Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019-01-15 Council Meeting (INCOMPLETE) CITY OF ASHLAND DRAFT MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL Tuesday, January 15, 2019 Council Chambers 1175 E. Main Street Note: Items on the Agenda not considered due to time constraints are automatically continued to the next regularly scheduled Council meeting [AMC 2.04.030.E.] 6:30 p.m. Executive Session* *Purpose of Executive Session Item - Conduct deliberations with persons designated by the governing body to negotiate real property transactions, pursuant to ORS 192.660(2)(e). 1. CALL TO ORDER II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. ROLL CALL ' I IV. MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS V. CITY ADMINISTRATOR REPORT VI. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Study Session of December 17, 2018 2. Business Meeting of December 18, 2018 VII. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS VIII. MINUTES OF BOARDS, COMMISSIONS. AND COMMITTEES Airport Conservation Forest Lands Historic Housing and Human Srvs. Parks & Recreation Planning Public Arts Transportation Tree Wildfire Miti ag tion IX. PUBLIC FORUM Business from the audience not included on the agenda. (Total time allowed for Public Forum is 15 minutes. The Mayor will set time limits to enable all people wishing to speak to complete their testimony.) [15 minutes maximum] F~ A. WO w Q lj" Q! Ado •r . r. , h i A •.ti,•- ov "P'te' i {`p a,•. . i` 1 •~sl'. r .l F.y. V:._ r,iS _ _T'. .r.r :C. 'i r . _ . L~r 'J r. Council Business Meeting January 15, 2019 Agenda Item Approval of Liquor License Request for Kickstand Cafe, LLC. From Melissa Huhtala City Recorder Contact Melissa.huhtala(a~ashland.or.us 541-488-2307 SUMMARY This is a request for approval of a Liquor License Application from Kickstand Cafe, LLC. Located at 116 Lithia Way Suite 2, Ashland, OR 97520, POLICIES, PLANS & GOALS SUPPORTED AMC Chapter 6.32 Liquor License Review. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION N/A BACKGROUND AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION This is an application for a new Liquor License. FISCAL IMPACTS N/A STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the Liquor License application. 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. ACTIONS, OPTIONS & POTENTIAL MOTIONS I move to approve the Liquor License for Kickstand Cafe, LLC. REFERENCES & ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1: Application Page 1 of I CITY OF ASHLAND . RIB C =+1I V I-~ OREGON LIQUOR CONTROL COMMISSION sams LIQUOR LICENSE APPLICATION LICENSE FEE: Do not include the license fee with the CITY AND COUNTY USE ONLY application (the license fee will be collected at a later time). Date application received APPLICATION: Application is being made for: Name of City or County E] Brewery ❑ Brewery-Public House Recommends this license be Granted Denied ❑ Distillery ❑ Full On-Premises, Commercial B ❑ Full On-Premises, Caterer By ❑ Full On-Premises, Passenger Carrier Date ❑ Full On-Premises, Other Public Location ❑ Full On-Premises, Nonprofit Private Club OL / El Full On-Premises, For-Profit Private Club ❑ Grower Sales Privilege Limited On-Premises Application recei d by r-1 Off-Premises Date ❑ Off-Premises with Fuel Pumps ❑ Warehouse License Action: ~16 Wholesale Malt Beverage & Wine (WMBW) ❑ Winery I _J 1. LEGAL ENTITY (example: corporation or LLC) or INDIVIDUAL(S) applying for the license: Applicant #1 Applicant k2 - ~ K. St~~d C~e- L LC Applicant #3 Applicant #4 2. Trade e of the Business (the name customers will see): Ca r t l (41;p 3. Business Location: Number and Street 1~' u C' City (~di(,1 u~• ~G~" - _ I C~ ounty_._~ 6KJV ZIP C1 j-~-Q 4. Is the business at this location currently licensed by the OLCC. Yes IINo 5. Mailing Address (where the OLCC will send your mad): _ - PO Box, Number, Street, Rural Route C"J City Q'j~~ State _ ZIP - 6. Phone Number of the Business Location-~1~ [p L/ j 4 7 Contact Person for this Application: Name Gl 42,-={~( o Phone Number / Mailing Address, City, State, ZIP - Email 4~bE? CI~CC' _C_ C"o 37 r" - - I understand that marijuana (such as`6se, consumption, ingestion, inhalation, samples, give-away, sale, etc.) is prohibited on the licensed premises. _ Si na a of Applicant #1 ' Signature of Applicant #2 Signature of Applicant #3 Signature of Applicant #4 i i OLCC Liquor License Application Rev. 06;1017, OREGON LIQUOR CONTROL COMMISSION LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY QUESTIONNAIRE Please Print or Type LLC Name: 1 %ClpSfa'c~ LLC Year Filed: D10 Trade Name (dba): Business Location Address: 116~7 C;), City: ZIP Code: aCJ List Members of LLC: Percentage of Membership Interest: 1~'al'~L (managing member) 2. (members) 3. 4. 5. 6. (Note: If any LLC member is another legal entity, that entity must also complete an LLC, Limited Partnership or -Corporation Questionnaire. If the LLC has officers, please list thorn on a separate sheet of paper with their titles.) 5 ~ ~ _ Server Education Designee: RJCe r&0 6&e' DOB:) Z8,x( 30 q zg~z3 I understand that if my answers are not true and complete, the OLCC may deny my license application. Signature: Date: q ame) (flue) 1-800-452-OLCC (6522) www.olcc.statexnus (rev. • OREGON LIQUOR CONTROL COMMISSION BUSINESS INFORMATION Please Print or Type Applicant Name: ~ Phone: Trade Name (dba):_(' y7zp_ & Q Business Location Address: 1169 City: r!~ ZIP Code: Sao I - Business Hours: Outdoor Area Hours: The~autdoorarea isused far,- Sunday O to pNv~ Sunday -?32Am to . prFo service Hours: 730arrio ~Ja.m- Monday ~}~to Monday ito, iol service Hours: 7t')A ffi Tuesday -1 to Tuesday fib, o nclosed, ho L° Wednesda ~J to yy n ednesdiy`l~ o ~Jvy _ Re Thursday oThursday 17,r7 amo The extdrfrfr~r6~'fwta-uate~Jfi:~fie Friday ~ :7bar ,to ~ D V ^ Fr day "79D o supervised ice Pennittees. Saturday oSSaturday ~o~ (InvestigatorsIni ) Seasonal Variations: ❑ Yes /No If yes, explain: Check all that apply: • • Live Music ❑ Karaoke Recorded Music ❑ Coin-operated Games Sunday to Monday to ❑ DJ Music ❑ Video Lottery Machines Tuesday to Wednesday to ❑ Dancing ❑ Social Gaming ThuMda to ~d F(ficlay to ❑ Nude Entertainers ❑ Pool Tables Saturday to ❑ Other: Live mss; Ono tar/ ✓ro r~~~ Ix ~M1~P1 ■ Restaurant: Outdoor: I oLccuseONLY Investigator Verified Seating:_(Y)'_(N) Lounge: Other (explain): investigator initials: Banquet: Total Seating:4 Date: I understand if my answers are not true and complete, the OL:CC may deny my license application. Applicant SignatuDate: ce ` 1-800-452-OLCC (6522) www.oregon.gov/olcc (rev. 12107) L OREGON LIQUOR CONTROL COMMISSION FLOOR PLAN • Your floor plan must be submitted on this form. • Use a separate Floor Plan Form for each level or floor of the building. • The floor plan(s) must show the specific areas of your premises (e.g. dining area, bar, lounge, dance floor, video lottery room, kitchen, restrooms, outside patio and sidewalk cafe areas.) • Include all tables and chairs (see example on back of this form). Include dimensions for each table if you are applying for a Full On-Premises Sales license. J1 WP1L III/ X Z T t U J ~O O p \ v o p ~ ~ 0 a N ro c C) 7- 0 k zl Q j 6 , \ kp 0 c \P IZs Ly,~> 0 0 c 2~ b l GvOL LA, Yz WOL Z S L 1-C IBC ..........OLCC USE ONLY.......... 45-74-Name MINOR POSTING ASSIGNMENT(S) lq4 //6_~' Trade Name (dba): Z'i5 Date: Initials: 7/ City and ZIP Code 1-800-452-OLCC (6522) www.oregon.gov/olcc (rev. 09/12) Council Business Meeting January 15, 2019 Agenda Item Approval of Liquor License Request for Plaza Hospitality, LLC. From Melissa Huhtala City Recorder Contact Melissa. huhtala(a)ashland.or.us 541-488-2307 SUMMARY This is a request for approval of a Liquor License Application from Plaza Hospitality, LLC. Located at 98 Central Avenue, Ashland, OR 97520, POLICIES. PLANS & GOALS SUPPORTED AMC Chapter 6.32 Liquor License Review. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION N/A BACKGROUND AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION This is an application for a new Liquor License. FISCAL IMPACTS N/A STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the Liquor License application. 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. ACTIONS, OPTIONS & POTENTIAL MOTIONS I move to approve the Liquor License for Plaza Hospitality, LLC. REFERENCES & ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1: Application Page I of I CITY OF ASHLAND OREGON LIQUOR CONTROL COMMISSION LIQUOR LICENSE APPLICATION ' JC'eNSEFEL, OonotInclude thegcensefeewfththe MY ANDCOUNTY USEONLY application (the license fee will be collected at a later time). _1\ Date application received APPLICATION: Application is being made for. 0 Brewery Name of Clryor County ❑ Brewery-Publlc House Recommends this license be Granted _ Denied ❑ Distillery ❑ Full On-Premises, Commercial By ❑ Full On-Premises, Caterer ❑ Full On-Premises, Passenger Carrier Date ❑ Full On-Premises, Other Public Location ❑ Full On-Premises, Nonprofit Private Club OI-CC USE ❑ Full On-Premises, For-Profit Private Club Grower5alesPrivilege Application received by Off-Premises ❑ Off-Fremises with Fuel Pumps Date ❑ Warehouse LlcenseAttion: ❑ Wholesale Malt Beverage & Wine (WMBW) ❑ Winery 1, LEGA& EiT "i example: co ratlon orLL.t or II.IDIVIOUAL 5 cpplying for the lkenset Applicant #1 APPltdnt q2 ~ Applicantg3 Applicant #4 2. Trade Name of a Business (the name customers will see Business Location: Number and Street j 11n Court p ZIP 4. Is the business at thia fomtlan currently ilcetsod b the OLCL7 Yes No L-J 5, 1talAryAddresS (where thL, OLCCwill send urmall: PO Box, Number, Street, Rural Route IM. A( Wj -f "a GtY ppd I State Vi ; 6. Fhone Number of the Buslness Location: 7. CuntactPerson forthlsA licotlon: Name Phone Numbers! Malin Ad e p, CBy, State, ZIP Email ~ I understand that marijuana (such us use, consumption, Inge,Bon, Inhalation, semples, give way, S&L, etc) Is I rohibitod on the licensed premises. Signature OfA nt Sign re of licantItz Slgnaturea t,0 Signature ofApph aet#4 -1 fI Cttt aawrrhmuryXU tWa Oft. W10171 a - OREGON LIQUOR CONTROL COMMISSION PriMPorm STATEMENT OF FUNDING SOURCES ?Pease Print or 7Wv Each person who Invests mom in this licensed business must complete this form which will become a part of the permanent file. The information must he printed legibly In Ink or typed. Now autlot, change of ownership, change of locator. Not Including amounts you will owe on contrail what is the approximate total amount you will put into this business to buy or start it up? (For example: advance rent payment, down payments on contracts, buying inventory, remodeling, city and licensing fees, purchasing stock in a corporation or membership Interest In an LLC. Total 5 OR evA Change to exlst_rng licenso (greater privilege, additional privilege, change in legal entity, extension of premises, remodel) What is the approximate total amount you will put Into making the change you are requesting? (For example: buying Inventory, remodeling, clty and licensing fees, purchasing stock in a corporation or membership Interest In an LLC.) Total $ 1 Identify whets you got your invowmapt money. List the full name of the bank, lender, or person who loaned or gave you money. The total in this section should be equal to, or more than, the total amount listed above. Sworn Statomeni: I swear the above information is true, accurate and complete. I understand that the OLCC may require me to give proof of the above Information and that if the Information is not true, accurate or complete the OLCC may prosecute me criminally for False Swearing under ORS 162.075. The OLCC may also refuse to grant my license application or if the license is granted may act to revobe my license baeed on a false sworn statement. t Trade Name (d.b.~a1.)) pfd ! ~[t J i t 1< f}$I7~Q1?t1r /esi'Fa[ amity _ `J`!(1ld Ems` Printed Name ~JJ~ GIYIN~f1J? Signature I~6 A7- - Date_. 1-800452-OLCC (6522) (rev. D00) vni•K•.oregon.uov/Dice i OREGON LIQUOR CONTROL COMMISSION BUSINESS INFORMATION Please Print or Type L~-~ II JJ Applicant Name: Plaza. tilt Dl7ZIFlit W d, Phone: 54) -'U43 ' ACC Trade Name (dba): Plaza. I K m ~ S2v .+ea 0uf fl,(1)CL J CkPelV- Business Location Address: qy Ceah-od Ayeve. City: ~il'll ZIP Code: q~5. ig Business Hours: Outdoor Area Hours: A The outdoor area is used tor: Sunday to Sunday to N /r 13 Food se 'ce Hours: to Monday to Monday to ❑ Alcohol servi Hou to Tuesday Tuesday ❑ Enclosed. how Wednesday Wednesday Thursday Io Thursday toto The exterior area' adequately iewed and/or Friday to Friday to supervised by ervice Permittees. Saturday to Saturday to (Investigator's Initials) Seasonal Variations: ❑ Yes VP No If yes, explain: Check all that apply: • ' • • • - • ❑ Live Music ❑ Karaoke /V//"to ❑ Recorded Music ❑ Coin-operated Games Sunday Monday to ❑ DJ Music ❑ Video Lottery Machines Tuesday ~t Wednesday tO ❑ Dancing ❑ Social Gaming Thursday / Friday o ❑ Nude Entertainers ❑ Pool Tables Saturday to ❑ Other. • Restaurant: Outdoor: OLCC USE ONLY p~`~ Investigator Verified Seafnq _(v) _(N) Lounge: Other (explain): (r/lkWy keA -ss Investigator Initials Banquet: Total Seating: SS Date I understand if my answers are not true and complete, the OLCC may deny my license application. Applicant Signature: Date: 1-800-452-OLCC (6522) www.aregon.gov7olcc (rev. 12707) l OREGON LIQUOR CONTROL COMMISSION LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY QUESTIONNAIRE Please Print or Type LLC Name: : 4111 & st d Ar .1 . L Le:& Year Filed: col X Trade Name (dba):~ C^H;bt/A k s'g0ficM] 14;y If 9~i Business Location Address: t N-` Sti:11/ICT BLS r~f'/ %3 City:_,:5~p v _ l'lJA ZIP Code: c . ' i List Members o; LLC: Percentage of Membertihio Interest: 1. Fill Ldw~g'~g ele z bo-Oh(,2c.~ a~ B/P 4. 5. ' 6. (Note: if any LLC member is another lagal entity, that entitymust also complete an LLC, Limited Partnership or Corporation Questionnaire. If the LLC has officers, please list them on a separate sheet of paper with their titles.) ' I Server Education Designee: •.~Q.1 VI Q. ~'V GC t4.~L DOB: A - t 9/ I undarstand that ii my answers are not true and complete, the OLCC may deny my license application. a 9~r9 Signature: DD:3: (ne owe) 1-800.462-OLCG (6522) rvar~orcesmte.orus (rev. 8/11) OREGON LIQUOR CONTROL COMMISSION LIMITED LIABILITY" COMPANY QUESTIONNAIRE Please Print or Type LLC Name: P11 Year Filed: Trade Name (dba)- Uzi hin c 54-xijEA AS(nf t r~(2i,,zek, Business Location Address: City:. III,~ ZIP Code: a± Gt List Members of '-LC-. Percenimge of Membership Interest: i. tt~lf'jh~':,~,r~.I~,4/: 2. If-svierbrzkyr (memeeB) Y ; 3. 4 6. (Note; If any LLC memheris another legal entity, that entity must also complate an LLC, Limited Partnership or Corporation Questionnaire. If the LLC has officers, please list them on a separate sheet of paper with their titles.) Server Education Designee: 11R DOB: 11, !e I; I undr.•atand that If my answers are not true and complete, the OLCC may deny my licence application. Signature: apt - - - Data. 0 91 (name) (title) 9-800452.OLCC (6622) wwav.clccstate.orus f+ev. 6111) 1 ' I OREGON LIQUOR CONTROL,COMMISSION LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY QUESTIONNAIRE Please Print or Type LLCName:_yjj k-,,l C (-Litni-mexiis-, (1,.W, Year Filed: Trade Name (dba). Business Location Address: 1 RJ Z ~ SIC 7 U~ City: ~+7 ZIP Cedar List Members ~o'f ~LL"C: Percentago of Membership Interest: 1. La1//~uJ~ % ((Mmber) 3. 4. 5. i (Note: ;f any LLC member is another legal entity, that enfily must. aft complete an LLC, Limited Partnership or Corporation Questionnaire. If the LLC has officers, please list them on a separate sheet of paper with their tilles.) Server Education Designee A_., DOB: 1 understand that If my ansmr rs are not true and co;l,pit te, the OLCC may deny my license application. Signalure: 4" e5AO&C~ Date Creme) 1-800,452OLCC (6622) rtwwotcastcte.arus (mV. all 1) Aga OREGON LIQUOR CONTROL COMMISSION LIQUOR LICENSE APPLICATION LICIUSE FEE. Do not Include the license fee with the Cf7Y AND COUIM USE ONLY application (the license fee will be collected at a later time). Date application received APPLICATION: Application is being made for. ❑ Brewery Name of Clry or County . ❑ Brewery-Public House Distillery Recommends this license be Granted Denied ❑ - ❑ Full On-Premrses,Commercial By ❑ Full On-Premises, Caterer ❑ Full OrrPremises, Passenger Carrier Date ❑ Full On-Premises, Other Public Location ❑ Full On-Premises, Nonprofit Private Club OLCC USE ❑ Full On-Premises, For-Profit Private Club Q Grower Sales Privilege Lvj Umfted On-Premises Application received by ~j Off-Premises ❑ Off-Fremises with Fuel Pumps Date ❑ Warehouse License Action: ❑ Wholesale Malt Beverage & VAne (WMBW) ❑ Winery 1. :EGAS e.'rriY exempfe: co ration orLLt or INDIVIDUAL 5 applying for the Ikenw: Applicant #1 Applicant g2 ApRLJ d 11tfYA err Appllmntf74 2. Tra.de ame of a Business (the name customers will see M rsra 4, 3. Businessl.ocatlontNum rv and Street ( , t 4. Is lire business a this lcratlan Boren !hL • Ilce:tsod 6 the OLCC7 Yes No 5. sha14r6Addrress(where the0LCCwIl/send urmaN: PO Box, Number, Street Rural Route Gb' P6 - 45, State i ZIPS i Oh - 6. Phone Number of the Business Laxtlone fu h 7. Contact Person for thisA Ila+tion: r Name Phone Number ~4 Malgn Ad re , Ctt , State, ZIP t~i~.klrrf~~ ' Email iAyY--••._' ~IUJX~au.E'kP tram 1 understand that marijuana (such us use, consumption., ingestion, inhalation, samples, giva4wLy sere, etc) is I rol Ibiud on the licensed premises. II 'Signature ofA nt Slgn re of limntk2 t 5lgnaturea ,11 Signature ofAppfitaMg4 _i ' otavuw,u,m,r~,a„iao.osnosrl OREGON LIQUOR CONTROL COMMISSION P rintrronn STATEMENT OF FUNDING SOURCES Planse Print or 7ygs Each person who Invests money in this licensed business must complete this form which will become a part of the permanent file. The information must be printed legibly In Ink or typed. n Now outlet, change of ownershlo, change of location Not Including amounts you wlli awe on contra what is the approximate total amount you will put into this business to buy or start it up? (For example: advance rent payment, down payments on contracts, buying Inventory, remodeling, city and licensing fees, purchasing stock in a corporation or membership Interest in an LLC. Total $ OR ,i Chengo to ex1stini; iieenso (greater privilege, additional privilege, change In legal entity, extension of premises, remodel) What is the approximate total amount you will put Into making the change you are requesting? (For example: buying inventory, remodeling, city and licensing fees, purchasing stock in a corporation or membership Interest In an LLC.) Total $ J Identify where you got your Invsstn•.ent money. List the full name of the bank, lender, or parson who loaned or gave you money. The total in this section should be equal to, or more than, the total amount listed above. Sworn Statement I swear the above information is true, accurate and complete. I understand that the OLCC may require me to give proof of the above Information and that if the Information is not true, accurate or complete the OLCC may.prosecuts me criminally far False Swearing under OPS 162.075. The OLCC may also refuse to grant my license application or if the license is granted may out to revoke my license based on a false sworn statement. L ~1 Trade Name (d.b.a.) Printed Name l n Signature bts Date 1-800452-OLCC (6522) (rev. 000) - Wni%•.otagon._aov/pike J i • OREGON LIQUOR CONTROL COMMISSION BUSINESS INFORMATION Please Print or Type ' L.X Applicant Name: PIQZ~ D)Ja-LW ZC~ Phone: 574) ' 199 ' S"W Trade Name (dba): Rlaza_ Imm ~ 6Li,L• ey &Lf f#StifCU A C4w*_ Business Location Address: q8 Ce&4W Avenve. , City: /b5h 6U7z' ZIP Code: L7 0 Business Hours: Al Outdoor Area Hours: A The outdoor area is used for: ~ff~ Sunday to Sunday to N /r ❑ Food se Hours: toV/ Monday to Monday to ❑ Alcohol sem Hou to Tuesday t Tuesday to ❑ Enclosed, how Wednesday Wednesday Thursday to Thursday to The exterior area' adequately iev" and/or Friday to Friday to supervised by ervice Pennittees. Saturday to Saturday to (Investigator's Initials) Seasonal Variations: ❑ Yes No If yes, explain: Check all that apply: • ' ❑ Live Music ❑ Karaoke ❑ Recorded Music ❑ Coin-operated Games Sunday N/ Monday to ❑ DJ Music ❑ Video Lottery Machines 'Tuesday t Wednesday o ❑ Dancing ❑ Social Gaming Thursday to Friday to ❑ Nude Entertainers ❑ Pool Tables Saturday to ❑ Other. • Restaurant: Outdoor: tlLCC use ONLY Invesligalm Verified Seaing _(Y) _(N) Lounge: Other (explain): G kAw kelh S S Investigator Initials Banquet: Total Seating: SS Date I understand if my answers are not true and complete, the OLCC may deny my license application. Applicant Signature: Date: 1-800-452-OLCC (6522) lawmoregon.govlolcc (rev. 12107) I OREGON LIQUOR CONTROL COMMISSION! LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY QUESTIONNAIRE Please Print or Type LLC Name: No I i(r IF T j g i' I Year Filed: Trade Name (dba): Avodfj IftJ k %cm„4' 4 e1 V17 4' f i Y A Business Location Address: f-' ~I~stl `ai{.s 5 City:_ lrl t~l ZIP Cade 67 ' List Members o; LLC: Percentage or Memberuhip Interest: 7.5111 E~(1~'aG4'~ ~ o-nNiv (gym) 3. -fit 4. 5. 6. (Mote: if any LLC member is another lagal entity, that entity must also complete an LLC, Limited Partnership or Corporation Questionnaire. !f the LLC has officers, please list them on a separate sheet of paper with their titles.) sower Educa4.oz Designee: _ DOB: I endamterd that it my answers are not true and complete, the OLCC may deny my license appltcation. Signature: 0ate: (ne (ale) i-800452-OLCC (6522) t~►v~~olcc,staie.or.us (rev. 8111) OREGON LIQUOR CONTROL COMMISSION LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY QUESTIONNAIRE. ?lease Print or Type ' L - t LLC {dame: Irt2~ • Yf/~+~lfrri,(4. 