. These services, if required, will be completed as part of Task 6. 217003-000 Page 2 Exhibit D - Scope of Work 2.20 No boundary surveys or easements will be required. 2.21 Evaluation of water quality and treatment will not be needed. 2.22 Scope is limited to the pump station site and adjacent yard piping. Design of offsite piping, pressure zone modifications, and other offsite improvements is not included in Scope of Work. 2.23 Reuse of existing generator will not be evaluated. Existing generator will be salvaged and returned to the City. Deliverables: 2.24 Predesign report for pump station (draft and final). SCHEDULE Consultant intends to complete draft predesign report within 30 days. This schedule assumes a seven calendar day turn-around on City reviews and requests for information. Surveying and geotechnical services are anticipated to occur following City's review of the draft predesign report. COMPENSATION SCHEDULE Consultant will complete the services on a time and materials basis per the current title code billing rates (Refer to Exhibit D.I. for the 2017 rates). While the individual task amounts may be exceeded, the total authorized amount will riot be exceeded without written approval from the City. Task Description Compensation 1 Project Management and Meetings $6,655 2 Predesign $42,048 TOTAL $48,703 217003-000 Page 3 i Exhibit D.1 KELLER ASSOCIATES, Inc. 2017 TITLE CODE BILLING RATES 2017 Personnel Classification Hourly Rate Project Engineer - I (El) $85.00 - $100.00 Project Manager - I (PE) $120.00 - $155.00 Project Engineer - II (PE) $110.00 - $185.00 Project Manager - II (PE) $160.00 - $190.00 CAD -1 $80.00 - $100.00 CAD - II $110.00 - $145.00 Engineering Student $65.00 Principal (PE) $210.00 - $225.00 Chief Engineer/Structural Engineer (PE, SE, PLS) $225.00 Senior Water Treatment Engineering $210.00 Structural Engineer - I (PE, SE) $155.00 Electrical Engineer - I (PE) $150.00 Electrical Technician $75.00 Professional Surveyor (PLS) $145.00 Surveyor $75.00 - $100.00 Field Representative $75.00 - $120.00 Clerical & Administration $65.00 - $85.00 Other Billing Terms Mileage: Billed at Federal Rate (currently $0.535 per mile) Per Diem: $60.00 per day Subconsultants at Cost x 1.10 Reimbursable Expenses at Cost x 1.05 The Title Code Billing Rates are effective January 1, 2017 and will be adjusted each January of subsequent years New employees may be added throughout the yeas CONFIDENTIAL KELLASS-01 NWEISER ACORL7° CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE DATE(MM/DD/YYYY) 02/0212017 THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AFFIRMATIVELY OR NEGATIVELY AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. THIS CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE ISSUING INSURER(S), AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OR PRODUCER, AND THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. IMPORTANT: If the certificate holder is an ADDITIONAL INSURED, the policy(ies) must have ADDITIONAL INSURED provisions or be endorsed. If SUBROGATION IS WAIVED, subject to the terms and conditions of the policy, certain policies may require an endorsement. A statement on this certificate does not confer rights to the certificate holder in lieu of such endorsement(s). CONTACT PRODUCER NAME: The Hartwell Corporation PHONE PO 208) 459-1678 FAX (A/c, No, Ext): ( Box 400 (A/c, No):(208) 454-1114 Caldwell, ID 83606 E-MAIL nancy@thehartwelicorp.com INSURERS AFFORDING COVERAGE NAIC # INSURER A: Travelers Indemnity Co of Am. 25658 INSURED INSURER B : Travelers Indemnity Co 125666 Keller Associates, Inc. INSURER C : Travelers Casual and Sure 31194 131 SW 5th Ave, Ste A INSURER D : XL Specialty Insurance Co. 37885 Meridian, ID 83642 INSURER E INSURER F : COVERAGES CERTIFICATE NUMBER: REVISION NUMBER: THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. INSR TYPE OF INSURANCE ADDL SUBR POLICY NUMBER POLICY EFF POLICY EXP LIMITS LTR IN SID WVD MM/DD/YYYY MM/DD/YYYY A X COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY EACH OCCURRENCE $ 1,000,000 CLAIMS-MADE ~ OCCUR X 680-4H953952 12/01/2016 12/01/2017 DAMAGE TO RENTED 1,000,000 PREMISES Ea occurrence $ X CGD381 MED EXP An one person) $ 10,000 PERSONAL & ADV INJURY $ 1,000,000 GEN'L AGGREGATE LIMI1 APPLIES PER: GENERAL AGGREGATE $ 2,000,000 POLICY ❑X PRO El LOC PRODUCTS - COMP/OP AGG $ 2000,000 JECT El OTHER: $ B AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY (Ea acccidentSINGLE LIMIT $ 1,000,000 X ANY AUTO X BA-78771-468 12/01/2016 1210112017 BODILY INJURY Per person) $ OWNED SCHEDULED AUTOS ONLY AUTOS BODILY INJURY Per accident $ HIRED NON-OWNED PROPERTY DAMAGE AUTOS ONLY AUTOS ONLY Per accident $ X CAT353 $ 4,000,000 C X UMBRELLA LIAB X OCCUR EACH OCCURRENCE $ EXCESS LIAB CLAIMS-MADE CUP-8961X179 12101/2016 12/01/2017 AGGREGATE $ 4,000,000 DED X RETENTION $ 10,000 $ C WORKERS COMPENSATION X PER OTH- AND EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY STATUTE ER Y/ N UB-9722Y081 12/01/2016 12/0112017 1,000,000 ANY PROPRIETOR/PARTNE-R/EXECUTIVE LN N / A E.L. EACH ACCIDENT $ OFFICER/MEMBER EXCLUDED? 1,000,000 (Mandatory in NH) E.L. DISEASE - EA EMPLOYE $ If yes, describe under 1,000,000 DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS below E.L. DISEASE - POLICY LIMIT $ D Professional Liabili DPR9909212 12/01/2016 12101/2017 Each Claim 2,000,000 D $100,000 deductible DPR9909212 12101/2016 12101/2017 Aggregate 2,000,000 DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS / LOCATIONS / VEHICLES (ACORD 101, Additional Remarks Schedule, may be attached if more space is required) CERTIFICATE HOLDER CANCELLATION SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE City of Ashland, Public Works THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, NOTICE WILL BE DELIVERED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE POLICY PROVISIONS. 20 E Main Street Ashland, OR 97520 AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE 9 ACORD 25 (2016/03) © 1988-2015 ACORD CORPORATION. All rights reserved. The ACORD name and logo are registered marks of ACORD COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY THIS ENDORSEMENT CHANGES THE POLICY. PLEASE READ IT CAREFULLY. BLANKET ADDITIONAL INSURED (ARCHITECTS, ENGINEERS AND SURVEYORS) This endorsement modifies insurance provided under the following: COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY COVERAGE PART 1. The following is added to SECTION II - WHO IS h. This insurance does not apply to "bodily AN INSURED: injury" or "property damage" caused by "your Any person or organization that you agree in a work" and included in the "products- "written contract requiring insurance" to include as completed operations hazard" unless the an additional insured on this Coverage Part, but: "written contract requiring insurance" specifically requires you to provide such a. Only with respect to liability for "bodily injury", coverage for that additional insured, and then "property damage" or "personal injury"; and the insurance provided to the additional b. If, and only to the extent that, the injury or insured applies only to such "bodily injury" or damage is caused by acts or omissions of "property damage" that occurs before the end you or your subcontractor in the performance of the period of time for which the "written of "your work" to which the "written contract contract requiring insurance" requires you to requiring insurance" applies, or in connection provide such coverage or the end of the with premises owned by or rented to you. policy period, whichever is earlier. The person or organization does not qualify as an 2. The following is added to Paragraph 4.a. of additional insured: SECTION IV - COMMERCIAL GENERAL c. With respect to the independent acts or LIABILITY CONDITIONS: omissions of such person or organization; or The insurance provided to the additional insured d. For "bodily injury", "property damage" or is excess over any valid and collectible other "personal injury" for which such person or insurance, whether primary, excess, contingent or organization has assumed liability in a on any other basis, that is available to the additional insured for a loss we cover. However, if contract or agreement. you specifically agree in the "written contract The insurance provided to such additional insured requiring insurance" that this insurance provided is limited as follows: to the additional insured under this Coverage Part must apply on a primary basis or a primary and e. This insurance does not apply on any basis to non-contributory basis, this insurance is primary any person or organization for which to other insurance available to the additional coverage as an additional insured specifically insured which covers that person or organizations is added by another endorsement to this as a named insured for such loss, and we will not Coverage Part. share with the other insurance, provided that: f. This insurance does not apply to the (1) The "bodily injury" or "property damage" for rendering of or failure to render any which coverage is sought occurs; and "professional services". (2) The "personal injury" for which coverage is g. In the event that the Limits of Insurance of the sought arises out of an offense committed; Coverage Part shown in the Declarations exceed the limits of liability required by the after you have signed that "written contract "written contract requiring insurance", the requiring insurance". But this insurance provided insurance provided to the additional insured to the additional insured still is excess over valid shall be limited to the limits of liability required and collectible other insurance, whether primary, by that "written contract requiring insurance". excess, contingent or on any other basis, that is This endorsement does not increase the available to the additional insured when that limits of insurance described in Section III - person or organization is an additional insured Limits Of Insurance. under any other insurance. CG D3 81 09 15 © 2015 The Travelers Indemnity Company. All rights reserved. Page 1 of 2 Includes the copyrighted material of Insurance Services Office, Inc., with its permission COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY 3. The following is added to Paragraph 8., Transfer 4. The following definition is added to the Of Rights Of Recovery Against Others To Us, DEFINITIONS Section: of SECTION IV - COMMERCIAL GENERAL "Written contract requiring insurance" means that LIABILITY CONDITIONS: part of any written contract under which you are We waive any right of recovery we may have required to include a person or organization as an against any person or organization because of additional insured on this Coverage Part, payments we make for "bodily injury", "property provided that the "bodily injury" and "property damage" or "personal injury" arising out of "your damage" occurs and the "personal injury" is work" performed by you, or on your behalf, done caused b an offense committed: under a "written contract requiring insurance" with by that person or organization. We waive this right a. After you have signed that written contract; only where you have agreed to do so as part of b. While that part of the written contract is in the "written contract requiring insurance" with effect; and such person or organization signed by you before, and in effect when, the "bodily injury" or c. Before the end of the policy period. "property damage" occurs, or the "personal injury" offense is committed. Page 2 of 2 © 2015 The Travelers Indemnity Company. All rights reserved. CG D3 81 09 15 Includes the copyrighted material of Insurance Services Office, Inc., with its permission i COMMERCIAL AUTO THIS ENDORSEMENT CHANGES THE POLICY. PLEASE READ IT CAREFULLY. BUSINESS AUTO EXTENSION ENDORSEMENT This endorsement modifies insurance provided under the following: BUSINESS AUTO COVERAGE FORM GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF COVERAGE - This endorsement broadens coverage. However, coverage for any injury, damage or medical expenses described in any of the provisions of this endorsement may be excluded or limited by another endorsement to the Coverage Part, and these coverage broadening provisions do not apply to the extent that coverage is excluded or limited by such an endorsement. The following listing is a general cover- age description only. Limitations and exclusions may apply to these coverages. Read all the provisions of this en- dorsement and the rest of your policy carefully to determine rights, duties, and what is and is not covered. A. BROAD FORM NAMED INSURED H. HIRED AUTO PHYSICAL DAMAGE - LOSS OF B_ BLANKET ADDITIONAL INSURED USE - INCREASED LIMIT 1. PHYSICAL DAMAGE - TRANSPORTATION C. EMPLOYEE HIRED AUTO EXPENSES - INCREASED LIMIT D. EMPLOYEES AS INSURED J. PERSONAL PROPERTY E. SUPPLEMENTARY PAYMENTS - INCREASED K. AIRBAGS LIMITS L. NOTICE AND KNOWLEDGE OF ACCIDENT OR F. HIRED AUTO - LIMITED WORLDWIDE COV- LOSS ERAGE - INDEMNITY BASIS M. BLANKET WAIVER OF SUBROGATION G. WAIVER OF DEDUCTIBLE - GLASS N. UNINTENTIONAL ERRORS OR OMISSIONS PROVISIONS A. BROAD FORM NAMED INSURED this insurance applies and only to the extent that The following is added to Paragraph A.1., Who Is person or organization qualifies as an "insured" An Insured, of SECTION II - COVERED AUTOS under the Who Is An Insured provision contained LIABILITY COVERAGE: in Section Il. Any organization you newly acquire or form dur- C. EMPLOYEE HIRED AUTO ing the policy period over which you maintain 1. The following is added to Paragraph A.1., 50% or more ownership interest and that is not Who Is An Insured, of SECTION II - COV- separately insured for Business Auto Coverage. ERED AUTOS LIABILITY COVERAGE: Coverage under this provision is afforded only un- An "employee" of yours is an "insured" while til the 180th day after you acquire or form the or- operating an "auto" hired or rented under a ganization or the end of the policy period, which- contract or agreement in an "employee's" ever is earlier. name, with your permission, while performing o= duties related to the conduct of your busi- B. BLANKET ADDITIONAL INSURED ness. The following is added to Paragraph c. in A.1., 2. The following replaces Paragraph b. in B.5., Who Is An Insured, of SECTION II - COVERED Other Insurance, of SECTION IV - BUSI- AUTOS LIABILITY COVERAGE: NESS AUTO CONDITIONS: Any person or organization who is required under b. For Hired Auto Physical Damage Cover- a written contract or agreement between you and age, the following are deemed to be cov- T--- that person or organization, that is signed and ered "autos" you own: executed by you before the "bodily injury" or (1) Any covered "auto" you lease, hire, "property damage" occurs and that is in effect rent or borrow; and during the policy period, to be named as an addi- (2) Any covered "auto" hired or rented by tional insured is an "insured" for Covered Autos your "employee" under a contract in Liability Coverage, but only for damages to which an "employee's" name, with your CA T3 53 02 15 n 2415 The Travelers Indemnity company. All rights reserved. Page 1 of 4 Includes copyrighted material of Insurance Services Office, Inc. with its permission, 002192 I COMMERCIAL AUTO permission. while performing duties (a) With respect to any claim made or "snit" related to the conduct of your busi- brought outside the United States of ness. America, the territories and possessions However. any "auto" that is leased. hired. of the United States of America. Puerto rented or borrowed with a driver is not a Rico and Canada: covered "auto". (i) You must arrange to defend the "in- D. EMPLOYEES AS INSURED sured" against, and investigate or set- tle any such claim or "suit" and keep The following is added to Paragraph A.1., Who Is us advised of all proceedings and An Insured, of SECTION it -COVERED AUTOS ac- tions- COVERAGE: LIABILITY Any "employee" of yours is an "insured" while us- (ii) Neither you nor any other involved "insured" will make any settlement ing a covered "auto" you don't own, hire or borrow without our consent. in your business or your personal affairs. (iii) We may, at our discretion, participate E. SUPPLEMENTARY PAYMENTS - INCREASED in defending the "insured" against, or LIMITS in the settlement of, any claim or 1. The following replaces Paragraph A.2.a.(2), "suit". of SECTION II - COVERED AUTOS LIABIL- (iv) We will reimburse the "insured" for ITY COVERAGE: sums that the "insured" legally must (2) Up to $3,000 for cost of bail bonds (in- pay as damages because of "bodily eluding bonds for related traffic law viola- injury" or "property damage" to which tions) required because of an "accident" this insurance applies, that the "in- we cover. We do not have to furnish sured" pays with our consent, but these bonds- only up to the limit described in Para- 2. The following replaces Paragraph A.2.a.(4), graph C.. Limits Of Insurance, of of SECTION II - COVERED AUTOS LIABIL- SECTION 11 - COVERED AUTOS ITY COVERAGE: LIABILITY COVERAGE. (4) All reasonable expenses incurred by the (v) We will reimburse the "insured" for "insured" at our request, including actual the reasonable expenses incurred loss of earnings up to $500 a day be- with our consent for your investiga- cause of time off from work. tion of such claims and your defense of the "insured" against any such F. HIRED AUTO - LIMITED WORLDWIDE COV- "suit", but only up to and included ERAGE - INDEMNITY BASIS within the limit described in Para- The following replaces Subparagraph (5) in Para- graph C., Limits Of Insurance, of graph B.7., Policy Period, Coverage Territory, SECTION II - COVERED AUTOS of SECTION IV - BUSINESS AUTO CONDI- LIABILITY COVERAGE, and not in TIONS: addition to such limit. Our duty to (5) Anywhere in the world, except any country or make such payments ends when we jurisdiction while any trade sanction, em- have used up the applicable limit of bargo, or similar regulation imposed by the insurance in payments for damages, United States of America applies to and pro- settlements or defense expenses. hibits the transaction of business with or (b) This insurance is excess over any valid within such country or jurisdiction. for Cov- and collectible other insurance available ered Autos Liability Coverage for any covered to the "insured" whether primary, excess. "auto" that you lease, hire, rent or borrow contingent or on any other basis. without a driver for a period of 30 days or less (c) This insurance is not a substitute for re- and that is not an "auto" you lease. hire, rent quired or compulsory insurance in any or borrow from any of your "employees", country outside the United States. its ter- partners (if you are a partnership), members ritories and possessions, Puerto Rico and (if you are a limited liability company) or Canada. members of their households. Page 2 of 4 J 2015 The Travelers Indemnity Company All rights reserved. CA T3 53 02 15 Includes copyrighted material of Insurance Services Office, Inc with its permission i COMMERCIAL AUTO You agree to maintain all required or (2) In or on your covered "auto". compulsory insurance in any such coun- This coverage applies only in the event of a total try up to the minimum limits required by theft of your covered "auto". local law. Your failure to comply with No deductibles apply to this Personal Property compulsory insurance requirements will coverage. not invalidate the coverage afforded by this policy, but we will only be liable to the K. AIRBAGS same extent we would have been liable The following is added to Paragraph B.3., Exclu- had you complied with the compulsory in- sions, of SECTION 111 - PHYSICAL DAMAGE surance requirements. COVERAGE: (d) It is understood that we are not an admit- Exclusion 3.a. does not apply to "loss" to one or ted or authorized insurer outside the more airbags in a covered "auto" you own that in- United States of America, its territories flate due to a cause other than a cause of "loss" and possessions, Puerto Rico and Can- set forth in Paragraphs A.1.b. and A.1.c., but ada. We assume no responsibility for the only: furnishing of certificates of insurance, or a. If that "auto" is a covered "auto" for Compre- for compliance in any way with the laws hensive Coverage under this policy; of other countries relating to insurance. b. The airbags are not covered under any war- G. WAIVER OF DEDUCTIBLE - GLASS ranty; and The following is added to Paragraph D., Deducti- c. The airbags were not intentionally inflated. ble, of SECTION III - PHYSICAL DAMAGE We will pay up to a maximum of $1,000 for any COVERAGE: one "loss". No deductible for a covered "auto" will apply to L. NOTICE AND KNOWLEDGE OF ACCIDENT OR glass damage if the glass is repaired rather than LOSS replaced. The following is added to Paragraph A.2.a., of H. HIRED AUTO PHYSICAL DAMAGE LOSS OF SECTION IV - BUSINESS AUTO CONDITIONS: USE - INCREASED LIMIT Your duty to give us or our authorized representa- The following replaces the last sentence of Para- tive prompt notice of the "accident" or "loss" ap- graph A.4.b., Loss Of Use Expenses, of SEC- plies only when the "accident" or "loss" is known TION III - PHYSICAL DAMAGE COVERAGE: to: However, the most we will pay for any expenses (a) You (if you are an individual); for loss of use is $65 per day, to a maximum of (b) A partner (if you are a partnership); $750 for any one "accident". (c) A member (if you are a limited liability com- I. PHYSICAL DAMAGE - TRANSPORTATION pany); EXPENSES - INCREASED LIMIT (d) An executive officer, director or insurance The following replaces the first sentence in Para- manager (if you are a corporation or other or- graph A.4.a., Transportation Expenses, of ganization); or SECTION III PHYSICAL DAMAGE COVER- (e) Any "employee" authorized by you to give no- AGE: tice of the "accident" or "loss". We will pay up to $50 per day to a maximum of M. BLANKET WAIVER OF SUBROGATION $1,500 for temporary transportation expense in- The following replaces Paragraph A.5., Transfer curred by you because of the total theft of a cov- Of Rights Of Recovery Against Others To Us, ered "auto" of the private passenger type. of SECTION IV - BUSINESS AUTO CONDI- J. PERSONAL PROPERTY TIONS: The following is added to Paragraph A.4., Cover- 5. Transfer Of Rights Of Recovery Against -i age Extensions, of SECTION III - PHYSICAL Others To Us DAMAGE COVERAGE: We waive any right of recovery we may have Personal Property against any person or organization to the ex- tent required of you by a written contract We will pay up to $400 for "loss" to wearing ap- signed and executed prior to any "accident" parel and other personal property which is: or "loss", provided that the "accident" or "loss" (1) Owned by an "insured"; and arises out of operations contemplated by CA T3 53 02 15 © 2015 The Travelers Indemnity company. All rights reserved. Page 3 of 4 Includes copyrighted material of Insurance Services Office, Inc. with its permission. 002193 i COMMERCIAL AUTO such contract. The waiver applies only to the The unintentional omission of, or unintentional person or organization designated in such error in, any information given by you shall not contract. prejudice your rights under this insurance. How- N. UNINTENTIONAL ERRORS OR OMISSIONS ever this provision does not affect our right to col- The following is added to Paragraph B.2., Con- lect additional premium or exercise our right of cealment, Misrepresentation, Or Fraud, of cancellation or non-renewal. SECTION IV BUSINESS AUTO CONDITIONS: Page 4 of 4 3 2015 The Travelers Indemnity Company. All rights reserved. CA T3 53 02 15 Includes copyrighted material of Insurance Services Office. Inc with its permission. i KELLER associates EXHIBIT D - SCOPE OF WORK TERRACE STREET PUMP STATION PREDESIGN Date: March 14, 2017 Project Number: 2015-31 (KA# 217004) Project Name: Ashland Terrace Street Pump Station Upgrade PROJECT DESCRIPTION The existing Terrace Street Pump Station requires a major upgrade. As part of the upgrade, the pump station will need to be able to deliver water to the new treatment plant at a site and elevation to be determined. The City intends to upgrade the existing pump station at the existing site before December 31, 2017. Services to be completed by the Consultant are described below in the Scope of Work. These services will be completed in coordination and with prior authorization by City staff. Task 1- Project Management and Meetings Consultant Responsibilities: 1.1 Provide general project management for this task, including contract administration, progress reports, and internal project administration. 1.2 Consultant shall attend one project meeting and will participate in up to two conference calls with City staff during the predesign phase. These are anticipated to be coordinated with the Park Estates Pump Station Replacement predesign. Assumptions: 1.3 City to provide forum for meetings. 1.4 Project will be funded with Infrastructure Finance Authority (IFA) funding. Funding administration services will be provided by others. 217004-000 Engineering Solutions, Satisfied Clients Bend - Clarkston - Idaho Falls - Meridian - Pocatello - Rock Springs - Roseville - Salem i Exhibit D - Scope of Work Task 2 - Predesign Consultant Responsibilities: 2.1 Visit the existing site to generally assess conditions of existing facilities. This is anticipated to be coordinated with the kickoff meeting. 2.2 Review available record drawings. Review list of known issues and age of existing assets provided by the City. 2.3 Use Lidar data, field measurements gathered by the City, and record drawings for the proposed site to develop existing site map. 2.4 Evaluate hydraulic requirements needed to convey water from the pump station to the new treatment plant. This is anticipated to include hydraulic evaluations for delivery to the Concrete Pit and Granite Treatment Plant sites, for both high and low plant options. 2.5 Consider potential hydraulic impacts of piping the section of Talent Irrigation District (TID) canal located upstream of the pump station 2.6 Identify needs for a potential permanganate feed facility at the pump station site. This includes reviewing water quality and need for permanganate; review of permanganate chemical storage, feed, and instrumentation options; and development of permanganate storage and feed process and piping and instrumentation diagram (P&ID). 2.7 Discuss with City design capacity and desired redundancy/resiliency. 2.8 Evaluate alternative pump sizes and types and make a recommendation for pump size and type. Because the hydraulic conditions for delivery to the Granite and Concrete Pit Treatment Plant sites are anticipated to be similar, evaluation is limited to an initial review of two pump types of similar size for a low plant and high plant option at the Concrete Pit site, followed by a refined sizing of the selected pump type. As part of pump evaluation, consider capital costs and ongoing power requirements, recognizing the City's desire for high-efficiency systems. 2.9 Develop a conceptual plan and section showing proposed mechanical and site improvements. 2.10 Summarize with City input recommended electrical (including standby power), instrumentation, and control improvements. 2.11 Discuss potential implementation strategy. 2.12 Develop a Class 5 opinion of probable cost for the alternatives considered. Refine estimate to Class 4 estimate for preferred alternative. 2.13 Prepare a draft predesign report. Respond to City comments, and prepare final predesign report. 217004-000 Page 2 i Exhibit D - Scope of Work City Responsibilities: 2.14 Assist in pump station tour, and provide available record drawings, age information, and list of known issues. 2.15 Provide information on available TID water rights (diversion rate), existing pump design flows, existing TID canal capacity limitations, and input on design capacity, including firm capacity. 2.16 Provide timely review of predesign report. 2.17 Provide supplemental fieldwork as needed (if available). Assumptions: 2.18 Substantive modifications to screening and diversion facilities are not anticipated. If required, these design services will be provided as an additional service. 2.19 Improvements will be constrained to the existing site / vault. If a new building structure is desired, design and construction services will be completed as an additional service. 2.20 No environmental, land use, hillside development, or other permitting are included as part of this task. These services, if required, will be completed as part of Task 6. 2.21 No geotechnical services will be needed. 2.22 Final design, bidding, and construction phase services for onsite standby power (if desired) will be provided as an additional service. 2.23 No boundary surveys or easements will be required. No topographic surveying will be provided, and drawings will be based on record drawings and field measurements. 2.24 Scope is limited to the pump station site and adjacent yard piping. Design of offsite piping, pressure zone modifications, and other offsite improvements are not included in Scope of Work. Deliverables: 2.25 Predesign report for pump station (draft and final). SCHEDULE Consultant intends to complete draft predesign report within 30 days and design services within 80 days of receiving City comments on the pre-design. This schedule assumes a seven calendar day turn-around on City reviews and requests for information. 217004-000 Page 3 i Exhibit D - Scope of Work COMPENSATION SCHEDULE Consultant will complete the services on a time and materials basis per the current title code billing rates (Refer to Exhibit D.1 for the 2017 rates). While the individual task amounts may be exceeded, the total authorized amount will not be exceeded without written approval from the City. Task Description Compensation 1 Project Management and Meetings $6,115 2 Predesign $29,048 TOTAL $35,163 217004-000 Page 4 i Exhibit D.1 KELLER ASSOCIATES, Inc. 2017 TITLE CODE BILLING RATES 2017 Personnel Classification Hourly Rate Project Engineer - I (El) $85.00 - $100.00 Project Manager - I (PE) $120.00 - $155.00 Project Engineer - II (PE) $110.00 - $185.00 Project Manager - II (PE) $160.00 - $190.00 CAD -1 $80.00 - $100.00 CAD - II $110.00 - $145.00 Engineering Student $65.00 Principal (PE) $210.00 - $225.00 Chief Engineer/Structural Engineer (PE, SE, PLS) $225.00 Senior Water Treatment Engineering $210.00 Structural Engineer - I (PE, SE) $155.00 Electrical Engineer - I (PE) $150.00 Electrical Technician $75.00 Professional Surveyor (PLS) $145.00 Surveyor $75.00 - $100.00 Field Representative $75.00 - $120.00 Clerical & Administration $65.00 - $85.00 Other Billing Terms Mileage: Billed at Federal Rate (currently $0.535 per mile) Per Diem: $60.00 per day Subconsultants at Cost x 1.10 Reimbursable Expenses at Cost x 1.05 The Title Code Billing Rates are effective January 1, 2017 and will be adjusted each January of subsequent years New employees may be added throughout the yeas CONFIDENTIAL i KELLASS-01 NWEISER CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE DATE (MM/DD/YYYY) 02/02/2017 THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AFFIRMATIVELY OR NEGATIVELY AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. THIS CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE ISSUING INSURER(S), AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OR PRODUCER, AND THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. IMPORTANT: If the certificate holder is an ADDITIONAL INSURED, the policy(ies) must have ADDITIONAL INSURED provisions or be endorsed. If SUBROGATION IS WAIVED, subject to the terms and conditions of the policy, certain policies may require an endorsement. A statement on this certificate does not confer rights to the certificate holder in lieu of such endorsement(s). CONTACT PRODUCER NAME: The Hartwell Corporation PHONE 459-1678 FAX 208 454-1114 PO Box 400 (A/C, No, Ext): (208) (A/C, No):( ) SS: nancy@thehartwellcorp.com Caldwell, ID 83606 E-MAIL INSURERS AFFORDING COVERAGE NAIC # INSURER A : Travelers Indemnity Co of Am. 25658 INSURED INSURER B : Travelers Indemnity Co 25666 Keller Associates, Inc. INSURER C : Travelers Casual and Surety 31194 131 SW 5th Ave, Ste A INSURER D : XL Specialty Insurance Co. 37885 Meridian, ID 83642 INSURER E INSURER F : COVERAGES CERTIFICATE NUMBER: REVISION NUMBER: THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. INSR TYPE OF INSURANCE ADDL SUBR POLICY NUMBER POLICY EFF POLICY EXP LIMITS LTR IN SD WVD MM/DD/YYYY MM/DD/YYW 1,000,000 A X COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY EACH OCCURRENCE $ CLAIMS-MADE ❑X OCCUR X 680-4H953952 12101/2016 12/01/2017 DAMAGE TO RENTED 1,000,000 PREMISES Ea occurrence $ X CGD381 MED EXP An one person) $ 10,000 PERSONAL & ADV INJURY $ 1,000,000 GEN1 AGGREGATE LIMIT APPLIES PER: GENERAL AGGREGATE $ 2,000,000 POLICY F7X PRO- LOC PRODUCTS - COMP/OP AGG $ 21000,000 JECT OTHER: $ COMNED Ea acccdentSINGLE LIMIT $ 1 ,000,000 B AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY ( X ANY AUTO X BA-7877L468 12/01/2016 12/01/2017 BODILY INJURY Per erson $ OWNED SCHEDULED AUTOS ONLY AUTOS BODILY INJURY Per accident $ HIRED NON-OWNED PROPERTY DAMAGE AUTOS ONLY AUTOS ONLY Per accident $ X CAT353 $ C X UMBRELLA LIAB X OCCUR EACH OCCURRENCE $ 4,000,000 EXCESS LIAB CLAIMS-MADE CUP-8961X179 12/01/2016 12/01/2017 AGGREGATE $ 4,000,000 DED X RETENTION $ 10,000 $ C WORKERS COMPENSATION X PER OTH- AND EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY STATUTE ER Y/N UB-9722YO81 12/01/2016 12/0112017 1,000,000 E.L. EACH ACCIDENT $ ANY PROPRIETOR/PARTNER/EXECUTIVE N/A OFFICER/MEMBER EXCLUDED? 1,000,000 (Mandatory in NH) E.L. DISEASE - EA EMPLOYEE $ If yes, describe under 1,000,000 DESCRIPTION OF OPERA"IONS below E.L. DISEASE - POLICY LIMIT $ D Professional Liabili DPR9909212 12/0112016 12/01/2017 Each Claim 2,000,000 D $100,000 deductible DPR9909212 12/01/2016 12/01/2017 Aggregate 2,000,000 DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS / LOCATIONS / VEHICLES (ACORD 101, Additional Remarks Schedule, may be attached if more space is required) CERTIFICATE HOLDER CANCELLATION SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE City of Ashland, Public Works THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, NOTICE WILL BE DELIVERED IN y ACCORDANCE WITH THE POLICY PROVISIONS. 20 E Main Street Ashland, OR 97520 AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE 9 xACORD 25 (2016/03) © 1988-2015 ACORD CORPORATION. All rights reserved. The ACORD name and logo are registered marks of ACORD i COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY THIS ENDORSEMENT CHANGES THE POLICY. PLEASE READ IT CAREFULLY. BLANKET ADDITIONAL INSURED (ARCHITECTS, ENGINEERS AND SURVEYORS) This endorsement modifies insurance provided under the following: COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY COVERAGE PART 1. The following is added to SECTION II - WHO IS h. This insurance does not apply to "bodily AN INSURED: injury" or "property damage" caused by "your Any person or organization that you agree in a work" and included in the "products- "written contract requiring insurance" to include as completed operations hazard" unless the an additional insured on this Coverage Part, but: "written contract requiring insurance" specifically requires you to provide such a. Only with respect to liability for "bodily injury", coverage for that additional insured, and then "property damage" or "personal injury"; and the insurance provided to the additional b. If, and only to the extent that, the injury or insured applies only to such "bodily injury" or damage is caused by acts or omissions of "property damage" that occurs before the end you or your subcontractor in the performance of the period of time for which the "written of "your work" to which the "written contract contract requiring insurance" requires you to requiring insurance" applies, or in connection provide such coverage or the end of the with premises owned by or rented to you. policy period, whichever is earlier. The person or organization does not qualify as an 2. The following is added to Paragraph 4.a. of additional insured: SECTION IV - COMMERCIAL GENERAL c. With respect to the independent acts or LIABILITY CONDITIONS: omissions of such person or organization; or The insurance provided to the additional insured d. For "bodily injury", "property damage" or is excess over any valid and collectible other "personal injury" for which such person or insurance, whether primary, excess, contingent or organization has assumed liability in a on any other basis, that is available to the additional insured for a loss we cover. However, if contract or agreement. you specifically agree in the "written contract The insurance provided to such additional insured requiring insurance" that this insurance provided is limited as follows: to the additional insured under this Coverage Part must apply on a primary basis or a primary and e. This insurance does not apply on any basis to non-contributory basis, this insurance is primary any person or organization for which to other insurance available to the additional coverage as an additional insured specifically insured which covers that person or organizations is added by another endorsement to this as a named insured for such loss, and we will not Coverage Part. share with the other insurance, provided that: f. This insurance does not apply to the (1) The "bodily injury" or "property damage" for rendering of or failure to render any which coverage is sought occurs; and "professional services". (2) The "personal injury" for which coverage is g. In the event that the Limits of Insurance of the sought arises out of an offense committed; Coverage Part shown in the Declarations exceed the limits of liability required by the after you have signed that "written contract "written contract requiring insurance", the requiring insurance". But this insurance provided insurance provided to the additional insured to the additional insured still is excess over valid shall be limited to the limits of liability required and collectible other insurance, whether primary, by that "written contract requiring insurance". excess, contingent or on any other basis, that is This endorsement does not increase the available to the additional insured when that limits of insurance described in Section III - person or organization is an additional insured Limits Of Insurance. under any other insurance. CG D3 81 09 15 © 2015 The Travelers Indemnity Company. All rights reserved. Page 1 of 2 Includes the copyrighted material of Insurance Services Office, Inc., with its permission i COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY 3. The following is added to Paragraph 8., Transfer 4. The following definition is added to the Of Rights Of Recovery Against Others To Us, DEFINITIONS Section: of SECTION IV - COMMERCIAL GENERAL "Written contract requiring insurance" means that LIABILITY CONDITIONS: part of any written contract under which you are We waive any right of recovery we may have required to include a person or organization as an against any person or organization because of additional insured on this Coverage Part, payments we make for "bodily injury", "property provided that the "bodily injury" and "property damage" or "personal injury" arising out of "your damage" occurs and the "personal injury" is work" performed by you, or on your behalf, done caused b an offense committed: under a "written contract requiring insurance" with by that person or organization. We waive this right a. After you have signed that written contract; only where you have agreed to do so as part of b. While that part of the written contract is in the "written contract requiring insurance" with effect; and such person or organization signed by you before, and in effect when, the "bodily injury" or c. Before the end of the policy period. "property damage" occurs, or the "personal injury" offense is committed. Page 2 of 2 © 2015 The Travelers Indemnity Company. All rights reserved. CG D3 81 09 15 Includes the copyrighted material of Insurance Services Office, Inc., with its permission i COMMERCIAL AUTO THIS ENDORSEMENT CHANGES THE POLICY. PLEASE READ IT CAREFULLY. BUSINESS AUTO EXTENSION ENDORSEMENT This endorsement modifies insurance provided under the following: BUSINESS AUTO COVERAGE FORM GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF COVERAGE - This endorsement broadens coverage. However, coverage for any injury, damage or medical expenses described in any of the provisions of this endorsement may be excluded or limited by another endorsement to the Coverage Part, and these coverage broadening provisions do not apply to the extent that coverage is excluded or limited by such an endorsement. The following listing is a general cover- age description only. Limitations and exclusions may apply to these coverages. Read all the provisions of this en- dorsement and the rest of your policy carefully to determine rights, duties, and what is and is not covered. A. BROAD FORM NAMED INSURED H. HIRED AUTO PHYSICAL DAMAGE - LOSS OF B_ BLANKET ADDITIONAL INSURED USE - INCREASED LIMIT 1. PHYSICAL DAMAGE - TRANSPORTATION C. EMPLOYEE HIRED AUTO EXPENSES - INCREASED LIMIT D. EMPLOYEES AS INSURED J_ PERSONAL PROPERTY E. SUPPLEMENTARY PAYMENTS - INCREASED K. AIRBAGS LIMITS L. NOTICE AND KNOWLEDGE OF ACCIDENT OR F. HIRED AUTO - LIMITED WORLDWIDE COV- LOSS ERAGE - INDEMNITY BASIS M. BLANKET WAIVER OF SUBROGATION G. WAIVER OF DEDUCTIBLE - GLASS N. UNINTENTIONAL ERRORS OR OMISSIONS PROVISIONS A. BROAD FORM NAMED INSURED this insurance applies and only to the extent that The following is added to Paragraph A.1., Who Is person or organization qualifies as an "insured" An Insured, of SECTION II - COVERED AUTOS under the Who Is An Insured provision contained LIABILITY COVERAGE: in Section II. Any organization you newly acquire or form dur- C. EMPLOYEE HIRED AUTO ing the policy period over which you maintain 1. The following is added to Paragraph A.1., 50% or more ownership interest and that is not Who Is An Insured, of SECTION II - COV- separately insured for Business Auto Coverage. ERED AUTOS LIABILITY COVERAGE: Coverage under this provision is afforded only un- An "employee" of yours is an "insured" while til the 180th day after you acquire or form the or- operating an "auto" hired or rented under a ganization or the end of the policy period, which- contract or agreement in an "employee's" ever is earlier. name, with your permission, while performing duties related to the conduct of your busi- B. BLANKET ADDITIONAL INSURED ness. The following is added to Paragraph c. in A.1., 2. The following replaces Paragraph b. in B.5., Who Is An Insured, of SECTION II - COVERED Other Insurance, of SECTION IV - BUSI- AUTOS LIABILITY COVERAGE: NESS AUTO CONDITIONS: Any person or organization who is required under b. For Hired Auto Physical Damage Cover- a written contract or agreement between you and age, the following are deemed to be cov- that person or organization, that is signed and ered "autos" you own: executed by you before the "bodily injury" or (1) Any covered "auto" you lease, hire, "property damage" occurs and that is in effect rent or borrow; and during the policy period, to be named as an addi- (2) Any covered "auto" hired or rented by tional insured is an "insured" for Covered Autos your "employee" under a contract in Liability Coverage, but only for damages to which an "employee's" name, with your CA T3 53 02 15 n 2415 The Travelers Indemnity company. All rights reserved. Page 1 of 4 Includes copyrighted material of Insurance Services Office, Inc. with its permission. 002192 COMMERCIAL AUTO permission. while performing duties (a) With respect to any claim made or "stilt" related to the conduct of your busi- brought outside the United States of ness. America, the territories and possessions However. any "auto" that is leased, hired. of the United States of America. Puerto rented or borrowed with a driver is not a Rico and Canada: covered "auto". (i) You must arrange to defend the "in- D. EMPLOYEES AS INSURED sured" against, and investigate or set- tle any such claim or "suit" and keep The following is added to Paragraph A.1., Who Is us advised of all proceedings and An Insured, of SECTION II -COVERED AUTOS ac- tions. LIABILITY COVERAGE: Any "employee" of yours is an "insured" while us- (ii) Neither you nor any other involved "insured" will make any settlement ing a covered "auto" you don't own, hire or borrow without our consent. in your business or your personal affairs. (iii) We may, at our discretion, participate E. SUPPLEMENTARY PAYMENTS - INCREASED in defending the "insured" against, or LIMITS in the settlement of, any claim or 1. The following replaces Paragraph A.2.a.(2), "suit". of SECTION II - COVERED AUTOS LIABIL- (iv) We will reimburse the "insured" for ITY COVERAGE: sums that the "insured" legally must (2) Up to 53,000 for cost of bail bonds (in- pay as damages because of "bodily cluding bonds for related traffic law viola- injury" or "property damage" to which tions) required because of an "accident" this insurance applies, that the "in- we cover. We do not have to furnish sured" pays with our consent, but these bonds. only up to the limit described in Para- 2. The following replaces Paragraph A.2.a.(4), graph C., Limits Of Insurance, of of SECTION II - COVERED AUTOS LIABIL- SECTION II - COVERED AUTOS ITY COVERAGE: LIABILITY COVERAGE. (4) All reasonable expenses incurred by the (v) We will reimburse the "insured" for "insured" at our request, including actual the reasonable expenses incurred loss of earnings up to $500 a day be- with our consent for your investiga- cause of time off from work. tion of such claims and your defense of the "insured" against any such F. HIRED AUTO - LIMITED WORLDWIDE COV- "suit", but only up to and included ERAGE - INDEMNITY BASIS within the limit described in Para- The following replaces Subparagraph (5) in Para- graph C., Limits Of Insurance, of graph 8.7., Policy Period, Coverage Territory, SECTION II - COVERED AUTOS of SECTION IV - BUSINESS AUTO CONDI- LIABILITY COVERAGE, and not in TIONS: addition to such limit. Our duty to (5) Anywhere in the world, except any country or make such payments ends when we jurisdiction while any trade sanction, em- have used up the applicable limit of bargo, or similar regulation imposed by the insurance in payments for damages, United States of America applies to and pro- settlements or defense expenses. hibits the transaction of business with or (b) This insurance is excess over any valid within such country or jurisdiction. for Cov- and collectible other insurance available ered Autos Liability Coverage for any covered to the "insured" whether primary, excess. "auto" that you lease, hire, rent or borrow contingent or on any other basis. without a driver for a period of 30 days or less (c) This insurance is not a substitute for re- and that is not an "auto" you lease, hire, rent uired or compulsory insurance in any or borrow from any of your "employees", country outside the United States. its tepartners (if you are a partnership), members ritories and possessions, Puerto Rico and (if you are a limited liability company) or Canada. members of their households. Page 2 of 4 J 2015 The Travelers Indemnity Company All rights reserved. CA T3 53 02 15 Includes copyrighted material of Insurance Services Office. Inc with its permission COMMERCIAL AUTO You agree to maintain all required or (2) In or on your covered "auto". compulsory insurance in any such coun- This coverage applies only in the event of a total try up to the minimum limits required by theft of your covered "auto". local law. Your failure to comply with No deductibles apply to this Personal Property compulsory insurance requirements will coverage. not invalidate the coverage afforded by this policy, but we will only be liable to the K. AIRBAGS same extent we would have been liable The following is added to Paragraph B.3., Exclu- had you complied with the compulsory in- sions, of SECTION III - PHYSICAL DAMAGE surance requirements. COVERAGE: (d) It is understood that we are not an admit- Exclusion 3.a. does not apply to "loss" to one or ted or authorized insurer outside the more airbags in a covered "auto" you own that in- United States of America, its territories flate due to a cause other than a cause of "loss" and possessions, Puerto Rico and Can- set forth in Paragraphs A.1.1b. and A.1.c., but ada. We assume no responsibility for the only: furnishing of certificates of insurance, or a. If that "auto" is a covered "auto" for Compre- for compliance in any way with the laws hensive Coverage under this policy; of other countries relating to insurance. b. The airbags are not covered under any war- G. WAIVER OF DEDUCTIBLE - GLASS ranty-, and The following is added to Paragraph D., Deducti- c. The airbags were not intentionally inflated. ble, of SECTION III - PHYSICAL DAMAGE We will pay up to a maximum of $1,000 for any COVERAGE: one "loss". No deductible for a covered "auto" will apply to L. NOTICE AND KNOWLEDGE OF ACCIDENT OR glass damage if the glass is repaired rather than LOSS replaced. The following is added to Paragraph A.2.a., of H. HIRED AUTO PHYSICAL DAMAGE - LOSS OF SECTION IV - BUSINESS AUTO CONDITIONS: USE - INCREASED LIMIT Your duty to give us or our authorized representa- The following replaces the last sentence of Para- tive prompt notice of the "accident" or "loss" ap- graph A.4.b., Loss Of Use Expenses, of SEC- plies only when the "accident" or "loss" is known TION III - PHYSICAL DAMAGE COVERAGE: to: Cn However, the most we will pay for any expenses (a) You (if you are an individual); for loss of use is $65 per day, to a maximum of (b) A partner (if you are a partnership); . = $750 for any one "accident". (c) A member (if you are a limited liability com- I. PHYSICAL DAMAGE - TRANSPORTATION pany); EXPENSES - INCREASED LIMIT (d) An executive officer, director or insurance 0:= The following replaces the first sentence in Para- manager (if you are a corporation or other or- graph A.4.a., Transportation Expenses, of ganization); or SECTION III - PHYSICAL DAMAGE COVER- (e) Any "employee" authorized by you to give no- AGE: tice of the "accident" or "loss". We will pay up to $50 per day to a maximum of M. BLANKET WAIVER OF SUBROGATION $1,500 for temporary transportation expense in- The following replaces Paragraph A.5., Transfer curred by you because of the total theft of a cov- Of Rights Of Recovery Against Others To Us, eyed "auto" of the private passenger type. of SECTION IV - BUSINESS AUTO CONDI- J. PERSONAL PROPERTY TIONS: The following is added to Paragraph A.4., Cover- 5. Transfer Of Rights Of Recovery Against age Extensions, of SECTION III - PHYSICAL Others To Us DAMAGE COVERAGE: We waive any right of recovery we may have Personal Property against any person or organization to the ex- tent required of you by a written contract We will pay up to $400 for "loss" to wearing ap- signed and executed prior to any "accident" parel and other personal property which is: or "loss", provided that the "accident" or "loss" (1) Owned by an "insured"; and arises out of operations contemplated by CA T3 53 02 15 © 2015 The Travelers Indemnity Company. All rights reserved. Page 3 of 4 Includes copyrighted material of Insurance Services Office, Inc. with its permission. 002193 i COMMERCIAL AUTO such contract. The waiver applies only to the The unintentional ornission of, or unintentional person or organization designated in such error in, any information given by you shall not contract. prejudice your rights under this insurance. How- N. UNINTENTIONAL ERRORS OR OMISSIONS ever this provision does not affect our right to col- The following is added to Paragraph B.2., Con- lect additional premium or exercise our right of cealment, Misrepresentation, Or Fraud, of cancellation or non-renewal. SECTION IV - BUSINESS AUTO CONDITIONS: Page 4 of 4 2015 The Travelers ~ndemn+ty company. All rights reserved. CA T3 53 02 15 Includes copyrighted material of Insurance Services Office. Inc with its permission. EXHIBIT A Scope of Work City of Ashland Water Treatment Plant Owner's Representative February 2017 Background The City of Ashland's (City) existing water treatment plant (WTP) is located in a canyon downstream from Hosler Dam. The WTP has experienced flooding in the past 50 years owing to its location and is at risk of inundation should there be a dam failure. To reduce the risk to the WTP, the City plans to construct a new 2.5 million gallon per day (MGD) water treatment plant to provide water to the City's system. The new WTP will either treat water in conjunction with the existing treatment plant, or become the singular water treatment plant. The new WTP will be built to a capacity to meet the demands of the City and be capable of operating solely, if needed, in the future. The City recently completed a selection and negotiation process for the initial design phase services. The engineering consultant team selected for these design services is herein referred to as Designer. The proposal also established a process of granting the second highest ranked proposal team the ability to negotiate with the City to act as the owner's representative for peer review of alternatives and final engineering. RH2 Engineering, Inc., (RH2) and Black and Veatch (B&V) have been asked to provide a scope of services for peer review services for the City, including review of the Designer deliverables and other supporting tasks in the first phase of the preliminary engineering design for the WTP. The initial scope of work will be to complete detailed review of recommendations provided to the City by the Designer for the design improvements. RH2 and B&V's services included in this Scope of Work will be limited to reviewing the treatment alternatives and siting analysis for the location of the proposed facilities. The City is aware that this a crucial step in the project and requires verification that the recommended treatment processes and recommended siting location is the most suitable for the water system. RH2 is also currently updating the City's Water Master Plan (WMP) and will be providing technical information to the City to support the new WTP alternatives analysis as part of this Scope of Work. Task 1- Project Management Objective: Perform project management of task work; coordinate with the City, RH2, and B&V to track project performance and report on progress after each review deliverable. Approach: 1.1 Perform project management of task work, coordinate with the City and consultants, track project performance, and report on progress after each deliverable. 1.2 Participate in one (1) project conference call for the purpose of reviewing comments on the Water Quality Analysis. 1.3 Participate in one (1) first-phase project completion conference call for the purpose of reviewing comments on the WTP site selection and treatment process technical memorandum (TM). 1.4 Review other documents and/or processes, as necessary. 1 2/14/2017 1:18:40 PM Z:\Both eH\Data\COA\S40\WTP Owners Representative\PSA SOW COA WTP Owners Representative 20170214.docx City of Ashland Exhibit A Water Treatment Plant Owner's Representative Scope of Work Assumptions: • RH2 project manager and lead technical reviewer will participate in each conference call. • Project duration is six (6) months. • Site visits are not required for successful performance of peer review tasks. • City will advise timing of reviews a minimum of three (3) weeks ahead to facilitate B&V resources. • Within this task, it is anticipated that RH2 will provide up to three (3) TMs. Deliverables: • Progress reports with budget status summary table and invoice. Deliver progress reports after each of two (2) peer review deliverables. Task 2 - Water Master Plan Coordination Objective: Provide technical information gathered through the WMP project that supports the WTP alternatives analyses. Approach: 2.1 Provide technical data as requested. 2.2 Verify consistency between the WMP and recommended alternatives. 2.3 Coordinate demand forecasting. 2.4 Provide stored water recommendations for water system. Assumptions: • It is assumed that technical data will be limited to demand projections, storage requirements, and system head conditions to facilitate analysis of siting study. Provided by City: • TMs provided by Designer. • Written requests for data. RH2 Deliverables: • Up to three (3) TMs in response to data requests in electronic PDF format and one (1) hard copy, 8 %2- by 11-inch. Task 3 - Peer Review of First-phase Preliminary Engineering Memorandum Objective: Perform a peer review of Designer memoranda and deliverables, as shown below, for the first-phase preliminary engineering design for the WTP. Peer review of work by Designer will include reviews for technical approach and feasibility, costs, and constructability. Approach: 3.1 Perform peer review of water quality analysis TM (RH2 and B&V). 3.2 Review WTP site selection and treatment process selection TM (RH2 and B&V). 2 2/14/17 1:18 PM Z:\Bothell\Data\COA\S40\WTP Owners Representative\PSA SOW COA WTP Owners Representative 20170214.docx City of Ashland Exhibit A Water Treatment Plant Owner's Representative Scope of Work 3.3 Review impacts and benefits to the overall system based on siting recommendation. 3.4 Provide general technical expertise support to address issues that may arise internally, from the City Council, the Ashland Water Advisory Committee (AWAC), or the public. Responses will be documented as appropriate for the topic under consideration (RH2 and B&V). Assumptions: • Designer process train and site selection to be reviewed will be presented in a single report. • Review of one (1) version of each draft TM is assumed. Review of TMs beyond a single-version of each TM can be conducted as an additional task. • Treatment process selection will include a decision matrix with elements such as: capital costs, operations and maintenance considerations; sustainability, impacts to distribution system; building footprint; and reliability, at a minimum. • Review of Designer work plan, project approach, and other preliminary design deliverables beyond those included here are excluded from this Scope of Work and can be conducted as an additional task. • B& V cost review will be based on similar-sized plants and relevant experience. An Engineer's Opinion of Probable Constructed Cost is excluded. • B&V will not review the accuracy of assumptions or data inherent in the reviewed memoranda. The City and Designer are responsible for validity of the basis of design assumptions. Deliverables: • One (1) copy of each TM in MS Word with all changes and comments tracked. • Draft and final peer review comments table for water quality analysis TM. The peer review comments table will include substantive comments from each technical reviewer. The table will be finalized after the water quality analysis conference call. • Draft and final peer review comments table for WTP site selection and treatment process TM. The peer review comments table will include substantive comments from each technical reviewer. The table will be finalized after the first-phase completion conference call. Task 4 - Pump Station Review Objective: Provide technical review of the Park Estates Pump Station design. Approach: 4.1 Provide system hydraulic information as requested from the WMP Update. 4.2 Verify consistency between WMP and recommended alternatives. 4.3 Review design and siting recommendations. 4.4 Review design recommendations and integration with new WTP design alternatives. 4.5 Within this task, it is anticipated that RH2 will provide up to two (2) TMs. 4.6 Attendance at four (4) meetings with City staff. 3 2/14/17 1:18 PM Z:\Bothell\Data\COA\S40\WTP Owners Representative\PSA SOW COA WTP Owners Representative 20170214.docx City of Ashland Exhibit A Water Treatment Plant Owner's Representative Scope of Work Assumptions: • It is assumed that technical data will be limited to existing system pressures. The review of the design recommendations will not entail reviewing every component of the facility. The review will be limited to the function of the recommended facilities interaction with the existing and future system. Provided by City: • TMs and design documentation provided by City's design consultant. • Written requests for data. RH2 Deliverables: • Meeting attendance at four (4) meetings. • Up to two (2) TMs after review is completed in electronic PDF format, and one (1) 8 by 11-inch hard copy. Project Schedule RI-12 and its subconsultant (B&V) will schedule work with the City after the City receives information from the Designer. As stated within the Scope of Work, three (3) weeks' notice will be required before internal coordination and scheduling can begin. It is expected that the review work will begin approximately May 1, 2017. RI-12 will deliver technical review and evaluation to the City within fourteen (14) days after receiving data from the City. 4 2/15/17 9:20 AM Z:\Bothell\Data\COA\S40\W7P Owners Representative\PSA SOW COA WTP Owners Representative 20170214.docx i EXHIBIT D - Preliminary City of Ashland Water Treatment Plant Owner's Representative Fee Estimate Description Total Total Labor Total Subconsultant Total Expense Total Cost Hours Task 1 Project management 44 $ 7,566 $ 8,535 $ 277 $ 16,378 Task 2 water master Plan Coordination 37 $ 5,701 $ - $ 333 $ 6,034 Task 3 Peer Review of First-phase Preliminary Engineering Memorandum 46 $ 7,620 $ 28,102 $ 352 $ 36,074 Task 4 Pump Station Review 56 $ 9,414 $ - $ 480 $ 9,894 PROJECT TOTAL 183 $ 30,301 $ 36,637 $ 1,442 $ 68,380 Z:\BotheII\Data\COA\S40\VVFP Owners Representative\PSA FEE COA WTP Owners Representative 20170206.xlsm 2/15/2017 7.36 AM i EXHIBIT E RH2 ENGINEERING, INC. 2017 SCHEDULE OF RATES AND CHARGES RATE LIST RATE UNIT Professional 1 $129 $/hr Professional II $138 $/hr Professional III $147 $/hr Professional IV $157 $/hr Professional V $168 $/hr Professional VI $183 $/hr Professional VII $199 $/hr Professional VIII $209 $/hr Professional IX $209 $/hr Technician 1 $80 $/hr Technician 11 $88 $/hr Technician III $89 $/hr Technician IV $95 $/hr Administrative 1 $65 $/hr Administrative 11 $76 $/hr Administrative III $92 $/hr Administrative IV $110 $/hr Administrative V $131 $/hr CAD/GIS System $27.50 $/hr CAD Plots - Half Size $2.50 price per plot CAD Plots - Full Size $10.00 price per plot CAD Plots - Large $25.00 price per plot Copies (bw) 8.5" X 11" $0.09 price per copy Copies (bw) 8.5" X 14" $0.14 price per copy Copies (bw) 11" X 17" $0.20 price per copy Copies (color) 8.5" X 11" $0.90 price per copy Copies (color) 8.5" X 14" $1.20 price per copy Copies (color) 11" X 17" $2.00 price per copy Technology Charge 2.50% % of Direct Labor price per mile Mileage $0.535 (or Current IRS Rate) Subconsultants 10% Cost + Outside Services at cost Rates listed are adjusted annually. RESOLUTION NO. 2016 I A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND, OREGON DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO REIMBURSE EXPENDITURES FROM PROCEEDS OF TAX-EXEMPT OBLIGATIONS RECITALS: A. The City Council of the City of Ashland, Oregon (the "Issuer") desires to finance the costs of a new reservoir expected to service the Crowson and Granite service areas, including a pre- design study to confirm storage requirements and evaluation of the piping to the Crowson reservoir (the "Project"); and B. The Issuer intends to finance costs of the Project or portions thereof with the proceeds of the sale of obligations the interest upon which is excluded from gross income for federal income tax purposes (the "Obligations"); and C. Prior to the issuance of the Obligations the Issuer desires to incur certain capital expenditures (the "Expenditures") with respect to the Project from available moneys of the Issuer; and D. The City Council of the Issuer has determined that those moneys advanced to pay the Expenditures prior to the issuance of the Obligations are available only for a temporary period and it is necessary to reimburse the Issuer for the Expenditures from the proceeds of the Obligations. THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The Issuer hereby states its intention and reasonably expects to reimburse Expenditures of the Project paid prior to the issuance of the Obligations with proceeds of the Obligations. SECTION 2. The reasonably expected maximum principal amount of the Obligations is $9,000,000. SECTION 3. This resolution is being adopted no later than 60 days after the date on which the Issuer paid its first Expenditure on the Project to be reimbursed from proceeds of the Obligations (excluding certain preliminary expenditures which may have been paid before that date). SECTION 4. The Issuer will make a reimbursement allocation, which is a written allocation that evidences the Issuer's use of proceeds of the Obligations to reimburse an Expenditure, no later than 18 months after the later of the date on which the Expenditure is paid or the Project is placed in service or abandoned, but in no event more than three years after the date on which the Expenditure is paid. SECTION 5. This resolution is adopted as official action of the Issuer in order to comply with Treasury Regulation Section 1.150-2 and any other regulations of the Internal Revenue Service relating to the qualification for reimbursement of Expenditures of the Issuer incurred prior to the date of issue of the Obligations. i SECTION 6. The Finance Director of the Issuer is hereby authorized to make future declarations of intent to reimburse under Section 1.150-2 of the Federal Income Tax Regulations, on behalf of the Issuer and without further action by the City Council. All such future declarations shall be in writing and the original or a certified copy of each declaration shall be maintained in the public records of the Issuer. SECTION 7. This resolution takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. This resolution was duly PASSED and ADOPTED this _ day of December, 2016. Jarbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of December, 2016. R4 Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: David Lohman, City Attorney 2 i Council Business Meetina March 21, 20171 Title: Rogue Credit Union Appeal From: Bill Molnar Director of Community Development bill.molnar(@-ashland.or.us Summary: Consideration of Rogue Credit Union's appeal of the Planning Commission's February 14, 2017 denial of a request for Site Design Review approval to construct a 4,508 square foot, single-story credit union building with drive-up window as part of the phased development of the properties located at 1651 Ashland Street. The application proposes the use of a shadow plan involving adjoining properties that will be outside the future control of the applicant as a means for complying with the minimum Floor Area Ratio (F.A.R.) of 0.50, and requests an Exception to the F.A.R. standard as well. The application also included requests for a Property Line Adjustment and a Tree Removal Permit to remove eight of the site's 24 trees. Actions, Options, or Potential Motions: 1. Move to affirm the decision of the Planning Commission, reject the appeal and direct staff to prepare written findings for approval reflecting the original staff recommendations to Planning Commission from the January 10, 2017 meeting for adoption by Council. 2. Move to reverse the decision of the Planning Commission and support the written appeal, and direct staff to prepare written findings for adoption by Council (include specific direction as to where the original decision was found to be in error). 3. Move to modify the decision of the Planning Commission and direct staff to prepare written findings for adoption by Council (include specific direction to staff as to the modifications being made). 4. Move to send the decision back to the Planning Commission with the following instructions for further proceedings, with the understanding that subsequent actions by the Planning Commission will be the final decision of the City (include specific instructions relating to further proceedings). Staff Recommendation: Planning staff recommends that the Council affirm the decision of the Planning Commission, reject the appeal and direct staff to prepare findings for adoption by Council. Resource Requirements: N/A. Policies, Plans and Goals Supported: Council Goals - Develop and support land use and transportation policies to achieve sustainable development (#13); Develop infill and compact urban form policies (#13.2); Support alternative transportation choices 13.3); Develop and encourage alternative transportation options 18.2) Page Iof12 CITY OF ASHLAND Comprehensive Plan Elements: Element XIV - Regional Problem Solving. [Through the associated Regional Problem Solving (RPS) plan and agreement, the city committed to accommodating a doubling of regional population with current Employment lands. RPS included a commitment to achieving Regional Transportation Plan benchmarks for new employment in mixed-use, pedestrian friendly areas.] Master Plan Policies - Not within a Master Plan area. BacklZround and Additional Information: Original Request The original application was a request for Site Design Review approval to construct a 4,508 square foot, single-story credit union building with drive-up window as part of the phased development of the properties located at 1651 Ashland Street. The application proposes the use of a shadow plan involving adjoining properties that will be outside the future control of the applicant as a means for complying with the minimum Floor Area Ratio (F.A.R.) of 0.50, and requests an Exception to the F.A.R. standard. The application also included requests for a Property Line Adjustment and a Tree Removal Permit to remove eight of the site's 24 trees. Planning Commission Decision The Planning Commission ultimately found that the shadow plan provided by the applicant failed to meet the Floor Area Ratio (F.A.R.) standard, and also found that the requested Exception to the F.A.R. standard did not equally or better achieve the level of intensity of development or sense of enclosure of the street sought by the standard and therefore denied the application without prejudice. (As detailed in AMC section 18.5.1.030.A, unless a denial is specifically stated to be "without prejudice the applicants are not eligible for resubmittal for one year from the date of the denial.) Floor Area Ratios (FAR's) and Shadow Plans The minimum Floor Area Ratio standards is found in AMC section 18.4.2.040.C.1.a. "Orientation and Scale" which states that, "Developments shall have a minimum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 0.50. Where a site is one-half an acre or greater in size, the FAR requirement may be met through a phased development plan or a shadow plan that demonstrates how development may be intensified over time to meet the minimum FAR. See shadow plan example in Figure 18.4.2.040. C.1. a. Plazas and pedestrian areas shall count as floor area for the purposes of meeting the minimum FAR." Ashland has had a Floor Area Ratio in place since the adoption of the Site Design and Use Standards in 1980's. The previous standard had a minimum Floor Area Ratio of 0.35 and a maximum Floor Area Ratio of 0.50, but was changed to simply require a minimum 0.50 Floor Area Ratio in conjunction with the adoption of the Pedestrian Places Ordinance in 2012. As explained during the Planning Commission's January 10, 2017 hearing, there are really three underlying purposes for the minimum Floor Area Ratio standard. First, the minimum Floor Area Ratio sets an intensity standard to deliberately create a level of development to support transit, Page 2of12 CITY OF ASHLAND similar to a minimum residential density standard. Second, the minimum Floor Area Ratio seeks the efficient use of limited available commercial land, a long-standing goal most recently reflected through the city's commitments under the Regional Problem Solving (R.P.S.) process, and its associated goals and policies, to accommodate a doubling of the region's population within existing boundaries. Third, the F.A.R. seeks to provide a sense of enclosure to the streetscape, as noted in AMC 18.4.6.040.A.2 which explains that "All streets in Ashland shall be designed using the following assumptions: Building setbacks and heights create a sense of enclosure. ' ) Appeal Request Subsequent to the mailing of a the Planning Commission's adopted findings, an appeal was timely filed by attorney Mark S. Bartholomew on behalf of the applicant Rogue Credit Union. This appeal will be processed on the record according to AMC 18.5.1.060.1. The grounds for the appeal as identified in the notice of appeal are: 1. The Planning Commission failed to properly consider the Appellant's request for an exception to the strict Floor Area Ratio standards due to the Appellant's unique use (i.e. a drive-up). The Planning Commission made only conclusory findings with regard to the uniqueness of the proposed use. 2. The Planning Commission improperly construed the Ashland Municipal Code in determining the use of a Shadow Plan to meet Floor Area Ratio standards is discretionary on the part of the Planning Commission, rather than discretionary on the part of the Appellant. The Planning Commission's improper construction was erroneous. 3. The Planning Commission improperly considered Appellant's two contiguous parcels to be separate parcels, contrary to the Ashland Municipal Code, which provides that contiguous parcels under the same ownership shall be considered a single parcel for purposes of development. The Planning Commission's error in this regard undercut Appellant's proposal for a Shadow Plan to meet the Floor Area Ratio standards. 4. The Planning Commission improperly applied the Ashland Municipal Code with respect to Shadow Plans. Shadow Plans are merely conceptual plans that must show that development intensity could be increased in the future. The Planning Commission's findings and deliberations reveal that it imposed a stricter standard - a guarantee that development of a certain intensity will occur. This is contrary to the Ashland Municipal Code, as well as the very recently approved Goodwill Industries addition (PA-2016- 02060). In that planning file, the Planning Commission approved a Shadow Plan after staff acknowledged that "the applicant is under no obligation to build the site out further as shown in the shadow plan" and that the applicant (Goodwill) "could choose to modify their approved shadow plan." The Planning Commission made the correct decision in the Goodwill application, but failed to apply the same standards to the instant application. The Planning Commission in this case found that more intense development will not occur while the Appellant owned the property. The foregoing is incorrect for two reasons. First, it is incorrect because there is no standard in the Ashland Municipal Code that requires a guarantee of build out according to a Shadow Plan. Secondly, it ignores the fact that the "property" consists to two discreet parcels, including the second, larger parcel upon which no development is yet proposed, but yet could be developed to a greater intensity, thus allowing the two parcels (which are considered a single parcel per Page 3of12 CITY OF ASHLAND the code) to meet Floor Area Ratio density. 5. The Planning Commission provided no findings in rejecting appellant's offering a restrictive covenant to ensure a minimum Floor Area Ratio of the property (consisting of two parcels). This is especially erroneous, considering, as previously stated, Appellant is not required to guarantee build out according to a Shadow Plan per the Code. Despite that, consistent with Appellant's desire to be an outstanding community partner, Appellant offered to encumber its property with a covenant to require development intensity on the combined property to meet the Floor Area Ratio standards. It is ironic that the Planning Commission determined that the application was deficient, when in reality, the application exceeded the applicable standards by stipulating to be bound by the covenant, which would run with the land and bind all future property owners. This is in stark contrast to the Goodwill approval, which has no mechanism to ensure that the property will eventually develop to Floor Area Ratio standards. The appeal on the record is limited to these five grounds for appeal which were clearly and distinctly identified in the appeal request. Considering the Grounds for Appeal 1. The Planning Commission failed to properly consider the Appellant's request for an exception to the strict Floor Area Ratio standards due to the Appellant's unique use (i.e. a drive-up). The approval criterion for an Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards has two sub-criteria, and an Exception may be approved when either is satisfied: 1) There is a demonstrable difficulty meeting the specific requirements of the Site Development and Design Standards due to a unique or unusual aspect of an existing structure or the proposed use of a site; and approval of the exception will not substantially negatively impact adjacent properties; and approval of the exception is consistent with the stated purpose of the Site Development and Design; and the . exception requested is the minimum which would alleviate the difficulty.; or 2) There is no demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements, but granting the exception will result in a design that equally or better achieves the stated purpose of the Site Development and Design Standards. While the application was somewhat confusing with regard to an Exception being part of the request [i. e. a shadow plan was proposed, which would negate the need for an Exception, yet the application addressed an Exception while also indicating in some places that no Exception was requested.] However, where an Exception was addressed in the application, the request was framed in terms of sub-criterion #2 which speaks to there being no demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements but instead providing a design which equally or better achieves the stated purpose of the standards. Considerations of the unique or unusual aspect of the proposed drive-up use posing difficulties in meeting the standards would fall under sub-criterion 41 and were not put forth by the applicant as a basis for an Exception. Page 4of12 CITY OF ASHLAND While the application materials only minimally addressed the drive-up use and did not present it as a basis for Exception in their written materials, Commissioners nonetheless questioned at the hearing whether the drive-up window's removal would enable additional parking to support a larger building and further considered the drive-up component during deliberations: Norton voiced support for the motion. He commented that the drive-thru use is a unique and unusual circumstance and noted the applicants own the last available drive-thru in the city. Mindlin expressed concern with the commission defining the special circumstance and having to justify the exception themselves. Mr. Molnar clarified the applicants made an argument under exception criteria (2) and there has been testimony tonight presenting arguments under criteria (1). He went on to say the record contains information on both and the commission could grant the exception under either criteria. Pearce commented that it is difficult to make the case based on the "as good or better " criteria. He stated the other criteria speaks to the unique or unusual aspect of the existing structure or proposed use, but they are considering approving this based on the proposed user, not use. He stated it is a bank use all banks have different requirements and regulations and raised concern with granting an exception based on the proposed user. Thompson commented that other businesses could potentially make a similar argument that they should not have to build a larger building and meet the FAR requirement because they do not need the extra space and doing so would be an imprudent use of their resources. Brown commented that most businesses that build larger structures have the ability to lease the extra space out, but this applicant cannot. - Page 5 of 6 of the January 10, 2017 Ashland Planning Commission Minutes, Deliberations and Decision (Attachment 5). The Commission also considered the unique aspects of the credit union's charter as a potential basis for an Exception, but ultimately made the following findings: The Planning Commission finds that the final approval criterion has to do with Exceptions to the Site Development and Design Standards. Given concerns with the proposed shadow plan satisfying the requirements of the code detailed above, the applicants have also requested an Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards relative to the F.A.R. standard and offered a shadow plan supplemented by a covenant which would restrict the development of Lot I by a future owner to be consistent with the shadow plan. The Commission finds that there are two potential criteria to be considered in granting an Exception. The first is that, "There is a demonstrable difficulty meeting the specific requirements of the Site Development and Design Standards due to a unique or unusual aspect of an existing structure Page 5of12 CITY OF ASHLAND or the proposed use of a site; and approval of the exception will not substantially negatively impact adjacent properties; and approval of the exception is consistent with the stated purpose of the Site Development and Design; and the exception requested is the minimum which would alleviate the difficulty. " And the second is that, "There is no demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements, but granting the exception will result in a design that equally or better achieves the stated purpose of the Site Development and Design Standards. " The applicants have requested the Exception based on the latter, suggesting that while there is no demonstrable difficulty in meeting the F.A.R. standard, the proposal will equally or better achieve the purpose of the Site Development and Design Standards. They emphasize that the building will have a positive impact on the streetscape, using brick and metal paneling and breaking the building into multiple masses, placing parking at the rear of the building, providing inviting pedestrian spaces adjacent to the proposed street improvements, providing bike parking at the plaza and more glazing than called for under the standards. The Planning Commission finds that the magnitude of the Exception requested, asking for a 0.247 F.A.R. where a minimum 0.50 F.A.R. is required, demonstrates that the proposal is not in line with the vision sought through the Floor Area Ratio standard for a property of this size, and in considering an Exception the Commission must determine that the requested design achieves the stated purpose equally or better. The Commission finds that the Exception as proposed does not equally or better achieve the level of intensity of development or sense of enclosure of the street sought by the standard. In particular, the purpose and intent for non- residential development at 18.4.2.040.A states that properties visible from highly traveled arterial streets are held to a higher development standard and states that one of the purposes of the site review standards is to enhance pedestrian and bicycle traffic. Ashland Street in this location is a highly traveled arterial, and the Planning Commission finds that the project is in large part an automobile-oriented use and does not equally or better achieve the purpose of enhancing pedestrian traffic. In addition, the purpose of site design review at 18.5.2.010 includes enhancing the environment jor walking, cycling, and mass transit use. For the same reason, the Planning Commission finds that the proposal does not equally or better meet this purpose over a project that conformed to the F.A.R. standard. The Commission finds that the Exception requested is not an equal or better design to one that would meet the F.A. R., but further finds that the request should also be considered in light of the first criterion, that "There is a demonstrable difficulty meeting the specific requirements of the Site Development and Design Standards due to a unique or unusual aspect of Page6of12 CITY OF ASHLAND an existing structure or the proposed use of a site; and approval of the exception will not substantially negatively impact adjacent properties; and approval of the exception is consistent with the stated purpose of the Site Development and Design; and the exception requested is the minimum which would alleviate the difficulty. " The Planning Commission finds that accommodating the proposed drive-up use and the associated site planning, circulation and parking configuration necessary to address the special use standards for drive-up uses has not been demonstrated to impact the site planning to a degree that would prevent accommodating a larger footprint on Lot #2. Commissioners recognize that this was one of only 12 drive-up windows allowed in Ashland, and that the criteria for locating allowed drive-up uses within the city puts constraints on where a drive-up use may be allowed, limited the applicants' ability to select a suitable property, but the Planning Commission finds that that the drive- up component of the request has not been demonstrated to create specific difficulties in meeting the F.A.R. standard on the subject property. The Planning Commission further finds that as a credit union, being subject to charter regulations preventing them from pursuing speculative development proposals does not constitute a unique or unusual aspect of the proposed use of the site, as this is ultimately aspect of the specific user (Rogue Credit Union) and not the proposed use as a financial institution. The Planning Commission finds that there is not a demonstrable difficulty in meeting the standards due either to a unique or unusual aspect of an existing structure or the proposed use of the site, and that as such an Exception is not merited. The Commission finds that the suggestion to impose a real estate development covenant on proposed Lot #1, requiring a future owner to develop to a density of at least. 624 F.A.R., does not cure the problems with the proposed shadow plan in this application. The two lots would be separate lots, under separate ownerships, and for totally separate developments, which does not meet the definition or intent of a shadow plan in the Land Use Ordinance. - See Section 2.3 beginning on Page 8 of the February 14, 2017 findings (Attachment 4). In staff's view, the Planning Commission fully and properly considered the unique aspects of the appellant's proposed use of the property, both in terms of a financial institution and of a drive-up use, in ultimately reaching the decision that an Exception was not merited. 2. The Planning Commission improperly construed the Ashland Municipal Code in determining the use of a Shadow Plan to meet Floor Area Ratio standards is discretionary on the part of the Planning Commission, rather than discretionary on the part of the Appellant. AMC 18.6.1 defines a shadow plan as: A schematic or conceptual design for future land development when a lot Page 7of12 CITY OF ASHLAND could be developed at a higher intensity. A shadow plan demonstrates that the proposed development will not impede the future use of the lotto be fully developed to the required building intensity standards (i. e., Floor Area Ratio), and that the proposed development has been planned to prevent piecemeal and uncoordinated development. AMC section 18.1.2.050 "Rules of Ordinance Construction" subsection D deals with "Requirements versus Guidelines" as follows: Use of the word "shall, " "must, " "required, " prohibited" or similar directive term means the ordinance provision is a requirement. Use of the word "should, " "encouraged, " "recommended, " "mav, " or similar term, means the provision is a guideline. Guidelines are intended to assist City decision-making bodies where certain land use actions require the exercise of discretion. With regard to shadow plans, AMC 18.4.2.040.C.1.a. provides that, Where a site is one-half an acre or greater in size, the FAR requirement may be met through a phased development plan or a shadow plan that demonstrates how development may be intensified over time to meet the minimum FAR. " With regard to the use of a shadow plan, the Commission found as follows: "The Commission further finds that the allowance for the use of a shadow plan in the code is discretionary on the part of the Planning Commission (i. e. the standard language in AMC 18.4.2.040. C.1. a. uses "may " rather than "shall'). The Commission finds that the shadow plan provided is counter to the intent of providing more intense development along the Boulevard corridor to contribute to a sense of enclosure of the streetscape, while instead pushing the more intense future development nearer to residentially-zoned neighbors at the rear of the property, and further finds that the current application and shadow plan provided as part of that application fails to meet the Detailed Site Review Standard regarding Orientation and Scale in 18.4.2.040. C.1. " - See Subsection 2.3 on Page 6 of the February 14, 2017findings (Attachment 4). In staff's assessment, the Commission was exercising what they found to be appropriate discretion "to prevent piecemeal and uncoordinated development" because they found that the development illustrated in the shadow plan provided was "counter to the intent of providing more intense development along the Boulevard corridor to contribute to a sense of enclosure of the streetscape, while instead pushing the more intense future development nearer to residentially-zoned neighbors at the rear of the property. " 3. The Planning Commission improperly considered Appellant's two contiguous parcels to be separate parcels, contrary to the Ashland Municipal Code, which provides that contiguous parcels under the same ownership shall be considered a Page 8of12 CITY OF ASHLAND single parcel for purposes of development. In AMC 18.6.1, a lot is defined as, "A unit of land created by a partition or a subdivision or a unit or contiguous units of land under single ownership, which complies with all applicable laws at the time such lots were created. Any contiguous ownership of non- conforming lots will be considered one tract of land." While the applicant currently owns the two contiguous subject properties here, the application materials and testimony made clear that the applicant was precluded from development of the second parcel through their charter as a credit union and as such they would be selling the property and would have no involvement in its future development although they would be willing to place a deed restriction which would have required that the second property develop in the future according to a higher minimum Floor Area Ratio to comply with the proposed shadow plan. The Planning Commission ultimately found: "The Planning Commission finds that the shadow plan provided poses some concerns. First, the applicants have explained that as a credit union, they are unable by charter to act as developers and as such can neither develop the remainder of the site with buildings other than the credit union nor can they add a second story that would then be rented to tenants other than the credit union. As such, while a shadow plan is provided, the remaining lot would not be under the applicants control and would instead be sold and developed by the future buyer. The Planning Commission finds that by definition, the Ashland Municipal Code provides that contiguous lots under a single ownership may be considered a single property for planning purposes, however in this case it is clear that development is not to occur while the properties are under the same ownership and as such the Planning Commission finds that they should not be considered together as part of a shadow plan. " - See Subsection 2.3 on Page S of the February 14, 2017 findings (Attachment 4). The Commission made the determination that while contiguous properties under a single ownership were considered to be one lot for planning purposes, in this instance because it was made clear by the applicants that the two properties would not be under the same ownership for the development of Lot #1, they would not provide for coordinated planning of the site, and thus should not be considered together initially. 4. The Planning Commission improperly applied the Ashland Municipal Code with respect to Shadow Plans. In AMC 18.6.1, a shadow plan is defined as: A schematic or conceptual design for future land development when a lot could be developed at a higher intensity. A shadow plan demonstrates that the proposed development will not impede the future use of the lot to be fully developed to the required building intensity standards (i. e., Floor Area Page 9of12 CITY OF ASHLAND Ratio), and that the proposed development has been planned to prevent piecemeal and uncoordinated development. As discussed in #2 above, the Planning Commission found that there was discretion on their part as to whether the shadow plan adequately addressed the standard, and found that: the shadow plan provided is counter to the intent of providing more intense development along the Boulevard corridor to contribute to a sense of enclosure of the streetscape, while instead pushing the more intense future development nearer to residentially-zoned neighbors at the rear of the property, and further finds that the current application and shadow plan provided as part of that application fails to meet the Detailed Site Review Standard regarding Orientation and Scale in 18.4.2.040. C.1. - See Subsection 2.3 on Page 6 of the February 14, 2017 findings (Attachment 4). In staff's assessment, the Commission was not seeking to require assurance that development will occur as depicted, although the applicant had offered to deed restrict the property with a guarantee that development would occur at a specific intensity. The Commission was instead exercising discretion "to prevent piecemeal and uncoordinated development" because they found that the development illustrated in the shadow plan provided was "counter to the intent of providing more intense development along the Boulevard corridor to contribute to a sense of enclosure of the streetscape, while instead pushing the more intense future development nearer to residentially-zoned neighbors at the rear of the property. " 5. The Planning Commission provided no findings in rejecting appellant's offering a restrictive covenant to ensure a minimum Floor Area Ratio of the property (consisting of two parcels). The Planning Commission findings with regard to the appellant's offering of a restrictive covenant were as follows: ....The Commission finds that the suggestion to impose a real estate development covenant on proposed Lot #1, requiring a future owner to develop to a density of at least. 624 F.A. R., does not cure the problems with the proposed shadow plan in this application. The two lots would be separate lots, under separate ownerships, and for totally separate developments, which does not meet the definition or intent of a shadow plan in the Land Use Ordinance. - See the last paragraph of Section 2.3 on Page 9 of the February 14, 2017 findings (Attachment 4). The Commission made the determination that while contiguous properties under a single ownership were considered to be one lot for planning purposes, in this instance because it was made clear by the applicants that the two properties would not be under the same Page 10of12 CITY OF ASHLAND i ownership for the development of Lot # 1, they would not provide for coordinated planning of the site, and thus should not be considered together initially. Key Questions to Consider In staff s view, the some key questions for the Council to consider are: • Did the Planning Commission err in determining that the city has discretion in accepting a shadow plans to address the Floor Area Ratio standard? • Is the allowance for a shadow plan for parcels larger than one-half acre intended to simply allow applicants to defer addressing the Floor Area Ratio standard and leave it to be considered later at the applicant's discretion, or did defining a shadow plan as demonstrating "that the proposed development will not impede the future use of the lot to be fully developed to the required building intensity standards (i. e., Floor Area Ratio and that the proposed development has been planned to prevent piecemeal and uncoordinated development" intend to provide some measure of discretion to the Planning Commission to consider, as is the case here, whether a shadow plan pushing the most intense development of the site away from the street corridor, closer to adjacent residential properties and deferring further consideration was appropriately coordinating the future development of the parcels? • If the Planning Commission was correct in not accepting the shadow plan, does the Council believe that the Commission erred in denying the requested Exception? If the Council believes the Commission erred, it should be based on a finding that unique aspects of the credit union use and its underlying restriction on acting as a developer and the limitations on site selection and site planning associated with the drive-up window combined to pose a demonstrable difficulty meriting an Exception. The Procedural Handling of an "Appeal on the Record" Prior to 2008, appeals were processed through a de novo action, meaning that when considering an appeal the Council could conduct a new hearing and review new information that was not previously included in the record on which the Planning Commission based their decision. The current appeal procedures were adopted by the Council in 2008 to require that appeals to Council be handled as an "Appeal on the Record." An "Appeal on the Record" is an appeal of a land use decision where the City Council must consider the same facts and information ("the record") that the Planning Commission saw. The City Council may not consider new facts or information. Once the Planning Commission makes a decision on a land use matter, a person ("the appellant") can appeal that decision to the City Council. The appellant must identify, in writing, specific areas where they think the Planning Commission made a mistake. The mistake has to be an error in interpretation of a fact, an interpretation of a rule or regulation, or in procedure. The City Council reviews only those specific issues raised as "errors." In considering "An Appeal on the Record" the Council must decide: 1) Whether there is substantial evidence to support the decision of the Planning Commission; and 2) If the Planning Page IIof12 CITY OF ASHLAND Commission committed an error. In the course of the appeal, the City Council is not to re- examine issues of fact but rather is to limit its review to determining whether there is substantial evidence to support the findings of the Planning Commission, or to determining if errors in law were committed by the Commission. Review is to be limited only to those issues clearly and distinctly set forth in the notice of appeal, and no issue may be raised on appeal to the Council that was not raised before the Planning Commission with sufficient specificity to enable the Commission and the parties to respond. At the City Council appeal hearing, the only people who are allowed to talk directly to the Council will be the City staff, the applicant, the people who have filed the written appeal, and participants who provided oral or written testimony during the original Planning Commission hearing process and who subsequently submitted wr' men s at least ten days in advance of the City Councl meeting. The appellant is to be allowed ten minutes and the applicant is to be allowed ten minutes, while participants who have filed written arguments are to be allowed three minutes to summarize their arguments for the City Council. No one can introduce new information or facts. [Note: In this instance, only the appellants have provided written arguments at least ten days in advance of the City Council meeting, and thus only the appellants will be able to speak at the hearing.] Ultimately, the Council may: • Affirm the decision of the Planning Commission and reject the appeal, or • Reverse the decision of the Planning Commission and support the written appeal, or • Modify the decision of the Planning Commission, or • Send the decision back to the Planning Commission with instructions for further proceedings. Subsequent actions by the Planning Commission are to be the final decision of the City, unless the Council calls the matter up pursuant to subsection 18.5.1.060.J. (The Council should be aware that under the state's "120-Day Rule " a final decision of the City is required no later than April 27, 2017.) Attachments: 1. March 10, 2017 Written Argument Submittals from Mark S. Bartholomew on Behalf of Rogue Credit Union 2. March 1, 2017 Mailed Notice for Appeal Hearing 3. February 22, 2017 Notice of Appeal submitted by Attorney Mark S. Bartholomew on behalf of Rogue Credit Union 4. February 14, 2017 Adopted findings for the Planning Commission Decision 5. January 10, 2017 Planning Commission Hearing Minutes 6. January 10, 2017 Items Submitted at the Hearing 7. Planning Commission Packet Materials for Planning Action #2016-01894 Page 12of12 CITY OF ASHLAND HORNECKER COWLING LLP Attorneys at Law John Blackhurst 14 North Central Ave., Ste. 104 OF COUNSEL Joseph E. Kellerman, LL.M. Medford, OR 97501 James A. wallan (541) 779-8900 R. Ray Heysell Charles E. Bolen Fax: (541) 773-2635 Ryan J. Vanderhoof Nvwtiv.roguelaNv.com RETIRED Stefanie L. Burke* Mark S. Bartholomew Robert L. Cowling Michael J. Mayerle John R. Hassen Shane J. Antholz, LL.M. Melisa A. Button* Gregory T. Hornecker 1933-2009 Sara J. Collins B. Kent Blackhurst 1922-2007 Ervin B. Hogan 1927-2000 *Also admitted in California March 10, 2017 John Kaz-nS City Administrator I E 0 V E 20 E Main Street Ashland, OR 97520 20 17 RE: WRITTEN ARGUMENTS - PA-2016-01894 Mr. Karns: We represent Rogue Credit Union. This letter shall set forth our written arguments in the referenced matter. Applicant owns two adjacent parcels located within the City of Ashland. The subject application seeks approval to construct a new credit union building on one of the parcels-tax lot 8700. Tax lot 8700 is a 0.58 acre parcel, while adjacent tax lot 9201 is 1.02 acres. For planning purposes, the two parcels constitute one "lot" under the Ashland Municipal Code ("AMC") because they are contiguous units of land under the same ownership. A "lot" is defined as "[a] unit of land created by a partition or a subdivision or a unit or conti ids knits of land tinder single oivnersh p." AMC 18.6.1.030. The subject property is located in the Detail Site Review overlay. Its situs requires that development must achieve a minimum 0.50 Floor Area Ratio ("F.A.R."), unless the F.A.R. standards are reduced due to an exception, or can be met in the future, as demonstrated by a shadow plan. F.A.R. is equal to the percentage of the building's floor area of the total lot square footage. The proposed credit union, prior to build out of the entire "lot" (which again includes the adjacent lot 9201), constitutes a F.A.R. of .247. However, the Applicant sought to avail itself of the AMC's allowance of a shadow plan to demonstrate that the lot can achieve a F.A.R. of 0.506-above the normal requirement-in the future. The Planning Commission erroneously denied the application, and this appeal followed. 1. Applicant Qualifies For A Shadow Plan. AMC 18.4.2.040(C)(1)(a) sets forth the above-mentioned F.A.R. standards for development within the Detail Site Review overlay. However, the minimum 0.50 F.A.R. standard is not an inflexible standard. It provides that "[w]here a site is one-half an acre or greater in size, the HORNECKER COWLING LLP John Karns, City Administrator March 10, 2017 Page 2 F.A.R. requirement may be met through a phased development plan or a shadow plan that demonstrates how development may be intensified over time to meet the minimum F.A.R." AMC18.4.2.040(C)(1)(a). Because the site is in excess of one-half acre, the Applicant has the ability to meet F.A.R. standards by submitting a shadow plan that shows how the lot can meet the F.A.R. standards in the future. Accordingly, Applicant submitted a shadow plan as part of its application. The shadow plan demonstrated the ability to achieve a F.A.R. of 0.506 on the lot. That submittal constituted full compliance with the AMC requirements, yet the Planning Commission denied the application for lack of compliance with F.A.R. standards. The Planning Commission's findings and order indicate a misapplication of the AMC with regard to F.A.R. standards. The Planning Commission found that, because the Applicant is a credit union, it would not be developing the remainder of the lot (which, by definition, includes the neighboring parcel).I The implication of the foregoing is apparently that Applicant would not be in a position to control the density of development on the lot in the future to ensure compliance with F.A.R. standards. The Planning Commission's reasoning was in error, because there is absolutely nothing in the AMC that requires a guarantee of a build out according to a shadow plan. It merely requires a shadow plan "that demonstrates how development may be intensified over time to meet the minimum F.A.R." The shadow plan did just that, and the Planning Commission made no findings that the shadow plan failed to show how development may be intensified over time to meet the minimum F.A.R. The Planning Commission's findings were merely a reflection of doubt as to whether the shadow plan would actually come to fruition and constitute the ad hoc application of a non-existent criterion. "The city may not manufacture standards and criteria in ruling on an application for permit approval." Bztel-McIntire v. City of Yachats, 63 Or LUBA 452 (2011). Denial based on a non- existent criterion exceeds the scope of review and range of discretion permitted in the AMC. A decision outside the range of discretion is forbidden in Oregon law. LUBA shall reverse a local government decision and order the local government to grant approval of an application for development by the local government if the board finds based on the evidence in the record, that the local government decision is outside the range of discretion allowed the local government under its comprehensive plan and implementing ordinances. ORS 197.835(10)(a)(A). If the board (meaning LUBA), reverses the decision, "the board shall award attorney fees to the applicant and against the local government." ORS 197.835(10)(b). We believe that if the 1 This is due to Applicant's statement that, as a non-profit credit union, it has a fiduciary duty to members not to overbuild, and that its charter prevents the credit union from becoming a developer. However, there is no restraint on the credit union's ability to sell the remaining parcel, which would obviously be developed by a subsequent owner. i HORNECKER COWLING LLP John Karns, City Administrator March 10, 2017 Page 3 Planning Commission's order is upheld, LUBA would reverse the decision on appeal and award attorney fees to Applicant. The intent of the shadow plan is to demonstrate that a property is not irrevocably committed to a substandard density, not to guarantee that a certain pattern of development will take place at the time the first building is constructed on a lot, as the Planning Commission incorrectly applied in this case. For example, the illustration of a shadow plan in the AMC (figure 18.4.2.040(C)(1)(a) refers to "potential" future development. It is surprising that the Planning Commission adopted this approach, because it is not supported in the AMC, and because the Planning Commission correctly interpreted the shadow plan requirements in the recent addition to the Goodwill Industries building (PA 2016-02060).2 In that application, the proposal constituted a 0.280 F.A.R., similar to the current proposal. In order to meet F.A.R. standards, Goodwill submitted a shadow plan to demonstrate that two additional stories could be added to the building in the future to meet the minimum F.A.R. City staff confirmed that Goodwill is under no obligation to actually build the site out according to the shadow plan. See 12/13/2016 Planning Commission Minutes. The Planning Commission approved that application unanimously. Since the AMC does not require a guarantee of a certain build out according to a shadow plan, which was also confirmed by staff in PA 2016-02060, it was erroneous for the Planning Commission to deny Applicant due to a feared lack of assurance of shadow plan build out. The denial was inconsistent with the AMC and with recent past practices by the Planning Commission. Furthermore, we submit that it is far more likely that Applicant's proposed shadow plan (or some other development with equal or greater F.A.R.) will become reality than the seemingly remote likelihood that Goodwill Industries will add two additional stories. II. Shadow Plan Is Not Discretionary. The Planning Commission further found that the Applicant's ability to meet F.A.R. standards by means of a shadow plan "is discretionary on the part of the Planning Commission," meaning the Planning Commission has discretion as to whether to permit Applicant to use the Shadow Plan to meet F.A.R. standards. The Planning Commission's findings focus on the fact that the AMC says that F.A.R. "may be met" by presenting a shadow plan. The findings go on to contrast the word "may" with the word "shall." There are several serious deficiencies with this finding. First, the Planning Commission suggested that the word "shall" would allow the Applicant the option to use a shadow plan. That is correct, but it would mean that, rather than actually build 2 We recognize that the Goodwill application involved an existing building and that Applicant's building is proposed as new construction. However, the AMC does not make a distinction between additions and new buildings and the application of any such distinction would exceed the scope of discretion in the AMC. HORNECKER COWLING LLP John Karns, City Administrator March 10, 2017 Page 4 to F.A.R. standards in the first instance, an applicant would be required to submit a shadow plan (or perhaps submit a shadow plan in addition to building to F.A.R. standards). Such an interpretation of the AMC does not make sense. Secondly, if the word "may" means that the Planning Commission or some other decision- making body has to decide whether or not an applicant may actually do something, then it would effectively turn large portions of the AMC on its head and render it meaningless. For example, AMC 18.4.8.060(B) states that any property owner "may apply for a solar access permit." Given the Planning Commission's reasoning, the property owner would have to first ask a decision maker if it "may" actually apply for the permit. Another example is contained within AMC 18.5.3.030(B), which provides that an "applicant may" request changes to an approved preliminary plat. Based on the findings in this application, it is questionable whether an applicant really could request such changes, since the word "may" is used, rather than shall. There are too many other examples to list. This is in contrast to the instances in which the AMC expressly grants discretion to the Planning Commission, rather than to an applicant. See, for example, AMC 18.5.6.050(D) (Planning Commission may modify the location of a street), AMC 18.5.1.100 (Planning Commission may initiate procedures), and AMC 18.5.030(C) (Planning Commission may approve plans for phasing a subdivision, provided the plan meets enumerated criteria). Finally, and most importantly, if in fact the Planning Commission is correct that the word "may" means that the Planning Commission can decide if an applicant can use a shadow plan, then the ordinance is impermissibly vague. There are no standards by which to judge whether or not a shadow plan can be used (except that it shows how more intense development can occur in the future that would meet the F.A.R.. and Applicant has met that criterion). "An applicant should be able to know the standards by which his application will be judged before going to the expense in time, investment and legal fees necessary to make application." State e1: rel West Main Townhomes v. City of Medford, 233 Or App 41, 48 (2009). Simply put, the F.A.R. and shadow plan provisions are impermissibly vague if the Planning Commission retains discretion to permit or deny them, beyond a showing that a development can intensify in the future to meet F.A.R standards, because such standards would either be impermissibly vague at best or nonexistent and manufactured at worst.3 3 There was also a brief reference to the proposal not qualifying for a shadow plan because it did not offer a "sense of enclosure." That is again an improper basis for denial because a) the AMC does not require that as a condition of a shadow plan and b) the code provision requiring a sense of enclosure is in AMC 18.4.6.040 governing the design of streets. That provision is totally irrelevant in this case and is an additional instance of the Planning Commission exceeding the scope of its discretion, against Oregon law. In any event, the proposed building is located along the street, with parking in the rear, which meets the sense of enclosure. It is also worth noting that the City's own photograph of a streetscape with a sense of enclosure has the second and third stories stepped back from the street. HORNECKER COWLING LLP John Karns, City Administrator March 10, 2017 Page 5 III. Applicant Qualifies For An Exception to F.A.R. Standards. As an alternative to the shadow plan, Applicant requested an exception to F.A.R. standards. AMC 18.5.2.050(E) provides that the approval authority may approve exceptions to the site development standards (including F.A.R. standards) if: There is a demonstrable difficulty meeting the specific requirements of the Site Development and Design Standards due to a unique or unusual aspect of an existing structure or the proposed use of a site; and approval of the exception will not substantially negatively impact adjacent properties; and approval of the exception is consistent with the stated purpose of the Site Development and Design; and the exception requested is the minimum which would alleviate the difficulty. Applicant holds one of 12 drive-up permits in Ashland. Drive-up permits are capped at that number and such permits are a rare and valuable asset. Drive-up permits may only be utilized in the C-1 zone, which eliminates the majority of vacant land in the city on which Applicant could site a new building. Furthermore, the drive-up permit has a significant effect on site design, given the required configuration for loading in the drive-up line. Given the code- imposed scarcity of drive-up permits and the fact that drive-ups can only be located in the C- 1 zone, the proposed use is both unique and unusual. The proposal meets the stated purpose of Site Development and Design. Applicant's presence will not negatively impact adjacent properties. There is no question that Applicant builds high quality buildings, and this shall be no different. The proposal includes an eight foot sidewalk that connects to the interior pedestrian circulation and public space areas, provides ten bicycle spaces, and provides a covered bench that can be used as a transit shelter. Applicant will also include solar panels on the roof and a large daylight diffusing skylight, along with appropriate south-facing shading devices to promote energy conservation. HORNECKER COWLING LLP John Karns, City Administrator March 10, 2017 Page 6 IV. Conclusion We respectfully request that the City Council reverse the Planning Commission's decision and approve the submitted application. Rogue Credit Union is committed to being a community partner, and the addition of this branch will serve its many members in Ashland. Applicant meets both the letter and the intent of the AMC in all respects and should be approved. Thank you for your consideration. Very truly yours, HORNE KER COWLING, C LP MARK S. BARTHOLOMEW H:\USER\F1LES\24457A\LT John Karns 03-10-17.docx Planning Department, 51 Winburn Way, Ashland, Oregon 97520 C I T Y OF !'L 541-488-5305 Fax: 541-552-2050 www.ashland.or.us TTY: 1-800-735-2900 -.S H LAN D PLANNING ACTION: PA-2016-01894 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 1651 Ashland Street OWNER/APPLICANT: Rogue Credit Union/Kistler, Small & White Architects, LLC DESCRIPTION: An appeal ofthe Planning Commission's denial ofa requestfor Site Design Reviewapproval to construct a 4,508 square foot, single-story credit union building with drive-up window as part of the phased development of the properties located at 1651 Ashland Street. Also included are requests for a Property Line Adjustment and a Tree Removal Permit to remove eight of the site's 24 trees. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Commercial; ZONING: C-1; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 391E 10DC; TAX LOT 8700 & 9201 This appeal will be processed on the record according to AMC 18.5.1.060.1. The grounds for the appeal as identified by the appellant are: 1) The Planning Commission failed to properly considerthe Appellants requestfor an exception to the strict Floor Area Ratio standards due to the Appellant's unique use (i.e. a drive-up); 2) The Planning Commission improperly construed the Ashland Municipal Code in determining the use of a Shadow Plan to meet Floor Area Ratio standards is discretionary on the part of the Planning Commission, rather than discretionary on the part of the Appellant; 3) The Planning Commission improperly considered Appellant's two contiguous parcels to be separate parcels, contrary to the Ashland Municipal Code, which providesthat contiguous parcels under the same ownership shall be considered a single parcel for purposes of development; 4) The Planning Commission improperly applied the Ashland Municipal Code with respect Shadow Plans; 5) The Planning Commission provided no findings in rejecting appellants offering a restrictive covenant to ensure a minimum FloorArea Ratio of the property (consisting of two parcels). The appeal on the record will be limited to the five grounds forappeal which have been clearly and distinctly identified in the appeal request. ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING: Tuesday, March 21, 2017 at 7:00 PM, Ashland Civic Center f ! j ~ j PA #2016-01894 1651 ASHLAND ST E - SUBJECT PROPERTY s a. I a+ a+. Approx. # Footprint y ASHLAND 1 Notice is hereby given that the ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL will meet to consider an Appeal on the Record for Planning Action #2016-01894 on the meeting date and time shown above. The meeting will beat the ASHLAND CHIC CENTER, 1175 East Main Street, Ashland, Oregon. Review of a decision of the Planning Commission by the City Council shall be confined to the record of the proceeding before the Planning Commission in accordance with 18.5.1.060.1. The record shall consist of the application and all materials submitted with it; documentary evidence, exhibits and materials submitted during the hearing or at other times w hen the record before the Planning Commission w as open; recorded testimony; ( including DV Ds when available), the executed decision of the Planning Commission, including the f indings and conclusions. In addition, for purposes of City Council review , the notice of appeal and the written arguments submitted by the parties to the appeal, and the oral arguments, if any, shall become part of the record of the appeal proceeding.A copy of the record and of the appeal materials are available for inspection at the Planning Department at no cost and w ill be provided at reasonable cost, if requested. Oral argument on the appeal shall be permitted before the Council. Oral argument shall be limited to ten minutes for the applicant, ten for the appellant, if different, and three minutes for any other Partywho participated. A party shall not be permitted oral argument if w ritten arguments have not been timely submitted. Written arguments shall be received in the Planning Department on or before 4:30 p.m., March 10, 2017. Written and oral arguments on the appeal shall be limited to those issues clearly and distinctly setforth above in this Notice of Appeal; similarly, oral argument shall be confined to the substance of thewritten argument. Statements of supportor opposition are notargument. The record on this matter remains closed and no new evidence maybe submitted. Argument may be submitted only by parties to the planning action and is to be directed to the Ashland Planning Department, Community Development and Engineering Services Building, 51 Winburn Way, Ashland, Oregon 97520 or e-mailedto lucasa(a)ashland.or.us. Submissionswhich do not constitute legal argument on identified issues in the notice of appeal will not be forwarded to City Council. In compliance w ith the American 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). If you have questions or comments concerning this request, please feel free to contact the Ashland Planning Department at 541-488-5305. SITE DESIGN AND USE STANDARDS (AMC 18.5.2.050) The following criteria shall be used to approve or deny an application: A. Underlying Zone: The proposal complies with all of the applicable provisions of the underlying zone (part 18.2), including but not limited to: building and yard setbacks, lot area and dimensions, density and floor area, lot coverage, building height, building orientation, architecture, and other applicable standards. B. Overlay Zones: The proposal complies with applicable overlay zone requirements (part 18.3). C. Site Development and Design Standards: The proposal complies with the applicable Site Development and Design Standards of part 18.4, except as provided by subsection E, below. D. City Facilities: The proposal complies with the applicable standards in section 18.4.6 Public Facilities and that adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, electricity, urban storm drainage, paved access to and throughout the property and adequate transportation can and will be provided to the subject property. E. Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards. The approval authority may approve exceptions to the Site Development and Design Standards of part 18.4 if the circumstances in either subsection 1 or 2, below, are found to exist. 1. There is a demonstrable difficulty meeting the specific requirements of the Site Development and Design Standards due to a unique or unusual aspect of an existing structure or the proposed use of a site; and approval of the exception will not substantially negatively impact adjacent properties; and approval of the exception is consistent with the stated purpose of the Site Development and Design; and the exception requested is the minimum which would alleviate the difficulty.; or 2. There is no demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements, but granting the exception will result in a design that equally or better achieves the stated purpose of the Site Development and Design Standards. PROPERTY LINE ADJUSTMENTS (AMC 18.5.3.120.B) The Staff Advisor shall approve or deny a request for a property line adjustment in writing based on all of the following criteria. 1. Parcel Creation. No additional parcel or lot is created by the lot line adjustment. 2. Lot Standards. Except as allowed for nonconforming lots, pursuant to chapter 18.1.4, or as required by an overlay zone in part 18.3, all lots and parcels conform to the lot standards of the applicable zoning district, including lot area, dimensions, setbacks, and coverage, per part 18.2. If a lot does not conform to the lots standards of the applicable zoning district, it shall not be made less conforming by the property line adjustment. As applicable, all lots and parcels shall identify a buildable area free of building restrictions for physical constraints (i.e., flood plain, greater than 35 percent slope, water resource protection zones). 3. Access Standards. All lots and parcels conform to the standards in section 18.4.3.080 Vehicle Area Design. Lots and parcels that do not conform to the access standards shall not be made less conforming by the property line adjustment. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT (AMC 18.5.7.040.B) 1. Hazard Tree. A Hazard Tree Removal Permit shall be granted if the approval authority finds that the application meets all of the following criteria, or can be made to conform through the imposition of conditions. a. The applicant must demonstrate that the condition or location of the tree presents a clear public safety hazard (i.e., likely to fall and injure persons or property) or a foreseeable danger of property damage to an existing structure or facility, and such hazard or danger cannot reasonably be alleviated by treatment, relocation, or pruning. See definition of hazard tree in part 18.6. b. The City may require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each hazard tree pursuant to section 18.5.7.050. Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit. 2. Tree That is Not a Hazard. ATree Removal Permit for a tree that is not a hazard shall be granted if the approval authority finds that the application meets all of the following criteria, or can be made to conform through the imposition of conditions. a. The tree is proposed for removal in order to permit the application to be consistent with other applicable Land Use Ordinance requirements and standards, including but not limited to applicable Site Development and Design Standards in part 18.4 and Physical and Environmental Constraints in part 18.10. b. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on erosion, soil stability, flow of surface waters, protection of adjacent trees, or existing windbreaks. C. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on the tree densities, sizes, canopies, and species diversity within 200 feet of the subject property. The City shall grant an exception to this criterion when alternatives to the tree removal have been considered and no reasonable alternative exists to allow the property to be used as permitted in the zone. d. Nothing in this section shall require that the residential density to be reduced below the permitted density allowed by the zone. In making this determination, the City may consider alternative site plans or placement of structures of alternate landscaping designs that would lessen the impact on trees, so long as the alternatives continue to comply with the other provisions of this ordinance. e. The City shall require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each tree granted approval pursuant to section 18.5.7.050. Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit. APPEAL OF TYPE II DECISION AMC 18.5.1.060.1 Appeal of Type II Decision. The City Council may call up a Type II decision pursuant to section 18.5.1.060.J. A Type II decision may also be appealed to the Council as follows. 1. Who May Appeal. Appeals may only be filed by parties to the planning action. "Parties" shall be defined as the following. a. The applicant. b. Persons who participated in the public hearing, either orally or in writing. Failure to participate in the public hearing, either orally or in writing, precludes the right of appeal to the Council. C. Persons who were entitled to receive notice of the action but did not receive notice due to e rro r. 2. Appeal Filing Procedure. a. Notice of Appeal. Any person with standing to appeal, as provided in subsection 18.5.1.060.1.1, above, may appeal a Type II decision by filing a notice of appeal and paying the appeal fee according to the procedures of this subsection. b. Time for Filing. The notice of appeal shall be filed with the City Administrator within ten days of the date the notice of decision is mailed. C. Content of Notice of Appeal. The notice shall include the appellant's name, address, a reference to the decision sought to be reviewed, a statement as to how the appellant qualifies as a party, the date of the decision being appealed, and a clear and distinct identification of the specific grounds for which the decision should be reversed or modified, based on identified applicable criteria or procedural irregularity. d. The appeal requirements of this section must be fully met or the appeal will be considered by the City as a jurisdictional defect and will not be heard or considered. 3. Mailed Notice. The City shall mail the notice of appeal together with a notice of the date, time, and place to consider the appeal by the City Council to the parties, as provided in subsection 18.5.1.060.1.1, at least 20 days prior to the meeting. 4. Scope of Appeal. a. Except upon the election to reopen the record as set forth in subsection 18.5.1.060.1.4.b, below, the review of a decision of the Planning Commission by the City Council shall be confined to the record of the proceeding before the Commission. The record shall consist of the application and all materials submitted with it; documentary evidence, exhibits, and materials submitted during the hearing or at other times when the record before the Commission was open; recorded testimony; (including DVDs when available), the executed decision of the Commission, including the findings and conclusions. In addition, for purposes of Council review, the notice of appeal and the written arguments submitted by the parties to the appeal, and the oral arguments, if any, shall become part of the record of the appeal proceeding. b. Reopening the Record. The City Council may reopen the record and consider new evidence on a limited basis, if such a request to reopen the record is made to the City Administrator together with the filing of the notice of appeal and the City Administrator determines prior to the Council appeal hearing that the requesting party has demonstrated one or more of the following. i. That the Planning Commission committed a procedural error, through no fault of the requesting party, that prejudiced the requesting party's substantial rights and that reopening the record before the Council is the only means of correcting the e rro r. ii. That a factual error occurred before the Commission through no fault of the requesting party which is relevant to an approval criterion and material to the decision. iii. That new evidence material to the decision on appeal exists which was unavailable, through no fault of the requesting party, when the record of the proceeding was open, and during the period when the requesting party could have i requested reconsideration. A requesting party may only qualify for this exception if he or she demonstrates that the new evidence is relevant to an approval criterion and material to the decision. This exception shall be strictly construed by the Council in order to ensure that only relevant evidence and testimony is submitted to the hearing body. iv. Re-opening the record for purposes of this section means the submission of additional written testimony and evidence, not oral testimony or presentation of evidence before the Council. 5. Appeal Hearing Procedure. The decision of the City Council is the final decision of the City on an appeal of a Type II decision, unless the decision is remanded to the Planning Commission. a. Oral Argument. Oral argument on the appeal shall be permitted before the Council. Oral argument shall be limited to ten minutes for the applicant, ten for the appellant, if different, and three minutes for any other party who participated below. A party shall not be permitted oral argument if written arguments have not been timely submitted. Written arguments shall be submitted no less than ten days prior to the Council consideration of the appeal. Written and oral arguments on the appeal shall be limited to those issues clearly and distinctly set forth in the notice of appeal; similarly, oral argument shall be confined to the substance of the written argument. b. Scope of Appeal Deliberations. Upon review, and except when limited reopening of the record is allowed, the Council shall not re-examine issues of fact and shall limit its review to determining whether there is substantial evidence to support the findings of the Planning Commission, or to determining if errors in law were committed by the Commission. Review shall in any event be limited to those issues clearly and distinctly set forth in the notice of appeal. No issue may be raised on appeal to the Council that was not raised before the Commission with sufficient specificity to enable the Commission and the parties to respond. C. Council Decision. The Council may affirm, reverse, modify, or remand the decision and may approve or deny the request, or grant approval with conditions. The Council shall make findings and conclusions, and make a decision based on the record before it as justification for its action. The Council shall cause copies of a final order to be sent to all parties participating in the appeal. Upon recommendation of the Administrator, the Council may elect to summarily remand the matter to the Planning Commission. If the Council elects to remand a decision to the Commission, either summarily or otherwise, the Commission decision shall be the final decision of the City, unless the Council calls the matter up pursuant to subsection 18.5.1.060.J. 6. Record of the Public Hearing. For purposes of City Council review, the notice of appeal and the written arguments submitted by the parties to the appeal, and the oral arguments, if any, shall become part of the record of the appeal proceeding. The public hearing record shall include the following information. a. The notice of appeal and the written arguments submitted by the parties to the appeal. b. Copies of all notices given as required by this chapter, and correspondence regarding the application that the City mailed or received. C. All materials considered by the hearings body including the application and all materials submitted with it. d. Documentary evidence, exhibits and materials submitted during the hearing or at other times when the record before the Planning Commission was open. e. Recorded testimony (including DVDs when available). f. All materials submitted by the Staff Advisor to the hearings body regarding the application; g. The minutes of the hearing. g. The final written decision of the Commission including findings and conclusions. 7. Effective Date and Appeals to State Land Use Board of Appeals. City Council decisions on Type 11 applications are final the date the City mails the notice of decision. Appeals of Council decisions on Type II applications must be filed with the State Land Use Board of Appeals, pursuant to ORS 197.805 - 197.860. i CITY OF ASHLAND Appeal on the Record Frequently Asked Questions A recent land use decision of the Planning Commission has been appealed to the City Council. The appeal of a Planning Commission decision is handled according to the procedures found in AMC 18.5.1.060.1 as "An Appeal on the Record." What is "An Appeal on the Record"? An "Appeal on the Record" is an appeal of a land use decision where the City Council must consider the same facts and information (i.e. "the record") that the Planning Commission saw. The City Council may not consider new facts or information. Prior to 2008, City Council appeals were handled through a de novo hearing process and the City Council was able to consider new information during an appeal that was not previously included in the record upon which the Planning Commission based their decision. Since 2008, City Council appeals have been handled through an appeal on the record. What are the steps to appeal? Once the Planning Commission makes a decision on a land use matter, a party to the original decision may appeal that decision to the City Council. The appellant must identify, in writing, specific areas where they think the Planning Commission made a mistake. The mistake has to be an error in interpretation of a fact, an interpretation of a rule or regulation, or in procedure. The City Council will review only those specific issues raised as "errors." The Council will decide: 1) whether there is substantial evidence to support the decision of the Planning Commission, and 2) if the Planning Commission committed an error. What will happen at the hearing? At the City Council meeting, the only people who will be allowed to talk directly to the Council will be the City staff; the applicant; people who have filed the written appeal; and participants who provided oral or written testimony during the original Planning Commission hearing and who submit written arguments at least 10 days in advance of the City Council meeting. The applicant will be allowed 10 minutes and the people who have filed the written appeal will be allowed 10 minutes. Participants who have filed written arguments will be allowed 3 minutes to summarize their argument for the City Council. No one can introduce new information or facts. What may the Council consider in reaching a decision? Except when limited reopening of the record is allowed as provided in AMC 18.5.1.060.1.4.b., the Council shall not re-examine issues of fact and shall limit its review to determining whether there is substantial evidence to support the findings of the Planning Commission, or to determining if errors in law were committed by the Commission. City Council review is limited to the issues clearly and distinctly set forth in the notice of appeal. No issue may be raised on appeal to the Council that was not raised before the Planning Commission with sufficient specificity to enable the Planning Commission and the parties to respond. Ultimately, the Council may- • Affirm the decision of the Planning Commission and reject the appeal; • Reverse the decision of the Planning Commission and support the written appeal; • Modify the decision of the Planning Commission; or • Send the decision back to the Planning Commission with instructions for further proceedings. In this case, subsequent actions by the Planning Commission will be the final decision of the City. The final decision of the City can be appealed to the State Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA). HORNECKER COWLING LLP Attorneys at Law John Biackhurst 14 North Central Ave., Ste. 104 OF COUNSEL Joseph E. Kelierman, LL.M. Medford, OR 97501 James A. wallan (541) 779-8900 R. Ray Heysell Charles E. Bolen Fax: (541) 773-2635 Ryan J. Vanderhoof www.roguelaw,com RETIRED Stefanie L. Burke* Mark S. Bartholomew Robert L. Cowling Michael J. Mayerle John R. Hassen Shane J. Antholz, LL.M. Melisa A. Button* Gregory T. Horneeker 1933-2009 Sara J. Collins B. Kent Blackhurst 1922-2007 Ervin B. Hogan 1927-2000 *Also admitted in California February 22, 2017 John Karns, City Administrator 20 E Main Street Ashland, OR 97520 RE. NOTICE OF APPEAL Mr. Karns: We represent Rogue Credit Union. This letter shall be considered a "Notice of Appeal" under AMC 18.5.1.060(I)(2)(a). 1. Appellant's Name, Address, and Reference to the Decision on Appeal The Appellant is Rogue Credit Union, 1370 Center Drive, Medford, OR 97501. The Appellant is appealing the Ashland Planning Commission's decision in PA-2016-01894, dated February 15, 2017. II. Standing of Appellant Appellant is the applicant for planning action PA-2016-01894. III. Allegations of Error The Planning Commission erred in its denial of the application in various respects: A. The Planning Commission failed to properly consider Appellant's request for an exception to the strict Floor Area Ratio ("F.A.R.") standards due to Appellant's unique use (i.e. a drive up). The Planning Commission made only conclusory findings with regard to the uniqueness of the proposed use. B. The Planning Commission improperly construed the Ashland Municipal Code in determining that the use of a Shadow Plan to meet F.A.R. standards HORNECKER COWLING LLP John Karns, City Administrator February 22, 2017 Page 2 is discretionary on the part of the Planning Commission, rather than discretionary on the part of the Appellant. The Planning Commission's improper construction was erroneous. C. The Planning Commission improperly considered Appellant's two contiguous parcels to be separate parcels, contrary to the Ashland Municipal Code, which provides that contiguous parcels under the same ownership shall be considered a single parcel for purposes of development. The Planning Commission's error in this regard undercut Appellant's proposal for a Shadow Plan to meet F.A.R. standards. D. The Planning Commission improperly applied the Ashland Municipal Code with respect to Shadow Plans. Shadow Plans are merely conceptual plans that must show that development intensity could be increased in the future. The Planning Commission's findings and deliberations reveal that it imposed a stricter standard - a guarantee that development of a certain intensity will occur. This is contrary to the Ashland Municipal Code, as well as the very recently approved Goodwill Industries addition (PA 2016- 02060). In that planning file, the Planning Commission approved a Shadow Plan after staff acknowledged that "the applicant is under no obligation to build the site out further as shown in the shadow plan" and that the applicant (Goodwill) "could choose to modify their approved shadow plan." The Planning Commission made the correct decision in the Goodwill application, but failed to apply the same standards to the instant application. The Planning Commission in this case found that more intense development will not occur while the Appellant owned the property. The foregoing is incorrect for two reasons. First, it is incorrect because there is no standard in the Ashland Municipal Code that requires a guarantee of build out according to a Shadow Plan. Secondly, it ignores the fact that the "property" consists to two discrete parcels, including the second, larger parcel upon which no development is yet proposed, but yet could be developed to a greater intensity, thus allowing the two parcels (which are considered a single parcel per the code) to meet F.A.R. density. E. The Planning Commission provided no findings in rejecting Appellant's offering of a restrictive covenant to ensure a minimum F.A.R. of the property (consisting of two parcels). This is especially erroneous, considering, as previously stated, Appellant is not required to guarantee build out according to a Shadow Plan per the Code. Despite that, consistent with Appellant's desire to be an outstanding community partner, Appellant offered to encumber its property with a covenant to require development HORNECKER COWLING LLP John Karns, City Administrator February 22, 2017 Page 3 intensity on the combined property to meet the F.A.R. standards. It is ironic that the Planning Commission determined that the application was deficient, when in reality, the application exceeded the applicable standards by stipulating to be bound by the covenant, which would run with the land and bind all future property owners. This is in stark contrast to the Goodwill approval, which has no mechanism to ensure that that property will eventually develop to F.A.R. standards. Rogue Credit Union is diligently striving to be a good community partner and has shown good faith in working with the City of Ashland to meet both the letter and intent of the Code. Rogue is a not-for-profit financial cooperative owned by its members and has operated in Ashland for more than 30 years. Approximately 60% of the citizens of Ashland are member- owners of the credit union. These mutual constituents have been fervently requesting another Ashland branch location for years. The proposal in question would provide these citizens with an additional branch location, while alleviating some of the downtown traffic congestion and providing new local jobs. This is a mutually beneficial proposition. We appreciate the opportunity to have the City Council evaluate the application on its merits and reverse the Planning Commission's decision. Very truly yours, HORNFCKER COW 1NG LLP IAl~ K S. BARTHOLOMEW MSB:snc HAUSER1FILES;24457XLT John Karns 42-21-17.docx x BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION February 14, 2017 IN THE MATTER OF PLANNING ACTION #2016-01894, A REQUEST FOR ) 3 SITE DESIGN REVIEW APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A 4,508 SQUARE FOOT, ) SINGLE-STORY CREDIT UNION BUILDING WITH DRIVE-UP WINDOW AS } PART OF THE PHASED DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT ) 1651 ASHLAND STREEET. ALSO INCLUDED ARE REQUESTS FOR A PROP-- ) ERTY LINE ADJUSTMENT AND A TREE REMOVAL PERMIT TO REMOVE } FINDINGS, EIGHT OF THE SITE'S 24 TREES. THE APPLICATION PROPOSES THE USE } CONCLUSIONS & OF A SHADOW PLAN INVOLVING ADJOINING PROPERTIES THAT WILL BE ) ORDERS OUTSIDE THE FUTURE CONTROL OF THE APPLICANT AS A MEANS FOR } COMPLYING WITH THE MINIMUM FLOOR AREA RATIO (F.A.F.) OF 0.5. ) OWNER/APPLICANT: Rogue Credit Union/ ) Kistler, Small & White Architects, LLC } r RECITALS: 1) Tax lots #8700 and #9201 of Map 39 1E IODC is located at 1651 Ashland Street and is zoned C-1 (Commercial). 2) The applicants are requesting Site Design Review approval to construct a 4,508 square foot, single- story credit union building with drive-Lip window as part of the phased development of their properties located at 1651 Ashland Street. Also included are requests for a Property Line ' Adjustment and for a Tree Removal Permit to remove eight of the site's 24 trees. The application proposes the use of a shadow plan involving adjoining properties that will be outside the future control of the applicant as a means for complying with the minimum Floor Area Ratio (F.A.R.) of 0.5. Site improvements are outlined on the plans on file at the Department of Community Development. 3) The criteria for Site Design Review approval are described in AMC 18.5.2.050 as follows: A. Underlying Zone; The proposal complies with all of the applicable provisions of the underlying zone (part 18.2), including but not limited to: building and yard setbacks, lot area and dimensions, density and floor area, lot coverage, building height, building J orientation, architecture, and other applicable standards. B. Overlay Zones: The proposal complies with applicable overlay zone requirements (part 18.3). C. Site Development and Design Standards: The proposal complies with the applicable Site Development and Design Standards of part 18.4, except as provided by subsection E, below. D. City Facilities: The proposal complies with the applicable standards in section 18.4.6 Public Facilities and that adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, electricity, r PA #2016-01894 February 14, 2017 Page I E 1. 3 urban storm drainage, paved access to and throughout the property and adequate transportation can and will be provided to the subject property. E. Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards. The approval authority may approve exceptions to the Site Development and Design Standards of part 18.4 if the it circumstances in either subsection 1 or 2, below, are found to exist. j 1. There is a demonstrable difficulty meeting the specific requirements of the Site l Development and Design Standards due to a unique or unusual aspect of an existing structure or the proposed use of a site; and approval of the exception will not substantially negatively impact adjacent properties; and approval of the Y exception is consistent with the stated purpose of the Site Development and j Design; and the exception requested is the minimum which would alleviate the difficulty.; or s 2. There is no demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements, but granting the exception will result in a design that equally or better achieves the stated purpose of the Site Development and Design Standards. 4) The approval criteria for a Property Line Adjustment are detailed in AMC 18.5.3.120.8 as follows: I' k 1. Parcel Creation. No additional parcel or lot is created by the lot line adjustment. 2. Lot Standards. Except as allowed for nonconforming lots, pursuant to chapter 18.1.4, or as required by an overlay zone in part 18.3, all lots and parcels conform to the lot standards of the applicable zoning district, including lot area, dimensions, setbacks, and coverage, per part 18.2. If a lot does not conform to the lots standards of the applicable zoning district, it shall not be made less conforming by the property line adjustment. As applicable, all lots and parcels shall identify a buildable area free of building restrictions for physical constraints (i. e., flood plain, greater than 35 percent slope, water resource protection zones). 3. Access Standards. All lots and parcels conform to the standards in section 18.4.3.080 Vehicle Area Design. Lots and parcels that do not conform to the access standards shall not be made less conforming by the property line adjustment. 5) The approval criteria for a Tree Removal Permit to Remove a Tree That is Not a Hazard are detailed in AMC 18.5.7.040.B.2 as follows: j a. The tree is proposed for removal in order to permit the application to be consistent with other applicable Land Use Ordinance requirements and standards, including but not limited to applicable Site Development and Design Standards in part 18.4 and Physical and Environmental Constraints in part 18.3.10. s b. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on erosion, soil stability, flow of surface waters, protection of adjacent trees, or existing windbreaks. C. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on the tree densities, sizes, canopies, and species diversity within 200 feet of the subject property. The City shall grant j an exception to this criterion when alternatives to the tree removal have been considered Y PA #2016-01894 February 14, 2017 Page 2 ii 5 and no reasonable alternative exists to allow the property to be used as permitted in the zone. d. Nothing in this section shall require that the residential density to be reduced below the permitted density allowed by the zone. In making this determination, the City may consider alternative site plans or placement of structures of alternate landscaping designs that would lessen the impact on trees, so long as the alternatives continue to comply with the other provisions of this ordinance. e. The City shall require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each tree granted approval pursuant to section 18.5.7.050. Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit. 6) The Planning Commission, following proper public notice, held a public hearing on January 10, 2017 j at which time testimony was received and exhibits were presented. Subsequent to the closing of the hearing, the Planning Commission denied the application without prejudice. t Now, therefore, the Planning Commission of the City of Ashland finds, concludes and recommends 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" y Hearing Minutes, Notices, Miscellaneous Exhibits lettered with an "M" l SECTION 2. CONCLUSORY FINDINGS 2.1 The Planning Commission 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 Planning Commission finds that the proposal for Site Design Review, Property Line Adjustment and Tree Removal Permit approval fails to meet all applicable criteria for Site Design Review approval described in AMC 18.5.2.050, Property Line Adjustment in AMC 18.5.3.120.B, and for Tree Removal described in AMC 18.5.7.040.B.2. The site plan and elevation drawings provided delineate the proposed building location, design and associated site improvements. 2.3 The Planning Commission finds that the request involves Site Design Review approval to construct = a 4,508 square foot, single-story credit union building with drive-up window as part of the phased PA #2016-01891 February 14, 2017 Page 3 Y t development of the properties located at 1651 Ashland Street. Also included are requests for a Property Line Adjustment and a Tree Removal Permit to remove eight of the site's 24 trees. r a The first approval criterion for Site Design Review is that, "The proposal complies with all of the l applicable provisions of the underlying zone (part 18.2), including but not limited to: building and yard g setbacks, lot area and dimensions, density and floor area, lot coverage, building height, building orientation, architecture, and other applicable standards. " The subject property is located in the C--1 ' base zone and the Detail Site Review and Pedestrian Places overlay zones. Commercial services, offices and their associated accessory uses are permitted outright in the C--1 zone. In addition, drive-up uses are a special permitted use and the applicants have provided plans and narrative to demonstrate compliance with the applicable special use standards along with evidence that they hold one of the 12 drive-up use permits allowed in the city (Permit #2012-01506). Within the C-1 zone, there is no minimum lot area, width or depth, or maximum lot coverage; or minimum front, side or rear yard. Along arterial streets like Ashland Street, there is a required arterial setback of "not less than 20 feet, or the width required to install sidewalk andpark row i7nprovenients, consistent with the street standards in chapter 1& 4.6, whichever is less. " In this instance, the applicants propose to install city standard sidewalk and park row improvements and will thus comply with the arterial setback requirements. The C-1 zone allows building heights of up to 40 feet, and where buildings are located more than 100 feet from a residential zone, buildings may be greater than 40 feet but less than 55 feet in height with the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. As proposed, the height of the building is only approximately 24.0 feet. Lot coverage is limited to 85 percent and 15 percent of the site must be landscaped within the C- 1 zone, and the proposal notes that 78.6 percent r° of the site would be covered and 21.4 percent landscaping provided. The second approval criterion is that, "The proposal complies with applicable overlay zone requirements (part 18.3). The property is located within the Detail Site Review overlay zone, the Pedestrian Places overlay zone, and is subject to additional standards applicable to development of the Ashland Street boulevard corridor. The Detail Site Review overlay triggers specific standards that apply as part of the Site Development and Design Standards in AMC 18.4.2.040.C. Compliance with these standards is addressed under the next approval criterion later in this document. The Pedestrian Places overlay requirements apply to proposed development that requires a planning application approval, and involves development of new structures or additions other than single-family dwellings. Pedestrian Place overlay provisions supplement those of the applicable base zoning district and other applicable ordinance requirements. Because the proposal does not involve mixed-use r development in a residential zone, the Pedestrian Places overlay only impacts the subject property in two f ways: 1. Building Setbacks. The solar access setback in chapter 18.4.8 Solar Access r applies only to those lots abutting a residential zone to the north. In this instance, k because the lot to its north is zoned R-1-5 (Single Family Residential) solar access setbacks do apply for Lot 1. 2. Plazas and Landscaping Ratio. Outdoor seating areas, plazas, and other useable paved surfaces may be applied toward meeting the landscaping area requirements !i PA #2016-01894 February 14, 2017 rv 1 Page 4 'a a I F e L 5 in chapter 18.4.4 Landscaping, Lighting, and Screening, but shall not constitute more than 50 percent of the required area. The third approval criterion is that, "The proposal complies with the applicable Site Development and Design Standards ofpart 18.4, except as provided by subsection E, beloii)." The application materials explain that proposed parking is located to the rear of the building, and the t; proposed building on Lot #2 occupies 70.1 percent of the street frontage and with development of the proposed shadow plan the 63 percent of the two fiontages will be occupied by buildings. Building entrances are to be oriented to Ashland Street, and the street frontage is to be improved to city street standards. The application explains that the building has multiple jogs and offsets, a recessed entry with protection for pedestrians, changes in relief, and more than ample glazing on all walls in proximity to the F streetscape. Within the Detail Site Review Zone, properties are required to have a minimum 0.50 floor area ratio (F.A.R.). This means that the building's floor area must be equal to at least one half of the lot area to meet the standard. The Planning Commission finds that the purpose of the Floor Area Ratio (F.A.R.) standard is three-fold. First, the F.A.R. is intended to deliberately create an environment supportive to transit by achieving a minimum level of intensity for commercial developments, similar to a minimum residential density standard. Second, the F.A.R. seeks the efficient use of available commercial land in keeping with the City's commitments not to expand its current boundaries under the 2012 Regional Problem Solving agreement with Jackson County and the other cities of the region, and the subsequent goals and policies seeking to concentrate more intense development along arterials. Finally, in terms of the built environment, the F.A.R. standard seeks to provide a sense of enclosure to the streetscape as noted in the street standards in AMC 18.4.6.040.A.2 which explain that, "All streets in Ashland shall be designed using the, following assumptions:... Building setbacks and heights create a sense of enclosure. " As proposed, the 4,508 square foot single-story building achieves a .247 F.A.R. For properties greater than one-half acre, the Site Design and Development Standards provide that the Floor Area Ratio standard may be addressed with a "shadow plan" illustrating how the development could be intensified over time to meet the minimum F.A.R. The Planning Commission finds that this allowance is intended both for phased development of large vacant sites, and to allow for incremental phased redevelopment of currently underdeveloped properties. In this case, the applicants have provided a shadow plan showing how l additional buildings could be constructed to achieve an F.A.R. of .624 on Lot 1, a contiguous property under their ownership. If considered together this would yield a combined F.A.R. of .506 between the two parcels when the contiguous parcel is developed. The Planning Commission finds that the shadow plan provided poses some concerns. First, the applicants I have explained that as a credit union, they are unable by charter to act as developers and as such can E neither develop the remainder of the site with buildings other than the credit union nor can they add a second story that would then be rented to tenants other than the credit union. As such, while a shadow plan is provided, the remaining lot would not be under the applicants control and would instead be sold and developed by the fiiture buyer. The Planning Commission finds that by definition, the Ashland Municipal Code provides that contiguous lots under a single ownership may be considered a single ; 2 PA #2016-01894 a February 14, 2017 Page 5 s F Is property for planning purposes, however in this case it is clear that development is not to occur while the propel-ties are under the same ownership and as such the Planning Commission finds that they should not li be considered together as part of a shadow plan. The Commission further finds that the allowance for the use of a shadow plan in the code is discretionary on the part of the Planning Commission (i.e. the standard language in AMC 18.4.2.040.C. La. uses "may" h rather than "shall"). The Commission finds that the shadow plan provided is counter to the intent of providing more intense development along the Boulevard corridor to contribute to a sense of enclosure of the streetseape, while instead pushing the more intense future development nearer to residentially-zoned neighbors at the rear of the property, and further finds that the current application and shadow plan provided as part of that application fails to meet the Detailed Site Review Standard regarding Orientation and Scale in 18.4.2.040.C.1. The fourth criterion for approval is that, "The pro osal complies with the applicable standards in section 18.4, 6 Public Facilities and that adequate capacity of City facilities far water, sewer, electricity, urban storm drainage, paved access to and throughout the property and adequate transportation can and will be provided to the subject property." E The Planning Commission finds that Public Works, Engineering and Electric Department staff have noted the following with regard to utilities: • Water - The property is currently served by an eight-inch water main in the Ashland Street right- 1 of-way, and the application indicates that the applicants intend to provide new services from this main. Both the Water and Fire Departments have reviewed the applicants' initial utility lay-out and indicated that a double check detector assembly (DCDA), bypass meter and vault will need to be installed near the property line at the street to provide adequate fire service for the development_ of the site. ' • Sewer - The property is currently served by a six-inch sanitary sewer main that enters into the property across the northern property line. The applicants propose to acquire a new easement over Tax Lot #9800 to the north of the property and install a new six-inch sanitary sewer line out to Parker Street. • Electric - The applicants have met with the Electric Department, and it has been determined that the transformer location shown on the submitted plans will requires a "three-phase pull box" and ' re-routing the source of the power by boring beneath or trenching across Ashland Street to a transformer in front of Wendy's. The Electric Department has indicated, and Planning staff concurs, that the pull box would be better located outside of the park row planting strip, behind the sidewalk to provide a spatial buffer from cars traveling at arterial speeds. The Electric t Department has also suggested locations for future lines to serve future buildings on Lot 1, and the applicants will provide a service plan once they have an Electrical Engineer on board to consider how the other lots may develop. • Storm Drainage - The property is currently served by a 12-inch storm sewer main in the Ashland Street right-of-way. The application materials indicate that storm water associated with the development on Lot 2 is to be detained on site for percolation into the soil. A treatment/detention trench is proposed along the full length of the property line for Lot 2, with any overflow to be PA #2016-01894 February 14, 2017 Page 6 pumped up to the curb on Ashland Street. The application notes that the project's civil engineer, Dew Engineering, will prepare a final storm drainage and surface water management plan for review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits.' is With regard to considerations of paved access and adequate transportation, the Planning Commission finds that Ashland Street is a state highway, and is considered to be a "boulevard" under Ashland's Transportation System Plan (T.S.P.). City-standard frontage improvements for a boulevard include irrigated street trees planted in five-foot square planters with tree grates spaced every 30 feet and an eight-- to ten--foot wide sidewalk along the full property frontage. In areas where no on-street parking is to occur, the applicants may propose an alternative frontage treatment to include a planted Swale within the park row. The applicants have proposed to install frontage improvements consistent with these requirements ff as part of their proposal. The Planning Commission further finds that for proposals accessing a boulevard, directly or indirectly, a j` Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) is required where the proposed land use meets one or more of the following thresholds: • Generating 50 new vehicle trips inbound and outbound during the adjacent street's peals hour; • Installing any traffic control device or construction of any geometric improvements affecting the progression or operation of traffic; or • Generating 20 new heavy vehicle trips (inbound and outbound) during the day. In this instance, because more than 50 new vehicle trips would be generated during the adjacent street's f peak hour, the application materials provided include a Traffic Impact Analysis (T.I.A.) prepared by Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering, L.L.C. The T.I.A. includes the following findings: 1. All study area intersections were shown to operate within performance standards under existing year 2016, Phase 1 design year 2017 no-build, Phase l design year 2017 build, full build design F year 2026 no-build, and full build design year 2026 build conditions during the p.m. peak hour. 2. One queue length was shown to be exceeded in the study area under analysis scenarios. The east bound left turn queue length on Ashland Street at Walker Avenue was shown to be exceeded by one vehicle length (25 feet) under existing 2016 no-build conditions and continued to be exceeded in every analysis scenario. This increased the adjacent through lane queue length, but was not shown to create any adverse queuing conditions downstream. No mitigation is shown to be necessary. 