1 1,16. Year Fled Trade Name (dba);I{1b 1 .5t; ~'fy z ~51nt r~'~ 4~• Business Location Address: ,fl .1 I Vaiye, City: kin la unyI ZIP Code: List Members of.LLC: Parcaniag_ of Membamhip Interest: Inlt~~l-;'. iTe, I(riSl~d-y{~{Pfl,+s (~G~~g mdMe,,-- , - - (memte~e) 3. s 5. 6. (Note: ff any LLC memberis anotheriegal entity, that entity must also complats an LLC, Limited Partnership or Corporation Questionnaire. If the LLC has olfroers, please list them on a separate sheet of paper with their titles.) Server Education Designee: ~,)C ML? •I'V-e,-Y0'1 DOB: J II 4 I undrr.stand that It my answers are not true mid oontalate, the OWC may deny my licensee spplicatton. signature:!- Data: 0 91 (name) 9-800.462-OLCC (6622) wwnrciccstate.arus (rev. 8/11) i ~ i . i OREGON LIQUOR CONTROL,COMMISSIOM r LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY QUESTIONNAIRE Please Ptint or Type LLC Idame:~ Lai, _ Year Filed: Trade flame (dba): y , f c Business Location Address Q Iy z ~ d1 c~ L ~7 U City:~,~.t ZIP Coda: List Members of LLC: Percentage of Mamtsarship Interest: J5lr! I &W z. (7neov '46/ Id ftmxnt 3. 4. 5. (Note: if any LLC member is another iegal entity, that entity must also complete an LLC, Limited Partnership or Corporation Questionnaire. If the LLC has officers, please list them on a separate sheet of paper with their titles.) Server Education Designee: -1I'l DOB: I fp';q { I understand that if my answers are not true and complete, the OLCC may deny my license application. Signalura: ~'tDe+c+- r Cate: 8 9~~ t~I ro~i 1-900-"2.0LCC (6522) nww.olcastcre.orus (MV.. 8/11) Council Business Meeting January, 15 2019 Agenda ltein ! Appointment of Marion Moore to the Conservation Commission From Melissa Huhtala City Recorder Contact Melissa. huhtalaCcDashland.or.us 541-488-5703 SUMMARY Confirm Mayor's appointment of Marion Moore to the Conservation Commission. POLICIES, PLANS & GOALS SUPPORTED Ashland Municipal Code (AMC) Chapter 2.19. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION N/A BACKGROUND AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION This is confirmation by the City Council of the Mayor's appointment to the Conservation Commission. FISCAL IMPACTS N/A STAFF RECOMMENDATION N/A ACTIONS, OPTIONS & POTENTIAL MOTIONS I move to approve the appointment of Marion Moore to the Conservation Commission with a term expiring April 30, 2022. REFERENCES& ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1: Application Page 1 of 1 CITY OF ASHLAND CITY OF ASHLAND APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO CITY COMMISSION/COMMITTEE Please type or print answers to the following questions and submit to the City Recorder at City Hall, 20 E Main Street, or email melissa.huhtala@ashland.or.us. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact the City Recorder at 488-5307. Attach additional sheets if necessary. Name Marion L. Moore Requesting to serve on: conservation commission (Commission/Committee) Address2657 Takelma Way, Ashland, OR 97520 Occupationyoga teacher Phone: Home 541-488-4448 (no text) Work Email mlmatlpc@hotmail.com Fax 1. Education Background What schools have you attended? Univ. of Minnesota (B. Math 1964), Stanford University 1958 What degrees do you hold? Bachelor of Mathematics; certification for yoga teacher training from lyengar Yoga Institute, San Francisco What additional training or education have you had that would apply to this position? Master Climate Protector Class, Jan. 2017. from Southern Oregon Climate Action Now 2. Related Experience What prior work experience have you had that would help you if you were appointed to this position? One of two owners and operators'of Ashland Yoga Center, 1998 - 2017 Vice chairperson of Ad Hoc Senior Program Advisory Committee, 2017 Do you feel it would be advantageous for you to have further training in this field, such as attending conferences or seminars? Why? Formal training would be helpful, but I feel I can self-train by reading and research 3. Interests I have been interested in, Why are you applying for this position? and practicing, conservation of resources for over 40 years. This effort is critical for our survival. 4. Availability Are you available to attend special meetings, in addition to the regularly scheduled meetings? Do you prefer day or evening meetings? afternoon or evening meetings are my preference 5. Additional Information 17 years How long have you lived in this community? Please use the space below to summarize any additional qualifications you have for this position I understand the amount of work necessary for city commissions to be effective, and I am willing to do the work. I am a good speaker and fairly good writer. I minored in physics in college and have the ability to understand scientific concepts and data. 1 Nov. 26, 2018 Date Ignature Council Business Meeting January, 15 2019 Agenda Item Appointment of Jeffrey Phillips to the Public Arts Commission From Melissa Huhtala City Recorder Contact Melissa.huhtala(a)ashland.or.us 541-488-5703 SUMMARY Confirm Mayor's appointment of Jeffrey Phillips to the Public Arts Commission. POLICIES, PLANS & GOALS SUPPORTED Ashland Municipal Code (AMC) Chapter 2.19. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION N/A BACKGROUND AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION This is confirmation by the City Council of the Mayor's appointment to the Public Arts Commission. FISCAL IMPACTS N/A STAFF RECOMMENDATION N/A ACTIONS, OPTIONS & POTENTIAL MOTIONS I move to approve the appointment of Jeffrey Phillips to the Public Arts Commission with a term expiring April 30, 2022. REFERENCES & ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1: Application Page 1 of 1 CITY OF ASHLAND CITY OF ASHLAND APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO CITY COMMISSION/COMMITTEE Please type or print answers to the following questions and submit to the City Recorder at City Hall, 20 E Main Street, or email melism.huhtalarashland.or.us. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact the City Recorder at 488-5307. Attach additional sheets if necessary. Name :T ~FR /:j, (fl-7L/ rLL lY':~2.S Requesting to serve-on:."FV-9 L I C AY4~ -C S (Commission/Committee) Address Z3s G(/7~q,4~ lF s 7- AS~?LRIVD,09- 2_752o coy/ l'Ci'I rnoi~,ARy ,4P_ i Occupation c V f: A •T O Ie Phone: Home S) Y- 6 32 -r 2.7 g Work / t' Email-rfl 6;A&T ,4 R-r pR os E•c T A? Fax -MA +L , Cc A 1. Education Background What schools have you attended? CALL ro Q T'i A /4✓Sr/TVTE bT-- "i kF A K_1 S What degrees do you hold? 73. -FA• A.-EA What additional training or education have you had that would apply to this position? 2. Related Experience What prior work experience have you had that would help you if you were appointed to this position? L~A S SC-_ C_ A:7 /7 Ac&fiFo tP6-rrc,h L Do you feel it would be advantageous for you to have further training in this field, such as attending conferences or seminars? Why? YES • 1 'b `R CM A) Al Cv R t NT f~ E. k C- kv 0 2 p /AIA N c fS N- ~oNI-E~f'ol2ARY `r►zC_-NDS. ALS1> -7-0 C/v0A9•_ W /Th oR9/~/V ►zfF~ joN`S liv ~,-k4E 1r, CoM^t,IV ,rY) /2~5foN.4cT~L;V ANA ST w/ -nc S T t` 'P .v 3 L/C R i I /2 A- C.T I -C-' S .4 h/b D C) /Q TVJv/-r/Wis. Ifi C /lI oR E /<'~.lc, LCD 9~ *dt l 19 'TTE7C', 3. Interests Why are you applying for this position? b 4-1 C T 1 i` ANA ss~ o 4. Availability Are you available to attend special meetings, in addition to the regularly scheduled meetings? Do you prefer day or evening meetings? ES . W t' 9 S E L ca 7C 1 L e F+Y D 62 All 6 T r S o, ;C, 5. Additional Information How long have you lived in this community? Please use the space below to summarize any additional qualifications you have for this position A~ ti'J 5-1K ATl VIE--: AJvZ:;, CVAOA7-OR1,AL CuLL,4 t7i2AT/a~✓ AfliyAYS 1•1/7-/V A 1,0 - DF ~NTipVY ASly Z zqA FA r2 T 1 c V L A tQ L`f i A17G;,e C5-7'c-377 1 >v -rd C / Al T-6 F+ e-- 7-7 c r/ t=TW c t;:-✓ A -1 1,!ST' Z d4y~L7 L ~G V, 2 Q~ "Lo L Date i e ~r, L ' Jeff Phillips Contemporary Art Curator Resume theartartUroject gmail com (818)632-5278 Career Summary , The establishment of independent curatorial programming at high profile public locations providing new and ongoing exhibition opportunities. Developing the protocols and creating business/community partnerships through sponsorship and philanthropic activity supporting the mission to bring contemporary art to diverse audiences. Managed and supervised the development, marketing, design, and installation of multi purpose large scale exhibition'platforms. Collaborated with painters, muralists, photographers/cinematographers including functional art, miniatures, sculpture, mobiles, time-based video art, textiles, ceramics, tapestries, prints and drawings. Planned and implemented exhibition related programming and community outreach for the setup and supervision of artist receptions, poetry readings, music performances, speakers, and panel discussions all thematically liked. The supervision of installations with multi person crews using specialized tools, power equipment, scaffolding, scissor lifts, extender ladders, stanchions, forklifts, wires and pulleys. Special attention to wall surfaces with treated materials. architectural Supervising the shipping, delivery, installation and deinstallation of multi dimensional. large scale sculpture. Responsible for the design and placement of exterior and interior lighting. Responsible for the multi-track lighting of art in theatre grarid lobbies. Adhered to all safety procedures and museum standards and practices. Administered the necessary security, insurances, and permitting requirements for the art placement. Responsible for advertising, consignment agreements, contracts, certificates, invoices, and safety inspection compliance. Tracked all art inventory, shipping and scheduling. Responsible for deadlines and master yearly exhibition calendar. Primary point of contact for press releases, inquiries, and tours: Didactic wall text labels and brochures. I Responsible for the placement and care of thousands of works of art for an estimated audience exceeding a million visitors. Attended numerous art fairs, conventions, panels, receptions, pop up contemporary exhibits, professional networking events and happenings. Curatorial art selection studio visits of numerous emerging, mid career and established master artists. Developed and maintained ongoing relationships with art professionals representing museums, universities, institutes, community and neighborhood organizations, nonprofits, corporations, property management companies, city councils and municipalities. Conducted curatorial walk-throughs and supervised school tours. Jeff Phillips i I I Selected Exhibition Highlights as Curator, Contemporary Fine Art - Gensler & Associates Architects "Nuevos Encuentros" - The Directors' Guild of America "The Art Speaks for Itself" series (I through XX) Contemporary Fine Art Exhibiting Program, Including: - "The Contemporary Chicano Narrative" East Los Streetscapers, Muralists - "The ContemporaryVienna Succession" - New Space/New Directions" "New Space/New Directions II" - KLSX Classic Rock Art Show annual auction benefitingAmFAR (at the DGA) - KLSX Classic Rock Art Show II annual auction benefiting AmFAR (at the DGA) - KLSX Classic Rock Art Show III annual auction benefiting AmFAR (at the DGA) - The Chase Foundation annual "Art From the Heart" benefiting Children's Hospital Los Angeles (at the DGA) - The Chase Foundation, annual "Art From the Heart" II Benefit with Christie's Auctions, i for Children's Hospital Los Angeles (at the Four Seasons Hotel, Beverly Hills) The Chase Foundation, annual "Art From the Heart" III Benefit (at the Four Seasons Hotel, Beverly Hills) - The Chase Foundation, annual "Art From the Heart" IV Benefit (at the Four Seasons Hotel, Beverly Hills) - "The Child Within: Innocence and Anxiety in Contemporary Art" - Barnsdall Art Park at the LA Municipal Art Gallery "Contemporary Sculpture Garden" on the Frank Lloyd Wright Hollyhock House Grounds, City of Los Angeles, Department of Cultural Affairs - "Bronze & Steel" - "Wind Garden Metal & Steel" - Bamsdall Gallery Theatre Exhibitions - " 4 Dimensions" - "Presence of the Past" - Contemporary Mural Masters" - "Civil Wrongs to Civil Rights" - "Light Years" - "Busy Canvas" - Civic Arts Plaza at Thousand Oaks, CA (Founding Curator), "New Visions" - Pacific Design Center, West Hollywood, CA, sculptural installations, "Stellar Axis" - The Writers' Guild of America/West, continuous contemporary art exhibition programming, West Los Angeles, CA - The International Photographers Guild, Local 600 (Annual photo exhibit/DGA) - The Madrid Theatre and Gallery, LA Cultural Affairs Facility, Canoga Park, CA - "Drawing a New Map" - Contemporary New Images" - "Drawing a New Map II" - Conrad N. Hilton Foundation "Visionary Landscapes" - William Rolland Gallery of Fine Art and Football Stadium Complex, California Lutheran University - Founding Curator 2011-2013 - "Highlights and Selections" 19th and 20th century French bronze sculptures, oils and watercolors - "Gotta Dance" Original vintage movie poster artwork 1930-196o - "Resonating Images" American Realism Ashcan Group of Eight, 1900-1950 - "Resonating Images II" American Realism, 1950-2000 - "Resonating Images III" The Contemporary Narrative, 2000-2014 - "Western Salon" Selections from the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library and Museum - California Contemporary Sculpture Museum (Sculpture at the Plaza), Woodland Hills, CA - "The New Stone Age" - "Nature Takes Its Course" - "Making the Invisible Visible" - "Contemporary Sculpture Group" - "Stainless Steel" - "Contemporary Bronze" - Sherwood Country Club "Contemporary Art Group", Malibu, CA - Regency Club, Westwood California "Our Lives in Art" - The Art Art Project Gallery (pop up) at Westfield Topanga Mall, contemporary art and sculpture revolving exhibitions. - Anderson Gallery, Westwood, CA "Contemporary Russian Art", Los Angeles-St. Petersburg sister cities diplomatic initiative. - Participated in A.I.M. (Art In Motion) VI "Technological Pervasions" at Armory Center for the Arts - Temporary Space LA Video Installation, "Media, Then and Now" "The Graphic Poster Installation 1970-1990 - MRG Gallery, Sherman Oaks, CA "Contemporary Noir" "Cats juxtaposed" - Praxis Film Works, North Hollywood, CA "Site One" 1 - SIR Studios, Hollywood, CA 1 "Contemporary Art Exhibiting Program" Professional/Community Partnerships Huckleberry Fund at the Children's Hospital of Los Angeles, Executive Committee (past) California Institute of the Arts Alumni Board of Directors, Executive Committee (past) The United Nations for Bosnia Relief Art Auction, Hilton Hotel, Beverly Hills, CA The San Fernando Valley Community Arts Project Auction and Studio Tours Metropolitan Transportation Authority Los Angeles (MTA) Art Panels, Orange Line - Selection Panel Warner Center Association, Woodland Hills, CA Department of Cultural Affairs Los Angeles, PublicArt Committee Woodland Hills Chamber of Commerce Warner Center Master Plan Oversight Committee, PublicArt II I Awards & Recognition "Charlie Award", Best Visual Arts - Hollywood Arts Council for the Directors Guild of America Contemporary Exhibitions Certificate of Appreciation, The Democratic National Committee Merit of Honor, City of Thousand Oaks CulturalArts, CivicArts Plaza Contemporary Arts Exhibiions Certificate of Recognition, City of Los Angeles, Sculpture at the Plaza "Nature Takes Its Course" Certificate of Recognition, City of Los Angeles, Sculpture at the Plaza "Stainless Steel" Certificate of Recognition, California Legislative Assembly, Office of Assemblyman, 37th District Business Owners and Managers Association International (SOMA) "Toby Awards Competition" Building of the Year, Sculpture at the Plaza Gardens Lifetime Junior Member, "City of Hope" Boys and Girls Club of the West San Fernando Valley, Fundraising Art Auction Children of the World Fundraising Art Auction, Santa Monica, CA Grand Opening Orange Line Community Celebration Co-Hosted at the Sculpture at the Plaza Gardens, "Making the Invisible Visible", The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) Warner Center transit hub destination, Woodland Hills, CA Highlighted Achievements The establishment of "The Art Speaks for Itself" at the Directors' Guild of America. Designed and created a permanent ongoing revolving contemporary art exhibition program. Responsible for the multipurpose modular installation and lighting design. Creation and placement of revolving exhibition panels. Contemporary art series I-XX featuring over ioo painters and photographers. The establishment of the "Contemporary Sculpture Garden" at the Los Angeles Department of Cultural Affairs Municipal Art Gallery at Barnsdall Park and the Frank Lloyd Wright "Hollyhock House" gardens, Hollywood, CA, City of Los Angeles, Department of Recreation and Parks. The establishment of the "Sculpture at the Plaza Gardens" Woodland Hills, CA (Warner Center). A 2-acre dedicated monumental sculpture site of revolving exhibitions featuring California's leading sculpture artists. Interior Gallery free standing, pedestal and work under plexi. Installation and video time-based projections. Educational Highlights California Institute of the Arts film school, selected studies T.A. (Teacher's Assistant) BFA Program ! "Narrative Film and the French New Wave" "Cinema of British Social Realism" "Italian Neorealism" T.A. MFA Program "Comparative Narrative, the Modern Cinema Aesthetic" Jeff Phillips I Knowledge of critical theory and history of world cinema, including European, Japanese, Chinese, African, and Russian. Knowledge of American underground experimental cinema. Knowledge of the Hollywood Studio system and its development, 1920 to present, including Film Noir, the Western, Screwball Comedy, Historic Epic and the American Musical. Comprehensive knowledge of the history of the Academy Awards. Attended Academy Awards, Shrine Auditorium, 2000. Attended numerous motion picture industry events involving branches or affiliated industries and guilds. Attended SMPTE (Society of Motion Picture & Television Engineers), LA Convention Center. Martin Bregman Productions, Universal Pictures (internship), script analyzer Kings Road Productions (internship), international sales SC Entertainment, development and acquisitions -Attended numerous acquisition screenings as well as reviewed packages and scripts. Motion Picture Technical Experience Kaleidoscope Films, assistant editor and sound engineer. Modern Film Effects, optical expediter. Praxis Film Works (at Industrial Light and Magic, ILM), visual effects department, "Star Wars" Theatrical Experience California Institute of the Arts, selected undergraduate ensemble playwright/theatre school, "The After Birth Trilogy", CalArts Modular Theatre Playwright, "Stage with Two Faces, The American Absurd", Evergreen Theatre, Hollywood, CA. Mixed media lighting and projections "Turquoise Bird Light Show", Venice, CA. "San Francisco Mime Troupe" staging, set design and construction crew, Venice, CA. Line Produced "Metropolis" Grand Opera Opening Night Gala, LA Art Biennial, Bergamot Station, Santa Monica, CA Public Engagement Experiences Assistant press secretary/advance team 1988, California Presidential Primary, Jesse Jackson Campaign. Advancement/fundraising 2000 California Presidential Primary, Democratic Convention, Los Angeles, CA Advancement/fundraising 2004 California Presidential Primary, "Art Auction", Santa Monica, CA Advancement/fundraising 2004 California Senatorial Campaign, "Art Auction" Santa Monica, CA Economic Alliance of the San Fernando Valley, Livable Communities Committee International Museum Initiative Presentation, Sherman Oaks, CA Jeff Phillips i Publications Los Angeles Times C- Suite Quarterly Magazine Venice Los Angeles Arts Los Angeles Visitors Magazine Molly Barnes, live interviews on local FM Radio Los Angeles Business Journal Los Angeles Daily News Art Scene Magazine International Sculpture Magazine Ventura Boulevard Magazine California Institute of the Art s Class Notes Ventura County Star Directors' Guild of America, Numerous occasions i Professional Affiliations The Museum of Latin American Art College Art Association American Alliance of Museums Jack Rutberg Fine Arts California African American Museum David Hockney Studios Association of Academic Museums and Galleries Mixografia International Sculpture Center (ISC) Eli Broad Foundation The Los Angeles Museum Marketing Roundtable L.A. Louver Gallery California Institute of the Arts Alumni Association The Palm Springs Art Museum The Ronald Reagan Presidential Library Awards & Recognition "Charlie Award", Best Visual Arts - Hollywood Arts Council for the Directors Guild of America Contemporary Exhibitions Merit of Honor, City of Thousand Oaks Cultural Arts, CivicArts Plaza Contemporary Arts Exhibiions Certificate of Recognition, City of LosAngeles, Sculpture at the Plaza "Nature Takes Its Course" Certificate of Recognition, City of Los Angeles, Sculpture at the Plaza "Stainless Steel" Certificate of Recognition, California Legislative Assembly, Office of Assemblyman, 37th District Business Owners and Managers Association International (BOMA) "Toby Awards