3. Sight distance was found to be adequate in both directions from both driveways on Ashland Street. 4. A center two--way left turn lane currently exists on Ashland Street at the proposed development, r and the criterion for a westbound right turn lane was not shown to be met under the Phase 1 design year 2017 or the full build design year 2026 conditions during the p.m, peak hour. 5. There were no safety concerns based on the crash histories at the studied intersections. PA #201601844 February 14, 2017 Page 7 is J i i l The T.I.A. concludes that the streets serving the subject property are demonstrated to have adequate x capacity to support the proposed development. City Engineering staff reviewed the T.I.A. and expressed support for its findings with no further recommendations. The Commission finds that a 26-foot driveway aisle has been provided to accominodate fire apparatus access, including aerial truck access to the future buildings at the rear of the property. The driveways exceed the requirement for a 20-foot driveway to serve seven or more parking spaces. The applicants have been in discussion with the Fire Marshal to ensure that address fire apparatus access can be provided. The Planning Commission finds that the final approval criterion has to do with Exceptions to the Site Development and Design Standards. Given concerns with the proposed shadow plan satisfying the requirements of the code detailed above, the applicants have also requested an Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards relative to the F.A.R. standard and offered a shadow plan supplemented by a covenant which would restrict the development of Lot 1 by a future owner to be consistent with the shadow plan. The Commission finds that thew are two potential criteria to be considered in granting an Exception. The first is that, "There is a demonstrable difficulty meeting the specific requirements of the Site Development and Design Standards due to a unique or unusual aspect of an existing structure or the proposed use of a site; and approval of the exception will not substantially negatively impact adjacent properties; and approval of the exception is consistent with the stated purpose of the Site Development and Design; and the exception requested is the minimum which would alleviate the difficulty. " And the second is that, E "There is no demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements, but granting the exception will result in a design that equally or better achieves the stated purpose of the Site Development and Design Standards. " The applicants have requested the Exception based on the latter, suggesting that while there is no demonstrable difficulty in meeting the F.A.R. standard, the proposal will equally or better achieve the Ir purpose of the Site Development and Design Standards. They emphasize that the building will have a positive impact on the streetscape, using brick and metal paneling and breaking the building into multiple masses, placing parking at the rear of the building, providing inviting pedestrian spaces adjacent to the proposed street improvements, providing bike parking at the plaza and more glazing than called for under ~r the standards. The Planning Commission finds that the magnitude of the Exception requested, asking for a 0.247 F.A.R. where a minimum 0.50 F.A,R. is required, demonstrates that the proposal is not in line with the vision ,s sought through the Floor Area Ratio standard for a property of this size, and in considering an Exception the Commission must determine that the requested design achieves the stated purpose equally or better. The Commission finds that the Exception as proposed does not equally or better achieve the level of intensity of development or sense of enclosure of the street sought by the standard. In particular, the purpose and intent for non--residential development at 18.4.2.040.A states that properties visible from highly traveled arterial streets are held to a higher development standard and states that one of the purposes of the site review standards is to enhance pedestrian and bicycle traffic. Ashland Street in this location is a highly traveled arterial, and the Planning Commission finds that the project is in large part an PA 42016-01894 February 14, 2017 j. Page 8 automobile-oriented use and does not equally or better achieve the purpose of enhancing pedestrian traffic. In addition, the purpose of site design review at 18.5.2.010 includes enhancing the environment for walking, cycling, and mass transit use. For the same reason, the Planning Commission finds that the proposal does not equally or better meet this purpose over a project that conformed to the F.A.R. standard. The Commission finds that the Exception requested is not an equal or better design to one that would meet the F.A.R., but further finds that the request should also be considered in light of the first criterion, that "There is a demonstrable difficulty meeting the specific requirements of the Site Development and Design Standards due to a unique or unusual aspect of an existing structure or the proposed use of a site; and approval of the exception will not substantially negatively impact adjacent properties; and approval of ~ the exception is consistent with the stated purpose of'the Site Developmenl and Design; and the exception requested is the minimum which would alleviate the difficulty. " The Planning Commission finds that accommodating the proposed drive-up use and the associated site planning, circulation and parking ' ~ configuration necessary to address the special use standards for drive-up uses has not been demonstrated to impact the site planning to a degree that would prevent accommodating a larger footprint on Lot #2. Commissioners recognize that this was one of only 12 drive-up windows allowed in Ashland, and that the is criteria for locating allowed drive--up uses within the city puts constraints on where a drive-up use may be allowed, limited the applicants' ability to select a suitable property, but the Planning Commission finds that that the drive-up component of the request has not been demonstrated to create specific difficulties in r meeting the F.A.R. standard on the subject property. The Planning Commission further finds that as a credit union, being subject to charter regulations preventing them from pursuing speculative development proposals does not constitute a unique or unusual the site, as this is ultimately aspect of the specific user Credit Union proposed ~ Y (Rogue ) aspect of the use of and not the proposed use as a financial institution. The Planning Commission finds that there is not a demonstrable difficulty in meeting the standards due either to a unique or unusual aspect of an existing structure or the proposed use of the site, and that as such an Exception is not merited. The Commission finds that the suggestion to impose a real estate development covenant on proposed Lot #1, requiring a z fixture owner to develop to a density of at least.624 F.A.R., does not cure the problems with the proposed shadow plan in this application. The two lots would be separate lots, under separate ownerships, and for totally separate developments, which does not meet the definition or intent of a shadow plan in the Land Use Ordinance. t 2.4 The Planning Commission finds that while the applicants have indicated that they are exploring sale of Lot 91 to an affordable housing provider, they have also made clear that based on the limitations posed by their charter they could not be involved in the development of Lot 41. WMle the application includes a detailed shadow plan involving Lots #1 and #2 as part of addressing the F.A.R. standard or an Exception to that standard, the current development proposal being considered is limited to Lot #2 and the applicants are y not seeking approval for the development of Lot #1 for affordable housing or any other purposed at this time. 2.5 The Planning Commission finds that the proposal includes a request for Property Line Adjustment to adjust the property lines between the applicant's Lot #1 and Lot #2. This would enlarge the existing Lot #1 by 2,977 square feet while reducing Lot #2 by a commensurate amount. The application materials emphasize that there is no minimum lot area, width, depth or coverage in the C--1 zoning district; that adequate setbacks from the adjacent residential zones can be provided; that both tots can be built upon PA #2016-01894 i` Febi•tiaiy 14, 2017 Page 9 Y j after adjustment; and that there are no physical constraints to pose any concerns. In addition, the application notes that the adjustment does not make access less conforming and will allow for better driveway alignment with the driveway across the street. 2.6 The Planning Commission finds that the application materials include a Tree Protection & Removal Plan prepared by Landscape Architect Alan Pardee that identifies 24 trees on the property as well as a number of trees on adjacent properties within 15 feet of the property line. Eight of the site's trees are proposed for removal with the current proposal. These include: Tree #5, a 20-inch d.b.h. Black Oak; Tree #18, a 12-inch d.b.h. Cedar; Tree #19, a double-stemmed 14-inch d.b.h. Big Leaf Maple; Tree #20, a 30-inch d.b.h. Cottonwood; Tree #21, a 24-inch d.b.h. Silver Maple; Tree 922, a 10-inch d.b.h. Silver Maple; Tree 423, an 18-inch d.b.h. Siberian Elm; and Tree #24, a 24-inch d.b.h. Siberian Elm. In the Tree Removal Permit request, Pardee explains that efforts were made in the plaluiing process to accommodate the site's trees. He notes that for years, the site was used as a trailer park and as such the central portion is largely without tree cover and those trees that are in place are primarily concentrated along the property lines at the perimeter. This arrangement provided for the preservation of the bulk of the site's trees, and in Pardee's assessment the retention of these target- established trees at the property boundaries will benefit the site and surrounding properties. He goes on to explain that the tree removals proposed are in areas that will be disturbed by paving, building construction or utility installation to develop the site in keeping with the Site Development and Design Standards, and that the Rogue Credit Union project will include many new trees selected for their hardiness, beauty and longevity selected to meet Ashland's standards and more than mitigate the removals proposed. He asserts that these removals will not have a significant negative impact on erosion, soil stability, flow of surface waters, protection of adjacent trees, or existing windbreaks, or upon the tree densities, sizes, canopies, and species diversity within 200 feet of the subject property. SECTION 3. DECISION 3.1 Fused on the record of the Public Hearing on this matter, the Planning Commission concludes that the proposal for Site Design Review approval, and Tree Removal Permits is not supported by evidence contained within the whole record. The Planning Commission finds that the shadow plan provided fails to meet the Floor Area Ratio standard. The Commission also finds that the requested Exception to the F.A.R. standard does not equally or better achieve the level of intensity of development or sense of enclosure of the street sought by the standard. Therefore, based on our overall conclusions, we deny Plaiuling Action #2016-01894 without prejudice. F t . Tebluaty 15, 2017 Planning Commission Chair Date PA #2016-01894 February 14, 2017 Page 10 CITY of -AS H LAN D ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES JANUARY 10, 2017 CALL TO ORDER Chair Melanie Mindlin called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street. Commissioners Present: Staff Present: Troy J. Brown, Jr. Bill Molnar, Community Development Director Michael Dawkins Brandon Goldman, Senior Planner Debbie Miller Derek Severson, Senior Planner Melanie Mindlin April Lucas, Administrative Supervisor Haywood Norton Roger Pearce Lynn Thompson Absent Members: Council Liaison: None Greg Lemhouse, absent ANNOUNCEMENTS/AD HOC COMMITTEE UPDATES Community Development Director Bill Molnar made the following announcements: 1) DEQ will be holding an informational meeting on January 19 regarding the railroad property cleanup project, 2) the commission's January 24 meeting will include a legislative public hearing for an amendment to the Neil Creek floodplain map, 3) on January 19 Project Manager Adam Hanks will present an update on the Climate Action and Energy Plan, and 4) the annual State of the City Address will be held on January 31 at the Community Center. CONSENT AGENDA A. Approval of Minutes. 1. December 13, 2016 Regular Meeting. Commissioners Thompson/Miller m/s to approve the Consent Agenda. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed 7-0. PUBLIC FORUM Huelz Gutcheon/Spoke regarding climate change and global warming. UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Adoption of Findings for PA-2016-02060, 639 Tolman Creek Road. No ex parte contact was reported. Commissioners Brown/Thompson m/s to approve the Findings for PA-2016.02060. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed 7-0. Ashland Planning Commission January 10, 2017 Page 1 of 6 TYPE II PUBLIC HEARINGS A. PLANNING ACTION: PA-2016-01894 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 1651 Ashland Street OWNERIAPPLICANT: Rogue Credit Union/Kistler, Small & White Architects, LLC DESCRIPTION: A request for Site Design Review approval to construct a 4,508 square foot, single-story credit union building with drive-up window as part of the phased development of the properties located at 1651 Ashland Street. Also included are requests for a Property Line Adjustment and a Tree Removal Permit to remove eight of the site's 24 trees. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Commercial; ZONING: C-1; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 391 E 10DC; TAX LOT 8700 & 9201. Commissioner Mindlin read aloud the public hearing procedures for land use hearings, Ex Paree Contact Commissioners Pearce, Norton, and Miller declared site visits. No ex parte contact was reported. Staff Report Senior Planner Derek Severson stated the subject property is located at 1651 Ashland Street, across from Lit Way and the Wendy's restaurant. He explained the request is for site design review to construct a 4,508 sq.ft. single story credit union building with a drive-up window. A shadow plan has been submitted which includes adjoining property and shows how the minimum floor area ratio (FAR) of .50 could be met in a later phase; however, the adjoining property will be outside the future control of the applicant. As proposed the 4,508 sq.ft. building on lot 2 achieves a .247 FAR. The shadow plan shows additional buildings could be constructed on lot 1 to achieve a FAR of .624 and combined the two lots would have a .506 FAR. Mr. Severson stated the applicant is also requesting permission to remove 8 of the site's 24 trees and a property line adjustment, Mr. Severson displayed photos of the site as well as the applicant's site plan, lot line adjustment, proposed building elevations, landscape plan, utility plan, tree removal and protection plan, and the architects rendering of the new building. Mr. Severson noted the applicants submitted a traffic impact analysis which shows that the streets serving the property have adequate capacity. The Public Works Department has concurred with this finding and they have no additional recommendations for this project. Mr. Severson stated the three primary concerns raised in the staff report are: 1) The Electric Department has not been consulted to verify whether adequate capacity to serve the property is already in place or can be provided. 2) There needs to be further consideration or cross easements to enable pedestrian and/or vehicular connectivity with adjacent properties. 3) The shadow plan provided appears to counter the intent of the FAR standard. Mr. Severson explained that following the release of the staff report the applicants met with the Electric Department and received direction. The transformer location shown on the plan will work but it will require boring or trenching underneath Ashland Street to a transformer located in front of Wendy's. Additionally, Planning staff and the Electric Department would like to see the transformer located outside of the parkrow and behind the sidewalk. Mr. Severson touched briefly on the staff recommendation to include cross easements that would enable future pedestrian connectivity with adjacent properties and stated the last issue is regarding the minimum FAR standard. He presented the code language and stated the purpose of the FAR standard is to 1) deliberately create an environment supportive to transit, similar to a minimum residential density, 2) seek efficient use of available commercial land in keeping with Regional Problem Solving commitments and the associated goals and policies, and 3) provide a sense of enclosure to the streetscape. Mr. Severson stated in order to receive an exception to this standard the application must meet the following criteria: 1) there is a demonstrable difficultly meeting the specific requirement of the Site Development Design Standards due to a unique aspect of an existing structure or the proposed use of the site; and approval of the exception will not substantially negatively impact adjacent properties; and approval of the exception is consistent with the stated purpose of the Site Development and Design standards; and the exception requested is the minimum which would alleviate the difficulty, or Ashland Planning Commission January 10, 2017 Page 2 of 6 2) there is no demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements, but granting the exception will result in a design that equally or better achieves the stated purpose of the Site Development and Design Standard. Mr, Severson explained it is difficult for staff to support the approval of the exception request. He added the commission has several options; they could approve the exception request with the recommended conditions of approval, deny with action without prejudice which allows for a new application to be submitted within one year, or continue the hearing and provide direction to the applicants relative to the FAR. Mr. Severson concluded his presentation and stated staff is recommending the last option. Questions of Staff Commissioner Pearce asked about the FAR and Mr. Severson clarified the proposed FAR for the credit union building is .247. Commissioner Norton inquired about the parking. Mr. Severson clarified the applicants have proposed 14 spaces where only 13 are required. He also confirmed if the building size is increased, the parking requirement will go up. Commission Thompson asked about the plaza and landscaping ratio and stated it appears they have a deficit. Mr. Severson recommended this question be addressed by the applicant. Applicant's Presentation Matt Stephenson/Rogue Credit Union Executive Vice President & COO/Mr. Stephenson explained the credit union was started locally 60 years ago by a group of teachers and they have been in their current building in Ashland since the 1980's. He noted there are now branches inside Ashland High School and Southern Oregon University and stated their partnership with the citizens of Ashland has allowed them to see tremendous growth in their membership. Mr. Stephenson stated the Ashland branch currently services 12,000 members and their membership has expressed their desire for a branch with better vehicle accessibility, He explained the credit union has a fiscal responsibility to their members to not build a structure larger than they need, and noted their desire to partner with a local agency who would build affordable housing on the adjacent lot. Jerome White/Project Architect/Mr. White stated the shadow plan shows how the FAR requirement can be met over time and stated if the building size increases the parking requirements go up. He commented that they have addressed the electric requirements and are comfortable with the condition recommended by staff. He also stated they are open to cross easements and already have some existing in the title. Mr. White stated the primary issue with this proposal is the FAR. He cited the shadow plan provision provided for in the land use code and stated the FAR could be met if you combine both lots. He explained as a credit union they are not permitted to develop property that is not for their own use and this is the basis for their exception request. Mr. Stephenson noted the federal and state regulations that prohibit them from doing development that is not for their own use and explained they would like to sell the other lot to an agency who will construct housing. Mr. White provided a brief overview of the project details, including 8 ft. sidewalks, 10 bicycle parking spaces, direct access to the bike lane, a covered bench that could serve as a future transit shelter, and solar panels on the roof. He stated they believe the proposal meets the intent of the code and asked for the commission's support. Questions of the Applicant Commissioner Mindlin stated the Planning Commission and the city are working hard to increase the density in this area and asked the applicants to address the FAR exception criteria and explain why their proposal is equal or better. Mr. Stephenson stated if you look at the property collectively, it does meet the FAR. He added they believe having the property developed by them is better than it sitting empty. Ashland Planning Commission January 10, 2017 Page 3 of 6 Commissioner Thompson questioned how a higher FAR could be imposed on the back lot if it is under different ownership and the land use code does not require it. Mr. White stated whoever purchases that property will want to build as much as possible and there is enough space to do what is shown in the shadow plan; their only limitation is parking. Commissioner Pearce stated he had the same question. He commented that the shadow plan looks at the whole site but this is really two sites, not one. Mr, Stephenson restated their intent to sell the lot for affordable housing. Mr. White commented that Rogue Credit Union is a good community member and stated the land use ordinance is asking them to build space they don't need. Commissioner Miller asked how long the development of the second lot would take and asked what the first floors would be used for. Mr. White stated under the current standards a commercial use would be located on the first floor with housing units above; however it has been discussed in the past to rezone this area to R3 and he would like to see that happen so that residential units could go on the first floor as well. Commissioner Norton questioned if the drive-thru was removed could they achieve the parking needed for a larger building. Mr. Stephenson stated the number one issue they get requests for in Ashland is a drive-up window and improved parking. Commissioner Brown asked what will happen with lot one in the interim. Mr. Stephenson stated they would maintain it as flat land until it is sold. He added they are not allowed to do more than that but they will clearly maintain it to city standards. Staff was asked why they were not supportive of a future second story on the proposed credit union building at the pre- application stage. Mr. Severson questioned the appropriateness of approving a shadow plan that is unlikely to ever happen. He stated Ashland has never had a commercial building that later adds a second story for housing. He stated it did not appear this was a realistic option and stated it was better to request the exception. Project Traffic Engineer Kim Parducci was asked to come forward and speak to the circulation plan. She clarified for the commission that they anticipate most turns from the west driveway will be right turn only and if drivers wish to make a left onto Ashland Street they will likely go back through the site and use the main entrance. Mr. Stephenson was asked how long ago they acquired the property and he responded 18 months. When asked if they were aware at the time of the pre-application conference that there were FAR requirements he responded "Yes." Public Testimony Jerry Hauck/847 Garden Way/Stated he is a retired teacher and coach from Ashland High School and is currently chairman of the RCU board. Mr. Hauck stated they are proud of what they do for the community and will continue to be here for a long time. He stated they are constantly being hit with requests for more space at the Ashland branch and a better parking lot. Liz Shelby/1016 Aspen St., Medford/Stated she has been employed at Southern Oregon University for 25 years and is currently a RCU board member. Ms. Shelby explained they have been looking for years to find a good site in Ashland to better serve their members and accommodate growth. She stated this is an ideal site and noted their fiduciary responsibility to balance what is good for the members with the safeguarding the brand and financial integrity. She stated this is a win-win situation and hopes the commission will approve their request. Scott Mulkins/365 Ridge Rd/Stated he chose to live and work in Ashland due to its progressive scene and hopes they will place a premium on good progressive companies like Rogue Credit Union and grant the exception. Huelz Gutcheon/2253 Highway 99/Requested Ashland require all new structures to be completely autonomous, with no utilities going in or out, and everything on the site being clean energy. Ashland Planning Commission January 10. 2017 Page 4 of 6 John Fields/845 Oak St/Recommended the commission use the flexibility allowed in the code when looking at projects. Mr. Fields stated businesses have ideas and needs and need some room to function. He voiced his objections to overly mandating proposals and encouraged the commission to support the application just the way it is. Commissioner Mindlin closed the hearing and the record at 8:30 p.m. Questions of Staff Mr. Molnar stated staff has been working with the applicant and project team for some time and they have tremendous respect for them. He said staff has been very honest about what they can and can't do at this location. He explained the application is eligible for an exception which provides the commission more flexibility than a variance. He stated if the commission accepts the applicant's findings, the proposed use and its restrictions presents an unusual circumstance. Mr. Molnar noted the shadow plan is very detailed and shows how the entire property can meet the .50 FAR. He stated the applicants are committed to findings a good partner for the remainder of the property and there are a lot of options for this property over time. Commissioner Dawkins questioned the feasibility of making an exception that no commercial is needed on the rest of the property. Mr. Molnar clarified this would have to be a zone change and could not be done under the exception criteria. Commissioner Thompson asked if the exception is granted, would there be restrictions on the back property? Mr. Molnar noted the applicants have indicated the potential for a deed restriction which would put a higher burden on that property when it is developed. He added with no deed restriction the parcel would be subject to the current standards. Staff clarified the application before them is only for lot two. Deliberations and Decision Commissioners Brown/Dawkins m/s to accept the proposal for PA-2016-01894 as presented and approve the exception. DISCUSSION: Brown commented that the exception criteria is there for a reason and once in a while you run into a project that warrants it. He stated he does not believe this sets precedence and stated not all businesses have the same limitations as Rogue Credit Union. He stated this proposal meets the exception criteria and recommended they not restrict what is done with the adjoining lot. Pearce stated he is open to a discussion on granting the exception, however he is having a hard time with the "as good or better" criteria. He agreed with Brown that they should leave the other lot alone and not add deed restrictions. Thompson commented that this is a big exception and does not adhere to what the land use code outlines for a piece of property this size. She acknowledged the applicant's arguments but questioned if the design achieves the stated purpose equally or better. Miller commented that it would be easier to approve the exception if they were a little closer to the .50 FAR requirement. Norton voiced support for the motion. He commented that the drive-thru use is a unique and unusual circumstance and noted the applicants own the last available drive-thru in the city. Mindlin expressed concern with the commission defining the special circumstance and having to justify the exception themselves. Mr. Molnar clarified the applicants made an argument under exception criteria (2) and there has been testimony tonight presenting arguments under criteria (1). He went on to say the record contains information on both and the commission could grant the exception under either criteria. Pearce commented that it is difficult to make the case based on the "as good or better" criteria. He stated the other criteria speaks to the unique or unusual aspect of the existing structure or proposed use, but they are considering approving this based on the proposed user, not use. He stated it is a bank use all banks have different requirements and regulations and raised concern with granting an exception based on the proposed user. Thompson commented that other businesses could potentially make a similar argument that they should not have to build a larger building and meet the FAR requirement because they do not need the extra space and doing so would be an imprudent use of their resources. Brown commented that most businesses that build larger structures have the ability to lease the extra space out, but this applicant cannot. Dawkins commented on the city's policy for infill and stated this is not a good use for this big parcel of land. He added that he will not vote on principle and will base his decision on whether the application meets the exception criteria. Thompson stated she will reluctantly vote no and commented that the requirements for the exception have not been met. Mindlin agreed that the Ashland Planning Commission January 10, 2017 Page 5 of 6 exception is hard to justify. Roll Call Vote: Commissioners Brown and Norton, YES. Commissioners Dawkins, Pearce, Thompson, Miller, and Mindlin, NO. Motion failed 5-2. Commissioners Thompson/Miller m/s to deny the application without prejudice. Roll Call Vote: Commissioner Norton, NO. Commissioners Brown, Thompson, Dawkins, Miller, Pearce, and Mindlin, YES. Motion passed 6.1. DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Cottage Housing Standards. Senior Planner Brandon Goldman provided a brief history of the draft cottage housing ordinance and stated staff is seeking feedback before the ordinance comes back for final refinements and the formal public hearing. He explained the draft ordinance now includes a maximum unit size of 1,000 sq.ft. and the exemption to allow preexisting single family homes to remain on the site is still included, but a maximum floor area ratio (FAR) requirement has been added. Mr. Goldman asked for the commission's feedback on the appropriate scale of cottage housing developments. He questioned if three units would be acceptable for smaller sized lots and whether 12 or 16 was appropriate for the higher end. He also commented on the feedback he received from his discussions with local building professionals who cited lot coverage concerns. In response, staff is considering increasing the lot coverage requirements to accommodate impervious surfaces such as parking, driveways, sidewalks, and porches, Mr. Goldman stated another consideration raised by the building professionals was how to accommodate external storage (shared garages, etc.) under the .35 FAR. He stated staff will need to come back with additional detail on whether those common buildings that are used by all members of a cottage housing development would be allowable under the FAR if it stays at .35. Commissioners Dawkins/Millerm/s to extend meeting to 10:00 p.m. Commissioner Feedback • Commissioner Mindlin commented that it makes more sense to have a different standard for garages and inhabitable spaces. • Commissioner Pearce thanked staff to reaching out to the development community and voiced support for a minimum of 3 units and a maximum of 12. He also voiced his support for increasing lot coverage for impervious surfaces. • Commissioner Norton recommended the ordinance include a parking requirement that is at least equivalent to the multifamily parking standard and to base it on bedrooms instead of square footage. He added using a requirement that is less than multifamily would be a mistake in single family neighborhoods. • Commissioner Miller encouraged design standards that would complement single family neighborhoods. • Commissioner Dawkins agreed with a range of 3 to 12 units. • Commissioner Mindlin agreed with what has been said but would like a maximum of 16 units. She noted it is unlikely they would get a development this size due to available lot sizes, but they should not prohibit it. Mindlin expressed concerned with over-regulating the design of the open space and stated she would be willing to let go of most of those requirements. • Commissioner Brown suggested general language be added that would allow them to address design elements and protect individual privacy. He commented on the buildings relationships to each other and the buildings relationship to open space and stated they to make sure the sense of privacy is maintained. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 9:55 p.m. Submitted by, April Lucas, Administrative Supervisor Ashland Planning Commission January 10. 2017 Page 6 of 6 Good evening and thank you all for your service to our community, My name is Jerome White, Principal architect with KSW architects, and I reside at 253 A Street here in Ashland. With us here tonight is my partner Matt; Kelly, Matt, and Alan from Rogue Credit Union, and Kim Parducci of Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering. STAFF'S 3 CONCERNS ITED IN STAFF REPORT: Electric Cross easements And the primary issue here tonight, and the one I wish to speak to, is that of the requested exception to the required minimum Floor Area Ratio required in 18.4.2.040 C. Detailed Site Review Standards 1. a. Orientation and Scale for the proposed Rogue Credit Union building on Lot 2 and what perceived impact this exception will have on the Ashland Street environment. Early in the design process, Staff requested that we address both Lot 1 and Lot 2 to demonstrate that Lot 1's developability would not be restricted by what was being proposed on Lot 2 for the Credit Union. We proceeded to schematically design the future building footprints and site design for Lot 1 along with the design for the proposed Credit Union building on Lot 2. 18.4.2.040 C. Detailed Site Review Standards 1.a. Orientation and Scale allows for a "shadow plan" stating, `Developments shall have a minimum Floor Area Ration (FAR) of 0.50. Where a site is one-half an acre or greater in size, the FAR requirement may he met through a phased development plan or a shadow plan that demonstrates how development may he intensified over time to meet the minimum FAR..." We then proceeded to develop a `shadow plan' for Lot 1, as allowed by this Ordinance section; Lots 1 and 2 combined and separately both exceed one-half acre in area. The plan presented in the initial application proposed a 2nd floor shadow plan for Lot 2 but Staff stated that they would not support this proposal. We then proposed transferring density from Lot 2, the lot with the proposed RCU one story building, to Lot 1. These combined building areas for both Lots 1 and 2 would thereby exceed the minimum FAR required for the combined lots. Lot 2 exceeds half an acre but there is no room on the site to add additional building area. This FAR would be 50.6% as currently envisioned and is only limited by parking. i Here is the hitch in that plan. As a credit union, Rogue is restricted to developing property for their use only and cannot engage in speculative development. Hence the property must remain as two distinct lots to meet this legal requirement. • This is the reason we revised our submittal to request an exception to the minimum F.A.R. as suggested by Staff in their pre-application comments. • While we are now requesting this exception to the F.A.R., we believe that the Shadow Plan argument is still relevant to the discussion as we have shown how Lot 1 could be developed to meet the FAR in combination with Lot 2. The Exception requires that we meet the purpose and intent of the Ordinance section. One section is 18.4.2.040 A. Purpose and Intent for Non-Residential Development Zones which states in part, One area in which Ashland's commercial differs from that seen in many other cities is the relationship between the street, buildings, parking areas, and landscaping. The most common form of modern commercial development is the placement ofa small buffer of landscaping between the street and the parking area, with the building behind the parking area at the rear of the parcel with loading areas behind the building. This may be desirable for the commercial use because it gives the appearance of ample parking for customers. However, the effect on the streetscape is less than desirable beca use the result is a vast hot, open, parking area which is not only unsightly b u t results in a de velopm en t form which the City discourages. " • This application proposes placing the building at the street with the parking to the rear and thus meets this intent. The Ordinance purpose does not distinguish whether a one story or a two story or a three story building is required to meet the intent. Current thinking in the Planning world recommends creating a "street wall by placing the building at the sidewalk, in addition to street trees, thereby creating a street room". • Our proposal meets this thinking through the addition of the six required street trees, by placing the building at the sidewalk, with parking to the rear, and by increasing the height of the building; the corner element being 25 Y feet tall. 2 The Purpose and Intent further describes the desire for a pedestrian and bicycle friendly environment. Is this intent changed by changing from a maximum to a minimum building area; from a one story to a two or three story structure? Widened sidewalks, bike lanes, pedestrian plazas, benches, sheltered overhangs and alcoves, landscaped park rows, and other features are what creates this pedestrian and bicycle 'friendly' environment. This project includes all these pedestrian and bicycle 'friendly' features. The preliminary Transit Transportation Triangle Study commissioned by the City, that you are all familiar with, recommends that buildings could be stepped back at the second and successive upper floors; effectively presenting a single story at the sidewalk. Is this recommended to not be so imposing to pedestrians by creating a more humanly scaled building fagade or 'street wall'? This recommendation implies that the more stories a building has, the more a building potentially negatively impacts the pedestrian experience on the sidewalk. 1 t , 1 ' . ~ .w y .r 01, .w.. : • This concept is in apparent opposition to the stated Purpose and Intent and creates an argument that our proposal exceeds the stated Purpose and Intent by mitigating the effect of taller buildings on the pedestrians at the sidewalk while still presenting a "street wall" at the sidewalk. 18.5.2.050 Approval Criteria A. Underlying Zone • The project meets the applicable criteria for the C-1 zone as demonstrated in this presentation, the drawings and the Project Narrative. B. Overlay Zones • The project meets the overlay zone requirements for the Detail Site Review and Pedestrian Places Overlay zones as demonstrated in this presentation, the drawings and the Project Narrative. C. Site Development and Design Standards. The proposal complies with the applicable Site Development and Design Standards ofpart 18. 4, except as provided by subsection E, below. • We believe this project complies with the Site Development and Design Standards as demonstrated in these findings and the project drawings with the exception of meeting the minimum F.A.R. in 18.4.2.040. D. City Facilities • City facilities are available to the site and has adequate access to and through the site for transportation. E. Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards. The appro val a u thority may approve excep tions to the Site Developm en t an d Design Stan dards of part 18.4 if th e circumstances in either subsection 1 or 2, below, are found to exist. 2. There is no demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific re quirem en ts, b u t gran ting th e excep Lion will res ul t in a design that equally or better achieves the stated purpose of the Site Development and Design Standards. 4 r I! Chapter 18.4.2 Building Placement, Orientation, and Design 18.4.2.010 Purpose A. Enhance the environment to encourage alternative modes of transportation, such as walking, bicycling, and transit` • This project provides for an eight foot wide sidewalk for walking that connects to the interior pedestrian circulation and public space areas, provides direct access to the existing bike lane to promote bicycle use, provides ten bicycle parking spaces, and provides a covered bench that could serve as a transit shelter should service be restored to the north side of Ashland Street. B. Provide a business environment that is safe and comfortable, and natural surveillance of public spaces, or "eyes on the street" for crime prevention and security; • 32.8 % of the wall facing the street, 29.4% of the wall facing the Public Space, and 30.3% of the west wall is in glazing that provides for `eyes on the street'. These walls exceed the required 20% requirement. Credit Unions and banking institutions by their very nature are concerned with having "eyes on the street". C. Reduce dependency on the a utomobile for short trips, thereby conserving energy and reducing unwanted congestion; • Additional bicycle parking spaces are being provided to promote bicycle use by members. • The proximity of this Credit Union to the SOU allows for easy walking or biking from the college for student members. • The addition of this location will ease congestion at the existing downtown Rogue branch and will provide for closer access for members living on the east side of town. D. Support resource conservation and reusable energy generation, through solar, wind, and other renewable energy sources and • Project proposes installation of solar panels on the roof. • A large daylight diffusing skylight and significant window area with shade devices facing south will provide for a significant amount of the lighting needs for this building. E. Require high quality development that makes a positive contribution to the streetscape and maintains a sense of place that is distinctly Ashland. S • Rogue Credit Union is committed to building high quality facilities, installing generous and well maintained low water use landscaping, and providing a high quality local service for their many Ashland members. CLOSING What we have is an imaginary line, a property line that restricts us from transferring density that is allowed by Ordinance via a 'Shadow Plan'. If the property line was not there, then the transfer is permitted by Ordinance at the discretion of the City. We are therefor requesting an exception while still providing for the minimum required density over the two combined lots in the future. We would argue that the single story building proposed DOES NOT negatively impact the experience of pedestrians and bicyclists but rather meets, equally if not better, the stated Purpose and Intent of the Detail Site Review Standards toward creating a friendly pedestrian and bicycle environment. As Matt has noted, we also have a potential opportunity for additional affordable housing units on Lot 1 if very preliminary discussions between RCU and COLUMBIA CARE / ACCESS result in an agreement to sell Lot 1 to a respected affordable housing developer. By transferring the density from Lot 2 to hot 1, we have an opportunity to add four additional units to the additional floor on either Building 1 or 2. We believe that this proposal meets the stated purpose and request that you move to approve the proposed Rogue Credit Union building for Lot 2 with the exception for a reduced FAR. Thank you for your time and thank you for your service to our community. We are happy to answer any questions you might have. The primary function is to improve the project's appearance, enhance the City's streetscape, lessen the visual and climatic impact of parking areas, and to screen adjacent residential uses from the adverse impacts which commercial uses may cause. s } i Q ~ NOJ~2~0 'aN'dlHStf 13~2~1S aNb'IHSd 659 ~ w h ' NoZ zW~ NOINf111a~~1~3f1J02~ W ~ o ~ ~o ~ q w F Q ~oFOOZa wQ~ z 2 ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~`?~o~Wo ~~N 5 ~ o w ~ o ~ ~ ~m~mo'zu wm~ H~Nd2~8 aNd~HSd~ W ~Q ago v w o z Woz > 0 0 Qwgo~ ~ w°° a°~ N 01 N (1 114 ~ ~ ~ ~ fl J 0 ~ ° o w ~~z~~ i, z ~ a z ~ F 1 Y Y , ~tk tit ~,.r. ` ~ K t~; ~ ~ ' ~ `~i . ~ ~a' ' ! o ii ~ ~i yam` - 1 1~ . 't.~ i r^kw ~ I h~. ~ ~ ) ~k,. Y CI FN z r► ~ ` t . ~ k, ~ ~ooF Wz i ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~~zz~nm ~ as ti - ~ s ~ ~ ''~\F Qzz~~azz z o-' w ti r ~ ~ ~~~i~~w-i{'~~n ti,.y ~ ~ ~ ~ az~g~aa00 0 ~z > ~ a-aaWaa o a ~ ~ ~ ~k ~ rs ,F ~ , ,.3, ~ ~ ~ ~ o a a ~ z o ~ , t ax. W~ ~ ~ ~~wwNpo» o ~ m 1 ~ 5 - ti ~ W~ON(IJ JIJL~WW J U W 6 Q Q ~ F _ ~ Nr ~ ~ ~ I~oooFOOatt ~ WO ~ ~ M ~ ~"t~ fit: ~ Q ~Qm~i cpaNN00 a Wtt J " 'r f - W LL ~ azooowoo~~ W ~a - ~ ' ::°wooozoo~w " ~ t - I i ~ ~ U 0~ lY~u:OfY tYX X o Q W~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ w amaaaoaaww v ~ ~ a J_ ❑ ~ ~ _ a \ ~ ~ a N M V l~ (0 h o] m~ ~ Z W - [ W r '14/v~r'/li 1 I L ~ ~ ~ ~ W ~ ~ ( s ' ~ ~ ~ ~ _ t. ~ - ~ ~ ~ ! - ~ i n I r t. i ~ < < < ~ ~ ~ f 1 4; ~ 'i ~ : ` ~ 1 'l'~f ! ~ 1 i ~ ~ ~ ~i Y h L~ 1 ~ 1. ~ _ i Y 1 ~ ~ ~ f li.~~.t 1 ~f, ~ ~ Z i ~ i ~ i~r r O ~ _ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ 1 I 'w r i ~ V ~ f f f i, I , ~ ,I ti~°~ ~ w~ ~i 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ! i ~ e..~,.. y - , ~ ~ i i 1' ~l: t IVY ~ ( ,,n-..-^_~,-~---~.~_.~,._-,._i' ~ jj ~ 4 l ~ j t _ ~ i f ~ I ~ ~ _ ~ _ _ _ . 1 Ij ~ ~ t I' ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ r ~ _ - ~ f j i - ~4 - ~ ~ ~ 11 ,li ~ I ~ ~ ~ i ~ i 1 ~f E' I ~~~tf its it~~ t , ~ _ ~ Ij _ ~ j,~~ _ ~ I i i ~ i ~I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ i t ~ 1y K ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r i f ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ I , , r ~ 1 ~ _ a~ t d f` ~ I ~ ~ I 4 ~ - _ tip`  11 1 1 Ad 06 ~r-7 ZlOZl61l 'slsapgaiV ap,gM, pews iapsiA 10 Uoiyeiibgjne uappmayllnogiimloalwd raylo Fue io}'ued ui,,oapgm uw,'pasn ago; lou si pue sloap,gwyaP4M+IlewSiapsi,N to Fpradad agl si'aairuasjeuoi,ssalwdp juawrulsw ue se'uweiag peleio(Wouw su6isap pue seapi agf pue yuewnsop si,yl Oll'sjoajigoiyapgM+ pewSiapsiyj g loZalpmRdoo N00~2~0'aNt/~HSt/ 1~32~1S aN`d~HSd 659E } =~Z ~ NOINf111a~2~0 ~(1J02~ ° z N o 0 H o ~ u100 zww Z xs 1 w o t~LL- OUa WQ ~ Q ~ ~ z Zo~c~~zQ 0 ~ J ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 3~~ooQw w=p to d d ~ ui ~ o m Kw0 ~~m K~o v ~ ~mNmpzu Wmm > Wf- ~ H~Nd2~8 aNd~HSd ~ ~=0 Qwao~ a ~o° d J p~ w ~Nam~ ~ N NoiNn lia~~o ~noo~ aNN Z C7 v o Q (7 Z Z w w °a N o ii ~ w > d Q w wp[y~ W U 6¢. U a Q Q ~m a a N r w U ~ K K Q O w 2 w ~ z ~a ~ tUil ~ ~ _ ~ ~ o r ~rv a U Z Z 7 W N 0 0 W N W g a a a U p ~ 0 a J Z Q J U E- ~W 7_ =U UN ~ f- ' w cn ~ o wa LL = Y 0 W U Q'; w> w~ Q Y W' ~D Q F m N XW ~ ~ KQ W a Z Z w ao VJ ~WW WW QQ Z Z o U ~z ~~0 QO ~ ~ r¢ M7 Q Q z~ wQ W ~o 0 ~ W U ~w U L ~ ~ a _ ~ it ~ ' ~ > { I I - f a Y 0 _ w 0 Q ~ ~ ~ w w w w l~,_! tl~ \ 1~ 1 ~ f Z W? a W Y W Z Z Z Z Z Z ~ ~~s«_._~_ _ _ ___-~a UZ o~ ~ ~ a' g g w z w g g _ I IL .~e V Q 0 Ow 0 b o Y ~ f1 j K fY Y -'3 ! ~ N Q O O w w ~ m o D ~ o o m ~ ~ Q mK Z Z W W W W W W W z P' ~,ww 1- ~QO ~ ~ ~ Ida I N ~ ~ ~ i'~ ~ ~ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ o z ~ ~ III ~ ~ ~ y z¢ z P v,- I --O Ywp Io ] 1 cc ' "a U 0 p N I r z it K a ~ ~ I i ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ (7 W W ~ k, c _ ti oo~r6 r~" w - r~ss5' ~ - ~~~°o_ I~ $ ~ZX~N ~ ~ ~ I ~ I ~ z f q~ ~ 0 W ° _ _ w ,I `a IwI~~I iW: o o~ I~~- ~ ~ ~ _ , 9 Mop ~I ~ f I I N II ~ ~ ~ ~ v'J T I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ } ~ ~ ~ ~ W N I { ~l M Q 7 I ^Y I I ~ ~ I I m~~ I o I w~ f-~~bN i I ap 'I _ 1 II ~ '~,I I _1 ~ o ~ N ~ > ~ ~ N a If w + ( I i ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~I~ X' z p t _ - ~ ~ ~ . ~ _ I ~ ~ _ ~J - ~ ~ _ ~ - m j i i ~ F YI - - - m - l w ~ i I ~ ~en aais zNO~ ~ > :r~ > v o - s~ -z- - _ w - - a ¢ r~ N a _ 1 ' Q i ~ ~ ~ wok ~s' ~ I a o a~ ~~J ww m I I w ~>w ~ 1~ o - - mN UI ~ , o-,e~ i p m a y - ~ - _ - / - w ' ~ - ~ ~ - - I - - t- - m ~I ~ I ss ao•d9'ae ww i ~ ~ _ d r~- ~ p ~ ~ p K i mQ ~ f• _ I ~ ~ ~ ~ m ao F ~ _ O U z n ! to ~ I-,. 0 01 } ~ ~ ~ m w ~ ~ I ~ o ..M I~ l 7 Q I m ~ - _ ~ m ~ "l ~ m W + ~ r~' m ~ - w w W ~ ~ ~ w 0 w I~ ~ I X ~ < )i O ~url d n Y Z ~ ,may ~j a t RJ 1 I N ~ ~ O Q~~ J Q I F o~~Q ~ a ~-J~ ~ N d' w w al " i J ¢ ~ ~ z poi; r f-~ I ~ 3i? I iWZ f o ° I ' q ~ jWY~ I.~ I - IQ ~ I ~ ~~0~ ~ ZF rj a ~ w ' i O F wa~¢ m ° w toy Iwo I*.. ~ U~ ~,LL~ I ~ ~ it ~ ~ a ow ~ z w a u _ IN IZ I I~~~ oa m~ ti ~ ~ I ,i°I~, °aU~ I r a i ~ t ~ _ w x ~ _ m W I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 'U f ~ ~ ~ r-- j ~ ~ y ~ ~ ~ ~ ( ~ ~ i ~ I - _ -'I-- - 116;75' ~ w z sw ` o - z_ t W,JtlN ~Y W. 1 rwaz wa ^m / poF~ ro \ Kul a 2 wwt7 ~n~ V O O O Z Q ~ p ~ m W W Q z w LL Z w > mm~ U Q a- ~ z z oJ~ } UQO u~ aW o0 Z w ~ dap pQ' p ~Q w> NN NWW v v YFa ZQU Q ~o ~w Z Q ~QO F H Qw°~ Q~Z ~Z JU N w w maw 2 J Kw rQ ~ N u) I-KK NFW-U ~U . Q o o ~~O QW ~ d0 K ~ QUO > QQ QQ Jm 0 0 Owl iv r~ (n U u -  i sloaligojy ailgM + pews iapsIN )o uol;ezpoq;ne uaguM aq; inoq;lM;oa(oid jaglo due,o}'ued ui jo alogM ul `pasn aq o;;ou sl pue sloallgojd al!gM + Ilewg japsly, }o A;jedod aql si,'aolnJas leuolssa}od }o;uawnilsul ue se'ulajay pa;eiodioaul su5isep pue seapl aq; pue'luawnoop slyl p-n's;aa;lyo y a)lyM + llewg aPslH 9lOZ o' J N00~~10 `ONd~HSd 1~~2~1S aNdlHSd X596 ¢ ~ NOINfI 110~2~0 ~f1J02~ o z a o ~ o ~ goo zww ~J 1 w o cnLL OUa WQ 4 N N ~ ~ z i°wU(9~ z¢ 0 J Y/ v ¢w~°p>w c7 > W J goo ~ -f ~m°mpzp wmo~ w ~ ¢ W~Q N~ °~a ~°Q H~ N d~ 9 0 N d ~ H S d~ w w 3~=a, a Wog ~ N Q. ~ w ~ ~ ~~cn~w ~ ~ a ~ ~J NOINfI lla~~l~ ~(1~02~ ~on¢m~ 1 R V I pe Z I i w U Z rn ~ U - N N~ I i# z~ Q w I ~ o~ _ xK I r---- ~ ~a ~N ~ I ~ Iv ~ ~ ~ 6 ,1 ~ u ? 2 F. ~ 5 ~i r r '~rr~'' it I r ■ rrrrr r ■ ~ rrr~r ' a rrri r r rrr~ r r rrr~ I ~ I W I r Z I w 0 _ I ~ I , ~ ~ 1 w.. - _ 0 ~ I ~ - ~ ~ ~ z ~ - ~ U r 1 I I z°a ~ 1 ¢ a U N ❑ ~ ~ V/ Q a~> I I W} W W ~i 1 ~ 1- ~ o I ~ , 1 ~ ~ ~ 0 Y~z I ~ II a~ ~.p tom ( \ , ~ ~W~~ f l I ~ ~ f i.l ~ a _ - - i Na I a ~ I W ~ zpw x o ° ~ ~ 1 I ~ ~ ~ ~ CAL w~a ~ µ I - ~ ~ - ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ' o ~~I ~ 1 , q - - ~ _ ~ - / << °1 ~ ~ _ N~HM301S ~~NO~ 3bfllfl~ 1 f i , ~ J__, w 0~ ❑ • Z w ~ - p W ❑w I - f ~ a~ w> i f o f ' ° ? ~ i ~ ~ ~ 1 - - . I _ -1-- i ~ ~ ~ ~ _ _ _ ~Li - r-.r~.r-r- .-..~--r1.EL~-r- tirwr~-r-r- S OC?°,~:~'38" IN - " 154J5 ~ • ' ~wM~als ~~NO~ (N1 - a _ _ w i 11 ~ ~ ~ F~ . ~f ~ ~ _ ~ ~ o f FIoN~e ~ w No a ~ 1, , I w I ~ w I ~ ~ p ~ Z 'I - ~i m I I ~ ~ ~ s r I ~ 1 1 I w a 1 i ~ I° ¢ I 1 J }w Ir ~ 1 ~ I~ i t w ~ j ~ p j 1 1' U ~ F~ ~ p ~ 1~ ~ ua ~ z I ~ r ~ v,1 11 ~ ~ } 11 ~ t ~ N a i ~I ~ 1 ~1 1 1 _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a I ° ~ 1 all W ~ 1 i O o z_ ~i _ I' 1 ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ z ~ w sz ' - ~ - ~Q o o I ~ y I ~ I ~ ~ II ~ 1 ~ 1 0 o r-a, w ~ a~ ~ ~ I \ N U 07 rr~ 1=a zp p~ II a ~ I ~ ~ ~ V ~ z;za Ir Y ~ z° Z m~ ~ w I I ~ z a ~ w + ~ ~ ~ - _ ~ J ~ ~ ~ ~ o J ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .fit - I ~ " N Z > I ~ q Z a i_ t V'~ ~ ~ ~ + w ~ a ~ o a ~ D ❑ Z Q ¢ - ~ ~ 0-91 I ..9-.9' ~ ~ LL ~ I w' w a r- ' ~ I Y w ~ N p ~ 1 w o ° ~ ~ o I - r u~ x ow ° ma I ~10~ ~ ~ co CV ~ I ~ p z= m jo l Y ~ O(n~ ~ Y I zm rn 4 ~ ~ ~r N ~ ~p ~ u p~ I Q 'JQ~ - a Oo ~ ~ o J v z ~ w ~ U w, w - r o J ❑ J w F ~ ~ _ ~ ~ 1 w' ~ ~ ~o ..0';96 ~ Io _f= p 1 ,ZQ I f m° a U ~ ~ U U ~ z oo ~ ' Z » a - Z ~ z Q w i g m~ I v _ J > - ~ I o ~ - ~ ..0 ~~l ..0-.8 ~ ~ ~ va ~ X0,81 I z ' ~ { N ~ a Y ~ ag ~ I' iii r~- ❑ ~ w r _ 1 ~ _ ~ ~ - _ m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~;z rn m III a ~ ~ x:..0-.8 :b'~2 f III a i I ~ ~ t ~ ~ - ~ t 11 I I I ~ ~~1 w o o N { , ~ , ~ j ~IG III ~ ~ 1 ` ~ N m t -J ~ ~ Z I I ~ - _.-1-_ - ~ ~ 0 ~ L .~J l~ J, ~ ~ ' ~ S 00°1'26" E - ]26.95' ~I r r rrrr r r rrr~~ r r~ ~ jc r r r~rra r r ~r r r irrrr r r ~r~r r r rim r r i U Z m ~ I ml 116. /`J I 0 ~ ~Q~ I WY Z IN ~ i U o ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ wQ Z ~r r r r ~ ~ 0~ O ww U ~ ~ Z~ W ~ ~ G ,z ~d I I Q i oo ~ I; ~ w ~ u~ Z Z a Q a ii ~ a W O,, ~ ~ Y ! w U U Ww~ _~~w h'~ W W ~ ~ Q ~ ~ N~ ~z¢ ~ o~ UZ ~ w w woo ww~ ~ UQO w w ' Y ~ r ~Y~ UO Z ~N F- w N' m o 0 O ~~Q a w - FFn rZh- ~rn~ ~ 5 ~ b o  Owz n0LU Izi- W n w w w w W~~ W~> C¢7 Lu spa;i,yoiy a;lyM+ pews gal;si,N;o uol;ezuoq;ne uapuM aq;;noq;lM;oafojd ~aq;o Rue io}'tiled w io alogM ul'pasn aq o;;00 sl pue s;oa;i,gaJy a;lgM+IIeWS Jal;si,N;o /gadod aq; sl'aolnJas leuolssa}od }o;uawni;sul ue se'ulaiaq pa;ejodioaul suBlsep pue seapi, ay; pue';uawnoop slgl 071 's;oa;lgoiy allgM + Ilews JanslN 91oz+o` N0~32~0 'aNd~HS`d 1~~2~1S aN'd~HSd X596 J W ~ Q ~Qo~oZQ WQ~ NOINf111a~2~~ ~f1J02~ o a J z N o ~ ~ ~ ~ z zN~zoa>~ W~~ ~ W ~ Q r ~i/ o a ~ Q~~g~;o ~~o ~J w w w o z o ~ ~ Z~ U o Sao ~ J ~mNm°Z~ wmom', H~ N d ~I 8 a N d ~ H S'd W "W a~ Q QWQo" ~ boo ~O~ wm 0 ~ w w ~~=~J a. Wz ~ U~ o ~ w ~'mam~ ~ N NOIN(1 11a~2~~ ~(1~02~ ~ aN~ z /~I o0 o N aN a II II I~ f0 c] X % ~a ~ ~N b N O N O O J Z Q j J ~ } I ~ J I ~ I W ' ~ I ~ J I a ~ ~ ~ ~ I w ~ . i I ~ ~ ~ z _ ~ ~ ~ I o ~ ~ ~ U I I _ I I ~ ' LL , _ ~ _ I ~ ~ ~ U ~ W ~ ~ ~ , ~ U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ a I z _ ~ ~ s, LL ~ ~ ~ ~ i m + -T-~- - ~ ~ ~ ~ `1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ w ` o i ~ ~ - ~ a p , I _ , _ I ~ ~ ~ ~ a ~ @ I ~ ~ I i i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ I P r ~ ~ ~ a I ~ ' , ~ 4 _ - I , ~ i z a:~ ` , • ~ j i. o I , " ~ ~ ~ Wa, ~ w z w z I q~ o w',, X Z ~ ` R ~nz4 _ I £ ~ A K Q a ~ r m= 1 1 ~ W o ( W W ~ m~z -r ~-H g ~ a'b ~ W v~ ~N ~ Q z o N~} e8 ~ 1 u y Q Z i ~ C~ N , Y ~ " e i ~ ~ ~ ~ ! ~ ti _ ~ ~ z ~ p w~ ❑ ~ ~ ~ ;''+h ~rc~ 7"p TN~~ ~ z w' w 3 ~ w - ~w€ } ' w ~ . mm~. ~ ~ =f~ I I N ~ ~ I Q ~ " ~ Q ~ z m ~ ~ ~ i ~ - ' ~ / j ' ~ ~ , . _ w „a8p ,w. ` ,.M.,,.,.,~A 1 `y. ~ ~ t { ' I F __T_ d t I ww s 1 o' w ~o°~ o ~ ~mF Oo Z I WLL J~ F-~ ~ ~m~ ~w~ o~ ~ I wwOF z~~ Qrp zQU w ti ~ >OpW ~=Z Z~Zo Q~Z W U J I t QwFw uwiF~ uQi~~rn rq~U - ~ ~ __w ~ w ~FZw Q~U w~ Qw w w m w } , wo gUcn ~ Q~~~ u.w~ oNQ} ~ ~ ~ ~ m Q I m COQ OQw owm 0 O Q U ~ o~~~az~.a oz~o I ~ c4 z ~ a w zw~pUU wQOa z z Q w w( OO~ox1QWd O~w`0 Q ~ m U C7U nnWOOUZO n21~~ ~ F v ~ '  00 CD 0 a-<w ao~=mm am0~ w w Z W ?m s;aa;!gait' a;MM+ pewS Japsi { }o uopezuoq;ne uapum ay;;noq;!m;oafoid jag;o hue,o;'lied ut jo alogm w'pasn aq o;;ou s! pue syoa}igoiy al!gM+ IlewS japs!){ jo Ryiadoid ay; sl 'aainiae leuolssa;md;o;uawnj;su! ue se'u!aj@q pa;ejodioaui su6isap pue seep! aq; pue';uawnoop s!ql 3-p's1391iymy a;ipM + pews J911si,N glOl 31 J ~ N0032~0'aNb'~HStf 1~~2~1S aNd~HSb` 696 , Q., ~ NOINfI 11a32~0 ~(100~1 W Q o 0 > ~z r o ~ ~Op ZW~ >J z ~ (/J N ~ ~ M/ 1 W o NLL- OUa WQ w ~ Q C7o~C7FZ r~ Q w - J w~,-OZ m F- Q W°a N~ °~~m~°Q H E N d?~ 8 0 N d ~ H S d~ ~ °o W° W a ~ N ~~Q~~ ~ N NOINfI 11a~2~~ ~(1~0~1 0 0~ 0 0 „s-,o ~ ..o,zr I ..a,z~ .r¢ ; a,~ I nti-.z ~ „o-~o~ ,~e-~a~ „e,a~ ~ ~o,a Z ~ I N as ~ ~ m o n O ~ ~ xx _ ~ ~N ~ _ o_ J O r 1 ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ I ' Z I w II I ~ ~ ~ i Q I Q ~ M = I , I f ~ I I I~ v O I ~ I I a II ,~Z~ l ~~Z16 ~~ZI ~Z16 ~ I I 0 0 ~ II II N 0 O o ~ IL ~ o I__ 0 w m II w m I ~ a a > O d _ ~ ~ c LL U I I I 0 I I I + -J _ ~ ~ 0 IL--~ r- r a I o ~ a ~ I a „Z6~~~816 „Z6~„Blb m ~~Z~ = Z 0-_ I I I I I I I I o I a a I I t~ ~ I I _ ¢ I a I I I I I ~ I 0 i I I ~ m I 0~_ o~_~ IZ j ~ \ N ~ U I ~ } ~ ~ _ I I ~ \ ~ i o I o q I a o m ~ ° - I ~ I I ~ ~ 0~ I Z~.~ z~.~ I a 0 I I I I I I I ~ I o I a o I N 7 ~ a I / 0 I ~ I m I N 0 I - I a 0 0 0 I ' I ~ I I I m I ~~Z~ ~~Z~ I I q } I I q w I I m o wWU I ~ I ' 0UQ I I I I ~Q= I I i I I I I 0 _ ~ - ___0 III ~ ~ w ~ ~ ~ II ~ I I I w w w w w W I w I I ___a -a _ a_ a_ a a__ i I ~ ~ Q a a a 5 II ~w 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~m ~ ~ ~ ~ m N ~ II I I z I I o q ~ m „Z~'II U I o _ I 4 ' III I I w I I a ~ ' I ~ I I I a a I I 0 r----_-----_--, I a I I I I I q a ° O - ~----J ------J ~----J 0 0 I I I I 1I- I I .o-s~ ..o-,zz „o-s~ ,  00 0 0 0 ~ 00 s;aapya V apyM + dews laps! {;o uopezuoy;ne uapum ag;;noq;lM pafoid jag;o Rue,o}'Ued ul,,o alogm a 'pesn eq of;ou sl pue s;oa;!gojy a;!yM+ pews japs!H }o Apadod ay; s!'ao!nies leuo!ssa}oA jo;uawru;sul ue se'ulajay pa;ejodmoui s0!sep pue seep!! ay; pue';uawnoop s!qi O-n's as;!yo,y a;!yM + IIewS ehs!H 9604 o` i N00~2~0'aNb'~HSd 1332~1SONdlHS'd 6596 ~ ~°o o~~ WQ~ NOINf111a~2~0~(1J02~ ~ I boo q o w o Z Uo~U~zQ I-~ ~I o ~ 1 W ZN7Zp}lL a'~N ~ W Q 0 W m ~ ~7ttU WO to (9 0 m J AWN-U m.- W F- ~m~m~z~W H~N`d2~8 ONb'~HSb'~ ~ ~Q ~~o ? w o z WpZ ~7~ ;u,~ z ~~g ~ d ~~J W ~ w z= ~ NOIN(1 110~2~~ ~f1J02~ W a mw ~ ~ 0 ~ G~ ~ ~ 0 0 P 4dC J.- Jf0 WO _ Oda J~ J(0 WO ~ OO LL N Q N 3~ J 2 pi 0 Q N > N J ~ ~ Q II II W O ~ ~ ~ II II d p p S p ~ ~ I~ ~ a ro ~ f- ( v m W J W ~ W~ W W U ~ N :L ~ U7 N /n~ S LD t` Z Q d ~ 2 VJ M~ i ' ~ z ~ a~ ~ ~ XX ~ \ XX o ~ o o ~ v~ / a~ U m U uZ J uZ UW N~ ~ W N~ ~ U7 ~ 2 cGQ \ Q z w zN zW z zW zm ( / " { ' J z W ~ ~Z ~o >o ~Z J W J 7 JQ JH J JF JQ ' Q m Q~ ~ N Qa ~ W j ~ , ~ I-" ~ I f- ~ - - W X ~ W m 00 _ _ ~ ~ ~ j' I U _ _ ` ~ ~ r _ - x._....-- - - I ~4 ~ ' ~ ~ I V ~ f}~ ~ ~~l , ~ A t' I I aw F` ' W ° ' ~ ~ ~ ~ k~ ~ I E ~ 1 ~ ~ _ ~ J 0 r~ _m ( ~z ❑ i o W 1 ~ W ~ ( ~ K ~ Q t l Ua M m ( - \~f - ~ N 0 ~ _ _ ~ ~ ILL tg~.....~..w..M~..... r o Jm R ~ w ~ a 7N Q ?WW^ III U _ ' COQ ti '-'-^A QtLN°J 4 S U a n `,a--- 1 ( F ~ QJ ` ~ ~ ~i I ~ - T - ~ ~~il { ~ t it ti~(~`} {j LL. r ~ , ~ o ' ~i C t ; t i p rn W rn ~ J' F Z ~ t- f ' I:( ~ d W ~ m m ~li~ ~ 'I. _ ( 1 ~Z ~U ~ ' Ii-"' J ~ 7 ~ ~ ~ . yk ZJ ZW - }4I~! ~~t ~ ~W ~W _ i l 7Z 70 Y ~ 1 ~ JQ JF i r 2 ~ ~ ~ ~ ( P I I ~ 1 ~ . ~ ~ -.p-_i (i~. ~ ~1~l+ 1 ' ~ 4.1 ~ € /N LL ..,.A~ ~ r; ~ ~ i I\ i~{ i I U l0 ~fI,E~ {r{ " ~ !L I N m ~ it ~ t t ~4' i LL U UZ E rc t i~ a.. Q J I'- 1~ '..I~~ :j LC I II a I 1 ; ~ m Q~ ut ~ E ~,y, I~~.,, ~rl r,~ ~ o ~ G ~1~. 7 , t U I ~ l~'. 1,;~;' ~4~~.~- o ~ ~N am 1 fj ~ 7 t ti ~i r.- iii z ~ ~ o Il i J UW I~LZ ~ z JW ~ U~ ~U Q ? Q~ J 11: ~Z 7~ Q ~W I,' ~ E 'i 7z ~o ~r,(~(~ wl I J Q ~ - - . f~ l l _ ~ , I ',1 I' f! I ~'cW~ N,o ~o _ ~ 11 ~ ~ Jlicpa ~o m'; Wo I i J I ~ N i {t I p ~ Q O N ~ ~li i ~ Y ~ d W z a Q tt 1- ~ ~ m .,tai I ( ~ ~ a ~wW = 0 0 0 ~ w o a o rn ~ v v ~ I- z4 zoo p Q o ~ ~ d W W I ~Z~dW Y w II 7 7 d to ~ II k I ~S Ill 7~ Z U > J 7 U /N~/ Z ? (n 7 Q U W 714 tl ~4i 1 N JO JOQ ~ ~ 0 L.L V ~ ~w Y W m 0 ~ ~ ,t QU QUd m D m U iD 7 7Z U ~ ~ U / r K i~ `i_`~ r r I ~ O ~ Q a m o U io 1 i. ~ l d N - - tl ~ 1~ ~ ~ i I I ~ ; ~ - f _ . 3. I i - r„ tp CI ~ I 1 v ; I 1~1~g1 I ~ , ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ hl ~ 14i1~ ~`t ~ ,i ~ V i ~ ~ i ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ I ~ 4 aj ~ LL j ' N ~ t ~ ` ~ I~ i~ ~ a r! I. ~ I ~ ~ ~ w ~ ~ r ~ `~j.l I z ~ ' i 'S~' ~ (fir ; _ 1 ' _ ~ r, i , II a ' ~ I ~ - - - _ ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ I ,1 1111 ~ ~ 1 i,. ~ idl w ~ a J ~LL o~ ~Jw w ~ T' I U W 4'- W 7W w~ 7ZQ Q Z Z F ~ ZI QrNi ?Qm m~_,.. 37.1 :'t.__ ~ W Z W ~N ~d 7 OU Y c~ 1  7 p K J z rl~ d W Z m m ~ z pcz p 0 Qp U Q U N Wd9t7VCV1606/61l s~oapyoiye~iyM+pewgiepsi~}ouogezuoq;neus;iijmaglinoq{im;aejoidiegloFueioj'pedmioapgmut'pasnago;;ousipuesjaep,goiysjigM'1Iw5jepsiiNjo/yledoiday si`aaimasleuoissaj oidpluaww1swuese 'uiaiagpa;eiod~oawsu8isappueseapieqj pueyuawnopsig1 D7 'sloali,ywye~i,qM+pewSiapsiN910ZalumAdoo a ~ NOJ~2~0 `ONd~HS`d 1~32~1S aNt~lHSb' 659 N ~ ova W a ~ NOIN(111432~~ 3f1J0~ °w o ~ o o ~ ~ r w N rn~-o>'~ W1=c~ m ~ o W ~ wWU,-0 m~ w ~ ~ W Qmzm~zo W~~ H~ N d 2~ 8 a N d ~ H S'd ~ ~ W W° Q J W a w ~ ~~N~~' ' NoiNn lia~~o ~noo~ ~ W ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ W'. i J._i J_i J._ N~ ~.p dV J~ J(0 ~ W W WO 1jJ J, J i J'._i N QN Q`- d I F F ~ . ~N Q N Q~ 10 ~ O D ~ > U ~ Y d 0 ~ 0 0 J 2 0 0 Q Z ~ > W Z d a Q. > > ~ J ~ II II W O 0 ~ Z Q ~F p 0 d 0 II II d 0 O w W- 0 v o w~zo U o ~ LLvo~ w ~ ~ w z v ro ~ ~ ~ O w ~ z ~ w O z W w i z ~ > 'z ~ ~ZW~ Z~~ zN m O ion Y ~ ~F ~ Z KU' ~ 0 W > (0 I~ ~ Y F Y JCL w FW W ~W M'' W ZU ZOr4 ZU. > 0~ 00~ Q ~ _ ZwW M~ ~ W 0 ~ X ~Q I- ~Q ~ XX d ~z yaw ~z Y wz ~~w m XX a m ~ m au~ w as m as ~ ~ Ct ~O COQ ~0 tt ~0 ~ i ~ N~ day aUa au m o aim v J I I W - I_ - ~ W O - r 1~~ ~ ~~I ` u~~ I~~ t W ! p 1 ',d~'1. 1 ~ l t. H . I 4„ , ~ Ir ` ' ~ll~ r~' ~ ' W , ~ _ d„ ,rlt~- I - ~ - r ~ ~ ; 1 ~ I l `.1 ' ~ ~ , ~ 1 4 I I~' 11~ - ^ 1 t~1c, t <1f1 i IF l~lc 1 1 i 1 r ' I ,L I tt)~ 9 ~ .1' r ~ I,t,'~I~u~ _ I l b~ . i _ f I. 1 ~ I ~ 1 11 ~ ~ ~u ~ I 4,r ~ij ~ ~ ~ ~~I:~ i1 v.~ P I1'~L I { ~ a 0 _ w j ~ Z m~ 1 1 1 ~ ~ I! r~l n a ~ I. ,i FIB I~ i a 1r = ~ I c ~ ~ ~ J m 1 ~ ~ 1 1 ~ O QN I ~ ~ I~~ ~1~ 1 1 ' i # ~1 W LL I.; I I 1~ t~} ~ Z ~ 1c w ~ ~r ~ a a I 'iI ~ o o ~ i Q p L j1 t_ 7~ J Z ~ ~ I 0 lji I I I I 411 1 1 m tlj l~ 1 r ~ I .1 ~ ~ t N a~ ~}I a ~ 1 . III. 1 1 1 ~ ~ '~j 1 1 1 Il~li t o (l t~ ~r1r i ~ ~ ~,1 1~, i ~ l~ 1 c 1 r w Y I J, 4 . r ~ ~ ~ 111 N nl 1t 11 I I 1 ' .I II 11 I"Ifl 1~~ 4 ~ 1f< 1 i~ h j 1 ~ 1 1 ~ ~ n r~. r. 1 ~ : ~ ~ , -I , r i ~i~- 1 ri d , 1`1 E 1 1 ~ r o ~ ~ ~ . . ,i~`ff d l 1 1 i~1 r Z c n r ~I ~ ~ ~ 1, ~ rr i~ ~ t ~ ~<<~ 1 111 1 ~ t ~:1i 1 M~ ! rat-`-7 ~+N 1.~ r s-~ 0 irlll H t t ~ r I I ~ I,,1~1 I,~';; ~ ~ r~ . ~ I ~ ~ i l ~ 11 i ~ „ 1 t ' ' ~ ~ - t ~ . , i i~ ~ I i. ~~1 1 I l i d t~ f' r 1 i 1 ~ ct I1 ~11 1 ~t'~ aE 1i ~ Ir ~ 4 ~ t ft{ 1 ,~I~ 1~r1~ ~ m 1 I ~t ~ ~ tr I r `s i ~1.iry11 1 G C- w ~ 11 w tI{ ` r` 1 ~i ,1 , ~ ~ 1 r ~ ' j ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~lll, ~ tt11 ~ . 1, w X11 n r W ~ t. _0 1 11 I ~ 1 it~r' ~4 o ' _ ~ ~ S i { t~ 1 t', 1~ ~ ~ ~ 1 1 i~~ i1 ~ r~~ i 11}11 ~N r,l 1 L li' a ~ ~ 1~1{F ~1,~t 4a >>EI~ 1~~~liljj ?a 1'. (1 ~t 1 ;i ~ i~ j~~; I j~1) l'~~1 1 III ~ ~ f Hl .i~j~1~~ I ~ ~ 0 1 I t ~ sf i ~ ~ I, 1 ~ { I j i ' ~I c I , rl ~ ~ t ~11t iil ~ a0 1~ 1~, Ii 1 Il. ~ ` . c ~ ~ , }I, ~ ~l r!, ~ ~il ~ F 1 r ~ - - E 1 1 ~ ~ ~ I{`~ ~ 1 ~ 111 _ 4 i 1~ i ~ l~ c~ _ 4 t~° i I I ~ I ti t' J I i~ I ~',f ~ ~r i' ~~~w ~ ;1.~ ,I ~ ~ 1. r~i~ 1j ~G . f,ljx ~ 4.~ ~~1 I r. ~ I 1 11 q ff ~ I u 0 U 7 c I Sa ' 1 1~ 1~ - y' 1111 `~I ~ I i - . I t i~ { ~ ii ~ 1 c ~etl~ f~ ll,~~~i~ ili _ 1c , r ~ ' I I ~ t 1 ~ t~f ~1 f'1 i; ~ ~ t } t i ~+I<r rhq h 1. I '~tht 11 1~ I ~ I 1 C -I hllijl l 1 11 l; I 7 r 11 i fl 1`~I ~ t (il ,~Il 1 tt I, , ~ 111 1 I I 1 m ~'1~~~ 111'1 1 .{i 1 I 1~:;~1 1 ~ i I~,i~t~ ~ ~j _ w .l l.. ~h i I Ic,tl ~ - ~I: z I, 1j 1i.~1h~ a Il.i I a' 1 fi ~F I t 1 i t, ! ~ ~n i j ~ d v N~ f~~. I ' ~0 ~ 1, 7' QU i1H 7 ~ yt ~{il h''~I ~ r h I~~~` ~f N ~ 1, tl:~ I~1 1 11 t i u; yp~ P ~ P P ~ ~ W ~ N.~ to = ~.0 ° W 0 r ~ . J . i W Z 2p >O >r, >O NU 1 ZU Z J~ W - O I- ~ m Z ~ ~ W W Z ~ ~ Y' ~ 1 NN~~ ~ ~ ~ w WwoW O m ~ ~ 1. YN m ~ mC~aO W ~ F ~ ~Na~ a ~ ~ ~a' ~ QIFW ~oJm ~ a ~ v.+„ Z w~~-J Z0~ m Z =R _ - ' ~ ?~>m ~~w U > 7 0 ,hl ~ a mu~n> aoa m o ~ m ~ X i m 1 ~ ~I i ~ 'I II f \l 4 L- II ~ ti...M~. .,.w 1 ~ ~ z ~ a W ~ ~ i~ z ~ A w ~ ~ Y I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ /f t f r l~ ~ 1 1 n ~II~1 ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ t I LL ~ 7 j) I ~ 1 ~ i i~ i F ~l y L ~ ~ E~ f 1 1 _ I ~ t i I I i C 1' ~ ~ Q z i Q c> ~ ~ { ~ ~ a ~ ~ U 1,.,~ II ~ lu_ t i s ,y} t 1 ~ - \ - N t 1 ~ ~ f . , 1~, : ~ . ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ _ _ I ~ , I _ i W 1 ~ ~ rn W m W p i, , - 1, ~ ~ ~ m I _ ~ w..._. . _ E w - i l~ 0 0 ~ i i i ~ F 1~, 1, - ~ ~ ~ i a w w i 1 1 _ `?ti:xt:~y ~ ~ ~ a rn m w °w z Z ?N ~ m Z U ~0 ZW v j ~Z ~ j 0 0 ~ ~Q ~ ~a CL tt ~ ~ W~ JW Q Qd m O U iD ~0 aF Z Z~ ~ N ~ ~ a I z ~ ~ A a 0 b  Ad 50:66 411OZ164 'soap,gay ep,gM+ pewS iapsiy jo uoileauoq;ne uopum aye ~noggm joalad sq;o Rue io}'ped w b elogm m, 'pasn ag ol you si, pue s~o ji,gwtl ali4M, Ilewg iapsi,y;o /~iadojd aq~ si'aoiNas jeuoissajojd jo juewNjsu,r ue se'uiaiay paleiodbooul sufiisap pue seapi aq; pue'luawnxp sigl Ogq'sloapgaiy eli,gM+ liewg rapsi,H g 40Z e~umFdoo 575-SECT-ASHLAND TOP 16" x 62" Blackout 15 kV, 3-PHASE SECTIONALIZING Galvanized Nonslip Doors No. 6690-T-25NS-1662 w/Locking Bolts 2,148 lbs. 5'-6" Full 180' Open (Typical) ® 5'-6" Long Plastic Board (1 Each Side of Blockout) 2'-0" Long Galvanized "C" Channel C' 7'-6" (2 Each Side, 1 Each End) 2-Ton Lift Anchor (4 Places in Top) BASE No. 575-B 6" 4,800 lbs. 3.51 Term-A-Duct (1 End Wall) o Galvanized Pull/Lift Iron 0,.. (1 Each Corner) o: 6 4'-2" -2" fl D 4'-0" 3 -8" v ~(4) - Dia. Grounding Inserts (2 Inside Walls, 2 Outside Walls) 4.5" Dia. Term-A-Duct J 4 o (8 Each Side) 2.38" Term-A-Duct 12" Dia. Sump °.:b..: (2 Each End) 7'-0" 6.63" Term-A-Duct 4'-8" (2 Each End, 1 Each Side) 4.5" Term-A-Duct (2 Each End) 575-SECT-ASHLAND 575-SECT-ASHLAND Oldcastle Precast' 5 x 7 File Name: 575-SECT-ASHLAND Issue Date: 2012 CITY OF ASHLAND PO Box 323, Wilsonville, Oregon 97070-0323 Tel: (503) 682-2844 Fax: (503) 682-2657 oldcastleprecast.com/wilsonville I 575-SECT-ASHLAND 7'-6- ° 7'- 0 6'-6" 1'-2" 5'-2" 1'-2" (2) - 2" x 4" x 66" T Plastic Boards 16" x 62" Blackout 00 F- - - 17- } ® CABINET ~I I HOLD-DOWN CLEAT (6) - REQUIRED 17_=/VZ1111 777 N } 1J" x 2j" Stainless Steel Hold-Down Cleat ° N of in ` I, x 2" Galvanized Lag Screw Stainless Steel Bellville Washer A A ®I L- - (4) - 2-Ton Lift Anchors No. 25NS Galvanized Non Slip Doors w/Locking Bolts (4) - Dia. Grounding Inserts (2 Inside Walls, 2 Outside Walls) PLAN VIEW 3.51" Term-A-Duct No. 6690-T-25P-1662 (15 kV, 3-PHASE SECTIONALIZING TOP) (1 End Wall) 6.63" Term-A-Duct 2'-0" Long Galvanized "C" Channel (2 Each End) (2 Each Side, 1 Each End) (4) - Dia. Grounding Inserts (2 Inside Walls, 2 Outside Walls) 6.63" Term-A-Duct (1 Each Side) 4.5" Term-A-Duct 4.5" Term-A-Duct (2 Each End) (8 Each Side) Butyl Resin Sealant 2.38" Term-A-Duct F(2 Each End) 2'-0.. ~ I I I I I II ~ II - p I~I I~ II } 11 I II ¶ I I N rol II II II o I III II II I I M ~ II II II II ~ ~ I I II II ® II II II II ~ I II II ~ 0 II II II II I I II it I i _ co ® d OD -TI Co 8" 12" D] 0. 8" Sump 4" 4" Galvanized Pull/Lift Iron 8.. 8" 4 4 (1 Each Corner) 2'-0" SECTION AA END VIEW 575-SECT-ASHLAND 575-SECT-ASHLAND Oldcastle Precast' 5 x 7 File Name: 575-SECT-ASHLAND PO Box 323, Wilsonville, Oregon 97070-0323 Issue Date: 2012 CITY OF ASHLAND Tel: (503) 682-2844 Fax: (503) 682-2657 old castle precast.comlwilsonviIle I 575-TRANS-ASHLAND 2'-0" Long Plastic Board (1 Each End of Blackout) 16" x 60" Blockout Galvanized NonSlip Doors TOP W/Locking Bolts 4-25kV, 3-PHASE TRANSFORMER W/ACCESS No. 84/112-T-25NS-1660 2'-0" Long Galvanized "C" Channel 5,225 lbs. `(2 Each Side, 1 Each End) 7'-0" Full 180' Open 2-Ton Lift Anchor (Typical) (4 Places in Top) 3.51 Term-A-Duct " (1 End Wall) - 4'- 8 Galvanized Pull/Lift Iron } BASE (1 Each Corner) O " No. 575-B - s -s 0 4'- D 4,800 lbs. 0 0 4'-2" 0 0 0 3'-8" ° 0 0 1 0 19 0 0 (4) - Dia. Grounding Inserts 4.5" Dia. Term-A-Duct J (2 Inside Walls, 2 Outside Walls) ° 2.38" Term-A-Duct (8 Each Side) 7'-0 12"0 SUMP a (2 Each End) 4'-8" 6.63" Term-A-Duct (2 Each End, 1 Each Side) 4.5" Term-A-Duct (2 Each End) CABINET HOLD-DOWN CLEAT (2) - Required 1j" x 2j" Stainless Steel Hold-Down Cleat J" x 2" Galvanized Lag Screw 4" Stainless Steel Bellville Washer 575-TRANS-ASHLAND 575-TRANS-ASHLAND Oldcastle Precast' 5 x 7 File Name: 575-TRANS-ASHLAND PO Box 323, Wilsonville, Oregon 97070-0323 Issue Date: 2012 CITY OF ASHLAND Tel: (503) 682-2844 Fax: (503) 682-2657 oldcastleprecast.com/wilsonville I 575-TRANS-ASHLAND (4) - 2-Ton Lift Anchors (Typical) -a" I 6'_6" - I CID 1'-0" 5'-0" 1'-0" (2) - 2" x 4" x 24" Plastic Boards I I I N Oa I I N A A O D /(4) Z L No. 25P Galvanized Non Slip Doors w/Locking Bolts (Typical) 16" x 60" Blackout - Dia. Grounding Inserts (2 Inside Walls, 2 Outside Walls) (Typical) PLAN VIEW 3.51" Term-A-Duct No. 84/112-T-25NS-1660 (1 End Wall) 6.63" Term-A-Duct 2'-0" Long Galvanized "C" Channel (2 Each End) (2 Each Side, 1 Each End) (4) - 4" Dia. Grounding Inserts 6.63" Term-A-Duct (2 Inside Walls, 2 Outside Walls) (1 Each Side) 4.5" Term-A-Duct 4.5" Term-A-Duct Butyl Resin Sealant (2 Each End) (8 Each Side) 2.38" Term-A-Duct (2 Each End) yy' ~ i I 7 C .,lJ..p, Td.'•.Q14 0 2'_0" f o - } II TI ~i u !i Co u o ®(D d. 00 } _ -ITNII } 8" 12" Dia. f g I I 1'-0" 8' Sump 4" 4" Galvanized Pull/Lift Iron 8" 8" 4" 4" (1 Each Corner) 1'-0" 3'-0" 2'-0" END VIEW SECTION AA 575-TRANS-ASHLAND 575-TRANS-ASHLAND Oldcastle Precast' 5 x 7 File Name: 020UEE575TRANS2 Issue Date: 2012 CITY OF ASHLAND PO Box 323, Wilsonville, Oregon 97070-0323 Tel: (503) 682-2844 Fax: (503) 682-2657 oldcastleprecast.com/wilsonville I Project: Rogue Credit Union Project ° LO CML Lao li oo I- i I I :;t oo w y-- ~ I I I ~ III II T5105175 L Protective Bollards 11 Location To Be Street Light Svc i i Determined Disconnect He* per Elec Dept T5105180 requirements I Vault 575-TRANS-ASH 1 ; (TRANS to be determined) a N 1 ; 3 phase M 1 i Comm Svc Installed per NEC a~Vn I ~a l l U) = = 1 a 1 I Vault 575-TRANS-ASH 1 (3) 3" PVC @ 48„ i*4 _ E5105179 stub/cap at E end of project ~_(1) 4" Spare toy-$------ - • 1 end of project- j Protective Bollards Stub/Cap _ocationo-8e - Determined 2" PVC 1 00 2" PVC Street Light Cir 2 STIR AL 1 ~ Stub/Cap IU 'v 1 ASHLAND ST IM ■ 1 NOTES: 1 1.) PUE Required Outside of R.O.W. O 2.) Street Lights: Sternberg LED 55825 4 LB Base 3.) Install Protective Bollards @ bE E5155827 Transformer & Primary Cabinet Locations I II ~ M C~ \ Ln STREET SIDE M = v PHOTOCELL a cn i PLANTER ARM PLANTER ARM D ~ i i J ACCESS DOOR GFI/LP/IUC M J D M I- Lo M Z \ a0 =o CAST ALUMINUM HINGED a IN ' ROOF N o° t~ a<+ LED LIGHT SOURCE 0), a_ WHITE POLYCARBONATE ACORN LENS DRIVER COMPARTMENT \ v a 0 0 -0 ° w `S Z L Q JQ\ eee PHOTOCELL o q OPPOSITE ACCESS DOOR Q a_ (NOT AS SHOWN) o LOW PROFILE DUPLEX GFI RECEPTACLE WITH IN USE o \ COVER ~ If 1' I DOUBLE HOOKED PLANTER ARM 90' LEFT AND RIGHT OF ACCESS DOOR cJ (2) IRRIGATION HOLES ONE UNDER EACH PLANTER ARM I 0 I 4" DIA. FLUTED POLE I .125 WALL THICKNESS 6061-T6 STRUCTURAL GRADE ALUMINUM o < ~ Z 9' POLE WELDED FOR SINGLE UNIT CONSTRUCTION w Q ACCESS DOOR 18" DIA. HEXAGONAL BASE, .875 FLOOR THICKNESS, FOUR ANCHOR BOLTS I 4-LB 15-LB-ASHLAND Anchor Bolt Size and Spacing as Required Customer to Supply (4 Paces bn Top) MInirnum f Bolt Circle 8" Dia. VIntmum i' Bolt Circle = 8}' pia. Maximurn Bolt Circle = IT Dio. Conduit Enirance Grounding Insert (4 Places) O ' 4•^0. (4-LB) LAMP POLE FOOTING :d (s-t_a) No. 4-LB 1,080 lbs. 0. •_:.1 LAMP POLE FOOTING No. 5-LB 1.420 Ibs. 11~q 1 li J Note: Customer Is responsible for setting lornp pole footing- Footings should be selected using Structural Coda and/or consultation with Professional Engineer. Scci e: t' R V-0, otdcastfe Precast 4-LB 15-LB-ASHLAND 4-LB 15-LB-ASHLAND Utility Vault File Name: 020UEF4L85L8-ASHLAND PRECAST FOOTING Issue Date: 9-10-09 CITY OF ASHLAND Pte Box 323, Wilsonville, Oregon 87070-0323 Tel: (503) 682-2844 Fax: (503) 8822857 WWW.umilsonville.6m Inde6p I ow Planning Department, 51 Winburn Way, Ashland, Oregon 97520 CITY OF 541-488-5305 Fax: 541-552-2050 www.ashland.or.us TTY: 1-800-735-2900 -ASHLAND PLANNING ACTION: 2016-01894 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 1651 Ashland Street OWNER/APPLICANT: Rogue Credit Union/Kistler, Small & White Architects, LLC DESCRIPTION: A request for Site Design Review approval to construct a 4,508 square foot, single-story credit union building with drive-up window as part of the phased development of the properties located at 1651 Ashland Street. Also included are requests for a Property Line Adjustment and a Tree Removal Permit to remove eight of the site's 24 trees. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Commercial; ZONING: C-1; ASSESSOR'S MAP: 39 lE IODC; TAX LOT 8700 & 9201. NOTE: The Ashland Tree Commission will also review this Planning Action on Thursday, January 5, 2017 at 6:00 PM in the Community Development and Engineering Services building (Siskiyou Room), located at 51 Winburn Way. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: Tuesday January 10, 2017 at 7:00 PM, Ashland Civic Center, 1175 East Main Street ~a I I PA ##2016-01894 i- i 1651 ASHLAND ST SUBJECT PROPERTY L- i rN ASHLAND -l Notice is hereby given that a PUBLIC HEARING on the following request with respect to the ASHLAND LAND USE ORDINANCE will be held before the ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION on meeting date shown above. The meeting will be at the ASHLAND CIVIC CENTER, 1175 East Main Street, Ashland, Oregon. The ordinance criteria applicable to this application are attached to this notice. Oregon law states that failure to raise an objection concerning this application, either in person or by letter, or failure to provide sufficient specificity to afford the decision maker an opportunity to respond to the issue, precludes your right of appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) on that issue. Failure to specify which ordinance criterion the objection is based on also precludes your right of appeal to LUBA on that criterion. Failure of the applicant to raise constitutional or other issues relating to proposed conditions of approval with sufficient specificity to allow this Commission to respond to the issue precludes an action for damages in circuit court. A copy of the application, all documents and evidence relied upon by the applicant and applicable criteria are available for inspection at no cost and will be provided at reasonable cost, if requested. A copy of the Staff Report will be available for inspection seven days prior to the hearing and will be provided at reasonable cost, if requested. All materials are available at the Ashland Planning Department, Community Development and Engineering Services, 51 Winburn Way, Ashland, Oregon 97520. During the Public Hearing, the Chair shall allow testimony from the applicant and those in attendance concerning this request. The Chair shall have the right to limit the length of testimony and require that comments be restricted to the applicable criteria. Unless there is a continuance, if a participant so requests before the conclusion of the hearing, the record shall remain open for at least seven days after the hearing. In compliance with the American with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Administrator's office at 541-488-6002 (TTY phone number 1-800-735-2900). Notification 72 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting. (28 CFR 35.102.-35.104 ADA Title 1). If you have questions or comments concerning this request, please feel free to contact the Ashland Planning Division, 541-488-5305. G:Acoaun-devAp1anning\P1anning Actions\Noticing Folder\Mailed Notices K Signs\2016\PA-2016-01894.docx SITE DESIGN AND USE STANDARDS 18.5.2.050 The following criteria shall be used to approve or deny an application: A. Underlying Zone: The proposal complies with all of the applicable provisions of the underlying zone (part 18.2), including but not limited to: building and yard setbacks, lot area and dimensions, density and floor area, lot coverage, building height, building orientation, architecture, and other applicable standards. B. Overlay Zones: The proposal complies with applicable overlay zone requirements (part 18.3). C. Site Development and Design Standards: The proposal complies with the applicable Site Development and Design Standards of part 18.4, except as provided by subsection E, below. D. City Facilities: The proposal complies with the applicable standards in section 18.4.6 Public Facilities and that adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, electricity, urban storm drainage, paved access to and throughout the property and adequate transportation can and will be provided to the subject property. E. Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards. The approval authority may approve exceptions to the Site Development and Design Standards of part 18.4 if the circumstances in either subsection 1 or 2, below, are found to exist. 1. There is a demonstrable difficulty meeting the specific requirements of the Site Development and Design Standards due to a unique or unusual aspect of an existing structure or the proposed use of a site; and approval of the exception will not substantially negatively impact adjacent properties; and approval of the exception is consistent with the stated purpose of the Site Development and Design; and the exception requested is the minimum which would alleviate the difficulty.; or 2. There is no demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements, but granting the exception will result in a design that equally or better achieves the stated purpose of the Site Development and Design Standards. PROPERTY LINE ADJUSTMENTS 18.5.3.120.6 The Staff Advisor shall approve or deny a request for a property line adjustment in writing based on all of the following criteria. 