Competition" Building of the Year, Sculpture at the Plaza Gardens Lifetime Junior Member, "City of Hope" Boys and Girls Club of the West San Fernando Valley, Fundraising Art Auction Children of the World Fundraising Art Auction, Santa Monica, CA I' h ' Master Class MFA Program "Directing Techniques for the Narrative" Brecht Studies "Theatre, Then & Now" The Mise-En-Scene/MFA Program "Cinematography/Composition In Depth" BFA California Institute of the Arts Film School MFA California Institute of the Arts Film School UCLA Extension Playwriting Program, Westwood, CA Valley Community College Media School, Van Nuys, CA I ~ i Jeff Phillips I f _ Selected Curated Exhibitions by Jeff Phillips Barsdall Art Park Sculpture Garden Michael Todd "Bronze & Steel" Peter Shire Paul Chilkov Barnsdall Art Park Theatre Gallery Wayne Healy "Presence of the Past" Roberto Delgado "4 Dimensions" Dianne Buckler "Contemporary Masters" Paul Botello Patti Heid Helen Garber "Civil Wrongs to Civil Rights" Miles Regis "Light Years" Richard Rogg I "Busy Canvas" Yossi Govrin Randye San del Robert Williams Anthony Ausgang Doug.Webb Guillermo Bert California Contemporary Sculpture Museum The Sculpture at the Plaza Gardens Paul Lindhard "The New Stone Age" Rude Calderone Ramone Byrne David Middlebrook "Nature Takes Its Course" Michael Todd Hy Farber Paul Chilkov "Making the Invisible Visible" Steven Simon "Stainless Steel" Peter Shire "Sculpture P" Betty Gold Bret Price John G Luebtow Conrad N. Hilton Foundation "Visionary Landscapes" Brad Howe Constance Mallinson Don Farber Michael Knowlton Pacific Design Center Lita Albuquerque i William Rolland Gallery of Fine Art "Highlights and Selections" 19th and 20th century bronze sculptures, oils, and watercolors "Gotta Dance" Original vintage movie poster artwork "Sprezzatura" Senior Art Show "Resonating Images" Peggy Bacon Lorser Feitelson George Bellows William Gropper Thomas Hart Benton George Grosz John Steuart Curry Kathe Kollwitz Max Weber "Resonating Images II" Ernie Barnes DJ Hall Sandell Birk David Hockney Fernando Botero Chuck Close Rebecca Campbell Larry Rivers Andy Warhol Ruth Weisberg "Resonating Images III" F. Scott Hess Ruth Grace Jervis Gegam Kacherian Ron English Odd Nerdrum Billy Norrby "Western Salon" Selections of American Western Art from The Ronald Reagan Presidential Library "The Child Within: Innocence and Anxiety in John Baldessari Dennis Hopper Contemporary Art" Billy Al Bengston Mike Kelley Tony Berlant Andy Moses Co-Curated with Dale Chihuly Ed Moses Maurice Tuchman Guy Dill Mark Ryden Frank Gehry Hiro Yamagata The Chase Foundation Robert Graham Carl Ostendarp R.B. Kitaj Peter Alexander Directors' Guild of America . "The Art Speaks for Itself' East Los Street David Botello Scapers Wayne Healey I through VX 1990-1995 Muralist 15,000 feet Contemporary Art exhibition space Eva Cockcroft Ute Gruenwald Trevor Norris Christof Kohlhofer Carlos Perez Paz Cohen "Viena Succession" 1991 Franz Pichler Jochen Traar Werner Wurtinger "KLSX Classic Rock Art Show" Elton John John Lennon Auction AmFAR Jerry Garcia Bob Dylan David Bowie Henry Diltz Ron Wood Bob Crewe Council Business Meeting January, 15 2019 Agenda Item Appointment of Cat Gould to the Tree Commission From Melissa Huhtala City Recorder Contact Melissa.huhtalana.ashland.or.us 541-488-5703 SUMMARY Confirm Mayor's appointment of Cat Gould to the Tree Commission. POLICIES, PLANS & GOALS SUPPORTED Ashland Municipal Code (AMC) Chapter 2.19. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION N/A BACKGROUND AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION This is confirmation by the City Council of the Mayor's appointment to the Tree Commission. FISCAL IMPACTS N/A STAFF RECOMMENDATION N/A ACTIONS, OPTIONS & POTENTIAL MOTIONS I move to approve the appointment of Cat Gould to the Tree Commission with a term expiring April 30, 2022. REFERENCES & ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1: Application Page 1 of 1 CITY OF ASHLAND CITY OF ASHLAND APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO CITY COMMISSION/COMMITTEE Please type or print answers to the following questions and submit to the City Recorder at City Hall, 20 E Main Street, or email melissa.huhtala@ashland.or.us. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact the City Recorder at (541) 488-5307. Attach additional sheets if necessary. Cat Gould Name: Requesting to serve on: Tree Commission (Commission/Committee) Address: 114 Van Ness Ave, Ashland OR 97520 Occupation: Local business owner Personal Phone: 541-512-8887 Work Phone: Email: catgould@gmail.com 1. Education Background What schools have you attended? Southern Oregon University What degrees do you hold? BFA Acting What additional training or education have you had that would apply to this position? 2 terms on the Conservation Commission, local for 19 years. 2. Related Experience What prior work experience have you had that would help you if you were appointed to this position? Work as stage manager has helped me to build communication and collaboration skills Do you feel it would be advantageous for you to have further training in this field, such as attending conferences or seminars? Why? I would like training in Tree health etc if offered, but not necessary i CITY OF ASHLAND 3. Interests Why are you applying for this position? I spend a lot of time walking around Ashland, appreciating the trees, especially the on I'd love to help on this commission from a citizen standpoint. 4. Availability Are you available to attend special meetings, in addition to the regularly scheduled meetings? Do you prefer day or evening meetings? Find out if the meeting times for each commission fits your schedule by either going to our City calendar or Commission/Committee pages at ashland.or.us. Yes, Day is better for me. 5. Additional Information How long have you lived in this community? 19 years Please use the space below to summarize any additional qualifications you have for this position. I have great communication skills, collaboration, coordinating. Open minded and practio I care deeply about the health of trees in the community and our status as Tree city. Cat Gould 11/15/18 Signature Date Council Business Meeting January 15, 2019 Agenda Item Letter of Support for Rogue Valley Transportation District (RVTD) Grant From Scott Fleury PE Deputy Public Works Director Contact scott.fleuryCa.ashland.or.us 541-552-2412 SUMMARY Before the Council is a letter of support for an Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) Statewide Transportation Improvement Fund (STIF) discretionary program grant to be prepared and submitted by the Rogue Valley Transit District (RVTD) for a two-year demand response micro transit pilot project within the City of Ashland. The City's Transportation Commission (TC) supports the grant application and recommends the City Council provide a letter of support (see attachment) for RVTD's grant request. POLICIES, PLANS & GOALS SUPPORTED Climate Energy Action Plan-Urban Form, Land Use + Transportation: ULT-1-1. Coordinate with neighboring local governments to promote use of transit, carpooling, and car- sharing. ULT-1-2. Work with RVTD to implement climate-friendly transit. ULT-1-3. Establish policies to support development near transit hubs without displacing disadvantaged populations. ULT-14. Evaluate feasibility of expanded local transit options. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION The Council previously awarded a Transit Feasibility Study contract to Nelson Nygaard at the February 20. 2018 Business meetin¢. The Feasibility Study was meant to develop a set of flexible strategies with respect to improving transit within the City of Ashland. The requested letter of support for RVTD supports and compliments early findings and recommendations from the Study. Staff and Nelson Nygaard will bring the full Transit Feasibility Study and supporting documentation before the Council at a future date. BACKGROUND AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Since award of the contract for the Transit Feasibility Study in February 2018 to Nelson Nygaard, the project team has worked to develop two technical memorandums and an executive summary with respect to potential transit enhancements within and to the City. The study has developed a list of flexible strategies for improving transit that include fixed route services (intra-city and inter-city), demand response services within the City, propulsion technologies and infrastructure capital improvements to support accessibility to transit and help to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. In addition to the City performing a transit feasibility study, RVTD is currently developing a 2040 Transit Master Plan. RVTD staff are a part of the City's Transit Feasibility Study Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), and City staff in return are working with RVTD on their master plan as part of their TAC. Paige West, RVTD's Planning and Strategic Programs Manager, presented background information and discussed funding sources and options for region-wide transit projects at the City's TC meeting in November 2018. Page 1 of 2 CITY OF ASHLAND A follow up TC meeting occurred in December 2018 with Nelson Nygaard presenting the final technical memorandum documents for the Feasibility Study. The Commission discussed the documents and potential grant funding opportunities through RVTD to support enhanced transit within the City. With the passing of House Bill 2017 "Keep Oregon Moving," an increase in dedicated transit funding through a payroll tax is available for local transit district operators. One source of available funding is through a discretionary competitive grant program for transit enhancement projects. RVTD has been supportive of potential transit enhancements within the City and in working with Nelson Nygaard and the Transportation Commission. Two potential projects for discretionary grant funding were presented to the TC to gain a recommendation for a grant application in 2019. The first potential project was a Route 10 express bus that would have limited stops between Medford and Southern Oregon University and most likely run on interstate 5. The second potential project was an intra-city demand response pilot program that would utilize four ADA accessible Ford Transit Hybrid vans. The demand response program would operate during normal RVTD hours and citizens would be able to reserve a ride 30 minutes in advance with a phone call, website reservation or phone application-based reservation. The specialty software would group trips whenever possible. RVTD would be able to track ridership and destination data from the program and this information could be used to move towards fixed route circulation or continued/expanded use of the demand response program. After discussion, the TC recommended the Council provide a letter of support for an RVTD discretionary grant application for the on demand micro-transit pilot program. Motion: Graf moved for the Transportation Commission to recommend the City Council provide a letter of support for the RVTD Demand Response Micro-transit demonstration project. Borgerson seconded. All ayes. Motion passed. The Commission also strongly recommended the use of plug-in hybrids if RVTD was awarded the grant. FISCAL IMPACTS The main fiscal impact associated with the grant application are staff soft costs to support RTVD. RVTD would manage and implement the project if a grant was received. RVTD did request at the December 20, 2018 Transportation Commission meeting, that if successful with the grant application that City staff assist with marketing the pilot project which will require additional soft match staff time. Staff anticipates not more than 60 hours a year and has the capacity to dedicate time in support of this marketing and outreach effort. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends Council provide a letter of support for RVTD's grant application. ACTIONS. OPTIONS & POTENTIAL MOTIONS I move to approve the Mayor sign a letter of support for RVTD's discretionary grant application for a two-year demand response micro-transit pilot project using hybrid vans. The alternative is to do nothing and not provide a letter of support at this time to RVTD. REFERENCES & ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1: Draft Letter of Support Attachment 2: RVTD Grant fact sheet Page 2 of 2 CITY OF ASHLAND I CITY OF ASHLAND 15 201 January 9 Oregon Transportation Commission 355 Capitol Street NE, MS #11 Salem, OR 97301-3871 Oregon Transportation Commissioners, I am writing in support of Rogue Valley Transit District's (RVTD) grant application for Oregon Department of Transportation Statewide Transportation Improvement Fund discretionary funding of an on demand micro-transit pilot project using Ford Transit hybrid vans within the City of Ashland. The City of Ashland has developed its own transit feasibility study and this micro-transit project is a highly feasible transit enhancement for the City that will meet the needs of citizens and tourists alike. RVTD provides 1.3 million trips annually throughout the Rogue Valley in Southern Oregon, serving the communities of Medford, Ashland, Central Point, Talent, Phoenix, White City, and Jacksonville. Through its service, RVTD aims to provide a viable, quality public transportation option that improves quality of life in the Rogue Valley by reducing traffic, boosting business, and allowing individuals to access jobs, school, and health care. This grant would allow RVTD to enhance service in Ashland as a two-year pilot project. Thank you for your consideration of this important grant application. Sincerely, John Stromberg Mayor City of Ashland I ~--,0NSP0Rr47Zq O N Ashland Demand Response MicroTransit Demonstration Project RVTD in partnership with the City of Ashland will provide a flexible curb to curb demand response service that connects to regional routes. On demand scheduling, similar to taxi and ride-hailing services, uses a sophisticated trip reservation system available by phone, website or smartphone. Passengers will share rides to reduce cost and improve efficiency. Uses wheelchair equipped Ford Transit Hybrid Vans. • Service available Monday through Saturday between 6:00am and 8:00pm. • Key destinations include downtown Ashland, Ashland Hospital, Science works, Mountain Meadows and several neighborhoods above and below the boulevard. • Estimated annual route ridership of 9,390. • Uses new MicroTransit fleet with hybrid technology. • Ongoing funds would be provided by STIF funds if sufficiently available. I '*.~y CITY OF ASHLAND BOUNDARY . y 7S '•7 ~i gyp, t L' / 1 t :X Z_ 3'r ..rte, end'lL._ r-f / f ~ rse `7, _ d 0 A Y y ~'r ucinslrt u.+.. Fxflc..a ~~4.udr tl BUDGET Total Operating Cost $ 380,000 Administration $ 45,000 Purchase 3 Ford Transit Hybrid Vans $ 210,000 Marketing and Vehicle Wraps $ 13,500 Onboard Eqpt. And Reservation Software $ 35,000 Match (Federal CMAQGrant) $(110,000) TOTAL STIF DISCRETIONARY REQUEST $ 573,500 Council Business Meeting January 15, 2019 Agenda Item 188 Garfield Street Appeal - Adoption of Findings From Bill Molnar Director of Community Development Derek Severson Senior Planner Contact Bill.molnarC@ashland.or.us (541) 552-2042 Derek.severson(aashland.or.us 541) 552-2040 SUMMARY Adoption of findings to formalize the Council's decision on the 188 Garfield Street appeal. POLICIES. PLANS & GOALS SUPPORTED N/A. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION At the December 18, 2018 meeting, the Council considered an appeal of the Planning Commission's approval a 72-unit apartment project at 188 Garfield Street. The Council rejected the appeal on all 12 issues raised and reaffirmed the Planning Commission's approval. BACKGROUND AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION The attached findings formalize the Council's decision in terms of the procedural handling of the appeal hearing, address the 12 appeal issues, and adopt the Planning Commission's approved findings for the original land use decision as an attachment. FISCAL IMPACTS There are no direct fiscal impacts related to the appeal of the planning action related to 188 Garfield Street. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Planning staff recommends that the Council adopt the findings as presented. ACTIONS. OPTIONS & POTENTIAL MOTIONS 1) I move to adopt the findings for the appeal PA-APPEAL-2018-00005 as presented. 2) [move to adopt the findings for the appeal PA-APPEAL-2018-00005 with the following amendments [explain proposed amendments to findings]. REFERENCES & ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1: DRAFT Findings for PA-APPEAL-2018-00005 for Council Adoption Attachment 2: November 13, 2018 Planning Commission Findings for PA-T2-2018-00003 to be adopted as Exhibit A of the Council findings Page 1 of I CITY OF ASHLAND BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL January 15, 2019 IN THE MATTER OF PLANNING ACTION PA-APPEAL-2018-00005, AN APPEAL ) TO THE ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S ) APPROVAL OF PLANNING ACTION PA-T2-2018-00003, A REQUEST FOR ) SITE DESIGN REVIEW APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A 72-UNIT STUDIO ) APARTMENT COMMUNITY LOCATED AT 188 GARFIELD STREET. THE ) APPLICATION ALSO INCLUDES REQUESTS FOR A TREE REMOVAL PERMIT ) TO REMOVE 15 TREES THAT ARE MORE THAN SIX-INCHES IN DIAMETER AT) BREAST HEIGHT (D.B.H.); AN EXCEPTION TO THE SITE DEVELOPMENT AND) DESIGN STANDARDS TO TREAT STORMWATER RUN-OFF IN A COMBI- NATION BIO-SWALES, UNDERGROUND TREATMENT FACILITIES AND DE- ) TENTION PONDS RATHER THAN IN LANDSCAPED PARKING LOT MEDIANS ) AND SWALES: AND FOR EXCEPTIONS TO STREET STANDARDS TO RETAIN ) FINDINGS, THE EXISTING CURBSIDE SIDEWALK SYSTEM ALONG THE FRONTAGES OF ) CONCLUSIONS THE PROPERTY AND FOR THE LOCATION OF THE DRIVEWAY CURBCUT ON) & ORDERS QUINCY STREET, WHICH IS PROPOSED TO BE SHARED WITH THE PROP- ) ERTY TO THE EAST AND WHICH WOULD EXCEED THE MAXIMUM DRIVE- ) WAY CURB CUT WIDTH FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS. ALL OF THE ) PROPOSED UNITS ARE STUDIOS WITH LESS THAN 500 SQUARE FEET IN ) GROSS HABITABLE FLOOR WHICH COUNT AS'/4 OF A UNIT FOR DENSITY ) CALCULATIONS; DENSITY BONUSES ARE REQUESTED FOR CONSERVATION) HOUSING, OUTDOOR RECREATION SPACE AND MAJOR RECREATION FACIL-) ITIES. ) OWNER/APPLICANT: Spartan Ashland Rivergate Real Estate ) Rogue Planning & Development Services ) APPELLANTS: Devin Huseby and Michael Hitsky ) RECITALS: 1) Tax lot #2100 of Map 39 lE 10 CB is located at 188 Garfield Street within the R-3 High Density Multi-Family Residential zoning district. 2) The applicant is requesting Site Design Review approval to construct a 72-unit studio apartment community ("The MidTown Lofts") for the properties located at 188 Garfield Street. All of the proposed units are studio units that are less than 500 square feet in gross habitable floor area and each counts as 3/4 of a unit for purposes of density calculation; density bonuses are requested for conservation housing, outdoor recreation space and major recreation facilities. The application also includes requests for a Tree Removal Permit to remove 15 trees that are more than six-inches in diameter at breast height (d.b.h.); an Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards to treat stormwater run-off in a combination of bio-swales, underground treatment facilities and detentions PA-APPEAL-2018-00005 Council Findings January 15, 2019 Page 1 ponds rather than in landscaped parking lot medians and swales; and for Exceptions to Street Standards to retain the existing curbside sidewalk system along the frontage of the property and for the location of the driveway curb cut on Quincy Street, which is proposed to be shared with the property to the east and which would exceed the maximum driveway curb cut width for residential developments. 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 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. 4) The approval criteria for'an Exception to Street Standards are described in AMC 18.4.6.020.B.1 as follows: a. There is demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements of this chapter due to a unique or unusual aspect of the site or proposed use of the site. b. The exception will result in equal orsuperior transportation facilities and connectivity considering the following factors where applicable. i. For transit facilities and related improvements, access, wait time, and ride experience. ii. For bicycle facilities, feeling of safety, quality of experience (i.e., comfort level of bicycling along the roadway), and frequency of conflicts with vehicle cross traffic. PA-APPEAL-2018-00005 Council Findings January 15, 2019 Page 2 iii. For pedestrian facilities, feeling of safety, quality of experience (i.e., comfort level of walking along roadway), and ability to safety and efficiency crossing roadway. C. The exception is the minimum necessary to alleviate the difficulty. d. The exception is consistent with the Purpose and Intent of the Street Standards in subsection 18.4.6.040.A. 5) The approval criteria for a Tree Removal Permit are described in AMC 18.5.7.040.B as follows: 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 altemative 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 PA-APPEAL-2018-00005 Council Findings January 15, 2019 Page 3 I I 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 October 9, 2018 at which time testimony was received and exhibits were presented. Prior to the closing of the hearing, participants requested that the hearing or record remain open pursuant to ORS 197.763(6) to present additional evidence or argument. The Planning Commission continued the hearing to 7:00 p.m. on October 23, 2018 at the City Council Chambers, at which time testimony was again received and exhibits were presented. Subsequent to the closing of the hearing, the Planning Commission approved the application subject to conditions pertaining to the appropriate development of the site. Findings, Conclusions and Orders were subsequently adopted by the Planning Commission on November 13, 2018 and mailed to parties on November 14, 2018. 