1. Parcel Creation. No additional parcel or lot is created by the lot line adjustment. 2. Lot Standards. Except as allowed for nonconforming lots, pursuant to chapter 18.1.4, or as required by an overlay zone in part 18.3, all lots and parcels conform to the lot standards of the applicable zoning district, including lot area, dimensions, setbacks, and coverage, per part 18.2. If a lot does not conform to the lots standards of the applicable zoning district, it shall not be made less conforming by the property line adjustment. As applicable, all lots and parcels shall identify a buildable area free of building restrictions for physical constraints (i.e., flood plain, greater than 35 percent slope, water resource protection zones). 3. Access Standards. All lots and parcels conform to the standards in section 18.4.3.080 Vehicle Area Design. Lots and parcels that do not conform to the access standards shall not be made less conforming by the property line adjustment. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT 18.5.7.040.6 1. Hazard Tree. A Hazard Tree Removal Permit shall be granted if the approval authority finds that the application meets all of the following criteria, or can be made to conform through the imposition of conditions. a. The applicant must demonstrate that the condition or location of the tree presents a clear public safety hazard (i.e., likely to fall and injure persons or property) or a foreseeable danger of property damage to an existing structure or facility, and such hazard or danger cannot reasonably be alleviated by treatment, relocation, or pruning. See definition of hazard tree in part 18.6. b. The City may require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each hazard tree pursuant to section 18.5.7.050. Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit. 2. Tree That is Not a Hazard. A Tree Removal Permit for a tree that is not a hazard shall be granted if the approval authority finds that the application meets all of the following criteria, or can be made to conform through the imposition of conditions. a. The tree is proposed for removal in order to permit the application to be consistent with other applicable Land Use Ordinance requirements and standards, including but not limited to applicable Site Development and Design Standards in part 18.4 and Physical and Environmental Constraints in part 18.10. b. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on erosion, soil stability, flow of surface waters, protection of adjacent trees, or existing windbreaks. c. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on the tree densities, sizes, canopies, and species diversity within 200 feet of the subject property. The City shall grant an exception to this criterion when alternatives to the tree removal have been considered and no reasonable alternative exists to allow the property to be used as permitted in the zone. d. Nothing in this section shall require that the residential density to be reduced below the permitted density allowed by the zone. In making this determination, the City may consider alternative site plans or placement of structures of alternate landscaping designs that would lessen the impact on trees, so long as the alternatives continue to comply with the other provisions of this ordinance. e. The City shall require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each tree granted approval pursuant to section 18.5.7.050. Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit. GAcomm-dev\planning\Planning Actions\Noticing Folder\Mailed Notices & Si.ns\2016\PA-2016-01894.docx I PROJECT NARRATIVE / FINDINGS 10/5/2016 Rogue Credit Union -Ashland Branch Chapter 18.2.3 - Special Use Standards 18.2.3.100 Drive-Up Use Drive-Up uses the #l ,.a''',# they are limited to the area ear of a line c.€ are )wed C-1 ter, Sdiuular i,:: t§d Street at the #t1iecP1or of Ashland ~eet and S ,Iou otzieu®d, ne number of D3 € Up 3e s shall not exceed the 12 it-, existence . J J., ALLOWED: Property is in C-1 zone and within the designated location on Ashland Street. 13, Drive-Up ..l ~ s~...s w.; . ~ 3 to are ° ;"c3 to "'=tom' following -#,~F` -dar s" :~ry I for ea( Jde shall not average wa r 1; 0. r } e } # grounds for revocation of 1' F WILL COMPLY.. The PTM (Personal Teller Machine) at the Drive-Up `window' is connected via the screen and voice to multiple tellers based remotely in RCU's Medford offices. These tellers are dedicated to serving customers at remote sites, are not distracted by other duties, and are therefore always available during regular business hours. The efficiency of this system significantly reduces wait times as compared to Drive-Up windows of the past and will not exceed an average of five minutes. 2, Al X17# ; ~t I # j Drive-Up , o , ' # wv t' o e- n d spa i spaces imn- =I'- be a the service d 'ow or -)rovir othel i c u s t o e +J receive service #'fP 'ta v. q r°€while ~~3 t,1-d, rr v ,a.... _ ',j ~ ~~F ~.I~ time to DEEMED TO COMPLY. Twenty parking spaces are available beyond the service PTM (Personal Teller Machine). Two spaces will be designated in front of two additional walk up PTM's to allow customers to receive service. -teens o; egress or veh'-_ ~ tome ` who wish to leave the he w l in shall be provided. DEEMED TO COMPLY. An additional 10 ft. travel lane is adjacent to the Drive-Up lane to allow customers to leave the lane. The line shown between the two lanes is striping and not a curb. 3 a ~ , 31~t~' ice: ~ stacking ~ ~ or ?iv~€a #t. eliminate e area to Drive-Up shall # ,--excessive fuel consul pt3on and e taust during the a'd'. . , in lit # , DEEMED TO COMPLY. Grade will be flat or slightly downhill towards the PTM at the vehicle stacking area. t° €_a Ds ;..,eat shall be designed to provide as much # natural van as _ possible o eliminate € € the buildup of exhaust gases. DEEMED TO COMPLY. Cantilevered covered area will be supported by two columns and will be open all around with no solid walls to cause exhaust gases to buildup. be P. -'t- ensur-- its-of-way are not obstructed, shall, r) 'D JDEEMED TO COMPLY: Stacking area provides for 4 or 5 cars to stack behind the PTM. Additionally, if the line is full, vehicles can pull into the bi-pass lane and circulate around to the two designated parking spaces in front of the walk-up PTM's. ps~ pe€ ty line e erg level communications systems i o exceed 55 decibels a the ~ro ar''so shall otherwise comply t ,`ise with the Ashland ipal Code levels. N ~regarding sound =.f,v„ DEEMED TO COMPLY: Average decibel level for the PTM is to be held to less than 55 decibels at the property line. Drive-Up uses may be transferred t another location n accord with all !requirements this even the section. The number of Dr°e-U window stalls shall t, exceed one per ~ location, # ~ 1 I PROJECT NARRATIVE/ FINDINGS 10/5/2016 Rogue Credit Union-Ashland Branch tray s er ~d, u hac-i greater an one stall, DEEMED TO COMPLY: One (1) Drive-Up `window' .will be installed at this transferred location. , A it ,,_r i t ri U cans j ; i shall be ~a ie foe the tra i `aer a? i t D ve-U pusE _ order to document transfr-r of th4:use, DEEMED TO COMPLY. Drive -Up Transfer Permit was obtained by prevgiious ministerial action. deemed to have pirekd is considered L) u plan, i'1.,,,, plic-ation or upon on-site verific-at' NOT APPLICABLE: RCU has a Drive-Up Transfer Permit. (See attached permit) 11, tit I } v Drive-Up u- re K days c n w -he use -is -a ,E NOT APPLICABLE: Project is a transfer/ relocation of an existing Drive-Up use, and not an abandonment requiring removal of components. 18.2.3.130 Dwelling in Non-Residential Zone E- the E-1 zone are limit to t1he R- one, -1-:,pter 18.3,1` `al NOT APPLICABLE: Not in E-1 zone. : d o site, " >3 i _ ? 1, v a s l i , floor, Where r(; ofi ouilding ~ located on _s -0 , site, not more man u)O percent o''af me „u 5 t area shall be desiyrnated for residential uses, DEEMED TO COMPLY: The proposed Rogue Credit Union on LOT 2 and the future three buildings on LOT 1 are proposed to have in Residential Use the following (See Planning Summary): - 51.3% of the total building area > 50% - 5.5% of the ground floor area < 50% - 42% of the parking spaces < 50% - 32.4% of the occupants < 50% Based on these percentages, without attempting to designate on residential use areas the site plan, we conclude that less than 50% of the Site will be used by the occupants of the residential use. This is due to the fact that the percentage of occupants (and therefor site pedestrian areas) and the percentage of parking spaces ascribed to the Residential uses are both less than 50%. EE-1 d _ shall not e, ._~il ,Ig L.. cre l the zo: , , _ts z acre ~ b ,31.1 zone, nu Jng : :t~''., ~ c I the a i~~ s om Y ` v€'•-~, units a: t. 00 square i of gross 3-„t. DEEMED TO COMPLY: See 18.2.6.030 Residential Density response in this document. 3. Residential si s ~at}$£ subject iit to to ~ 3is,~.~~ ¥•..o- <a~,t3b~.z~ design standards s for _..)u. uses ms'..`~ `..a.a~,~ landscaping, n - e ri d uses £ the underlying zone, DEEMED TO COMPLY: Compliance with C-1 zoning regulations indicated within these findings that follow. ze Not Applicable 2 I PROJECT NARRATIVE/ FINDINGS 10/5/2016 Rogue Credit Union -Ashland Branch 5. VVhere the number of resi- ifial unit's weed of s" shall be affordable oc te- co `vt> €e_ {~>9a ~.r=..a ~'co with the standards for v. ,s the of ~'7+ r `,_Tb „e~t~ to be f o -}a, ~ had be 7 r<sOU S, ~ dog. L0 l , i a .a , r s ~.~r ,.,-.~,L;~.1}~, The number of 1.a. _i't,.. holes j j €t, WILL COMPLY: Proposed `shadow plan' for Lot 1 indicates two future buildings with sixteen (16) potential dwelling units requiring one (1) affordable unit. Application for Lot 1 Site Review will comply with this Ordinance section at time of submittal based on actual number of units proposed at that time. No dwellings are proposed for Lot 2. 3 I PROJECT NARRATIVE/ FINDINGS 10/5/2016 Rogue Credit Union -Ashland Branch Chapter 18.2.4 - General Regulations for Base Zones 18.2.4.010 Access and Minimum Street Frontage C:a,C' lot sl~ a all bn public E ,.a,r than an alley or ; no, less than 40 . -ept, where ,It lot, ? is o an approved ala. or 10,,t_Its cW -.1' is 6 'su 3o d _ ~=i,,'a ,?_..~,,1 a widt ; i 5 feet, DEEMED TO COMPLY., Proposed street frontage for Lot 1 is 82.00' and Lot 2 is 137.03' and meets this requirement. (See Site Plan A1) 18.2.4.020 Accessory Structures and Mechanical Equipment b ' structures shall },r ' l i, ~s a3. mss c rs L.,,` ifi zd a.b t2€; rdin rice, DEEMED TO COMPLY., Proposed canopy over Drive-Up PTM complies with all requirements. , ~icel -,L `ent shall not be e locate-1 t-,,e' ~~'t~~ zee „ 7~n , i I ;,,n€ ; €,C~~~vare on i € s..at! +.a =.~5 ~ ;~ta ~a , s ~a :giver )t ! it _e )r ° r r hat it € nc , dia1.rel m L bli`+~s t, .tea` 4 , Piss'"ta°' °e4 t ea $os€a'I not t d fi-,>nC°.r heights. :'h be 1c 3e?-.?a s t in G , .s€ nary r or ! % onsist t i 'ia 1~l -,o. ` i4,.1 a of this a~•,.aed at ~ and gP operation a .,:a .,.k, <t ~g, . . =.>s side I a. yards, J / Wit , 'a u ink a , .~j%, €w,a;, 7 r . r r+ or t~ -,,A c,. , , , . v e l.,o a =.7 ~ - : . ~,r , 3 ix ~ ..a~ ~ ~ a 1 3~' 3 0' - .o „d no i3, , t g, DEEMED TO COMPLY: Mechanical equipment will be located on the roof and will be screened by the parapet. 18.2.4.030 Arterial Street Setback T Sr he s et _ om an artt-,_ i I er" shall € of le_ than 0 feet the 3 required to ;Mail is ?ex DEEMED TO COMPLY: Ashland Street currently meets a majority of the proposed arterial street standards proposed in the Street Standards with four travel lanes, a center tum lane, and bike lanes on both sides of the street. The street is only lacking in the park row and sidewalk improvements. This application proposes adding a seven (7) ft. park row and eight (8) ft. sidewalk to bring the street frontage of this property into conformance with the street standard. The proposed setback from the curb on Ashland Street is 15 feet (7 ft. park row + 8 ft. sidewalk) and will be 5 feet 3 inches from the property line. (See Enlarged Site Plan sheet A2) It should also be noted that approximately 26.5' was abandoned by this property and adjacent properties at an earlier date to accommodate expected/realized expansion of the street R. O. W. to its current full width of ninety (90) feet. 18.2.4.050 Yard Requirements and General Exceptions 3 A 's rbr; to, the rerniirem€ = of chapters ~J', its 11 ,2,6, requirements c to the So,3r Access standards of chapter 8.4,8, Lot 1- WILL COMPLY: The two proposed future buildings to the north on Lot 1 have been set back from the residential property to the north with the Parking area between. The buildings are shown as a "shadow plan" for proposed future development and are not being proposed as part of this project. Future applications for these two buildings will need to show conformance with the Solar Access 4 i PROJECT NARRATIVE/ FINDINGS 10/5/2016 Rogue Credit Union -Ashland Branch standards. LOT 2 - NOT APPLICABLE: Lot Ito the north of Lot 2 is zoned C-1. Solar Access is not applicable to lots abutting C-1 lots to the north per 18.4.8.020 B.3. Eaves and awnings sJ, encroach ,.d required .d l z - .V# yards, may [ts3 oact $ 18 inches into required C.;d, . DEEMED TO COMPLY: Lot 1 buildings are not being proposed as part of this project and any future applications for the two buildings on Lot 1 will need to demonstrate conformance with this ordinance section as they abut residential zones and therefor have required setbacks. LOT 2 - NOT APPLICABLE: No yards are required in C-1 Zone for Lot 2 and proposed building eaves and awnings fall within the property lines. C. Th for structures that;-: 3 'ol:owing ge erg s _ s •j entry stairs, [ _ patios, and similar v j NOT APPLICABLE: No structures are proposed that are lower than 30 inches. 18.2.6.030 Unified Standards for Non -Residential Zones Residential j"i re-it a /dwel Int ' -r C- ! 3() £ulaic LOT 1 - WILL COMPLY. Proposed `shadow plan' for Lot 1 indicates two future buildings with 16 potential dwelling units. Lot 1 is 1.11 acres / 30 = 33 DU's allowed. LOT 2 -NOT APPLICABLE: No dwellings are proposed for Lot 2. ; no -n' ilimurn front. side or ar ya---l r- - d ga s o i n which Case , r, a .u r rear yard not less t ~ 0 ft, o^ s,.., 3 T, LOT 1 - WILL COMPLY. Lot 1 buildings are not being proposed as part of this project and any future applications for the two buildings on Lot 1 will need to demonstrate conformance with this ordinance section as they abut residential zones and therefor have required setbacks. The 3-story future buildings proposed will have a thirty (30) feet minimum setback adjacent to the Residential properties. (See Site Plan A1) LOT 2 -NOT APPLICABLE: No yards are required in C-1 Zone for Lot 2. -P:-xce; _.l i w t € 100 ffeed. resi `"s solar se back star; R ,4 'X` do not to -Ilructures in the C-11 zone, LOT 1 - WILL COMPLY.- The two proposed future buildings to the north on Lot 1 have been set back from the residential property to the north. The buildings are shown as a "shadow plan" for proposed future development are not being proposed as part of this project. Future applications for these two buildings will need to show conformance with the Solar Access standards. LOT 2 - NOT APPLICABLE: Lot 1 to the north of Lot 2 is zoned C-1. Solar Access is not applicable to lots abutting C-1 lots to the north. See also e ,,t , 1 ,2,4. "50 > „ ia-, .,,;,,Setback LOT 1 - WILL COMPLY: The proposed future buildings will meet this standard. LOT 2 - WILL Comply: Proposed building on Lot 2 to be approximately 25'-6" tall at the highest point. Landscape /-~rea - Minimum oil developed lot area) 1 55~)" DEEMED TO COMPLY: The proposed Landscape Coverage for Lots 1& 2 will be approximately 24% of the two lot area. 5 I PROJECT NARRATIVE/ FINDINGS 10/5/2016 Rogue Credit Union -Ashland Branch Chapter 18.3.12 - SPECIAL DISTRICTS AND OVERLAY ZONES 18.3.12.030 Detail Site Review Overlay The DE-,tail evict a' s a =Overlay i "rs a, defined " ,°.,'I'~ Design ..~ign Zones '°-x map, , ihe ,it y' [ in ° l~ -.a;,. APPLIES: Project is within Detail Site Review Overlay. R ion to _ ~ x m , e€ i 9 the Detail Sit= § -g coons of this ~ APPLIES: See 18.4.2.040 findings that follow. i € t` €in D P t 'I C`°=. verl which ~'°x-E .:d-,4 ,,.J,000 au rte. f`~e`'~; c 111 0 11 1 _-d according 'n T i , 5. 0 16, APPLIES: Proposed building area for Lot 2 is less than 100 feet and less than 10,000 sq. ft. Combined with conceptual future buildings on Lot 1, the building area would exceed 10, 000 sq. ft. 18.3.12.0+60 Pedestrian Place Overlay .s A., 3 Pede s., , 'lac'e d y is intended to direct a~n and :,sip en'lad ~ €rage development f...mss''al ..s -that pro-. §x. °E(Io,„,- of gathering places, hous.rig, businesses, and i to -,S., i.£ a _.z and s- bicycling, dtransit Z s..s~i.n .~?..sv aIt r pS~ Ip way v „ > ap e to properties ~ . d. CAS.e on to Site 3 z Z APPLIES: Project is within the Ashland Street Pedestrian Place Overlay. 2 Re a,ew P1 -e u e h ":I s' '--lace :;r", - i r tints apig y 1ro proms sed dr.ia nt lociata-d in the Pedestrian Place .,,eilay APPLIES: Project is within the Ashland Street Pedestrian Place Overlay. Name C,_._ 7 tans, .d 1s. ! 3' Place Concept _ l' (i.e. site "`Wi't Sur 1' ii> I , ' a,.,ildin 'Il €a-? ,.,s'{"'=_'o'" are or the p.} °.,a' rpo =..s fir to : ple of „a t 1 L ; 9 a L 2 ..r 3 ~ 3 ~ ,..a ~ ~ € s , c 'ti, r 7 a -id not ter, € s s r ea k_, I ns _t t r d ,-if this is .<hap ter. _ , ,r.-> Lj i 16, 1 : +.ts e € + : ~~e r. solar access 'z chapter 18A8 ''"7l£,€`r-.. z' -~,.3=: ^ •Y,•.,ss t' 'r only t o I ~ i,a, €.~i d UK, .„.f . setback "~,.,3. - .a a _ those £t abutting s residential on to the north, Lot 1- WILL COMPLY. The two proposed future buildings to the north on Lot 1 have been set back from the residential property to the north with the Parking area between. The buildings are shown as a "shadow plan" for proposed future development and are not being proposed as part of this project. Future applications for these two buildings will need to show conformance with the Solar Access standards. LOT 2 - NOT APPLICABLE: Lot Ito the north of Lot 2 is zoned C-1. Solar Access is not applicable to lots abutting C-1 lots to the north per 18.4.8.020 B.3. Plazas and La s a { na Ratio, Outdoor seating areas, plazas, and other useable paved t surfaces may be s i g area tav.€ ~'~es ~ s' applied toward the e landscaping ,a requirements chapter 1 6 I PROJECT NARRATIVE/ FINDINGS 10/5/2016 Rogue Credit Union -Ashland Branch Landscaping. sa.a i_ ~`.a r`3 not Cow; t°t more Lj~°'` € ..l ~F 5n_1 'i~3if: i o", ,~~h l8 ~n S . £ yy~ 1~.,.a! € €i.J 1. ~ t percent L. r s1jired area. COMPLIES: No Plaza area has been used to meet landscape area requirement. 7 I PROJECT NARRATIVE/ FINDINGS 10/5/2016 Rogue Credit Union -Ashland Branch Chapter 18.4.2 - Building Placement, Orientation, and Design 18.4.2.040 Non-Residential Development Purpose and intent. ai"rim:rci,x. ,ry r developments should have a positive on a Site ~ lords. Orientation and Scale,. a ~,r_i Buildings hall have their primary orientation 1ion toward t~Y r Automobile e circulation or ,if- tr et parking is not loo !Ld L ° _ I L (3 i=- to i , ~ as s- ad be ind bu tr€ e4:, Parking areas DEEMED TO COMPLY. Parking is located behind the buildings. b, or Ld3Lt [__W 'tea' ,r°+s°. y ,rr s 4 of ~,.-t" § .i ,a _ s„ '..#L. t. z ....a; 141 ,2.s.,f4- , and avoid sip, o,s a ~ n at ,[Fci, r ~{~i`r ~...r `J` di£ a °ronfic created throua a combination driveway ,s r1 1 -C aC`a vehi-la 1 { Y. This 'dressed z y but al z.i. - _ , .J a [a c of %sS 1 rn 3_ i.€ t' , d r_J I ILA g es ' ."s TrO p~ S.,6 is ,a if e a E, a bz,<ildina ha n aap z -!sci h oe es ri n are DEEMED TO COMPLY. The proposed future building on Lot 1 occupies 51.2% of Lot 1 frontage and the proposed building on Lot 2 occupies 70.1 % of Lot 2 frontage. Combined these building frontages occupy 63% of the Ashland Street frontage. Note that the Lot 1 frontage, while not a `majority' of the frontage, includes the driveway required to access the rear of the lot. c. Bu, i nuance shall be oriented toward he street and wall be accessed from a put - g be designed visible, si„3 i.1i~;. and F ~=3~t< ~ u Viz; z nti?h~n 3 ]~ae shall "t to iJ 's b w clearly n ±-f z. , .,,',..sh-zvaz'.,..iri~s $i,.i~; ess tatr-,,, Figure 1,`,,t'•`~a',~=-',_..~',.~ DEEMED TO COMPLY: Building entrances for Lot 1 and Lot 2 face Ashland Street. The additional entrance on Lot 2 faces the parking area to the north. This additional entrance is required to accommodate the `Accessible Route' from the ADA parking space(s) via the ramp. We do not want to require disabled persons to walk all the way around the Plaza to the entrance on Ashland Street. Building and site accessibility starts with the shortest possible route to the entrance according to Federal guidelines. i I 'ti; to wh icy l,hv ..[IL'} i'1 a z 1 l,a'; ated ~L ~ fz ..,a si.> r h J to oriented, E cepti s'r is m-, t'' I E _ og a ?i',a constraints, o at ti3a; 8. ~a ',A![-- ' gr t°a_w Sh;:~r`' re # an improved °t. nr sites ~i,r~ e ,,~,sio ~°`t~ ;r<~~^et t _ ca.cr,e ' ~ t' = i~l ~ il~ r aL- a 1ta~} iS r r , r buildings r `3t i 1 jrd, DEEMED TO COMPLY: Building entrance for Lot 2 is 10'-10" from property line at R. O. W. sidewalks shall p ,d.,.d itip public wr tea. along the street frontage. Public DEEMED TO COMPLY: An eight (8) foot sidewalk is proposed along the entire Ashland Street frontage of Lots 1 & 2. 3 gets :;roe, i; street tees chosen from the sues, tree l= shall be placed for each 0 e o 8 I PROJECT NARRATIVE / FINDINGS 10/5/2016 Rogue Credit Union -Ashland Branch for that portion the development ve m fronting the pursuant, to subsection DEEMED TO COMPLY: Six street trees, spaced 30 feet apart, are proposed for the 219 feet lot frontage; one short of requirement. This is due in part to the driveway clearance and the width of the driveway with park rows and sidewalks on each side. If we count the two trees at the south end of the driveway park rows closest to Ashland Street, we believe we then have one additional street tree and are therefore in compliance with this Ordinance section. 3 ndsc a; r~;~ 3'e - - - - -S, rk -t svrat . ~ b. Landscaping and recycle/refuse disposal areas shall be provided pursuant to chapter 18.4.4. DEEMED TO COMPLY. Recycle/refuse disposal areas are proposed in accordance with Chapter 18.4.4. 4, Designated Creek -Protection, ~1 -u section Noise and , €€1.,? >.,,j ' jas.az re Artificial 1 ?t e ~~,d shall meet the requirements i3ghtig o ~`^.,-sectso;.n 4 3 ~ , , .~v X50 „ lnce with ,i' 9,08. i 0,c n AMC 9, 8. ? 7 related to 'poise is required. WILL COMPLY: Artificial lighting standards shall meet these requirements for noise and glare. 0 'on an -S i,... , [ shall have m£i Sim; n Floor e Ratio "FAR) of0.50, aer site i in ' ' `ire r may be met through phased size, the FAR rea,' that d*'~r zon J. *s 3+.d#] tvi ~,o `d end may intensified LAshadow plan 's ;3,'~ v 4,z Ll t£ £ { ~ E?o v i z Y ; See nan example Figure 18. , . 0 4 0 ,,,.,i, , i h .f . t ' u shad( Plazas nd i °tria ,o n as Qio -,)r the purposes o n'm _ PHASED DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED: Project shows a phased development with Lot 1 future improvements having an FAR of 62.4% and Lot 2 an FAR of 24.7% for a combined FAR of 50.6% frr - Water than t in length shall a offsets-Jogs, Orin, _ ;.r NOT APPLICABLE: Proposed building on Lot 2 has a ninety-six (96) foot frontage. However, the street facing fagade has multiple offsets and jogs both in plan and elevation. (See Sheet A9). plaza, q , 4 = € 3 x't, G?'i 30 e st ' the t 'e' t.3 other p u,; ` ii ope e ace a ja1i co o ' L i'= tp'/rt at least ` percent r' - wall area, facing the street in display areas, windows, or o N , - 'w',Jindows must allo, i view into working areas. lobbies- pedestrian -entrances, or displa','s walls within *s 3 feet Of tf1 are prohibited, to 40 isp t_ percent of length >,a~f ~e,~c~,. Blank street f t the t(!~.. ~i~ toward loading ~ ai°=°" "e ",i,i a perimeter can exempted for r standard if oriented d ~ service areas, DEEMED TO COMPLY: The south Ashland Street facing fagade has 21.6% of the wall area in glazing. The east elevation facing the Plaza I Public Space has 29.4% of the wall abutting the 9 I PROJECT NARRATIVE/ FINDINGS 10/5/2016 Rogue Credit Union -Ashland Branch plaza in glazing and the west elevation within 30 feet of the R. 0. W has 30.3% glazing. (See sheets A9 &A 10) Buildings sixa i o s in ease, s i w ~ as} to en'trances, DEEMED TO COMPLY: The recessed entrance is transparent and covered by a projecting awing that strongly emphasizes the entrance from Ashland Street. (See Sheet A 1). ill bUildings, . aa. + to p existing parking lots ' r;y;.c- r- .r and desirable, DEEMED TO COMPLY: The future building on Lot 1 and the proposed building on Lot 2 front on Ashland Street have wall frontages that combined equal to 63% of the lot frontages and are proposed to have parking to the rear of the buildings. w f, F ildings shall incorporate s, roof., lortic-oes, ar`1C L that to ans fr S the rain and ss'~ i. DEEMED TO COMPLY: The entrance on Ashland Street is recessed and has an awning that projects over the sidewalk for a total depth of 9.5' and is 8 feet wide. Two additional awnings four (4) feet deep by 12'-8" wide project over the sidewalk at the center two `bays; and another awning covers a bench in a recessed alcove on the left side of the fagade facing Ashland Street. Additional awnings will cover the walk up Personal Teller Machines and the entrance facing the parking lot. 2 2 _ St.:e (paving :items? shall 3,>,,. ed to designate jos>,.1 areas, amp t s,_ d,..,;s ions ,.--jig be unit masonry, scored and 1 concrete. .assn c or co,3+a. i t' above, DEEMED TO COMPLY: Concrete paving will be utilized for the sidewalks on site and concrete pavers will be utilized to designate the Plaza /Public Spaces. shy re tha. 'ffi e feet f1r, z ~ a public sidewalk i`~ ~ :.~v i.t . Is s a f~ shall 3~ 'ebo setback n~..do~ I ins {?.J _ i ~ 3+.o sa. w '~~?.s a..63rk ~Z or d a-,ra-= t }tie such a s plazas or of ~ c.: j g areas- or r a requiref utility easement, i This standard snail apply to to both -c-. t t,~ .fi s at ...fir lots. 1 t ore t~m',ipm § `st than on-.,--- ,rUct re is. proposed for a s site 9 0 s ~ to building feet o the a'---- frontage ;al be within five ^ DEEMED TO COMPLY.• The entire Ashland Street fagade is at or within five (5) feet of the sidewalk with the exception of the entrance that is setback from the edge of the sidewalk six (6) feet. The entrance only constitutes 8.3% of the entire fagade for Lot 2. a. Landscape buffers and screening shall be located between incompatible uses on an any n;# lot., rs can ~ consist or or either plant material uilding materials ~ ~ _ ~..a:or € b.s =J £',J tS 'f a;,,f r € t Those must be Coo ti ' ; proposed buildings. NOT APPLICABLE: Adjacent uses to Lot 2 are compatible and have the same C1 zone designation. Lot 1 screening will be addressed in future application at time of submittal for development. Parking lots shall bin`s; from the, ;main street, cross streets, and sc .:led from residentially zoned land, DEEMED TO COMPLY.• The parking lots are screened by the buildings from the main street and there are no cross streets adjacent. The distance from parking area on Lot 2 is approximately 142 feet from the adjacent residentially zoned properties and we believe this distance negates the requirement for screening this lot. Screening for the future 10 I PROJECT NARRATIVE / FINDINGS 10/5/2016 Rogue Credit Union -Ashland Branch parking on Lot 1 will be a six (6) foot high fence and will be proposed at the time of submittal for development. 4, Buil li is Materials. a. Buil ii s shall inn' + changes in relief such as cornices, bases, fenestration, ash lu d' ry o the e-for wall area, masonry, . for of ~ = percent e ,a..t ~t DEEMED TO COMPLY. The building has a 32" high base around the perimeter in brick at the brick fagade, and in ACM panel with a slightly darker silver color on the ACM fagade. A continuous 16" tall cornice caps the brick and projects 4" from the face. A 30" continuous cornice that project 18" sits atop the ACM paneled wall. Additionally, the windows and the entrance facing Ashland Street are setback significantly from the fagade. to ate ct attention to the building or _ng o. `s. a it:;1 . ~ are b, Bright or neon paint colors used t~h -ed extensively rnrp'srC atw glass majority u'the ~u ildina skin, ks. prohibited. Buildings i s no'. a . 1 x r la.~ ,,~i c, , s $ w-,a „ DEEMED TO COMPLY: There will be no bright or neon colors used as shown in the perspective drawing on Sheet Al. Only 21.6% of the street facing fagade and 29.4% of the west, the walls with the most amount of glazing incorporates glass; not a majority of the building skin. Additional Standards for L rs In the Detail it Review overlay, e velop s that greater than 10,000 a Fe g o floor area or- contain m , than os jI xa ~ fen .a 'gyre.~s a, 3>e-~ i, _ f 1 -1 -H ,ro- conform to th -.0- :)win(_, 3rds, D_- -)mes E A i'"is.ss ilia _?e,--F and sizes that _c s:te to hi- 'an - ~ incE pora,'~~ wi` s;na, i'ss.. o direction, #ft•„zt i o" d„s..:. scale li ~in g, ; a e 9 i i ' i 1 > y? and nd small DEEMED TO COMPLY: The proposed building on Lot 2 is divided into two main masses, one brick and one taller of ACM panels, and is separated by a lower roofed entry connector that is predominantly transparent. The design uses recesses, sheltering roofs and light at all four facades. The brick fagade is divided into three `bays' through the use of vertical control joints and recesses in the building face. Smaller `night sky' compliant wall lights help to further define this division of the brick mass. The taller ACM panel massing has the windows setback from the east and south facades two (2) feet with light shades the break the windows horizontally. br 0~.,t.¢ -.:se of Downtown D - rn Standards r°.° erlay3 _ 3 e ~~;ilL"7i s ~.,~,-~pa i l i. ' x:iS y'{ ! a .„>'';?2 Sit, , .:`ti'p verlay E - rri o .ASS 1 ~ t;' ~ d s a I' n haay rsa.. . r on wall f havi a wails +o c g at --o grac.- shall be o ,si er-d as, , wilding. NOT APPLICABLE: The proposed building on Lot 2 and future buildings on Lot 3 are stand-alone structures. 'f 1i; ~~n ~ s',__ no .~i exceed building footprint" area j 45,000 ~45,000 0 square "t'e ~,,.~tta~n..a , a. COMPLIES: No building footprint will exceed 45, 000 sq. ft. iiL ___3L s shall not exceed gross 110r r of 00 sou eel COMPLIES: No building area will exceed 45,000 sq. ft. iv. Building shall o exceed a combined contiguous building length of 30 feet, COMPLIES: No building length will exceed 300 feet. , Pali Soaves, a. One square fool, plaza e public space shall be required far every en square feet of gross 11 I PROJECT NARRATIVE/ FINDINGS 10/5/2016 Rogue Credit Union -Ashland Branch floor area, except for the fourth gross floor area. COMPLIES: 2852 square feet of Plaza is required. 2,224 square feet of Plaza and 1, 224 square feet of Outdoor/ Public Space are proposed for both lots for a total of 3,448 square feet. E plaza or publi a spa{ce hall incorporate at least four of h following lem Sitting Space PaI4.r at one 3tt9i 1g space e t3 each b 500 '~qua5 a feet, s6 tom" be included ;r the plaza, s ~ shall id seating be a ~ of ~.1 inches in height and `30 ' ' ~ in d~ i, a plaza, minimum Sz .A *+3 i.t Ledge benches shall have a minimum depth of _ 'I Ches. COMPLIES: Six seating spaces on three 60 inches wide benches are provided for the Plaza on the east side of the building on Lot 2. I L , provide both sunlight and shade. ii A mixture of areas that 1 -1, COMPLIES: The street tree to the south and the trees in the driveway park row in addition to the building (on west side) and the two trees in the Plaza provide partial shade. Sunny pockets will happen at various times of the day in the center and on the north side of the plaza. € . , Protection o1 1 wind by screens and i..e s I , COMPLIES: Plaza is protected for the wind by the building on the east side of the plaza. 1, -1 -iurn of one tree --r r o v !n pro o ; t.,-1; to £ E COMPLIES: Two trees will be provided for the 828 sq. ft. Plaza on Lot 2. NOT USED: No water feature is proposed. vi, Outdoor eating areas -rfood vendors, NOT USED: No eating areas are proposed. r°« Transit Amenities, ta e se r pullouts. and f designated i lanes [ s- eqDu si; s accordance wit, t the $-;j,»,''sj°-; Transportation Plan Ca~ d r- guidelines establ'°s,£i`;. d : b, °'i^.,...°, p si ''ab ida i Rogue b WILL COMPLY.• RVTD currently does not provide service on the north side of Ashland Street at this project's location. The Ashland Transportation plan provides for a future route along Ashland Street, but it is not clear whether it will service both sides of the street. In the event that it does serve the north side, the proposed bench beneath the awning on the street facing fagade of the building will serve as a transit stop and rider waiting area. 12 I PROJECT NARRATIVE / FINDINGS 10/5/2016 Rogue Credit Union -Ashland Branch Chapter 18.4.3 - Parking, Access, and Circulation 18.4.3.030 General Automobile Parking Requirements and Exceptions Minimum umber o Off -Street Automobile Parking paces, Off--street parking hall be provided ur € ant to o€ 7'~s s.f3 r ' , 's'u following threw 'n'th~..tud *.a and shall a€l include required Disabled Person rPark nt'=, .-€F +,J L.4. 4 s~ ',3 C ± y i, Standard Ratios for / it rnbile Parkins.. COMPLIES: Commercial ratio of 11500 sq. feet for Buildings 1-3 on Lot 1 yields a requirement of 22.8 spaces. A Retail ratio of 11350 sq. ft. for Lot 2 yields a requirement of 12.9 spaces. Eight one bedroom and eight two bedroom apartments requires 27 spaces. Total spaces required - 63. Total spaces proposed - 64. Moir ber - e number o spaces r s a yz's j s"+ artiC>` ar use in °j y € A i ,.r ri` u 3 (--T spaces required, by ? ! S _ the u b of r ~ 12 n o b? l o r' 3"l f' by y J more than Le p : j. Spaces provided rr-;,„ t3e:.a4, L, jt€ ing o hapt'~°'' t°o Of _ nt,o, . structures, ~ ~ o .r under-structure parking, g.. in multi- )arkl 3 above of ~ ~ 3 t A' in ? f ro ;,i Ft~ ; J parking, 3 ~..c s below surface o~ C- ;~€a€r€ ce lots, s i;~,. sall not apply otowards 1x€ 3 maximum ~b , esr of spaces, €lo allowable COMPLIES: One surplus parking space is proposed for the combined Lots 1 and 2. Lot 2 parking provides for 7 more spaces than required by the proposed use for the building on Lot 2. These spaces will be shared with the future residential uses in Lot 1 Buildings 1 and 2 in a night-day use scenario and also with the future Building 3 commercial uses during the day. The reason for this arrangement is due to the need for an on-site detention pond (approximately 30'x 60) for Lot 1 that will be located in the lowest area of the Lot at the northwest comer. This pond restricts the amount of parking area available to the north of future buildings 1 & 2 on Lot 1. The area behind the future Building 3 on Lot 1 is restricted by its' width which limits the number of spaces available to Building 3. 18.4.3.070 Bicycle Parking . , i =27i It ~ um Requirement, All ,dace... i Fi I ices shall f-- roi-inded up to the next whole space, j, unlL, .a not `t ii, : 1, a garage -or each - . 1ir shall provide biC s v par _'.g spaces C l o l l t,.;;%' j Mu ; - ti_Ss'.."ml pi( Residential, One sheltered s, ac C"e P g' i~•.,f.''` unit Yy {~,ne f~A '..ad,o dm,! „A; €2-' , _ l Viio o ~,sthree-bedroom a,- '§e It t" spaces per d room unit', two sheltered spaces per i. WILL COMPLY: Future buildings 1 & 2 on Lot 1 will provide eight sheltered for 8 one bedroom units and twelve sheltered for the 8 two bedroom units. 1 Bicycle Parking t loo Uses, Uses required provide off street park' noted, shall ? provide L t , spaces w~.a primary ces per pr€i,,.tr use, or r one u bicycl~... parking r. king space a as specifically >,o t';r#^~i e a ri prsrkink p- spaces, whichever is j greater, Fifty 01 3ceY`=ar~r~, s~ r'bn €lu 'v€ ~ ~,ry ~ five required r 1€ired automobile p € €;g t sp ce'„a` required shall be errs; the weather L l`amt S l~ w spaces shall be located i H_ I- sheltered All & r#irn;t = to the uses they are intended to serve COMPLIES: Two spaces are required for Lot 1 future Building 3 and three spaces for the proposed Lot 2 building. Ten spaces are proposed on Lot 2; 6 covered and 4 uncovered. An additional rack for two bicycles will be part of the future building 3 on Lot 1. 13 I PROJECT NARRATIVE/ FINDINGS 10/5/2016 Rogue Credit Union - Ashland Branch d11_-, ' o . for Use. bicycle pars' spaces required b this standard hall ~d _r leased, however, refundable deposit 1 may be charged. This does not pr s v rental busi te ns. WILL COMPLY: Bicycle spaces will not be rented. H, Bicycle Parkin e4 idi ` Bicycle arkt shall , located 1 that E visible to and conveniently accessed by cyclists promotes r , -,1r,.-.y from theft and damage. COMPLIES: Four spaces are visible from the sidewalk on A Street and six spaces are visible from the driveway sidewalk. , Bicycle park; i e; iuj m nt , pursuant this section, can be, met ` an c " - fllo g ways. bicycle r c ai Pr oc ,rh ~~°,t d L C', Providing t a building, underneath awning € marquee, or in an accessory parking 3f structure, COMPLIES: Bike racks are located outside the building; six beneath an awning and four in the Plaza. r } rs r n 4~ All vi",.Ja,._l;i•e-'sYd i 9 ri ig shall rr~'i`~' ly dtY3"i, 5 ...du o fa r'"e ,.'r 1 t°"a r ~rl*.arr~u`~'.a..a Cva„~.<~'~i °r'Z fe L.€ rill used brAildina entrance i farts from i i, ---,,than the closest t arking space, Bicycle parking shall have d[r..,,,a-. isL.: ea,"s hi-a L <s:. s >a public € ,i=":,., . and to 61 . t j a; n entrance of %h principal us-, IF . 'ith i.3~'i4 ^~3-a buildings, building ir:~_,l., "<ird€r lots -s i it rci a cis t ria„rg e', ? "rr r ; > convenience for bicyclists. COMPLIES: Bicycle parking will be located at time of submission for future buildings on Lot 1. Four bicycle spaces are located within 50 feet of the front door on Ashland Street and six covered spaces are located within 50 feet of the north entrance for Lot 2 - only three spaces are required for Lot 2. Required t c do rv ~ p=r- -''c,ri'y, , spa spaces located out ro a7 € shall ~ visible enough a1 w a.1gi ii, a Lighting shall be pa,. i a 1 parking area ..e thatall facilities are thorough- _ s moto€ i p,...=_1 I lots daj. € .g all €Ldu;*« of use. .a an,- visible la vI la adj,~,.3 ( v:.e1 -.a > „:s, ;:+a =moo pl_ shall be at as WILL COMPLY. The north bicycle parking area for Lot 2 is visible from the parking lot where we expect fairly constant traffic and the four spaces in the Plaza are visible from the street and the interior of the building. Paving and Si iis€ O!?.car bicycle parking facilities shall b surfaced it i h tea''? manner ar~€ - ac` 1e parking area a rr~i?a-~g Ii r37t~`i ~ m£i..1a° fto -11c~a ~ 11 ess of fig r ` s, cdna f e =.u '~o ~sr~, a:;I- ialt, cor - -e, pavers, or slimiL nal) and shall t- --ly level. This will be I -c rained conditi ILIO COMPLIES: Bicycle parking will be 4" thick concrete paving or pavers. :€parking 1aL„ outside i?a€r shall provide and maintain an , aisle to, bicycl m aneuvering a;r~ n each row of bicycle parking. Bicycle parking including rack installations si conform to the minimum clearance standards as t, ate i is strate in ~ Figure i~'.13 s° ~ i,070 7 6 shall NOT APPLICABLE: There are only two single rows of bicycle parking. 14 i PROJECT NARRATIVE / FINDINGS 10/5/2016 Rogue Credit Union -Ashland Branch 8. a required bicycle parking spare shall be accessible without moving another bicycle. COMPLIES: All bicycle parking spaces are designed in accordance with City Standards. ' aside s 'lF' parking marked r e clearly end rose' ed or bicycle 1a. Areas :..t asdr„,9 e, o re bi _ parking only, WILL COMPLY: Signage will be installed stating bicycle parking only. 0, 'E'€-, r r '~~n 1 tit -Tr ~ecte~..,~ ' s ,i, must include -'the mi; 3 "i . I a., ..G shall #qg to t~~,t 1 ~ all precipitation d h ir~ 3 I ~ parking 9 1 pr Lion covnrages a is Figure 8,4,-,,0£70 , 1, Io, WILL COMPLY: Bicycle parking cover for six spaces will be designed and presented to Staff for verification that designs meet standards and for approval. 11, B'ki_ , the r~ of tid te; ~tail d.."I_~ fir _;i'$i.h - I i<~ i a z _ c rnin r~l e t ~ o ~i" k~, ie( COMPLIES: Bicycle parking is located adjacent to pedestrian circulation. r n iC e a 6i *.a r -t impede or c3'jai a i -'a9Z-.drd j L pedestrians, 1 They shall not be located so Iw , n -e standards o-' e-flon 1 05 Pict' -ark n facilities b It"i, , C ~r - Lneir nwir on m"? ~ l~,'s '~)oth and design, i. ; i should 3.1 be E - t s~..#;,Facilities COMPLIES: Bicycle parking spaces are set back from sidewalk and adjacent to building or landscape walls out of the way of pedestrian circulation. 11,, cl ea~e„+ narking Rack -lards. ~ € ~'°'tre :.,n of following standards i ensure ~ ~ i required Bicycle Bicycle _ f the tip is to ;}y.~ -3 are riE _ so tthe bi' securely ~ locked to ~ ~ undue a e ~ i _ _ them without 13 iS✓i.l? 1ve I; inc`..a and will be reasonably ~.~L w ,d from j intentional or accidental ct'.E. L,:: Il4tl damage. WILL COMPLY: Bicycle parking racks will conform to these standards. Design will be submitted to Planning Staff for approval at time of Building Permit submittal. 18.4.3.080 Vehicle Area Design Parking Location T'm t fo iC~'r sin ale and le an ~ is"' A7 °I ~ 9 dwellings, required auto-mobile parking facilities may be 7.~~.. li lr.. ~°,e for l ~ 3 fi., .on _ another s,d , r aC~~id said parcel i+.3 d's within 0 feet of k the the use -'.e` c '.I+..ael s of { f land, . provided _ COMPLIES: Additional parking provided on Lot 2 for use by Lot 1 is within 200 feet of future buildings 1 & 2 on Lot 1. Z L_ ,gip }s in s 30 l .3 J below, automobile parking shall not « located i f,orb; and side yard setback area abutting a public street, ex=cept alleys. COMPLIES: Parking is not located in front or side yards for the proposed building on Lot 2 and the future building on Lot 1 abutting Ashland Street. 3-1 r s a.' 3 - 1 -~'-a`~-~?i, ?~"'e ~1` rig B, e j Area Design, 7. l,: eed ar in areas shall be denial ~ed irk Ci~.a;,.+.~t ~...~z 3 I=.«- 1§I it ,11ty ~ r st~z ~ y, idar s and dimensions as illustrated- In 18,x.3.080,13. See also. accessible ar in(_~ space requirements section 1 8,4,3.0150 and parking lot and screening standards in subse on . Parking spaces hall be a minimum i of feet by 18 feet. COMPLIES: Sixteen (16) of twenty (20) spaces on Lot 2 meet this standard. Future parking for Lot 1 buildings will meet this standard. NOTE: This application proposes widened the sidewalk behind the buildings by two feet and widening 15 I PROJECT NARRATIVE / FINDINGS 10/5/2016 Rogue Credit Union -Ashland Branch the planter areas where the parking abuts a planter by two feet so the curb will act as a wheel stop. The Site plan drawings show dashed lines where the parking overlaps these features. This method was recently approved by Planning for the Safeway site and serves to provide for less impervious area where the parking abuts the planters. The spaces still effectively meet the 9 ft. x 18 ft. requirement. , p to -1 percent o she total automobile asking spaces a parking lot may be psi a ed for cars, i imuim, for compac _c ~ sall e feet by 1 Such p' ~ ~ ~ , dimensions for ~ spaces compact o fee ` d with "C'.~~< p'T }~aa14 ~ a`• r1°`," shall be s i~~ the space ~°„c with the words COMPLIES: Four compact spaces are proposed for Lot 2 which is 31 % of the thirteen (13) required spaces. 3, P i spaces shall have a bay> -;gip maneuvering pace not less than 2 feet, el ep where t S. p i angled, n d which o n a. ;c" ` sit tee moving ofother v e-h iC s COMPLIES: Proposed back-up maneuvering space is 24 feet at all proposed and future parking areas. 11 . - ~ s = ` a -yam a r", ~ t", t^> 'i"r~' a sts. , .~-c--a" - „e x°"'.r a _ 11, i~'~.i `r v s ea 3 z`''S`X sue;: 4- J t----3 4 44, 4c ea, NOT APPLICABLE: No parking lot has more than 50 spaces and pedestrians will not have to traverse more than 150 feet. ,a areas E)all be designed min i s the adverse en onme al and mic oclim is in OT F, parking through design and t l s :r _ p -ice ply t _ i r U e i i~.3"•.~t. z..J. s^ a than e-. 3a..ar= 'n,€t p; x _ Parking e'°~. .^..3<..s ~ a a - 's ;.~,-a Use ate. 3€~ } ~ strategies for t`i=,.a rem, o 1 t ti '+..lvu at l~~s~ ~ one ~ ~n.31 of the 9 °i~'~o .s~-~i ti'~ ~ iIp~ l:r~~.ate eo !'-e v l~ a~+,avc` _ parking s ~ ~dt 5 ,.1 percent of parking underground, Ft1 ~a arki5 t~.i ~ is with 5 spaces, ' the approval authority ✓ L ~ ..a 3..1 more may approve combination of strategic-). I Use light colored materials a ~J S h solar reflectance (Solar Reflective Index ws paving ao (SRh of a least g t reduce lea . for a mini n o 5 percent o till' parking area surface, i. Pro vi e porous soli ut -facing open i pavement system that, i's 50 percent § ~s for a minimum ff - h parking are rj3.1 us ~~erviy 4.14..§ ~3 of r: of ~,s rte; percent o Se area ,.tl`sacs ,,s, east 0 percent „ tree ro canopy over the parking area surface within ii, ; ovide a' ; shade five years of project occupancy, fir: Pr °ri a r WILL COMPLY: Applicants propose to use a combination of strategies i, ii, & iii to attain a minimum of 50% shading % for the parking area. We request that a condition be applied to present the strategy for review and approval by Planning Staff. , Design parkin lets and other hard surface areas i a way that captures n reap runoff with landscaped medians and sales. COMPLIES: Storm water runoff will be directed to the Treatment swale along the north end of 16 I PROJECT NARRATIVE/ FINDINGS 10/5/2016 Rogue Credit Union -Ashland Branch the property for Lot 2. Lot 1 will be designed at time of submittal for planning action and will meet this requirement. C. Vehicular Access a Ci. nd , he intent ~ this subsection is ran ge access land as r on-site circulation and rr' ain transportation s tern safety n operations. For transportation Improvement requirements, refer t chapter 8.4:6 Public Facilities. , AoclicabilitV. This section applies 1' streets within the it and all properties that abut these streets, The standards apply when developments are subject planning ;n loo Site Design Review, Conditional Use m d , e ce St~,s, Js ubid' 1's' Site Circulation. New accommodates development ill provide a provide'ui; y~ "~~,~~'~.a e "`,`.6~L ~~~v.,asJS a s shall s (s€~ )rate, traffic, on d € € e site, 'e, All 'tom €'i;°~'-Ion systems s € in ~e, street-like e t res as described ' 18.4.3.080. B,4, Pedestrian )nne tin s o : s' € i- z:,~ €di g connections €af..g t~ sites, connections b r,-sites n i': is through . provisions ea~'.~r` _ it€ ' s ; ~ 1',at conform to ,h' ~ ~ ` , COMPLIES: Site circulation is shown on sheet A4 Propose Site Plan - Lots 1 & 2. The main driveway leading in to the site has been designed with park rows and sidewalks on both sides. Sidewalks connect the sidewalk on Ashland Street to the site, plazas, and all buildings. An existing easement to Tax Lot 9202 (First Church Christ Scientist) for access to their vacant lot will cross the future driveway behind future building 3 on Lot 1. The eight feet sidewalk on Ashland Street will return on both ends to reconnect to the existing 5 ft, sidewalk currently at the curb. 3, IntErse t'on and ri' e ay Separation, The distance from a streE, intersection to a dnvevva , or ~g € r she r°i driveway another driveway sha, li meet '_.;ham minimum sp n requirements street's classification in the Ashlar 'ra s of a i ds Sys;err: Plan (TI I a illustrated in Figure r;,, l 'v, rd streets, from intersection a~ d r.isa driveways e t'~~e i ;W'y', ;~:ree°'t~. distance Is COMPLIES: Proposed distances between the proposed driveways and the existing adjacent driveways on Ashland Street, a boulevard, is greater than 100 feet as shown on sheet A4. We contacted ODOT for their requirements and were told that Ashland Street falls under Ashland's requirements. T r ys l _ b, Partitions and su baivisions of locat - d In an R-2, R-3, C- 1 l":_:- 1 M, or ~ -r°'~.°c ~`.r c =.a.: . a %.,~'-a .s> ~below, ..6 M3 zone shall it I..sl the t the control!,,, s ` d°a s set forth f applicable, c viR~s sF'} Wis.e required easements s,l i~3 - , ; ve,a ~ to ~.l 4 ~ =t „r 1 'q,?. £}.1 1, ~°.r created s by the access division can € be Made € o ; i _ one or more points. COMPLIES: The existing lots provide a 25 ft. wide flag drive for access to Lots 1 & 2 and the adjacent vacant Church property. This access is proposed to be widened so as to align the driveway with the driveway into the Ashland Shopping Center across Ashland Street. All three lots will maintain their access to the newly aligned driveway. c. Street and driveway points in an - ~ s J' ~M. or M-1 S j shall. b limited to the following, i, Distance between driveways, boulevard streets. 00 feet COMPLIES: Proposed distances between the proposed driveways and the existing adjacent driveways on Ashland Street, a boulevard, is greater than 100 feet as shown on 17 PROJECT NARRATIVE / FINDINGS 10/5/2016 Rogue Credit Union -Ashland Branch sheet A4. We contacted ODOT for their requirements and were told that Ashland Street falls under Ashland's requirements. ii. Distance fray lterse;alas. L boulevard v=e s; 00 fees COMPLIES: Proposed distances between the proposed driveways and Lit Way to the east is greater than 100 feet. 4. Shared Use of rig ewavs and Curb lu, a, Ps£~;s ut„?~} (?iLv eer' -or developments tm planning ion action shall indicate h a'-s s d 's ?,~1 subject d.:, how I`v e ions E -eet v been minimized through he s$_~ of shared driveways any., all 1 = _ ,.cw1 a :.~3ar.a-i~; ~ easements. 'j v r ~1 b,,,-a~`..s ~>®e3 s ~.3 ~ i p ~ access purDoses, the City may requireioint access and/or E J d ',,j s in the following management situations, „ For s arEd o - F ad kin! ~~areas 'C;.r ~-t develop,, ~ vd ere an , arterial is limited, , 3.ahwhere access ;,~te``s onto e t~- o l r 2- `r, d v developments on t P S 3 Ltiple i lots, COMPLIES: Proposed driveway provides access to three lots. b, Developments st,.dec? to 0 planning action u3 a€ ; s,i3'£ lov=..s all curb cut and driveway approaches of shown to be necessary for existing improvements or the proposed 'fi Cur 1 cuts and shall 3~ replaced with vtt e approaches a :.f standard z_curb, a sid--~v and planter/furnishings strip as appropriate",1 COMPLIES: Two existing curb cuts for driveway approaches will be abandoned. (See sheets A4 and C1). r he s l i shared r r It y _ 't'iPa ' £ rte- he a , w '-.r, I, t1 ~ served access 'sd alley. '.a access _i$ i a i`~...-;.r ni ~.~rE t#~.a~~•,.a must frontage, '-L I shared access or alley and not from the st.. COMPLIES: Three lots are served by the shared access from Ashland Street. D. -ind Turn-Around D----in. Driveways and turn-arounds providing access to parking arm i~ p r to the €l ' pr silod? s, 3 Parking `ng areas L ~i 3 ~ i3... .~"tS,J l be by 2' t. in 1 width ~>so 3.11 more shall l t~?:; served .1,~ driveway a id constr acted t f a o off the Fi}te with d regard to pedestrian and vehicle safety: be de~ .-d are defined: -id provide adequate aisles or turn-around areas s that, all v eh -.ies r r street in a fc c' manner, COMPLIES: Proposed parking areas have 20 ft. driveways leading in to the 24 ft. driveway/ backup space between aisles. Parking spaces will be striped and adequate aisles are provided so vehicles can enter the street in a forward manner. T ex width of drig eas and curb cuts in the park row and sidewalk area stall be minimized. COMPLIES: Proposed driveways and curb cuts are at the twenty (20) ft. minimum required and no larger. 63 Vertical Clearances. Driveways, aisles, turn-around areas and ramps shall have a minimum vertical clearance of feet for their entire length are width, Parking structures are exempt 18 I PROJECT NARRATIVE/ FINDINGS 10/5/2016 Rogue Credit Union -Ashland Branch from 'this requirement, COMPLIES: Vertical clearance of 13.5 feet will be provided. Tree canopies overhanging the driveways will be pruned at regular intervals to maintain this clearance. =s . s t.,~ 4 , a~ ,ez t ,Vis.i,~ l.a r 1 l-~'°i t.a',_+. No obstructions `o a.~ ~ be placed in ~ t,~ vision cle S~ n c area except a ~ set forth i section '18.22.4.040, NOT APPLICABLE: Proposed does not include a street to street / alley intersection. for any p ion or '''ays in all € al r=via 20 percent f I of the If required by the City, the developer or owner shall provde ceO of drive 1 'made u, a l mead land surveyor, COMPLIES: Proposed driveways will not exceed 20 percent and are much shallower (5.5% maximum on Lot 2) as the site is relatively flat. (See sheet C1 Grading Plan). Al driveways l J in ~ ~ -ir uant to r,_€t tand igy'7a m' t issuance 3of a ,a e r til 11 l i ,r to ~ a:~~(I`,.? prior f.aror ,t .a, occupancy for new constri. Jion, WILL COMPLY: Proposed driveways will be installed per City standards. 10, € ay sz lots created r' modified ..,rju; ? land division or- property line adjustment, is and cli„ ,d' a ose 1s, n§;,a.3 . shall °.r..s=. ~ rn~ the ? ~€~,.~ir~``£ ~i ents of chapter 18.5.3 Land Divisions eerty Line WILL COMPLY: See findings in Chapter 18.5.3 later in these findings. Parking and Access Construction. The development are maintenance a provided elov hall apply in all cases, except single-family dwellings. 1, Paving, ice., , s= ~-'terited parking aisles, ; rn® r shall b € pave with driveways c asphaltiC, porous solid surface, 01- a rnpa bl _ n , constructed t standards file i the office the City Engineer. WILL COMPLY: Proposed paving is either asphaltic or concrete and will conform to City standards. 2 All required r parking and urn._ ro li `gal i provisions made "or areas, aisles, on-site collection o 41 drainage to eliminate sheet uch waters nt' *.p i *.r ~ S) . waters to zflow o~ 'a of such 3 , ? i ~1.'s3€ € = ~.5= .s k1 ~a, t', rights-of-way, € lbli c abutting private r~" pe-rt ' COMPLIES: All storm water on site is designed to flow off of sidewalks onto landscape planters or vehicle paving and then directed to the treatment swale along the north property line for Lot 2. No water will be directed on to adjacent properties. z^t d to V. D}ne$eJjVV'# f}.I},.dS c's I}. Approaches C.d€ be p}S =xn .d za1:Sriu +..dz 2 ' 33 3 =.1onV» ..hz`'-.J I City Engineer, -n of the , , WILL COMPLY: Driveway approaches are proposed as concrete and will be constructed to City standards. t't€ 3 'A#~,i a Parking more than seven spaces shall have e all spaces permanently and clearly ~ lots o i ri€.?+ or "e1vma*ed. WILL COMPLY: All parking spaces will be permanently and clearly marked by painted stripes. - in , vA,/heel stops. Wheel stops shall a minimum is r inches in height n width and six feet I length, e shall firmly attached t he ground and o constructed as ~ withstand anal w ar. Wheel stops shall b provided where appropriate for all spaces abutting property lines, buildings, landscaping, are n vehicle shall overhang a public right-of-way. COMPLIES: Applicant is proposing replacing the wheel stops with 6 in. high concrete curbs at widened sidewalks and widened planters (two feet wider). Wheel stops are trip hazards and collect wind-blown trash. Widened planters provide for greater pervious areas on site. 19 I PROJECT NARRATIVE/ FINDINGS 10/5/2016 Rogue Credit Union -Ashland Branch , ';,'alts n Hedaes V}There parking facility i adjacent street, a decorative masonry wall, o evni hedge screen between 0 and 42 inches in height and a minimum 1 inch s i ith shall established parallel to and t[ two feet from ~ € ~ the r€ h`-°€~f-'. linne, ;~pt,"~.=~~.,` ~ar,t to ~ , t not nearer ~~i_..€l€.~ the following requirements, NOT APPLICABLE: Parking facilities are not adjacent to any streets. . €s s r r r- r r rl r n l r r, a-21I c i t r s-5 ~ ~s a . ~ , ~„P , ~ ,.a , a . 1. La ,d c , . Ire all .ones all parking facilities shall i i.s11w , scapin to cover not less 11(hari seven percent of the area devoted to to outdoor parking € si including e landscaping r € in subsection above. ,.Ja='~ P dE . 9 .l P eo r r = d € '18,4,3,080,E,6, ~ h ll br' i ~ € €ni- rl'{ ~ .,~ist ibtad €tr; r' ' . ..r~;a € ..a€..,a,t~.~ thrl;.r° the parking ve€";d ~el 1 'piti irrigation € p~ ~ ~ n, ;ii, - o`~ raised ~'~t~";€ area, and ~ a>,;v ro wood headers, It may y consist of trees, p5uv shrubs, ground or i ..,mot.„s mlt r of o tree per seven parkir .g spaces is elm°. COMPLIES: Landscape plantings are provided along the entire north edge of the parking area and within five landscape peninsulas on Lot 2. This landscape area surrounding the parking area on Lot 2 is 1242.7 sq. ft. and is 22.8% of the 5440.8 sq. ft. parking area. 8, Lighting. Lighting of parking areas within §p0 feet of Property in residential zones shall be t from . . t e ,.3a ~ ill not be directed ~',a into o .~r on t the site away property 1'€=~ie such e "that light element hi t directly ~ visible from abutting .residential property, Lighting shall comply with section 18-4.4,050, ~ ~,Js`' ectr;~, - 18.4.3.090 Pedestrian Access and Circulation epos I t nt subject to this chapter, except single-family dwellings o individual r's s r„ ,-,.r, l 'r. the following standards n f pedestrian € . a so, i teo essor str otore shall ~ 10 r or access ano circulation, o itlrl= o s ll a System. Extend the 1 , system throughout the development site and oo eot to all future phases of develo rent, a to existing or planned off-site adjacent s ;`al- public parks, and! open space areas the practicable, The s ' a kl ao , . s greatest extent . developer may alss be required to connect or stub walkway(s) to adiacent, street's and to private property for this purpose, COMPLIES: Site plan provides for a continuous walkway system throughout the development to connect the proposed building on Lot 2 with the future buildings on Lot 1 and to the proposed eight ft. sidewalk on Ashland Street. , Safe,. Direct, and Convenient, Provide safe, reasonably direct, and 'convenient aw l w `tC.air~Sp.. entrances l t~t streets. For the purposes of 5 , 't"] Cyti ~o(€a between primary and ~r ~icc=.s.g€en` this section, the toll _ definitions apply. Reasonably €;eon means a roue that does not deviate unnecessarily from a strain t line or " di a, a roots y hat does not involve a si r ifioant amount of out-of-=: ireotior travel for likely users, COMPLIES: Primary entrance facing Ashland Street for proposed building on Lot 2 is direct to the sidewalk. b. "Safe and convenient" means reasonably free from hazards and provides a reasonably direct means of walking between destinations, COMPLIES: All pathways on site are to be ADA accessible and as such, the building code 20 I PROJECT NARRATIVE/ FINDINGS 10/5/2016 Rogue Credit Union - Ashland Branch will not allow for any hazards. "Primary entra ce" f r a non-residential building means the main public entrance t + the building. It the case where is en cee exists, connections shall be provided to public street t e main employee entrance, COMPLIES: The primary entrance to the building on Lot 2 is on Ashland Street. Staff believes the other entrance is the primary and it may in fact be the entrance most used by customers that drive to the site. This secondary entrance is necessary for ADA accessibility; we are providing an accessible ramp in front of the ADA parking space in order to provide a van accessible parking space that is the closest parking space to the entrance as is required by the Americans with Disabilities Act. Ashland ordinance 18.4.3.09 2. a. cited above requires a "reasonably direct" route to the primary entrance. Not providing this secondary entrance with the accessible ramp would require individuals with disabilities to walk or wheel themselves up and around the plaza to the primary entrance facing Ashland Street for a distance of approximately 150 feet; twice the 75 feet by using the ramp. We believe this to be unreasonable and quite possibly not in compliance with the ADA. r"for ?3'r^~ f'r¢y' l facing the streeu For i$ 'te' i'i t?` LI i t 'CJ. {3 . "Primary f _ a residential buildino 4., ¢'t' front oo~ multifamily'- .a„ ~gs and mixed-use buildinas where not all dwelling units, have in individual exterior n` e , ~ "pr?~ry entrance" may be a lobby, courtyard, or b; ce°- serving as a common entrance for i-nore than, one dwelling, WILL COMPLY: The future mixed-use buildings 1 and 2 on Lot 1 will comply with this requirement. 3, Connections within Development. Walkways within developments men shall provide connections meeting all of to following requirements as 't" tr in Figures 18.4,10903.1a and 'Connect ~ entrances ~ e another i~ tai to the extent practicable, a, all 4 III-, . ..s ~ to . ca COMPLIES: All building entrances will be connected by way of sidewalks with the exception of the emergency exit only that exits the Break Room for the proposed building on Lot 2. b. 1--lonneCt on-site parking areas, recreational fLc'litles, and common areas, and connect. off- I djacent uses to the site to the extent ~c: a development is 13 ~.S is ~9t, mf. y be cause for no-, M K g ce t, L-~ s"t€~- -,.7 as, COMPLIES: All common areas including the Outdoor spaces, Plazas and parking will be connected by way of sidewalks. s. e i *-+3 sA. 4 .f. ~+.i 2 . a. a✓ 4n . ..t X t A S d s. ~ ~ E € . a a T r.s" ~ v _ , a sn j ' V LJ s x a e NOT APPLICABLE: No path from parking area requires traversing more than 150 feet. 4. Wal wav Design any. Construction. Walkways sill Conform all of h ov 1(-standard: as ? 18.4,3,0gn.B,-,a and .4,,B. For tear s i r'e e°L ne uirernents refer to chapter 1 , .6 Public Facilities, a, Vel islet '111j'al waa; Separation, Except for crosswalks. where a walkway a-b is a driveway or street, it shall be raised six inches and aj. rl ed along the edge e the driveway. Alternatively, the approval authority may approve a wal wapt abutting a driveway at the same grade as tl e driveway it the walkway Is distinguished from { ehicle_mane er ng areas, Examples off alternative treatments are mountable curbs, surface treatments such as stamped concrete or reflector bumps, and using a row c decorative meta; concrete bollards t separate a 21 I PROJECT NARRATIVE/ FINDINGS 10/5/2016 Rogue Credit Union -Ashland Branch walkway from, rivi-., it y mark , Crosswalks. Where vays cross a parking ~ area or driveway, crosswalks with contrasting paving materials e,g., light-c=olor concrete inlay between asphalt), which may b pare of a raised ' 'hm r si o area. Painted or Kerr o-plastic striping and Similar types of non-permanent applications may be approved for crosswalks not exc-eeding 24 feet in length, COMPLIES: The crosswalks across the driveway will be paved in concrete to distinguish them from the asphaltic paving of the driveway. Crosswalks will be 20 feet curb to curb, 7`, l v ace. and Width, Walkway surfaces concrete, ;E ric "maso r 3 l~ ~I durable u ryee~, least fiod g t~«sv wide, y~ 3 ! r is .r= pavers, or other ae ~:tea.a." `s is E .a are pedestrians") shall be n a f-- asps a are at least ten -'z ,ui e, a , rdan the section f . 040 -r esi an, 'Is COMPLIES: Walkways will be paved in concrete or concrete pavers and will be 5 feet in width. No multi-use paths are proposed on site. hall ,'vL d, Accessible routes, k 4 I comply a v~a,, 1 with e Americans , Disabilities Oct D and tats' ry ~kgon requirements, T , `*e, nc3 of all raised wa a v s where the ~ndl w i te, s ; driveway o t? ~ oeis ramps +i. t are `'tea a1...~e -t accessible, € {'-,tea ~:a :r r , shall direct ro tee tO teary building et WILL COMPLY: All routes on site will be accessible. e, g ti€ ,L.~~` . La t n s s:?a. ~rLr'f ~ with ;a hall comol s section l I.~, . , +.1:~,050 „iahtiS~ , WILL COMPLY.- Lighting will comply with this section. See findings that follow in this narrative. 18.4.3.100 Construction The required parking, access and circulations facilities, shall b installed prior to a release of a certificate of use and occupancy or release of utilities, and sell be permanently maintained as condition ~~s However, s Building Official m1 i~li~s ttl`a,r'~ e ais eds`~,..~ b the Planning condition the ; ~i~r r*;~~~~ ?i siK or Staff Advisor, release temporary certificate of use and occupancy and a temporary ,release f a-It"l;"ais before to ~ provided, ({111 ~ r there is proof roof that th owner has of .a installation of 3 facilities t~ has of thy' entered ~:ix a ql t ° bonded, contractor c for . t.h ~,a, completion the into contract sfi~1_ and insured t ; .,mot ..y t g, „-€n~.,d other elements !~„sn~.a,s required ~1 this chapter, s with a n specified parking, i- a ''ta i 3 g walkways, land--,-- time, a_ _i other conditions of approval ~ are outstanding: or 1`21 t '.e owner has ( d a satisfactory fay ~ aivithj sr , time, i 9 1 p f r r',a bond t insure the installation of f said parking r WILL COMPLY: Phase I will include all of the work shown for Lot 2 plus the entire width of the shared driveway up to and including the sidewalks from Ashland Street to the northerly edge of the north PTM driveway on Lot 2. Lot 1 work will be installed after a separate planning action. 18.4.3.110 Availability of Facilities Required parking, access, and circulation shall available for use b residents, customers, and employees only, and sell not b used for the storage or display vehicles or materials, WILL COMPLY: Site will be totally accessible for use by residents, customers and employees. No storage or display will occur on site. 22 I PROJECT NARRATIVE / FINDINGS 10/5/2016 Rogue Credit Union -Ashland Branch Chapter 18.4.4 - Landscaping, Lighting, and Screening 18.4.4.030 Landscaping and Screening General Landscape Standard. . All portions c a lot no otherwise developed with buildings, accessary structures vehicle maneuvering areas, parking, or other approved and ca es shall be landscaped pursuant, to this chapter, COMPLIES: All areas not planned to be hardscaped will be landscaped. Landscape and C All lots jnform he minimum landscape area S. -m Area . .ge. °-d of ~ /see Table ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ r for residential f t e applicable zoning ~~.~~c ,~,_.;~.zones and s,s~,~~ s sr' t' for w, Except ,Y'tq as otherwise p provided by this chapter. i abie i 8, ,6, 3.~ non-residential . r'~3 i )s € areas to be = covered with plant materials ta~~ plant'. coverage i not : less t('~~a. 0 proposed Lered d~i~ larm ~ r -la e iis shall percent ergae and gn percent coverage itYr; _ ir fi sY~,i years _ planting, avu~ ~ wii"~ € one- ~ year ~:n ~ COMPLIES: 16.2% of Lot 2 is proposed and 27.6% is shown for the future development of Lot 1. C. Lan s ap, and a_ 1 _'tion, _ h 7 ds - ,s...~ and selection „a _3 shall be rased all of 'the following sl,,,. i r ee nc Shrub Retention, Existing healthy trees an shrubs shall c retained, pursuant to ci-ij- 1_ -r 8.5, nsiet with 1.4.5 ,.3 t , Co r*= r€ chapter ' i3 ree Preservation -and P'ro echo' ci~eait may be rn A toward ; the landscape ar.,~ where a project p l includes preserving ~ iarea requirements r£,~i healthy vegetation that contribute(s, to the landscape design. COMPLIES: Proposal is to retain 17 of the existing 24 trees on site (See sheet L2). All shrubs are to be removed. 2. Plant election, se a variety deciduous k evergreen tree shrubs, and ground covers, n L and water availability, The are ~a ,..a. va Use lat S °s that ppr rIG§'b. " i € local cal climate, exposure, - presence utilities an drainage conditions shall also be considered, c= Storm Water Facilities. Us water-tolerant where storm : a ~ an, ~LenL c, , at water quality ie f, ~s are proposed, , Crime Prevention and Defensible Space, 'Landscape fans shall provide for crime prevention and defensible space ~or example, by L -J~~~ hedges eelhas and sib", ~i= r plants ilc'~~~lng natural surveillance t?~:,,si and semi-pugg1;~ area, and by using impenetrable hedaes in areas whe,r physical uC i isco r e , Street Trees. Street trees shall con3crn 3 to the street tree list approved the Ashland Tree Commission, See the Ashland Recommended greet Tree side, 3, Water aier'v€n ardscairla. Commercial, irausria., non-residential, and mixed -use developments '-that are subject t chapter 8,5,22 Site Design Review, shall use plants that are low water use and meet the requirements of 1 . ,4, 30,1 `,/Va er Conservinrgl Landscaping. 4, hillside hands and'e= 'e=ater Resources Landscape plans for land located in the hillside' ands Lands, overlay must also conform ~acti 18.3.110,001.0 Dev"° p"§Set Staidas,..€+..; E'i Hillside 18, , ] i ,1 ? 0 € and it, h e iv'Javer Resources s~ overlay must also conform section rr t o Mitigation Requirements or V,, at r Resource Frost Lion ones, 5, Screening a. Evergreen shrubs shall be used where a sight-obscuring landscape screen is required, b, lv,%/here a ledge is used a a screen, evergreen shrubs shall be planted that not less than 0 percent the desired screening is achieved within two years and 100 percent i 23 I PROJECT NARRATIVE/ FINDINGS 10/5/2016 Rogue Credit Union -Ashland Branch fi,^§ ~`-f£ } itrin four years. Living _ 3"~z' ,a c er in the screen strip shall a be ue: planted €c P~ that achieved r~' ? the percent coverage ice...' achieved w t€ t~g'' ~ 3, , Plaint Sizes a, Trees hail be not less Livo if caliper for i street trees, and 1,5 ,`v, I caliper for other trees the time of planting. d , , Shrubs shall e planted from not lessthan ? gallon containers, and where F-- r ii' shall meet tll _ its .0. t i ..i »n cr e}= j, Tree Pres .(-n,, a s P rotection, r. ,n y cr, of r 18.4,5 for Tree Protect;r- D. 7 R ern 18,5 1 for T, M £ ,i~°l . E, - it men1s. Pvnd r rj} tl t chapter The u e of street ttrees is ',to a deciduous y over street, the T saes a, all- ~ desired p to --id 'In rnal c-rcu"Htion street-, o t --et feea # i i these area: v., ire e y l € ;,J€=' r-•°", r*a-'t 'Yt'r''t°~, ~„s,,, t=...~ , "vate streets shall `vt`',' to di 9:. street trees in accordance ~A ith the t,T1€',3 •€1~1 Iq~ ~ ll €€''~j"ng ~ p a3 i~i< :~„d chosen d from § € the ~..r recommended list, `a~` street dt€.', 5 trees, 'fi't Location •..s1t. Trees, Street uee shall located in i ice' designated planting s3 l~,r trip (o `s7s ...6,.< L.d ~r € i t £.3 ~.s be ~.au~ ,a `+git*„o ...a „ wells y; ii` -.s the La n `i e Ci it 1,a.,s thsidewalk where planting tf or behind IE i cases F i,l . § J and sidewalk, tr--~,a ells a, or will not ox's jr, place, ' re-' trey's shall rha i %i, rt l , Ias and ~3 t f : ;.s ,.at i a.,a ; € r nfo i £ E to the , standards ' ab } mm P a? t, ger ',v 'he ~r Street Trees , naci and Placement ~ i All spacing may be made sg blect to snecial site conditions that may, for reasons i € j r; decision n s 1r. proposed special condition shall tatted€vct to f u _ c' he ch v A a n' , s s and approval, i"'P✓ ila(-em ent, iP"i and 3"x s"# l "'r' shall s ' a all of the e ° 3 , requi m Street trees rya be placed at the rate one tree for ~ very 30 feet of tr at Vont e, , , s 1, evenly spaced, ~ d, with variations ~ to the spacing ..,i perm -J o r cificfit -,ns tt~y i 'd vaC~i i . , such _ driveway aoProaches. Street tree shall not `f' planted . Jos h 5 e from the i line of intersections of C r'°L , closer ten w f i private on, ( ''v rid at the acs et alleys, and i than feet r r~ i ~ ~ i€ ~t a..r^ -yam n =i 'the sidewalk), ;i, hydrants, or € t= l z , , s~~ poles, ci. -~t trees , 'iall not be planted closer than 0 feet to light standards, Except for U sa-,_- n,,,) lir'-ol standard location shall be positioned closer than ten feet to any exi- • . >L str tree. _ :r l such locations Nxi1l be a, 1 20 fees distant, , i planted l i ~r than 2,55 ~ t~ c of the curb street trees t Street trees shall lit t ,i ri m shall a:~' o be planted Within i two feet ~.so any surface paving e ~J°.. la.€ - I i~ ;~l..a 5,.,,, walkway, ev r. la;^ _i _I 'n concrete for trees or tree u, at, leas' 25 square fee- however. shall larger tt2 c c ; g { becaus _ additional air iA3 'di' r ir'k`; t root systei ` -ii acid to tl, e-'"}z the C,ve= T shall b covereds b ~ -,rates in accordance .ii C-litx/ specifications, % planted under A icower lines shall selected so as to tit r i11 power lines at, maturity. h 'ir`;i trees may used trei, trees rs there ''v9 be no damage ?"l "°'€t,, development, which will kill or weaken the tree. Sidewalks of variable width and elevation, where approve ter 18~`'.4,06r^..040 tr reet Design m utilized k to ~,e existing ur Uant to section ~ Standards, to ~ street trees, subject to approval by h Staff Advisor, . r nini , Street trees. they grow, shall pruned t provide at least eight feet of clearance 24 I PROJECT NARRATIVE/ FINDINGS 10/5/2016 Rogue Credit Union -Ashland Branch above sidewalks and 2 feet above street roadway s r . Trees. r i ra removed roles shall be 4, Replacement of Street r ac # by >c, developer a • # those from et tree list ~s~' I t the 1` ~Tree the ~ ~'~d,,.tt>r a~ ?~I i approved s ` ' icar' `>`.,.3 ~ - 9 P`., rte. si = r°all a # of size t",ai t rs;°@ fh'd Z^ieC`, $ to t at re of iv'mod, The # re {nib ~zfr pec s.ms# i,#'la3' t1 . £ _ L :"F,. by # r--- Staff Advisor, rar. Ashland RecommenStreet re € 9 £ - the ehicle F r--1- -ndscaping and g. Parking lot landscaping, including areas ol ve i ` ing narking. and and to 5i: €i € meet the ollo~§>ig requirements. •7 1 _ 1-4 a` A3 a lot, dac;~ pinshall £ ~ y consist of i-,~ Hirai m of seven p j t# e total parking area , ~ the plus ,:d ratio I one r'~... et"a & seven parking space-s, "to create a canopy effect', -t e e a hall e_ m, l e c t e d b e:1 tree species ay -rte.- on 'ate ..s large g ._i -bade i n J 3a t. ,si d root damage •""a.>, €rx m# .fie' the ,r`-s" street b the Ashland aw trees a- #i b~-t.`.1 .a.ii°'~ € L C-d ~ area such that the tree ,le 'a least E.'d'` „ a ta is Ii .fit r m any curb or paved a re a, y j i ea shall distributed throughout he r . irk r, A parkin=g ire' at the re£ it -1 e'. That rec required ~ landscaped yard, ark buffer `r), or .aa = € scre nin strip rim C~~ z # bUttino parking i.a<on i ~€OT ,~~.,a st ri a ne counted toward 3,eciudred parking lot t i Capin but only for those t a 9~".,', species. it#,og material c ;~0 - a r r as the t L > t. ra Ion.,. e, d ,a ap ng ..,a as Is at plant 7. ~ :'t b t. ,,sat~ l ~ _ment distribution acyi e?~ia are also met, Front o air exterior -$~rd lay§u~ ~t =..10st••' l=-.f a., t it rd # t..# s.J ~'a r-.~=~7 r7 t,,,iinterior reaa.~ a" r€,t' ir*. a ia~, . . , ~ . ,.,a = stalls, 2. S~r eee it`;, , Screening Abutting Property Lines. five foot landscaped strip cren arl, _ ope line, '€P^ r^ buffer between ones i required. the n he'll b it ccr w :d i i the require duffer t'i . and will iL - be ac ruq =~irE ---~~~ree-nft~g-mac-e-f7-t-te -~~esfde~atiei-~u~dd~rag: _ c, Screening at Required Yards. incorporate a i Parking abutting r ~ = yard or e~,te1'v' a ~ for i:a shall € front i v sight obstructing hedge 0 1 3 into the is L` landscaped yard. The screen sPL grow 11,.- 36 if ic, ;e;J higher than t the finished grade of the area, exceP w1L, clearance r 3 section 1 ,2 4.015 • ii< he ci¢e _ , ? teit3h; may _ a,: se a co of earth 1 r- e ,,s; ,..f 'rte a s _e materials. tr t l screen ?#h 'he f9 : ,e retaining {.=ails, i°. le_~,~t _ parkin g )t ;gal # € parking and I r is ter. r , a. ~ r€ Y` e containers, o, tdoor ;cream,- Screening is required for e ar'ia' # ec c~ ~ ~L J s:; r # -ry ~~r mechanical ~ ii ii ei t7: and the Clit me,, require . areas, i'~,.< - y _ .a corridors. eq ag" ~t 9 # y screening other ii...aii"f ui"ud';t with °i requirements o ti's ordinance, ~ re shall , Re~~~_`~ce and Refuse oritiiri;r creed, e ~,,c°~'e and re ~..~fae containers or , disposal be screened Gtr- -b placement of a solidi wood en or mason wall five to eight feet n height limit it the adjacent properties or iui~.~~ is:.~ All recycle ~ 2 and ',~i~~~~ from au~ rights-off-way. recycle i~~, refuse ia`kei°iaa pia b contained within the screened area, 2. Outdoor Storage, Outdoor storage areas shall b screened from view, except such screening pZ not required in the M-1 zone, 25 I PROJECT NARRATIVE/ FINDINGS 10/5/2016 Rogue Credit Union -Ashland Branch 01 Lo dlno Facilities and Service orri ors. an industrial loading facilities and se vice car Aidors shall be screened when ad'acent to ~ al zones. Siting and _-,;fin of such e Il areas shall reduce the adverse OT noise. odor. eand sul .~lL L adjacent effects visual res'dent al uses, _ e-„ ';Itial equipment shall screen by placement ur '~€.>~l° Equipment.-Mechanical ~ least equal in heigh § t to the equipment limit view from pub 1lic rights-of-way, 1,: -ceps . {+r, al ~lr1ey~s a~i"5€.,a ~ a from . and .4 -et residentially zoned properly, Mechanical equipment meeting f r§ €h.d[ .1. `cc ~J a.s t&. F § 9',.s~ ~ § Yf9 e fit` '„.a .s section ~.,;,~.~.f~ i~ requirements ~n ~ ~ satisf the screening ' a. Roof-mounted Equipment. cree n, a for roof i unte .s equipment shall be c ct of building's used in § co :I _ n and 'riclu re tu. < u c as a rape ? . _ or other s;:,~; tt°,tl ci1ing feature I td of € s q 3l. solar collection i „ 6".a a i.o exempt from Li requirement Pursuant to ubsec'Lio it 1 8,5 , 2, 0 /2 0, C, 3, b. Other Mechanical Equipment. Screening for other rnecl i , r r ("e.g., ins" 'd € e,a 1 v "el, include f t G~ features such a solid wood ~ ..r as a b`ite j} oo-. fence. masc. 3 or i °=..,,=°'dge SC r m 7; ~ 1 s o=,.t Irrigation, Irrigation ' y Berns shall be installed to ape access. I. a lay . sc s proposed ..E without irrigation, - landscape p, oIes=~ -1 C 'if y the 3 c--, be s § ti ,ei.F Ca'§i ^yIrrigation ~,r4.-E n-s - re through t€„;s~€., ~ ga , f, . a? process u rv t .6 hout artificial ~~I Llfi:.rt irrigation. _s time of jz,, per r _ *subm', ls.. r es O:h g ,Y$'r°,,. C .3s ; er`ir S jx ;'r,v at tmr ~'1u been ! a scare, valuable l ~ i ~€,.a , ~ g :~r,~, °s United l ~ w inter rains gie i t ' ...~-e9 „,.J", n 21..E Rogue a €1 way to , Lan s caning Design Standards a. Landscaping Coverage, . „ x~ -,it Coverage .,o' less c nom' r~v/ ~ ~ ..~g~ng ~ shall h ax. : r~; . , t ~-~~er cons'. "than 0 percen k, 0A§ a re n of r u:i r a d t - ,,eet t e 1 Z 5 perk-lent coverage .'thin or-,- year. = Plant Selection, plants in ~ the non-tuff shall l s'= sae as droht At yeast 90 ~r~ ~ § areas ~rg tolerant §t in et S jt:~eto rn t..~a, :mot n € book, ' ~.rI ~ ~ at tee`-' ie Landcc '."1,P ~ .i°eo or be- sin- in ? the ~ Sunset kt ` eg~ r . of the pl,.-c~w I its may be y be of a nor- d¥ - ~ )Ieerart °a=p';;~,,~I =`e"'`~"1 or species as long as thy"'`. are ~ e t,._,~ grr L, ed together an are located in a se irrig "m zone, Screening, Plant screening hedges to attain 50 p ' coverage after two ears, a, Mulch, Add a m„ nErrum of two inches of mulch in on ~,_11 areas to the soil urfac ,.,~i rs,s~ fr3 Neither ~{{her large nuggets nor fine bark y be `Sep"' for mulch. p x - ~ ~ `l,tis ~s €dmay € -s k' fixer no a ~i.+o Eo d~.w~ , . ;al sh, b lac under this mu!lc , e, Turf and Water Areas, Limit combined turf or wat= areas 3 i, e pools, ponds, and f = ; . . i„; § P' t not apply to public ~ ~ to 20 percent of tree landscaped areas~ l iris $ ~ parks Sri coa9,€§€,..~n (open space, required outdoor r:~' °'.13 courses, cemeteries, and school recreation [ areas. Fountains, Design all fountains to recycle their water, , Turf Location= Turf is restricted to slopes less than ten percent grave, h, Berms and Raised Beds, , No more "than five percent of landscaped area o any lot or project may be berms or raised beds l ial per than one foot unless there is demonstrated reed for sound or safety barrier, if allowed, berms must be no taller than 1 / o their width. i, All plantings on ears o foot or greater in height must be drought tolerant, iii, Only drirrigation is allowed on berms more than one foot in height, 26 PROJECT NARRATIVE/ FINDINGS 10/5/2016 Rogue Credit Union -Ashland Branch i, SOLI Quality. When new vegetation is planted, soils all °i` ended for plant ° afth n rp}'Or`~, Add mature compost three cubic yards of compost per water e° a€i~o"a a a~: sane feet area be landscaped, and soil a amendment(s) to a depth of four- to i inches, This requirement € be waived it or=j rr'=re of r £ following circumstances, a. The are to be landscaped is fenced off to fully protect native soil from disturbance and compaction during construction, Soil tests document an organic content o a least free percent based on a r .pre ^e ta i e core sample al's n at a rate of or ~ test per 20,000 s u~ E , based o a minimum of three cor- _ r _ )er temot.. & shall be taker ~ Pt to a, depth of six i `ic 1-C .3 attainment _jlug h grade,. The area to be lands,:-, d v,` used tc, ,;s •v treat ads .g'iL`<n- -3r subject to separate design standards, t Design Irrigation a ± fro i `nisreriai rocess 29, , IL L a sir Sprinkle, ~ I spacing r e d-1- cover a Design irrl ti -J m mini m runoff at v pra to non-irrigated re , tic - -ads for ad circuit, c, Match p, rates for all i3 a - . a s of p 9~d~a= , and d type o ~.r :is'"~ £ Separate ,-t ~,.ries based d ta of, needs of sprinklers being use 6-e_ rotating, I~ldl wd.s fixed spy, eor drr P Iain? with ir~i£tit watering needs shall be in the ='t i a ~ b.z,.aSA;.s shall same irrigation zone unless irrigated by drip irrigation having emitters sized for individual plant water needs, f. s sprinkler heads t1,a`; prE ,fir rate of 4 5 inches e hour ....s a exceeding 15 pe, cent ; mi imi , ' -o , or when slope ceed ten t££ £ yen feet, hardy 'ape, a, le '.