7) This matter came before the City Council as an appeal on the record pursuant to Ashland Municipal Code (AMC) 18.5.1.060.1. Subsequent to the mailing of the Planning Commission's adopted findings, an appeal was timely filed by Devin Huseby and Michael Hitsky, neighbors of the project who received required notice of the initial evidentiary hearing and participated in the hearing process by providing both oral and written testimony. AMC 18.5.1.060.I.2.c requires that each appeal set forth 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. The 12 clearly and distinctly identified grounds for appeal in this case were: 1) The Planning Commission erred in approving the conservation housing density bonus; 2) The Planning Commission erred in approving the outdoor recreation space density bonus; 3) The Planning Commission erred in approving the major recreational facility density bonus; 4) The Planning Commission erred in approving the alternative bicycle parking solution proposed by the applicant; 5) The Planning Commission erred in failing to address evidence in the record regarding the inadequacy of existing water and sewer facilities and failed to plan to rectify those deficiencies; 6) The Planning Commission erred in calculating each of the 72 units as .75 units; 7) The Planning Commission erred in granting the on-street parking credits and by approving a project with insufficient off-street parking; 8) The Planning Commission erred in approving a driveway location on Quincy Street in exception to the street standards; 9) The content of the notice of public hearing was insufficient in not including the name and phone number of a City contact person and in failing to cite the applicable criteria and citations for decision; 10) The Planning Commission erred in approving an alternative to the PA-APPEAL-2018-00005 Council Findings January 15, 2019 / Page 4 landscaped medians and swales; 11) The Planning Commission erred procedurally and failed to provide due process by admitting new evidence during the applicant's rebuttal without providing other parties an opportunity to respond and in making findings which contradict the conditions of approval with regard to unit sizes, density bonuses and open and recreation space; 12) The City erred procedurally and failed to provide due process by failing to provide the parties with the staff report and initial recommendations at least seven days before the initial public hearing, and in not making the full record available publicly. 8) The City Council, following proper public notice, held a public hearing on December 18, 2018 at which time oral arguments were presented. Subsequent to the closing of the hearing, the City Council rejected the appeal on all 12 grounds, upheld the Planning Commission's original decision and approved the application. Now, therefore, the City Council 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" Hearing Minutes, Notices, Miscellaneous Exhibits lettered with an "M" SECTION 2. CONCLUSORY FINDINGS 2.1 The City Council finds that it has received all information necessary to make a decision based on the staff reports, public hearing testimony and the exhibits contained within the whole record. 2.2 The City Council finds that the Planning Commission was correct in determining that the proposal for Site Design Review approval met all applicable criteria for Site Design Review approval described in AMC section 18.5.2.050; that the proposal for an Exception to Street Standards with regard to the curbside sidewalks met all applicable criteria for an Exception described in AMC section 18.4.6.020.B.1; and that the proposal for a Tree Removal Permit to remove five trees met all applicable criteria for Tree Removal described in AMC section 18.5.7.040.B. The Council further finds that the Planning Commission erred in addressing the request for an Exception to Street Design Standard with regard to the Quincy Street driveway, and should have instead PA-APPEAL-2018-00005 Council Findings January 15, 2019 Page 5 I determined that the approved "Option B" for treatment of the Quincy Street driveway was an exempt alteration of a non-conforming development and did not require an Exception. The record shows that the nonconforming driveway curb cut location is pre-existing and cannot be relocated by the applicant because it serves an adjacent parcel not belonging to the applicant. The Council interprets AMC section 18.1.4.040 to allow the applicant to retain the existing driveway curb cut location as a nonconforming development, and the curb cut location will not be enlarged to further increase the nonconformity (i.e., bring it closer to other nearby curb cuts). The Planning Commission's adopted findings for Planning Action #PA-T2-2018-00002 are hereby adopted as Exhibit A to these findings, with the recognition that the initially-requested Exception to Street Standards with regard to the Quincy Street driveway in 2.4 was rejected by the Planning Commission and the alternative "Option B" approved by the Commission was an exempt alteration of a non-conforming development and did not require an Exception. 2.3 The Council finds that the proposed development of the 72 apartments is supported by the Comprehensive Plan: Element VI -Housing. Goal 6.10 of the Housing Element is "Ensure a variety of dwelling types and provide housing opportunities for the total cross-section of Ashland's population, consistent with preserving the character and appearance of the city." The Council further finds that the proposed development is supported by 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 within current boundaries. RPS included a commitment to achieving Regional Transportation Plan benchmarks for the number of new dwelling units in mixed-use/pedestrian friendly areas. The Council further finds that the proposed development is a documented "Needed Housing" type in the Housing Needs Analysis: A Technical Supporting Document to the Housing Element of the City of Ashland Comprehensive Plan. The Housing Needs Analysis (HNA) notes that "the housing types most needed, including multi family rentals and government assisted housing are not being developed in accordance with needs." The HNA advises that the City develop strategies to encourage more multi-family housing. 2.4 Appeal Issue #1 is that the Planning Commission erred in approving the Conservation Housing density bonus. The appellants assert that there is not substantial evidence in the record to support the Conservation Housing density bonus, and that by granting the bonus without such evidence and deferring the requirement to additional evidence provided to the Building Division, the Commission abdicated their duty and granted authority to the Building Division in excess of its jurisdiction. In considering this issue the City Council first finds that, counter to the appellants' assertions the granting of a density bonus is not an Exception. AMC 18.2.5.080.F.3.a provides for a Conservation Housing density bonus as follows: "The maximum bonus for conservation housing is 15 percent. One PA-APPEAL-2018-00005 Council Findings January 15, 2019 Page 6 hundred percent of the homes or residential units approved for development, after bonus point calculations, shall meet the minimum requirements for certification as an Earth Advantage home, as approved by the Conservation Division under the City's Earth Advantage program as adopted by resolution 2006-6." Resolution #2006-6 provides that the City adopts Earth Advantage Standards as the standards for the City's program for purposes of calculating the conservation housing density bonus. The City Council finds that Earth Advantage is a third-party home certification program which seeks more sustainable, energy efficient homes. Compliance in design and construction is certified by a third-party inspector, and city staff review is limited to verifying that the building plans and point sheets have been provided to Earth Advantage for review. City staff do not conduct discretionary review for Earth Advantage compliance, and evidence of certification by an Earth Advantage third- party inspector is required prior to occupancy approval. The City Council further finds that the application materials provided note that, "The new, energy efficient units are proposed to be developed to Earth Advantage Multi-Family Standards. High efficiency HVAC systems, Low E windows and insulation with high R values will be provided. The proposed thermal envelopes will provide for more comfortable and stable room temperatures. LED lighting will be utilized both interior and throughout the property to further reduce energy consumption (Applicant's Amended Findings 8/23/18, pg. 4 of 22)." "All of the units are proposed to have an energy efficient envelope. The units are proposed to have LED and low electricity usage appliances. All of the proposed units will comply with Earth Advantage Multi-Family Standards (Applicant's Amended Findings 8/23/18, pg. 7 of 22)." "All of the units are proposed to have an energy efficient envelope. The units are proposed to have LED and low electric usage appliances. All of the proposed units will comply with Earth Advantage and Energy Star Requirements for new construction (Applicant's Amended Findings 8/23/18, pg. 10 of 22)." "Energy Usage: All of the units within the proposed development will be constructed to the Earth Advantage and Energy Star Standards. A detailed analysis of the actual energy consumption has not been determined but due to the high energy standards of the two programs the units will require substantially less energy to operate than typical construction. The units will be high performance, using the best practices and innovative construction technologies to gain efficiency in design, energy systems and materials for increased energy efficiency, superior indoor air quality, lower water usage and responsible use of natural resources (Applicant's Amended Findings 8/23/18, pg. 12 of 22)." "All of the units are proposed to have an energy efficient envelope. The units are proposed to have LED and low electric usage appliances. All of the proposed units will comply with Earth Advantage and Energy Star Requirements for new construction. Specifically, points from the Earth Advantage@ Multifamily Homes 2012 Standard Measures Resource Guide (Modified) will be implemented on site. Due to the proximity to transit, community services, retail, schools; the small footprints, the amount of proposed open space areas, low water consuming landscaping, solar orientation, etc. the proposal will greatly exceed the minimum standards for compliance. This will be demonstrated on the building permit submittals (Applicant's Written Submittal 10/16/18, pg. 2 of 20)." PA-APPEAL-2018-00005 Council Findings January 15, 2019 Page 7 The Council further finds that during the applicant's October 91" hearing testimony, it was indicated that the project team had met with a representative of Earth Advantage, and that a points list based on Earth Advantage specifications would be provided with the building permit submittals as required to demonstrate compliance (Ashland Planning Commission Minutes 10/9/2018, pg. 8 of 10). The City Council also finds that the Planning Commission made the finding that, "With respect to the conservation housing bonus, the Planning Commission finds that conservation housing is feasible and can be documented at building permit submittal. (Planning Commission Findings 11/13/2018, page 4)." The Planning Commission's condition #5m required that the building permit submittals include, "Demonstrations that the conservation housing, additional recreation space and major recreational facilities requirements are satisfied to meet the requirements for the requested density bonuses. (Planning Commission Findings 11/13/2018, page 13)." Condition #7h required that prior to project approval or the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, "The applicant shall provide evidence of Earth Advantage certifications necessary to satisfy the requirements for the conservation housing density bonus requested (Planning Commission Findings 11/13/2018, page 14)." The City Council concludes that the Planning Commission determined based on evidence in the record that it was feasible to obtain the required third-party Earth Advantage® certification as required for the Conservation Housing density bonus, and included conditions to require evidence that the applicant was pursuing certification with the submittal of a building permit and that certification had been obtained prior to final occupancy. The Council further concludes that the Commission relied on evidence within the record and expert testimony that compliance at the building permit phase was feasible and typical and that the appellants had provided no evidence that compliance would not be feasible. The City Council rejects Appeal Issue #1. 2.5 Appeal Issue #2 is that the Planning Commission erred in approving the Outdoor Recreation Space Density Bonus. AMC 18.2.5.080.F.3.b provides for a density bonus for "Outdoor Recreation Space" as follows: "The maximum bonus for provision of outdoor recreation space above minimum requirement established by this ordinance is ten percent. The purpose of the density bonus for outdoor recreational space is to permit areas that could otherwise be developed as a recreational amenity. It is not the purpose of this provision to permit density bonuses for incidental open spaces that have no realistic use by project residents on a day-to-day basis. One percent increased density bonus for each percent of the project dedicated to outdoor recreation space beyond the minimum requirement of this ordinance. " The City Council finds that separate from any density bonus, there is a minimum "Open Space" requirement for Residential Developments in the Building Placement, Orientation and Design Standards chapter (AMC 18.4.2) which is detailed as follows in AMC 18.4.2.030: H. Open Space. Residential developments that are subject to the provisions of this chapter shall conform to all of the following standards. PA-APPEAL-2018-00005 Council Findings January 15, 2019 Page 8 1. Recreation Area. An area equal to at least eight percent of the lot area shall be dedicated to open space for recreational use by the tenants of the development. 2. Sur acin . Areas covered by shrubs, bark mulch, and other ground covers that do not provide suitable surface for human use may not be counted towards this requirement. 3. Decks and Patios. Decks, patios, and similar areas are eligible for open space. 4. Play Areas. Play areas for children are required for projects of greater than 20 units that are designed to include families. Play areas are eligible for open space. The Council further finds that the Definitions chapter in AMC 18.6.1.030 defines "Open Space" as, "A common area designated on the final plans of the development, permanently set aside for the common use of the residents of the development. Open space area is landscaped and/or left with a natural vegetation cover, and does not include thoroughfares, parking areas, or improvements other than recreational facilities." The Council finds that "Outdoor Recreation Space" is not defined in the ordinance. The Council finds that the appellants argue that the record and decision are entirely unclear as to what parts of the project are counted for the outdoor recreation space bonus except for the private patios and deck areas, which were improperly counted as outdoor recreation space. The appellants further argue that other areas including incidental open space and the space dedicated to the purported major recreational facility were improperly counted, and that by granting the density bonus, which they again incorrectly describe as an Exception, without substantial evidence and then deferring the requirement to review by Building and Planning staff the Commission abdicated their duty and granted authority to the staff being their jurisdiction. The City Council finds that the applicant's request explains (Applicant's Written Submittal 10/16/18, pg. 2-3 of 20): "The required eight percent outdoor recreation space for a 91,474 square foot parcel is 7,318 square feet. In order to obtain an outdoor recreation area credit an additional 9,147 square feet in area for outdoor recreation is required (16, 465.32 square feet). " "The proposed outdoor recreation space for the property is a combination of semi private patios and balconies and the larger open space with lawn areas, large patio area with table and chairs, community BBQs and fire pit and a shade structure. There are substantial lawn areas that are also outdoor recreation areas. " "The total lot area devoted to outdoor recreation area for the MidTown Lofts `community' is 21,643 square feet in area or 23.6 percent. " "Each unit also has a semi private outdoor space that is either a deck or a patio area which accounts for 6,624 square feet. The courtyard and lawn area (evidence by hashed line on AP 1.1.1 attached) 15, 019 square feet. These areas total 21,643 square feet in area of the property devoted to outdoor recreation space. " PA-APPEAL-2018-00005 Council Findings January 15, 2019 Page 9 "To be consistent with Staff and Commission's previous decisions regarding `usable' area of the outdoor recreation area, approximately 15.5 square feet of area from each unit was excluded for entry areas (findings state 5,616 this is the area of the patio excluding the entry area in front of each door). This reduces the total provided area to 20,635 which still exceeds the required area of 16, 465.32 square feet in area. " The City Council finds that the applicant's October 23, 2018 submittals include sheet AP 1.1 "Site Plan w/Areas which illustrates the proposed recreation space including the central courtyard area, patios and lawn area. The Council further finds that the Planning Commission made a finding that, "With respect to the outdoor recreation space bonus, the Planning Commission finds that the bonus provisions do not specifically require outdoor recreation space to meet the "Open Space" definition in 18.6.1.030, so the spaces proposed for patios and decks can comply with this requirement and there is more than sufficient outdoor recreation square footage in the proposal to juste the requested bonus (Planning Commission Findings 11/13/2018, page 4)." The Council further finds that in addition, to insure that final permit submittals would be consistent with the approval, a condition 45m was included to require that the final building permit plans include, "Demonstrations that the conservation housing, additional recreation space and major recreational facilities requirements are satisfied to meet the requirements for the requested density bonuses." The City Council concludes that the Planning Commission correctly found that there was more than sufficient outdoor recreation space square footage to justify the requested bonus. As noted above, the narrative submittal and supporting drawings indicated that a total of 23.6 percent of the site was to be provided in required open space and proposed additional outdoor recreation space where only 18 percent of the project area (eight percent for required open space plus 10 percent for outdoor recreation space to support the requested density bonus) was required. 18 percent equated to 16,465 square feet, while the project plan identifies 20,465 square feet - after excluding the portion of the semi private patios dedicated to the entry path to doorways, which would be unavailable for recreational use - of total project open and recreational space. The project plans show that 15,019 square feet is proposed in broad common areas including courtyard and lawn which easily meet the 8 percent/7,318 square foot minimum open space requirement, and that the remaining 13,147 square feet provides outdoor recreation space, including decks and patios, in areas that could have "otherwise developed" with other types of uses per 18.2.5.080.F.3.b. The City Council rejects Appeal Issue #2, and support the Planning Commission's findings and their determination that semi-private patios and decks, which provide outdoor areas for residents to have a personal barbeque, outdoor seating, or patio garden, can appropriately be considered as outdoor recreation space rather than requiring them to meet the definition of "Open Space." 