~c:v al~ io' p~"~., ei'i`~llt rs e,a for rip systems, are required a ~i;>`am.>£~ ~ v; pressure compensating drip ~~'r£3~ee an elevation difference I1`°te, ~ than 20 feet exists ay iri~r ~l ;c~a~~, on a'n , ~ £o systems arequired i for ~ ~ ~ trees unless `,1'v~ w'''srthin la=~'v~ri areas, 4..~q ir ;irrigation t s, D ~..sr~a.~ ~{r,r?~C;;~,.i; ~ £ :;~$~a' '.zones € recomm"nd- # operating - £i regulator gides t' } ' meet manufacturer's recommend- s t pressure C.; 1 9 ° _ the Y -~s LH. rire for the, .a ri v u nor of eaC £ zone, except in those, instances h ~ ~=,#a ty~'~ etis . a i n c v v € ; ~ p, g £ ='r.±' . " R~ i llL'.,7~ be located to meter or solenoid valve, . al ~ ..a~=„t . Automatic Sprinkler Controls. of Equip all H"riga:.ior1 systems 1~'~~ith aco„rroler capable 01 dual multiple programming, r~ ~ Controllers shall have a multiple start time capability, station u' ides minutes hours, and water days by inter,/al. day of the week, and even/odd days, i' . r'±1~.- u • t 'water ;g t' feature, r" L',"h 1 €i, Use controllers ~J''it!i per,-., acJl..;`~ ibudget' ,.aSL.~ f £the _ ~1 i'.1 ul accepting a external or soil r ~ sensor. th ~iire , ~ ~ o. ~i.a e~..~t demonstrate the 3, Exc:~i e- rons, Requests to cl.~ e-`'+7ar: 3 fr~.Jr~m the req of this section shall i ~ ~ ~ if r ~ for the project £ occur v hid'er consumption as a whole h le is eq~..s~r to equal to or less ~han what would f th standards w,'"`ar strictly applied, in s adC„2siVd 7 to meeting the criteria fir' 1 n,.r, u'...05ta...,.. x-r es.1l, :..1n t.6 the Site Development and Design Standards, yaw iance. , , landscaping shall be maintained In good condition, or otherwise r _p 11 d the rope ty owner, dead plants must be replaced within 180 ass o discovery, Replacement plant'Ing consistent with are approve plan does not require separate City approval, 27 i PROJECT NARRATIVE/ FINDINGS 10/5/2016 Rogue Credit Union -Ashland Branch 18.4.4.040 Recycling and Refuse Disposal Areas -,s--_ -T _ . All residential, E z s `"mrsrc*.1€i. n d~..t manufacturing developments 1.3 d h~ are subject tom''~.1 ch°:~~1~t...r r,' _ a'~i$ =°~a;4a ~i 8.5.2 Site- Design t , shall j provide an opportunity-to-recycle site for use of ft 3y,rr Review . occupants, .al ir 2, Co ieroial, Commercial cial e£ e p£,,e3 8 having a refuse i; - hall provide a site eqi; greater size adjacent t or with access comparable t the refuse receptacle t a £.lomr- mat ria soi,ec£ed b .rye local sanitary service franchisee under its on-route collection c, for p rhos s of recycling COMPLIES: Enclosure for two dumpsters is provided for on Lot 1. es ~§'ccc.~~s and s§ £a3 be located tous,'~ ,.3 Areas. Recycling and refuse disposal areas to >a- € r i~_ € 3,.x!= not be a. p£aLr+,fia within any required front yard or required landscape aiela. COMPLIES: Truck access to the refuse and recycling area is available via the north PTM driveway and exits via the 12 feet wide exit lane on the west side of Lot 2. C~ a n . ,r € ,.s wf1€,..: ,„7 e disposal area scS-.ow $iPo shall be pro,,, t..e pu, ..?a2t to ".z ',.riun -,a 18,4.. , ?`)1, ;.6, , COMPLIES: Disposal area will be surrounded on three sides with a minimum six ft. high masonry brick wall and will be enclosed by two powder coated/ screened metal gates. 18.4.4.050 Outdoor Lighting Vii: .,e ski ,b~ot.dn . i £ry i,.s 4d'3i levels o t.d £ outdoor §[~j £t~ §`4. qq~ regulations requiring adequate l ! 7 " i'spillover §L~ adjacent onto properties ii ti ? is i $ z,fig light, Applicability, All ouo 'r; P's t' lighting c't to the requirements € °t£ is section, ",v"' r ed 1,0 1 v 7 p.17 `+a d t i'-w`' a L LJ s ec. 1J td I , t NF j or Type £ review, the approval authority . may 1 as + ".~s eci,fic,l r lii~i_ ,~io€€ ~ ' condition of ro l t protect ti'~public .~r ~ ~ e0.' specific.,, lighting ~~in ~ levels health, , a - w3 ni ~ guideline, lighting levels shall be no greater than necessary to provide for lighting, pe§est 'IF -i safety, p. op ,'l~iv£ s ~iv identification, ~ and 1'f-!me prevention, All outdoor € ~ , streetlia s shall comply with she ollowii standards, . Arrange l` al lighting direct ill€,£ ' ~i'~it ~a~, ~ o, ~ a ~ au=nt ~ Arrange and insa~ ; ~iioia~£r ~ there is ; ~o , , residential WILL COMPLY. All lighting will be directed downward or shielded to eliminate direct illumination onto adjacent residential properties to the east, west, and north. Provide t of n greater than 14 et in height for pedestrian (Pedestal- or §et f io illuminating -alk way` e for ~ l _ _ d inside bo€l -s lighting g i an alternative '~t;.`velo s but ;L not c§~.>'ic s z.er.,et ~ right-of-way. 1 ~C located ii 1 ,te a a :I, COMPLIES: Lighting for pedestrian areas will be with low bollards or lighting wall mounted onto the building. Wall lighting will be directed downward onto the walking surface. fi standard placed over 1 t''~'r sidewalk or walkway, i' is `;$t;in minimum vertical 3, leie e a lia clea e of eight feet, COMPLIES: Proposed City approved on site light standards to be used are 14 feet to underside of fixture. . Install light fixtures where they will not obstruct public ways, drip#ew s, or walkways. 'kNher light standard most be placed within a walkway, maintain an unobstructed pedestrian through 28 i PROJECT NARRATIVE/ FINDINGS 10/5/2016 Rogue Credit Union -Ashland Branch zone per 'mer n with ? bi ~3 ~ (ADA) compliance, COMPLIES: Light fixtures are located on the building or in landscape planter areas and will not be located in any pedestrian pathway in compliance with ADA standards. direct n to 5. Except permitted for signs, ioutdo light i : ; - Low ~ ~ a and have full h e ; ~ minimize light exCessive adjaacent, r°° , For v 'e-flight require-n- ,s, see subsection 8A, , 0. . 1 & g _ Jut door A 6 a hall b rye + d 3 _ condition or otr placed the grope a? c e _ i er, WILL COMPLY: Owner agrees to maintain lighting in good operating condition. 29 I PROJECT NARRATIVE/ FINDINGS 10/5/2016 Rogue Credit Union -Ashland Branch Chapter 18.4.5 - Tree Preservation and Protection 18.4.5.030 Tree Protection Tree Protection Plan. tree protection plan shall be approved b the to Advisor concurrent with applications for Type Type II, and Type Ili planning actions, ! tree removal is proposed, a i r e Removal Permit pursuant t chapter 18,5 i ma£ be ~ _ , COMPLIES: See sheet L2 "TREE REMOVAL AND PROTECTION PLAN" and attached "Tree Removal Permit Request" prepared by Alan Pardee of Covey Pardee Landscape Architects dated September 27, 2016. Trey Protection lay b r ~v~rem n , i order t obtain approval of a 'r e Protection plan an applicant shall submit a 9a? 1 £ne City, w3. 6c clearly depicts all trees 5o be preserved ?`1d.~/o§r removed n the site, The plan rrs . be drawn sr,'< ar ;.,s include the f~.,a de the fv~~$i , on t.m ~ ,.~•.,s o -.a ,,,a~i.~t~y< tg , a€ A ~ I I cav tIo species, s 9 ry; ' r h teem` o ?..o, it it i f&-of the t,t'e and is «L 1 cafi ~~i i the drip lire of each i tr'- 3. inventory of the health are. hazard each a.9 ee on site, and , om mend a. n , _ cur for each free. L i of r proposed rams, water, nd sto rr'.I F rinri atio,-,and other ~t~~ existing ~ sanitary ~ ~ ~ and ~ ~~~x II -sand easements. , u~~a on of dray wells. dram; lines n - e trenches, r r, , tors r~ of r ; sted and existing : r , 7. G change or Cut and ill during ~ n f : co isT c i n, x's , and rop ed impervious surfaces, maintaining the approved tree protection 10, Location and type of tree c,o ctiors measures to be installed per section 1138, 5,' 30 C. COMPLIES: See sheet L2 "TREE REMOVAL AND PROTECTION PLAN" and Site Plans on sheets A4 and A5. Sheets A4 and A5 show the trees to be removed as heavy dashed lines relative to proposed paving and site work. C. TrA_~ - E _;urea Req ui red. E i! -fr oin a minimum of s feet tall ith steal posts placed r farther i re inn fey, a p, r t, shall be Installed a'I' the edge of the - protection zone or dr piir , whichever is greater, and at the boundary of any open spa., trac,_-, riparian areas, or conservation easements 'that, abet the parcel being evel aped, he fencing shall u h with t al undisturbed grade, en no ai is a r , , 3 Approved signs shall b attached to the h;: . link e° i sating that inside the t protection zone not b disturbed unless ; r approval has been obtained from the Staff visor for the project, . N construction activity shad occur within the tree protection zone, Including, but not limited to dumping or storage of materials such as building supplies, soil, east items, equipment.., or pare vehicles. 5, The tree protection zone shall remain free o chemical) injurious materials and liquids such as paints, thinners, cleaning solutions, petroleum products. concrete or dry/ wall excess, are construction debris or run-off. 30 i PROJECT NARRATIVE/ FINDINGS 10/5/2016 Rogue Credit Union -Ashland Branch 6, No excavation, trenching, grading, root pruning, o t other activity shall occur with the tree protection zone unless approved by the Staff Advisor, ~xc as otherwise terr-rnie~ by the Staff ze;i'. all required tree protection measures set forth `n this section shall be hall y--'~ instituted any eel pme activities, ..>b_ t not ~ in aprior o :.~6 including, l3~~it.~- ',.d v to clearing, grading, excavation, i.JI ~...;mo~#iLsL.t° work, -..-c€ i ,Gigg be removed but • € y ,..zft*,e'. ci?let{i of all cHs6 L=csi'i'"? activity, including landscaping and irrigation installation. WILL COMPLY: Chain link fencing will be used, installed, and maintained according to these seven requirements. Dc_ The 4 applicant € of 'i'ce' with any construction a-,,'., except installation of ° @S fi t~! the «.}.4 =J approved installation „ I 4 4.r --4.~& 1<a i.k . 33n control 1 res d City has inspected and t e .,ad a o- ~ x = ~_Ir ; -„3 n3=,a° *d issued b the ty tree .-rotec~.sti=,.1a measures al a building and/or grading es <<a~..<d~.r<.~ *<a . ~ protection _ 3permit has WILL COMPLY..- Applicant agrees to this requirement and will ensure that General Contractor hired for the work complies with this requirement also. 18.4.5.040 Performance Security The --,,iLy L may require he permsittee to t , ti t Ity bond, o t ,er suitable collateral t f, by 'it y i, T } ''tor p p _ and of the the tr` rate I m< t 3 er- b the City r d Vii? is ,.o , ensuring ti 8 s sati ,~*.r ~~.d'i w ~ I i e.. maintenance .:1 ~ protection plan. Suitable collateral m be in the o of letters o credit, re it t of deposit, cash bond, or bonds issued an 'insurance company legall`} doing urine in the State of Oregon, WILL COMPLY: Applicant agrees to this requirement if the City requests posting of a bond. 18.4.5.050 Verification Permit A. 11 site has rec&i .eve:)pmeInt approval through ca planning action ~ Set with the standards of this chapter, then er [l Permit ill be required for those tree proved for removal 3 I htra` process, To , =ai n r [ ific io Permit, an applicant must clearly identify on the -,)per+Ly t e trees t be removed by pink tagging tape around each tree n submitting L J, plan indicating the cation the r _ d trees. Vegetation four- to i }'~-~iinChe B that i to ay _ "taff d isor ea ire the it is ,removed shall also be marked w . tagging tape, he footprint o k, ` e de`tc.l `gyp ment o be s kt- t allow for accurate verification the permit elplication. ~ m; t~,3ch ~ tl~ i St:-'. visor then verify that the ' ~ requested ree~; match the site plan approved ~ _ planning ,,t,n, ThJ C#is shall :dire the applicant to t,"-.i-gte for the removal of each st~e!~ ~S,. it to section 5 7 050 Such - ifi tip' re-q i, shall be condition of lg<dropa of the o! , lo merit permit, ~f$}^ S Lk 1s e,s..r~~ to 1WILL COMPLY.- Applicant agrees to this requirement and will flag the trees to be removed and stake the building footprint if requested. B. Verification 'Permits s~ e required ~ the i su e of an i excavation i building .a.shall t~prior o .J t the 1s e ; • s 3 and, prior to any site disturbance and/or storage of materials the subject prop , 31 I PROJECT NARRATIVE / FINDINGS 10/5/2016 Rogue Credit Union - Ashland Branch Chapter 18.4.6 - Public Facilities 18.4.6.040 Street Design Standards A, ~eY : R ~ i -a -e~°~'~r t`i`~~ f oil ky~ sh all onfo °m t the pg ; on a C( . r y a Ni yd s-E iS f es gf f r. r 3, as sum . arize in I able 18. .6, 4O. , f Ld 1 ~ l"*lutaf1 t rd. COMPLIES: Proposed seven ft. park row and eight ft. sidewalk along Ashland Street have been designed to meet the requirements detailed in x8.3.12 - Site Development Design Overlays, Pedestrian Places and the diagram on page 3-180 of the Ashland Municipal Code titled "Ashland Street Future Improvement ~des s'=m 4 r r W f ~ z f ,rt a ~ z Y "'-a 3~z ,~.i -,r +..J~-.- = g~_...,....v L Nil - K. f 1I d " 001 1 , Puy oo e and Intent. D-° i" Standards, Improvements in the e Ashland Street right-of-way shall t the following n ds, 1. La as aoe azedi a , NOT APPLICABLE: No median required. Island was recently installed by the City directly to the south of the proposed building on Lot 2. , Sidewalk. a, A five _ eight-foot wide minimum area for street e e placement -e fired (e.g,, five feet wide for street tree eels, seven to eight feet wide for park rows'), COMPLIES: Proposed seven ft. park row along Ashland Street has been designed to meet the requirements detailed in x8.3.12 - Site Development Design Overlays, Pedestrian Places and the diagram on page 3-180 of the Ashland Municipal Code titled "Ashland Street Future Improvement b. Trees shall be drought tolerant and hardy, placed with root barriers and tree grates to City specifications, e in landscaped strips with ground cover, COMPLIES: Proposed street trees are to be Halka Zelkova species and will be installed according to City specifications. 32 I PROJECT NARRATIVE/ FINDINGS 10/5/2016 Rogue Credit Union -Ashland Branch concrete sidewalk street tree mix to tern-foot wide t E-. ir.-'d or scored sidewalk in addition "I,,) ~ e area (total widths wo i, be a minimum o eight feet), COMPLIES: Eight ft. wide sidewalk proposed across the entire 219 feet of frontage on Ashland Street. Applicant will discuss with City Planning options for texturing or scoring the concrete sidewalk and will specify and install agreed upon selection. Pedestrian sua=,, d light, fixtures place in ; t street tree rip. COMPLIES: Street lights will be proposed and approved by City Planning. Current proposal is to install City recommended light standard by "Sternberg". e Specially designed street name signs, NOT APPLICABLE: No new streets are proposed. ecial Pedestrian Areas, a, Pedestrian refuges protected from weather shall be placed near transit stops or at internals o 400 feet in the corridor it no transit stop is nearby. ° , Textured - masonry paving shall be used be in these area to . u~ n_ ate ~ concrete r ~ fin.s. p;~i.gf e" S ter n from; other areas, e c, Stre:am,t furniture 'e,g, benches, yunita ;ns. ne~~~' ~ .1 ramk shall be e included for the drinking ,~~~r . comfort and convenience of the edestrian, 18.4.6.060 Public Use Areas A. ra M `:Ion of Public Use Areas. VVhere a proposed park; playground. trail, or other public use sh n a plan adopted b the Cite i located in whole or i cart in subdivision, the City may require the dedication o this area to the City=, or the designation of this area on the final plat for future icatio} to t', provided that try mt of the deveipment on the City par system roughly proportional to the dedication, conforms to the requirements o this ordinance, and is consist Mt with applicable parks and trailer master plans, NOT APPLICABLE: Not a subdivision. 18.4.6.070 Sanitary Sewer and Water Service Improvements. A. ; . _ ® _ : r ° s Required. All new development i required t connect t city water n s n tan sE er systems. sitar' sewer and eater si stern improvements must be installed to serve new development and to connect developments t existing mains, considering the City's adopted facility -nter plans and applicable standards. Where streets are required t be stubbed to the edge c the development, sewer and water system improvements, and other utilities, rest also be st 'o ,th the streets; except where alternate rate liC '1 n ) are fro' b the City Engineer, COMPLIES: Buildings will connect to existing 6" sanitary sewer lateral to runs to an existing sanitary sewer line in Parker Street to the north of Lots 1 & 2. City water will be connected to the 8" ductile iron pipe water main in Ashland Street. and Water Plan Approval. Development permits for sewer and water improvements in +the public right-of-way or public easements must be approved by the Cite Engineer. WILL COMPLY.• Plans for sanitary sewer and water improvements will be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer (Dew Engineering) and submitted for review and approval by the City Engineer. C. Over-Sizing. The approval authority may require as a condition o approval that sewer and water lines serving new development be sized to accommodate future development within the area as projected by the applicable facility master plans; and the City may authorize other cost-recovery or 33 i PROJECT NARRATIVE / FINDINGS 10/5/2016 Rogue Credit Union -Ashland Branch cost-sharing methods as provided under state law. AGREE: Applicant agrees to over size improvements if over sizing is required by City. , inadequate Facilities. Development permit may be restricted or rationed by the City where a deficienicy exists in § the existing water or sewer system that cannot be rectified by the development and which if not rectified will result in a threat to public health or safety, surcharging of existing mains, orviolations o state' or federal standards pertaining t operation o domestic water and sewerage Lreatment sy3L- is. AGREE: Applicant agrees to abide by restrictions if imposed. 18.4.6.080 Storm Drainage and Surface Water Management Facilities X ---,n Drainage Dian App: Development p rr is for storm drainage and sur ac va eir e plans must bin r. r xisl 'the City Ei airy r and i ildi o Official, 11-1 menl its and tl r ilities s; ` sized to r of U P! fie, 1 drainage fad v to future n 'r r drainage are-, ; . n t h ¢`oiimoc~ ate axis Asti ear =i r !s; .~ii ~ s adopted f El- r plans and a plicaol standards. Such a iliti a shall s ~ to - be bix r v and approval h End' er WILL COMPLY: Plans for storm drainage and surface water management will be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer (Dew Engineering) and submitted for review and approval by the City Engineer. The current proposal for storm water management for Lot 2 is to detain all storm water on site for percolation into the soil. A treatment / detention trench is proposed along the entire length of the north property line of Lot 2. Overflow will be pumped up to the curb in Ashland Street. B. Effect on Downstream I J i i , a City n i''eE that the additional runoff resulting from the de,; : . .i ld ver. ad an existing drainage i ' the Cite' wall Withhold approval ,~a., `x ~e ~ev1rt'l provisions have been made f~ r imp, ient of the ~;lo~men i~~; ~ ~ %~'~ri', M _ ~ r f ; condition o until provisions have- br?.~~a o been ~ a storage 09 additional runoff caused y t,,e potential development in accordance with City standards, AGREE: Applicant agrees to abide by restrictions if imposed. v----- The autriorit may require as a condition of approval ;,a the storm drainage system serving nE development shall be sized t accommodate future development within the area as FYI t .a'r r b' x 3 i¥ma ~.eplC and # t,.:iy s tr or§ Yr cost recover or i oi_ .1;,~ applicable t t' .se P'$ ; Ii*. methods as $.1, $ Sv € i i t' 1i=,dld, under state law, Cost-- AGREE: Applicant agrees to oversize improvements if over sizing is required by City. i" w v 44aay-..ts "a'Y .s u~~:_ 3.~ v a. 'n -r- ~'a 'C's 18.4.6.090 Utilities The following standards apply to new development her extension of electric power or communication lies is required, A. General Provision. The developer is responsible for coordinating his or per de elopi rent plan with the applicable utility prodders and paying for the e tensiontinstallatioi` o utilities not otherwise mailable to the subject property, 34 I PROJECT NARRATIVE/ FINDINGS 10/5/2016 Rogue Credit Union -Ashland Branch Utility transmission and 3u i;~i lines, poles, an towers r~'a exceed height ~ ~ limits , ~ -~i~.~. othervilse provided for in thi's )t for wireless communication systems as provided in chapter 18.4. 10 and in she A ~ C provided 'in chapter 18.3. T , Underground Utilities,. , Ge lei al Requirement, The requirements of t utility service provider ust b met, All 1 lines i new developments, ri ions', and ubdivi i-is including but, not limited those s n s;~..~ facilities, t placed underground, -E t for ';.electric, oim'nicati s„ lighting. r=_ m t° g r pa below, _,,p1 provided for , 1 . .6.~j ;9& D, COMPLIES: All utility extensions will be installed below grade. 35 I PROJECT NARRATIVE/ FINDINGS 10/5/2016 Rogue Credit Union -Ashland Branch Chapter 18.4.7 - Signs 18.4.7.030 General Sign Regulations Placement of Signs. dear Residential. ? I ' shall be lO aie a commercial or industrial zone so that _ i primarily visible only from residential zone, COMPLIES: The two signs proposed for Lot 2 will not be visible from the adjacent residentially zoned properties to the north. Both signs will face to the south; one on the canopy at the drive-thru and one on the building facing Ashland Street. 3, Near Driveways. No sign or portion of thereof shall be erected "pis yen feet of driveways £e. ~ ~C~'r~Is less ss ~ Lt 's= feet, in height pursuant L- ~.a the vision to t u clearance area j ~ the n l 2 ~ t in .c unless requirements in seeCtion NOT APPLICABLE: No sign is proposed within ten fee of any driveway. r~ k4: S r, r rb ra; r+..s C. _ b Signs. No sign or portion ' r. of shall ~ placed o that obstructs an i ,e room c, stairway, o arl~~ flppe-I interfere- 'Y,,uman ~ l iro~~ i ig any window t of any located above the first floor of any building obstructs any or required exit from any building; or o a r ;'s any required light or ventilation, - .a 18.4.7.050 Prohibited Signs , s otwi testa-idir section 18,4,7,040 Exempted Signs, and except as provided by section 18,4,-7 Government Signs, the following signs and sign elements are prohibited, COMPLIES: No sign proposed for Lot 2 is prohibited by this section. 18.4.7.080 Commercial, Health Care, Employment, Croman Mill and Industrial Zones Signs in the C-1, HC, E-1. 'M, and M- zones, excepting the C- 1-D one and the Freeway Sign Overlay, l all oonforrr to the following regulations, A. Speciall Provisions 1. ron acie, The number and use o signs allowed by virtue of a given lousiness frontage shall be plate only upon such business frontage. DEEMED TO COMPLY: Two signs proposed for RCU on Lot 2 will face Ashland Street. One of the signs is proposed to be installed on the canopy over the drive-thru and while not technically placed on the frontage, it may be exempt as it will not be visible from Ashland Street. It will face the parking area and will be blocked from visibility on Ashland Street by the proposed building. 36 I PROJECT NARRATIVE/ FINDINGS 10/S/2016 Rogue Credit Union -Ashland Branch . Aqqregate Number of Sions, The aggregate number of signs for each business shall be two signs for each business frontage. COMPLIES: Two signs are proposed for RCU for Lot 2. sigh established fished b ar~ located Irea of Signs, T , aft gax•.., a, of on ~ all rg street frontage, shall not a area equal to one square foot of sign area for each lineal frontage, floot of street r„ shall n F include nameplates, temporary real estate and construction signs, COMPLIES: Lot 1 frontage is proposed to be 137 feet so the maximum not to exceed of 60 sq. ft. applies. The two proposed signs will total 59 sq. ft. (35 + 24). -I --J Wall i s Nu "mber. Two sS ns per building Frontage shall perm I ed for as each business or group of businesses occupying s,, -ale common space or suite i lieu of a wall sign, COMPLIES: Two wall signs are proposed for RCU for Lot 2. , at business frontages shall be permitted one square foot ~ ~ of ,i-f"i , pie Buildings ~ t~~vx ~ two or fsr h§ business t re aacr lineal foot o ass , o n t a , s 3 , t di-[~-$ n~4oms' `^Y,`, r: "r,tv''s''"v -a=-,-,- _ ..c~-- ,,.r ~ `u~""` . The a single building, shall of exceed 060 square 'J 1.~:.3 "v` la'+,I es fri?.-+.c~~..o -~,a tlaa s t!-lt~°e ~ x,31 more, on ~ s-~ .rte feet, comply with the all of t~ ..,=,.o~ ~ e,°3 ' in chapter 1 , lona la ~'et - E. $ . the ~ . ~ rie station, and Design, COMPLIES: Two signs are proposed for the single business of Rogue Credit Union on Lot 2 and will total 59 sq. ft. a, pedestrian entrance designeed to be attractive and functional, and open to the public uric; all business hours, COMPLIES: An eight ft. wide recess in the street facing fagade leads to a pair of double doors and serve as the pedestrian entrance to the building proposed on Lot 2. This entrance will remain open during all business hours. b. The pedestrian entrance ss gall be accessed a walkway ~,onne lid from ~`te~ to a public sidewalk, COMPLIES: The pedestrian entrance is accessed directly from the sidewalk on Ashland Street. 3, Pi. "f:)"' txCe p for marquee or awning s p';ec?.i;g sign may project a maximum of two lee"- the face of ~ the bu 'ld' thi . g" a,-, . ~'+'ed, provided portion o the t b, rte, , ~ , to which ~ ~ the lowest ~ t ~;h , ..f m.z; %t~ ct _ u¢ sign i at wast eight feet ® aboa `'e grade, r y ~JY`~v? f,.ir' -r than h? feet can only project `a f~~ y roje`..,r -.s t four inches, NOT APPLICABLE: No projecting signs are proposed for RCU for Lot 2. 4, i Extension Above loo r. Signs ~ east.~ 1in.._ of ee othe building, f~n:sis not ~,r,~; c above or NOT APPLICABLE: No signs will project above the cornices at the roof. C. Per. . _ round Signs g Number, One sl sell permitted for each lot with sheet frontage in excess of 50 lineal feet, Corner lots can count both sheet frontages in determining the lineal feet of the sheet frontage blut only one ground sign is permitted on corner lots, Two or more parcels of less than 0 feet may he combined for purposes of meeting the foregoing standard, , Area. Signs shall not exceed an area of one sure foot for each two lineal feet of street frontage, with a maximum area of 6 square feet per sign, , Placement, Signs shall he placed so that no sign or portion thereof shall extend beyond and, 37 i PROJECT NARRATIVE/ FINDINGS 10/5/2016 Rogue Credit Union -Ashland Branch property line of the premises one which such sign is located, Signs on corner properties shall also comply with the vision clearance area requirements E section i 8,2,4,040, , height, No ground sign shall be i excess of flee feet above grade, Permitted rein or aruee ns er,..itte Portable u it ems: i #,.e Three imen i, .A ns NOT APPLICABLE. No awning, marquee, portable business, or three dimensional signs proposed. 18.4.7.100 Construction and Maintenance Standards A. ri is of Cor ti , Commercial and Industrial Zones. / .ll signs and their supporting members shall be constructed of non-combustible materials or fire-retardant treated wood which maintains its fire-resistive ,~alit£es when tested in accordance with he rain an weathering tests of the Building Code, unless otherviise provided ~ in this section, tin this WILL COMPLY.- All signs will be constructed of non-combustible steel, aluminum, and plastic. 3. Non-Treated Slans, All wall, around, marauee, and projecting signs of twenty souare feet or less may be constructed of non-treated wood, NOT APPLICABLE: No wooden signs are proposed. + n - - Si `~€c.r rs, All e from within ,d with Iasa tic.=.3s approved Illuminated i ~C?'~s : m;'gated ~'h~,~;~ within : ~'€~1' be Ban~e: by the Building Code, WILL COMPLY.- Directly illuminated wall signs will be faced in plastics approved by the building department. , 'lass, All lass used in signs small be shatter-resistant or covered by a shat-ter-resistant ma1. e ral, NOT APPLICABLE: No glass signs are proposed. r , OOd. 5` od in contact with the around shall be foundation-grade redwood, fos ndat on- rte "e ,.~f'J~ b ~~..~ed ~;L': an cecar, all ° ~A 7od cypress, or any species of-'wood that been re , ~re-t, t~~rvP~-. ;b` ~,i,i- approved preservative, Trim and backing strips may be constricted of wood, B, Construction Methods ill signs shall be constructed of such materials or treated in such manner that normal weatherinf will not harm, deface or otherwise affect the sign, WILL CO,}MPLY.- All signs will be constructed of durable steel, aluminum, and/or plastic. , All i tter , fi're ar'i similar , ?~ar ssaae elem--r?t,s sell be safer and securely attached t to ~ the sign structure, WILL COMPLY.- All signs will be constructed of non-combustible steel, aluminum, and plastic , All :signs shall be designed and constructed to resist the applicable wind loads set forth to the Building Code, C. Maintenance. 38 I PROJECT NARRATIVE/ FINDINGS 10/5/2016 Rogue Credit Union -Ashland Branch Chapter 18.4.8 - Solar Access 18.4.8.020 Applicability Lot Classifications. All lets shall meet tl e provisos this section and will be classified accrording, t the following formulas and table, 21 Standard B Lots, s with north-south l dimension that is mss" than that calculated rm Ala l but greater than that calculated b l'-ormul ll. any lot zoned C-1, E-1, e M- and of e t by 18.4.8.020,13, or let riot abutting residential zone t the north, shall be required to ~ r e~''a setback standard 18.4.8.030.B. definition ~ a tin ICJ 3. ,.~I' 1C.;,-t taa ! t imen ion ii t '+s" B in S See s [ o ~.ai L~?"`+.z~,.~~1 18';3' , LOT 1- WILL COMPLY: Lot 1 abuts residentially zoned property to the north and is subject to Standard B. Future designs for Lot 1 will be required to meet this solar standard. LOT 2 - NOT APPLICABLE: Lot Ito the north of Lot 2 is zoned C-1 therefor is not required to meet solar requirement. rdons. hitect ral r ecti s. Rooftop r l £te 1 1 features maximum of four feet in su -l as chimneys and vent pipes, and light poles and flag poles shall be exempt from the setback st -isr s in section 8. ,8.0 , I c, les Any lot in the C_ -D, C? , any l' M-C zones, and proper-ties in the C-1 zone not abutting a residential zone, shall be exempt from the sett c standards in section 11 8.4,8,0 3)0, APPLIES TO LOT 1: Lot 1 to the north of Lot 2 is zoned C-1 thereforis not required to meet solar requirement. 39 PROJECT NARRATIVE / FINDINGS 10/5/2016 Rogue Credit Union -Ashland Branch Chapter 18.5.2 - Site Design Review 18.5.2.010 Purpose The purpose and intent of this chapter i t regulate he mariner in which land in the City i used and developed, t reduce adverse effects on surrounding property owners and he general public, t create a business environment that i safe and comfer able, to further energy conservation efforts within she City#, to enhance the environment for walking, cycling,, n mass transit use, and t ensure Sh is high quality development i maintained throughout the (_"I 18.5.2.020 Applicability }e v`i eY fitr~ following r ~rl Review ~ required sa~:~`~ ~ of project proposals. Sit A. Commercial, Industrial, Non-Residential, and _ Uses. Site Design Review applies the following },1g types., J non-residential s and project proposals, including proposals for -,om er ial tai r~9S.R a industrial, iil. and ]]'~ap(e us%q^ ~ projects, pursuant section 18 '"0 Review Procedures, f FPIR to i.<t,~7 , ~,2 ~~.J1, Ne,,v structure = r ion , or expansions in C-1 P_-'I, , W and M-1, zones, APPLIES: Project non-residential in the C-1 zone. 18.5.2.030 Review Procedures B. Detail Site Review Overlay. In the Detail Site e ie- overlay, net a structures or additions greater '10,000 square feet. gross floor area, or longer than 00 "met in length or width are subject to than p ii review, APPLIES: Project falls within the Detail Site Review Overlay. 18.5.2.040 Application Submission Requirements The following information i required for Site Design Review application submittal, except where the Staff Advisor determines that ~ some some information ? n pertinent an therefore is not required, A. General Submission Requirements. Information required for Type I or Type II review, as elmen ~ tA✓ € applicable "se..a sections ,a, , 1 t ~ .,s, ,0150 and 18.51.060'), including but not limited to written a t::E" ± nd ^I of criteria standards, or ~.,n~~=s' ,''f` the application satisfies each c and # ~ s relevant ~.,and ~ B, Site Desic - i addition the ae ral information required or elite Design Re i~.,v~y the i; the olie't~sin 'Information. ,~iia=,~ Ana=~ provide Basic Plan Information, COMPLIES: See project drawings. . Site Anal;psis Ma COMPLIES: See sheet A2. 3, Proposed Site Plan COMPLIES: See sheets A4 and A5. , Architectural rani nos COMPLIES: See sheets A1, A7, A8, A9, and A10. . Preliminarv ra ina and rainacie Plan COMPLIES: See sheet C1. 40 I PROJECT NARRATIVE/ FINDINGS 10/5/2016 Rogue Credit Union -Ashland Branch . Erosion Control Plan. COMPLIES: See sheet C1 . Laridscaoe and lr rioation Plans COMPLIES: See sheet L 1. Irrigation plans are deferred until building plan submittal. 18.5.2.050 Approval Criteria Underlying one, The proposal complies with all o the applicable provisions of the underlying zone art 18.2"), including but not limited to, building and yard setbacks, lot area and dimensions, densi and floor area, lot coverage, building height, building orientation architecture, and other applicable standards. COMPLIES: Proposal complies with all applicable provisions for both Lots combined and reviewed as one large parcel. Applicant is proposing a "shadow" plan for future building on Lot 1 with a building area transfer from Lot 2 to Lot 1 to demonstrate how the minimum FAR of 50% will be met over both lots. Lot 1 will have an FAR of 62.4% and Lot 2 an FAR of 24.7% for a combined FAR for both lots of 50.6%. The applicant is asking for this transfer in order to build a one-story building on Lot 2. Banking is going through major changes and one of those changes is the reduction is the size of branch buildings. Rogue Credit Union only has a need for a 4500 sq. ft. branch in Ashland and will maintain the existing branch downtown. Staff has suggested that RCU "have other multi-story buildings elsewhere in the valley". These multi-story buildings are already owned or include the new RCU headquarters in south Medford. RCU is not building two story branch banks anywhere in the valley and would have no use for a second story at this location. Overlay ones; The proposal complies with applicable overlay zone requirements (part 18,3"), COMPLIES: Proposal complies with the Detail Site Review Overlay and the Pedestrian Place Overlay as demonstrated in these findings and the project drawings. C. Site Development and Design t -,-,-s. The proposal complies with the applicable Site Development o Design Standards o part 18A, except as provided b subsection below. COMPLIES: Proposal complies with the Site Development and Design Standards as demonstrated in these findings and the project drawings. i y Facilities. The proposal complies with the applicable standards in section 18A.6 Public ~`it , urban storm that facilities sewer, ~ ~ ~5 aoilities, and that adequate capacity of City i for w.~ electricity, drainage, pave access t and throughout the properly, and adequate transportation can and will, be provided to the subject property, COMPLIES: Adequate capacity of City facilities exists adjacent to the site as shown on sheet A6. An 8" water line is in Ashland Street. An existing 6" sanitary sewer line runs through an adjacent property to the north into the sewer line in Parker Street. Electric service is provided by a transformer and vault at the midway point of the westem property line. Storm water will be treated and detained on site with overflow to be pumped up to Ashland Street. Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards. The approval authority may approve, exceptions to the Site Development and Design Standards of part . if h circumstances i in either subsection or , below, are found to exist. a4;4,z „i }n v R 4 3" a I`3 7 fz - /<~Ci~T°v ~ t..a f✓ 4 3 s 2J e i < 3 t ➢ ~ s I 5 P's ` < 5 t 5. I w 5 k.t - °.f 9"'<+ i ~ <n Sri r. r^, ~t ~ t. P`1°3 :P,t112131`~_ 1 41 i PROJECT NARRATIVE/ FINDINGS 10/5/2016 Rogue Credit Union -Ashland Branch , here is n demonstrable dl is l y i meeting the specific requirements, but granting the exception will re?.,~ ~ design that equally or better achieves v:. 1 stated purpose of the Site Development and Design Standards, 42 I PROJECT NARRATIVE/ FINDINGS 10/5/2016 Rogue Credit Union -Ashland Branch Chapter18.5.3- Land Divisions and Property Line Adjustments 18.5.3.020 Applicability and General Requirements AApplicability, The requirements for partitions and subdivisions apply, as , ' . r Proper ao'ostmerts are modifications to loo lines or parcel boundaries that d not result, in 3. line j the creation of new lots. APPLIES: Proposal requests property line adjustment that does not result in creation of new lots. Lot 1 is to be enlarged by 2,977 sq. ft. and Lot 2 is to be reduced by the same amount. (See attached Planning Summary and sheet A3. wrr r t f~'r r i r r+ r;citr Ott 4-.-4, .e,'- Land Survey. Before any action taken pursuant to this ordinance that wool cause aad . =meats or realignment of property limes, required yard, areas, or setbacks, the exact lot lines shall be validated by location of official survey pins or bat a survey performed by a licensed surveyor, by COMPLIES: See attached "As-Built Site Survey" prepared by Polaris Land Survey. -p_ ..~..r.v~ - R&-Gf- -R4 _~~-c~ va41_4-atn ~3 ~A$~ ' I a^t ~ 1 €a ar~~t li t'~3#^rr P'~ `"~r, Y r° n;~- i ire ~ ^t Amendments. hhe ollow nq minor amendments t subdivisions and partitions are subject t r= ice3`'ste Ciz 5 1 tt Changes to an apr ed a~ r? or condition approval that vial reY Ire ;~ptr ,r0~ do not meet th thresholds for a minor ar> nd ent. Below, are s ect to Chapter 18.5,6 Modifications to Approved Planning Actions. NOT APPLICABLE: Property is not a subdivision or partition. 18.5.3.120 Property Line Adjustments A Property Lire Adjustment is the modification of lot boundary when no lot is created. The Staff Advisor reviews applications for Property Line Adjustments through the Ministerial procedure, per section 18.5.1,040, The ap cation submission and approval process for Property Line Adjustments Is as follows, APPLIES: Proposal includes adjusting two property lines. Submission Requirements. All applications for Property Line Adjustment shall be made on forms provided b the Cite and shall include information required for a Ministerial review, pursuant to section 18,5, l ,040. The application shall include a preliminary lot line map drawn to scale identifying all existing and proposed lot lines and dimensions: footprints and dimensions of existing structures (including accessory structures); location and dimensions of driveways and public and 43 I PROJECT NARRATIVE/ FINDINGS 10/5/2016 Rogue Credit Union -Ashland Branch private streets within or ab Littin the subject lots, location of lands subject to the Ashland l=loodplain Corridor Overlay, e istin fences and walls; and any other information deemed necessary b the Staff Advisor for =ensuring compliance with City codes. The application shall be signed all of the owners as appearing on she deeds of the subject lets, COMPLIES: Submittal includes an "AS BUILT SITE SURVEY, sheet A2 "SITE ANALYSIS MAP"; and A3 "PROPOSED LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT"that provide information required. Application for Property Line Adjustment is attached at end of these findings. . Approval Criteria. The Staff ov,so; shall approve or deny a request for a ,,.pert line adjustment in writing based all the following criteria. i Parcel Creation, No or let is created by ~ the the lot line e adjustment, i ~Y additional parcel COMPLIES: No additional lot is being created by this adjustment. r. I Standards, rt. 3 d" 1 y. ~+n 1 t'% to Lot Except , allowed ,or noncon,ora inn lots, p~irs~iant 'Lo ~:,,ap: r : or required b an overlay zone in part 18...1, all ~s and parcels conform to the lot standards of the applicable zoning district, including lot area. dimensions, setbacks, and coverage, per part 1 8.22, shall not be of the zo ~,1~ 1in if io conform °,r l,., t does not = to the lots standards o~ applicable zoning district, it . a 'tea. less conforming by the property line adjustment, As applicable. all lots and parcels shall identify a buildable area free of building restrictions for physical constraints ,1,e,, flood plain, greater than 35 percent slope, water resource protection zone--,--), COMPLIES: There are no requirements for lot area, width, depth, or lot coverage in the C-1 zone, Detail Site Review Overlay, or Pedestrian Place Overlay. Setbacks to the adjacent residential zone can be met on Lot 1 and are indicated on sheet A4. The entirety of Lot 9 and Lot 2, before and after property line adjustment, can be built upon. The lots do not fall within any physical constraint zones. ~,.~oli tom, ,.as _ 's., , Access Standards, I°'`a3l and All log ad pG~`ic~s conform the standards in ~ section 18a ,v ~.~,J:J ~ #ia~ 1,8~.~ ergici. Area Design. and ~ is and parcels that co not conform the access standards shall not ot of t ~ ~ i~:,> b made less conforming by the oroperty line adjustment, COMPLIES: Both lots meet the required Access Standards as demonstrated in the SITE PLAN on sheet A4 and as described in these findings. Property line adjustment does not make access less conforming and is in greater conformance by the relocation of the driveway aligning with the Ashland Shopping Center driveway across Ashland Street. C. Final operty Line Adjustment 11-he final plat for Property Line Adjustments shall be, prepares as a partition plat any rre f the reqUirern ants of sections 13,0.3.093, WILL COMPLY.• A Final Plat map will be prepared as a partition plat and will comply with section 18.5.3.090. ecordin Property Line Adjustments. , Recording. ',A/iti in 0 days of the City approval of the final plat f or the approval of the preliminary property line adjustment map expires), the applicant shall submit the final plat to Jac son County for signatures of County officials as required by ORS chapter 92, 2. irne unit= The applicant shall submit a cop's of the recorded property line adjustment survey map to the City within 13 days of recording and prier to any application being filed for building permits on the re-configured lots. WILL COMPLY: Applicant will comply with this requirement if Planning Application is approved by the Planning Commission. 44 I PROJECT NARRATIVE / FINDINGS-Supplemental 11/22/2016 Rogue Credit Union -Ashland Branch 18.2.3.130 Dwelling in Non-Residential Zone B. Dwellings in h - and C- zones shall meet all the following standards, 1. If there DEEMED TO COMPLY: The proposed Rogue Credit Union on LOT 2 and the future three buildings on LOT 1 are proposed to have in Residential Use the following (See Planning Summary): - 41% (was 43%) of the parking spaces < 50% 18.2.6.030 Unified Standards for Non-Residential Zones Landscape Area - Minimum % of developed lot area), 15,34 DEEMED TO COMPLY.• The proposed Landscape Coverage for Lots 1 & 2 will be approximately 21.4% (was 24%) of the two lot area. 18.4.2.040 Non-Residential Development A, Purpose and Intent. mmerc al and and employment derv=elopments should have a positive impact upon... Detailed Site Review Standards. , Orientation and Scale, a. Developments shall have a minimum Floor Area Ratio "FAQ) of 0,50, Where a site is one- half an acre or greater n size. the FAR requirement may be met through a phased development plan or a shadow plan that demonstrates how development may he intensified over time to meet the minimum AR, See shadow plan example in Figure 3, ,2,04 , ,1,a, Plazas and pedestrian areas shall count as floor area for the purposes of meeting the minimum FAR.. PHASED DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED: Project shows a phased development with Lot 1 future improvements having an FAR of 62.4% and Lot 2 an FAR of 24.7% for a combined FAR of 50.6% b. Any wall that is within 30 feet of,,. DEEMED TO COMPLY. The south Ashland Street facing fagade has 32.8% (was 21.6%) of the wall area in glazing. The east elevation facing the Plaza I Public Space has 29.4% of the wall abutting the plaza in glazing and the west elevation within 30 feet of the R. O. W has 30.3% glazing. (See sheets A9 & A 10) 18.4.3.030 General Automobile Parking Requirements and Exceptions A. ini umber of Off-Street Automobile Parkin es. 1, to dard Ratios for tnmedile Parking. COMPLIES: Commercial ratio of 11500 sq. feet for Buildings 1-3 on Lot 1 yields a requirement of 22.8 spaces. A Retail ratio of 11350 sq. ft. for Lot 2 yields a requirement of 12.9 spaces. Twelve (was eight) one bedroom and four (was eight) two bedroom apartments requires 25 spaces (was 27). Total spaces required - 63. Total spaces proposed - 64. B. f j -nu umber of Off-Street Automobile Parking paces. COMPLIES: One surplus parking space is proposed for the combined Lot 2 (was Lots 1 and 2). Lot 2 parking provides for 1 (was 7) more spaces than required by the proposed use for the building on 1 I PROJECT NARRATIVE / FINDINGS-Supplemental 11/22/2016 Rogue Credit Union -Ashland Branch Lot 2 and space for three future spaces for Lot 1 Building 3. These spaGeS t444 be shared tn4th the future residential uses in Lot 4 BWdings 1 and 2 in a P~ght day USe SGeparjo and a so t444 the- Reed A9F an on sge deteption P19nd (appr-eximate4e 304- 60 9 Agr- Let 4 that M4 he leGated in the lowest area of the Lot at the noghwest c-erper, This pe-nd r-estr44-S the amount of pa44ng area ava#able to the notth of futuFe bu#d~ngs 4 & 2 on Lot 4. The area behind the future Building 3 19P Lot 4 is 18.4.3.080 Vehicle Area Design Driveways and Turn-Around Design. 1 Parking areas more than sere parking... COMPLIES: Proposed parking areas have 26 ft. (was 20 ft.) driveways leading in to the 24 ft. driveway / backup space between aisles at Lot 2 and 26 ft. at Lot 1 Building 1 and 2. Parking spaces will be striped and adequate aisles are provided so vehicles can enter the street in a forward manner. 4, The width driveways and curb cuts ! h park w and sidewalk area shall b minimized. COMPLIES: Proposed driveways and curb cuts are at the twenty-six (26) ft. (was 20 ft.) minimum required and no larger. E. Parking and Access Construction, L aridscaoi... COMPLIES: Landscape plantings are provided along the entire north edge of the parking area and within five landscape peninsulas on Lot 2. This landscape area surrounding the parking area on Lot 2 is 1654.7 sq. ft. (was 1242.7 sq. ft.) and is 33.0% (was 22.8%)of the 5016.98 sq. ft. (was 5440.8 sq. ft.) parking area. 18.4.3.090 Pedestrian Access and Circulation B. Standards. d. Wala way Design and Construction. ii. Crosswalks, COMPLIES: The crosswalks across the driveway will be paved in concrete to distinguish them from the asphaltic paving of the driveway. Crosswalks will be 26 feet (was 20 ft.) curb to curb. 18.4.4.030 Landscaping and Screening ini . . Landscape Area and overage. COMPLIES: 18.1 % (was 16.2%) of Lot 2 is proposed and 23.0% (was 27.6%) is shown for the future development of Lot 1. Landscape Design a fart Selection. The landscape design and selection o plants shall be based o all o the following standards. a. Tree and Shrub Retention. Existing healthy gees and shrubs shall be retained, pursuant to chapter 18.4.5, Consistent with chapter 18.4.5 Tree Preservation and Protection, credit may be granted toward the landscape area requirements where a protect proposal includes preserving healthy vegetation that Contribute(s) to the landscape design. COMPLIES: Proposal is to retain 16 (was 17) of the existing 24 trees on site (See sheet L2). All 2 PROJECT NARRATIVE / FINDINGS-Supplemental 11/22/2016 Rogue Credit Union -Ashland Branch shrubs are to be removed. 18.4.6.070 Sanitary Sewer and Water Service Improvements. A. Sewers and Water Mains Required. COMPLIES: " Bu#d~qgs wX connect to existing ewer line in Or ke S met to the negh of Lots 4 &2. Buildings on both Lots 1 & 2 will connect to sanitary sewer line in Parker Street via a new 6" sanitary sewer line within the proposed easement on Tax Lot 9800 to the north of Lot. City water will be connected to the 8" ductile iron pipe water main in Ashland Street. 18.5.2.050 Approval Criteria Site Development and Design Standards. The proposal complies with the applicable Site De elo ment and Design Standards of part 18. 4, except as provided b subsection E, below, COMPLIES: Proposal complies with the Site Development and Design Standards as demonstrated in these findings and the project drawings with an exception of meeting the minimum F.A.R. in 18.4.2.040. See E.2. below for justification. Exception to the Site e e - - - t - - Design Standards. The approval authority may approve exceptions to the Site p-nen a Design Standards of pan 18.4 if the circumstances in either subsection or . elow, are found to exist. , There is n demonstrable difficulty it i meetin he specific requirements, but granting the exception ~ ~ a;equally or better {as~iie ~ f the Site result purpose Development and Design an~! _'3. DEEMED TO COMPLY: The following comments respond directly to the "stated purpose" (or Purpose and Intent) outlined at the beginning of the Site Design and review standards for Non- Residential Development 18.4.2.040. Commercial a~i d eyployrni ~s~~ `S 3 t development--- Z to should have si ive Impact upon the $ 7 ~ ~,t £ 3.} `3 . stn esc xar l~`3, buildings unadorned made of concrete block S painted or ~ ~ with t€ ~ '"~r 1~_ b$6,- undesirable ct ~ ~ p on _a x: r^r~ primary colors used to attract attention can n Cl, t an effect £ ion the ~is`^.atree : The proposed building on Lot 2 uses brick and metal paneling and breaks the elevation up with multiple masses. No unadorned concrete block is proposed. Landscaping and site design for commercial and employment zones is somewhat different from that required for residential zones. The requirement for outdoor spaces is much less. The primary function is to improve the project's appearance, enhance the City's streetscape, lessen the visual and climatic impact of parking areas, and to screen adjacent residential uses from the adverse impacts which commercial uses may cause. One area in which Ashland's commercial differs from that seen in many other cities is the relationship between the street, buildings, parking areas, and landscaping. The most common form of modern commercial development is the placement of a small buffer of landscaping between the street and the parking area, with the building behind the parking area at the rear of the parcel with loading areas behind the building. This may be desirable for the commercial use because it gives the appearance of ample parking for customers. However, the effect on the streetscape is less than desirable because the result is a vast hot. open, parking area which is not only unsightly but results in a development form which 3 I PROJECT NARRATIVE / FINDINGS-Supplemental 11/22/2016 Rogue Credit Union -Ashland Branch the City discourages. This project conforms to Ashland's standards by setting the parking to the rear of the building, providing inviting pedestrian spaces adjacent to a new eight feet wide public sidewalk with a park row featuring new street trees and lighting. In addition, the proposed building for Lot 2 has 32.6% of the facade in glazing with the interior visible from the sidewalk at Ashland Street. The alternative desired in Ashland is to design the site so that it makes a positive contribution to the streetscape and enhances pedestrian and bicycle traffic. The eight foot sidewalk, accessible directly to the existing bike lane, with the Public Plaza that includes bike parking, and then direct access to the entry facing Ashland Street, meets the desired alternative. The following development standards apply to commercial; industrial, non-residential and mixed- use development. The application of the standards depends on what area of the City the property is located. Generally speaking, areas that are visible from highly traveled arterial streets and that are in the Historic District are held to a higher development standard than projects that are in manufacturing and industrial area. 4 1 =11 I ~ ~ it ~ ~ ~ CoveyPardee _ ~tt~I ~i''.a. 8, li `sI 3:`l". OR f~t52~J i :t^±1 ar 1015 i ~jrq, (u:r,'p l{e crv 1-1 November 18, 2016 City of Ashland Tree Commission 20 East Main Street Ashland, OR 97520 Re: Tree Removal Permit Request Rogue Credit Union Dear Tree Commission Members, Efforts were made in the planning process of the Rogue Credit Union project to accommodate existing trees. sixteen of the twenty-four existing trees will be retained, with eight removed to accommodate project development. For many years the project site operated as a trailer park. With the central portion of the site primarily without tree cover, with most trees oriented along the perimeter of the site; this configuration allowed retention of the majority of the existing trees, and will benefit the project and the surrounding area. All trees 6" dbh and larger are indicated on the Tree Protection & Removal Plan. Replacement trees will be provided as part of the standard development process in accordance with City of Ashland's Municipal Code. Removal of these trees will not have a significant negative impact on erosion, soil stability, flow of surface waters, protection of adjacent trees, or existing windbreaks. Additionally, the removal of these trees will not have a significant negative impact on the tree densities, sizes, canopies, and species diversity within 200 feet of the subject property. One or more trees will be planted in the new landscape as mitigation for each tree with a dbh 6" or larger that is removed. Tree #125" Black Locust (3 stems). This multi-stem tree is on the west property line and within roughly five feet of the proposed driveway. Black Locust is an exceptionally tough non-native trees species that is likely to survive construction. This tree is part of a row of the same species, and will be retained. Tree #2 25" Black Locust. At the north end of a row, this tree is also located very near the west property line and within roughly six feet of the proposed driveway. Located within a proposed landscape area, this tree will be retained. Tree #3 28" Black Oak (3 stems). Located near the west property line and within a proposed landscape area, this tree will be retained. Tree #4 9" Big Leaf Maple (2 stems). Located within a proposed landscape area, this tree will be retained. Tree #5 20" Siberian Elm. Located within a proposed paved area, this tree needs to be removed to allow for construction. Tree #6 12" Siberian Elm. Located within a proposed landscape area, this tree will be retained. Tree #7 12" Black Oak. Located within a proposed landscape area, this tree will be retained. Tree #8 22" Maple. Located within a proposed landscape area, this tree will be retained. I Tree Removal Permit Request Rogue credit Union September 27, 2016 Tree #9 12" Maple. Located within a proposed landscape area, this tree will be retained. Tree #10 14" Maple. Located within a proposed landscape area, this tree will be retained. Tree #119" Black Oak (2 stems). Located within a proposed landscape area, this tree will be retained. Tree #12 18" Black Oak. Located within a proposed landscape area, this tree will be retained. Tree #13 10" Almond. Located within a proposed landscape area, this tree will be retained. Tree #14 10" Black Oak. Located within a proposed landscape area, this tree will be retained. Tree #15 12''' Black Oak (3 stems). Located within a proposed landscape area, this tree will be retained. Tree #16 9" Almond (2 stems). Located within a proposed landscape area, this tree will be retained. Tree #17 12''' Black Oak (3 stems). Located within a proposed landscape area, this tree will be retained. Tree #18 12" Cedar. Located within the development area, this tree needs to be removed to allow for construction. Tree #19 14''' Maple (2 stems). Although located within a proposed planter, paving, grading, and trenching activities will occur within dripline; the tree would not survive these impacts, and will be removed to allow for construction. Tree #20 30''' Cottonwood. Located within a proposed paved area, this tree needs to be removed to allow for construction. Tree #2124" Silver Maple. Located within the proposed building footprint, this tree needs to be removed to allow for construction. Tree #22 10''' Silver Maple. Located within a proposed paved area, this tree needs to be removed to allow for construction. Tree #23 18"' Siberian Elm. Located within a proposed paved area, this tree needs to be removed to allow for construction. Tree #24 24" Siberian Elm. Located within a proposed paved area, this tree needs to be removed to allow for construction. The Rogue Credit Union project will include many new trees selected for hardiness, beauty, and longevity, and coordinated with the City of Ashland's landscape requirements. Respectfully, Alan Pardee Covey Pardee Landscape Architects Covey Pardee Landscape Architects Page 2 of 2 I %9'8L ~s 9b£`tiS ~s b£L`Lt ~s Zt9`9£ 3Jd83/1O0 3ddOSa81/H + JNlalln8 '101 %ti'LS ~s tZL`6£ ~s 9ZZ`£t ~s S6ti`9Z 1111O13db'pSa8t1H %t'Et ~s 6L0`6 ~s $tS`£ }s t9S`S ~s L8S ~s 9tt ~s ZLb S30'd38nS SnO1A83dW 'OSIW ~s Sti6`t ~s 8tiS ~s 96E`t tIZ'dld 30t1dS 0119nd ~s LtiS`9 ~s SS8`Z ~s £69`E 31380NO0 - S~dM~lb'M JN1/lt/d Nt1181S3a3d - 3d`dOS48t1H %E'bti ~s Zti9`OE ~s 80L`6 ~s bE6`OZ ~s 9171`1 ~s ZOS ~s £ti9 31380N0~ - S88n0 ~s p ~s p ~s p SnO1/183d - JN1/1dd ~s SLO`6Z }s OZO`6 ~s SSO`OZ 11dHdSt1- JN1111Jd ~s tZti ~s Sgt ~s 9£Z 31380NO0 - JN111t1d JN1/1b'd 3118OWOlnd - 3ddOS48dH %t'tZ ~s SZ9`tit ~s 80S`ti ~s Ltt`Ot JNlalln8 39tla3A0~ 3dtlJS4atlH / 9Nldlln8 ~s L66`ti ~s £tZ`t ~s ti8L`E (11~133tJ) I Sf11d8f1S ~s 9LE`Ot ~s LtiZ`£ ~s 6Zt`L p381nb38 ~s ZLE`St ~s 09ti`ti ~s Et6`Ot a3SOdO8d lb'1O1 ~s gtiS ~s gtiS - 3db'OS48t/H 3011dS 0118nd %t'8t %0'£Z ~s tiZ8`bt ~s tt6`E ~s Et6`Ot (SnO1/183d) 03SOdO8d Z 10130 % t 10130 % 39tla311O0 3dtlOSaNt11 n4 9t n4 0 n0 9t n4 0 n4 8 n4 8 43SOdO8d S,n0 n4 8b n4 St n4 EE 43llIW83d S11Nn JN1113M0 ~a 6S't ~a OS'0 60'1 3Jd380t11O1 ~~/na o£ (lalluap!sa8 aan~n3) JIlISN3a 9N1113M4 ds LZ ds E ds SZ ds L't ds S'tt ds b'tt 0381nb381d1O1 ds L ds E ds S ds L't ds S't ds ti't a381nb381dI1N341S38-NON ds pZ ds pZ ds 0'Ot ds 0'Ot 4381nb3811/I1N341S38 AlIWt13-Il1nW 9Nl~atld 31~A019 t't (6'£) (v'E) (o'z) 9't (111330) I smd8ns 0'8S ds p'tit ds p'titi ds p'S ds p'gt ds 0'tZ 43SOdO8d / 0341/1O8d JN1~8dd '101 t9 ds 6'Zt ds 6'Lti ds ~'g ds 0'OZ ds ti'6t JN1~8b'd 4381nb38 lb`1O1 ds SZ ds 9£ p'Et - ds p'Et - ds S'g ds S'9 80013 a81H14381nb38 %Z'tti %8'8S Z'9t - ds Z'9t ds Z'ti ds p'9 ds 0'9 80013 aNO03S 0381nb38 ~ui~aad paalnba8 S'tE ds 6'Zt ds g'gt ds Z'ti ds S'L ds 6'9 8OO131S813 4381nb38 ~a~ol /~q a~esn a~IS t Ja18 S1111O1 E J418 Z J418 t J418 9Nl~atld ~s bZZ`t ~s tiZZ`t ~s £ZS ~s tOL (111330) / Sn1d8nS ~s Zt9`t ~s Zt9`t ~s E66 ~s 619 0381nb38 ~s 9E8`Z 'd'N ~s 9E8`Z 'd'N }s 9tS`t ~s OZ£`t p3SOdO8d t J418 S1t11O1 £ J418 Z X418 t J418 30tldS aOO41nO ~s 9tE (11~133a) ~ Sn1d8nS ~s bZZ`t 4311dd11 Sn1d8nS 30t/dS 8OO41nO ~s (806) ~s L6 }s (SOOt) ~s (99Z) ~s (ZtrZt) ~s t8 (11~133a) / Sn1d8nS ~s ZS8`Z ~s tSb ~s Z0~`Z ~s ZZb ~s ZbZ`t ~s 091`1 (1138b''JalB %Ot) a381nb38 t138'd ~s tiZZ`Z ~s 8Z8 ~s 96E`t ~s 9St ~s 0 ~s OtiZ`t 43SOdO8d 30t/dS 0118nd '101 ~s 08Z ~s 08Z ~s 0 ~s 0 ~s 0 ~s 0 3d1/~SaNd1 NI 03SOdO8d'd38Y/ ~s Sb6`t ~s 8tiS ~s 96£`1 ~s 9St ~s 0 ~s OtiZ`t 3db'OS481/H NI 03SOdO8d d38b' tlZtlld / 30tldS 0119nd ~s 98E ~s (LBtiS) ~s £L8`S (111334) / Sn1d8nS ~s S8S`tiE ~s £Z8`Ot ~s Z9L`EZ (OS') 4381nb38 WnWINIW %9'OS %L'tiZ %ti'Z9 43SOdO8d '8'1l'3 ~s tL6`ti£ ~s 9££`S ~s S£9`6Z ~s 08£`ti ~s Ltti`Zt ~s 8£8`Zt '8'1!'3 803 434n1~N11138t/ 111101 ~s tiZZ`Z ~s 8Z8 ~s 96E`t ~s 9St ~s 0 ~s ObZ`t '8'11'3 48t1MO130ddS 0118nd ~s LbL`Z£ ~s 80S`b ~s 6£Z`8Z ~s bZZ`ti ~s Ltb`Zt ~s 86S`tt St138t/ JNlalln8 03SOdO8d ('a'tl'3) Olltla tl3atl x0013 ~s SZ9`i?t ~s 008 ~s 008 ~s OOti ~s OOti (dS) 03111W83d 1'd103dS %S'S %S'ti6 ~s SZ8`Et ~s 80S`b ~s LtE`6 ~s Ztt`Z ~s 6£L`E ~s 99ti`€ (d) 03111W83d dS pa~~!~aad s3sn aoolj aNnoa9 Sao LtiZ %ti'Z£ %9'L9 ~~0 08 ~~0 O8 t~ 6£ 1dI1N341S38 S~UaC1n~~p aao L9t ~~o S~ ~~o ZZt ~~0 Z17 ~~o tb ~~0 6E 1t11083WWO0 le~ol rtq a8asn a~IS ~s 8LZ`8 ~s ZEL`L dtlOllNtldn0~O ~s LtiL`ZE ~s 80S`17 }s 6EZ`8Z ~s 17ZZ`b ~s Lt~`Zt ~s 865`11 d381! 8OO131'd1O1 ~s Ot8`9t ~s L£6`St ~s S00`8 ~s 0 ~s S00`8 - ~s 6Et`ti }s 998`E 80013 481H1 %£'tS %L'8ti ~s Ltt`Ot ~s 0 ~s Ltt`Ot }s Ztt`Z }s 6£1`37 ~s 998`£ 80013 aNO03S aaay ~u!plln8 ~s SZ9`tit ~s 80S`b ~s Ltt`Ot ~s Ztt`Z }s 6£t`ti ~s 998`£ 8OO131S813 ~a~ol /~q a8asn a~!S Sl'd1O1 Stl3atl 9Nldlln8 43SOdOad %0'E9 %t'OL %Z't5 133815 / 30d~1/3 8£t 96 Zti Zti 0 0 3J'd1NO83 34'd~tl3 JNIOlinB 6tZ LEt Z8 3Jd1NO83 3N11 A183dO8d 39tl1N0a3133a1S 103fOad ~s (p) ~s (LL6Z) ~s LL6`Z 3JN1/H0 ~s OLt`69 ~s 9ti9`tZ ~s bZ5`Li? 43SOdO8d ~s OLt`69 ~s EZ9`17Z ~s LbS`i7b JNIISIX3 (pasodoad) (aan~n3) (aan~n3) (aan~n3) Stl3atl13~atld S1tl1O1 t J018 S1tl1O1 E Ja18 Z Ja18 t J418 Z - Z S1O1 Z 101 (uald mopayS) Z 101  AtIVWWIlS UNINNVId 9i/zz/TT HDNd~19 GNVIHSV - NOINn il(13'dD 3f1JOi ~ m ~ ~ a~ °~o ~ ~ 0 N o q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a q p p ~ ~pp ~ ~ ~ ~yy ~ d ~ C ~~S ~ ~~b ~~~a~~~ ~ ~ ~ p o I W Vj ~ ~ ~ U ~ $ d~ ~ ~~i ~ ~ 4 ~ o o t,~, ~ Ada m >~2~ No ti " b Oh"~ ~ ~ ~~a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ II n ~ ~a~, x ~ ~ of a~ ~ U ~0~ ~ k~ro~~o~a~~Q~~~~33~d~~d~d~ a 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a U J p U ii"1ti411 ~ II ~ a ~ ~ g ~ ~ w a m g ,o^ .w by ~ ~ ~ i h~ 3~~~8~~ az~;o b~ ~ a ~~ff ~a ~ ~ w, ~ ~ 2~°~ III ~o ~ a a ~ ~ I I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ j al g i ----~-----1-----1-----~-~---------~--- I ~r ---1-----~----J-- ~ V hl Z I 7 - i ~ ` ~-----~-----~-----~----T- ~ g I I I 1 ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ! a k 1 ~-----I------- v~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~.r ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ y - ~ ~ ,~i~ ~ ~ ~ J r ~ ~ : - ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ I i ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ; I i ~ i ~ io lia ~ ~ _ ~ ~ i w W ~ ~ ~ I i J, ~ II ~ ~I I I~I ~ ~ iraor aer .wn~ _ ~ ~ \ 'i n~~ ~N/ ~ ~ Y t gg~~ v- i l ry ~ I /I J N 00'18'1/1 W - (78.95! ~ \ ~ ~ y~ j I I / I ~ ~ I ~ !1 ~ ~ i 1 ~ v~ 1 ~ I ~ / i / i ~ ~`r - ~ x osie'r' w r ss - ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ I H I t ~ ~ . i I ~ - ~ i ~ ~l i i ~ ti b~~ r i x ~i j ,r- i ~ I I i I ~ ~ ~I ~rf ~!7 ~ _ w= ~ I I 1 _ I ~ v~ I I ~ ~e ~ I ~ I ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~l 1, f ~ Y~// : ~ j " _ ~ I ~ ti~ I ~ I ~ ~~t~ ~I~~"n ~--t,I I ~ 5~~~ I I W ~ ~ ~ it i ~ li i ~ ~,~~'\I\,`1 ~ ` ~ ~ as ~ I ~n ~ ' ~ 4W§l lF u~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ \1 ti I ~ ~ W y- n°' p~ ~ ~ II ~ ~a ~L k i I ~ R ~ i 1 ~ 1 ~ I n _ pp i i i _ ~ ~ _ a~~a ~ I ~ ~ i i i i I ~ i i A i , i i i ~ ~ i i ~ ~ qa~ ~ ` , ~ 4 r ~ i ~ gg ~r j ~I ~J -F v ~ g~ ~ ~ _ "o H ~ d- , I nN , ry 1~ N A q f i , tl k x R 1 ~ i " ~ J tl ~ I o 1 ~ ~~l v o ~ ~ ~ ~m~ 1 I ~ ti _ v- I ~ ~ ~ ~ e~ v i ~ ~ j a ~ . I 0 ~.GI F ~.M~ N V VV 4 N 11 J n ~ a ~ ~ i T I r N0032i0 `aNblHSb 1~32~1S aNblHSb 6596 W o ~ Noo ZWW ~J NOINf111a32~0 ~f1002~ ~ o 0 m z Zo~ZQaLL o' d ~ m N ~ r ~ ~ ~ as~~o~wo ~~d ~ _ J cQc tto0 a J "m~m~ZU Wm0) 1 (n Q G F Q aWQo" ~ Wro ~ H~ N d ~I 8 4 N d ~ H S d~ Q°° OU r~'NJ d wz W ~~am~ ~ N NOIN(1 11a~2~~ 3(1~02~ ~ a~~ ~ QQZ Z Z ^ nu Z ~ _ Q nm U _ ~m j c C Kx G ~ N ro 4G C I 1 ` ' (n ~o _ o a~ vJ b _ I ~ J . I ~ Q W I Z W ~ I. K I W ' I'' r I~. W J 5 ~ I Q ~ I ~ I F U F- Y z ~z ~ ; z WW ~W ~ ~,ww o ~ _ I ~UZ QO ~Q0 p q Q ~ Q r~ d t ~ I _ ° n W U ~ W n ~i w (Il ib. ~ U W ~ ~ 7 " Y U d ~ i t W W Q I, p Z w Q Q Q m I' ~ Y W o¢ ~g d ~ 0 N Q p oz oW i ro 0 - aY Q N O ~ p m ~l ¢ d 0 ~~b'~9 3 ,.6-.69 N N ~ o - ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ _ ' _ _ a ~ rt - ~ ~ ~ i i W >z z~ i z W I r 5 5 5 3'~g g'~ 5~ `q W o w z W S W ~ O W, > > i ~ > > w _ , f w w Z ~ o o( r o, ~ o m I LL z W W w w W w w ..w t w NWW w J Y ~ UQO UZ I~ Q m pN ~ Q0 U ~pN i ~ Q Q Q ~ i I p ~ 1 w ~ i I Q II Q' z a ~ ~ ~ R ~ t ~a i O ~q w ( ~ J Z. ` ~ ~ ~ y f ~ LL ~ o ~ , I E 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i I, ~ f p W ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ o ~ ~ o ~ ~ i i i f I i- o Q o ~ ( ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q i N I~ p O ~ 1 ~ z ~ ~ a W U ~ ~ ~ I ~o U i p e i WQ~ N ~ W~ f f E ~Zw ~ ' --Q ~ p ~ a~ 5 ; ~ ~ ~ J ~ ~ ~ ~ s a r ~w~ ~ ~ TWO ow ~ a¢ ~ J d W w uri A~ m, f ~ ~ Q U ❑ " ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 oao ~ ~zQ oQ ~ ~a ~ o 0 ~ i ~ IOQd a~ W ~ yl"Q Q C IO ~ Uj z II w Ca W ~ pg a> o ~ 4 qq U N N ~ ;~~o 11 II ~ 1 i - ` 1 ~I ~ of I O r G ~w ' 0 ~z~; ~ ~ r r I ❑ Qz QzQ p I[ N ❑7 T ) Q ~ ~ ~Jd .9 ~ a7 ~ i W f ~ ~ W Y __I~ 0 ® I p p ~~a ~o u ~ z U U qo w p oo p E ~ p N U ~ U ~ ~ ~p I W I`\\ p ~ LL _ ~ , W ~ ~ J ~ ' ~ \ i I ~ ~ ~ - ! ! ( ~ ~ I _ _ _,.~J ~ ~ ~ a r - -1 _ ~ t Ll rJ`. 0 rr U Q , ~ ~ ~ m a z ~ cn cn N _ - N t ~ 7 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Id O U ~ z a W QQ p O 0 p ~ ~ W ~ ° ''1 a Wp + d Q a ~ a p p p p0 0 U ~ ~ I W..... O ~ m ~ W W W W U W I p N p p p p W p i a[ I M G N ~ N I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ z W g I i ~ d? F- W a ti ~ I ~ o N W W w~ I ~m a Q o ~ r i ~ I ' 3° ~o" ~o> } ~a ~ rQ Q wag p~ Z s I Q W W U Z €€w~ ~ ~ U ~ Z ~ Q W ( C ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~  sloallgoJV ONAA + pews JaIIS N to uogezuoglne uallum agllnoglim loafad jaglo hue iol'lied ui,o alogm ui'pasn aq of lou sl pue sloallgord al!gM+ IIeWS iapsiN jo 6liadmd aql si'aoitias leuo ssajoid to luawnilsui ue se'uiaiaq polejodjooui su6lsap pue seepi agl pue'luawnoop sigl 07~'slaaligwy allgM + Hews Japsi { gipz,o, N0032~0'aNb'IHSb' 1~~2~1S ONb`IHSd 696 ~ W a Q goo ova W Q NOINfI 110~2~0 ~f1002~ z ° Z W ~ m M ~ ~ Z Zo~c~~Za ~ ~ p ~ °zaQti ~ 0 J ~ ~ ~ ~ rFn 0 m ~ 3~tto°w~ ~ ~ ~ fn goo ~ ~mNm~ou wmo, w p p~ F a aWaa~ a °o° ~N H~ N d 2~ 8 4 N'd ~ H S d~ a J o W° Q'~W ~~N~W ~Z N NOIN(1 11a~2~~ ~(1~0~1 ~ dNN co tnQ mF- r O L 00 tD r IO M II II Z I~ (D M W ~a ~N O O O / O ~l1 I~ in a nj W ~ 13 Z ~ IN N J ~ Z Z ,ss'sa~ - M „4~,s~,oo N ~ I N - - - - - - , p V/ ~ U7 N N O ~ ~ Q h(+70 1 0 w~~~ J NI J V ~ ~ _ _ _ - _ - ~ ~ Q ~ N ( 0 ,S6'9Zl - M „61,91.00 N Z ~ Q ~ W 1 I ~ 1 1 1 W Z_ ~ J 0 wpp0 ~ N ~ 1 0~ 0 0 W ' J ~ 0~ aj ~p N ~I 3 I LL m - N ~ I w N J ~ p N °i ~ N ~ ~ ~ ro Z I ~ ~ I I 1 ~ I I W "7 1 ~ ~ O 1 ~ r ~ Z ,ss 4s ~ - 3 „4s,s ~.oo s ~ ~ z z wo 0 0 ~ z z j° r O~U~- ~ ~2 z~~~ ~ a0 5 ~ =U~U U Z~ W QoW? ~ UO inW~O 0 00 ~ m~ NZ w p I- Z Q oa ~ U ~~..p ~ ,£9' l4l - M ~6d,01.00 N Q U Z J a - - rtn0a a ~ N ~w~0 Q N W°'W a °Wm~ ~ 13 a~cn0 0 i 1 IN d I N - 01 Z Z ,S6'9Zl - M „41,91.00 N VJ ~ VI N N I" QV(DO 1 I 0 ~Ino~ I 1 QvNC~ W p o I (n J 1 I m O O 1 ~ N 1 0 n N 1 ~ ~ Q N ~ N ~ N I ,SL'4S l- M „B£,S£.00 S X 0 0 0 I o WI ~r m v N ro I ~ w ro ~ ~ 1 iv 1 N I ~ N N r7 ~ t0 I N~ 01 I ~ ~ W ~ n 1 ~ NI J~ , N N I d m OD W 1 I N ~ 1 I t!7 O N ~ Z ,os' ~a ~ ,o ~'e£ - - 3 9a oo s - -  sloaligoJy al!gM + pews iapsi {;o uogezjoglne uaguM ag; lnoq;iM loafoid jag;o hue jol'ued ui,o alogm ui'pasn aq o;;ou si pue s;oapga>d a;i,gM+ 11eWS iapsi,N 10 6uadoid ag; si'aoitias leuo ssapoid po luawni;su ue se'uiaJay paleJodjooui su6isap pue seapi agl pue quawnoop sigl Oiq's;oaUpoiy 011W + ews iapsiy, 9LOZ 0` N0032~0'aNb'~HSb' l~~~IlS aNd~HSd 659 } Z ~ NOINfI 110~2~0 ~f100?~ ° ' " M N wz~s a N ~ W o Q~°~ ova wQ~ z N ~ a ~ Z Zo~oFza j~~ 0 ~ Q ~ ~ . N o d 37~°a>o w~N ~ d d b r a~ ~ ~wm-ozw ~mc'- W ~ p0 ~ mZmU U W W Z v w O W Q Z ~ H~Nd~lB aNd~HSd W °'=0 W° ~F=N J a Woo aO~ mN a ~ w w m NOINfI 114~2~~ ~(1~0?~ (p7mrW r N ~ - a m m ~0 N Q 0~ Z r' (7 pV N O z Q w w w °a N.. ,Z ~ Z m W a a II II a m ~ a > > > r ~ -J------ W ~ a ~ a Q Q~~ Q 0~ W LL W M ~ W ° N U 0 I a ~ ~ Z W w ~ ~N a a Z Z m a I Z ~ m m~ r o W g a a ¢ ~ ~ s w z LL N v/ ~ O p J -----~-----~----~----;--------------~1 z Q r a ~Z W ~ w F~ LL I ' ~ m ~ o y ; 'I ~ wa j u' = Y p W 'I L' ~ W i r p i I~~ I. m ~ N xW ~ W b OU rr^^ o Z ~ Z ~ ao i I vJ N ,~ww i ww w as I i IoW ~QO , UQO ! O mz I Q z~ Q ~ a w ~ Ua ~ j I t O 44 ~ W 4 Cl~yzy y ~ ~ N i n ~ ~ I t ~ ~ f ---..--._-~-c._ _ -,'~`drj,✓ 9'W - 1~1.6J ~((`l~i W W ' I ~ 3 ~ x~'r' w Y` w w o Q o I ~ l ~ ~ ' .L .a. r z tt tt w w ~ ~ w w 'S - 3 ~ Z a Y w z z ~ z z z w Y,,,~ ww ~y o o a,g~ 5 i g g 5 ~ 3 ~ .y r. W ~ '"'~`J~ v U Z z r W m as w ~ w z w w g U I Q! N Q 0 oa m Y > > a > > w I o~--~~ ~ ;I~~o ~N °za a ° ° d s I w d a Y 1 p ao Ow ~ ~ m o o r o a m f- 13 Q Qd aZ z Iz.w w w w~ w w w z o ~ ~ - ~ I -~„-~I ~ ~ I Ian f E ~ o~~ alb ~z ] I ~o~~ ~ ti. I m a a (rltf in Y 7 f ~ ~ ~ , t _ a i I~~i~ o~~ zQ ~ ~ r, W W ~ ~ ~ _ ti ao~t6'fd,' w„ ~~95, ~ r. Q ` a a# FQI ~ II ~ D ° m I '~-.,V LL ~ W - ~ W ~ I ~ a. }Z°o CL~ Iwm OJ~I-~ ~ ~r ~ ~ f'7~ ~ ~.Z SOU jl ~ I ~7o a~ I~ '~-,wfgN ~ I II ~ ~ ~ ; I-~ ~ ~n LL.I~'~ l i; I ;p4om Qr 1 m, u r lt~ Q N: I m~~~ ~ M j r qti" I r V 0 W~ { I I ~ Q W~ a' I~ ~ w o I N a N I ~ ~ o I O J f'- III ~ 11 ~ m ~ ti wl ~ ~ 1 /n~ - I I ~ s LL U~ 'u',~ N~. I ul+ 4,, I ~ \ ] y ~ - Q~ F' (V ~ - l uNi ( cpo l f `0 n Z I a= - ~ LL (F ,i -~w~ I ~ ~ ll ~ l ~ ~ °U I a I ! ~ ~ d LLQ~" -l J ( N I~h 301S ~NG:7 > - - - ~ i> ~ > C7 I 11 f~.~> IJ T I ` i. ~ ~ ~ x y ~ ~ 1 ~ f _.iZ (m l I~~_ ~ d> =-~-,~~I ~lo',la~ 4 ~ , ~ ~~WOZ , j ~;-$Y~ I' Io I`~~? - - w ~a ~I ~ N ~ om ~ a ~o N I~ ~ ~ OBl I ~~OOd I I ~ INaorO h~ I ~ I' i I QU cQ 11 y- 1 ~ ~ I ~I ~ _ / ~ _ I'.l ~ 1 Z ~ r„ma... I ~.sr~'~i ~ as---+r I + ~ ` Q a If v._- 1 ~ m~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~ Oc ,~9'J8 W 14. ~ SIlVMi01S ONO ~ ~ I W r I _ - ~ ~ ~ tt~~ ; r 0 ~ ~ I ~ ~ 4. , . ; ,~z m~ ~ ICI ~ a ti o , ~ ~ _ M , ~ , ~ 1~- ~ ~ a w i 4 p ~ ~ ~ r r~i Q~ ~ o ( I~,., I a a ZO O N 0~ ~ I~' ` WQ J w > ll: ¢a > 3 i a m ~ 3 a cw w ~ "~°v Q - _ J w I I I ~ z > I° x o ~pc ti I' a `1` a la ~ ~ ~ f ~I 1 0 nt 'z ~ I ~ ~ , G a 4 - ~ r- a N_ I J f n F.~°co W ni w v a m (n O Y 0 If ~ L~-'~J,~ ISO m~m ~ ~ I o~ ~ci JQ(~/)~? e ~j o ~ z ' ..I _ ~ i Iow ~ F--~ I- _ I z ~ ~ z a w' ~ i I ~ ~ i l .0-91 „0-,9b A.HI 4 ~ ~ '7 O:OLL ~I ~ i as f ~ ~ ~,~0 r o ~ _ ~ ~ ~ _ ~ ~ I w,I d w w I1~ 1 N I I ~ I ~I °Q~ 3 i x om 0 n a ~ f ~ ~~~~L~ .r `J " u fy/ ~Y r~rw. ~ .~-w: I .,~~f ZU~ I - d I N , ~ _ I tt ~ ~ ~ I rar 4 I ~ l 1~ ~ ~ ~ J ~ ~ I N _ I 1 ~ ~ 1 I ` r I r` O/ 1 ~ W w, i ~ s~'JJ £ 2sB~~~ ~ '/i.'~,,,n,.,,,, ~ „ I I ~ J` .a ~ ~ ~ ~J 1 ( ~ 1 ( Q ~ i ° ~ z~ ~ ~ ~ i ~I ~ ~ ~ I W N ~ f ~ 'I i ~ I W I W m _ ~ a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ q I ~ ~o z ~ in a Z a r ~ zr ~ _ W W 0 ~ ? ! w ~ ~ o u~ o acwna zo Z r 3Nb om w ~ } UQ0 ~ w~ ~ I ? i o° ¢w > z w¢N •~m ❑CC LL ~ Q > wwogm~ ~UZ w ~ ~wm mm~ ZQZU ~d Q ¢O ~ ( oU +1 3~~mFw ~QO z w air Ow J Z ~r I ~ ~ Igo ~Om°od~ ~~N J m~ ¢Om NQZO 2WJ Ua~ OW ! ~ ! I¢ 2WN~za Q Q two Y~¢ QWU ~ a~ aQ ~ ` 3 Q ~ r>mrm~ m Wp >p Upw > oa aalll ~ ~ O~,p r Up o0~ Qa~ as QQ f Qar~zO m U~ owr Fm-aw ~ aQ ~ i jl pF'o Zar p pro WOO Zm ~ ~ ! wapwzQ N r wao ~ 0 ao ~ oil-W~w W:`a~ Qtr ~Q'~ Nz I ~ i ' aazwam O aw aaz gmr ig  I ~t n 6 5) mu. -Q s;aa;lyoJy GNAA + pews Japsl {;o uopezpoylne uaguM ay} Inoy;lM;oefad jay;o due io;'ped ul jo alogm w,'pasn aq o} }ou sl pue slaallyajy a;lqM+ Ilewg jaBs!)~ ;o dliedoid ayl sl'aolnJas leuolssa;oid }o;uawnilsul ue se'ulajay pa}eiodiooul subisop pue seep! ay} pue'luawnoop sly! 's;oallyo y a;lyM + pawg ial}slH 9 LpZ i~` J ~ N0~32i0 `aNblHSb 1~32~1S aNblHSb X596 Q.. o~ Noo ZWW NOIN(111a~2~0 ~f1J02i o z o N 1 w o ya OUa WQ~p ' ~ ~ z ZoUp~ZQ ~ ~ ~ Q ~ ~ 1 vii o m~ ;~~o~Wo ~~N ~ d d Q w a qa ~o >w ~ ~ ~ W°z °m~m~°Q H~ N d~ 8 a N d ~ H S d~ a~ J W W W aw~o., a Npp ~ ~ ~ ~ w ~~<m~ ~Z N NOINfI lla~~l~ 8f1~02~ ~ a~N ~N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~~z ~ 1 I Z w ~QO a~ N ~ o l ~ ~ N ~ - - I ~ a~ O Q Q I w " ~ ~ ~ z I~ ~ 0 Kx E ~ ~N I zo ~ ~ 4 r+rrr■ . ~ 4 N 00";~ ~ 1 ~u ;V~ 1.26..95' , • ` I ~ ~ - ~ '~~i ■ - < ^ r rrrrr r ~ , rr r r rrr~ r r rrr~ f + W ~ ~ I-0 ~ t _ ~ ~ ~ I ~ p N 1 I 1 ~ ~ w ~ _ J ~ ~ ~ I ~I~I' z~ ~ ~ 1 ~ Ij E ~ I ao ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~W ~ {I I I Qa W / U' Oar ~ _ o ~ ~ w ~ ~I ~ I~ W LLZ ) as ~ 1 ~ LLwQ ~ ~ ,_,i ~~~N ~ ~ Z ~p 4 I ~ aW F 0 df i ~ 0 0~~ II 1 W ~ I~ _ zow ~ a I ~ N I~ 4~4 ~ ~~v ~ _i i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ W ~ r „ , 1 ~ ~r ~ ~ ~ i o (n / ° , ~ , ~ 0 ! ~ ` ~ ' ~1HM301S'JN00 3af11f1~ o I 1 ~ ~ - - T _ r. T_~-~ / Q ~ ~ - ~ ~ I° ~ - _ ~ . J Fy ~ 1 r ~ ~ ` I / I ' 4. ~ 1 ~ I ' k / , \ J O I ~ Y CIO / Z ~ pO ~ ' NNN\~ / m a^z i ~ w 0 I o 3 ~ >o^ U f1 4 / , 00 ' Z ~ 1 I ~ I I _ y~ ~ - y,--rr•~ 1-a..rr~rr-r- r~r-w~-~ rirr--it -a~ ~I \ " n / I S 00°,~~'38" W - ~ 154, 75' ~idM~ais ~~rvo~ (rv) ~ ° ' i ~ ~ ~ - ~ _ i ~ ~ ~ - / ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ w ° ~ - - w10 ~ ~ f0 ~ yK I i I~ LJ ~ / ~ If - ' r#~ ~ Ll`, ~ COI ~,~~~U ~U a® ~ , ! I ~'jm a ~ ~ ~ - w I ~i'i 'w` ~ a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ - ~ ~ I ~ ~ i (gym a_ ~ s~HEa lr) I~ r+ ~ O N ' ~ _ , 0 =__r-__,~ ~ , I z . w ~ ` ' ~ - 1 ~ i. w , ~ ' ° 0 w ' " I ~ ~ ~ w I ~ l~ ;'it- 1 a ~ _m I w ~ I. ~ LL c, ~ I-I 1 ~ ~ w o 1 0 - ~ I , i ! f > n t a `~'I ~ a ~ o~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ " I ~ j ~ ~ o ~ ~ 1 t~I a ~ 1~ ~ j I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U M ~ ° ° ~o' f ~I ~ ~ ~ ~ o m 1~ ~ ~ ~ { W I I , i \ W _ I ~~I ~ ~ w r. I A N Z o ' Z ~ a N ~ ~ i r I - I ~ > ~~a yy Q ~ 1 0 I ~ _ Q ~ ~ L ~ T_~ ~i 0 m N ~ a - tD ~ I o! a Q m J ~ U O o 7~ W N v I- 1 tom, 1 'a ~~z ' r _ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ' ~Q ~ ~ a ~ o i ~ U I s : o ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ p Z d a- I U > uJ ':m ~ ..O".9E n~~~Z ..D".S~ ~ O ~ „W ~I W O ~ `Z I w - ~ a wm in o Y ~ w ~ ~ ~ ~ ~z p ~ m ~ ~ ~ I w ~ w o N ~ ~o io moo ~ Iz ~ 1 ~ UW co rn 0 II U U Y ~ zz N QO d O zw ~ Z ~ F ~o ~ ~a ii~ (4 I , ~ o Zr i rtz 4~ ~ m ~ ~ - z 'a U ~ , ~ ~ ~M z > w, ~ J 0 w I ~ _ I oa o A ~ -9l I,9S z rye f ~ ~ ..0-.Z 1 ~ i - a! w ~~I ~ m LL n~ ~ _ ~ ~ ~ ° o ..0-,8 .0 .L ~ - ~ 4 III r J l ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ n . f ~ l „a - - N i~ ~ ~ +I i ~ o o N ~ 1 ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ _ _ ~ a~ ~ z • ~ --r- r " " ~ ~ ~ a S OU°13 26 ~ - 126.95 cp J rt}}{ r r rrrril r r i~r - r r r i ' ~ `~"-r ~ r r rr.r r I, r~r r r rrrr r r rrrrr r r rrr~~ r r ` I ~ 11 I U' ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ?5 I 0 ~ I U U WY ° i r r r r r r -r.• ~ ~ tL ~ Z 0W` 0 II i Za I J (n W I I 1 ~ ~f ~ li a } I > ~ i ~ o d ` ~I Q ~ of I' ~o j. W W °w a~ ~ ~ I 5 g ~ ~ I8{~~~ o~ w U~ ~ Fo W W I- w 7 lL lQL z0 mw ~ OQ ~ U Z ~ ~ W W ~ ~ [L U Q p U o: Y ~ ~ CQL ~ w m 0 co ~ N a ~ N m o 0 F- W IL ~ ~ J Q ~ 0 W O O ~ I ~ a  ; w w w W v spoa31 ON a;!qM + pews iallsM jo uogezpoq;ne ue4pm aq;nogl!M joalod,aq~o ,due Jop'ued ui,o alogM u!'pasn aq of lou s pue sloapgojy apgM+ pews Japsi){ }o /uadod ay} s!'ao!,uas leuoissalod;o juawrulsu up se'ulajaq palejodjooui su51sep pup seep! aql pue yuawnoop s!ql Md's oa iyo y allyM +!lews agsN Ml; J N0032~0 `ONdIHSd 1~~2~1S aNb'IHSd ~~9~ J o ~ NgZ Zww ~J NOINfI 110~2i0 3f1J02i ~ ~ o 1 w o ~LL~ OUa WQ~p Z J ~ ~ ~ Z Z~VUh-ZQ j~ Q ~ ~ Z 1 ~ ~ m ~ ~jK0~jLL0 ~~N ~ W ] Q F W°z °o°m~°Q ~~r H~ N d~ 8 a N d ~ H S d~ Z~ a W W F Q a ~~N~W a ~Z N N NOIN(1 11a~2~~ ~f1~02~ ~ aNN ~oNQmr Z r /~I 00 p `V VN ------~----J-----J---~------- o~ X X ~a ~N O N O 0 0 ------1-----~ I Z l i ~ i Q. i i i (~II j I~ ~ ' J ~ ! I-- ~ ~i, ~ I ~ i i ~ II ~ W i ~ I f i i I E i i ~ ~ ~ _ _ ~ ~i ~ ~ i I Q F- 0 ~ ~ - - - - ~ W a _ ~ ' F ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 3 z ~ ~ U 1 ~ _ ~ o ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ W _ I ~I ~ ~ ~ ~ W i U w w ~C7~_ ~ z ~ ~ I ~ p n w p , ~ ~ j I - ~ ~ o ~ I ~ i li I ` LL ~ a ~ ~ N _ ~ i ~ ~ 1 ~ t. z _ ~ -a-- w ~ ~ 0 1% S LL ~ ~ ~ I ~ ; } q~_ ~ a I ~ -1-~----t-----~---1---- - ~ ' ' ~ ~ 1 ~ I 1 f i - ! ~ i f ~ ~ i - ~ f ~ ~ l I ~ ~ I ~ ~ _ _ _ ~ I , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ A ' » i \ ~ r pp P a .t _ & ♦ ~ ~ i I ~ ~ ~ : ~ ~ ~ ~ a' ~ G I ~ ~ U Q 1 ~ ~ ~ w ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~I r 3 d ~ ~ ~ i i 8~p ~ 1,, ~ ; f w w~o ~ I ( ~ ~ > W w F. ~ w } i - ~ - ~ z ~ ►-NO l/1 u ~ Q pp t ~ J V/ ~ J ~ ~ i U ~ ~ r~w~ ° - ~ ~ Q I l r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , i~, w ~ i m.~o P.ooMP . ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ Q - - ~ ~ z ~ ~ I 3 ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ r / ~ ! } ~ u. i ~ ' / ~ ~ ~k . ' ~ 1D I u { ; i - - T w ~ ~ ~ i~ ~ ~ ~ . . ~ , ~ ~ 3 K~~~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ - - - ~ ~ ~F , ~ i, ~ ' n, ~ I ~ ~ ~~I w ~o~~ o z ~ ~ ~ 1 I wwo~ z~~ Q~~ Z¢~ ~ ~ o ~ - ~ aw~w mF~ vai~~rn ~wU ~ ~ w ~ ~ zQ~~ wok gou~i~ Q> ~ ~ r uwi ~ ~ ~ i r~. N~~a o~~ °~~m o o a ~ 1 I, o~~~oZ~a ~ o~~o ~ ~ z ~ ~ ,E i ~n~warn~~~ ~ Q ~ ~ ~ I r aN~oo~Qwd aw~~ ~ _  dQw7rndmrn- a000 w w z w 610911yojy GINM + IIewS iallsM jo uollez!jo4lne uapum aq1 }nogllm loa!ojd jagxo Aue jol 'lied ui jo alogm uI'pasn aq o11ou sl pue s!oallgojy 91I4M +pewS jalpsM jo Aliadoid aq1 s!'aa!nJes !euolssa}oid }o !uawnilsu! ue se'ulaJag palejod,ooui su6lsap pue seapl agi pue'!uawnoop slgl 1'61091!40 7 allgM + IIeWS 8116!H 9lOZ;o` I N00~2~0'~Nd~HSd 13~2~1S ONd~HSb' X596 W o ~ ocwia W Q NOINfI 11a~2~0 ~f1J02~ °w ? N o N ~ Q °°~c7~za ~m z ~ Uj rl ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 3`j~o°'wo w-N ~ p ~ W J ~ QWao~ a °o~m~°~ NNE H~ N d~ 8 a N d 1 H S'd ~ W W W ~NQ~~ ~Z N NOIN(1 11a~2~~ ~f1~0~1 ~ a~~ Q Q~ 0 p 'I ,.4-.Z „tr-,Ol 'I „9-~bl ' .B-,Zl ~ .,0-.Z ° Z r I (v o 0 I ~ _ ~ ~ .-m ~ I N ~ 1 0~ _ ~ ~ J Z Qd W U ~W f~ ~ W W W I = ~ o m ~ U I ~ Q I m cn ~ II p z z U ~ ~ ' I z ~ ' ~ I ~ Q I O 4 o . ao a ~ - co J 0 a 0 N - N LL ~ > i > a Q ~ I a Z ~ w Z I I. Q U z - u-W o ~ ~ ~W 4 vJ Z m Z ro c O ~Q ~a ~Q 0 AVldS10 ` -o ~ ~ ~ llb'M,IlINf1WW0~ f~ - - ~ - ~ w u- ~ ~ ~ - - f~ n/ j LL ° I ~ m ' ~ I I m I W d ' ~ II I > a I ~ _ ! i I I 0 OBSCURE GLASS ' ~ r-W - - - I Z ~ _ ~ } ~ ai i ; W I ~ u. U ~ I q o ~ ~ g ~ w 0 LL 1 Q ~ ' I I ' ~ f 1 ~ ' ~ I ~ ~ ~ - ~ I 0 ~ I I ~ ~ ~ III ~ ~ I I ° ~ ~ ~ I w I I 4 0 m W ~ \ ~ III o io LL I u J ON ~ ~ E~ ~ N0 a I a o W a ~ o ~ ~ T ~ ~ ~ i 4 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I - - ~ _ ~ ~ II I " cn I W ~ I o ~ Q' I o = ~ o II U ~ m w w j I q o > p~,, ~ ~ ~ J zm N a sa3NOOl (s) o ' i ~lVldSla Ad1d510 N O _ ~ _ ~ _ ~lt'1d51Q ~ - - -0 I it I L_ ' Q / i i II ~ _ _ ~ ~ I 1 I ~ I I ~ ' Q', 11.1 ~ I ~ a I m'' ~ I W 1 `J I I r _ ~ _ ~ ~ I I i I \ ~ Z I I o I I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m ' _ ~ ~ z m I JQ q I L_ ' ~ ~ t~ 9 N r, O Z N 1 V N ~ ~ ~ i z~ I I I ~ f i m f~ 1 ~ I ~ W ~ , I ~ W ~ I I 0 - L_, W W ~ ~ _I __0 v ~ ❑ N 0 a 0 _ _ , _ _ _ 0 Z~ ~WZ Quo o ~ W } J .0•.6 .8-.9 ..6-.S ..4-.L „9-,41 0-,Zl .0-.4 ~ m ~ a o-s~ .a-zz „o-s~ ~ III ~ ~ ~  o,rs W a u w 00 0 0 U 0 00 J❑❑❑ s1oa11 ON a1WM + pews iagSN do uo!}ezuogane uallpm aql lnogl!m loa!wd jaq!o lue joj )ped ui jo elogm u! `pasn aq o} lou sl pue sloa;!gaJy el!4M + pews japsj){ to luadoid ayj sl'aa!nJas leuolssa}oid to luawnilsu! ue se'u!ajaq palejodiooui su6lsap pup seep! agl pue'luawnoop sly! 37q'sla9l!4o V a114M + Ilews apsi,H gloZ o NOO~bO'aNdlHS11 1~~b1S aN'dlHSb` 659 , ~ NOINfI 11a32~0 ~f100~1 ° Z ~ ~ o ~ Nod zww ~J W Q o 0 1 w o rnLL_ OUa WQ Z~ (n J N w ~ Q Uo~c~rz O ~ , ~ o m ~ 3~~o°w0 W_o ~ ~ W F- w o ~ ~a'~>w K~r~ LLB Woo ~ W °mom°Z~ W m°' H~ N d~ S a N d ~ H S d~ S O W ~~z ~ ~ w ~°a w 3FgN. a Wou N N ~ ° ~~N~W ~ N NOINfI 11a~2~~ ~(1~02~ ~ a~ mcn¢rnr 0 0~ 0 0 ..a-,ai „o-,zr nr,l I .e-,a~ .a-,~z r,~ I „ro-,z „r,N ,.e-wt .e-,a~ ..o-.z Z ~ I (V o 0 u n ~ ~a O xx ~ ~ ~ a _ r-------- , _ p~ J ~N _ _ I I ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ i ~ I Z I ~ w ~ ~ Z ~ I Q I ! Q ' Q ~ o J 4 i _ a I I Q. I I, j I ~~Z6~~~b16 „Z6 ~~b16 I I ON I I ~ I ~ li ❑ o II L' o I_ 0 W m I J I a a ~ m I 'q ~ 4 a I ~ _ I a C~ I p o I a _ I ~ a ~ U I 0 I I I I I 11 J 0 i - - ~--,I _ 0 o a I o ~~a~ _ ~~a I 0 - _ I - - 0 W I I a 4 ' ~ I I I a I I IJ i o I J ~ I m I 0- ~ - ~ -0 Z j ~ a ~ II U I } a I I ~ ~ I o I I 0 0 - m ~ ~ I I o 0 o I ll•y Zl•b I ` 0 ro o ~ \ 4 ' /l o a III ~ I 7 I ~ I ~ ~ ~ m / \ (V - UMM l'I ~ _ ~ d ~ 0 0 U I i 0 I w 1 I 1 o } I q a I I o ~ ,~Z~ O cWJ ~ uZ~ ~ I I I I I I I - N _ ~ r---~ N 0 I 0 I I I J I I w i I = I 0 I ~ ~ _w a I ~m I x I c9 I I = j I ~~Zl•~~816 I I I o I ' I 4 N I N N I I 1 I w ~ 'I d I ',I Q I 'I d I _ ~ L---~ _ 0 0 I I I I ~ - I o I I I I ~ I q v I I I I I I a I I I I I i 0 ~----J J------ '-------------------J J----J _ 0 I I I .o-,ro * .~-s „rs ~~r~t .a-,roe ~ „o,a~ „o•~e o-~s~ ao,aa .o-s~  I 00 0 0 0 ~ 00 slOa;lgoJy a;igM+pewS JapsM 10 uo9ezpog;ne uapum ag;;nog;lm;oafad iey;o Rue jo;'lied ul io alogm ul'pasn aq o;;ou sl pue s;oa;i,goJy G;IgM+ llewS iapSN to Aliedoid aq; si'aowas leuolssajoid;o;uawni;sul ue se'uiaieg pa;ejodiooul suBlsap pue seep! ay; pue';uawnoop slgl 07~ 's;oallgmV NqM+ llemS ~apsiN 9 ;pZ,, I i Q ~ N0032~0 `ON'dlHSd 1~~2~1S aNt~IHS`d 6596 ~ I, ~ Noo ZWW 3J NOINf1114~2~03f1J0~1 °w~Z q N ¢ N~~ ood w¢~ Z X00 ~ /I!\ W o 0o p~ZQ ~ ~ V/ m z ?N~ooWO w~N I O~F- F ~ I ~ ~7 rr (r~N ~WQ 0 ~ 0 m J ~wcn-p m.~- W F-~ F Q Q ~m z~w H~Nd2~8 ON'd~HSd~ o ~-Q ~~p ? W omz WOZ Z QwgoN aWO°~~~~~ NoiNnlia~~o~noo~ ~~W °oW ~ N 0 7 W ~~~~w ~ N a N r=n mu7GmH i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ W. J._i J. i J..' W J J J _i Q.. it J.r J(D W.O as J.