2.6 Appeal Issue #3 is that the Planning Commission erred in approving the Major Recreational Facility density bonus. AMC 18.2.5.080.F.3.c addresses the "Major Recreational Facilities" density bonus as follows: PA-APPEAL-2018-00005 Council Findings January 15, 2019 Page 10 `The maximum bonus for provision of major recreational facilities is ten percent. Density bonus points shall be awarded for the provision of major recreational facilities, such as tennis courts, swimming pools, playgrounds, or similar facilities. For each one percent of the total project cost devoted to recreational facilities, a six percent density bonus shall be awarded to a maximum of ten percent. Total project cost shall be defined as the estimated sale price or value of each residential unit times the total number of units in the project. Estimated value shall include the total market value for the structure and land. A qualified architect or engineer using current costs of recreational facilities shall estimate the cost of the recreational facility for City review and approval." The City Council finds that the applicant requested a four percent bonus for Major Recreational Facilities. The applicant's October 16, 2018 "Value of Major Recreational Facilities for the Ashland Urban Lofts notes that the total project cost is estimated at $11,775,000 and the one percent of that amount necessary for a six percent bonus would be $117,750. This would equate to a six percent bonus; a four percent bonus would necessitate a major recreational facilities expenditure of $78,500. The qualified architect's estimate indicates that the proposed improvements to the courtyard area will total $164,000 which significantly exceeds the amount necessary for the requested bonus. The Council finds that the appellant suggests that the facilities proposed do not meet the requirements for the bonus because the facilities proposed are not similar to the facilities identified in the code, and the applicant's submittals were contradictory and insufficient, including the financial calculations and estimates used to justify the amount of the bonus sought. The appellant argues that the area for the major recreational facilities appears to have been improperly double counted in support of other/inconsistent purposes. The appellant also asserts that the decision is not supported by substantial evidence, and that by deferring the review of additional evidence to the Building and Planning Division staff, the Commission has abdicated their duty and granted authority to the Building and Planning staff in excess of their jurisdiction. The City Council finds that the Planning Commission made a finding that, "...AMC Section 18.2.5.080.F.3.c allows a density bonus for major recreational facilities in exchange for the applicant providing "tennis courts, swimming pools, playgrounds or similar facilities." The bonus allowed is six percent additional densityfar each one percent of project cost, based on the estimated sale price or market value ofstructures and land, devoted to major recreational facilities. The facility proposed here is identified as a `flexible outdoor activity space... for `lawn'games such as badminton, spike ball, cornhole, croquet, ladder golf, and others. " Also included within the proposed recreation space are afire pit, barbecue kitchen area, and covered seating area. The Planning Commission finds that the facilities proposed are "similar facilities" akin to a playground for the likely adult tenants of the development and that the combination offacilities proposedfor lawn games, fire pit, barbecue, kitchen area and covered seating areas constitute major recreational facilities which will be heavily used by tenants and which will serve to build community within the development. The Commission PA-APPEAL-2018-00005 Council Findings January 15, 2019 Page 11 finds that these facilities qualify for the requested bonus based both on the recreational functionality of the unique combination of facilities proposed far anticipated tenants, and based on the estimated value provided (Planning Commission Findings 11/13/2018, page 5)." The Council further finds that the applicant provided an estimate from project architect Raymond Kistler using current costs of the proposed recreation facilities to estimate the cost of the recreational facility (Applicant's Value of Major Recreational Facilities..., 10/16/2018). The applicants also provided their sheet AP1.1 "Site Plan w/Areas" which illustrates the proposed recreation space and provides associated area calculations. The applicant's hearing presentation included a preliminary courtyard plan and photo-realistic color rendering illustrating the improvements proposed. The City Council concludes that the Planning Commission made the determination that the applicant had proposed facilities for lawn games, a fire pit, barbecue, kitchen area and covered seating areas which constituted major recreational facilities that would likely be heavily used by tenants and which would serve to build community within the development. The Commission found that these facilities qualified for the requested bonus based on the recreational functionality of the unique combination of facilities proposed for anticipated tenants which the Commission determined were similar to an adult playground, and based on the estimated value provided from a qualified architect and thus satisfied the requirements for the density bonus. The City Council rejects Appeal Issue #3. 2.7 Appeal Issue #4 is that the Planning Commission erred in approving the alternative bicycle parking solution proposed by the applicant. The City Council finds that the application explains "one covered bicycle parking space is required for each unit. In order to provide for bicycle security, a hanging bicycle rack for a single bicycle will be provided within each unit except for the two A-Type (ADA accessible) units. The hanging rack has a nook provided for the bike hanger, the A-type units require a larger bathroom and doorways that eliminate the areafor the bike hanger. Outside of the units, in covered areas as stand-alone structures, found near the parking area that parallel Iowa Street, inverted U-racks in groups of six providingfor 12 spaces for visitors, or tenants that chose to park outside of their unit (Applicant's Amended Findings 8/23/2018, pg. 12 of 22)." Exterior rack placement is illustrated on the applicant's Preliminary Landscape Site Plan (Sheet L01, 8/23/2018). The Council finds that the appellants argue that the Commission erred in approving the proposed bicycle parking as the indoor hangers are not an acceptable bicycle parking rack located in an appropriate location as and do not comply with AMC 18.4.3.070.1.2 or 18.4.3.070.J. The Council further finds that AMC 18.4.3.040.C.I requires one sheltered bicycle parking space per studio or one-bedroom unit. AMC 18.4.3.070.1.2 provides that bicycle parking requirements can be met either by providing bicycle racks or lockers outside the main building, underneath an awning or marquee, or in an accessory parking structure; by providing a bicycle storage room, bicycle lockers, PA-APPEAL-2018-00005 Council Findings January 15, 2019 Page 12 or racks inside the building, or by providing bicycle racks on the public right of way, subject to review and approval by the Staff Advisor. Bicycle parking is to be located so that it is visible to and conveniently accessed by cyclists, and promotes security from theft and damage. The Land Use Ordinance provides a number of standards for exterior bicycle parking and for racks, but with regard to interior parking notes only that, "A bicycle parking space located inside of a buildingfor employee bike parking shall be a minimum of six feet long by three feet wide by four feet high (AMC 18.4.3.070.I.7)." The applicant's proposal is for residential units and does not involve employee bike parking. The City Council finds that the Planning Commission made the finding, "that the applicants proposal to provide a bicycle closet with rack in each unit is consistent with the allowance in AMC 18.4.3.070.7 to address bicycle parking by providing `a bicycle storage room, bicycle lockers or racks inside the building.' In addition, the applicants have proposed 12 covered bicycle parking spaces outside in requesting an alternative vehicle parking credit underAMC 18.4.3.060.8.2. The Planning Commission finds that the parking proposed satisfies the parking requirements for the proposed units (Planning Commission Findings 11/13/2018, pg. 6)". The City Council concludes that the Planning Commission correctly found that the proposed bicycle closets with hangers within each unit satisfied the bicycle parking standards, which allow required parking to be provided indoors with "a bicycle storage room, bicycle lockers, or racks inside the building," and that this arrangement accommodates required bicycle parking as allowed under the standards and 'promotes security from theft and damage." The City Council supports these findings and rejects Appeal Issue #4. 2.7 Appeal Issue #5 is that the Planning Commission erred in failing to address evidence in the record regarding the inadequacy of existing water and sewer facilities and failed to plan to rectify those deficiencies. The appellants argue that the Planning Commission erred in failing to address evidence in the record regarding the inadequacy of existing water and sewer facilities and failed to plan to rectify those deficiencies through the proposed development in violation of AMC 18.4.6.070.D. The City Council finds that Appeal issue #5 is limited to water and sewer, which are considered separately from urban storm drainage both in the approval criterion and in the section (18.4.6.070) cited by the appellants in the appeal notice, and as issues raised with urban storm drainage arc outside the scope of the Council's consideration of Appeal Issue #5. The City Council also finds that the applicant's findings note: "Adequate city facilities exist to service the proposed development. " "Water: A water meter serves the property on Garfield Street. There is afire hydrant at the intersection of Garfield Street and Iowa Street. Another fire hydrant is present across Quincy Street from the subject property. Water mains are present in Iowa Street (six-inch main), PA-APPEAL-2018-00005 Council Findings January 15, 2019 Page 13 Garfield Street (four-inch main), and in Quincy Street where there is a four-inch main. A single service for the units, a service for the open space and fire connections are proposed on the north side of the driveway accessing the site from Garfield Street. " "Sanitary Sewer: Sanitary sewer services are present in Iowa Street, Garfield Street and in Quincy Street. Each has a six-inch sanitary sewer main. There is adequate capacity in the lines to service the new units. (Applicant's Amended Findings 8/23/2018, pg. 18 of 22)." The Council further finds that the applicant's sheet C1 includes a Conceptual Grading and Drainage Plan prepared by Marquess & Associates, Inc. which addresses proposed grading, drainage and utilities and which illustrates the proposed existing sanitary sewer and waterlines within the adjacent rights-of-way and the proposed extension of services to serve proposed irrigation and domestic water service meters and hydrant and fire vaults. The Council also finds that the Site Design Review approval criteria in AMC 18.5.2.050.D, address water and sewer facilities as follows: "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." With regard to water and sewer facilities, AMC 18.4.6.070 details the following: 18.4.6.070 Sanitary Sewer and Water Service Improvements. A. Sewers and Water Mains Required. All new development is required to connect to city water and sanitary sewer systems. Sanitary sewer and water system improvements must be installed to serve new development and to connect developments to existing mains, considering the City's adopted facility master plans and applicable standards. "ere streets are required to be stubbed to the edge of the development, sewer and water system improvements, and other utilities, must also be stubbed with the streets, except where alternate alignment(s) are approved by the City Engineer. B. Sewer 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 City Engineer. C. Over-Sizing. The approval authority may require as a condition of 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 cost-sharing methods as provided under state law. D. Inadequate Facilities. Development permits may be restricted or rationed by the City where a deficiency 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, or violations of state or federal standards pertaining to PA-APPEAL-2018-00005 Council Findings January 15, 2019 Page 14 operation of domestic water and sewerage treatment systems. The Council further finds that, with regard to water and sewer facilities, the Planning Commission findings noted: • Water: The application notes that a water meter currently serves the property from Garfield Street, and that there is afire hydrant in place at the intersection of Garfield and Iowa Streets and another is present on the opposite side of Quincy Street. The application further explains that there is a six-inch water main in Iowa Street, a four-inch water main in Garfield Street, and a four-inch water main in Quincy Street. The application proposes to provide a single water service for the proposed units, a service for the open space, and afire connection on the north side of the driveway accessing the site from Garfield Street. • Sewer: The application notes that there are six-inch sewer lines available in Iowa, Garfield and Quincy Streets, and indicates that these lines provide adequate capacity to serve the proposed units (Planning Commission Findings 11/13/2018, pg. 5). The Council finds that the Planning Commission also made the finding that, that the application includes conceptual plans detailing grading, drainage and utilities proposed to serve the project. Conditions have been included to require that prior to the issuance of a building permit, revised civil drawings including final grading, drainage, erosion control, utility, and electric service plan with load calculations be provided for the review and approval of the Building, Planning, Public Works/Engineering and Electrical Departments (Planning Commission Findings 11/13/2018, pg. 5)." The Council finds that the approval criteria require adequate capacity, and that the associated standards call for connection to city systems and require the approval of development permits by the City Engineer. The City Council further finds that compliance with the adopted water and sewer master plans is not an approval criterion, and that these master plans are intended to guide the city's long- term planning to insure that infrastructure projects are adequate for full build-out of the city, rather than to identify specific projects necessary for current developments. The criteria provide that development may be restricted or rationed where a system deficiency exists that cannot be rectified by the development. The Council further finds that the application included an engineered plan showing connection to the specific facilities within the adjacent right-of-way, and the applicant noted in October 9, 2018 presentation that "According to the various City of Ashland Public Works Departments, there is adequate capacity in the City 's system for the development of the property to be served by water, electric, sanitary sewer services and stormwater." The City Council concludes that AMC 18.4.6.070 requires that the applicant connect to city water and sewer systems, provide plans for the City Engineer's approval prior to the approval of development permits for work in the public rights-of-way, and further provides that if existing facilities are deficient and cannot be rectified development permits may be restricted. The application proposes to connect PA-APPEAL-2018-00005 Council Findings j January 15, 2019 Page 15 to city systems, includes a plan prepared by an engineer detailing these connections, and the Planning Commission approval was conditioned to provide a final plan with the development permit for approval by the City Engineer. While issues were raised during the hearing process that the existing facilities were not sized consistently with minimum pipe sizes for future master plan projects, the Council concludes that the master plan identifies projects and parameters for accommodating population growth over the long-term and are not intended to impose requirements on individual developments. The Planning Commission accepted the applicant's plan prepared by a professional engineer and assurances by the applicant's team of professionals that the water and sewer facilities were adequate and adequately sized, and that this had been confirmed by the Public Works Department. The Council concludes that the Planning Commission did not err, that there was sufficient evidence in the record to support their findings, and rejects Appeal Issue #6. 2.8 Appeal Issue 46 is that the Planning Commission erred in calculating each of the 72 units as .75 units. The appellants argue that each of the proposed units in the application were illustrated as being greater than 500 square feet in gross habitable floor area, and the Commission erred in allowing the applicant to submit evidence during their rebuttal argument that the units would be adjusted to be less than 500 square feet. The appellants also assert that the Planning Commission failed to adequately address definitional irregularities in the calculation of square footage. The City Council finds that AMC 18.2.5.080.B.2 "Residential Density Calculation in R-2 and R-3 Zones" provides that, "Units less than 500 square feet ofgross habitable area shall count as 0:75 units for the purposes ofdensity calculations." In the Definitions chapter (AMC 18.6.1), "Floor Area, Gross Habitable" is defined as, "The total area of all floors in a dwelling measured to its outside surfaces that are under the horizontal projection of the roof or floor above with at least seven feet of head room, excluding uninhabitable spaces accessed solely by an exterior door." The Council further finds that the applicant had proposed to construct all of the proposed units at less than 500 square feet of gross habitable floor area, however during the hearing process it was discovered that their methodology for measuring gross habitable floor area was inconsistent with the definition as they were measuring to interior walls when the code requires gross habitable floor area be measured to the outside surfaces, i.e. to exterior walls. During their rebuttal testimony, the applicants recognized the error in their methodology and indicated that the unit sizes could be adjusted to comply with the correct measuring methodology so that each unit would be less than 500 square feet in gross habitable floor area. The Planning Commission included a condition of approval (#1) which read, "That all proposals of the applicant shall be conditions of approval unless otherwise modified herein, including that the final units' dimensions shall be adjusted in the building permit submittals so that each unit has less than 500 square feet ofgross habitable floor area which is defined in AMC 18.6 as, `The total area of all floors in a dwelling measured to its outside surfaces that are under the horizontal projection of the roof or floor above with at least seven feet of head room, excluding uninhabitable spaces accessed solely by an exterior door' (Planning Commission Findings 11/13/2018, pg. 10)." The Council finds that in their initial submittals, the applicant had calculated floor area of the units to the inside wall surfaces, which is contrary to the code defined methodology for measuring gross PA-APPEAL-2018-00005 Council Findings January 15, 2019 Page 16 habitable floor area. When the measuring error was discovered, the applicant indicated that the unit sizes could and would be corrected to comply with the definitional requirements. The Council further finds that the Planning Commission found that it was feasible to correct the unit size in the building permit drawings, and that decks and other similar areas that are not inside the structure do not fit within the defined measurement methodology as they are aren't within the outside surfaces, i.e. the exterior walls, and that the appellants have not shown that correcting the unit size is not feasible. The Council concludes that the Commission did not err here, and rejects Appeal Issue #6. 2.9 Appeal Issue #7 is that the Planning Commission erred in granting on-street parking credits and by approving a project with insufficient off-street parking. The appellants argue that the Planning Commission's findings that there was more than 600 linear feet of frontage with roughly 30 on-street parking spaces available were not supported by evidence in the record as Quincy Street is unavailable and it is unclear how much of the remaining frontage on Garfield and Iowa Streets is available due to new yellow curbs and the proximity to the SOU zoning overlay. The appellant further argues that the Commission erred in accepting evidence regarding yellow curbed areas during applicant's rebuttal without giving other parties the opportunity to respond, and the evidence regarding the number of spaces in the parking lot is insubstantial and contradictory, and because the units are greater than 500 square feet (see appeal issue 96, above) 108 parking spaces are required rather than the 72 indicated by the applicant. The City Council finds that in Table 18.4.3.040 in the Parking, Access and Circulation chapter, multi- family dwellings less than 500 square feet are required to provide one parking space per unit based on gross floor area, with fractions rounded to the nearest whole number. AMC 18.4.3.060 "Parking Management Strategies" provides that credit for on-street parking spaces may reduce the required off- street parking spaces up to 50 percent (18.4.3.060.A). On-street spaces may not be counted for credits when they are within 200 feet of the SOU zone (18.4.3.060.A.3.d). The applicant's submittals note that the SOU zone is located approximately 200 feet to the northeast of the property (Applicant's Amended Findings 8/23/2018, pg. 3 of 22) and includes a reference map illustrating the relationship to the zone, and as such on-street parking on Quincy Street at the northeastern portion of the subject property is not excluded from consideration for credits. The Council further finds that AMC 18.4.3.060.13 provides that alternative vehicle parking may reduce the required off-street parking spaces by up to 25 Percent, with one off-street parking space credit for each five additional, non-required bicycle parking spaces. The Council finds that the applicant's request explains that: "The proposed development requires 72 parking spaces. The required parking was proposed as a combination of on-site parking in a 67-space surface parking lot and a request for five on-street parking credits., The shift of the driveway from a consolidated driveway to the existing curb-cut requires the elimination offive of the on-site parking spaces. This translates to an increase in on-street credits requested from five to seven. With the provision of 12- bicycle parking spaces above the 72 required, two vehicle parking credits are possible from the Parking Management Strategies found in AMC 18.4.3.060. With the approval of seven on- PA-APPEAL-2018-00005 Council Findings January 15, 2019 Page 17 street credits, the revised 63-space parking area and on-site bicycle parking complies with the minimum parking standard for the proposed development. " "Attached are photographs of the on-street parking from 2012, 2015 and 2018. In all photos, there is ample on-street parking present along the more than 600 feet of street frontage abutting the property. On average over the past six years, there have been between six to ten cars on Garfield Street; zero to two on Iowa Street and two-five on Quincy Street. There are newly painted yellow curbs that restrict parking within the vision clearance triangle of Iowa and Garfield Streets. With more than 30 available on-street credits, the request for seven is de minimus and should be allowed to off-set the increase in on-site pavement, and reductions in landscaping. (Applicant's Additional Submittals 10/16/2018, pg. 4 of 20). " The Council further finds that during rebuttal by the applicant, the applicant indicated that the proposed driveway location ("Option B") reduced on-site parking to a total of 64 spaces (Ashland Planning Commission Minutes 10/23/2018, pg. 4 of 8). The applicant's submittals include photos of on-street parking availability (Applicant's Additional Submittals 10/16/2018, pp. 7-19 of 20) and sheet AP 1.1 "Site Plan w/Areas" which illustrates nine potential on-street parking spaces on Quincy Street, 15 potential on-street parking spaces along Garfield Street, and six potential on-street parking spaces along Iowa Street. One of the appellants, Mr. Huseby, also provided a declaration regarding parking and traffic (Appellant Huseby's 10/16/2018 E-Mail submittal) which includes photos and observations of parking on the frontage streets. The Council notes that the Planning Commission found that: "With reg ff and to o -streetParking requirements detailed in AMC 18.4.3, the Planning Commission finds that 72 studio units less than 500 square feet require 72 parking spaces. The applicant proposes to provide 64 off-street parking spaces in surface parking lots and have requested the remaining eight spaces be addressed through a combination of six on-street parking credits and two credits for the additional exterior covered bicycle parking to be provided on-site. The subject properties have more than 600 linear feet of frontage with roughly 30 on-street parking spaces available. The site-specific evidence in the record shows that the requested on-street parking credit is reasonable, and that on-street parking is available except during relatively infrequent events such as larger events at the nearby Ashland High School. The Planning Commission further finds that the applicants proposal to provide a bicycle closet with rack in each unit is consistent with the allowance in AMC 18.4.3.070.1 to address bicycle parking by providing "a bicycle storage room, bicycle lockers or racks inside the building. " In addition, the applicants have proposed 12 covered bicycle parking spaces outside in requesting an alternative vehicle parking credit under AMC 18.4.3.060.8.2. The Planning Commission finds that the parking proposed satisfies the parking requirements for the proposed units (Planning Commission Findings 11/13/2018, pg. 6)." The Council finds that, as noted in the discussing of Appeal Issue 46 above, the units are required to have less than 500 square feet of gross habitable floor area by Condition #1 of the Planning Commission's approval, and as such require only on space per unit for a total of 72 parking spaces. The Planning Commission's approval allowed for an eight space reduction in required off-street PA-APPEAL-2018-00005 Council Findings January 15, 2019 Page 18 parking from 72 to 64 through a combination of six on-street parking credits and two credits for additional covered bicycle parking to be provided on site. The Council concludes that six on-street parking spaces require only 132 linear feet of curb frontage (six spaces x 22 feet/space = 132 feet) while there is over 600 linear feet of curb frontage noted, and the parking observations provided by the appellant suggest that there is ample parking along the properties' street frontages to accommodate six cars except during unusual events such as sporting events at the high school or university, and the written testimony established that there is sufficient parking available on street. The Council concludes that Planning Commission did not err in their findings and that there was sufficient evidence in the record that the parking requirements had been satisfied. The Council rejects Appeal Issue #7. 2.10 Appeal Issue #8 is that the Planning Commission erred in approving a driveway location on Quincy Street as an Exception to the Street Standards. The Council notes that the separation between the subject property's driveway on Quincy Street and the adjacent driveway to the east is approximately 18 feet, and that with regard to the driveway separation/curb cut width request, the Planning Commission made the finding: "that the existing driveway location on Quincy Street does not currently comply with the minimum 24 foot driveway separation requirements applicable for the lot as it currently contains less than three units. Distances from driveway standards are detailed in AMC section 18.4.3.080. C. 3, and developments of three units or more per lot are required to provide a 50- foot separation between driveways on neighborhood streets like Quincy Street. To address the separation requirement, the application proposes to shift the driveway east toward the adjacent driveway, paving the area between to provide a wider, single curb cut to accommodate the two drives, noting that this may necessitate protection or relocation of an existing power pole between the two drives. The application explains that this attempts to mitigate the lack of required separation by combining the curb cuts to improve the pedestrian and vehicular environment by reducing the number of curb cuts and better aligning with the driveways on the opposite side of Quincy Street. The application further explains that a recorded ingress/egress easement for 181 California Street, a flag lot which takes vehicular access through the subject property, must be retained and prevents the applicant from combining the two driveways to a single driveway or providing the required separation. The application notes that the proposed curb cut would be 36 feet in width, exceeding the maximum residential curb cut width of 18 feet and necessitating an Exception. " Through the hearing process, when it seemed that this Exception was unlikely to be approved by the Planning Commission, the applicant offered options including their "Option B" which involved retaining the current driveway location with the existing separation. The Planning Commission further found that: "the requested Exception does not address the underlying intent of the driveway separation/controlled access requirements, which seek to reduces conflicts between vehicles entering or exiting to the street and vehicles, bicycles and pedestrians already using the street. The Commission further finds that having multiple driveways come together at the curb within a single, wider-than-normally-allowed curb cut, rather than combining circulation on-site to PA-APPEAL-2018-00005 Council Findings January 15, 2019 Page 19 enter and exit from a single driveway within a single, standard curb cut has the potential to create more conflicts and add confusion as there continues to be multiple driveways using a single curb cut without any coordination of circulation to reduce conflicts. The Commission finds that this would only be exacerbated if a power pole, and any measures needed to protect it from vehicles, were to be retained in the middle of the curb cut. The Commission finds that absent a clear depiction of how turning movements with the adjacent driveway might be addressed, the Exception to combine driveways within a wider than normal curb cut is not merited. The Commission further finds that if the applicant is unable to combine driveways and circulation on site to provide a single driveway exiting from a single standard curb cut due to the existing ingress/egress easement for the neighbor, the most appropriate treatment, for the driveway would be the alternative "Option B " presented by the applicant during the hearing which would retain the existing non-conforming separation between the driveways which has been in place for years, and which has served Rivergate Church and its large parking lot The Planning Commission finds that allowing the project to use the existing curb cut location, rather than requiring the applicant to cure the existing non-conforming site condition to create a 50 foot curb cut separation, is appropriate. The existing curb cut location is required because of the easement owned by an off-site use, and this constitutes an "unusual aspect of the site. " The use of the existing curb cut location, rather than requiring yet another curb cut further to the west, will result in equal or superior transportation connectivity because it will minimize the number of curb cuts along Quincy Street and will locate the project curb cut along Quincy Street further from the intersection with Garfield Street (Planning Commission Findings 11/13/2018, pg. 9)." The appellants argue that the Commission erred in approving a driveway location on Quincy Street as an Exception to the Street Standards under AMC 18.4.6.020.B.1 rather than considering the driveway location in terms of the Variance criteria in AMC 18.5.5. The appellants further argue that there are no unusual or unique aspects of the property which warrant a Variance, and further assert that an existing easement which allows a neighboring property use of the driveway in its existing location does not qualify as such a condition. The appellants also argue that there is no evidence in the record that denying the requested Variance/Exception would result in an additional driveway on Quincy Street or that such a Variance/Exception is the minimum necessary to address any site specific concerns, or that the Variance/Exceptions results in any benefits that would be greater than the alternative of compliance with the standards. The City Council finds that in addressing Exceptions and Variances with regard to the Parking, Access and Circulation Chapter, AMC 18.4.3.020.D notes, "Requests to departfrom the requirements of this chapter are subject to chapter 18.5.5 Variances, except that deviations from the standards in subsections 18.4.3.080.B.4 and 5 and section 18.4.3.090 Pedestrian Access and Circulation are subject to 18.5.2.050.E Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards." Intersection and Driveway Separation are addressed in 18.4.3.080.C.3 and as such are subject to Variances rather than Exceptions to the Street Standards. As such, the Council finds that a request to install a new driveway closer than allowed by the standards would be subject to a Variance rather than an Exception. However, the City Council further finds that the existing driveway, which remains from the Rivergate Church development that was previously in place on the property, and cannot be move by applicant PA-APPEAL-2018-00005 Council Findings January 15, 2019 Page 20 because it also serves as easement access to an adjacent parcel not part of the application, is not a new proposed driveway but is instead a non-conforming development pursuant to AMC 18.1.4.040(A) in that the driveway is not presently located the required distance from the adjacent driveway to the east. AMC 18.1.4.040 addresses "Nonconforming Developments" as follows: A. Exempt Alterations. Repair and maintenance of a nonconforming development (e.g., paved area, parking area, landscaping) are allowed subject to approval of required building permits if the development is not enlarged or altered in a way that brings the nonconforming site less in conformity with this ordinance. See also, section 18.3.11.050 related to nonconforming uses in Water Resource Protection zones. B. Planning Approval Required. A nonconforming development may be enlarged or altered subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit under chapter 18.5.4 and approval of required building permits, except that a planning action is not required for exempt alterations described in subsection 18.1.4.040.A, above, and for non-residential development subject to subsection 18.4.2.040. B. 6. C. Roadway Access. The owner of a nonconforming driveway approach or access to a public street or highway, upon receiving land use or development approval, may be required as a condition of approval to bring the nonconforming access into conformance with the standards of the approval authority. The City Council further finds that the driveway represents a non-conforming development, and "Option B" presented by the applicant during the hearing and accepted by the Planning Commission would retain the existing non-conforming separation between the driveways which has been in place for years, and which has served Rivergate Church and its large parking lot and serves an easement to an adjacent parcel. The Council interprets AMC 18.1.4.040.A to allow the existing curb cut location to remain as an "Exempt Alterations" pursuant to 18.1.4.040.A above and be allowed without either a Variance or Exception because the non-conforming driveway and associated separation are not being altered in a way that brings the non-conforming separation less in conformity with the Ordinance. The City Council finds that AMC 18.1.4.040.C specifically addresses Roadway Access in noting that the owner may be required as a condition of approval to bring the nonconforming access into conformance with the standards, and further finds that the Planning Commission found that: "allowing the project to use the existing curb cut location, rather than requiring the applicant to cure the existing non-conforming site condition to create a 50 foot curb cut separation, is appropriate. The existing curb cut location is required because of the easement owned by an off-site use, and this constitutes an "unusual aspect of the site. " The use of the existing curb cut location, rather than requiring yet another curb cut further to the west, will result in equal or superior transportation connectivity because it will minimize the number of curb cuts along Quincy Street and will locate the project curb cut along Quincy Street further from the intersection with Garfield Street. " The Council further interprets 18.1.4.040.C not to apply to this circumstance, where the PA-APPEAL-2018-00005 Council Findings January 15, 2019 Page 21 I nonconforming driveway location is serves (is "owned") by both the applicant and the adjacent easement holder. The City Council concludes that the Planning Commission did err in addressing the Quincy Street driveway, however the error was not, as asserted by the appellants, in failing to treat the request as a Variance but rather in failing to clearly articulate in the decision that the Commission was denying the requested Exception and instead determining that the proposed "Option B" to retain the existing driveway location and its non-conforming separation amounted to an exempt alteration of a non-conforming development and as such did not require either an Exception or a Variance. Despite this error, the Planning Commission's decision was in keeping with AMC 18.1.4.040, and considered the possibility to require that the non-conforming Roadway Access be remedied with development and determined that this was not appropriate given the specific circumstances. The City Council concludes that the driveway location as approved was an exempt alteration of a non-conforming development, and rejects Appeal Issue 48's assertion that the driveway location should have been considered as a Variance instead of an Exception. 2.11 Appeal Issue 49 is that the content of the Notice of Public Hearing was insufficient in not including the name and phone number of a City contact person and in failing to cite the applicable criteria and citations for decision. With regard to the first part of Appeal Issue 49, the City Council notes that AMC 18.5.1.060.C.3.f addresses the "Content of Notice of Public Hearing" noting that "Notices mailed and posted pursuant to this section shall contain all of the following information... The name and phone number of a City contact person." The Notice of Public Hearing mailed and posted for the October 9, 2018 Planning Commission hearing noted, "If you have any questions or comments concerning this request, please feel free to contact the Ashland Planning Division at (541) 488-5305." The Council finds that based on the notice mailed and posted on site, the appellants were able to call this front desk number to determine the assigned staff planner for the project, have their call forwarded directly, discuss the application, and request information and materials. Both of the appellants were able to participate in the initial evidentiary hearing on October 9, 2018 with testimony; to request that the hearing be continued; and to present further testimony at the continued hearing on October 23, 2018. To rectify this issue in the future, the Planning Department's Notice of Public Hearing template has been changed to include the name and contact information for the assigned project planner for future projects. The Council concludes that the appellants were able to fully participate in the hearing process, did not raise issue with the notice for the Planning Commission to respond to at either hearing, and that the appeal request did not demonstrate that the errors alleged resulted in any substantial prejudice to a substantive right of the appellants. With regard to the second part of Appeal Issue #9, that the Notice of Public Hearing failed to cite the applicable criteria, the Council notes that the Notice of Public Hearing cited criteria for Site Design Review (AMC 18.5.2.050), for Exception to Street Standards (AMC 18.4.6.020.B.1), and for Tree Removal Permit (AMC 18.5.7.040.13). The Council finds that, while the appeal notice is not entirely clear on this point, the issue is that the Notice of Public Hearing and subsequent findings did not address the Variance criteria (AMC 18.5.050) in dealing with the Quincy Street driveway. In discussing Exceptions and Variances with regard to the Parking, Access and Circulation Chapter, AMC 18.4.3.020.D notes, "Requests to depart from the requirements of this chapter are subject to PA-APPEAL-2018-00005 Council Findings January 15, 2019 Page 22 chapter 18.5.5 Variances, except that deviations from the standards in subsections 18.4.3.080. B.4 and 5 and section 18.4.3.090 Pedestrian Access and Circulation are subject to 18.5.2.050.E Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards." Intersection and Driveway Separation are addressed in 18.4.3.080.C.3 and as such would be subject to Variances rather than Exceptions to the Street Standards. However, as discussed under Appeal Issue #8 in 2.10 above, the Council finds that because the existing driveway is considered a non-conforming development and the non-conformity is not to be altered with the application, and as such neither a Variance nor an Exception is required. The Council concludes here that the Notice did not fail to cite the applicable criteria, and the Council rejects Appeal Issue 49. 