~ J (0 WO ~N jN j~ W T O O Q¢.N jN j ~ W ~ O O d O Q r II II a O ~ ~ II II H N W J W ~ d' ~ ~ ~ H W a~ U 0 d O~ I Oa a ~ I M ~ Z ~ Q~ I Q ~ X X K X o c? o ~ m~ o i a~ ~ a~ U N U tiZ 7 WZ UW N ~ N~ N ~ ~ ~Q Q W LL lL m Z J W W J 7 to 7Z 70 7 70 7Z W ~ ' ~ W J 7 JQ JF J JF J¢ ~ I a m ad Q~ Q am Qd W I , C X X i I,. . i` L rn 4, W ta':. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i YkJ r ~ ~ LS t r ~ 0 r z ~ - ~ I 0 F r.~ 1.; _ W 0 ~ _ _ ~o I Zm J v... j LL l' ~ > ~ p '1': F- m~ \ C O p ~ ~ ~N 7p~ IIW d ZW W^ O Jtn ~ F 0 7 Q O o a Q> N QLLfI)`. u Zak p ~~t♦ J~I-m ~ W W U ~ Z_ JOQ ~ w~ ~ Ud ~ ~J QO 0 ~ w Q - I 0 ~L ~ ~f{{ E'1 I f t~ - f N W i I o r 4 11 ~ ~ 0m II z ~ r - d w ~ o ~ :H~ I J `p'~ ~z m ~ ~z ~p F I , ~ I ~.i f ZN ZLL ~ J W (n ~ l Q d Q tJ) J to ~ J _ ~ ~ i i( ~ ~ ~ - _ ~ ° ~ N ,n C~1 ~m tf~ - Q~ ~ - 1 0 ' ~ I - o z I I I _ Q p ~ ' µ r J ~ r{: ~ '1 ~ Q ' I ~ I ~ s "tij ~ - ~ ~ ~ N ; I ~ ~ k ~ l j,E N a ~ ~ I _ f I ~ i 1 ~i~t, ~r W ~ ~ ww ~ _ ~ m f~ m ow z I c~Q Um Wm rt p a,~ Om N ro ~N d j - :n I t ~W Sm ~ = wF ~Z o k ~z Q - ~;+Fa - ~z ~ ~ Zo pa _ l{i ~ 7N Zlt ~ 7 7W Z 1 I.,n ZJ W 7 Z JW _ ~W Q ~ Qp ad Q~ Q ~ Q 1 I{~~~ # ~w 0 _ W ' ~ ~ U !n ~ W W 1 .,~f, ~ o ~ M ~ N L~ I 0 0 d a F z a Q ~ ~ m ~ - W - ~ ~ ~ W W 2 0 0 0 ~ W O Z ZN ~ ~G~ U v d W w ~f, J r w mz ~ ~ a ~ I' ~I~ 1al I ! ~ ~z v > g 7 ~ II Z zp 7 a U II J J Q a a o~: d' a J Y W m z W u ~ Q Q~ m o mU~ >Z ~ 7 a W ~ ~ O ~ J J Q ~ ~ ~ .F ~ W ~ Q Qa m O U io N r r Y,~ I -7 " . ~ ~ i ~ H 4 r: ~ Z I ' {~w I 'ice ~~{~Lt~. ~a~f~`f F _ i a o o z r ~ 14 I,,. IT+I ~ ~ Z ~~tl ~ ~ rQ, ~,K ~rNn - , JI r~"'~ ~1I~~ ~ U ~ ` ~ i ~ ~ ~ -a a ~ ~ _ ~ C 2 0 I ~ € W ~ r W ~ ~ ~ _ o ~ o ~ - E ~1 I: ` f r ~ , , al~' ~ r~ { 0 ' - - 1 ' I !1 I r ~ ~ ' ! tI 4 _ ~ Fi{ E ~ ~ 1 a 1 I ~~1 ~i , r, k; I K a,~ ~~j~,-. O W K d J ~ O" ~JW W v w 7 w W 7 z a a ~~4'~b „gz> ' ~ z ~ ~ ?z Q~ ?am m ~ W z W ~d 7 o ~ m 7F 7W ~ U Y ~ Y QI Q~ U  Z 0 m Z a_ o 01 ~w Z J~ 0 Q 0 Q0 0 U) Wd9SLL dL9W7/97JLL 'SLoajlgoiyapgM,IlewSiapsly,ouoijeiuogjneuallumegllnogmpaloidiaqloAueeo}'uedui,ioologmui,'pasnagollousipuespapgpiVapgM+llewSiallsly,;oduadoideglsi,'aouuasleuoissaloidj oluawNlsuluese 'uiaiagpajejodioamsubisappueseapi,aqj pue'luawnoopslgl o11`spopgwVallgM'IleWSiellsiNqLobejum6doo I ~ N00~2~0'aNt1~HSd 1~~2~1S aNd~HSd 6596 ~ Noo o~d wQ~ I NOIN(1 lla~?~~ ~f1J02~ z o g o ~ ~ ~ ~ Q c7o~c7~z I- ~ ' W 8 Z zuWi~zoia w~N I ~ ~~f- CL m ~ ~Z~O~wO N a W Q p ~~o ~ W omzm°oz W~~ ' H~ N d~ 8 4 N d 1 H S'd ~ oX W~ Q ~°z ~ wo~ wu¢ ~Ul ~ W J w ° ~Wg°~ a =Z NOINfI 11a~2~~ ~f1J0~ W °Nz V- N ~7fntiW F tDN ¢Ol~ d ~ fn /~~j ~ ~ ~O Na ~O e-~O ~ O O W J.. J'. i J. i av Jr J(0 I H ~ WO N N Y > W y ~ ~ tq N W 2 0 0 N= > WQQ D J.cr J O F J~ ~ O O Q U F } W ~ 0 0 J ~ ~ QN Q.N W 0 >.0 ~ II _II O O W O F ¢ ¢Z ~ p O p II II ~C[[ ~ LLJ W ~ ~ 0 ~ I F p LL Q Q ~ J V~ ~ ~ J W?p~ 7 Q ] N V~ a ~ w ~ ~ ~ ~ ? ~ W zw ~ ~ m O ter` I- F ~ I ~ f0 N i' V- Y C1 W N W ~ ~ W W ~ W W ~ W U U U J ~ W I M~ J R' O ~ J~ X J¢ F J¢ ~ XX W z d z z ~ W ~ vX ¢ m U m ¢a w ¢d rn ¢a v Z ~ ~ tt N~ I N~ 0 0 0 ~ p ~ W ~ U U U W D W > W Y~ ~ ~ Z W J ~ N W ~ ; _ Q ^ W a W , ~ a Q a a m a a c~i W O ,..t"i' I.~-~'N ~I ~N~i ~ i ~ W f ~ ~ ~i,~,,~,~i r 1, ( ~ i ~ ¢ ~ L ~ .f~ I X ~ ~ 4 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ W ~~t .,I i r l ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ X r I -~~~{r~i~L ~ i W I i I~~~ i' ~ ¢ j I,~ a I f I,h- ~t c 1 i ~I r ~ J r ~ f a~r E N1 1~ it ~~~~{I f ~r~`~~1`'Ir`~~'~41 Fnrj'rj~hjal~l V~ 11 ~ - l - h I C ~ r i rl. I i Gi 5 o ~I ,~o ! ~~L- } I , ~ JN i 41~ ri. I 4LL i I ~ 4 ~o ~ ~ . h 1 il~. ~ ,~~r J", ¢ 0 l~ If . ~ ~ t i ~`l~ ~ f ~ f ry rs '.i 'l~. + 0 ~ _ _o N , I ~ . . ~ ~ ~ ~~~~I ~,rr I I I ~ W ~ tir , i, ~ I ~ ~ ~ r i m F ~ -1 ~ 1~y1! `I"4}I I ,i J ~ ~,I; ! ~ o EI ! f'~I E, P; ~ ~ W ~ ~ . F ii ~ r o r_ ~ - ~ I ~ 7~ - W ` ~ ~ S{ ~ SIC ~ I ~ III ~ i ' Ii # 1 ~ i 1~~.~(' 1~ ~ ~1~'~(~ ~ ~ i. _ ~ k_` ~ I ,I~ i _ ~ _ ~ I I t r p~~~ ' ~~III ~ ~ ~;il ~ pal ~ , ~ ~ I ; I I [ ~I ~ I ~ I~ I r ~ I i ~ ~l ' ~ I I r I 1 ~ ~ 4 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ W ,r r ~ - --rte -a I~r ~ ~1 i ~ ~ I `r. ~ ~ f.I 1 y i I . Q ~ iii FI ~ _ f ~ ~ ~ t k~ i _ x ~ I , t I I I f;l' ~ i i. Fi I'i ~ ~ i~rh j, 1 ° ~ t ij ~ i ~ ~ ~ r hr~;rr? ~ ~ I ~ i , F ~ { `t{I ~t A - rl. I I .f~ ~ ~ I ~ II o ~ ~ ~ ~ l i 0 ~ ~ ~~I ~ ~ - o s i U m e ~ ~ ~ ~ t `r~ ry~~~~{444 _ I Z iF ~ ' iii rY /;r! 1 ~ ~ , ~I , ~ _ _ ` r~~~ ~I ~ f~ i' FtF I.I., li j r ~ ~ t ~I a I E ~ ~ 1 i LI ~ ~ ~~~i ~ X14 Q f+ i ~ i ~ ~ 4 i ! ~ 4Fi~` ~~~,I z m l ~ / ¢ c a ~J U J d~ W xWZ ~ F } I W_ W N ~ C7W Z , U X UJ¢W d ~ v 0¢ m NSF F b mZ N W V1 ~ W 0 W¢ W r U d m i W ~ zap ~ m ~ a o N W W o ~ W ~ ~ ~ a w c17 m d w z wLLN z z a ~ f~ ~ z ~ ? ~ Y W m o ~ I ~z~ U > > 1 m~~ Q m o v i~ (Y~ I I ~ R~i_~~ ili ~ o f- ° i n ~ ~ ~ ~ r~ ~ u ~ II i 's - ~ I k r~ r,~,~" O r ~,j,f I ~ ' ~ ~ w~. ,1 } a ! ~ d / { . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 7 Z ' Z { ~ I~ ~ Q - - ~ I I U I _ f, v _ 'fi I~ 1~1 i i ~ - l T ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,~j,ji f- W ~ , I ~,.I l`. ~ i 'L I Il~~ ~r ~ ~I ~ a~ I~ ~ w ~ ~ i , ~,li - ~a~ ~ ~ I ~ ~~~hr~~ I ~ o I N ~ ~ I~~II~ ~ z a i ¢ I I ~ I ~Lr I fi 'E ~ ~ ~ 0 0 ~ W J , I j ro Z Z J Y IL N¢ Z ~ - ~ ~ w U > 7 0 Q Qd m O U ro ~ WZ i Z ~0 ZZ ~I ~ ~ 0 ~w Id V ~ JW Q ~ F 0 ZO 0 N ~ ] a ¢ ¢ o  Ad614O9 O4Z4 'spaquorlalgM>pewSJapsi,N1000gezuOgyneuayumagllnoglimloeloidjaqoAn jog'ueduw,ioajogmm,'pasnagollousi,pup sjoapgwyap,qM+ljewgiapsi~ }o/liedoidaqj si'amiasjeuoissa}adjojuawn ilswup se 'majagpajeiodmowsu6isoppup seepieqj pup'juawnoopsi,yl oil 'SPOINONGINM,IMSJaps,N9LOdal!Adoo IVUJJNIN7'Ih I,')n'7'n1'i (I EUiGA NU!)~INO '(INUi(IlW bill ALL I>, inD1ld ]I,N7AH 117n'N IU ,Id a NO~~'~0 `QN~IHSV ti~`NO~~ Z~~T~2I~TZ~S}QN~4~IHS~4~ni~9i ~ ~ ~ ~o r-I y V1 N i .I J V I N i .1 4 I !1 \'-1 , V N Il 1 J it N, 1 S, I A tl ~l7~(b u~INII ZIQLL~~ LLL1~0~ ~ s£a~ ~ (Matna~ u~Id a~iS ,zoo) o ~ "33N1~~~ ~ N~`Id 'IO?IZNO~ ~IOIS02I~ ~ ~uIQ~~i~ 'It~I1Zd~~NO~ ~ ss~-goad p"~~~y glpZ }y6i~Sdop 'ouI '6ui~aauf6u3 reap }o uoi}ozl~oy}no ua}}uM }noy}iM loafad lay}o 6uo uo} '}god ui uo a~oyM ui 'pasn aq o} }ou auo puo •ouI 6uiuaauf6u3 Map }o ,(}uadoud ay} aio 'aoinias ~ouoissa}ad }o s}uawn~}sm, so 'uiauay pa}ouoduooui u6isap puo soapi ay} puo '}uawnaop siyl m~ rn r m o o c moy;°m ~m m ov~ip0 ~ Z ^ F~ amE c i ~<`mr ocQ c ~ _ Z oo~m ~ o ° ot~o~~c ~ W w~'~~ ~i« w: art roU amv Q ~ In y at°~ o oFC c EE J o: W oma [~~•T•~[b ua0 c«L 4~ 7 U m p m t m - 0 8bb «'t m m a$ w U O z O r z Q o"2u~E~o~o~^°;ium°m z z~~ a x o~° w Z o«`mo°O CE~mrn°wE~~vuo rc vi r w z U a a p oco.`. =vN"nic°' a: > a U m W K O w ~OO,o;o m«.yooo o~~j °uco Q tY U 0 7 m U N~ w m w ^E€E`ic ~°`°~vw~;$y w wa a o u~ o M~ W r F' Lpo V,'~°om°•,woooo~~ °o w 0 3 3 3 a a z r O Z Q «ymDaSotmo;~uurmcn.'3E' ~ a z z z~~ ~ w o N~ c } ov~vv``c Rvm«~md oN€mc~ o ~ so+ n N m O p~~°moo°commo.°`.y~n~cO I O I m\ U~ r o~~u-o ~ro° 0 oc mm 0 ov aam 3v~v..>m2U5 aa5a< ~ 2~ W r pow ~ Q° ~ma o~ ~r~ aH ~ 1 rya ~w w=F o~~ z~ Oa o w~~ ' z ~3 zvr~ .o£ N a i ~ wI g O ~ { u~l VJ-J ~r Y} ~ D: N t 1} 7 a ~,f i~~ } Z o I F ~ XW ..u I - ~ ` . % ! N~ I i ~ ~ Ill U a ooa°°a oo°oeo aoo~ <g o a°° ao o° °oo ao° a° Qo 0o a° oa°oo °a° ;oo° oG I aoaooa~ ooGOO o°aQaoo4ao ~Q x~•5 ° a ° o~~'ao 00 €~o° aoc ~ rn m N 1rn ap°0o'~Oao°N°~0~°oa°'oaao°° c°vr Oaa° °a0a ao° °0°°° °0~ zW o° oa° o°°°oo o° cj°° °o <a ' r ! ~ 3pNtla1N3 l3AVa9 A2Mapd1V31 D5X,pZ TIVISNI I I o m ii j yy rn ~ ~ ~ / / n 1 i o 1 ~ ~ I m ~ ~ 1 i <o ~ { o ~ '1 I " { , ~ ~ ~ rco a a w o f 't I t thr m rH , 1 ° ~a~~ m a ~ ~ I ° ~a ~ { i.. t ~ r~-. ~ Fm Q m a 7.+ ~ cif t'4., ~o U 1 - < ~t ~ ~ - _ as _ os I 1111 ~ oa~~ ~ '♦j E~r1`~ I ~r a i{ o c~ ~ z I ~ I ~ ~ 3or - - d a w~< m h I w a ~,ro m wza ~ I Xg•~ ~ I ~a W p. o w'~ r zt ~ ~ _L~-- ~ w z O N~'o 1 }1t1{{1 0l ~~g~ I I w~ N O =~°zl i a~~~ I I ~ ~ ~ i am ~iwu; I a O °w ~ m j (rn 0.J' Qax I m z W w F u <~~o ! ~ U`~~`2~ ~ " ~ F- Z a8~~ i ~ , ro w UUOVI i ~ w Q' ' 3 ~ ~ m X5'S I O ~ cL C4 w~ ~ zQ O°n' ~ a z ~o Zrc w II w w F-' t~~ p O w rn 3 K ¢ II ¢ z ro Ua O a W W ~.r rn o~ w l ~ ~ U ~ F~--- r z o Q z ~ 1 ~H ~ I' a~ a 3 ! ~ ¢ On I 3 a Xp'£ ~ w~ ~ j U m f~ O aV 3 i 0 r ~ W,D Z G I d. W~. ~ U _ vl r N I < dX Z w a - 3 ~ I F N . w O i ~ L....- z r I w l' ~ ~ I SS ~ i o - I ' 1', ~ i-'---'-------'- ~ I w I a~ I o { ~ ~ w I , m _ m w O U Q O ~ d >r 0 a~ ' N XSS m m rn " ~a K m ~ rn i X55'£ m o ~ r. my wU zm ~a a I N I Z d?I~41 ! WUZ r W ON7V i }z0 OO r 3NI1 A1d3d08d ld 30Vti9 9NI1SIX3 O1 821f1p M3N W02i~ 3dplS XVW l~~ wwNa In~~ Qwm> ;oa i 3~W; ! zr3 o s ~ ZO ~ ± U z awm~ ~a" air -r~~0 i rWtn i Np~+ ~i a~3~ HNW ,L~~ NOJ3~0 'aNb'IHSd 1~~2~1S ON'dlHSd 6596 r ° r ~oZ zw~ ~ ~ ~ v ~j~ NOINfI 11a~~0 3(1J0~ ~ ° a o _ :W ° ~ ~w~ Oua WQ~ ~ ~ Z (n ~ m Z ZooZQQ¢ ,F~ Lia nUOm ~ ~ ~ U Z N " ~ ~WNmOzo m ~ who w ~ ~ ~ ~ i- Q w `aWQ°~ ~ °o° a S~Q H~ N d~ 8 0 N d ~ H S d~ ~ g a~ W ~~N~W N NOINfI 110~2~~ ~f1J02~ ~ ~N mcnamr ~ L~~~ a r x "a ~ i 35~ 5 ~a~ I _ ~ --------i o ~ ~ - ~ - - o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ w o o I I w i i i ty.a Z m Nr ~ ~ _ ~ _ ~ ~ °Q ° of > ~ rcz o ~w ~o > ra C< w~ a ~'o L_J y I ~ z_ ,u. V ~rc z o~ ~0 0 V=m ~ ~ 5w ~ ;p wm ° rcw I o L J ~Z U Ur j o O o F W - - - ~ ¢ (n 3m F ~r w a W op or ~ C7 wy x~ ra ~ z ~ m~ w~ a"a fL Q aw oz Qw ~ Z o3 >w oa w J ZY 77 DU W Q U p W N~ ~ N LPL/ Q~Q U° d0 Q Z ozo a~ ~3a ~z~ o- rcw~ W ttc7~ aQ Z~m ,IVI, ,IVI, Ur wwF oo ~J7 >m7 ra oaw ~ Y ~ 2 a ro ~ a o ~ ~ _ Z N W ~ W m Q ~ Nw W z~ N x ~ ,tt` II rc~ ~ ~ ;r j 3~ 0 ~ Y ,o\ W N ~ ~ ~ ~ N j~ i II LJ _J ZJ Wy N _ _ Oa Z \ ~ . . ttm r Zar ~ ° O wr O ~w W ~~go mo d z°a o > aJ~~ 7Z O 3tt w mZOa ap ~ ~u a ~ ~n z m Jw o ¢~^O❑ as w1 rz to YW °w Z~ a U- r u ~w ~ OJ u a >da~ a~ ~w I ma ~r a oaw a3 w ~ ~ ~N az a ~~3~~ vriz 3 v~i¢ ~ °a vuia v 111111 In 1111111 ~ ~ ~~~II1_I Z -III' Z ~ 111111 g ~ ~ III d Q III= W 'NIVJ ,h w ~ : ~ = W o ~ ~ ~ ~ = ~ - mmmmm O,UUUU,VO,UVUU,UUIi UO,U,pU pUpUUCi - N 00000000000000 000: o ~ o: 000 mmmmmm JJJJJ y M~~ioaa~~~vroNai~ MroM°M °M ~n°inNc J JJJ JJJJJJJJJJ JJJJJ JJJJJJ aca<oQ QQQQa¢QQQQ aQQ2 aQQQQ Q2QQ<Q M C'1M t'1 N1~ ()(7[7(7 ~ C7 (7 C70() [7 (7 l7 (7 C7 (7 (7 ~ 1717 C7 ~7 (7 ~~N ~NNN N ~NNNN N~NN ~N~.-U1N r Q p O j Z Q O~ Y Ow J o rOUW p0 Q >~ra u Y ~~a ~Yw00 x? HZ~~ N w~ a W wo om ~ m Qaa J W' W ~C70 m~ d ° NNl Ky mp ~H~ m ~ In O In ° pZ~m m~awa z~ ~0¢w~' z~ Q~ O~~ ozomz v v ~-J >a K~- m r a- ~m ~~a~¢ gmN~?-zZwwllpw~ omQw ¢ O~m w ° ~ ~ a ¢wm~> ~zz3~xw~arn~¢FW ~~qza °F wpW m ¢ umam~ ~ ~n NOWW~ aa~0oamo~ww~~J um(7p¢ ~~IOL7Z C ~ -Ili YQwUNN z ¢~~~upzzt7~Zm z~QZC7 Q~~~da z r z ~ III-1- a>--w o~c7_>~¢Jo,~WOO~ YzoJo WWwaw z z a ~ U}j ZZQ ~i¢w~wwa0(7oaJxN Oww J mr w w III ICI, O m W Q a J ~ J Y Z J Z~ Z W J a' O r g Z CL J K J w~ O r W ~ ~ I- W7rxQQ K-OQ W-OQ!~OOKZ QJQW QWOOJ~ a Q ~ - U~ I U~ 0 N Y~ 0 0 0 U' a (7 a Q Y m 2 Y > Y m U LL J i, i, ~ 0 ~ m IIIII- w~ W W W o Qo o Ti-I ~ W Z m W J w ¢ W U O Q ~ Q ~~-III- N w ~ ~ Q ~ ~ N ~ Q N o ~ p ~°a IIIIIIIIII ~ ~ZO ~W~w z m j N F 1 ~ N m m ~ ~ z Z > >aQ d¢ ~a~w w w w- tt w> p v W ~ p p ~ ~ m a 0 ztt ~ r< j~a~ ~ ~ ~ z tt I w r ~ ~ 4 - Q. IFI^- ~ w a oQ] op]Qa~~ a NZW~a r w_ j m r ~ p m 0 ~ m vJ U7~7Y ~~OF.W QOJOZQZQ tf1 ~}Z2Q ~ QwmJ]W -III U J ~NaO~J 3yz~ ~z~~o~oW m JJO-.U ~ ~~~~W~ ~ i--i= - ~ mmr~z¢ m~'xQw~¢g~- ~-x~ w >¢I¢ ~ owe-z~- \ ~ 0 ~ o ~a~¢d ~x'~NYpma¢aao~za o a~p~o ~ ~Ywp~J Z \ -III-- ~a gz ~ _ = o fl~afAI QN Nm~mN07-¢ JWOQK U Q7~r~ Q ONWQZ~ IiI . ~ z 71-(0U j fll KK~NNW ~~QF Od'Q0 O NUOWW ~ ~NNQNQ /LLnJ ~ -III-III W K~Z7CL OY 0 mmSZZ2ZNOWOm¢X 0 ~WUZQ C< XOVONw V ~ _ -1 W Z W w0'74' YJ K d' 2 aa'd'd 0 d'II-OO~J 0 U dJZ U1 0 ~ KZxwK W ~ wQrcrrw I www0o¢wpQOIIaQ tt ~rwwo r ¢OZQma J n- ~ daaa~nN ~ mmc7uc7oww~aw~vim m axxam m up°~~m  slaailgoiy ORAA + pewS ua1lsi,H io uogezijogine uapum aqi inogim loefold jagio hue iol `lied ui io alogm m,'pasn aq of lou sl pue slaa8gay aIWM +IlewS jagsiA to dpadoid aql si'ooitias leuopsa}oid io luawniisui, ue se'ulaiaq paleiodiooui suBisap pue seapl aqi pue'iuawnoop sigl Dll'slaaliyojy ap,yM+ IIewS 1011sN mZQ) NOJ~2~0 `ON'dlHSd 13~2i1S aNdIHS'd ~59~ ~ J =~z ~ ~ W o' ~ ~f~ NoiNn lia~~~ ~n~o~ ~ o J ~ a w o ~ N~0 Oua Wa ~ b r J~i Z ~ W ; Z o ~ ~ Z t7Q~C7r=zQ W ao~ d' ~ ~ ~ ~ zw zaa ~ O N 0 a cG Q~~Q~wO W-O E-' ~ .u~~^~ ~ ~ U W ~ ~ m ~ J m~ - ~ mwmmozw m ~ °oo W > ~ W ~ ~ ~ boo ~ ~ H~ N d~ 8 4 N d ~ H S'd ~ o~ w° w J a a ~~~~w ~ LA~~~ NOINfI 114~~1~ ~f1J02~ ~ a a ~~Q~~ =a a w ao~ ~o v ago Z z 5 ~ F- 3 P~" W E E E v 0 ~ m " ~ E " " E E N ~ Z N m ~ 2 2 S " " _ ~ W LLL~ m m M m 2 2 0 o O m r'. n o m m m m m m J r Q Q 2 Q O O 2 iv o a ~ 2 2 2 2 ~ ❑ O Q Q ~ Z n N iN m N m N N Q1 m m m m O ~ - `J N N Q O c Q Q 2 Q Q _ Q N _ - F ~ 4] J N N J J JI J m = W N O ro N Z V~ p Z U N N d ~ ~ d a a a Q ~ ~ ❑ N m a Q J J ~ ~ w ~ U ~ O J J U U Y ~ W W Y ~ ~ ~ ~ Y ~ Y Y m Y N g O a a W W ~ ~ v ~ ~ O Q Q Q O Q Q Q QLL o 0 0 0 ~ o LL z ~ ~ Q Q ~ d Z Y Y Y W ~ ~ Y W W W W Y Z Y Y Z Y K ~ O ~ ~ F W X U U U J W W U J J J J U O U U O U a J ~ W W W W m W y g g g ~ m m g c~ ~ c~ m g ~ g g ~ g °w c~ o J 3 m m w W m m m m v, ~ m m m m m m a m m a m U m v ~ u, e b r ® o ON ~ N N N ❑ r ~ O t 6 w m 0 0 ~ ~ O N (0 W W Z ~ ~ W ❑ ~1 Z j Z Z m~ m~ W F0 F-Q J w~ w~ Io 1~- ~ v~ 4 y l a y y V"' I~ :v~ ~M Q N. i _ ~ ~ I v ~ 1 i ~~v~ ~w ; o I ~ ooI o I 1 m / 1. ao ~ 1r'M~'. MRtlI; p~.~~ ~ ~i ~ i. a I - a..' I ~'n v / / V I ~ ~ I ~ ..p~- I 1 ~ v. r ,}7~~ I % / / / / tl % ~ ~ N VIII + I \ 1 I V ~ ~ 4 d i ] / / 1 ~ / ~ I 1 V I y ~ ~ ~ N I ~ ee ~ III ~ ~ v~ ..r11. ~ ~ V RW~ I ~ V I I I \ V ~ 1 I 1 b ~ I ~ _ I i / I I I ~ I~ V~ Y.• . 1 I , ~y... II p i ' i ~ `v ' . ' II J 01 I , ~ I ~ ~m ~ .(mot' "V I ~ b I 1 i mr~~ I I h m rv I V . 1 ~ ❑ ~ o ~ IV v ' I V 41 pi ~ I I ~ V " {{IIrrII V N m I I~, .i~ ~,h -~.V V ~ , ' li , -m m M : I y W h ' f v ~ rn 01 ~ 1 Y 4 ny P I II I ~,o ;~4p~ l `C III I e• ~ ~ ti ~ ~ ` 4 1 d 1 y ~p a "4 II},'' h ~ ~ N~ I ~ N i ~ iE-1~ V w m 1 O 1~~ I V.~, V "1 ~ ~ ~ V 1 I ~ I ~ . k I I I I ~ I ~ ~ ~ I I _ i Aid .9 i 11+' YI I I 1 I I I ~ ~ 1 I I I I I V~ 0. I I o. tii, r IF 4 Eu I i ~r A~ ~ _03 a'' Y ma ~ I i e i` I ~rv i 4 ~~V 'va ~ C / ; ❑ I I ~ ~ ~ ~ R 2 V N I Y C lD d , / y ~ m ~ ~ "M 1 ~ ~ ~ Y 4. m~ , l / / p ti ~ v ~4 ~f ~ ~ 1 I ~ ,y W ~ w ~ 1 ~ ~ IV~~~ y' i ~  slaali,goiy a1IgM + IIeWS uallsl7l bo uagez!ioglne uauuM aginogllM loafoud jaglo Aue uoj 'lied ui jo a!ogm ul'pasn aq of lou sl pue sloal!gojy aIIgM + IlewS uaps!)4 }o Aliodad aql s!'aoltias leuolssayoud to luawnilsul ue se `w,waq paleuoduoaui su5i,sop pue seapl aql pue'luawnoop s!qj Ogq's;oallgord allgM+ IIewS galls!){ 9 60d~ Rogue Credit Union Ashland Site Development Traffic Impact Analysis November 281, 2016 Prepared icy: f OU7u-[PN OPT(fln TRllNfDORT!lTION -INGtl1~~~?ING, LAC .~~gg0 PRO~~f~ ~S ~G 1 NE&~ 532 (fP ~OREGON 1 °b~ LY PAR~~ ~;~~PS t ~e I E F F TABLE OF CONTENTS a L EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................................................5 II. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................................6 Background .............................................................................................................................................6 Project Location .....6 Project Description ...................................................................................................................................6 III. EXISTING YEAR 2016 NO-BUILD CONDITIONS .........................9 Site Condition 1 Roadway Characteristics ..........................................................................................................................9 Traffic Counts lr Intersection Capacity and Level of Service ............................................................................................12 Year 2016 No-Build Intersection Operations ..................:......................................................................13 Year 2016 No-Build 95't' Percentile Queuing ........................................................................................13 Crash History .....................14 IV. PHASE 1 DESIGN YEAR 2017 NO-BUILD CONDITIONS ...........................................................Is Phase 1 Design Year 2017 No-Build Description ..15 Phase I Design Year 2017 No-Build Intersection Operations ...............................................................15 Phase I Design Year 2017 No-Build 951h Percentile Queuing ................15 K: V. SITE TRAFFIC ....................................................................................................................................17 f' Trip Generation ......................................................................................................................................17 Trip Distribution and Assignment 7 VI. PHASE 1 DESIGN YEAR 2017 BUILD CONDITIONS ...................................................................19 z Phase 1 Design Year 2017 Build Description ........................................................................................19 Phase 1 Design Year 2017 Build Intersection Operations ......................................................................19 Phase 1 Design Year 2017 Build 95"' Percentile Queuing .....................................................................19 Sight Distance ........................................................................................................................................20 Phase 1 Design Year 2017 Build Turn Lane Criterion VII. FULL BUILD DESIGN YEAR 2026 NO-BUILD CONDITIONS 22 Full Build Design Year 2026 No-Build Description ............................................................................22 Full Build Design Year 2026 No-Build Intersection Operations Full Build Design Year 2026 No-Build 95;" Percentile Queuing ..........................................................22 } VIII. FULL BUILD DESIGN YEAR 2026 BUILD CONDITIONS ........................................................24 Full Build Design Year 2026 Build Description ....................................................................................24 Full Build Design Year2026 Build Intersection Operations ..................................................................24 Full Build Design Year 2026 Build 95"' Percentile Queuing .................................................................24 Full Build Design Year 2026 Build Turn Lane Criterion .......................................................................25 3 IX. CONCLUSIONS ...................................................................................................................................28 i i I LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Roadway Classifications and Descriptions 9 Table 2: HCM Level of Service Designations for Stop-Controlled intersections .........................................12 Table 3: HCM Level of Service Designations foe- Signalized Intersections ..................................................12 Table 4: Year 2016 No-Build Intersection Operations, PM Peak Hour ........................................................13 ' Table 5: Year 2016 No-Build 95`" Percentile Queue Lengths, PM Peak Houri ...................................13 Table 6: Study Area Intersection Crash Rates, 2011-2015 ....14 Table 7: Crash History by TYPe 2011-2015 .............................................................................................14 ~ Table 8: Phase I Design Year 2017 No-Build Intersection Operations, PM Peak Hour ...............................15 # Table 9: Phase I Design Year 2017 No-Build 95t" Percentile Queue Lengths, PM Peak Hour ....................15 Table 10: Phase I and Full Build Development Trip Generations ..17 € Table 11: Phase 1 Design Year 2017 Build Intersection Operations.... 19 B Table 12: Phase I Design Year 2017 Build 95"' Percentile Queue Lengths ..................................................19 Table 13: Full Build Design Year 2026 No-Build Intersection Operations, PM Peak Hour .........................22 Table 14: Full Build Design Year 2026 No-Build 95"' Percentile Queue Lengths, PM Peak Hour ..............22 Table 15: Full Build Design Year 2026 Build Intersection Operations .........................................................24 Table 16: Full Build Design Year 2026 Build 95`x' Percentile Queue Lengths ..............................................24 FIGURES FIGURE 1: Vicinity Map ...........................................................................................................................7 i FIGURE 2: Site Plan ......8 FIGURE 3: Intersection Lane Configurations ..........................................................................................10 FIGURE 4: Year 2016 No-Build Traffic Volumes, PM Peak Hour .........................................................11 FIGURE 5: Phase I Design Year 2017 No-Build Traffic Volumes, PM Peak Hour 16 FIGURE 6: Phase I Development Trip Distributions and Assignment, PM Peak Hour 18 FIGURE 7: Phase I Design Year 2017 Build Traffic Volumes, PM Peak Hour ......................................21 4 ' FIGURE 8: Full Build Design Year 2026 No-Build Traffic Volumes, PM Peak Hour ...........................23 FIGURE 9: Full Build Development Trip Distributions and Assignment, PM Peak Hour ......................26 FIGURE 10: Full Build Design Year 2026 Build Traffic Volumes, PM Peak Hour ..................................27 k y APPENDICES APPENDIX A: TRAFFIC COUNT DATA APPENDIX B: 1TE GRAPHS, SEASONAL ADJUSTMENTS, CRASH DATA I APPENDIX C: YEAR 2016 NO-BUILD SYNCHRO AND SIMTRAFFIC OUTPUT APPENDIX D: PHASE 1 DESIGN YEAR 2017 NO-BUILD SYNCHRO AND SIMTRAFFIC OUTPUT E 1 i APPENDIX E: PHASE I DESIGN YEAR 2017 BUILD SYNCHRO AND SIMTRAFFIC OUTPUT APPENDIX F: DESIGN YEAR 2026 NO-BUILD SYNCHRO AND SIMTRAFFIC OUTPUT APPENDIX G: DESIGN YEAR 2026 BUILD SYNCHRO AND SIMTRAFFIC OUTPUT APPENDIX H: TURN LANE GRAPHS I APPENDIX I: AGENCY REQUIREMENTS I I qx r THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY is f t s 4 f i S jl { A t l t f F Jf 7 i I s~ I I f f I 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Summary Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering, LLC prepared a traffic analysis for a proposed Rogue Credit Union site development in Ashland, Oregon. The subject property is located along the north side of Ashland Street (OR 66) between Walker Avenue and Lit Way. Access to the site is provided from Ashland Street through an existing driveway and a proposed new right-out only access. Proposed phase 1 development includes a 4,508 square foot (SF) credit union that is estimated to generate 668 average daily trips (ADT) to the transportation system with 58 net new trips occurring during the p.m. peak hour. Full site development includes an additional mix of general office uses and apartments. Full development is estimated to generate 936 ADT to the transportation system with 88 net new trips occurring during the p.m. peak hour. The study area included site driveways and the intersections of Walker Avenue / Ashland Street and Lit Way / Ashland Street. Study area intersections and driveways were evaluated under existing year 2016, phase 1 design year 2017 (no-build and build), and full build design year 2026 conditions (no-build and build) during the p.m. peak hour. Conclusions The findings of the traffic impact analysis conclude that the proposed Rogue Credit Union site development can be approved on the transportation system without creating adverse impacts. Results of the analysis are as follows: 1. All study area intersections are shown to operate within performance standards under existing year 2016, phase t design year 2017 no-build, phase 1 design year 2017 build, full build design year 2026 no-build, and full build design year 2026 build conditions during the p.m. peak hour. 2. One queue length was shown to be exceeded in the study area under analysis scenarios. The eastbound left turn queue length on Ashland Street at Walker Avenue was shown to be exceeded by one vehicle length (25 feet) under existing year 2016 no-build conditions and continued to be exceeded in every analysis scenario. This increased the adjacent through lane queue length, but was not shown to create any adverse queuing concerns downstream. No mitigation is shown to be necessary. 3. Sight distance is shown to be adequate in both directions from site driveways on Ashland Street. 4. A center two-way-left-turn-lane currently exists on Ashland Street at the proposed development. Criterion for a westbound right turn lane was not shown to be met under phase 1 design year 2017 or full build design year 2026 conditions during the p.m. peak hour. 5. There were no safety concerns as a result of crash history at study area intersections. The proposed Rogue Credit Union site development is shown to be in compliance with the City of Ashland Comprehensive Plan and Municipal Code. Streets that serve the subject property are shown to have adequate capacity to support proposed development. "b" ' s_ Nov. 28, 2016 1 Rogue Credit Union Dev Traffic Analysis 5 II. INTRODUCTION Background Southern Oregon Transportation Engineering, LLC prepared a traffic analysis foi- a proposed Rogue Credit Union site development in Ashland, Oregon. The subject property is located along the north side of Ashland Street (OR 66) between Walker Avenue and Lit Way. A traffic analysis is required to address development impacts in accordance with the City of Ashland Municipal Code pursuant to Section 18.2.3.100. The scope of the analysis includes evaluating impacts to the surrounding transportation system under existing and phased design year conditions. The study area included site driveways and the intersections of Walker Avenue / Ashland Street and Lit Way i Ashland Street. Study area intersections and driveways were evaluated under the following conditions during the p.m. peak hour: 1) Existing year 2016 no-build 2) Phase 1 design year 2017 (no-build and build) 3) Full build design year 2026 conditions (no-build and build) Access to the site is provided from Ashland Street (OR 66) through an existing driveway directly across from the Ashland Shopping Center and a proposed new right-out only access approximately 150 feet to the west. Project Location The subject property is located along the north side of Ashland Street between Walker Avenue and Lit Way in Ashland, Oregon. Refer to Figures 1 and 2 for a vicinity map and site plan. Project Description The subject property is currently occupied by a single family residence, which takes access from the existing driveway on Ashland Street directly across from the Ashland Shopping Center (eastern Wendy's driveway). Proposed phase l development includes a 4,508 square foot (SF) credit union that is estimated to generate 668 average daily trips (ADT) to the transportation system with 58 net new trips occurring during the p.m. peak hour. Full site development includes the proposed 4,508 SF credit union and a mix of general office uses and apartments within three additional buildings. Full development is estimated to generate 936 ADT to the transportation system with 88 net new trips occurring during the p.m. peak hour. E t _ #3 ± Nov. 28, 2016 ( Rogue Credit Union Dev Traffic Analysis 6 Figure 1 : Vicinity Map Ai~ 41 A`if`i~ ~ w~ ♦e• ar „ ! i.1~•~C, p ~ ~ S = ~ r4r A" . r~: i. s+Mtw..~,..k.!wr ry~ ~ 1o- 't~,ff• 1'~ r, w i ^ t ,ire}~ ~ ~ p.; r ` t• C y~'~ ~s ~ ~ yam: k G.}~~i Y w~+ t y Holmes Ave 41 4.4 Porker St . t a Site , , . oc i ss -A w k 1 O wkA a XL Tay t $*~m: ~alf* Ld f Y r a W O ~r1~ r F yJ 'CC . a . I 'J R. i ~4 { y y 1 f ~ 4W ' ♦.a ~Mr lam' jy , r ~y 1 ~ K. '^,~y77ff'~T`'' r~ti' •~y IM~ 1R .1 ~Q ~ t. . I • Nor rO R"Ai.E i O UT-wan okl(o n Ashland Rogue Credit Union Site development l Medford, Oregon 97504 Traffic Impact Analysis ph 541,608.9923 fax 541.535.6873 email : kwkp l 0q. com Ashland, Oregon I Figure 2: Site Plan 0- ( # ~1xry ,:<r?.'?r`i.fl` ~ 'ti;r l-Ze,;:+, I.LJ%>:-'E!"7T I 1 _ • rig ,'Ix~Fa f . 3T f C TH } cr , R 1 f} f.♦ i ( 11. 1 l ~f1 ~ `:Tires 3, ~ 1 1 r r~ t.`•f.~'~__ f 7 fir } I.. F tt. M l' LOT I , ~ d511t ~aY3•~s~ dJII.GINur? ~ ~ ~ fe,,~lfllJ.l~r Fu7-rR5 AA IXE r J, ;E I I i t FIIT JF£ MIX IXE I 7111t ofCf r LI-Ill,hJtr " 1'%4 zt li li:t ti.• I L____J r?_....._. c, I I w ____.-_...,.v....~.e I i 'i 11 r (R - 7`-:3 C 11 P S t } ~i to • ~ 1 - ~ ~'t I It . I i -~;:1~: , ~ 4 - ^T„. LDI I CM1?SIq.rR.' ~ • ~ I ~f 1. u - ?r'.1 31 Ix ,It rIx rd n F'J'Uti• y f! ,1.4' 3'.;•I~tlsl' 1. " I t , i++4:t. a'a1_'LV•;] 1 1 • rj .y rJ('d{irn-L i V, JL n.i -v,'~~i'.. -~7 I . x. : ,x~'J+I rs•,r ,f„ Iht.'r at+ I I Lt! 1~! LOT i LRI-NJ 010 4,, 4 11 •M ! YM (r t T s. `~.~-T.• i .jrY .r+tr. v. C) ~ I S ~ I -il`•~ , Iii +1' r •r,. ts:G )'JP P Cr _[.'kVs`. •.,tL.4'+:! _ fll - ~..s 1 +'lll.r'n. • •i. a•, v> a•r.~ xa, 'N I 1=-- P R Q P 0 S s a UT.4-CAN OPIUM Ashland Rogue Credit Union T-RANSPO-RT-ATION -Wlti-CWRING, LLC Site Development Medford, Oregon 97504 Traffic Impact Analysis ph 541.608.9923 fax 541.535.6873 en7ail: bvkp1C&cl.com Ashland, Oregon i III. EXISTING YEAR 2416 NO-BUILD CONDITIONS Site Conditions The subject property is located along the north side of Ashland Street between Walker Avenue and Lit Way in Ashland, Oregon. Ashland Street provides direct access to the site and is classified as a Boulevard. Walker Avenue to the west is classified as an Avenue, and Lit Way to the east a Neighborhood Street. See Table 1 below for additional information. Roadway Characteristics The project study area includes development driveways and the intersections of Walker Avenue/Ashland Street and Lit Way/Ashland Street. Less than 50 trips during the peak hour were shown to continue east or west from the site and reach Walker Avenue or Lit Way, but these intersections were included as study area intersections because they were the nearest intersection on either side of the proposed development. Ashland Street is under the City of Ashland jurisdiction so all driveways and intersections being evaluated are required to meet City performance standards. Table 1 provides a summary of existing roadway classifications and descriptions in the study area. Table 1 - Roadway Classifications and Descriptions Roadway Jurisdiction Functional Lanes Operational Posted Speed Classification Standard (MPH) Ashland Street (OR 66) City of Ashland Boulevard 5 LOS D 30 Walker Avenue City of Ashland Avenue 3 LOS D 25 Lit Way City of Ashland Neighborhood Street 2 LOS E 25 Traffic Counts Year 2016 manual traffic counts (3:00-6:00 pm) were collected in September at three intersections or driveways within the vicinity of the proposed development to determine existing traffic patterns. Counts were seasonally adjusted using ODOT's 2015 Seasonal Trend Table. An average commuter/summer adjustment produced a seasonal adjustment of 7%. Traffic volumes were then adjusted to reflect 30`j' highest hour volumes and balanced up to the nearest five trip denomination. Refer to Figures 3 and 4 for intersection lane configurations and year 2016 traffic volumes during the p.m. peak hour. Counts are provided in Appendix A. Nov. 28, 2016 Rogue Credit Union Dev Traffic Analysis 9 i I Figure 3: Intersection Lane Configurations a a F 0 z w V C Holmes Ave = dO.LS Parker St Site STOP 4- Ashland St bb 0 s'• C C ls~y ~ .J dO.lS J STOP { ` a a 2 H c~°rk 4 qpe 99 a Q ! a LL. Q © 2 2 > ca 4 a rz- X NO To SCALE Ashland Rogue Credit Union T- AMSPOWATIOH MINIZAING, LLC Site Development Medford, Oregon 97504 Traffic Impact Analysis ph 541.608.9923 fax 541.535.6873 email. kwkpl0q.can Ashland, Oregon i I Figure 4: Year 2016 No-Build Traffic Volumes, PM Peak Hour ~L a 0 Z 1~o 70 135 V 465 475 ai 25 70 a.+ + ill- ` C a p Holmes Ave 5 5 770 640 } 1 Parker St Site 5 7 Ashland St S•~• O f'p o00 ~ ~ 11 0 700 615 > 40 40 In C) W) E 0 z ciQ c qyQ 99 0 C J 5•, A C O E Q t/? 4J p ~ en i > L 4J p i. NOT TO SCALE S o nT-flan OPIUM Ashland Rogue Credit Union T-AA WO-PTATIAn InGIn RInG, 1.1,C Site Development Medford' Oregon 97504 Traffic Impact Analysis ph 541.608.9923 fax 541.535.6873 p email: kwkp 10q. com Ashland, Oregon I Intersection Capacity and Level of Service intersection capacity calculations were conducted utilizing the methodologies presented in the Year 2010 Highway Capacity, Alanual. Capacity and level of service calculations for unsignalized intersections were prepared using "SYNCHRO" timing software. Level of service quantifies the degree of comfort afforded to drivers as they travel through an intersection or along a roadway section. The level of service methodology was developed to quantify the quality of service of transportation facilities. Level of service is based on total delay, defined as the total elapsed time from when a vehicle stops at the end of a queue until the vehicle departs from the stop line. Level of service ranges from "A" to "F", with "A" indicating the most desirable condition and "F" indicating an unsatisfactory condition. The HCM LOS designations for stop-controlled and signalized intersections are provided in Tables 2 and 3. Table 2 - HCM Level of Service Designations for Stop-Controlled Intersections Level of Service Delay Range A <10 B >10- 15 C >15-25 D >25 - 35 E >35 - 50 F > 50 Table 3 - HCM Level of Service Designations for Signalized Intersections Level of Service Delay Range A <10 B >10-20 C >20 - 35 D >35 - 55 E >55 - 80 F >80 Streets within the study area are under City of Ashland jurisdiction. The City of Ashland maintains a level of service "D" minimum for signalized intersections and LOS "E" for the critical movement at unsignalized intersections. Mitigation is required if proposed development causes a study area intersection to exceed the operational standard and is shown to operate worse than no-build conditions. Nov. 28, 2016 (Rogue Credit Union Dev Traffic Analysis 12 I Year 2016 No-Build Intersection Operations Study area intersections were evaluated under existing year 2016 no-build conditions during the p.m. peak hour. Results are summarized in Table 3. Table 3 - Year 2016 No-Build Intersection Operations, PM Peak Hour intersection Performance Standard Traffic Conth•ol Year 2016 No-Bnild Walker Avenue 1 Ashland Street LOS D Signalized C Lit Way / Ashland Street LOS E Stop Controlled C (northbound) Dev. Driveway / Ashland Street LOS E Stop Controlled B (northbound) LOS = Level of Service Results of the analysis show study area intersections operate acceptably (within performance standards) under year 2016 no-build conditions. Refer to Appendix C for synchro output sheets. Year 2016 No-Build 95th Percentile Queuing Queuing is the stacking up of vehicles for a given lane movement, and it can have a significant effect on roadway safety and the overall operation of a transportation system. Long queue lengths in through lanes can block access to turn lanes, driveways, and minor street approaches, as well as spill back into upstream intersections. As a result of this, the estimation of queue lengths is an important aspect of the analysis process for determining how a transportation corridor operates. Queue lengths are reported as the average, maximum, or 95'1' percentile queue length. The 95t1i percentile queue length is used for design purposes and is the queue length reported in this analysis. Five simulations were run and averaged in SimTrafFc to determine 95`x' percentile queue lengths. Queues were evaluated at study area intersections under existing year 2016 no-build conditions. Queue lengths were rounded up to the nearest 25 feet (single vehicle length) and reported in Table 4 if shown to be exceeded during the p.m. peak hour. Table 4 Year 2016 No-Build 95th Percentile Queue Lengths, PM Peak Hour Intersection Available Link Distance (Ft) 95th Percentile Queue (Ft) Exceeded Roadway walker Ave. / Ashland St. Eastbound Left 100, 125' Left Turn Storage Note: Exceeded performance standards are shown in bold, italic Results of the queuing analysis show the eastbound left turn storage on Ashland Street at Walker Avenue is exceeded under existing conditions during the p.m. peak hour. This is not shown to impact the adjacent eastbound travel lane. No other links were shown to be exceeded within the study area. Refer to Appendix C for a full queuing and blocking report. Nov. 28, 2016 Rogue Credit Union Dev Traffic Analysis 13 I Crash History Crash data for the most recent 5-year period was provided from Ashland Traffic Accidents. Crash data was analyzed to identify crash patterns. that could be attributable to geometric oi• operational deficiencies, or crash trends of a specific type that would indicate the need for further investigation at an intersection. Study area intersection crash rates were also compared to the ODOT 90`r' percentile rate for tit-ban 4-legged stop controlled and signalized intersections. Tables 5 and 6 provide a summary of results. Crash data is provided in Appendix B. Table 5 - Study Area Intersection Crash Rates, 2011-2015 Total Crash ODOT Intersection 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Crashes ADT Rate 90`n % Walker Ave / Ashland St 0 4 2 2 1 9 18,050 0.270 0.860 Shopping Center / Ashland St 0 2 0 0 1 3 13,960 0.120 0.408 Lit Way / Ashland St 1 0 0 0 0 1 14,590 0.040 0.408 Table b - Crash History by Type, 2011-2015 Interseetion Collision Type Severity Rear- 'turning/ Backing Head- Ped/ Non- Injury Fatal End Angle on Bike Injury Walker Ave / Ashland St 4 2 1 1 1 8 1 0 Shopping Center / Ashland St 0 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 Lit Way / Ashland St 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 There were nine reported collisions at the intersection of Walker Avenue and Ashland Street within a five-year period. Approximately 44% of crashes were rear-end collisions, which are common at signalized intersections. There were three reported collisions at the shopping center driveway directly across from the proposed development driveway along Ashland Street, and all were angle or turning collisions. Angle or turning collisions are the most common collision at stop controlled intersections. There was two collisions involving a pedestrian and bike. The pedestrian collision occurred on Ashland Street at Walker Avenue and involved a pedestrian crossing against the traffic light. The pedestrian was determined to be at fault. The bike collision occurred on Ashland Street at Lit Way and the cyclist was found to be at fault. Study area intersection crash rates were all shown to be less than the ODOT published 90`r' percentile crash rate, which is used as a measure to determine whether further investigation should be taken. The number or severity of collisions within a five-year period at study area intersections is not found to raise safety concerns, and there are no crash patterns attributable to geometric or operational deficiencies. No further investigation is shown to be necessary. Nov. 28, 2016 1 Rogue Credit Union Dev `T'raffic Analysis 14 i I IV. PHASE 1 DESIGN YEAR 2017 NO-BUILD CONDITIONS Phase 1 Design Year 2017 No-Build Description Phase 1 design year 2017 no-build conditions represent phase 1 development build year conditions for the study area without consideration of proposed bank trips. This condition is evaluated to determine how a study area will be impacted by area background growth. Background growth in this report was derived using the City of Ashland Transportation System Plan (TSP). An average growth rate of 1.0% per year was applied to existing year 2016 design hour volumes to develop phase 1 design year 2017 no-build conditions. Refer to Figure 5 for phase 1 design year 2017 no-build traffic volumes. Phase 1 Design Year 2017 No-Build Intersection Operations Study area intersections were evaluated under phase 1 design year 2017 no-build conditions during the p.m. peak hour. Results are summarized in Table 7. 'f'able 7 - Phase I Design Year 2017 No-Build Intersection Operations, PM Peak Hour Intersection Performance Standard Traffic Control Year 2017 No-Build Walker Avenue / Ashland Street LDS D Signalized C Lit Way / Ashland Street LOS E Stop Controlled C (northbound) Dev Driveway / Ashland Street LDS E Stop Controlled B (northbound) LOS = Level of Service Results of the analysis show study area intersections continue to operate acceptably (within pet -formance standards) under phase 1 design year 2017 no-build conditions with no significant changes in operation. Refer to Appendix D for synchro output sheets. Phase 1 Design Year 2017 No-Build 95t1' Percentile Queuing Five simulations were run and averaged in SimTraffic to determine 95`h percentile queue lengths under phase 1 design year 2017 no-build conditions. Queue lengths were rounded up to the nearest 25 feet (single vehicle length) and reported in Table 8 if shown to be exceeded during the p.m. peak hour. Table 8 - Phase I Design Year 2017 No-Build 95`h Percentile Queue Lengths, PM Peak Hour Intersection Available Lints Distance (Ft) 951h Percentile Queue (Ft) Exceeded Roadway Walker Ave. / Ashland St. Eastbound Left 100' 125' Left Turn Storage Note: Exceeded performance standards are shown in bold, italic Results of the queuing analysis show the eastbound left turn storage on Ashland Street at Walker Avenue continues to be exceeded under phase 1 design year no-build conditions during the p.m. peak hour. In watching the simulations, the eastbound through queue length sometimes blocks the eastbound left turn pocket, which then creates the SimTraffic output that the eastbound left turn storage is exceeded when it actually is not. No other links were shown to be exceeded within the study area. Refer to Appendix D for a full queuing and blocking report. t I Nov. 28, 2016 Rogue Credit Union Dev Traffic Analysis 15 i B s i C-Figaure 5 : Phase 1 Year 2017 No-Build Traffic Volumes, PM Peak Hour Q 0 O z 70 135 V 47117 480 ~ 4t 25 J 70 Q 4.+ -sue L ~ } ~ QJ ~ vcr Holmes Ave Z 5 5 775 =r 645 5 Parker St Site y Ashland St 66 ~ p Ss a ~ ky 3 p4 occ ~ I 0 705 620 v AO 40 E O z L q`e 99 w U! c 3 d L V w a ~ ~ L Z a, o Q CL o L NOT To SCALE S N UT 1 N DA-Mm Ashland Rogue Credit Union T-UNSPD-RT-flrI0N -WINI"ING, LK Site Development Medford, Oregon 97504 Traffic Impact Anal vs/s ph 541.608.9923 fax 541.535.6873 j email.- kw1<p1aq.com Ashland, Oregon i V. SITE TRAFFIC Trip Generation Trip generation calculations for phase 1 build and full build site development were prepared utilizing the institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) TH13 Genet•alion, 9`" Edition. Rates were used for land use code 220 - Apartments, 710 - General Office, and 912 - Drive-in Bank (which was the closest land use in the ITE for a credit union). Phase 1 build development includes a 4,508 SF credit union and is planned for construction in the year 2017. Full build site development includes three additional buildings with general office uses and apartments On upper floors. The full build scenario is estimated to be developed by the future year 2026. Refer to Table 9 for a summary of trip generations. ITE trip generation sheets are provided in Appendix B. Table 9 - Phase 1 and Full Build Development Trip Generations Daily Land Use Unit Size Rate Trips PM Rate PM Peak Dour Pl . Phase 1 Development Total in Out 912 - Drive-in Bank 1000 SF 4.508 148.15 668 24.3 110 55 55 Pass-by 47% (52) (26) (26) Net New 'Trips 58 29 29 Full Build Site Development 220 - Apartments Units 20 6.65 133 0.62 12 8 4 710 - General office 1000 SF 12.229 11.03 135 1.49 18 3 15 Additimial Development Trips 30 11 19 Total Trips 936 88 40 48 * DU =dwelling unit Trip Distribution and Assignment Development trips were distributed to the transportation system in accordance with existing traffic patterns and engineering judgement regarding the surrounding area. Counts at driveways along the south side of Ashland Street between Lit Way and Walker Avenue showed northbound left and northbound right turn movements higher at driveways where the movement was easier to make, which overall balanced out to show fairly equal distributions to/from both the east and west. Based on this, distributions to and from the proposed development driveways were approximately equal in each direction. For Phase 1 development, all southbound right turns from the site were distributed to the right-out driveway because of the credit union location on the site and close proximity to that driveway. All other movements in and out of the site were distributed through the main driveway directly across from the shopping center driveway. Once on the transportation system, development trips were distributed in accordance with traffic patterns and engineering judgment at each study area intersection. Refer to Figure 6 for development trip distributions and assignments during the p.m. peak hour. _ , ~ , 1;1111' r ,1r „f,t 1i, I Nov. 28, 2016 Rogue Credit Union Dev Traffic Analysis 17 i Figure 6: Phase 1 Trip Distributions and Assignments, PM Peak Hour v a O oo- 0 V t0 L 1 I ~ 0 0 0 Holmes Ave ~l a o ~ a 14 ,r -ter- 13 t ~ T ° Parker St Site e r~ G O c -4 34% 45% Ashland St bb 31% 47°la S,s 4 0 a ki b .,yfl ~QN 3 0 J o 28 27 -3 ^~.-=r -13 0 1 f 0 ¢ ooc E O z C'/qr~ p -q 99 a. J 3~, L CU Z v ~ a ¢ ~ L L NOT TO SCALE SoUTfll-RN O- L ON Ashland Rogue Credit Union E TPANWOATATION -WINUMNG, LK Site Development I~ Medford, Oregon 9750¢ Traffic Impact Analysis ph 541.608.9923 fax 541.535.6873 email: kwkp 1 P q. com Ashland, Oregon I I VI. PHASE 1 DESIGN YEAR 2017 BUILD CONDITIONS Phase 1 Design Year 2017 Build Description Phase 1 build conditions in this analysis represent no build conditions for the study area with the addition of proposed development trips from a 4,400 SF bank. Phase I build conditions are compared to no-build conditions to determine what impacts and/or mitigation measures will result from the proposed bank. Refer to Figure 7 for design year 2017 build conditions during the p.m. peak hour. Phase 1 Design Year 2017 Build Intersection Operations Study area intersections and driveways were evaluated under phase 1 design year 2017 build conditions during the p.m. peak hour. Results are summarized in Table 10. Table 10 - Phase 1 Design Year 2017 Build Intersection Operations, PM Peak Hour Intersection Performance Standard Traff=ic Control Year 2017 Build Walker Avenue / Ashland Street LOS D Signalized C Lit Way / Ashland Street LOS F Stop Controlled C (northbound) Dev Driveway / Ashland Street LOS E Stop Controlled C (southbound) Right-out DW / Ashland Street LOS E Stop Controlled B (southbound right) LOS = Level of Service, DW = driveway Results of the analysis show study area intersections continue to operate acceptably (within performance standards) under phase I design year 2017 build conditions. The only significant change is shown in the southbound movement at the proposed development driveway, which changes from a LOS "B" to a LOS "C" as a result of southbound left turn trips. Refer to Appendix E for synchro output sheets. Phase 1 Design Year 2017 Build 95"i Percentile Queuing Five simulations were run and averaged in SimTrafftc to determine 95"' percentile queue lengths under phase I design year 2017 build conditions. Queue lengths were rounded up to the nearest 25 feet (single vehicle length) and reported in Table 11 if shown to be exceeded during the p.m. peak hour. _Table 11- Phase I Design Year 2017 Build 95`h Percentile Queue Lengths, PM Peak Hour Intersection Available Linlc Distance (Ft) 95t" Percentile Queue (Ft) Exceeded Roadway Walker Ave. / Ashland St. Eastbound Left 100' 125' Left Turn Storage Note: Exceeded performance standards are shown in bold, italic Results of the queuing analysis show the eastbound left turn storage on Ashland Street at Walker Avenue continues to be exceeded under phase 1 design year build conditions during the p.m, peak hour. No other links were shown to be exceeded within the study area. Refer to Appendix E for a full queuing and blocking report. 't = Nov. 28, 2016 Rogue Credit Union Dev Traffic Analysis 119 s ' 1;1 i_ I 1 Sight Distance Sight distance from the proposed development driveway is unrestricted in both the east and west directions. Minimum stopping sight distance (SSD) and desirable intersection sight distance (ISD) are both shown to be met in accordance with the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) standards. The minimum SSD necessary to meet the AASHTO standard is 200 feet and the desirable ISD standard is 335 feet. Sight distance from the development driveway was measured in the field to be well over 500 feet in each direction. It is recommended that this is maintained when buildings are placed along the property frontage of Ashland Street in the site layout. From north: Looking east From north: Looking `vest ji, 'Alt H Phase 1 Design Year 2017 Build Turn Lane Criterion Right Turn Lane Criterion Right turn lane criterion was evaluated on Ashland Street at the development driveway to determine whether a westbound right turn drop lane should be included as a result of proposed phase I development. Results showed that criterion is not met for a right turn drop lane. No further evaluation is shown to be necessary. Left Turn Lane Criterion A center TWLTL is currently provided on Ashland Street at the development driveway. No further left turn analysis is shown to be necessary. Nov. 28, 2016 Rogue Credit Union Dev Traffic Analysis 20 I Figure 7: Phase 1 Year 2017 Build Traffic Volumes, PM Peak Hour o O z 70 ! 138 L} 479 490 L 5 j 71 Q n O t~ 3 Holmes Ave 5 5 789 ~ 658 T Porker St Site 8 Ashland St - 66 S•~ o ~ 0 29 27 691 607 40~ ~40 O z C/ork a a UL 0 L7 ~ in r NOT T© SCALE S O UT-A-1-R N HIM Ashland Rogue Credit Union T-R-ANWO-RTATION -WIMMM, LK Site Development Medford, Oregon 97504 Traffic Impact Analysis ph 541.608.9923 fax 541.535.6873 en7ail: kwkp10aq.com Ashland, Oregon i I VII. FULL BUILD DESIGN YEAR 2026 NO-BUILD CONDITIONS Full Build Design Year 2026 No-Build Description Full build design year 2026 no-build conditions represent full build year conditions for the study area without consideration of proposed development trips. This condition is evaluated to determine how a study area will be impacted by ten years of area background growth. Refer to Figure 8 for full build design year 2026 no-build traffic volumes during the p.m. peak hour. Full Build Design Year 2026 No-Build Intersection Operations Study area intersections were evaluated under full build design year 2026 no-build conditions during the p.m. peak hour. Results are summarized in Table 12. Table 12 - Full Build Design Year 2026 No-Build Intersection Operations, PM Peak Hour Intersection Performance Standard Traffic Control Year 2026 No-Build Walker Avenue / Ashland Street LOS D Signalized C Lit Way / Ashland Street LOS E Stop Controlled C (northbound) Dev Driveway / Ashland Street LOS E Stop Controlled B (northbound) LOS = Level of Service Results of the analysis show study area intersections continue to operate acceptably (within performance standards) under full build design year 2026 no-build conditions with no significant changes in operation as a result of background growth. Refer to Appendix F for synchro output sheets. Full Build Design Year 2026 No-Build 95t1i Percentile Queuing Five simulations were run and averaged in SimTraffic to determine 95"' percentile queue lengths under phase 1 design year 2017 no-build conditions. Queue lengths were rounded up to the nearest 25 feet (single vehicle length) and reported in Table 13 if shown to be exceeded during the p.m. peak hour. Table 13 - Full Build Design Year 2026 No-Build 95`x' Percentile Queue Lengths, PM Peak Hour Intersection Available Link Distance (Ft) 95"' Percentile Queue (Ft) Exceeded Roadway Walker Ave. / Ashland St. Eastbound Left 100' 125' Left Turn Storage Note- Exceeded performance standards are shown in bold, italic Results of the queuing analysis show the eastbound left turn storage on Ashland Street at Walker Avenue continues to be exceeded in the future during the p.m. peak hour, but this still appears to be related more to the eastbound through queue length blocking the turn pocket and not allowing eastbound left turning vehicles to get into the pocket during peak conditions. This situation increases the queue length along Ashland Street, but doesn't appear to create any operational impacts to the west. No other links were shown to be exceeded within the study area. Refer to Appendix F for a full queuing and blocking report. Nov. 28, 2016 ( Rogue Credit Union Dev Traffic Analysis 22 I Figure 8: Full Build Year 2026 No-Build Traffic Volumes, PM Peak Hour Q 0 0 z 80 ISO 515 -r 525 L ?0 i 75 Q a Holmes Ave T _Jll~ 5 r 5 &,5 7 4 T 710 Parker St Site ~I~ o Q v' Ashland St x. bb t o 775 f 690 45 45 c O n L z C/0r~ a qy 99 a fi E _ m cL v Z NOT TO SCALE S o UINZ A H OPIUM Ashland Rogue Credit Union Site Development ® Medford, Oregon 97504 Traffic Impact Analysis ph 541.608.9923 fax 541.535.6873 email: kwkp 1 cr q.com Ashland, Oregon I VIII. FULL BUILD DESIGN YEAR 2026 BUILD CONDITIONS Full Build Design Year 2026 Build Description Full build conditions in this analysis represent no build conditions for the study area with the addition of proposed development trips from additional general office uses and apartments. Full build conditions are compared to no-build conditions to determine what impacts and/or mitigation measures will result from additional development trips. Refer to Figure 9 for full build development trip distributions and assignments and Figure 10 for full build design year 2026 build traffic volumes during the p.m. peak hour. Full Build Design Year 2026 Build Intersection Operations Study area intersections and driveways were evaluated under full build design year 2026 build conditions during the p.m. peak hour. Results are summarized in Table 14. 'T'able 14 - Full Build Design Year 2026 Build Intersection Operations, PM Peak Hour Intersection Performance Standard Traffic Control Year 2026 Build Walker Avenue / Ashland Street LOS D Signalized C Lit Way / Ashland Street LOS E Stop Controlled C (northbound) Dev Driveway / Ashland Street LOS E Stop Controlled C (southbound) Right-out DW / Ashland Street LOS E Stop Controlled B (southbound right) LOS = Level of Service, DW = driveway Results of the analysis show study area intersections continue to operate acceptably (within performance standards) under full build design year 2026 build conditions. The only significant change is shown in the southbound movement at the proposed development driveway, which changes from a LOS "B" to a LOS "C" as a result of southbound left turns. All other intersection operations are shown to stay the same. Refer to Appendix G for synchro output sheets. Full Build Design Year 2026 Build 95`h Percentile Queuing Five simulations were run and averaged in SimTraffic to determine 95`' percentile queue lengths under full build design year 2026 build conditions. Queue lengths were rounded up to the nearest 25 feet (single vehicle length) and reported in Table 15 if shown to be exceeded during the p.m. peak hour. Table 15 Full Build Design Year 2026 Build 95"' Percentile Queue Lengths, PM Peak Hour Intersection Available Link Distance (Ft) 95"' Percentile Queue (Ft) Exceeded Roadway Walker Ave. / Ashland St. Eastbound Left 100' 125' Left Turn Storage Note: Exceeded performance standards are shown in bold, italic Results of the queuing analysis show the eastbound left turn storage on Ashland Street at Walker Avenue continues to be exceeded under full build design year build conditions during the p.m. peak hour. As previously stated, this may not be a result of the left turn movement exceeding the turn pocket but rather the eastbound through movement queue length extending back past the turn pocket and not f;,, 3F, _~oI" 1 .'ra`ii Nov. 28, 2016 Rogue Credit Union Dev Traffic Analysis 24 I allowing vehicles to get into the turn lane. The result is a longer queue length in the adjacent through lane, but this is not shown to cause any other problems downstream. No other links were shown to be exceeded within the study area. Refer to Appendix G for a full queuing and blocking report. Full Build Design Year 2026 Build Turn Lane Criterion Right Turn Lane Criterion Right turn lane criterion was evaluated on Ashland Street at the development driveway under design year 2026 full build conditions to determine whether a westbound right turn drop lane should be included as a result of additional development trips. Results showed that criterion is not met foz• a right turn drop lane based on roadway speed and street volumes. No further evaluation is shown to be necessary. Left Turn Lane Criterion A center TWLTL is currently provided on Ashland Street at the development driveway. No further left turn analysis is shown to be necessary. a Nov. 28, 2016 Rogue Credit Union Dev Traffic Analysis ( 25 1 i i i Figure 9: Full Build Trip Distributions and Assignments, PM Peak Hour i a a Z i I oo~ p 5 u 13 _ (7 L 0 1 2 C 0 0 Holmes Ave 1 r _o 221 7 ~s Parker St Site i a - 35% _ 46% Ashland St bb 32% II } n y 33 } 33 13 -13 0 { 0 4 -J 0 0 o L O C'~r d ~qb 99 y o Q 0 C 0 L x 0 o 4 O ~ L NOT TO SCALE s o UT-Ma N O NM" Ashland Rogue Credit Union T-UNSPOATATINN MINl-RIND, LLB Site Development Medford, Oregon 97504 Traffic 1111 act Analysis ph 541.608.9923 fax 541.535.6873 ~ eir7ail.-kwlfpI@q.com Ashland, Oregon i FFJgure 10 : Full Build Year 2026 Build Traffic Volumes, PM Peak Hour v a 2 (I V.' 'n 1 ~ CI 80 1 I5~ U ! 528 4-r 542 ~ 30 f 77 Oct CD 00 ~ C j a Holmes Ave CJ A -6 $ 728 876 - 8 Pa rker St Site I Ashland St E!~ v a v p4 c c~~ 34 33 j 762 667 > I 45 45 Q E M ~ r L O z F k 1b a > E w 0 r 0 .14 E © 3 i NOT TO SCALE S O UT-i-Cp N H-C O N Rogue Credit Union Ashland Tit-ANSPO-RTATIOt~ ~NGIN-E-~-RING, ll.C Site Development Medford, Oregon 97504 Traffic Impact Analysis ph 541.608.9923 fax 541.535.6873 email: kwkp 10q. com Ashland, Oregon I IX. CONCLUSIONS Conclusions The findings of the traffic impact analysis conclude that the proposed Rogue Credit Union site development can be approved on the transportation system without creating adverse impacts. Results of the analysis are as follows: 1. All study area intersections are shown to operate within performance standards under existing year 2016, phase 1 design year 2017 no-build, phase I design year 2017 build, full build design year 2026 no-build, and full build design year 2026 build conditions during the p.m. peak hour. 2. One queue length was shown to be exceeded in the study area under analysis scenarios. The eastbound left turn queue length on Ashland Street at Walker Avenue was shown to be exceeded by one vehicle length (25 feet) under existing year 2016 no-build conditions and continued to be exceeded in every analysis scenario. This increased the adjacent through lane queue length, but was not shown to create any adverse queuing concerns downstream. No mitigation is shown to be necessary. 3. Sight distance is shown to be adequate in both directions from site driveways on Ashland Street. 4. A center two-way-left-turn-lane currently exists on Ashland Street at the proposed development. Criterion for a westbound right turn lane was not shown to be met under phase I design year 2017 or full build design year 2026 conditions during the p.m. peak hour, 5. There were no safety concerns as a result of crash history at study area intersections. The proposed Rogue Credit Union site development is shown to be in compliance with the City of Ashland Comprehensive Plan and Municipal Code. Streets that serve the subject property are shown to have adequate capacity to support proposed development. I I i i I 's i 3 I 3 i } j~ I S I Nov. 28, 2016 Rogue Credit Union llev Traffic Analysis 28 I Council Business Meetina March 21, 2017 Title: Results of Downtown Survey From: Ann Seltzer Management Analyst ann.seltzer@ashland. or. us Summary: This is a report from Eva Skuratowicz on the downtown survey conducted by Southern Oregon University Research Center (SOURCE). Actions, Options, or Potential Motions: This item is informational and does not require Council action. Staff Recommendation: N/A Resource Requirements: Council approved $4,996 for this project on November 1, 2016. Policies, Plans and Goals Supported: N/A Back round and Additional Information: Last spring, the City Council adopted a number of ordinances intended to address behavior issues in the downtown core. The ordinances dealt with sidewalk obstruction, intrusive solicitation and unlicensed dogs. The Council also adopted an ordinance that prohibits smoking within 10 feet of a downtown sidewalk or in public spaces downtown. The Ashland Police Department added a second Central Area Patrol Officer and increased the number of police cadets from four to seven in order to improve uniformed presence downtown. Additionally, the City contracted with Jackson County for the use of two jail beds for individuals convicted of crimes in Ashland Municipal Court. At its July 18, 2016, goal-setting session, the Council discussed its desire to evaluate the effectiveness of the actions it had taken regarding downtown behavior. At its November 1, 2016, meeting the City Council approved an intergovernmental agreement with Southern Oregon University for SOURCE to survey downtown businesses. At the November 15 meeting, the City Council reviewed the draft survey and approved the questions. Attachments: SOURCE Survey of Downtown Businesses Report Page 1 of 1 CITY OF ASHLAND I City of Ashland Downtown Ordinances J` L. I SULITH EKN 0 R E Gu" N UN I V E R S I T Y %OLJRCE RESEARCH CENTER r Elm I City of Ashland Downtown Ordinances RESEARCH '_E`JTER City of Ashland Downtown Ordinances Survey of Downtown Businesses The Southern Oregon University Research Center (SOURCE) was hired by the City of Ashland to use a survey methodology to assess the effectiveness of the downtown corridor ordinances that were implemented on June 1, 2016. The City wanted to determine whether there have been behavior changes as the result of bans on smoking, soliciting diners, soliciting ATM users, and leaving less than six feet of clear space on the sidewalk. In addition, the City wanted to know whether there have been changes in the presence of uniformed officers in the downtown corridor. The survey results show that while some of the ordinances are having the intended effect, there have also been some unintended consequences. Findings from an open-ended question on the survey provide a richer understanding of these intended effects and unintended consequences. Met110d()10( Y There were a number of methodological approaches considered for this project. SOURCE Director, Dr. Eva Skuratowicz, talked with Ann Seltzer from the City of Ashland to determine the research strategy. Since the approach needed to center on behavior change in the downtown corridor, it was necessary to ask people what they had observed and experienced before the ordinances were implemented on June 1, 2016 and what they observed and experienced after that date. The summertime was identified as a particularly important season to assess, and the June 1, 2016 implementation date gave us a natural comparison point. Thus we chose to have respondents compare Summer 2015 to Summer 2016. Business owners and managers were picked as the ideal respondents for this survey because they observe downtown interactions on a consistent basis, enabling them to be more reliable in reporting on a change over time. Additionally, the fact that members of the SOURCE research team could call or walk into a downtown business made it more likely that we could pursue non-respondents and get a higher response rate. Measuring change in the downtown environment posed a challenge. The research team knew that if businesses were asked questions about overall activity in the downtown area, it was possible that high- activity areas would receive more weight and we would be less informed about low-activity areas or those areas that had not seen a change. Since we wanted to know about patterns of behavior in specific locations, we restricted all of the questions, except one, to asking the businesses only about the public behavior that had been occurring in their outside perimeter. Outside perimeter was defined as the sidewalk, alley and street-level open space in the front, back and/or side of the physical boundaries of their business. SOURCE constructed a one-page questionnaire (the survey) and pilot-tested it on some Ashland business owners who are not located in the downtown corridor. Subsequently, Dr. Skuratowicz presented the questionnaire to the Ashland City Council and received feedback that enabled us to hone in on questions that reflected the City's particular areas of interest. (Please see Appendix A for the final 1 I City of Ashland Downtown Ordinances questionnaire.) The questionnaire was mailed to business owners on November 18, 2016, and a second questionnaire was mailed out to non-respondents on Dec 16, 2016. After the holidays, members of the research team called the remaining businesses that had not responded, and completed the survey with them over the phone. All businesses were guaranteed confidentiality, so that owners and managers could give honest answers without worrying about being identified. This means that no business names are used in this report or any report generated from these data, and that business names will never be connected with the data that they provided. Also, identifying information was removed from the open-ended responses from the final question of the survey. The City of Ashland provided SOURCE with an address list of 208 businesses along the downtown no- smoking corridor. Using the City's list, we determined that five of the businesses did not meet the criteria to receive a questionnaire (e.g. a single business that had two addresses or a business that was housed inside another business) and we also found that another 16 addresses were places that had gone out business at some point from June 2015 until February 2017. This left a total of 187 valid businesses. We obtained a filled-out questionnaire for 146 businesses, resulting in a very strong response rate of 78%. Of those 41 businesses that did not respond, 18 were street-level and the remaining were either on the second-story or were located behind street-level businesses. Geographic- Areas of Analysis In order to determine whether specific areas in the downtown corridor have seen changes in public behavior due to the new ordinances, we created nine geographic areas for analysis. Below is a map that is color-coded for each area as well as a text description of each one. In the results section, we will report the survey findings by first aggregating all of the businesses, and then by each geographic area. 2 I p „qr ~ v 3 o C3 T ~ c o W pkfr CY) Q !u .~:w~ y' i • . C' a . t" - Y 44 P-pa I City of Ashland Downtown Ordinances to Geographic Areas of Analysis, continued Area 1: From the parking lots on the southwest side of North Main Street between Church and Granite to the businesses on the southwest side of Lithia way west of Water Street. Area 2: Between North Main Street and Calle Guanajuato including the area on the west side of Winburn Way below the Ashland Community Center. Area 3: From Bill Patton Garden to the public parking lot on Hargadine Street to the walkway behind The Black Swan. Area 4: Between the corner of North Main Street and East Main Street to the walkway between the Varsity Theater and the Christian Science Reading Room on the southwest side of Main Street. Area 5: Between North Main Street and Lithia Way beginning on the southeast side of Water Street and up to the northwest side of Oak Street. Area 6: Between Oak Street and Rogue Valley Runners and between East Main Street and the gas station on Oak Street and the parking lot on North Pioneer and Lithia Way. Area 7: Between the Varsity Theater and Sunday Afternoons on the west side and First Street on the east side and between Lithia Way and the Ashland Springs Hotel parking lot. Area 8: The area bordered by Hargadine Street, First Street, Lithia Way and Second Street. Area 9: The area bordered by Hargadine Street, Second Street, Lithia Way, Third Street, and Gresham Street. 4 I City of Ashland Downtown Ordinances J T P` 1~L'`+ll~~`+ Smoking/Vaping Overall, more than half of businesses reported a decrease in smoking and vaping on sidewalks in the outside perimeter of their downtown businesses from the summer of 2015 to the summer of 2016 (Figure 1). When examining the results from individual geographic areas, over half of the businesses in areas 2, 3, 4, 6, and 9 reported a decrease in smoking and vaping on the sidewalks (Table 1). Reports of increasing incidents of smoking and vaping on sidewalks were few and completely non-existent in areas 3, 4, 5, and 7. SmokingNaping on Sidewalks n=144 53°'io 29% 6% 11% -_1_____1-_1 _M _1____1j1lllllll1111llll1lK_1_11_____' _'M Decreased Stayed the same Increased Unable to determine Figure 1. Changes in the rates of smoking/vaping on sidewalks in downtown Ashland between the summer of 2015 and the summer of 2016 Table 1. In comparing the summer of 2016 to the summer of 2015, the amount of smoking/vaping on the sidewalk(s) in the outside perimeter of my downtown Ashland business has: Area 1 9 22% 56% 22% 0% Area 2 18 72% 17% 6% 6% Area 3 3 67% 33% 0% 0% Area 4 15 87% 13% 0% 0% Area 5 15 40% 47% 0% 13% Area 6 15 67% 20% 13% 0% Area 7 11 45% 36% 0% 18% Area 8 34 29% 32% 6% 32% Area 9 24 67% 25% 8% 0% 5 i City of Ashland Downtown Ordinances i ,.J 4 1„ RE F _..~CH r;`~,;Tco A plurality of business respondents reported seeing an increase in smoking and vaping in alleys and parking lots in the outside perimeter of their businesses from the summer of 2015 to the summer of 2016 (Figure 2). In looking at individual areas, businesses in area 6, which contains part of Will Dodge Way, reported a substantial increase in this behavior while only those businesses in area 2 reported seeing a substantial decrease in this behavior (Table 2). Smoking/Vaping in Alleys/Parking lots n=113 40% 33% 16% 12% Decreased Stayed the same Increased Unable to determine Figure 2. Changes in the rates of smoking/vaping in alleys and parking lots in downtown Ashland between the summer of 2015 and the summer of 2016 Table 2. In comparing the summer of 2016 to the summer of 2015, the amount of smoking/vaping in the alley/parkin lot in the outside perimeter of my downtown Ashland business has: Area 1 8 0% 75% 25% 0% Area 2 12 42% 33% 17% 8% Area 3 2 0% 50% 50% 0% Area 4 10 20% 30% 20% 30% Area 5 9 22% 33% 44% 0% Area 6 13 8% 15% 69% 8% Area 7 9 22% 22% 44% 11% Area 8 28 7% 32% 39% 21% Area 9 22 18% 32% 45% 5% 6 i City of Ashland Downtown Ordinances REE SE..RCH CrJER Soliciting Sidewalk Diners Of the restaurants with sidewalk dining that responded to the survey, 71 % reported no change in the incidents of diners being solicited for money from summer of 2015 to the summer of 2016 (Figure 3). Soliciting Sidewalk Diners n=17 71% 12% 12% 6% Decreased Stayed the same Increased Unable to determine Figure 3. Changes in the rates of solicitation of sidewalk diners in downtown Ashland between the summer of 2015 and the summer of 2016 7 i City of Ashland Downtown Ordinances li~ A- Presence of Uniformed Officer Overall, only 5% of the businesses reported a decrease in the presence of uniformed Ashland officers from the summer of 2015 compared to the summer of 2016. A majority of respondents said it had stayed the same and about one-third of the businesses reported an increase in uniformed presence (Figure 4). In looking at individual areas, businesses in areas 2, 3, 4, and 7 reported no decreases in the presence of uniformed Ashland officers and well over 50% of the businesses in areas 4 and 6 reported that they have seen an increase. (Table 3). Presence of a Uniformed Officer n=144 37% 32% 26% 5% Decreased Stayed the same Increased Unable to determine Figure 4. Changes in the presence of uniformed Ashland officers in downtown Ashland between the summer of 2015 and the summer of 2016 Table 3. In comparing the summer of 2016 to the summer of 2015, the presence of uniformed Ashland officers occurring in the outside perimeter of my downtown Ashland business has: Area 1 9 11% 56% 0% 33% Area 2 18 0% 39% 44% 17% Area 3 3 0% 67% 33% 0% Area 4 14 0% 21% 71% 7% Area 5 15 7% 40% 27% 27% Area 6 15 7% 20% 60% 13% Area 7 11 0% 55% 27% 18% Area 8 34 3% 35% 21% 41% Area 9 25 12% 3670 16% 36% 8 I City of Ashland Downtown Ordinances Sidewalk Obstruction Almost half of the respondents reported no change in the obstruction of sidewalks in the front or side of their downtown businesses, while one-quarter saw a reduction in sidewalk obstruction from the summer of 2015 to the summer of 2016 (Figure 5). In looking at the individual areas, most areas reported a decrease or no change in the incidents of sidewalk obstruction, although in areas 1, 4, 5, 6 and 9, one- fifth or more of businesses reported an increase in this behavior (Table 4). Although there was a "not applicable" option for this question, only three businesses chose this response, thus they were not included in the chart or table. Obstructing Sidewalks n=140 45% 25% 18% 12% Decreased Stayed the same Increased Unable to determine Figure 5. Changes in the numbers of occurrences of sidewalk obstruction between the summer of 2015 and the summer of 2016 in downtown Ashland Table 4. Obstructing the sidewalks is defined by leaving less than six feet of clear space. In comparing the summer of 2016 to the summer of 2015, the percentage of time that the sidewalks in the outside perimeter of my downtown Ashland business were obstructed by people sitting or standing has: Area 1 9 0% 56% 22% 22% Area 2 17 41% 41% 18% 0% Area 3 3 0% 100% 0% 0% Area 4 14 57% 14% 29% 0% Area5 15 20% 47% 20% 13% Area 6 15 20% 33% 27% 20% Area 7 11 27% 45% 0% 27% Area 8 31 16% 55% 13% 16% Area 9 25 24% 48% 20% 8% 9 I City of Ashland Downtown Ordinances B Bank ATM Responses Four banks within the downtown corridor were individually queried about whether they had seen a change in customers being solicited for money while using the ATM. Two of the banks reported that there was no change: ATM solicitation was a problem before and continues to be a problem. One of the banks reported ATM solicitations were never a problem. The fourth bank reported that 2016 was the worst year yet for ATM solicitations. Responses to Open-fittied Question The main focus of the survey was to report on the behavior that is governed by the new ordinances and to only report on the behavior that occurred in each business' own outside perimeter. However, we also wanted to give business owners and managers a chance to comment more broadly on whether they had seen any changes in overall behavior throughout the downtown corridor. The final question they were asked in the survey was, "Specifically describe what you see as the difference, if any, in public behavior in the entire downtown corridor when comparing the summer of 2016 to the summer of 2015. If applicable, give examples." A total of 114 (out of 146) businesses answered this question and their responses give a broader perspective on the issues. In looking at the comments from the final open-ended question, we found that 20 businesses saw an overall improvement in downtown behavior. They cited less smoking, less confrontational and aggressive behavior, and better overall behavior. Two businesses off the Plaza reported "definite improvement on the Plaza block" but one went on to observe that the "Entrance to OSF off the sidewalk by Harvey's is still congested with transients." A retail business emphatically commented that the downtown has "vastly improved!" while another observed that there are "less large gatherings and transients" throughout the whole downtown corridor, and another noted there is a "huge increase in people not smoking." A retail business said they are "grateful for the change" and they see more student groups coming into their business now. It is important to note that all of these businesses are not located on Pioneer Street (areas 4 and 6). Thirteen business owners/managers felt that, overall, there had been no change from the summer of 2015 to the summer of 2016. They made general observations along the lines of, "I can't come up with specific differences. The last two summers haven't been that different," and "I personally haven't seen a difference, there still seems to be the same amount of smokers, homeless and panhandlers." A restaurant owner described it this way, "Not much changed this year." According to the comments of 29 businesses, the lack of change in the downtown is because problematic behavior has simply shifted from one part of the area to another. People now change location to engage in behavior that is unlawful in one part of downtown, but lawful in another. One business concluded, "Same people, same habits -just a shift to accommodate the laws - to alleys, sides of buildings, tighter in on the sidewalk." A retail store owner along the Plaza saw positive changes for their own store, but also stated "Migratory patterns shifted. I saw that other businesses got more than their fair share of loitering after the ordinances." The owners/managers of 19 of these businesses specifically commented on the Pioneer/Lithia Way/Will Dodge Way (areas 4 &6) as being disproportionately impacted by travelers/transients. An owner of a business that provides services stated, "I've noticed more congregating of smokers in alleyways and parking lots, i.e. the parking lot on 10 i City of Ashland Downtown Ordinances Lithia and Pioneer." A retail business near the Pioneer area described the challenges they face at their establishment as well as how it has extended onto Pioneer Street, "We've had human excrement at our doorstep... We've seen parking spaces and sidewalks blocked in the parking lot at Lithia Way and Pioneer and the market on the corner." A number of respondents spoke directly about Stop and Shop on Lithia Way and Pioneer. One business that is located near the market said, "The corner market... as well as the alley have become a gathering place for groups of `travellers' who beg and harass passersby. They are rude and smoke/vape. The Plaza area seems more in control and welcoming." Another business on Pioneer Street stated, "[P]anhandling, smoking/drinking, sidewalk blocking and people being followed down the street (at night) continue to be a serious problem. We (also) receive more and more patron complaints each year (about the areas) in front of the Three Penny and the convenience store on Lithia Way." Another business asked for a stronger "police presence or video cameras at the market." This shift has become a significant hardship for areas 4 and 6 (Pioneer/Lithia Way/Will Dodge Way). A business owner described what they have experienced as a result of travelers/transients relocating to this area, "Transients were forced out of Lithia Plaza and Lithia Park, then simply moved over a couple of blocks to the parking lot area - near my business! Same issues, just a different location! Used our bathrooms for bathing on a daily basis." Another business owner has faced many challenges: The number of travellers in front of our business has increased. Since being driven away from the courtyard, they have taken up residence at Lithia & Pioneer. Customers complain that travellers aggressively panhandle, curse and swear, smoke marijuana and cigarettes, do not control their dogs, yell, play loud music, take up sidewalk space and fight. Customers have come to associate this (area) with large groups of unruly, disrespectful travellers. Will Dodge Way is also worse now. We have found unconscious people in the alley. There are broken bottles, smoldering cigarettes in our trash cans, vomit, [and] feces... People smoke. Am I supposed to call the police? The cigarette will vanish long before a response." For 21 businesses, there are a variety of behaviors in the downtown area that have become worse. Many describe problems that are not covered by the new ordinances, such as the seven businesses that singled out more aggression in the summer of 2016. One example is a comment from a restaurateur, "Transient population increased and became more aggressive. Tourist base shrank and became more disenchanted." Another business described the transient population as more "confrontational and vulgar". There appeared to be a larger population of transients in 2016 according to eight businesses. Two businesses described an increase in crime (a stabbing and "an uptick in theft"). Five businesses did refer to an increase in behaviors that are governed by the new ordinances, such as smoking, cannabis use, and dogs not on leash. A service oriented business provided a summary of a number of these concerns, "2016 is much worse in terms of travelers obstructing sidewalks, saying confrontational things as I walk by, using our back entrance as a bathroom, and asking for leftovers and money." The effect of the ordinances and the resulting downtown behavior on tourists was described in three distinctly different manners. Of the 14 businesses that made comments, two felt that the changes due to the ordinances were positive for tourists, two stated that the ordinances were excessively tourist- 11 I City of Ashland Downtown Ordinances 7Z: n focused and 10 presented downtown behavior as increasingly bad for tourism. Of the two establishments that felt that the ordinances have made the downtown more hospitable for tourists, one indicated, "Big improvement - Thank you!!! More space for tourists now to enjoy downtown." Of the two businesses that felt the ordinances were overreaching, one stated, "Way more tourist-based, give the kids a break. Ashland should continue to accept people of all backgrounds." For the remaining 10 businesses, downtown behavior was continuing to have a significant impact on tourists, albeit in ways that were not addressed by the ordinances. One retail business noted, "People aggressively begging for food and money has gotten worse and worse! Our customers complain about it all the time. Especially the tourists!" A restaurant summed it up in this manner, "Less smoking, but other than that it is still the same for aggressive soliciting for food or money. It is also the same if not more for harassment of tourists... I've personally heard tourists say they wouldn't want to live here due to all the problems with the transients." The prevalence of drug and alcohol use in public was mentioned by 15 businesses. One retail business respondent said they "haven't seen as many drug deals" from their front window since the ordinances were passed. The remaining 14 chronicled the ongoing public consumption of marijuana, cigarettes, alcohol, and other drugs. The manager of a service-oriented business described looking down from their office window at work and seeing "open consumption/smoking of cannabis." The new ordinances were declared bad for business by 6 establishments. One explained, "I absolutely despise these laws because I own a bar and I'm trying to run a business, if anything, I think the new laws have been a drag on all activity downtown." A retail business stated that Ashland is "over- regulated." Three businesses expressed concern about the plight of the people on the street. One of them wrote, "Tragic to see young people like this - seems outreach counselors on the street needed to work with these kids. A homeless camp would be helpful too, with laundry and showers, food kitchen, bunkhouse, place for tents." Discussion These results point to the need to continue the discussion about public behavior in the downtown corridor. The overall findings, from some of the questions, are straightforward. Businesses reported a reduction in smoking on the sidewalks in the downtown corridor, and this holds up whether looking at the overall numbers or the specific outcomes by geographic area. At the same time, the reported increase in smoking and vaping in the alleys and parking lots suggests that smokers have migrated. The assessment of the presence of uniformed officers reveals some distinct trends. In the overall numbers, Ashland businesses reported seeing about the same or an increased number of officers. If these data are broken down by geography, there are some areas (Pioneer/Lithia Way/Will Dodge Way) where businesses reported seeing a significant increase in uniformed officers, while other areas on the outskirts of the downtown had a more difficult time determining if there has been a shift in officer presence. The data from the remaining questions on the survey do not provide the same type of clarity. The results from the sidewalk obstruction question show that one-quarter of the businesses reported a 12 I City of Ashland Downtown Ordinances decrease. However, the percentages of businesses that had seen no change or an increase in obstruction point to the fact that this may be an issue that deserves more attention. The responses to the questions regarding soliciting sidewalk diners and soliciting ATM users indicate that these may be issues that need a greater degree of support and enforcement. For all of these questions, the geographic data can be useful in terms of identifying where resources could be focused. The answers to the open-ended question indicate both successes and challenges regarding the new downtown ordinances. While many of the comments do address behaviors governed by the new ordinances, other comments focus on behaviors that are not covered by the ordinances such as aggression, harassment, littering and a perceived increase in the transient population. The open-ended comments do reveal a geographic shift in where problematic downtown behavior occurs. The trends identified by these comments can be used in conjunction with the geographic data to specify additional solutions. 13 I City of Ashland Downtown Ordinances Appeiidix A: Surve`T Instrument Ashland Downtown Ordinances Survey 1. My business in the downtown area is at: 0 Street-level 0 Above street-level* 0 Below street-level* *If your business is above or below street-level, please answer the following questions in regards to the street-level area directly above or below your business. 2. Does your business have access off of an alley or have a window that opens on an alley? 0 Yes ❑ No -For the next five questions, you will be asked about activities that occurred in the outside perimeter of your business. By outside perimeter, we are referring to the sidewalk, alley and street-level open space in the front, back and/or side of the physical boundaries of your business. Please assess only the activities that occurred in the open space that is within your property lines. 3. In comparing the summer of 2016 to the summer of 2015, the amount of smoking/vaping on the sidewalk(s) in the outside perimeter of my downtown Ashland business has: 0 Decreased 0 Stayed the same 0 Increased 0 Unable to determine 4. In comparing the summer of 2016 to the summer of 2015, the amount of smoking/vaping in the alley/parking lot in the outside perimeter of my downtown Ashland business has: 0 Decreased 0 Stayed the same 0 Increased 0 Unable to determine ❑ N/A 5. In comparing the summer of 2016 to the summer of 2015, the occurrence of sidewalk diners being solicited for money in the outside perimeter of my downtown Ashland business has: ❑ Decreased 0 Stayed the same 0 Increased ❑ Unable to determine ❑ N/A 6. In comparing the summer of 2016 to the summer of 2015, the presence of uniformed Ashland officers occurring in the outside perimeter of my downtown Ashland business has: 0 Decreased 0 Stayed the same 0 Increased ❑ Unable to determine 7. Obstructing the sidewalks is defined by leaving less than six feet of clear space. In comparing the summer of 2016 to the summer of 2015, the percentage of time that the sidewalks in the outside perimeter of my downtown Ashland business were obstructed by people sitting or standing has: 0 Decreased ❑ Stayed the same ❑ Increased ❑ Unable to determine 0 N/A 14 I City of Ashland Downtown Ordinances SuuKLE RESEARCH CENTER, 8. Specifically describe what you see as the difference, if any, in public behavior in the entire downtown corridor when comparing the summer of 2016 to the summer of 2015. If applicable, give examples. Continue answer on back if needed 15 I Council Business Meetina March 21, 2017 Title: Downtown Parking Management Strategy From: Michael R. Faught Public Works Director mike.faught@ashland. or. us Summary: The Downtown Parking Management & Circulation Ad-Hoc Advisory Committee is recommending that the City Council approve the draft Downtown Strategic Parking Management Plan. Actions, Options, or Potential Motions: Move to approve the Downtown Strategic Parking Management Plan as submitted. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Council approve the draft Parking Management Plan and direct staff to include funds in the proposed 2018/19 biennium budget for a new staff parking coordinator positon. Resource Requirements: The estimated cost to staff the proposed parking coordinator position and expand enforcement (through Diamond Parking) is as follows: Parking Coordinator $ 8200 Supplies $ 300 Vehicle $ 51000 Diamond Parking (includes expanded services) $171,700 Internal Fees $ 65,500 Total $327,200 _ T r ASHLAND Revenue to pay for the program would come from the parking fund which currently generates about $225,000 per year. Staff projects that by expanding the enforcement y° M area to cover the entire downtown area would "f conservatively generate another $102,200 for a total of $327,200 per year. Policies, Plans and Goals Supported: 21. Be proactive in using best practices in infrastructure management and modernization. Page 1 of 4 CITY OF ASHLAND I 21.1 Complete downtown parking management and traffic circulation plan. Backl1round and Additional Information: The adopted 2012 Transportation System Plan identified the Downtown Parking and Multi- Modal Circulations study as a high priority project (0-5) years. To that end, the City Council appointed the Downtown Parking Management and Multi-modal Circulation Advisory Committee at its November 5, 2013, business meeting. Committee membership includes ex officio members from the Chamber, trucking industry and city staff. In addition, 13 voting members were appointed (2 from the Chamber board, 2 Planning Commissioners, 2 Transportation Commissioners, and 7 stakeholders from the downtown area). Stakeholders include: merchants/business owners-managers, property owners, downtown residents, OSF, Pioneer/A Street, Fourth/A Street, and one citizen at large. With the help of Rick Williams Consulting, the committee was able to develop a long term downtown strategic parking management plan. They held monthly meetings and received a lot of public input throughout the process (which included large a community meeting December 1, 2016 to ensure the draft plan would fit our community objectives. Minutes for this committee can be found at: http://w-",xv.ashland.or.us/Agendas.asp?CCBID=241. On February 1, 2017 the Downtown Parking Management & Circulation Ad-Hoc Advisory Committee moved to forward the proposed Downtown Strategic Parking Management Plan to the City Council. Draft Parking Plan Summary: The first primary component of the plan is Guiding Themes and Principles which include the City's role and coordination, priority customers, active capacity management, information systems (supply & customer based) and integration with other modes. The proposed phase 1 (0-18 months) action strategies include: 1. Formalize the guiding themes and principles as policies for downtown access within the parking and transportation system plan; 2. Adopt the 85% rule as the optimum occupancy standard for measuring performance of the parking supply and triggering specific management strategies and rate ranges ; 3. Establish a Downtown Parking and Transportation Fund as a mechanism to direct funds derived from parking into a dedicated fund; 4. Centralize Parking Management. Consolidate the management and administration of parking management within a single division for Parking Services; 5. Develop a job description and submit a service package to create and hire a position of Downtown Parking Coordinator for the City of Ashland; 6. Establish a Downtown Parking Advisory Committee (DPAC) consisting of downtown stakeholders to assist in program implementation and review; 7. Develop a reasonable schedule of data collection to better assess performance of downtown parking; 8. Identify off-street shared use opportunities and feasibilities based on data findings in Strategy #7, Establish goals for transitioning employees, begin outreach to opportunity sites, negotiate agreements, and assign employees to facilities (see Downtown Ashland Parking Utilization map on next page); Page 2 of 4 CITY OF ASHLAND i . Irv* VWV7, s~+ Vii,.:- y x - i Tom" 1 { ab.. _..t._i vt 7 ft x 1 05 piy. ~ a R~ Y ~ b~~~ k 4~~ It" 1 f i., 10...4' Downtown Ash an -86% 2015 Parking Utilization ®sc~dy area boundary A~i~tarxi c~"pysn . s:1% • 7tr°% Saturday, August 22 9% - SS% 3:00 - 4:00 PM Peak Hour RICK WILLIAMS CONSULTING SSa _ D it 1 -S, " 35C , +a' Phase 2 18-36 months: 9. Create a critical path timeline to a new parking brand that can be utilized at all City- owned lots and shared supplies and in parking marketing/communications; 10. Simplify on-street time stays. Consider incorporation of new brand/logo into on-street signage per input derived in Strategy 9; 11. Deploy new off-street signage package; 12. Expand the bike parking network to create connections between parking and downtown to encourage employee bike commute trips and draw customers to downtown businesses; 13. Evaluate and pursue on-street pricing in high occupancy areas (85%); 14. Solicit firms to establish wayfinding and dynamic signage systems in the public right of way integrated with the off-street system using City parking brand developed in Strategy #9; Page 3of4 CITY OF ASHLAND i 15. Deploy wayfinding system as developed in Strategy 14; 16. Implement on-street pricing; 17. Explore expanding access capacity - new parking supply and/or transit/shuttle options; 18. Develop cost forecasts for preferred parking supply and shuttle/transit system options; 19. Explore and develop funding options; 20. Initiate new capacity expansion. Attachments: Draft Downtown Parking Management Strategy Page 4of4 CITY OF ASHLAND i City of Ashland, Oregon Downtown Strategic Parking Management Plan PROJECT SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PARKING MANAGEMENT FINAL REPORT March 15, 2016 a R R »t. f pr R R + j • tiB •wRICK WILLIAMS CONSULTING Parking & Transportation i Table of Contents Section I: Background 2 Section II: The Role of Parking in Downtown 3 Section III: Plan Organization 4 Section IV: Guiding Themes and Principles 5 Section V: Recommended Downtown Parking Management Strategies 10 Section VI: Summary 39 APPENDIX A. ACTIONS & IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE Rick Williams Consulting - City of Ashland, OR Strategic Parking Management Plan CITY OF ASHLAND: DOWNTOWN STRATEGIC PARKING MANAGEMENT PLAN 1. BACKGROUND In 2013, the City of Ashland commissioned a study to evaluate the state of parking in the downtown. The study was conducted by Community Planning Workshop and the University of Oregon, and analyzed use, occupancy, and demand for customer and employee parking throughout the downtown, and developed an initial set of recommended strategies and programs.' The project study area is illustrated in Figure A. Figure A The City subsequently determined Project Study Area that developing a more targeted CITY parking plan for the downtown core ASHLAND s SZ ~ kr.- would be beneficial, both as a guide Downtown Public Parking s., to daily management and as a F _ " rA D Public Pmking lots template for future decision- ;PIKE--~~ O Pul i. Lt -4 n making. To this end the City 031$,_N G-39e-pd engaged Rick Williams Consulting to ZONING work with its Downtown Parking I , C ;3 a E-t Management and Circulation Ad I„E R Hoc Advisory Committee to compile R} e j ; Rp c. a complete, simple, and effective set of operating strategies for = - A management of the City's downtown parking supply. The Advisory Committee includes representatives of the business and development sectors, citizens, City staff, City Commissions, and the City Council. The study entailed in-depth discussions with the Advisory Committee and other community stakeholders to develop a comprehensive parking management plan that responds to the unique access environment, goals, and objectives of Downtown Ashland. This was coupled with an evaluation of planned multimodal projects in the downtown core and existing parking policies, standards, and actual usage.' The parking management plan and its development process are summarized in this report. 1 See: Ashland Downtown Parking Management and Multi-Modal Circulation Plan -October2014, (Community Planning Workshop and the University of Oregon). z Usage data was derived from two sources: (1) Ashland Downtown Parking Management and Multi-Modal Circulation Plan (October 2014) and (2) Off-street usage data collected by Rick Williams Consulting (August 2015). Rick Williams Consulting - City of Ashland, OR Strategic Parking Management Plan i IL THE ROLE OF PARKING IN DOWNTOWN A successful downtown has a clear sense of place, and comprises an exciting and attractive mix of uses and amenities. The role of parking is to support the realization of this vision. Simply put, people do not come downtown to park. They come to experience an environment that is unique, active, and diverse. A tiKtN=' well-managed parking system helps make it safe, easy, and convenient for them to do so. Opp A Discussions with stakeholders resulted in a number of desired outcomes for - parking management. Parking management in downtown Ashland should: • Support a "messy vitality" by creating a vital, active, and interesting downtown environment. • Get the right parker to the right stall. • Assure convenient, affordable, and available parking for visitors and customers. • Ensure that parking in a district is managed to meet the needs of its priority users. • Ensure reasonable and safe parking for employees. • Communicate a clear sense of movement to parking options. • Provide for an integrated system on and off-street (parking & pedestrians). • Integrate alternative modes, particularly biking. • Anticipate and respond to increasing demand for access to the downtown. Parking is just one tool in a downtown's economic development toolbox, and must be managed to ensure an effective, efficient system of access that caters to the needs of priority users. In the case of downtown Ashland, the priority user for the City-owned parking system has been identified as the customer and visitor. The Advisory Committee concluded that the objective of parking management in downtown should be: "To support the development of a vibrant, growing, and attractive destination for shopping, entertainment, recreation, living, and working. The components of this plan need to be simple and intuitive for the user, providing an understandable system that is affordable, safe, secure, and well-integrated into other access options (i.e., transit, bike and walk)." Rick Williams Consulting - City of Ashland, OR Strategic Parking Management Plan i III. PLAN ORGANIZATION The strategies outlined below are intended to spark discussion between the City of Ashland and downtown stakeholders on policies and actions that will support a vital and growing downtown. We begin with a set of Guiding Themes and Principles developed by the Advisory Committee and designed to serve as a framework for decision-making. The principles encourage the use of parking resources to support economic development goals and to effectively serve the diversity of customers and visitors using the downtown (see Section IV). Following this list, recommended parking management strategies are presented as a series of steps intended to follow a logical progression, with each action providing the groundwork necessary for subsequent actions. Steps are divided into policy actions and operations, and further categorized as specific action strategies intended to be carried out in two phases that range from immediate to long- term (see Section V and Appendix A). As the City and its partners consider these strategies, discussion of the "who, what, and how" of implementation will be essential, and it may be determined that strategies should be reordered or implemented concurrently. Such refinements will be based on opportunities and challenges that arise, momentum, resource identification, and broader community input. The plan presented here is a template for a new approach to parking and multi-modal management in downtown Ashland, and changes and refinements can be expected. Rick Williams Consulting - City of Ashland, OR Strategic Parking Management Plan I IV. GUIDING THEMES AND PRINCIPLES The development of Guiding Principles for parking in downtown f Ashland supports creation of a parking system that facilitates and contributes to a vital and growing downtown. Guiding Principles are based on the premise that growth and development in the downtown will require an integrated and comprehensive package of strategies to support economic development and redevelopment. The ensuing parking plan becomes but one critical element of a larger coordinated package for economic growth. The results of stakeholder input can be summarized as five Guiding Themes comprising seventeen Guiding Principles. Ideally, these will establish a basis for consensus and provide near - and long-term direction for parking management in the downtown. A. CITY ROLE AND COORDINATION 1) Centralize management of public parking to ensure optimal use of the supply. Parking issues are too complex and widespread for status quo approaches to management. The City needs to provide more focused, coordinated, and strategic attention to daily management and delivery of near- and long-term parking solutions. 2) Coordinate parking in a manner that supports the unique character of emerging downtown districts and neighborhoods. Where appropriate, manage parking by zone. The downtown comprises several unique economic enclaves (e.g., the core, the theater district, the railroad area). As the areas differ economically, so too do the character and needs of their patrons. This may require a management approach tailored to each area, known as management by parking zone. 3) Ensure that a representative body of affected private and public constituents from within downtown routinely informs decision-making. Active participation by those affected guarantees an understanding of and consensus on parking management and the "trigger" points for decision-making built into the parking plan. This is best accomplished through an established parking advisory committee that reviews performance, serves as a sounding board for issues, and acts as a liaison to the broader stakeholder community. Rick Williams Consulting - City of Ashland, OR Strategic Parking Management Plan 1 4) Create a sense of security at all times, on-street and off-street. Public off-street lots should be maintained so as to not deter users due to poor design, pavement quality, or perceived security issues. Safe and well-lit links between parking areas and shopping, entertainment, and work sites should be planned for and provided. B. PRIORITY CUSTOMER 1) The on-street parking system is a finite resource and will be managed to provide a rate of turnover that supports "district" vitality. Most users of the downtown favor on-street parking. The parking management plan recognizes this premium on-street parking resource needs to be managed to provide a rate of customer and visitor turnover that supports downtown and district vitality. With this principle comes the recognition that growth in downtown parking demand will, over the longer term, need to be accommodated in off-street locations. Longer-term patron and employee parking must be managed so as not to conflict with customer parking, particularly on-street. On-street parking must be managed according to demand and time-stays conducive to customer need. 2) The most convenient on-street parking will be preserved for the priority user - as defined by base zoning in the affected district. The on-street parking system in the downtown must be formatted in a manner that assures turnover and minimized conflicts between the priority user and other users. Ashland will use base zoning in parking districts (e.g., commercial versus residential) to facilitate and support reasonable definitions of priority users. 3) Provide sufficient parking to meet employee demand, specifically in conjunction with other reasonable travel mode options. All parking strategies should be coordinated with transportation demand management goals and objectives to ensure that employees and customers have reasonable options available for access. For downtown Ashland, this should be initiated with efforts to encourage bicycling to the downtown, with longer term goals for transit/shuttles and ridesharing. This effort should be pursued as a partnership between the City and private sector businesses. Rick Williams Consulting - City of Ashland, OR • Strategic Parking Management Plan I C. ACTIVE CAPACITY MANAGEMENT 1) Manage the public parking system using the 85% Occupancy Standard to inform and guide decision-making. The 85% Rule is an operating principle for coordinating parking supply. When occupancies routinely reach 85% during peak periods, more intensive and aggressive parking management strategies are called for to assist patrons in finding available parking. The 85% Rule will facilitate reasonable and effective decisions regarding time stays, enforcement, and other decisions related to capacity management. 2) Supplies in excess of the 85% Occupancy Standard will require best practice strategies to minimize parking constraints. Several strategies identified in the plan are triggered by the 85% Rule. The City and the Advisory Committee are committed to moving forward with recommended strategies when parking demand requires them. Changes to the status quo can be difficult, but continued constraints in parking and access will adversely impact the downtown's success and ability to absorb growth. 3) Encourage shared parking in areas where parking is underutilized. This will require an active partnership with owners of private parking supplies. Numerous parking facilities in some downtown locations are underutilized. Efforts should be made to facilitate shared use agreements between different users (public and private) to direct parking demand into these facilities, in order to maximize existing parking resources. 4) Capacity will be created through strategic management of existing supplies, reasonable enforcement, leveraging parking with alternative modes, and new supply. Active effort must be made to manage the parking system on a daily basis. This will require partnerships with the private sector to leverage existing off-street supplies and to coordinate management in a manner that supports the development and growth of alternative modes. New parking supply becomes more feasible when all capacity options are maximized. Rick Williams Consulting - City of Ashland, OR Strategic Parking Management Plan i D. INFORMATION SYSTEMS (SUPPLY & CUSTOMER-BASED) Supply-based 1) Use performance measurements and reporting to ensure Guiding Principles are achieved. Committing to a routine and objective system of measurement and reporting ensures that decision-making will be informed. Key metrics include occupancy, turnover, average duration of stay, rate of violation, and customer input. Performance monitoring also provides a basis for routine evaluation of program effectiveness. Customer-based 2) Improve existing, and create new, information and educational resources (outreach, education, maps, websites, etc.) for use by the public and private sectors. Efforts to improve understanding, awareness, and ease of use of the parking and access system should be upgraded. A clear schedule should be maintained for the dissemination of information. This could be coordinated through a partnership between the City and a downtown business association. 3) Develop and implement a unique and creative wayfinding system for the downtown that links parking assets and provides directional guidance, preferably under a common brand/logo. Parking resources should be clearly identified and explained through branding and signage, increasing understanding of how to access on- and off-street parking resources. A common brand that unifies marketing materials, signage systems, and other communications simplifies customer recognition and use of the system. E. INTEGRATION WITH OTHER MODES 1) Encourage and facilitate increasing percentages of use, particularly by employees, of alternative travel modes to free up parking capacity. Parking should not be the only access option for employees. Every parking stall occupied by an employee means a lower rate of turnover and less access for customers and visitors. Employees should be given reasonable access to parking, but encouraged to use alternative modes that include walking, biking, transit, and ridesharing. If Ashland develops a strong system of alternative mode options for employees, these will then become options for residents, visitors, and customers. Rick Williams Consulting - City of Ashland, OR Strategic Parking Management Plan 1 2) Increase bike parking on and off-street to enhance the broader bicycle network. The City of Ashland's bike parking network should be as effectively formatted as the auto parking system. On- and off-street parking facilities for bicyclists are efficient and low-cost. 3) Explore remote parking locations and transit/bike connections to minimize the need for new parking structures. As the City explores new parking supply options, scenarios should include remote locations connected by transit and bike networks. Such options may be more cost-effective than structured parking and/or may be necessitated by land supply constraints in the downtown. Rick Williams Consulting - City of Ashland, OR • Strategic Parking Management Plan i V. RECOMMENDED DOWNTOWN PARKING MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES From discussions with the City and stakeholders, specific parking management strategies have been identified and are recommended for implementation. These recommendations are informed by evaluation of current policies and practices, information in the 2014 Community Planning Workshop report, and data collection in off-street facilities conducted by RWC in August 2015. This report contains recommendations for changes in current management/organization and several near-term Action Strategies for the first 18-months of implementation (Phase 1). The timing of implementation outlined in this document assumes that Phase 1 work will formally begin in July 2016 and run through November 2017. However, some work should precede Phase 1 (January -June 2016) through work with an interim Parking Work Group led by current Public Works staff. Phase 2 would begin in January 2018. However, any and all strategies can be implemented on an accelerated schedule or be reordered based on opportunity and resources. The proposed timeline is provided as a means to communicate a reasonable schedule and order of tasks. The strategies recommended in this report will assist the City in more effectively managing its downtown parking supply and preparing for future growth. They are organized as follows: • Policy and Organizational Action Strategies: Phase 1 (0 - 18 months) • Recommended Parking Management Strategies: Phase 1 (0 -18 months) • Recommended Parking Management Strategies: Phase 2 (18 - 36+ months) A summary of all recommended Strategies is attached as an Implementation Schedule at the end of this report. A. POLICY AND ORGANIZATION ACTION STRATEGIES These elements ensure that the goals of the parking management plan can be achieved by incorporating parking system management into the City's development policy. Grounding in the Guiding Principles and application of the 85% Rule as the threshold for decision-making connect the various policy elements. Centralizing the policy recommendations within a responsible and responsive Parking Services Division ensures that the life of the parking management plan extends beyond the first round of strategy implementation. It is recommended that the Policy Recommendations be adopted and implemented in the very near term. Rick Williams Consulting - City of Ashland, OR 1 Strategic Parking Management Plan STRATEGY 1: Formalize the Guiding Themes and Principles as policies for downtown access within the parking and transportation system plan. Implementation Timeline: Immediate to Near-Term (by July 2016) Formalizing the Guiding Principles by incorporating them into the policy element of the City's parking/transportation system plan will inform decision-making and development of future public facilities. Incorporating these principles into City policy assures the intent and purpose for parking management, established through this study, is carried out over time. Estimated Costs (STRATEGY 1): It is estimated that costs associated with this strategy would be minimal and mostly expended in efforts of existing staff to develop resolutions and ordinances through routine city planning processes. STRATEGY 2: Adopt the 85% Rule as the optimum occupancy standard for measuring performance of the parking supply and triggering specific management strategies and rate ranges. Implementation Timeline: Immediate to Near-Term (by July 2016) In the parking industry, it is assumed that when parking exceeds 85% occupancy in the peak during peak periods, the supply becomes constrained and may not provide full and convenient access to its intended user. Once parking routinely exceeds that figure, the 85% Rule requires that strategies be implemented to bring peak period occupancies below 85%. The parking inventory for Ashland revealed that existing peak occupancies within the core are often in excess of 85% for significant periods of the day. Having the 85% Rule formalized in policy will assure that a process for evaluating and responding to parking activity is in place. Estimated Costs (STRATEGY 2): It is estimated that costs associated with this strategy would be minimal and mostly expended in efforts of existing staff to develop resolutions and ordinances through routine city planning processes. Rick Williams Consulting - City of Ashland, OR Strategic Parking Management Plan I STRATEGY 3: Establish a Downtown Parking and Transportation Fund as a mechanism to direct funds derived from parking into a dedicated fund. Implementation Timeline: Immediate to Near-Term (by July 2016) As the supply of parking becomes constrained, it will be important to direct funds into supporting transportation and access in the downtown. This can be done with existing and/or future parking revenue, or with new revenues generated as a result of implementing this plan. The Downtown Parking Fund should be dedicated to: a. Debt service b. Parking operations c. Lot/garage maintenance d. Marketing and communications e. Transportation Demand Management programs f. New supply It is recommended that such a fund be established as soon as feasible to ensure that new revenues are appropriately directed. Estimated Costs (STRATEGY 3): It is estimated that costs associated with this strategy would be minimal and mostly expended in efforts of existing staff to develop resolutions and ordinances through routine city planning processes. STRATEGY 4: Centralize Parking Management. Consolidate the management and administration of parking management within a single division for Parking Services. Implementation Timeline: Immediate to Near-Term (by July 2016) The success of any multi-faceted parking system is dependent on administration, management, and communication of the City's parking program. This includes daily management of facilities, oversight of third-party vendors, financial accounting and reporting, marketing/communications, customer service, and strategic and capital planning. Ashland's existing administrative system for managing parking is spread across multiple departments, divisions, and commissions, which include Public Works, Community Development, Administrative Services, and Police. From a strategic management point of view there is no clear single point of responsibility for guiding the parking system in a manner that gives due diligence to the complexity of Rick Williams Consulting - City of Ashland, OR Strategic Parking Management Plan the existing system and the level of technical and response capability called for in the Parking Management Plan. Industry best practices recommend centralized management under the purview of a professional Parking Coordinator. Centralized management best supports the concept of an integrated parking system, as all elements of the parking system (off-street, on-street, enforcement, and oversight of any third-party provider) are consolidated within a single division and leadership structure. As such, administration and decision-making are structured to consider parking assets both individually and as a system. Resources can be managed in a tailored fashion where necessary and leveraged as appropriate and most efficient. It is recommended that the City begin internal discussion on restructuring parking management into a single Parking Services Division. A "downtown parking coordinator" will direct daily operation of the system, strategic implementation of policies and programs, and planning for growth. Estimated Costs (STRATEGY 4): At this time, the costs associated with restructuring parking management into a single operating division are unknown. There may be efficiencies, and there may be new costs (see Strategy 5, below). It is recommended that any new costs be supported by revenues derived from the parking system. STRATEGY 5: Develop a job description and submit a service package to create and hire a position of Downtown Parking Coordinator for the City of Ashland. Implementation Timeline: Near-Term (by September 2016) A single person should be assigned to oversee and manage all aspects of parking in the downtown, providing the community a single reference point for parking management. As stated in Strategy 4, consolidating parking operations within a single department under a Downtown Parking Coordinator creates administrative and operational efficiencies and seamlessly integrates on- and off-street parking, enforcement, and long-range strategic planning. It also provides a point of accountability and assures that adopted policy is fully implemented. The process for approving this type of service addition should be completed immediately to facilitate near-term hiring or restructuring of an existing position (see discussion below related to position options). Ideally, this person will staff a representative stakeholder group (see Strategy 6) to routinely review parking activity in the downtown overall and by district. Information would be used to evaluate "action triggers" and implement appropriate strategies. Rick Williams Consulting - City of Ashland, OR Strategic Parking Management Plan i The Downtown Parking Coordinator will, at minimum, lead in: • Coordinating and implementing all approved aspects of the Parking Management Plan. • Oversight of all personnel (City and third-party) involved in the delivery of on-street, off-street or enforcement services in downtown municipal parking resources. • Acting as liaison among businesses, users, and other agencies. • Coordinating with Administrative Services in the creation of consolidated financial reporting systems for parking. • Annual budgeting for parking services. • Oversight of any third-party management agreements for parking operations or enforcement services in City facilities. • Ensuring contract compliance by third-party parking providers. • Coordinating with relevant Departments and Divisions necessary policy and code changes approved in the Parking Management Plan. • Developing new signage and communications systems. • Developing and implementing marketing and communications programs and their on-going delivery. • Routinely assessing and recommending rate and fee adjustments based on demand dynamics. • Oversee data collection efforts as defined by policy. • Coordinating the transition to new parking revenue collection technologies necessary to implement performance-based pricing, as called for in Phase 2 of the Parking Management Plan. • Development of RFPs for parking services, equipment, and technology. • Coordination of review and selection of parking services, equipment, and technology providers. • Assessment of other upgrades (e.g. signage, lighting, security, maintenance, enforcement) as necessary. • Development and negotiation of contract agreements as necessary. • Developing usage tracking and reporting systems to measure and monitor program success or failure. • Troubleshooting program glitches. • Hosting and facilitating the work of a Downtown Parking Advisory Committee. Options for establishing this position include: Option A: New position/FTE Ashland could establish a new position and solicit professionals from within the parking industry. The consultant team favors this approach given the complexity of the recommendations in the Parking Management Plan. Rick Williams Consulting - City of Ashland, OR ' Strategic Parking Management Plan i New technology, responsive demand management, financial management, communications, coordination and integration of on and off-street assets, monitoring/reporting, and community liaison functions, to name a few, will require an individual who has demonstrated, successful experience with managing multi-faceted municipal or private sector parking systems. Option B: An existing FTE & Contract Consultant This model proved successful in Ventura, California. After adoption of a comprehensive parking plan in 2008, parking control was consolidated within a smaller number of departments, with an existing City employee assigned responsibility for coordinating operations and implementation of the plan. Through the reorganization process, it was determined that internal FTE capacity was available, and existing City staff could be utilized for the new position; ensuring that there was no additional burden on the parking fund. The reorganization process also identified the need to provide training and assistance to the Parking Coordinator to elevate their skill set to a level commensurate with new programs, services, and responsibilities called for in the parking plan. To this end, the City of Ventura contracted with a professional parking and transportation consulting firm to provide ongoing training and mentoring to the new Parking Coordinator. The consultant also provided assistance in establishing reporting formats, operating protocols, organizational development, and additional implementation planning to the City. The consultant contract provided up to 20 hours per week in consulting assistance and was in place for one year following adoption of the new parking plan. The Ventura model has been very successful, and was pursued because internal staff capacity was available and engaging the consultant was seen as less of a burden on the parking fund budget. Option C Improvement of systems and protocols with existing staff There are likely improvements in efficiency, coordination, and communications that could be made within the City's existing parking operations. These could include: • Increasing the total FTE responsible for administration. • Establishing a Parking Management Work Group, facilitated by a designated parking coordinator, that routinely reviews operations, performance, occupancy, and rates, and supports responsive and strategic decision-making. • Designate a parking coordinator to oversee the work of a Parking Advisory Committee. • Consolidate reporting and performance monitoring. Though the City currently has staff involved in the downtown parking program, the existing parking management format does not have a central point of responsibility and reporting. This makes it difficult Rick Williams Consulting - City of Ashland, OR Strategic Parking Management Plan I for users to conveniently understand and maximize downtown parking options. This is of particular importance given the complex and dynamic nature of the parking strategies recommended in this plan. For this reason, the consultant team recommends Option A or B. Additional discussion and costing may be needed to determine which option best fits Ashland's organizational structure. Estimated Costs (STRATEGY 5): As with Strategy 4, the costs associated with the restructuring of current management responsibilities into a single operating division under the leadership of a Parking Coordinator are unknown. It is recommended that any new costs be supported by revenues derived from the parking system. STRATEGY 6: Establish a Downtown Parking Advisory Committee (DPAC) consisting of downtown stakeholders to assist in program implementation and review. Implementation Timeline: Near-Term (consistent with hiring in Strategy 5) The City should develop and approve a process through which a representative cross-section of downtown interests routinely assists the Parking Coordinator in the review and implementation of the Parking Management Plan. It is recommended that the City Council formally appoint members to the Parking Advisory Committee. The stakeholder advisory process and a Parking Advisory Committee will assist the Parking Coordinator in implementing the parking management plan, review parking issues,; and advise City Council and other decision-making bodies on strategy implementation based on adopted policy for parking management and use dynamics identified for specific parking areas. Once the Parking Coordinator is established, the process of review, evaluation, and decision-making with the DPAC can be formally initiated. A consistent schedule of meetings should be established using this plan as a template for discussion. . Until a Parking Coordinator is hired, the City should consider a partnership with the Chamber of Commerce and the existing Downtown Parking Management and Circulation Ad Hoc Advisory Committee to form an interim Parking Work Group. This will ensure completion of the groundwork necessary to costing, scheduling, research and coordination of subsequent Phase 1 Strategies. Rick Williams Consulting - City of Ashland, OR Strategic Parking Management Plan i Estimated Costs (STRATEGY 6): There should be no additional costs associated with this recommendation if it can be initiated as a volunteer effort, hosted by the City and/or downtown business interests. Once fully implemented, the DPAC process would be part of the task portfolio of the Downtown Parking Coordinator. B. RECOMMENDED PARKING MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES: PHASE 1 This section details a range of operational enhancements that should be implemented within 18 months of Plan adoption. STRATEGY 7: Develop a reasonable schedule of data collection to better assess performance of the downtown parking supply. Implementation Timeline: Immediate (August/September 2015 - Completed) Near-Term (Spring and/or Summer 2016) Long-Term (Based on strategic schedule) A system for routine data collection will need to be established. To date, comprehensive statistical analyses of on-street parking (2014) and off-street parking (August 2015) have been completed. This has provided very good data for parking activity during the summer peak season, as well as potential shared use opportunities in off-street surface parking facilities located in or adjacent to the project study area. Conversations with the Advisory Committee indicated that a better understanding of off-peak data would also be useful, particularly as Phase 2 issues related to pricing are considered. Objective and up-to-date data will help the City and local stakeholders make better informed decisions as the downtown grows and redevelops. The system does not need to be elaborate, but it should be consistent and routine and structured to answer relevant questions about occupancy, seasonality, turnover, duration of stay, patterns of use, and enforcement. Parking information can be collected in samples, and other measures of success can be gathered through third-party data collection and/or volunteer processes. A methodology for conducting parking inventory and data analyses is provided in Oregon Transportation & Growth Management's Parking Made Easy: A Guide to Managing Parking in Your Community, most specifically Chapter 7. The guide can be found at www.oregon.gov/LCD/TGM/docs/parkingprimerfinal71213.pdf. Data derived from these efforts can be used by the City and a future Downtown Parking Advisory Committee to inform decisions, track use, and assess success measures. It is recommended that the City: Rick Williams Consulting - City of Ashland, OR Strategic Parking Management Plan I a. Work with an interim Parking Work Group (see Strategy 6 above) to develop a data collection schedule to address issues raised regarding peak and non-peak parking dynamics. Given the recent completion of both on and off-street occupancy studies, additional data collection could be done through sampling rather than all-day occupancy counting. The near-term data collection schedule should be completed no later than March 31, 2016. b. Schedule and initiate a non-peak-season occupancy study for both on and off-street systems. c. Conduct inventory and occupancy analyses no less than once every 24 months. Estimated Costs (STRATEGY 7): It is estimated that a data inventory and occupancy/utilization study would range from $20,000-$30,000 if conducted by a third-party consultant. Costs can be minimized in subsequent surveys given that the inventory/database would be built and through sampling and possible use of volunteers to collect data. STRATEGY 8: Identify off-street shared use opportunities and feasibilities based on data findings in Strategy 7. Establish goals for transitioning employees, begin outreach to opportunity sites, negotiate agreements, and assign employees to facilities. Implementation Timeline: Immediate: Short-listing sites (by February 2016) Near-Term: Outreach (February -July 2016) Mid-Term: Negotiations and Assignment (August 2016 - December 2016) A data collection effort by Rick Williams Consulting examined two days of occupancy activity in August 2015 (Friday 10/21 and Saturday 10/22). The study quantified actual hourly use of these facilities over a twelve-hour period each day. Fifty-one off-street sites comprising 1,998 parking stalls were surveyed. Findings from the study revealed that many sites are significantly underutilized, with an average total of approximately 1,000 stalls empty during peak periods of the day. The opportunity to direct downtown employees into these parking facilities would have a significant impact on on-street occupancies, particularly in areas where employees are using the on-street system and thereby denying customer/visitor use of the on-street supply. Figure A (next page) illustrates the findings of the off- street study. Rick Williams Consulting - City of Ashland, OR Strategic Parking Management Plan Figure A Peak Hour Parking Availability (Off-street Parking) NIP- 3 7f 4 s iZ a' pAaP. R A"WU a . _ T.Cti, x' . #M * y l Y Yt: 4 Na ~T*a . g i E nfR ~R 75 TIN i f~"' wra"'y..µ 9~e44 e 1 1 - in Aim • mss: t~ r. a Downtown As an ' > 86% st"aY area boundary 2015 Parkin Utilization ~ 84%.-70% Saturday, August 22 Astv'and O:an 69%-65% 3:00 - 4:00 PM Peak Hour RICK WILLIAMS CONSULTING 55% z a V7 ~ _001__1 I XIc ~ Rick Williams Consulting - City of Ashland, OR Strategic Parking Management Plan The interim Parking Work Group should consider the following for completion by February 2016, with later tasks transitioned to a Parking Coordinator and Downtown Parking Advisory Committee. a) Use the data from the August 2015 parking study to identify a subset of the 51 facilities surveyed that could serve as reasonable shared use "opportunity sites." Criteria for determining sites could be proximity to downtown, a meaningful supply of empty stalls, pedestrian/bike connectivity, walk distance/time, safety and security issues, etc. b) Based on the above, develop a short list of opportunity sites and identify owners. c) Establish a target goal for the number of downtown employees to transition into opportunity sites. d) Begin outreach to owners of private lots. e) Negotiate shared use agreements. f) Obtain agreements from downtown businesses to participate in employee assignment program. Estimated Costs (STRATEGY 8): It is estimated that costs associated with this strategy would be minimal and mostly expended in efforts of existing staff and volunteers to review and identify opportunity sites and conduct outreach to potential private sector participants. Planning in this regard may determine that funds are needed to create incentives and/or improve the condition of lots or pedestrian/bike connections. STRATEGY 9: Create a critical path timeline to a new parking brand that can be utilized at all City-owned lots and shared supplies and in parking marketing/communications. PARK ,n Implementation Timeline: Near-Term (by December 2016) 0 47 Guiding Principle D. 3 (p. 8) calls for development and implementation of "a wayfinding system for the downtown that links parking assets and provides directional guidance, preferably under a common brand or logo." The intent of this principle is to create a brand that unifies the public supply of parking and is easily communicated, both at parking sites and, ideally, through a , wayfinding system located throughout the downtown and on maps, websites and other communications and promotions. lieu The linchpin of any such program is a brand. It is recommended that the City and interim Parking Work Group engage a design firm to develop an attractive and recognizable "parking brand" for use by the City of Ashland at all of its public off-street facilities, and any shared use facility that offers visitor access. The design professional would: Rick Williams Consulting - City of Ashland, OR 1 Strategic Parking Management Plan I a) Work with stakeholders and the City to create a new parking brand for Ashland. b) Develop options and assist in developing a final recommended brand/logo. c) Develop cost estimates for the creation and placement of new brand/logo signage packages at all City-owned off-street sites and shared use facilities. d) Assist in signage creation. Estimated Costs (STRATEGY 9): It is estimated that engaging a design consultant to carry out the tasks identified above would range from $15,000 - $20,000. STRATEGY 10: Simplify on-street time stays. Consider incorporation of new brand/logo into on-street signage per input derived in Strategy 9. Implementation Timeline: Near-Term (January 2017 - June 2017) Multiple time stay designations in a downtown are often Example: On-street "Brand" confusing to customers, particularly very short-term stalls (e.g., Springfield, OR 5, 15, 30 and 60 minute stalls) that do not provide an adequate CIN STREIT SIGNAGE amount of time for a typical customer visit. Implementing this n strategy will bring understandable and consistent time stays need to downtown (e.g., core versus theater and Lithia Park). 2 HOUR 3HOUR Additionally, a new brand/logo can be incorporated into the on- 5P 8,~1• street system as a means of integrating the on and off-street systems. This would require coordinating changes in the on- OFF VREET51GNAGE street system to the branding work in Strategy 9, which would have a recommendation developed by December 2016. This PA R K would be similar to the effort completed in Springfield, Oregon EE FR where a stylized P was created for the public parking system and incorporated into on and off-street signage. This is illustrated in the example to the right. The 2014 Community Planning Workshop study outlined a series of recommendations for reformatting on-street time stays throughout the downtown. This work should serve as a template for action, with refinements developed through DPAC discussion, new data, and public input.3 An initial timeline for action would be: 'See: Ashland Downtown Parking Management and Multi-Modal Circulation Plan -October 2014, (Community Planning Workshop and the University of Oregon). Rick Williams Consulting - City of Ashland, OR Strategic Parking Management Plan I a) Coordinate with Strategy 9 to determine brand/logo integration into new on-street signage (July 2016 - December 2016). b) Identify/quantify changes to be made (July 2016 - December 2016) c) Initiate formatting changes (January 2017 -June 2017) - Eliminate 1-hour time stays, increase to 2 hours. - All block faces with retail/office/restaurant should be 2 hours. - Increase 4 hour stay options - assess feasibility of Residential Permits in select 4-hour zones - i.e., areas currently zoned R. - Assess supply capacity (based on data update) for feasibility of employee on-street permit program(s) in 4-hour parking areas (contingent on residential program). Estimated Costs (STRATEGY 10): Based on information from other cities, estimated per unit costs for signage upgrades would be: • A standard signage package would have two poles with blade signs per block face - one at each end of the block with arrows pointing inward. Unit Costs- Signage • Only material costs are provided in these estimates. • Pole unit cost = $470 • Blade sign unit cost = $30 • Unit cost for poles ($470) include hole boring and the pole STRATEGY 11: Deploy new off-street signage package Implementation Timeline: Near-Term (January 2017 - June 2017) The new brand/logo developed in Strategy 9 would be incorporated into new signage packages to be placed at all City-owned public facilities. This would create a uniform and easily identifiable look for public parking, setting the foundation for future expansion of the brand into a downtown wayfinding system. Placement of the new off-street signage package should occur no later than June 2017. Estimated Costs (STRATEGY 11): The costs of the new signage system would be developed in Strategy 9. Rick Williams Consulting - City of Ashland, OR Strategic Parking Management Plan STRATEGY 12: Expand bike parking network to create connections between r,. parking and the downtown to encourage employee bike commute' , trips and draw customers to downtown businesses. Implementation Timeline: Near-Term (October 2016 - June 2017) " :F . When we talk about parking management, we're not just talking about cars. Communities throughout Oregon support bicycling as a key sustainable transportation strategy, and the Oregon Transportation Planning Rule requires it for new developments. ~4~.. Ashland has the benefit of a strong bike culture, a high number of local bike shops, and active efforts to expand the City and Example: Interior Wall Racks downtown's bike lane system. What the downtown may be lacking is sufficient "trip-end" bike parking amenities on- street, off-street, and in private buildings. Providing adequate bicycle parking will expand the capacity of the overall parking supply downtown. It is recommended that the City expand its approach to bike parking in the downtown to deliver a four-strategy approach. It is assumed that this approach would support current Example: Bike Corral Ashland, OR efforts to expand the City's bike lane network. This effort should begin subsequent to the hiring of the Downtown Parking Coordinator (October 2016). Elements of the four-strategy approach would include: f a) On-sidewalk bike parking (October 2016 -December 2016). Identify locations for added bike parking within the pedestrian amenity zones. b) Bike corrals ((October 2016 -December 2016). Identify Example: Art Rack Baker City, OR locations for additional bike corrals either in plaza areas or on-street and adjacent to high-traffic businesses. c) On private property (October 2016 - December 2016). Identify areas on private property for bike parking improvements, especially for employees - e.g., interior bike cages, wall rack locations, and other secure areas. d) Identify funding/incentives and install (January 2017 -June 2017) - Assemble funding sources necessary to implement a) - d). Rick Williams Consulting - City of Ashland, OR Strategic Parking Management Plan i Estimated Costs (STRATEGY 12) The cost of an inventory of potential bike parking locations could be incorporated into the data collection portion of Strategy 7 above. Site identification could also be done through volunteer efforts and by working with downtown stakeholders and bike advocates. Costs are likely minimal. Estimated unit costs for actual bike infrastructure: • Staple or U racks: $150-$200 • Wall Mounted racks: $130-$150 • Bike Corral $1,2004 • Art Rack variable based on design STRATEGY 13: Evaluate and pursue on-street pricing in high occupancy areas (85%+). Implementation Timeline: Near-Term (January 2017 - June 2017) Recent data collection efforts have demonstrated that the on-street system 2hr routinely exceeds the 85% occupancy standard for sustained periods during the summer months. The Advisory Committee has indicated that less is Max g statistically known about non-peak seasons. Strategy 7 addresses the need PtMIUM Rate for additional occupancy and use data. Given that data collection would provide updated information for multiple seasons, it is recommended that the Parking Coordinator initiate a process with the Downtown Parking 8hr Advisory Committee to evaluate transitioning the downtown on-street Max parking system to paid parking. Parking UU0 Rate Hourly on-street occupancy data can also be used to model potential revenue hours for different rate scenarios. Revenue hours can then be integrated into an expense/revenue pro forma to objectively estimate the feasibility of moving to an on-street pay-to-park program. Data derived from an improved inventory database and real-time use information will allow development of an accurate feasibility model. Paid parking can support higher turnover within the system, yield higher compliance by employees directed to off-street locations so as not to compete for on-street parking with customers and visitors, create a more reasonable value relationship between parking and alternative modes, and provide 4 Based on City of Portland, Oregon cost estimate for 6 staple racks (12 bike parking spaces), striping, bollards and installation. Rick Williams Consulting - City of Ashland, OR Strategic Parking Management Plan i revenue streams necessary to support operations, marketing/communications, program delivery, and infrastructure (e.g., new capacity). Issues to examine, with supporting data, include: a) Establish Parking Enterprise Fund (Strategy 3) b) Update database (on-street counts/samples) (Strategy 7) c) Develop expense/revenue model using occupancy data to estimate financial viability of new revenue collection technology. d) Determine revenue collection technology that will best serve Ashland - Single meter vs pay station - Pay & Display vs Pay by Space e) Consider/adopt seasonal pricing, using data sets to assist f) Finalize pricing format g) Finalize time stay format and hours of operation - Consider No Limit parking in current 4 HR areas h) Solicit vendors for revenue collection technology Estimated Costs (STRATEGY 13) It is assumed here that the evaluation process would be incorporated into the routine schedule developed by the new Parking Coordinator and Downtown Parking Advisory Committee. Data collection efforts are a part of Strategy 7. General equipment costs for revenue technology are: • Multi-Space Meters (pay stations) $5,000 - $7,000 per unit (serving 8 -14 spaces) • Single-Space Meters $500 - $700 per unit (serving one space) • Back office support Varies by system and software selected STRATEGY 14: Solicit firms to establish wayfinding and dynamic signage systems in the public right of way, integrated with the off-street system using City parking brand developed in Strategy 9. Implementation Timeline: Near-Term (January 2017 -June 2017) Many cities brand their public parking facilities and use dynamic signage in the public right-of-way. These systems inform customers and direct them to available parking. Portland, OR, and San Jose, CA are good examples (see photo at right). Rick Williams Consulting - City of Ashland, OR Strategic Parking Management Plan i Dynamic signage is linked to occupancy information collected at individual or multiple parking sites, usually through loop detector/parking counter systems. This information is displayed at building entry plazas and/or at major roadway entry portals. The signs provide an address or facility name and real- time stall availability. The most successful programs tie into a parking brand incorporated into both the on-site and right-of- way signage. This provides customers a visual cue that translates from their first encounter on the roadway to being able to conveniently identify a parking location with available parking. Dynamic signage also complements parking apps and can be linked in real time to smartphones and/or websites. The idea behind branding the Ashland system with a name, logo, and marketing is to make it immediately recognizable to the customer. An engagement with a wayfinding firm would bring an industry professional to: a. Develop a signage package that incorporates a uniform design, logo, and color scheme into all informational signage related to parking (see Strategy 9). b. Brand each off-street public facility, open to public access, with the established logo package. c. Evaluate off-street facilities for installation of real-time counter systems that link to wayfinding signage. d. Identify key entry points into the downtown for placement of informational signage. e. Conduct cost feasibility analysis. f. Establish installation schedule. Estimated Costs (STRATEGY 14) It is assumed that costing for wayfinding would be incorporated into the solicitation. STRATEGY 15: Deploy wayfinding system as developed in Strategy 14. Implementation Timeline: Near-Term (June 2017 - November 2017) Implements plan developed in Strategy 14. Estimated Costs (STRATEGY 15) Developed and approved through Strategy 14 process. Rick Williams Consulting - City of Ashland, OR Strategic Parking Management Plan i C. RECOMMENDED PARKING MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES: PHASE 2 This section outlines longer-term strategies. It is anticipated that Phase 2 efforts will take place between January 2018 and June 2019. These strategies build upon and are facilitated by work completed in Phase 1 (July 2016 - December 2017). Phase 2 focuses on data, capacity management, communications, capacity growth, and identification of funding sources. Any and all Phase 2 strategies can be accelerated or moderated as necessary depending on community support and consensus, opportunity, and/or funding. The City and Downtown Parking Advisory Committee may elect to reorder strategies as opportunity dictates. As with Phase 1, all strategies outlined here will require consistent and dedicated management and coordination with active participation by the private sector. STRATEGY 16: Implement on-street pricing. Work completed in Strategies 13 -15 (Phase 1) will establish the timing for implementing on-street parking pricing. Initial steps will include outreach to potentially affected residential communities, and development of a marketing and communications plan to be rolled out in advance of on-street parking pricing. These action steps are outlined below. Step A (Strategy 16) Explore residential and employee permit programs (on-street) Implementation Timeline: Synched to pricing launch date G Changes to parking management in the commercial zones of the downtown could cause issues related to employees seeking parking in residential areas. In anticipation of this, the City Parking Coordinator and DPAC should begin an outreach and education process to residents and businesses in adjacent neighborhoods. The purpose of this is to raise awareness and understanding of programs being developed, and to begin framing possible mitigation strategies and solutions if new parking systems visrroR in the downtown exacerbate parking problems in neighborhoods. pARKr M ~xc~ar ex ZPE►c The most effective strategy to manage parking in neighborhoods adjacent to commercial/retail areas is an area permit program. Residents in areas zoned Residential (R) would be issued permits that allow unlimited parking on- street within the permit zone during specifically designated hours (determined through use data that would be assembled in updates per Rick Williams Consulting - City of Ashland, OR Strategic Parking Management Plan I Strategy 7). All other users (e.g., visitors and employees) would be limited to a time stay (e.g., 3 hours) or, if occupancy surpluses are indicated through data updates, through an additional employee permit. Adjacent neighborhoods should be allowed the option of requesting an area permit program if spillover is considered to be a problem and constraints are identified through data collection updates. The City should be prepared to respond with an already approved Area Parking Permit Zone (APPZ) program. The program would prioritize on-street parking in residentially zoned neighborhoods for residents and visitors. Employee parking permits can be introduced into approved APPZs when parking surpluses are demonstrated and priority parking is assured. To this end, and in coordination with Strategy 16, the City should: a. Develop and approve an Area Parking Permit Zone program. b. Initiate outreach/education to neighborhoods on downtown parking management plan and area parking permit concept. c. Be prepared to implement residential permit program in areas zoned R (if requested by neighborhood). d. Assess supply capacity (based on data updates) for feasibility of employee on-street permit program(s) in residential permit areas, contingent on establishment of an APPZ for residential use. Estimated Costs (STRATEGY 16 -Step A): There should be no additional costs associated with the outreach and policy work associated with this task, as this work would be within the ongoing responsibilities of the Parking Coordinator and the DPAC. Costs associated with delivery of an Area Parking Permit Zone program will need to be further developed. Some cities charge users for the permit, at a rate that covers cost of management and administration. Other cities use parking revenue from the meter zone to underwrite the cost of an APPZ, viewing it as a cost of mitigation. Others use revenue from employee permits as a means to cover costs for residential permits. Any or a combination of these funding options will need to be further explored. Step 8 (Strategy 16) Develop a marketing / communications and new system roll out plan Implementation Timeline: Synched to pricing launch date Implementation of paid parking, a new brand/logo and new rules of use will come with many questions, which are best anticipated and proactively solicited. A clear plan for marketing and communicating the new system and its purposes, goals, and benefits will facilitate community awareness and understanding as well as acceptance if strategically addressed. The Parking Rick Williams Consulting - City of Ashland, OR Strategic Parking Management Plan i Coordinator and DPAC should develop a plan that incorporates any of the following elements deemed appropriate. Goal • Inform and involve the downtown business community-employers, merchants, employees, and customers-in preparing for implementation of new time limits and paid on-street parking. Approach • Enlist a subgroup of the Downtown Parking Advisory Committee to help design communications with downtown stakeholders and customers. • Engage and update the downtown business community through credible partner organizations. • Communicate with downtown customers and employees through merchants and employers. • Provide friendly, timely response to persons who have questions/problems. Materials & Tools • Website/updates Txcma D*wmown Puking knp4mentatoon • Letter to downtown &x: aatatit Scr+rdu►e tit+M businesses": Fact sheet/map kra..x+.www«c . .*A. • Presentation tools: . . PowerPoint, display - - . b. boards • Merchant/employer packet: "Customer Parking Kit" IMa:ar F94fr.A A4iN Rt.7k.k ,S F'.NYMIMrr M13'kaSarKIIY II`IR14 was 4: Sr NtyAV '..f'xti • Point-of-purchase customer information Sample: Pay to Park Rollout Schedule • FAQs (frequently asked Tacoma, Washington questions) • Posters • Utility bill inserts • Business cards: hotline number • Meter graphics/instructions • Pay Station demo video • New signage: permanent, temporary (samples for merchants) • List of off-street parking resources/rates • Bicycle options Rick Williams Consulting - City of Ashland, OR • Strategic Parking Management Plan • Transit options • Grace period notice • Interested parties e-mail list • Website/links • Social media: Facebook, Twitter, YouTube • Order form (for more materials) • Paid advertising Target Audiences • City policymakers (Council, Commissions, Task Forces) • City staff • Downtown Parking Advisory Committee • Police Department • Enforcement staff • Downtown merchants/employers • Downtown customers/visitors • Downtown employees • Downtown residents • Neighborhood associations • Business district associations • Chamber of Commerce • Oregon Shakespeare Festival • News media • Hard to reach audiences Communications Partners • Chamber of Commerce • Neighborhood Associations • Rogue Valley Transportation District (RTVD) • Ashland Community Development • Southern Oregon University • Major employers Community Briefings • Organize a speakers' bureau to reach interested stakeholders in their regular group meetings. Media Strategy • Seek understanding and editorial support of local media outlets (print, radio, TV) • Demonstration workshop/training session for media Rick Williams Consulting - City of Ashland, OR 1 Strategic Parking Management Plan I • Monitor local media coverage - respond as needed. Customer Support • Pay station/meter demonstrations (established in contract with selected vendor) • Customer parking cards to distribute to merchants/customers (option in contract) • Hotline: single point of contact (established in contract) • Grace period for enforcement during rollout • Protocols and service levels for handling problems, complaints (established in contract) Spokesperson(s) • City spokesperson • DPAC spokesperson • Partner organizations Estimated Costs (STRATEGY 16 -Step 8): Costs associated with a communications and rollout plan are difficult to ascertain at this time, as such costs would be a combination of time allocated by the Parking Coordinator and DPAC as well as time provided by existing internal City public relations and information resources. Some cities have opted to employ professional third-party public outreach/communications firms and/or added certain rollout functions to the responsibilities of the selected parking revenue collection technology firm(s). Step C (Strategy 16) Initiate on-street paid parking Implementation Timeline: January 2018 (launch) Work completed in Strategy 13 (Phase 1) will establish the format, type of technology, and timing for implementation of this strategy. Strategy 13 is scheduled to be completed in June 2017, leaving adequate time before the beginning of Phase 2 in January 2018 to: a. Conduct outreach to the community (Step A) b. Develop a marketing/communications plan (Step B) c. Solicit vendor bids through an RFP process. d. Evaluate proposals. e. Award contract to preferred vendor. f. Refine budgets and expense/revenue forecast model (Strategy 7). On- g. Select a target launch date. Example: On- street Pay Station h. Launch. Rick Williams Consulting - City of Ashland, OR Strategic Parking Management Plan Estimated Costs (STRATEGY 16 - Step C): Estimated costs for a new on-street pay-to-park system were provided in Strategy 13. They are repeated here, below. • Multi-Space Meters (pay stations) $5,000 - $7,000 per unit (serving 8 -14 spaces) • Single Space Meters $500 - $700 per unit (serving one space) • Back office support Varies by system and software selected STRATEGY 17 Explore expanding access capacity - new parking supply and/or transit/shuttle options Implementation Timeline: January -June 2018 As Ashland's downtown grows employment, residents, and visitors, existing supplies of parking and alternative mode access will need to be expanded. Adding bicycle trip capacity was discussed above in Phase 1 (Strategy 12). With implementation of paid parking, and possibly area permit programs, the City should evaluate other forms of access capacity as well, including new parking supply and improved transit and/or shuttle options. These types of capacity growth require sophisticated infrastructure and are very costly. It will be important for Ashland to give adequate time and effort to determine the most beneficial and cost-effective formats for increasing YY the capacity of the downtown access system. Planning for, and finding funding for, new capacity is time-consuming, so focused and objective'{ evaluation will greatly facilitate decision-making before access constraints create adverse impacts on ~r :},a s "Al the downtown. ,-mot w ..;XA 0 W, VWV 1. Identify new garage opportunity sites One form of new access capacity would be adding - 'i to the current supply of parking through. construction of a new parking garage and/ork creation of new surface parking supply in a location,, outside the downtown and linked by transit or s,. 7, i shuttle. The consultant team conducted an i inventory of potential off-street parking opportunity sites in August 2015. These sites provide a starting point for evaluating potential Po% nzoti nASHIndPirkir.11 Stud, 1:3Wd,41" -,:A~ 2015 sites in the downtown. A map of those sites is =3 UCK WILLIAMS CONSULTING Pysla5 Total provided at right. To date there has been no evaluation of potential "remote" sites. Rick Williams Consulting - City of Ashland, OR Strategic Parking Management Plan i The Community Planning Workshop (2014) developed an initial database of existing parking occupancies in the downtown. Many areas of the downtown already exceed 85% occupancy in summer peak periods, and additional information on parking utilization will be developed in Phase 1 (Strategy 7). Additional data should be used to evaluate parking constraints and determine whether there is a deficit of parking downtown. This data will be useful in helping to "right size" any parking facility that might be developed. It is recommended that the Parking Coordinator and DPAC initiate the following: a. Establish desired parking "need" (w/ Strategies 7 & 13). b. Evaluate locations where parking is possible downtown. c. Evaluate "remote" sites that could be connected via shuttle/transit (surface lot option). d. Evaluate public/private partnerships to develop supply. e. Coordinate site evaluation with Community Development. f. Coordinate with Ashland Chamber of Commerce, particularly through contacts with potential site partners in the private sector. g. Engage local developers in evaluation process. h. Narrow to feasible site(s). 