2.12 Appeal Issue #10 is that the Planning Commission erred in approving an alternative to the landscaped medians and swales. The Council notes that AMC 18.4.3.080.B.5.b. calls for applicants to "Design parking lots and other hard surface areas in a way that captures and treats runoff with landscaped medians and swales," and that the approval of an Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards requires a demonstration that 1, 2 or 3 below are found to exist as detailed in AMC 18.5.2.050.E: 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; 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; or 3. There is no demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements for a cottage housing development, but granting the exception will result in a design that equally or better achieves the stated purpose of section 18.2.3.09 (Ord. 3147 §9, amended, 11/21/2017) The Council further notes that the stated purpose of the Site Development and Design Standards is noted in AMC 18.4.1.010 as, "Part 18.4 contains design standards for development. The regulations are intended to protect public health, safety, and welfare through standards that promote land use compatibility, resource protection, and livability, consistent with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Where an applicant requests an exception to a design standard, the approval authority evaluates the request against the purpose of the ordinance chapter in which the design standard is located." The stated purpose of Chapter 18.4.3, where the parking lot runoff standard is located, is detailed in AMC 18.4.3.010 as, "to provide safe and effective access and circulation for pedestrians, bicyclists, and vehicles." The Council finds that the applicant requested: PA-APPEAL-2018-00005 Council Findings January 15, 2019 Page 23 "An exception (to) 18.4.3.080.B.5.b. to not have the parking lots designed in a way that captures and treats runoff with landscaped medians and swales. The proposed bio-swales and underground treatment and detention ponds treat the hard surfaces and the parking lot surface. The proposed methods are a more efficient, cost effective stormwater detention and treatment facility. Since the parking lot medians are often walked upon by tenants entering and exiting vehicles, a traditional, walkable ground cover is a better use of the space than a variable grade, rocky and/or sloped landscape buffer with a grate system and possibly filled with water. It can be found that the proposal to include light colored, some pervious paving techniques, larger bio-swales outside of the area where vehicle entry and exiting occurs, is a superior low impact development design that the parking lot median bio-swales. The parking lot landscape buffer and parking lot landscape peninsulas are provided that are sized and design with species that will do well in the parking lot while achieving the purposed and intent of the Site Design Standards as they relate to landscape buffers (Applicant's Amended Findings 812312018, pg. 19 of 22). " The Council notes that the application includes information provided by engineer Jim Higday of Marquess and Associates. Mr. Higday asserts that adopted design guidelines require that the project engineer design site drainage to address a water quality storm event and a ten-year storm. Mr. Higday notes that swales would need to be a minimum of eight- to 12-feet wide to meet these standards, and this would render them not feasible for medians and swales within the proposed parking lot. As such, Mr. Higday notes that his firm designed a combination of above ground ponds, pervious concrete and underground Storm Tee chambers which all are approved methods for addressing storm water in the Rogue Valley Stormwater Quality Design Manual used by a number of Rogue Valley cities including the City of Ashland (Engineer Jim Higday's 10/10/2018 e-mail and attachment). The appellants argue that the evidence in the record is insufficient to support the requested exception to the standard. The Council finds that the Planning Commission finding was: "that the parking lot standards in AMC 18.4.3.080.B.5.b call for capturing run-off in a landscaped median or Swale to mitigate parking impacts, reduce stormwater leaving the site and recharge groundwater. The applicant has instead proposed to detain run-off in a combination of underground treatment facilities, detention ponds and bio-swales as they assert that these methods are more efficient and cost-effective. The applicant suggests that light- colored paving with some of it pervious, and larger bio-swales separate from the parking lot are superior to parking lot median swales and allow for occasional pedestrian traffic and better landscape buffers in the parking lot medians. The Planning Commission finds that the measures proposed adequately mitigate the parking lot's impacts while reducing stormwater leaving the site and serving to recharge groundwater (Planning Commission Findings 11/13/2018, Pg. 8). " PA-APPEAL-2018-00005 Council Findings January 15, 2019 Page 24 The Council finds that the second criterion for and Exception 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 Council further finds that the applicant's engineer noted that swales located in the parking lot medians and buffers were not suited to meeting drainage requirements because of the necessary size, and the applicant indicated that the medians within the parking lot were likely to be walked on by tenants entering or exiting their vehicles at times, and that a variable grade, rocky or sloped swale possibly filled with a grate system and standing water was a less safe or effective option for tenant pedestrians than the alternative proposed which addressing the parking lot drainage in landscaped swales which are not located within the parking lot itself. The Council further finds that the purpose of the broader Site Development and Design Standards in Part 18.4 speaks to standards that in part promote resource protection, which was addressed by the project engineer, while the purpose of the specific chapter involved (18.4.3) that more narrowly focuses on "safe and effective access and circulation for pedestrians, bicyclists, and vehicles" was addressed by the applicant in expressing concern that swales in the parking lot posed a potential problem for tenants going to and from their cars while the swales outside the parking lot equally addressed the stormwater while leaving the medians in the parking lot more suited to tenants on foot. The Council concludes that the applicant sought an Exception not in response to a "demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements" but rather because they asserted that "granting the exception will result in a design that equally or better achieves the stated purpose of the Site Development and Design Standards, " and that there is substantial evidence in the record to support the Planning Commission's finding that, while there was no demonstrable difficulty, the proposed alternative equally addressed the purpose and intent of the Standards in mitigating the parking lot's impacts, adequately reducing stormwater leaving the site and serving to recharge groundwater while seeking to provide safer and more effective pedestrian access within the parking lot that would be achieved by "a variable grade, rocky and/or sloped landscape buffer with a grate system and possibly filled with water. " The Council rejects Appeal Issue #10, finds that the Planning Commission did not err, and further finds that the decision was supported by evidence in the record. 2.13 Appeal Issue #11 is that the Planning Commission erred procedurally and failed to provide due process by admitting new evidence during the applicant's rebuttal without providing other parties an opportunity to respond and in making findings which contradict the conditions of approval with regard to unit sizes, density bonuses and open and recreation space, the applicant proposed units of less than 500 square feet in their application. The Council notes that when it was discovered that the unit dimensions illustrated did not measure less than 500 square feet according to the definition of gross habitable floor area, the applicant explained that they were unaware of the correct methodology but that it was feasible to make minor adjustments to comply with the square footage limit, as discussed under Appeal Issue #6 above. A condition was imposed to insure that the final drawings complied. Where similar issues with the open space and recreation space were noted through the hearing process, findings were made that the application complied and conditions were included to insure that final permit drawings addressed these discrepancies and demonstrated compliance. The Council finds that AMC 18.1.6.050 "Conditions of Approval" provides that, the Planning PA-APPEAL-2018-00005 Council Findings January 15, 2019 Page 25 Commission... when acting as the hearing authority, may impose conditions of approval on any planning action to modify that planning action to comply with the criteria of approval or to comply with other applicable City ordinances. Such conditions shall be binding on the approved planning action, and a violation of a condition imposed by the hearing authority shall be a violation of this ordinance, and subject to all the penalties thereof." The Council concludes that the Planning Commission determined based on evidence in the record that compliance with the applicable standards and criteria was feasible in the area's in question, and was within its authority in imposing conditions to require that the applicant's demonstrate compliance in their final permit drawings. The Council rejects Appeal Issue #11. 2.14 Appeal Issue #12 is that the City erred procedurally and failed to provide due process by failing to provide the parties with the staff report and initial recommendations at least seven days before the initial public hearing, and in not making the full record available publicly. The Council finds that based on testimony, the appellants requested the staff report and initial recommendations seven days prior to the hearing and were provided a draft with the explanation that these materials were still being reviewed by the Community Development Director and as such the initial draft recommendations might change slightly. Final documents were provided five days prior to the hearing, and as previously noted the appellants were able to participate both in the initial hearing and a continued hearing, which they requested. The Council finds that the concerns with the availability of the full record are somewhat unclear; the full physical record has been available in the Community Development office at all times, and video recordings of the October 9' meeting were posted on-line. Because the initial evidentiary hearing was continued at the appellants' request to October 23`d, which was originally scheduled for a Planning Commission study session, the meeting was not video-taped. The City's contract with Rogue Valley Community Television does not including video recording for scheduled study sessions, and as such recordings of the continued hearing were limited to audio recordings which took some time to make available on the city website. While the audio recordings were being uploaded to the website, a physical copy of the audio recording was copied to DVD and provided to the applicant at a charge of $5 to cover copying costs. When audio files became available they were added to the Council record which was available on-line at: http://www.ashiand.or.us/Page.asp?Nav[D=l 7699 . The Council concludes that these issues were not raised during the Planning Commission hearings to allow a Commission response, that despite the alleged errors, the appellants were able to fully participate in the hearing process and were given additional time with the hearing's continuation, and that the appeal request does not demonstrate that the errors alleged resulted in any substantial prejudice to a substantive right of the appellants. The Council rejects Appeal Issue #12. SECTION 3. DECISION 3.1 With regard to the appeal request, the City Council finds that there was substantial evidence in the record to support the original decision of the Planning Commission, and that the Commission's sole error was in regard to the Quincy Street driveway. This error was not however, as asserted by the PA-APPEAL-2018-00005 Council Findings January 15, 2019 Page 26 appellants, in failing to treat the request as a Variance but rather in failing to clearly articulate in the decision that the Commission was denying the initially-requested Exception and instead determining that the proposed "Option B" to retain the existing driveway location and its non-conforming separation amounted to an exempt alteration of a non-conforming development and as such did not require either an Exception or a Variance. The record shows that the nonconforming driveway curb cut location is pre-existing and cannot be relocated by the applicant because it serves an adjacent parcel not belonging to the applicant. The Council interprets AMC section 18.1.4.040 to allow the applicant to retain the existing driveway curb cut location as a nonconforming development, and the curb cut location will not be enlarged to further increase the nonconformity (i.e., bring it closer to other nearby curb cuts). Based on the record of the Public Hearing on this matter, the City Council concludes that the Planning Commission's original decision to approve the requested Site Design Review, Exception to Street Standards, and Tree Removal Permits is supported by evidence contained within the whole record, and that with the approval of the applicant's "Option B" for the Quincy Street driveway, this Exception is not required as the driveway proposed amounts to exempt alteration of a nonconforming development. Therefore, based on our overall conclusions, and upon the proposal being subject to each of the following conditions, the City Council rejects the appeal #PA-APPEAL-2018-00005 on all 12 issues and reaffirms the Planning Commission's decision to approve the original application Planning Action #PA-T2-2018- 00003 subject to the Planning Commission's original conditions of approval. Further, if any one or more of those conditions are found to be invalid, for any reason whatsoever, then Planning Action 4PA-T2- 2018-00003 is denied. The Planning Commission attaches the following condition to this approval: 1 That all conditions of Planning Action 4PA-T2-20 1 8-000 03 (attached hereto as Exhibit A") shall remain in effect. January 15, 2019 John Stromberg, Mayor Date City of Ashland PA-APPEAL-2018-00005 Council Findings January 15, 2019 Page 27 2019-0115_188 Garfield Appeal Findings-Ex. A 13EFORE THE PLANNING COMNUSSION November 13, 2018 IN THE MATTER OF PLANNING ACTION #T2-2018-00003, A REQUEST FOR ) SITE DESIGN REVIEW APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A 72-UNIT STUDIO ) APARTMENT COMMUNITY LOCATED AT 188 GARFIELD STREET. THE ) APPLICATION ALSO INCLUDES REQUESTS FOR A TREE REMOVAL PERMIT ) TO REMOVE 15 TREES THAT ARE MORE THAN SIX-INCHES IN DIAMETER AT) BREAST HEIGHT (D.B.H.); AN EXCEPTION TO THE SITE DEVELOPMENT AND DESIGN STANDARDS TO TREAT STORMWATER RUN-OFF IN A COMBI- NATION BIO-S WALES, UNDERGROUND TREATMENT FACILITIES AND DE- ) TENTION PONDS RATI-MR THAN IN LANDSCAPED PARI(ING LOT MEDIANS ) t AND SWALES: AND FOR EXCEPTIONS TO STREET STANDARDS TO RETAIN ) THE EXISTING CURBSIDE SIDEWALK SYSTEM ALONG THE FRONTAGES OF ) FINDINGS, AND FOR THE LOCATION OF THE DRIVEWAY CURBCUT ON QUINCY ) CONCLUSIONS, STREET, WHICH IS PROPOSED TO BE SHARED WITH THE PROPERTY TO THE) & ORDERS g EAST AND WHICH WOULD EXCEED THE MAXIMUM DRIVEWAY CURB CUT ) WIDTH FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS. ALL OF THE PROPOSED UNITS) ARE STUDIOS WITH LESS THAN 500 SQUARE FEET IN GROSS HABITABLE ) FLOOR WHICH COUNT AS'/a OF A UNIT FOR DENSITY CALCULATIONS; ) DENSITY BONUSES ARE REQUESTED FOR CONSERVATION HOUSING, OUT- DOOR RECREATION SPACE AND MAJOR RECREATION FACILITIES. ) APPLICANT/OWNER: ROGUE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ) SPARTAN ASHLAND RIVERGATE REAL ESTATE ) l RECITALS: 1) Tax lots #2100 and #2101 of Map 39 1 E I OCB are located at 188 Garfield Sheet and are zoned R-3 (High-Density Multi-Family Residential). 2) The applicant is requesting Site Design Review approval to construct a 72-unit studio apartment community ("The MidTown Lofts") for the properties located at 188 Garfield Street. All of the proposed units are studio units that are less than 500 square feet in gross habitable floor area and each counts as % of a unit for putpgses of density calculation; density bonuses are requested for conservation housing, outdoor recreation space and major recreation facilities. The application also includes requests for a Tree u Removal Permit to remove 15 trees that are more than six-inches in diameter at breast height (d.b.h.); an Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards to treat stormwater run-off in a combination of bio-swales, underground treatment facilities and detentions ponds rather than in landscaped parking lot medians and swales; and for Exceptions to Street Standards to retain the existing curbside sidewalk system along the frontage of the property and for the location of the driveway curb cut on Quincy Street, which is proposed to be shared with the property to the east and which would exceed the maximum driveway curb cut width for residential developments. Site improvements are outlined on the plans on file at the Department of Community Development. PA-T2-2018-00003 MidTown Lofts' November 13, 2018 Page 1 y a !j 2019-0115_1 q8 Garfield Appeal Findings_Ex. A 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 I 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, 8 urban storm drainage, paved access to and throughout the property and adequate transportation can and will be provided to the subject property. a 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. 5 e 4) The criteria for an Exception to Street Standards are described in AMC 18.4.6.020.B.I as follows: a. There is demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements of this chapter due 9 to a unique or unusual aspect of the site or proposed use of the site. S b, The exception will result in equal or superior transportation facilities and connectivity considering the following factors where applicable. I. For transit facilities and related improvements, access, wait time, and ride l experience. ii. For bicycle facilities, feeling of safety, quality of experience (i. e., comfort level of bicycling along the roadway), and frequency of conflicts with vehicle cross traffic. N. For pedestrian facilities, feeling of safety, quality of experience (i. e„ comfort level of walking along roadway), and ability to safety and efficiency crossing roadway. G. The exception is the minimum necessary to alleviate the difficulty. d. The exception is consistent with the Purpose and Intent of the Street Standards in subsection 18.4.6.040.A. PA-T2-2018-00003 L idTown Lofts November 13, 2018 Page 2 I; 4 G i t 2019-0115_1W*Garfield Appeal Findings_Ex. A i 5) The criteria for a Tree Removal Permit to remove a "Tree That is Not a Hazard" are described in AMC 18.5.7.040.B.2 as follows: I i 1. 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. 2. 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. 3. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on the tree densities, sizes, s' 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. g 4. 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 otherprovisions of this ordinance. d 5. The City shall require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each tree granted ; j 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 October 9, 2018 at which time testimony was received and exhibits were presented. Prior to the closing of the hearing, participants requested that the hewing or record remain open pursuant to ORS 197.763(6) to present additional evidence or argument. The Planning Commission continued the hearing until 7:00 p.m. on October g 23, 2018 at the City Council Chambers at which time at which time testimony was again received and exhibits were presented. Subsequent to the closing of the hearing, the Planning Commission approved the application subject to conditions pertaining to the appropriate development of the site. s 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. i= Staff Exhibits lettered with an "S" Proponent's Exhibits, lettered with a "P" Opponent's Exhibits, lettered with an "0" PA-T2-2018-00003 MidTown Lofts November 13, 2018 Page 3 3 ( 2019-0115_ 188 Garfield Appeal Findings_Ex. A Hearing Minutes, Notices, Miscellaneous Exhibits lettered with an "M" i S)ECTIOld 2. CONCLUSORY FINDINGS 2.1 The Planning Commission Ends 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, Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards, Exceptions to Street Standards and Tree Removal Permit meets all applicable criteria for Site Design Review approval as described in Chapter 18.5.2.050; for Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards described in Chapter 18.5.4.050; for Exception to Street Standards described in Chapter 18.4.6.020.8.1; and for Tree Removal Permit described in Chapter 18.5.7.040.8.2; with the attached conditions of approval. The site plan and elevation drawings provided delineate the proposed building location, design and associated site improvements. 