2. Explore shuttl%irculator connections (remote connector) As with an evaluation of new parking supply, it will be equally important to evaluate the cost and f V feasibility o y- f new transit and/or shuttle capacity. Transit and shuttles could be especially valuable all as a means to improve employee commute options, provide circulator links through - - - w x downtown for visitors, and link remotely located - Y parking supply. The Parking Coordinator and DPAC should involve RVTD, Community Development, and the community in discussions regarding a transit option that would best serve the downtown and effectively shift an increasing percentage of trips onto a transit/shuttle system. It is recommended that the Parking Coordinator and DPAC: a. Evaluate route options. b. Explore connections to remote parking in conjunction with parking supply evaluation c. Determine desired levels of frequency/type of vehicle/seasonality. d. Circulator shuttle or existing transit? Rick Williams Consulting - City of Ashland, OR Strategic Parking Management Plan e. Coordinate with RVTD. f. Narrow to preferred option(s). Estimated Costs (STRATEGY 17): The City and DPAC may want to retain third-party assistance in this process, particularly as regards the design and formatting of transit/shuttle systems. These systems will impact traffic and circulation and create land use issues related to transit/shuttle stops. Identifying and locating potential parking sites could be accomplished internally, with assistance from the Chamber of Commerce, local developers, and Community Development. As an estimate, the City could incur costs of $30,000 - $50,000 for route and system planning for a new transit/shuttle option. Some of this money could be used to cost the transit/shuttle option, which would reduce costing estimates for transit/shuttle described in Strategy 20 below. STRATEGY 18 Develop cost forecasts for preferred parking supply and shuttle/transit system options. Implementation Timeline: June -September 2018 Information derived from Strategy 17 will provide realistic data on parking and transit/shuttle enhancements that have community input and initial feasibility. Parking will have been evaluated as to location, size and format (garage or surface lot). Transit/shuttles will have been evaluated as to desired format, frequency, and routing. Estimated Costs (STRATEGY 18): Initial costing of garages/lots in the form of expense/revenue and financing pro formas can range from $5,000 - $7,500. This cost would be contingent on data and information already provided to a consultant from Strategy 19. Rick Williams Consulting does not have expertise in costing transit/shuttle systems. These numbers need additional evaluation. Estimated costs for new parking supply will range by type of supply. Estimates from projects recently completed in the Pacific Northwest are provided below. • Structured Underground $35,000 - $45,000 per stall • Structured Above Ground $20,000 - $25,000 per stall • Surface Lot $ 5,000 - $ 7,000 per stall NOTE: Does not include operating cost or full cost of land Rick Williams Consulting - City of Ashland, OR Strategic Parking Management Plan STRATEGY 19 Explore and develop funding options Implementation Timeline: September 2018 - March 2019 A wide range of funding sources and revenue streams could be used to implement an enhanced parking management plan and develop new parking or transit capacity in Ashland. Given the costs new infrastructure, consideration of new funding mechanisms is prudent. The list of potential sources here is not exhaustive, nor is these sources mutually exclusive. Funding for parking facilities, particularly garages, in emerging urban areas generally requires multiple sources. The use of fees continues to evolve as various State laws or City ordinances are authorized. Implementation of fees should be reviewed by the City Attorney to determine their feasibility in light of applicable laws. The funding options provided below assume a more detailed discussion of the role of the City in future funding of parking and transit, and public discussion regarding use of public funds to build and operate new systems. Options Affecting Customers User Fees Many cities collect revenue through parking meters and/or sale of permits and direct it to parking or transportation development enterprise funds. Transit or shuttle riders pay in the form of monthly or daily fares. These funds can be used to construct/bond for additional parking or transit capacity. Event Ticketing Surcharges This would impose surcharges in conjunction with local and regional facilities (e.g., performing arts, sports, and concert arenas) to support development of access systems. Fees are generally applied to ticket costs. Parking Fines Revenues are collected for parking violations and a portion directed to parking development enterprise funds. Options Affecting Businesses Parking and Business Improvement Area or District (BIA or BID) An assessment on businesses rather than property owners, these can be based on assessed value, gross sales, square footage, number of employees, or other factors established by the local legislative Rick Williams Consulting - City of Ashland, OR Strategic Parking Management Plan authority. Salem, OR assesses a fee on businesses in its downtown Parking District to support parking services and future supply. Portland assesses a business income tax through the State of Oregon to support transit. Options Affecting Property Owners Local Improvement District (LID) An LID is a property tax assessment that requires buy-in by property owners within a specifically identified boundary. LIDs usually result from a petition process requiring a majority of owners to agree to an assessment for a specific purpose-in this case, a parking facility or transit infrastructure improvement). Options Affecting Developers Fee-in-Lieu Developers may be given the option to pay a fee in lieu of providing parking with a new private development. Payment of a fee-in-lieu provides the developer access entitlements to public parking facilities near the development site. Fees-in-lieu can be assessed up to the full cost of parking construction. Generally, fees-in-lieu do not provide sufficient revenue to fully fund parking facilities, and are combined with other revenue sources If an in-lieu parking fee is considered by the City, there needs to be greater policy clarity on the intent and purpose of the fee and the City's role in using the fees to either increase parking supply in the future or increase access capacity through enhancement of alternative mode programs. Lack of specificity in this regard limits discussion of the type of in-lieu fee developed, the rate itself and the programs and strategies that would need to be in place to implement desired outcomes. A useful guide to the diversity of fee-in-lieu programs and their advantages and disadvantages is Donald Shoup, Journal of Planning and Education Research, 18:307-320, 1999. Public/Private Development Partnerships Development partnerships are generally associated with mixed-use projects in which parking is used to reduce the cost of private office, retail, or residential development. Public/private development can occur through a variety of arrangements, including: 1. Public acquisition of land and sale or lease of land/air rights not needed for parking to accommodate private use; 2. Private development of integrated mixed-use development with sale or lease-back of the public parking portion upon completion; and Rick Williams Consulting - City of Ashland, OR Strategic Parking Management Plan 1 3. Responsibility for public sector involvement directly by the City, through a public development authority (PDA), or other special purpose entity such as a public facility district created for the project district or downtown area. Options Affecting the General Public General Obligation (GO) Bonds Local jurisdictions may issue non-voted or voted bonds to develop parking or transit infrastructure, subject to overall debt limit requirements. With GO bonding, the municipality pledges its full faith and credit to repayment of the debt from general fund resources. In effect, general fund revenues would be reserved to repay debt that could not be supported by parking or transit revenues alone. Again, there may be imposed limits on the municipality for voter approved or non-voted debt. Refinancing GO Bonds This involves refinancing existing debt at lower rates, and pushing the savings from the general fund to debt coverage for new infrastructure. In these times of lower interest rates, the City of Ashland may have already maximized this option. Revenue Bonds Revenue bonds dedicate parking fees and other designated revenue sources to the repayment of bonds, but without pledging the full faith and credit of the issuing authority. Revenue bonding is not appropriate in situations where a local jurisdiction's overall debt limit is a factor and projected revenues are insufficient to cover required debt service. 63-20 Financing A potential alternative to traditional GO bonds, revenue bonds, and LID bond financing, 63-20 financing allows a qualified non-profit corporation to issue tax-exempt bonds on behalf of a government. Financed assets must be capital and must be turned over free and clear to the government by the time bonded indebtedness is retired. When a municipality uses this technique to finance a public facility, it can contract for the services of a non-profit corporation (as the issuer) and a builder. The issuer acts on behalf of the municipality, but has no real business interest in the asset being acquired. Community or Urban Renewal (Tax Increment Financing) Though originally created for the limited purpose of financing the redevelopment of blighted communities, tax increment financing (TIF) has developed into an integral part of the revenue structure of many local governments. The rapid growth of TIF as an economic development technique of choice to finance land acquisition, site development, and property rehabilitation/revitalization began in the early 1980s. Tax increment financing can provide an ongoing source of local property tax revenue to finance economic development projects, and other physical infrastructure projects, without having to raise property tax rates. Moreover, TIF can leverage future general fund revenues to support the repayment Rick Williams Consulting - City of Ashland, OR Strategic Parking Management Plan I of property-tax backed debt, without having to go directly to voters for approval, and without violating debt limitations. State and Federal Grants In the past, a variety of state and federal grant programs have been applied to funding parking and transit infrastructure in business districts. In the current environment of more limited government funding, there may no longer be readily identifiable programs suitable for parking facility development, though transit may be more feasible. General Fund Contribution Local jurisdictions may make either one-time capital or ongoing operating contributions to a downtown parking or transit/shuttle program. Estimated Costs (STRATEGY 19): This is very much a process task, requiring research and conversations with City policy- and decision- makers and legal counsel, and discussion with a range of potentially affected stakeholders. For the purposes of this Plan discussion, it is assumed that costs would be absorbed internally by the City and the new Parking Services Division. STRATEGY 20 Initiate new capacity expansion Implementation Timeline: June 2019 This strategy would be catalyzed by completion of Strategies 17 -19 and would complete Phase 2 of the downtown Strategic Parking Management Plan. By June 2019, the City and DPAC would have evaluated and researched the most effective option(s) for expanding access capacity in the downtown. This would be a capacity enhancement that provides the highest benefit to downtown in accommodating growth and funding through a package of finance options that are cost-effective and publicly supported. Rick Williams Consulting - City of Ashland, OR Strategic Parking Management Plan i VI. SUMMARY The parking management strategies recommended here are intended to provide a template for action leading to a more efficient and organized parking system for the downtown. The strategies would be led by a Downtown Parking Coordinator with informed insight and direction from a representative Downtown Parking Advisory Committee. The strategies envisioned here will be implemented over a minimum of three years, triggered by the 85% Rule and documented parking demand. Overall, the strategies are designed to "get the right parker to the right parking spot" in a manner that supports the Guiding Principles established as a part of this plan. Rick Williams Consulting - City of Ashland, OR Strategic Parking Management Plan i APPENDIX ACTION STRATEGIES IMPLEMENATION SUMMARY Rick Williams Consulting - City of Ashland, OR i Strategic Parking Management Plan I ACTIONS & IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE Phase 1 Phase 1 Phase 2 Strategy Strategies Immediate (6-18 (18-36+ Comment (0 - 6 months) months) months) POLICY ACTION STRATEGIES 1 Formalize the Guiding Themes Provides decision-making & Principles as policies for framework and policy foundation downtown access within the ✓ for decisions/actions. Target by parking and transportation July 2016. system plan. 2 The parking inventory for Ashland Adopt the 85% Rule as the revealed that existing peak period optimum occupancy standard occupancies within the core are for measuring performance of often parked in excess of 85% for the parking supply and ✓ significant periods of the day. triggering specific management Having the 85% Rule formalized in strategies and rate ranges. policy will assure that a process for evaluating and responding to future parking activity is in place. 3 As the supply of parking becomes Establish a Downtown Parking constrained over time, it will be and Transportation Fund as a ✓ important to direct funds into a mechanism to direct funds specific account intended to derived from parking into a support on-going transportation dedicated fund. and access in the downtown. 4 Centralized administration and Centralize Parking management best supports the Management. Consolidate the concept of an integrated parking management and system as all elements of the ✓ parking system (off-street, on- administration of parking management within a single street, enforcement and oversight of any third party provider) are division for Parking Services. consolidated within a single division and leadership structure. 5 Consolidating parking operations Develop a job description and within a single department or submit a service package to bureau under a Downtown Parking create and hire a position of Coordinator creates administrative Downtown Parking Coordinator ✓ ✓ and operational efficiencies and for the City of Ashland. seamlessly integrates on-street, off- street, enforcement and long-range strategic planning. Target by September 2016. Rick Williams Consulting - City of Ashland, OR Strategic Parking Management Plan i Phase 1 Phase 1 Phase 2 Strategy Strategies Immediate (6-18 (18-36+ Comment (0 - 6 months) months) months) 6 The stakeholder advisory process Establish a Downtown Parking and a Parking Advisory Committee Advisory Committee (DPAC) will: (a) assist the Parking consisting of downtown Coordinator/Coordinator in the stakeholders to assist in implementation of the parking program implementation and management plan; (b) review review. ✓ ✓ parking issues over time; and (c) advise City Council and other relevant decision-making bodies on strategy implementation based on adopted policy for parking management and use dynamics identified for specific parking areas. PARKING MANAGEMENT ACTION STRATEGIES (PHASE 1) 7 A system for routine data collection Develop a reasonable schedule will need to be established. of data collection to better Conversations with the Advisory assess performance of the ✓ ✓ ✓ Committee indicated that a better downtown parking supply. understanding of "off-peak" data would also be useful, particularly as Phase 2 issues related to pricing are considered. 8 The 2015 study of off-street lots Identify off-street shared use quantified actual hourly use of opportunities and feasibilities these facilities over a twelve hour based on data findings in period each day. Fifty-one (51) off- Strategy 7. Establish goals for ✓ ✓ street sites comprising 1,998 transitioning employees, begin parking stalls were surveyed. outreach to opportunity sites, Findings from the study revealed that many sites are significantly negotiate agreements, and underutilized, with an average total assign employees to facilities. of approximately 1,000 stalls empty during the peak hour of the day. 9 The intent is to create a brand that Create a critical path timeline to unifies the "public" supply of a new parking brand that can be utilized at all City-owned lots parking and is easily communicated; at specific parking and shared supplies and in parking ✓ ✓ sites and, ideally, through a system marketing/communications. of wayfinding and guidance systems located throughout the downtown and in maps, websites and other communications and promotions. Rick Williams Consulting - City of Ashland, OR Strategic Parking Management Plan i Phase 1 Phase 1 Phase 2 Strategy Strategies Immediate (6-18 (18-36+ Comment (0 -.6 months) months) months) 10 The 2014 Community Planning Simplify on-street time stays. Workshop study outlined a series Consider incorporation of new of recommendations for brand/logo into on-street ✓ ✓ reformatting on-street time stays signage per input derived in throughout the downtown. This Strategy 9. work should serve as a template for action moving forward. 11 Implements Strategy 9. Deploy new off-street signage package ✓ 12 Expand bike parking network to What the downtown may be create connections between lacking is sufficient "trip-end" bike parking and the downtown to parking amenities, both on-street, encourage employee bike ✓ off-street and in private buildings. commute trips and draw Providing adequate bicycle parking customers to downtown will expand the capacity of the overall parking supply downtown. businesses. 13 Data collection would provide Evaluate and pursue on-street updated information on use for pricing in high occupancy areas multiple seasons; it is (85%+). recommended that the Parking Coordinator initiate a process with the Downtown Parking Advisory Committee to evaluate a transition of the downtown on-street parking system to paid parking. 14 These systems are designed and Solicit firms to establish implemented as a means to inform wayfinding and dynamic and direct customers to available signage systems in the public parking within a brand that right of way, integrated with ✓ communicates quality, cost the off-street system using City effectiveness and convenience. parking brand developed in Strategy 9. 1s Implements Strategy 14. No later Deploy wayfinding system as than November 2017. developed in Strategy 14. Rick Williams Consulting - City of Ashland, OR Strategic Parking Management Plan i Phase 1 Phase 1 Phase 2 Strategy Strategies Immediate (6 - 18 (18-36+ Comment (0 - 6 months) months) months) PARKING MANAGEMENT ACTION STRATEGIES (PHASE 2) 16 Completes the necessary outreach, Implement on- street pricing data collection and planning for A. Explore residential launching paid parking within the and employee permit downtown on-street parking programs (on-street) ✓ supply. B. Develop a marketing / communications and new system roll out plan C. Initiate pricing 17 As Ashland's downtown grows Explore expanding access employment, residents and visitors; capacity - new parking supply ✓ existing supplies of parking and and/or transit/circulator alternative mode access will need options to be expanded. 18 Information derived from Strategy Develop cost forecasts for 19 will provide realistic data on preferred parking supply and parking and transit/shuttle shuttle/transit system options. enhancements that have community input and initial feasibility. Parking will have been evaluated as to location, size and format (garage or surface lot). Transit/shuttles will have been evaluated as to desired format, frequency and routing. 19 There are a wide range of potential Explore and develop funding funding sources and revenue options streams that could be used to support implementation of an enhanced parking management plan in the Ashland downtown as well as to plan for and support development of new parking or transit capacity. 20 This strategy would be catalyzed by Initiate new capacity expansion completion of Strategies 19 - 21 and would complete Phase 2 of the downtown Strategic Parking Management Plan. Rick Williams Consulting - City of Ashland, OR Strategic Parking Management Plan Council Business Meeting, March 21, 2017 Title: Modification of Existing Jefferson Ave Loan/Grant Contracts From: Adam Hanks Interim Assistant to the City Administrator Adam. Hanks@ashland. or. us Summary: Brammo, Inc. is requesting a modification to the Trust Deed and Security Agreement associated with the current note payable with the City of Ashland to assist in facilitating the sale of one of the three properties currently securing the outstanding note. The request involves making an additional principle payment with the proceeds of the sale of one of the properties in exchange for removing the sale property from the security agreement, reducing the outstanding loan balance roughly proportionate with the security value reduction. Actions, IJptions, or Potential Motions: I move to accept the request for modification to the Trust Deed and Security Agreement between the City of Ashland and Brammo, Inc. as proposed and direct the City Administrator to execute the contract documents necessary to complete the transaction. Staff Recommendation: Staff reco=mmends acceptance of the request from Brammo, Inc. as it maintains or improves the ratio of the value of the security instrument to the value of the remaining note payable to the City. Resource Requirements: This action requires staff time from the offices of the City Attorney and City Administrator to review and execute final contract amendment documents. No other costs shall be borne by the City of Ashland as part of this transaction. Policies, Plans and Goals Supported: N/A Background and Additional Information: In February of 2007, The City of Ashland was the recipient of a combination loan and grant from Business Oregon (Oregon Department of Economic Development) to fund the construction of the extension and connection of Jefferson Avenue to provide access and utility services to a proposed Brammo Motorsports (now Brammo, Inc.) production facility. After several amendments to the initial loan and grant award, the construction bid for the project was approved on September 7, 2010 and completed in July of 2011 Both the loan of $390,000 and grant of $310,000 were awarded to the City based upon job retention and creation commitments by Brammo, Inc. The City entered into contract with Page Iof3 CITY OF ASHLAND i Brammo, Inc, for loan repayment as well as created contract provisions in the event that the grant portion required repayment if Brammo was unable to meet the job creation commitment within the specified timeframe. Loan/Grant Summary Business Oregon determined that the grant of $310,000 was primarily satisfied with Brammo job creation over the course of the project. The final note payable included the loan of $390,000 and the grant reimbursement of $28,100 for a total of $418,100. Since the completion of the project Brammo, Inc. has made the first four of the ten scheduled annual payments to the City of $54,145.86 and is in good standing leaving a remaining current balance of $274,821.74. Trust Deed and Security Agreement Request The Brammo note is secured through a trust deed and security agreement placing the City of Ashland as a lien holder (2"d position) on the three parcels (originally one parent parcel) benefitting from the project improvements. Using the Jackson County tax assessor data as a basis for approximate value of the properties (no current appraisal available), the total real market value for the three properties is $1,939,690. Brammo, Inc. proposes to remove one of the three properties from the security agreement, which reduces the total real market value of the remaining security to $1,363,140. In exchange for the removal of one parcel from the security agreement, Brammo, Inc. proposes to make a principle payment of $60,000 towards the total balance owed. The combination of this principle payment and the four previous annual installment payments reduce the overall note to a balance of $214,821. In summary, the proposal from Brammo, Inc. results in a slightly increased ratio of the loan balance to the Jackson County Assessors calculation of real market value, from a current position of 14.17°/0 to a new position of 15.76%. See table 1 below for complete figures. Current Proposed Estimate of Security Value Estimate of Security Value RMV RMV Parcell 699,750 Parcell 699,750 Parcel2 576,550 Parcel2 0 Parcel3 663,390 Parcel3 663,390 Total $1,939,690 Total $1,363,140 Current Proposed New Loan Amount 274,821 Loan Amount 214,821 Loan to Loan to Security Ratio 14.17% Security Ratio 15.76% Page 2of3 CITY OF ASHLAND Attachments Brammo, Inc. Proposal letter to City Jefferson St Site Plan Jackson County Assessor Parcel Assessment Account Information Page 3 of 3 CITY OF ASHLAND Alexis "Lexi" Packer, a 20-year Ashland resident, practicing attorney, and entrepreneur, has contracted to purchase 2.34 acres of E-1/M-1 (dual-zoned) land on Jefferson Street from Brammo, Inc. The parcel is the westernmost of 3 parcels partitioned & annexed into Ashland in 2008 under a Development and Security Agreement memorializing the parties' sincere expectation that Ashland's financing Jefferson St ROW improvements would enable Brammo to develop an R & D facility creating over 100, family-wage jobs. When Brammo's financiers changed the company's business plan, they listed the parcels for sale in early 2014, and all have languished on the market since. Although the street improvements are weathering gracefully, the lots are currently... r a.A, f s sir' k t overgrown with blackberries... -A AW, lp 'A f 4 ~"r A' tw- i !j `T r r(k t I6 r • j~~~`. ~ ~ t r~ { ~~"~'rA ~ 3 - rot r ♦ •i,.. ,s~. .T~ ♦ f ~ r' '.=1~`'f-_ °~r.>i!~`++~m ._i..: ~1 ~ .mow f it strewn with rubbish, and y t x: ~ . y. . y ' ~Yry•, i lk- e ti ♦ y 4 { x - ' it ~ ~ •T 1i ♦ f .r,. i"~n'~ ~ ;r,^ s ~ ~ T SIN , y r` , . ~ -7N Rs. rL.-4 r 4 1'1~ _ ~'~Y t i r .I. 1 r .r i home to several hobo camps. In an admirable, philanthropic effort to resuscitate the 37K sf Ashland Tennis and Fitness Club, preserve its 30-year-old, closely-knit community, and restore its decomposing facilities, Lexi has also contracted to purchase the Club & its land/building/equipment. The Club's history of losing money is only rivaled by the author's, so Lexi faces substantial risk of financial loss and appears to be the only person with the resources to save the club from bankruptcy. The Club & its community have improved the health of a lot of people, provided structured recreation for many, Ashland youths, and even produced some champion tennis players. An expanded club would provide more health and recreation opportunities to our community and an improved venue that could attract more tournaments and competitions. She needs the adjoining land whether the club prospers & grows or fails & liquidates: Because the Club is under-parked and at its maximum coverage ratio, Lexi can neither expand the Club to broaden its fitness menu nor hedge her potential loss without acquiring additional land for expansion & parking. City code allows the Club's nonconforming use to expand up to 50%, so if the club is successful, some of the Brammo land would enable the Club to expand another 18K sf and the remainder could be used to develop a conforming, light industrial structure with parking shared by both. If the Club fails, Lexi would have enough land to repurpose the Club's building to a conforming use with sufficient, additional land to meet parking requirements and build additional structure(s). Lexi has sufficient capital to acquire the two parcels & restore the Club's deteriorating facilities, but she cannot undertake this endeavor if it requires more than another $15K. In addition to preserving one of Ashland's enduring, fitness and recreation alternatives, reducing the lien-release amount so these transactions can close would benefit Ashland's citizenry by 1. Breaking the stalemate that currently exists between Brammo & the City 2. Expanding/enhancing fitness and recreation opportunities for Ashland's residents 3. Drawing more traffic to Jefferson St & increase the likelihood that another employer would consider developing one or both of Brammo's remaining lots 4. Eliminating the rodent-harboring overgrowth, transient camps, and trash on the property i Brammo Inc - Jefferson Avenue Infrastructure Project Site Plan HUYVIIlUIUS Ashland Mountain Adventures 4 v Yerba Prima A Ashland Tennis & Fitness Club 0 v Parcel #3 Modern Fan c rr1 r ' E y ~F Parcel #2 < Organic Alcohol Company- Parcel #1 ~u i-1 Mistletoe Road do Services Q Self Storage s Parcel #3 Parcel #2 t a~ I Parcel #1 1 ~~a c a r~ IL • c i 3/9/2017 Details for account number 1-099072-1 Account Sequence Mao TL Sequence Assessment Year: 2016 • Print Window Close Window Assessment Info for Account 1-0990724 Map 391E14AC Taxlot 102 Report For Assessment Purposes Only Created March 09, 2017 Account Info Tax Year 2016 Info Land Info _ Account 1-099072-1 Pay Taxes Online Tax Code 5-01 Map 391 E14AC 102 Acreage -g 2.84 Taxlot Tax Report Zonin Owner BRAMMO INC Land Class Situs Address Tax Statement UNK 2.84 Ac 777 E JEFFERSON AVE ASHLAND $ First Tri Statement • Property Class 300 BRAMMO INC Second Tri Statement . Stat Class 000 Mailing Address 300 W VALLEY VIEW RD Tax History Unit ID 201238-3 Maintenance Area 2 TALENT OR, 97540 Tax Code 5-01 Neighborhood 000 Li Associated Taxlots 2 Acct Tax Type Due Date A22Z6 unt Study Area 77 5.01 R 1.062 12-0 391E14AC 100 ACTIVE Advalorem 11/15!16 15.07 Account Status ACTIVE 5.01 R 1-09 72.0 391E14AC 101 ACTIVE Tax Rate 15.9849 Tax Status Assessable Appraiser District Rates • Sub Type NORMAL District Amounts • Tax Rate Sheet Sales Data (AS 400) [Walue Summary Detail (For Assessment Year 2016) E Market Value Summary (For Assessment Year 2016) Code Area Type Acreage RMV M5 MAV AV 5-01 LAND 2.84 $ 699,750 $ 699,750 $ 885,180 $ 699,750 Value History ; . Total: l$ 699,750 $ 699,750 $ 885,180 $ 699,750 Improvements Images / Plans Item Image Image type Number Files RESIDENTIAL 1 1 ACCOUNT PHOTOS 2 1 All in One Report ' Appraisal Maintenance 2010 - VALID COMM RCIAL R.T. (C-COMMERCIAL/APARTMENTIINDUST.) ElAccount Comments ...03/04/2008 annexation to city; primary zoning changed from RR-5 to M-1... 318/2009 SUBSEQUENT YEAR MAV CALCULATION (CPR), BALANCED IN 2009 DUE TO PARTITION #158 05/19110 changed PC fSA from 21 to 00; dba37 BExemptions / Special Assessments / Notations / Potential Liability Notations Description Tax Amount Year Added Value Amount CARTOGRAPHIC ACTIVITY 2009 ELocation Map s Now. . e I 74 G SO J y n • R k Close Window Print Window http://web.jacksoncounty.org/pdo/Ora asmt_detaiIs.cfm?account=10990721 1/1 i 3/9/2017 Details for account number 1-099072-0 - Account Sequence Man TL Sequence Assessment Year, 2016 • Print Window Close Window Assessment Info for Account 1-099072-0 Map 391E14AC Taxiot 101 Report For Assessment Purposes Only Created March 09, 2017 Account Info Tax Year 2016 Info Land Info Account 1-099072-0 Pay Taxes Online Tax Code 5-01 Map 391E14AC 101 Acreage - 2.34 Tax Report Zonin3 Owner BRAMMO INC • Land Class Situs Address Tax Statement • UNK 2.34 Ac 763 E JEFFERSON AVE ASHLAND R First Tri Statement Pro rt Class 300 BRAMMO INC Second Tri Statement • Stat Class 000 300 W VALLEY VIEW RD Unit ID 201238-3 Mailing Address Tax History Maintenance Area 2 TALENT OR, 97540 Tax Code 5-01 Neighborhood 000 El Associated Taxlots 2 Acct Tax Type Due Date Amount Study Area 77 5-01 R 1-06 12-0 391E14AC 100 ACTIVE Advalorem 11115/16 8 457.77 Account Status ACTIVE 5-01 R 1-099972-1 391E14AC 102 ACTIVE Tax Rate 15.9849 Tax Status Assessable Appraiser District Rates ~i Sub Type NORMAL District Amounts • Tax Rate Sheet ' Sales Data (AS 400) IEValue Summary Detail (For Assessment Year 2016) E Market Value Summary (For Assessment Year 2016) Code Area Type Acreage RMV M5 MAV AV 5-01 LAND 2.34 $ 576,550 $ 576,550 $ 712,980 $ 576,550 Value History Total: $ 576,550 $ 576,550 $ 712,980 $ 576,550 Improvements Images / Plans Item Image Image type Number Files ACCOUNT PHOTOS 1 1 RESIDENTIAL 2 1 All in One Report Appraisal Maintenance 2010 -VALID COMMERCIAL R.T. (C-COMMERCIAL/APARTMENT/INDUST.) EJAccount Comments ...03/04/2008 annexation to city; zoning change from RR-5 to M-1...3!812010 SUBSEQUENT YEAR MAV CALCULATION (CPR), BALANCED IN 2009 DUE TO PARTITION #158 05119/10 changed SA from 21 to 00; dba37 IjExemptions / Special Assessments I Notations / Potential Liability Notations Description Tax Amount Year Added Value Amount CARTOGRAPHIC ACTIVITY 2009 D-Location Map 1 p JACXS0 I "I* ti COMTY Close Window Print Window http://web.jacksoncounty.org/pdo/Ora asmt_detaiIs.cfm?account=10990720 111 i 3/9/2017 Details for account number 1-062312-0 Account Sequence Map TL Sequence Assessment Year' 2016 v_I Print F I window Close Window 7- Assessment Info for Account 1-062312-0 Map 391E14AC Taxlot 100 Report For Assessment Purposes Only Created March 09, 2017 Account Info Tax Year 2016 Info Land Info Account 1-062312-0 Pay Taxes Online Tax Code 5-01 Map Ta xot 391El4AC 100 Acreage - 2.59 K2DIn9 Owner BRAMMO INC Tax Report ' Land Class l-' Situs Address Tax Statement UNK 2.59 Ac 758 E JEFFERSON AVE ASHLAND R First Tri Statement Property Class 00 Stat Class 000 766 E JEFFERSON AVE ASHLAND R Second Tri Statement Unit ID 201238-3 BRAMMO INC Tax History ' Mailing Address 300 W VALLEY VIEW RD Maintenance Area 2 Tax Code 5-01 Neighborhood 000 TALENT OR, 97540 Tax Type Due Date Amount Study Area 74 E Associated Taxiots 2 Acct Advalorem 11/15/16 8 710.08 Account Status ACTIVE 5-01 R 1-09Q72& 391E14AC 101 AC7 E Tax Rate 15.9849 Tax Status Assessable 5-01 R 1-099 72-1 391E14AC 102 ACTIVE District Rates • Sub Type NORMAL A raiser 69 District Amounts • pp Tax Rate Sheet • Sales Data (ORCATS) Sale instrument Sales Last Sale {ccnsktaration>0} Date Number History $1,719,700 Sep 05, 2008- ' 2008 33636 EValue Summary Detail (For Assessment Year 2016) EMarket Value Summary (For Assessment Year 2016) Code Area Type Acreage RMV M5 MAV AV 5-01 LAND 2.59 S 663,390 S 663,390 S 557,740 $ 557,740 Value History Total: S 663,390 $ 663,390 $ 557,740 $ 557,740 Improvements Images / Plans Item Image Image type Number Files ACCOUNT PHOTOS 1 1~~ RESIDENTIAL 2 3 All in One Report EAppraisal Maintenance 2010 - VALID COMMERCIAL R.T. (C-COMMERCIALIAPARTMENT/INDUST.) 2012 -HISTORY ONLY R.T. EAccount Comments 8-3-05 CORRECTED THE 2004 TREND TABLES THAT WERE INCORRECT FOR THE PERIOD 2-05 THROUGH 8-05 PER #23 >>>...03104/2008 annexation to city; zoning change from RR-5 to E-1... 31812010 SUBSEQUENT YEAR MAV CALCULATION (CPR), BALANCED IN 2009 DUE TO PARTITION #158 05119110 changed SA from 21 to 00; dba37 EExemptions / Special Assessments / Notations / Potential Liability Notations Description Tax Amount Year Added Value Amount RECALCULATION 2016 CARTOGRAPHIC ACTIVITY 2009 CARTOGRAPHIC ACTIVITY 2008 ELocation Map JACKSON COUNly t Bk Close Window Print Window hftp://web.jacksoncounty.orglpdo/Ora asmt details.cfm?account=10623120 1/1 i Council Business Meeting March 21, 2017 Title: Approval of Contract for Plaza Tree Enhancement Project From: David Lohman City Attorney david.lohman(a-)-ashland. or. us Summarv• At its March 7, 2017 meeting, Council approved proceeding with the Plaza Tree Enhancement Project, subject to approval of a contract for the tree planting work to be presented for Council consideration at its March 21 meeting. This agenda item presents the proposed contract with Solid Ground, Inc., for Council decision. Actions, Options, or Potential Motions: 1. Authorize Interim City Administrator Karns to execute the proposed contract with Solid Ground, Inc. [with the following modifications:......], along with any additional changes the Interim City Administrator deems necessary to reach consensus with the contractor and sufficiently protect the City's interests; or 2. Authorize staff to undertake further negotiations with Solid Ground, Inc. to seek agreement on a final version of the contract [that includes the following modifications.....] and to present it at the April 4, 2017 Council meeting for decision. Staff Recommendation: Evaluate the attached proposed contract, and choose one of the two possible actions shown above. Resource Requirements: Approximately 40 hours of staff time is expected to be required to oversee and manage the proposed project. This includes replanting removed trees and additional watering and maintenance over and above that required for the current trees. Policies, Plans and Goals Supported: N/A Backl4round and Additional Information: Minutes from March 6. 2017 Council Study Session regarding Plaza Tree Enhancement Project. Minutes from March 7. 2017 Council Regular Meeting regarding Plaza Tree Enhancement Proj ect. Attachments: Proposed contract Page 1 of 1 CITY OF ASHLAND i Contract for GOODS AND SERVICES CITY OF CONTRACTOR: Solid Ground Landscaping, Inc. -ASHLAND CONTACT: Seth Barnard 20 East Main Street Ashland, Oregon 97520 ADDRESS: 855 Reiten Drive Telephone: 541/488-6002 Fax: 541/488-5311 TELEPHONE: 541-601-9421 DATE AGREEMENT PREPARED: EMAIL ADDRESS: seth@solidgroundlandscape.com BEGINNING DATE: ESTIMATED TIME FOR COMPLETION: 2 days COMPENSATION: $1.00 GOODS AND SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED: See Statement of Work attached hereto as Exhibit B. ADDITIONAL TERMS: In the event of conflicts or discrepancies among the contract documents, the City of Ashland Contract for Goods and Services will be primary and take precedence, and any exhibits or ancillary contracts or agreements having redundant or contrary provisions will be subordinate to and interpreted in a manner that will not conflict with the said primary City of Ashland Contract. NOW THEREFORE, pursuant to Ashland Municipal Code Chapter 2.50.090 and after consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein the CITY AND CONTRACTOR AGREE as follows: 1. All Costs by Contractor: Contractor shall, provide all goods as specified above and shall at its own risk and expense, perform any work described above and, unless otherwise specified, furnish all labor, equipment and materials required for the proper performance of such work. 2. Qualified Work: Contractor has represented, and by entering into this Contract now represents, that any personnel assigned to the work required under this Contract are fully qualified to perform the work to which they will be assigned in a skilled and worker-like manner and, if required to be registered, licensed or bonded by the State of Oregon, are so registered, licensed and bonded. Contractor must also maintain a current City business license. 3. Completion Date: Contractor shall provide all goods in accordance with the standards and specifications, no later than the date indicated above and start performing the work under this Contract by the beginning date indicated above and complete the work by the completion date indicated above. 4. Compensation: City shall pay Contractor for the specified goods and for any work performed, including costs and expenses, the sum specified above. 5. Statutory Requirements: ORS 27913.220, 27913.225, 27913.230, 27913.235, ORS Chapter 244 and ORS 670.600 are made part of this Contract. 6. Indemnification: Contractor agrees to defend, indemnify and save City, its officers, employees and agents harmless from any and all losses, claims, actions, costs, expenses, judgments, subrogations, or other damages resulting from injury to any person (including injury resulting in death), or damage (including loss or destruction) to property, of whatsoever nature arising out of or incident to the performance of this Contract by Contractor (including but not limited to, Contractor's employees, agents, and others designated by Contractor to perform work or services attendant to this Contract). Contractor shall not be held responsible for any losses, expenses, claims, subrogations, actions, costs, judgments, or other damages, directly, solely, and proximately caused by the negligence of City. 7. Subsurface Soil and Other Conditions: City will advise Contractor of any known or suspected contaminates, dangerous conditions, and subsurface (or otherwise concealed) physical conditions that differ materially from those readily visible or apparent on the surface at the project site. City shall be responsible for all subsurface soil and other conditions not readily apparent on the surface of the project site. 8. Approvals: City will obtain all necessary development approvals from authorities and private parties with jurisdiction or control over the work to be performed under this Contract, except that Contractor shall obtain a City right-of-way closure permit. 9. Warranties and Guarantee: a. Landscaping Warranty. All plants and trees are guaranteed for a period of 18 months from date of job completion. During the warranty/guarantee period, keeping the trees upright and minimizing related risks of injury to pedestrians on the City Plaza are of the essence to this Contract. If, in the reasonable sole discretion of City, the uprightness of the subject trees cannot be maintained except by staking or any other measures that increase the risks of injury to pedestrians on the Plaza, Contractor will replace any such trees with approximately equivalent trees which are not likely to require measures unreasonably posing risks of injuries to pedestrians. b. Maintenance Schedule. As a condition precedent to any performance under this Contract, City and Contractor must have reached agreement upon a reasonable schedule for the watering, maintaining, and monitoring of the Contract for Goods and Services, Page 1 of 5 health of the subject trees during the warranty/guarantee period. c. Notice: During the warranty/guarantee period, Contractor shall keep City fully and currently apprised of any impending circumstance in which Contractor reasonably anticipates that it will not be capable of honoring its warranty obligations under this Contract. d. Subcontractor Warranties. Work performed by subcontractors, if City consents to any, is not warranted by Contractor but is subject to warranties provided by subcontractors. 10. Termination: a. Mutual Consent. This Contract may be terminated at any time by mutual consent of both parties. b. For Cause. City may terminate or modify this Contract, in whole or in part, effective upon delivery of written notice to Contractor, or at such later date as may be established by City if any license or certificate required by law or regulation to be held by Contractor to provide the services required by this Contract is for any reason denied, revoked, suspended, or not renewed. c. For Default or Breach. i. Time is of the essence for Contractor's performance of each and every obligation and duty under this Contract. City by written notice to Contractor of default or breach, may at any time terminate the whole or any part of this Contract if Contractor fails to provide services called for by this Contract within the time specified herein or in any extension thereof. ii. The rights and remedies of City provided in this subsection (c) are not exclusive and are in addition to any other rights and remedies provided by law or under this Contract. d. Obligation/Liability of Parties. Termination or modification of this Contract pursuant to subsections a, b, or c above shall be without prejudice to any obligations or liabilities of either party already accrued prior to such termination or modification. However, upon receiving a notice of termination (regardless whether such notice is given pursuant to subsections a, b, or c of this section, Contractor shall immediately cease all activities under this Contract, unless expressly directed otherwise by City in the notice of termination. Further, upon termination, Contractor shall deliver to City all contract documents, information, works-in-progress and other property that are or would be deliverables had the Contract been completed. City shall pay Contractor for work performed prior to the termination date if such work was performed in accordance with the Contract. 11. Independent Contractor Status: As certified by Contractor's execution of attached Exhibit A, Contractor is an independent Contractor and not an employee of the City. Contractor shall have the complete responsibility for the performance of this Contract. 12. Non-discrimination Certification: The undersigned certifies that the undersigned Contractor has not discriminated against minority, women or emerging small business enterprises in obtaining any required subcontracts. Contractor further certifies that it shall not discriminate in the award of such subcontracts, if any. The Contractor understands and acknowledges that it may be disqualified from bidding on this contract, including but not limited to City discovery of a misrepresentation or sham regarding a subcontract or that the Bidder has violated any requirement of ORS 279A.110 or the administrative rules implementing the Statute. 13. Assignment and Subcontracts: Contractor shall not assign this Contract or subcontract any portion of the work without the written consent of City. Any attempted assignment or subcontract without written consent of City shall be void. Contractor shall be fully responsible for the acts or omissions of any assigns or subcontractors and of all persons employed by them, and the approval by City of any assignment or subcontract shall not create any contractual relation between the assignee or subcontractor and City. 14. Insurance: Contractor shall at its own expense provide the following insurance: a. Workers Compensation insurance in compliance with ORS 656.017, which requires subject employers to provide Oregon workers' compensation coverage for all their subject workers. Workers compensation insurance is required if work is performed by employees, subcontractors, or volunteers. b. General Liability insurance with a combined single limit, or the equivalent, of not less than $2,000,000, for each occurrence for Bodily Injury and Property Damage. C. Automobile Liability insurance with a combined single limit, or the equivalent, of not less than $1,000,000, for each accident for Bodily Injury and Property Damage, including coverage for owned, hired or non-owned vehicles, as applicable. d. Additional Insured/Certificates of Insurance. Contractor shall name The City of Ashland, Oregon, and its elected officials, officers and employees as Additional Insureds on any insurance policies, excluding Workers' Compensation, required herein but only with respect to Contractor's services to be provided under this Contract. As evidence of the insurance coverages required by this Contract, Contractor shall furnish acceptable insurance certificates prior to commencing work under this Contract. Contractor's insurance shall primary and non- contributory. The certificate shall specify all of the parties who are Additional Insureds. Insuring companies or entities are subject to the City's acceptance. If requested, complete copies of insurance policies, trust agreements, etc. shall be provided to the City. Contractor shall be financially responsible for all pertinent deductibles, self-insured retentions and/or self-insurance. 15. Governing Law; Jurisdiction; Venue: This Contract shall be governed and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Oregon without resort to any jurisdiction's conflict of laws, rules or doctrines. Any claim, action, suit or proceeding (collectively, "the claim" between the City and/or an other or department of the State of Oregon) and Contract for Goods and Services, Page 2 of 5 i the Contractor that arises from or relates to this Contract shall be brought and conducted solely and exclusively within the Circuit Court of Jackson County for the State of Oregon. If, however, the claim must be brought in a federal forum, then it shall be brought and conducted solely and exclusively within the United States District Court for the District of Oregon filed in Jackson County, Oregon. Contractor, by the signature herein of its authorized representative, hereby consents to the in personam jurisdiction of said courts. In no event shall this section be construed as a waiver by City of any form of defense or immunity, based on the Eleventh Amendment to the United States Constitution, or otherwise, from any claim or from the jurisdiction. 16. Mediation and Arbitration: The parties shall first attempt to settle any unresolved controversy concerning this Agreement conducted by the Landscape Contractors Board (LCB). If the LCB decides not to mediate the dispute, then the parties shall promptly mediate under the terms and conditions of ORS 36.185 to 36.210 using the Portland Arbitration Service. In any event (be it LCB or private mediation), the mediation shall be subject to the confidentiality provisions of ORS 36.180 TO 36.228 as amended. If the parties are not able to resolve the controversy through mediation, then the controversy shall be resolved through binding arbitration by the Arbitration Service of Portland. There will be one arbitrator. The costs of the arbitrator and the arbitration service shall be shared equally by the parties. The results of the arbitration shall be binding as provided by Oregon law, and judgment on the award rendered by the arbitrator shall be entered in the circuit court of Jackson County. The arbitrator shall have the authority to issue preliminary and equitable relief, as well as the authority to award any other remedy or relief that an Oregon court could order or grant. Notwithstanding, a party may, without any inconsistency with this Agreement, seek from a court any interim or provisional relief that may be necessary to protect the right of property of that party pending the establishment of any mediation or arbitration (or pending the arbitrator's determination of the merits of the dispute, controversy or claim). 17. THIS CONTRACT AND ATTACHED EXHIBITS CONSTITUTE THE ENTIRE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE PARTIES. NO WAIVER, CONSENT, MODIFICATION OR CHANGE OF TERMS OF THIS CONTRACT SHALL BIND EITHER PARTY UNLESS IN WRITING AND SIGNED BY BOTH PARTIES. SUCH WAIVER, CONSENT, MODIFICATION OR CHANGE, IF MADE, SHALL BE EFFECTIVE ONLY IN THE SPECIFIC INSTANCE AND FOR THE SPECIFIC PURPOSE GIVEN. THERE ARE NO UNDERSTANDINGS, AGREEMENTS, OR REPRESENTATIONS, ORAL OR WRITTEN, NOT SPECIFIED HEREIN REGARDING THIS CONTRACT. CONTRACTOR, BY SIGNATURE OF ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE, HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGES THAT HE/SHE HAS READ THIS CONTRACT, UNDERSTANDS IT, AND AGREES TO BE BOUND BY ITS TERMS AND CONDITIONS. 18. Prior Approval Required Provision. Approval by the City of Ashland Council or the Public Contracting Officer is required before an work may begin under this Contract. Solid Ground Landscape, Inc: City of Ashland By By Signature Interim City Administrator Print Name Print Name Title Date W-9 One copy of a W-9 is to be submitted with the signed contract. Purchase Order No. Contract for Goods and Services, Page 3 of 5 i EXHIBIT A CERTIFICATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS: Contractor, under penalty of perjury, certifies that (a) the number shown on the attached W-9 form is its correct taxpayer ID (or is waiting for the number to be issued to it and (b) Contractor is not subject to backup withholding because (i) it is exempt from backup withholding or (ii) it has not been notified by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) that it is subject to backup withholding as a result of a failure to report all interest or dividends, or (iii) the IRS has notified it that it is no longer subject to backup withholding. Contractor further represents and warrants to City that (a) it has the power and authority to enter into and perform the work, (b) the Contract, when executed and delivered, shall be a valid and binding obligation of Contractor enforceable in accordance with its terms, (c) the work under the Contract shall be performed in accordance with the highest professional standards, and (d) Contractor is qualified, professionally competent and duly licensed to perform the work. Contractor also certifies under penalty of perjury that its business is not in violation of any Oregon tax laws, and it is a corporation authorized to act on behalf of the entity designated above and authorized to do business in Oregon or is an independent Contractor as defined in the contract documents, and has checked four or more of the following criteria: (1) I carry out the labor or services at a location separate from my residence or is in a specific portion of my residence, set aside as the location of the business. (2) Commercial advertising or business cards or a trade association membership are purchased for the business. (3) Telephone listing is used for the business separate from the personal residence listing. (4) Labor or services are performed only pursuant to written contracts. (5) Labor or services are performed for two or more different persons within a period of one year. (6) I assume financial responsibility for defective workmanship or for service not provided as evidenced by the ownership of performance bonds, warranties, errors and omission insurance or liability insurance relating to the labor or services to be provided. Contractor (Date) Contract for Goods and Services, Page 4 of 5 EXHIBIT B STATEMENT OF WORK FROM SOLID GROUND LANDSCAPE, INC Client name: City of Ashland Job location: Ashland City Plaza Solid Ground will perform the following landscaping work: 1. General conditions (permits, traffic mitigation, pedestrian safety precautions, site evaluation, and utility locates). 2. Dig and remove 3 existing trees to be relocated to other City property or to SOU for others to plant. 3. Dig and relocate one Zelcova tree to planter nearest information booth (Southernmost tree). 4. Deliver and install 2 large caliper Zelcova trees and 2 Willow Oak trees (already located in tag from local nursery). 5. Modify irrigation as required for new plantings. 6. Fertilize and mulch trees as required. 7. Site cleanup, including restoration to pre-installation status, repairing any damage to subsoil, and repairing or replacing any pavers or public facilities damages in the course of the work. Contract for Goods and Services, Page 5 of 5 i Council Business Meeting March 21, 2017 Title: An Ordinance Extending Smoking Ban From: David H. Lohman City Attorney david.lohman@ashland.or.us Summary: This agenda item is the First Reading of an amendment to Chapter 9.30.020 of the Ashland Municipal. Code to extend the current smoking ban to include 175 Lithia Way and any space within 20 feet of pathways for smoke to enter places of employment or enclosed spaces open to the public. Actions, Options, or Potential Motions: 1. I move to approve First Reading by title only of an ordinance titled, "An Ordinance Amending AMC 9.30.020 to extend the current smoking ban to include 175 Lithia Way and any space within 20 feet of pathways for smoke to enter places of employment or enclosed spaces open to the public" [with the following changes... ] and move the ordinance on to Second Reading. 2. Council could take no action, leaving the current smoking restrictions as is. 3. Council could make other revisions to the areas affected by the smoking ban. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of this ordinance. Resource Requirements: Passage of the ordinance is not likely to have any direct fiscal impact. Policies, Plans and Goals Supported: Quality of . Life (Administrative Goal) Provide, promote and enhance the security/safety, environmental health, and livability of the community. Background and Additional Information: The no smoking ordinance for the City's downtown area became effective in 2016. The ordinance generally has been positively received. From trial and error, however, city officials have learned that the 10 foot buffer around smoke sensitive areas is not sufficient enough to effectively disperse smoke and effectuate the purposes of the ordinance. The proposed ordinance amendment simply enlarges that distance from 10 to 20 feet with the intention of reducing conflicts between smokers and persons sensitive to smoke. Page Iof2 CITY OF ASHLAND Additionally, increasing numbers of complaints have been reported by persons seeking to park in the public parking lot at 175 Lithia Way and neighbors. Groups of people congregate in the parking lot and smoke tobacco, marijuana and other smoking products, the smoke from which is intense and drifts into these properties and makes use of the parking lot for its intended purposes less desirable, especially for persons with sensitivities to smoke. The proposed amendment would expand the downtown no-smoking area to include 175 Lithia Way Public parking lot. Expanding the downtown no-smoking area to include the Lithia Way parking lot should help address smoking-related problems at that particular location. But, as Council members know, such a change probably would only partially serve to resolve downtown smoking-related problems generally. For example, some concerned citizens have complained to the City that the downtown smoking ban pushes smokers into adjoining areas, with the result that smoking- related problems are merely moved rather than solved. Such displacement may have been a factor in the Lithia Way parking lot becoming a gathering spot for persons wishing to smoke near the downtown business area. Addressing displacement concerns by further expanding the no-smoking area could have similar consequences, as well as making enforcement necessarily more sporadic and eliciting concerns about government intrusion. Attachments: Ordinance Page 2 of 2 CITY OF ASHLAND i ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING AMC 9.30.020 TO INCREASE SMOKING DISTANCE FROM BUSINESSES AND PROPERTIES SENSITIVE TO SMOKE Annotated to show de et o„ and additions to the code sections being modified. Deletions are bold lined through and additions are bold underlined. WHEREAS, Article 2. Section 1 of the Ashland City Charter provides: Powers of the City. The City shall have all powers which the constitutions, statutes, and common law of the United States and of this State expressly or impliedly grant or allow municipalities, as fully as though this Charter specifically enumerated each of those powers, as well as all powers not inconsistent with the foregoing; and, in addition thereto, shall possess all powers hereinafter specifically granted. All the authority thereof shall have perpetual succession. WHEREAS, the overall effect of the recent smoking restrictions within the downtown area has reportedly been received positively by business and property owners and citizens living, working and traveling within the City's no smoking zone; and WHEREAS, nevertheless, the original ten foot no-smoking area around building entries do not provide a sufficient buffer to prevent smoke from drifting directly into building doorways, windows and other enumerated entrances in the ordinance that negatively affect the occupants inside; and WHEREAS, increasing the restricted distance for smoking around building doorways and windows and other enumerated entrances in the ordinance for smoke to twenty feet would likely reduce the negative impacts of smoke odors to occupants of downtown buildings and passersby. THEREFORE, THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Chapter 9.30.020 is amended as follows: 9.30.020 Smoking Prohibited A. Except as allowed in AMC 9.30.040, a person may not smoke, aerosolize or vaporize an inhalant or carry a lighted smoking instrument in a place of employment, in an enclosed area open to the public, on any sidewalk or on any public or private property within tffi twenty (4-0 20) feet of a sidewalk in Downtown Ashland, on the City property commonly referred to as the Theater Corridor Walkway (Assessor's Map no. 391E09BC, Tax Lot 901) except for that Ordinance No. Page 1 of 3 i portion of the property controlled by leasehold right of the Oregon Shakespeare Festival (commonly known as the Thomas Theater); on the sidewalk on North Main Street between Granite Street and the Plaza, on sidewalks on Winburn Way abutting Lithia Park, in the public walkway between 150 and 166 East Main, on the Plazai -,of on the area at the corner of East Main Street and South Pioneer Street known as Chautauqua Square; or in the public parkinIZ lot at 175 Lithia Way. B. A person may not smoke, aerosolize or vaporize an inhalant or carry a lighted smoking instrument within twenty J4-0 20) feet of the following parts of places or of employment or enclosed areas open to the public: 1. Entrances; 2. Exits; 3. Windows that open; 4. Ventilation intakes that serve an enclosed area; and 5. Outdoor dining areas C. A person may not smoke or carry any lighted smoking instrument in a room during the time that jurors are required to use the room. SECTION 2. SavinjZs. Notwithstanding this amendment/repeal, the City ordinances in existence at the time any criminal or civil enforcement actions were commenced, shall remain valid and in full force and effect for purposes of all cases filed or commenced during the times said ordinances(s) or portions thereof were operative. This section simply clarifies the existing situation that nothing in this Ordinance affects the validity of prosecutions commenced and continued under the laws in effect at the time the matters were originally filed. SECTION 3. Severabilit_y. The sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses of this ordinance are severable. The invalidity of one section, subsection, paragraph, or clause shall not affect the validity of the remaining sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses. SECTION 4. Codification. Provisions of this Ordinance shall be incorporated in the City Code, and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "code", "article", "section", or another word, and the sections of this Ordinance may be renumbered or re-lettered, provided however, that any Whereas clauses and boilerplate provisions, i. e., Sections 2-4 need not be codified, and the City Recorder is authorized to correct any cross-references and any typographical errors. The foregoing ordinance was first read by title only in accordance with Article X, Section 2(C) of the City Charter on the day of , 2017, and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of , 2017. Barbara M. Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of , 2017. Ordinance No. Page 2 of 3 I John Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: David H. Lohman, City Attorney Ordinance No. Page 3 of 3 i Council Business Meeting March 21 2017 Title: First Reading of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 11.26 to Limit the Use of Public Parking Lots for Purposes Other Than Parking Vehicles From: Dave Lohman City Attorney david.lohman@ashland.or.us Summary: This agenda item is the First Reading of an ordinance to amend Chapter 11.26 of the Ashland Municipal Code to restrict use of parking lots to their intended purpose. This proposed ordinance would limit the use of public parking lots to the parking of vehicles, with exceptions for other short-term uses pursuant to City-issued permits. Actions, Options, or Potential Motions: 1. Approve First Reading by title only of an ordinance titled, "An Ordinance Amending Chapter 11.26 to Limit the Use of Public Parking Lots for Purposes Other Than Parking Vehicles" [with the following changes...] and move the ordinance on to Second Reading. 2. Council could take no action. Staff Recommendation: Approve First Reading of the proposed ordinance. Resource Requirements: Passage of the proposed ordinance is not expected to have a direct fiscal impact on the City. Additional police presence may be necessary to enforce the proposed ordinance. But keeping persons from congregating in parking spaces so as to exclude their use for vehicle parking is expected to reduce calls to the police department concerning offensive behavior in parking lots and make a few more spaces available for parking in the downtown area. Policies, Plans and Goals Supported: N/A Backl4round and Additional Information: This ordinance is applicable to all City-owned parking lots. It is prompted partly by the well- recognize shortage of parking spaces in the downtown. The high cost of providing new downtown parking capacity makes it prudent for the City to see that its parking lots are used for parking except on rare occasions and subject to a City-approved permit. Limiting the use of parking spaces in public parking lots to vehicle parking would be a commonsense parallel of the existing prohibition on occupying or encroaching on a public right- of-way for purposes other than passage or temporary vehicle storage (parking). AMC 13.02.040A. Under the latter ordinance, unpermitted occupation of vehicle parking spaces on the street so as to Page 1 of 2 CITY OF ASHLAND i exclude use of those spaces for purposes other than parking would be a violation; unpermitted occupation of vehicle parking spaces in public parking lots for purposes other than parking should be no different. In both cases, occupying parking spaces so as to keep them from being used for their intended purpose amounts to appropriating for one's exclusive personal use public property dedicated to a particular public use. Recently, residents and passersby near at least one public parking lot have been experiencing considerable disruption to their quiet enjoyment as a result of loud, vulgar, or other offensive behavior by persons gathering in and around the parking lot at all times of the day and night; the strong order of tobacco and marijuana smoke; and the accumulation of trash and human waste in the parking lot. Also, drivers using the parking lot to park their cars have complained about being approached at vulnerable moments as they are exiting or entering their cars and solicited by members of small groups occupying nearby parking spaces for extended periods of time. This ordinance is designed to accommodate requests for temporary special events on public parking lots provided the requests are processed through the city administrator's special events permitting procedure. Attachments: Ordinance Page 2 of 2 CITY OF ASHLAND I ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING AMC 11.26.020 TO LIMIT THE USE OF PUBLIC PARKING LOTS FOR PURPOSES OTHER THAN PARKING VEHICLES Annotated to show ae et o and additions to the code sections being modified. Deletions are bold lined through and additions are bold underlined. WHEREAS, Article 2. Section 1 of the Ashland City Charter provides: Powers of the City. The City shall have all powers which the constitutions, statutes, and common law of the United States and of this State expressly or impliedly grant or allow municipalities, as fully as though this Charter specifically enumerated each of those powers, as well as all powers not inconsistent with the foregoing; and, in addition thereto, shall possess all powers hereinafter specifically granted. All the authority thereof shall have perpetual succession. WHEREAS, the City has directed significant financial and other resources to constructing and maintaining parking lots in and near the downtown to accommodate high demand for parking spaces; and WHEREAS, a shortage of downtown parking spaces in times of peak demand has prompted the City to consider various measures to increase the availability of such parking spaces; and WHEREAS, persons trying to park vehicles in City public parking lots have increasingly been unable to do so because otherwise available parking spaces, including parking spaces for handicapped persons, were occupied by persons using the parking spaces for purposes other than vehicle parking; and WHEREAS, exclusionary unpermitted occupancy of public parking spaces for uses other than vehicle parking inconveniences the general public and imposes undue financial burdens on the City; and WHEREAS, the City of Ashland occasionally finds that portions of public parking lots are sought to be used temporarily for beneficial purposes other than strictly for vehicle parking. The City Administrator should be authorized to issue permits for short term, temporary uses whose benefits to the general public outweigh the inconveniences. , THEREFORE, THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Chapter 11.26.020 is amended as follows: Ordinance No. Page 1 of 3 1 11.26.020 Prohibitions In addition to the parking prohibitions in the motor vehicle laws of Oregon, no person shall: (1) Except where the street is marked or where officially indicated otherwise, stand or park a vehicle in a street other than parallel with the edge of the roadway, headed in the direction of lawful traffic movement, and with the curbside wheels of the vehicle within 12 inches of the edge of the curb or, if no curb, as close as possible to the edge of the shoulder; (2) Park on a street or in a City parking lot in a manner or at a time prohibited by official signs; (3) Park on a street or in a City parking facility longer than the time specified by applicable official parking signs: (a) The period of time so specified shall begin when the vehicle is parked in a particular limited time zone on a particular block face; and (b) The period shall be terminated when the vehicle is moved and parked on a different block face, at which time a new period shall begin as stated in (a); (4) Park so as not to be entirely within the painted lines of a single parking space; (5) Park within an area marked off by traffic markers or by painted curb or pavement; (6) Park within 10 feet of a fire hydrant or within 30 feet of a fire station; (7) Park in a street intersection, including the area used for crosswalks, or upon a sidewalk, or upon a bicycle path; (8) Park upon a bridge, viaduct, or other elevated structure used as a street, or within a street tunnel, or upon any parkway, unless marked or indicated by official signage otherwise; (9) Park across or within the entrance to an alley or driveway; (IO)Park in an alley, except to load and unload persons or materials for not longer than 20 consecutive minutes in any 2 hour period; (11) Park in an unimproved portion of the front setback of any structure in any residential zoned district; (12) Park on any public right-of-way with expired vehicle registration; (13) Park on any public right of way with the principal purpose of: (a) Displaying the vehicle for sale; (b) Washing, greasing, or repairing the vehicle, except repairs necessitated by an emergency; or (c) Selling merchandise from the vehicle, except in an established marked place or when so authorized or licensed under the ordinances of this City; or (14) Park, stand or stop a truck or bus on a public street or in a public parking area with its engine running, if such engine emits exhaust fumes into the air. Vehicle engines shall be turned off when loading and unloading passengers or merchandise. This subsection shall not apply to: (a) An engine running for less than five minutes; (b) A vehicle in the moving traffic lane waiting to move with the normal flow of traffic; (c) An engine needed to operate equipment used to load or unload merchandise; or (d) Emergency vehicles, utility company vehicles, or any construction and maintenance vehicles which have engines that must run to perform needed work. Ordinance No. Page 2 of 3 1 (15) Use of parkinIZ lots owned by the City shall be restricted to parkinIZ of vehicles as defined in ORS 801.590 unless otherwise permitted by special use permit issued by the City Administrator's Office. SECTION 2. Savings. Notwithstanding this amendment/repeal, the City ordinances in existence at the time any criminal or civil enforcement actions were commenced, shall remain valid and in full force and effect for purposes of all cases filed or commenced during the times said ordinances(s) or portions thereof were operative. This section simply clarifies the existing situation that nothing in this Ordinance affects the validity of prosecutions commenced and continued under the laws in effect at the time the matters were originally filed. SECTION 3. Severability. The sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses of this ordinance are severable. The invalidity of one section, subsection, paragraph, or clause shall not affect the validity of the remaining sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses. SECTION 4. Codification. Provisions of this Ordinance shall be incorporated in the City Code, and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "code", "article", "section", or another word, and the sections of this Ordinance may be renumbered or re-lettered, provided however, that any Whereas clauses and boilerplate provisions, i. e., Sections 2-4 need not be codified, and the City Recorder is authorized to correct any cross-references and any typographical errors. The foregoing ordinance was first read by title only in accordance with Article X, Section 2(C) of the City Charter on the day of , 2017, and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of , 2017. Barbara M. Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of , 2017. John Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: David H. Lohman, City Attorney Ordinance No. Page 3 of 3 i Council Business Meetina March 21, 2017 First Reading of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 10.120.010 To Include Title: City's 175 Lithia Way Parking Lot Within Enhanced Law Enforcement Area From: David Lohman City Attorney david.lohman@ashland. or. us Summary: This agenda item is the First Reading of an ordinance to amend Chapter 10.120.010 of the Ashland Municipal Code to enlarge the Enhanced Law Enforcement Area ("ELEA") to include an adjacent city parking lot on Lithia Way. The expansion is intended to protect the public against health and welfare hazards posed by persons attracted to the parking lot for opportunities to engage in or to contact others to engage in unlawful activity. Actions, Options, or Potential Motions: 1. Approve expansion of the ELEA as proposed by passing the following motion or a version thereof. "I move to approve the First Reading of an ordinance entitled, "Amending Chapter 10.120.010 To Include City of Ashland's 175 Lithia Way Parking Lot Within the Enhanced Law Enforcement Area." [with the following changes...] and move the ordinance on to Second Reading." 2. Council could take no action, leaving the ELEA as it is. 3. Council could make further additions to the ELEA, either as part of the expansion proposed by this agenda item or in subsequent ordinance amendments. See discussion in Background section below. Staff Recommendation: Approve First Reading of the proposed ordinance. Resource Requirements: The addition of this parking lot to the ELEA should not require any additional law enforcement resources beyond those already required for enforcement in the subject parking lot. The proposed amendment would not increase or decrease the number or nature of activities that are deemed unlawful. It might, however, result in some additional Municipal Court cases concerning possible temporary expulsion from the entire ELEA of persons found guilty of certain offenses or failures to appear in court multiple times. Policies, Plans and Goals Supported: • Public Safety (Council Goal) 23. Support innovative programs that protect the community Page Iof2 CITY OF ASHLAND i • Quality of Life (Administrative Goal) Provide, promote and enhance the security/safety, environmental health, and livability of the community. • Public Safety (Administrative Objective) 24. Increase safety and security city-wide Background and Additional Information: The City of Ashland's public parking lot at 175 Lithia Way is used by shoppers, employees, and visitors, some of whom want or need to be able to leave their vehicles there for extended periods of time without undue concern for their personal safety or damage to their vehicles. Because of its location near downtown and partly because of being adjacent to the present ELEA boundary, the parking lot increasingly has become a gathering spot for persons engaging in unlawful or otherwise offensive behavior. Such behavior includes conduct currently proscribed by the City's persistent violation ordinance (e.g., scattering rubbish, undue noise, out-of-control dogs, consumption of alcohol or marijuana in public), as well as taking up parking spaces and not moving from where drivers are attempting to park, camping, and vehicle tampering. APD and administrative staff are receiving repeated complaints from neighboring property owners and vehicle owners concerning unwanted behavior by persons using the parking lot for activities unrelated to parking. This proposed ordinance amendment would affect offenders who have been cited for multiple violations or who fail multiple times to appear in court to address charges against them either by challenging the charges legally or by acceding to proposed penalties. The proposed ordinance amendment would not increase or decrease the number or nature of proscribed activities; instead it increases slightly the downtown area from which persons found by a court to be guilty of multiple offenses can be temporarily expelled. This proposed admission to the ELEA is feasible in that it is fairly small in area, abuts the current ELEA boundary, and is demonstrably a site where unlawful activities are occurring with increasing frequency. Some concerned citizens have suggested other additions to the ELEA. To withstand scrutiny in court, such additions would have to be justified, at a minimum, by substantial numbers of calls for APD enforcement. Attachments: Ordinance Exhibit A: Map of proposed Downtown Enhanced Law Enforcement Area Page 2of2 CITY OF ASHLAND i ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING AMC 10.120 TO ADD THE 175 LITHIA WAY PUBLIC PARKING LOT TO EXISTING ENHANCED LAW ENFORCEMENT AREA Annotated to show delet ons and additions to the code sections being modified. Deletions are bold lined through and additions are bold underlined. WHEREAS, Article 2. Section 1 of the Ashland City Charter provides: Powers of the City. The City shall have all powers which the constitutions, statutes, and common law of the United States and of this State expressly or impliedly grant or allow municipalities, as fully as though this Charter specifically enumerated each of those powers, as well as all powers not inconsistent with the foregoing; and, in addition thereto, shall possess all powers hereinafter specifically granted. All the authority thereof shall have perpetual succession. WHEREAS, The City's public parking lot located at 175 Lithia Way, is adjacent to the existing Enhanced Law Enforcement Area; and WHEREAS, City of Ashland law enforcement has experienced increased and disproportionate instances of individuals' recurring unlawful activities within the 175 Lithia Way public parking lot which would constitute persistent violations under AMC 10.120.020 if they took place nearby in the City's current Enhanced Law Enforcement Area; and WHEREAS, City of Ashland law enforcement considers it is necessary to expand the Enhanced Law Enforcement Area to include the parking lot located at 175 Lithia Way in order to protect the public against health and welfare hazards posed by persons who are attracted to the parking lot. THEREFORE, THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Chapter 10.120 is amended as follows: 10.120.010 Enhanced Law Enforcement Area and Persistent Violations, Misdemeanor A. It is the intent of the City Council to protect discrete areas within the City that are experiencing increased unlawful activity against becoming an attraction for more such activity and to protect the public against health and welfare hazards posed by persons who are attracted to these areas for opportunity to engage in or to contact others to engage in unlawful activity. B. The City Council finds that the following geographic areas within the City are particularly affected by unlawful behavior and/or are subject to a disproportionate number of incidents of the Ordinance No. Page 1 of 3 i unlawful activities comprising persistent violation as defined in AMC 10.120.020 below, and declares each such area to be an enhanced law enforcement area: 1) Downtown Enhanced Law Enforcement Area, inclusive of Bill Patton Garden and 175 Lithia Way public parkins lot, as depicted in Exhibit A. 10.120.020A Person Commits the Crime of Persistent Violation if: A. The person is convicted in Ashland Municipal Court for any combination of the following crimes or violations occurring in separate incidents within a six month period within an enhanced law enforcement area: 1) Three (3) or more Class A, B or C felonies or Class A, B or C misdemeanors; 2) Two (2) Class A, B or C felonies or Class A, B or C misdemeanors plus one (1) or more violations of the ordinances set forth below; 3) Three (3) or more violations of any of the following ordinances or laws: a. AMC 9.08.110 - Scattering Rubbish; b. AMC 9.08.170 - Unnecessary noise; c. AMC 9.16.010 - Dogs - Control Required; d. AMC 10.40.030 - Consumption of Alcohol in Public; e. AMC 10.40.040 - Open Container of Alcohol in Public; f. AMC 9.16.015 - Dog License Required; or g rAleas11° 91, Seetior 5 ORS 475B.280 - Use of marijuana in public place prohibited. B. The person knowingly enters an enhanced law enforcement area in violation of a Municipal Court expulsion order as a term of the person's probation or a court expulsion order pursuant to AMC 10.125.010, et sec. SECTION 2. Savings. Notwithstanding this amendment/repeal, the City ordinances in existence at the time any criminal or civil enforcement actions were commenced, shall remain valid and in full force and effect for purposes of all cases filed or commenced during the times said ordinances(s) or portions thereof were operative. This section simply clarifies the existing situation that nothing in this Ordinance affects the validity of prosecutions commenced and continued under the laws in effect at the time the matters were originally filed. SECTION 3. Severability. The sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses of this ordinance are severable. The invalidity of one section, subsection, paragraph, or clause shall not affect the validity of the remaining sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses. SECTION 4. Codification. Provisions of this Ordinance shall be incorporated in the City Code, and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "code", "article", "section", or another word, and the sections of this Ordinance may be renumbered or re-lettered, provided however, that any Whereas clauses and boilerplate provisions, i. e., Section nos. 2-4 need not be codified, and the City Recorder is authorized to correct any cross-references and any typographical errors. The foregoing ordinance was first read by title only in accordance with Article X, Ordinance No. Page 2 of 3 I Section 2(C) of the City Charter on the day of , 2017, and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of , 2017. Barbara M. Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of , 2017. John Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: David H. Lohman, City Attorney Ordinance No. Page 3 of 3 ti ~r~H ~4'. 04~1 ss Q~ Q z J C -a w U ' ~v xj W 'Is QN vo O as Al, tvvH ~ O a- O C o Q14 n U 4 a O I Opp J i I i I s ~s X60 48, I Eo ~ ~ a I LL- O s to ~ c h ~ ACftlvll, w z ~ asp ~ ~