1 2.3 The Planning Commission finds that the first criterion for Site Design Review approval is that, "The proposal complies with all of the applicable provisions of the underlyingzone (part 18.2), including h 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. " The Planning Commission finds that the subject properties are zoned R-3 (High Density, Multi-Family Residential) and the 91,474 square foot, 2.1-acre parcel exceeds the minimum lot area and minimum dimensions for the zoning district. The proposal is for nine groups of two-story, eight-plex units that consist of 496-square foot studio units. These units are proposed in a "modern, Danish inspired architecture" with a mix of wood, stucco and metal, and the design seeks to provide a strong orientation to the public street. Each unit has a semi-private patio, and while the patio doors are not intended as a primary entry the application emphasizes that they can function as a front entry and provide a strong orientation to the street. The application includes varying roof forms, pitches and heights to break up the massing, and that standard solar access will be met. [ t The Planning Commission further finds that the base density for the R-3 zone is 20 dwelling units (d.u.) per acre. The subject property is 2.1 acres and has a base density of 42 d.u. (21 acres x 20 d.u./acre = 42 d.u.). Density bonuses are approved for Conservation housing (15%), Outdoor Recreation Space (10%) and Major Recreation Space (4%) for a total density bonus of 29%. With respect to the conservation ; housing bonus, the Planning Commission finds that conservation housing is feasible and can be documented at buildingpermit submittal. With respeetto the outdoor recreation space bonus, the Planning Commission finds that the bonus provisions do not specifically require outdoor recreation space to meet the "Open Space" definition in 18.6.1.030, so the spaces proposed for patios and decks can comply with n this requirement and there is more than sufficient outdoor recreation square footage in the proposal to justify the requested bonus. Major recreation facilities are discussed in more detail below. This brings the property density to 54.18 d.u. (42 d.u. x 1.29 = 54.18 d.u.). All of the proposed units are less than 500 ti square feet and count as 0.75 units for purposes of density. As such, the density allows 72.24 studio units less than 500 square feet (54.18 d.u./0.75 = 72.24 d.u.) The Planning Commission Ends that the proposed density is 72 units, with all proposed at less than 500 square feet, which is consistent with the density PA-n-2018-00003 MidTown Lofts November 13, 2018 Page 4 s I 2019-0115_18P Garfield Appeal Findings_Ex. A 3 allowed by the zoning with the requested density bonuses. The Planning Commission further finds that the applicants made clear daring the hearing that the units were proposed and intended to have less than 500 square feet of gross habitable floor area per unit to qualify as '/4 units for density purposes, and indicated that the final units' sizes would be adjusted in the building permit submittals so that each unit ° has less than 500 square feet of gross habitable floor area. Gross habitable floor area is defined in AMC 18.6.1 as, "The total area of all floors in a chvelling measured to its outside surfaces that are under the horizontal projection of the roof or floor above with at least seven feet of head room, excluding uninhabitable spaces accessed solely by an exterior door." A condition requiring that the units meet this definition prior to building permit approval has been included below. The Planning Commission finds that AMC Section 18.2.5.080.F.3.c allows a density bonus for "major recreational facilities in exchange for the applicant providing "tennis courts, swimmingpools, playgrounds or similar facilities." The bonus allowed is six percent additional density for each one percent of project cost, based on the estimated sale price or market value of structures and land, devoted to major recreational facilities. The facility proposed here is identified as a "flexible outdoor activity space... for `lawn' games such as badmhnton, spike ball, cornhole, croquet, ladder golf, and others." Also included within the proposed recreation space are a fire pit, barbecue kitchen area, and covered seating area. The Planning Commission finds that the facilities proposed are "similar facilities" akin to a playground for the likely adult tenants of the development and that the combination of facilities proposed for lawn games, I fire pit, barbecue, kitchen area and covered seating areas constitute major recreational facilities which will k` be heavily used by tenants and which will serve to build community within the development. The Commission finds that these facilities qualify for the requested bonus based both on the recreational functionality of the unique combination of facilities proposed for anticipated tenants, and based on the estimated value provided. 1 The second approval criterion is that, "The proposal complies with applicable overlay zone requirements 1 (part 183). " The Planning Commission finds that the subject property is not located within any overlay zones. S The third criterion for Site Design Review approval is that, "The proposal complies with the applicable Site Development and Design Standards afpart 1except as provided by subsection E, below. " g 4 The Planning Commission finds that all ground floor units will have a semi-private patio area with a cleat entrance to the unit, while the upper floor units have a deck area that provides a visual connection and clear orientation to the public street. Parking is located to the side or behind the structures. Building are 1 proposed to have a 19 foot width with a separation of approximately eight-feet between connected buildings and the required 12-foot separation between the connected eight-plexes. This is similar to the massing of structures in the vicinity. The Planning Commission finds that the proposal complies with z setbacks for the zone, and that while the buildings designs and materials are modern they are compatible with the surrounding area and include clear-coated wooden siding, corrugated metal siding, standing seam metal roofing, metal railings and vinyl windows. The application also notes that while final paint colors have not been selected, they will not be bright primary or neon colors. Landscaping and recycling/refuse disposal containers are proposed to comply with AMC 18.4.4, with a common, screened refuse and I recycling area to be provided adjacent to the parking area. PA-T2-2018-00003 MidTown Lofts November 13, 2018 Page 5 y' fi E 2019-0115_118 Garfield Appeal Findings_Ex. A 111 The Planning Commission finds that AMC 18.4.2.030.H requires that residential developments subject to Site Design Review are to provide recreation area equal to at least eight percent of the lot area dedicated to open space for recreational use by the tenants of the development. This area is to be surfaced suitably for human recreational use, and as considered in addressing the requirements of this section decks, patios and similar areas are eligible for consideration as open space. The applicants have also requested a density bonus for providing an additional ten percent of outdoor recreation space above the minimum requirement, for a total of 18 percent. Eighteen percent of the total lot area here is approximately 16,643 square feet and the applicants have provided a plan identifying approximately 21,643 square feet as recreation space including semi-private patio spaces. The Commission finds that the combination of open and recreation I space provided satisfactorily addresses these requirements. The Planning Commission finds specifically that the larger open spaces meet the open space requirements for Open Space in AMC IS. 4.2.03 O.H. With regard to off-street parking requirements detailed in AMC 18.4.3, the Planning Commission finds that 72 studio units less than 500 square feet require 72 panting spaces. The applicant proposes to provide 64 off-street parking spaces in surface parking lots and have requested the remaining eight spaces be addressed through a combination of six on-street parking credits and two credits for the additional exterior covered bicycle parking to be provided on-site. The subject properties have more than 600 linear feet of frontage with roughly 30 on-street parking spaces available. The site-specific evidence in the record shows that the requested on-street parking credit is reasonable, and that on-street parking is available except during relatively infrequent events such as larger events at the nearby Ashland High School. The Planning Commission further finds that the applicants proposal to provide a bicycle closet with rack in each unit is consistent with the allowance in AMC 18.4.3.070.1 to address bicycle parking by providing "a bicycle storage room, bicycle lockers or racks inside the building." In addition, the applicants have proposed 12 covered bicycle parking spaces outside in requesting an alternative vehicle parking credit under AMC 18.4.3.060.B.2. The Planning Commission finds that the parking proposed satisfies the parking requirements for the proposed units. The fourth criterion is that, "The proposal complies with the applicable standards in section 18.4.6 Public Facilities and that adequate capacity of Cityfacilitiesfor 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. " Water: The application notes that a water meter currently serves the property from Garfield Street, and that there is a fire hydrant in place at the intersection of Garfield and Iowa Streets and another is present on the opposite side of Quincy Street. The application further explains that there is a six-inch water main in Iowa Street, a four-inch water main in Garfield Street, and a four-inch water main in Quincy Street. The application proposes to provide a single water service forthe proposed units, a service forthe open space, and a fire connection on the north side of the driveway accessing the site from Garfield Street. o Sewer: The application notes that there are six-inch sewer lines available in Iowa, Garfield and Quincy Streets, and indicates that these lines provide adequate capacity to serve the proposed units. Electricity: The applicant notes that there is overhead power present on the south side of Iowa Street, on the west side of Garfield Street, and along the property frontage on Quincy Street. There is a cobra head style streetlight on the south side of Iowa Street, near the intersection of Garfield and Iowa Streets. The PA-12-2018-00003 MidTown Lofts November 13, 2018 Page 6 2019-0115_1 ~8 Garfield Appeal Findings_Ex. A application indicates that all electrical service on site will be served by a single transformer to be installed on the property from the primary poles across Garfield Street. This transformer is to be to the north of the relocated driveway, and the application goes on to note that while the exact location has not been determined there is adequate open space and lot coverage to allow for the placement. The application further notes that the power pole within the driveway on Quincy Street will be relocated to meet the needs of the Ashland Electric Department. A preliminary electric service plan is included with the application. Storm Drainage: The application explains that there are currently no storm drainage facilities on the subject property, but that there are 12-inch storm sewer mains in the rights-of-way for both Garfield and Quincy Streets. © Paved Access/Adequate Transportation: Iowa Street is an avenue or major collector street as classified in the Transportation System Plan, while both Garfield and Quincy Streets are residential neighborhood streets. The application details that all street frontages are paved with curbs, gutters, curbside sidewalks and street trees in place, and an Exception to Street Standards has been requested (see 2.4 below) to retain the existing curbside sidewalks ratherthan providing standard parkrow planting strips with irrigated street trees between the curb and sidewalk. The application materials include a trip generation analysis prepared by Sandow Engineering which explains that the anticipated trip generation from the proposed 72-unit studio apartment complex would be 33 trips during the A.M. peak hour and 40 trips during the P.M. peak hour. This analysis concludes that because the peak hour trips are less than 50, no new traffic controls or geometric improvements are proposed and fewer than 20 additional heavy vehicle trips per day will be generated, a full traffic impact analysis (TIA) is not warranted. The Planning Commission finds that the application includes conceptual plans detailing grading, drainage and utilities proposed to serve the project. Conditions have been included to require that prior to the issuance of a building permit, revised civil drawings including final grading, drainage, erosion control, utility, and electric service plan with load calculations be provided for the review and approval of the Building, Planting, Public Works/Engineering and Electrical Departments. The fmal criterion has to do with "Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards, " providing that, "The approval authority may approve exceptions to the Site Development and Design Standards of part 18.4 if the circumstances in either subsection I 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 adjacentproperties; 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. " PA-T2-2018-00003 N idTown Loits November 13, 2018 Page 7 2019-0115_188 Garfield Appeal Findings_Ex. A I The Planning Commission finds that the parking lot standards in AMC 18.4.3.080.B.5.b call for capturing run-off in a landscaped median or swale to mitigate parking impacts, reduce stormwater leaving the site and recharge groundwater. The applicant has instead proposed to detain run-off in a combination of underground treatment facilities, detention ponds and bio-swales as they assert that these methods are more efficient and cost-effective. The applicant suggests that light-colored paving with some of it pervious, and larger bio-swales separate from the parking lot are superior to parking lot median swales and allow for occasional pedestrian traffic and better landscape buffers in the parking lot medians. The Planning Commission finds that the measures proposed adequately mitigate the parking lot's impacts while reducing stormwater leaving the site and serving to recharge groundwater. 2.4 The Planning Commission finds that the application includes two requests for Exceptions to Street Standards, one to retain the existing curbside sidewalk system along the frontage of the property and the other for the location of the driveway curb cut on Quincy Street, which is proposed to be shared with the property to the east and which would exceed the maximum driveway curb cut width for residential developments. With regard to the sidewalks, the applicant's narrative requests an Exception to retain the existing curbside sidewalks around the full perimeter of the site, arguing that the existing pedestrian environment is already established and that the Exception allows for the preservation of larger stature, existing, healthy street trees. The Planning Commission finds, however, that the plans provided illustrate removal of the trees along the northern Garfield frontage and all trees along Quincy Street, and further illustrate the installation of standard sidewalks and parkrows in those areas. Given that the project proposes to fully redevelop the site at well more that the base density, the Planning Commission finds that providing standard sidewalks with parkrows to safely support and encourage pedestrians is of particular importance and accordingly has included conditions to require that standard parkrows and sidewalks be provided on the northern portion of Garfield Street and the full Quincy Street frontage, and that the approved Exception to allow curbside sidewalks shall be limited to Iowa Street and the portion of Garfield Sheet necessary to preserve the existing Elm, Mulberry and Sweetgum street trees (47, 49417,419-23). The Commission finds that these existing, well-established trees are the barrier to providing standard sidewalks, and that their preservation and protection is beneficial both to the site and to the neighborhood streetscape, and that this partial exception would be the minimum necessary to alleviate the difficulty while providing the feeling of safety and quality of experience sought for the pedestrian facilities by the standards. With regard to the driveway separation/cu b cut width request, the Planning Commission finds that the existing driveway location on Quincy Street does not currently comply with the minimum 24-foot driveway separation requirements applicable for the lot as it currently contains less than three units. Distances from driveway standards are detailed in AMC section 18.4.3.080.C.3, and developments of three units or more per lot are required to provide a 50-foot separation between driveways on neighborhood streets like Quincy Street. To address the separation requirement, the application proposes to shift the driveway east toward the adjacent driveway, paving the area between to provide a wider, single curb cut to accommodate the two drives, noting that this may necessitate protection or relocation of an existing power pole between the two drives. The application explains that this attempts to mitigate the lack of required separation by combining the curb cuts to improve the pedestrian and vehicular environment by reducing the number of curb cuts and better aligning with the driveways on the opposite PA-T2-2018-00003 MidTown Lofts November 13, 2018 Page 8 2019-0115_ 188 Garfield Appeal Findings_Ex. A side of Quincy Sheet. The application farther explains that a recorded ingress/egress easement for 181 California Sheet, a flag lot which takes vehicular access through the subject property, must be. retained and prevents the applicant from combining the two driveways to a single driveway or providing the required separation. The application notes that the proposed curb cut would be 36 feet in width, exceeding the maximum residential curb cut width of 18 feet and necessitating an Exception. The Planning Connnission finds that the requested Exception does not address the underlying intent of the driveway separation/controlled access requirements, which seek to reduces conflicts between vehicles entering or exiting to the street and vehicles, bicycles and pedestrians already using the street. The g Commission further finds that having multiple driveways come together at the curb within a single, wider- than-normally-allowed curb cut, rather than combining circulation on-site to enter and exit from a single driveway within a single, standard curb out has the potential to create more conflicts and add confusion as there continues to be multiple driveways using a single curb cut without any coordination of circulation to reduce conflicts. The Commission finds that this would only be exacerbated if a power pole, and any measures needed to protect it from vehicles, were to be retained in the middle of the curb cut. The Commission finds that absent a clear depiction of how tuning movements with the adjacent driveway might be addressed, the Exception to combine driveways within a wider than normal curb cut is not merited. The Commission fwther finds that if the applicant is unable to combine driveways and circulation on site to provide a single driveway exiting from a single standard curb cut due to the existing nigress/egress easement for the neighbor, the most appropriate treatment for the driveway would be the I alternative "Option B" presented by the applicant during the hearing which would retain the existing non- conforming separation between the driveways which has been in place for years, and which has served 5 Rivergate Church and its large parking lot The Planning Commission finds that allowing the project to use the existing curb cut location, rather than requiring the applicant to cure the existing non-conforming site condition to create a 50-foot curb cut separation, is appropriate. The existing curb cut location is required because of the easement owned by an off-site use, and this constitutes an "unusual aspect of the site." The use of the existing curb cut location, rather than requiring yet another curb cut further to the west, will result in equal or superior transportation connectivity because it will minimize the number of curb cuts along Quincy Street and will locate the project curb cut along Quincy Street further from the intersection with Garfield Street. 2.5 The Planning Commission finds that the Tree Protection & Removal Plan provided identifies 30 trees on and adjacent to the subject property and requests Tree Removal Permits to remove 15 trees. Four of these 15 are noted as having been removed prior to the project, either as exempt/dead trees or in conjunction with the Rivergate Church demolition. The remaining 11 are proposed for removal to accommodate the buildings, driveways, parking and circulation areas and utility installations proposed. $ The applicant's submittals indicate that the requested removals will not have a significant negative impact on erosion, soil stability, flow of surface waters, protection of adjacent trees or existing windbreaks and further asserts that the removals will not have significant negative impacts to tree densities, sizes, canopies or species diversity within 200 feet of the subject property, and that replacement trees will be provided with one or more trees planted in the new landscape to mitigate each removal. PA-n-2018-00003 MidTown Lofts November 13, 2018 Page 9 2019-0115_188 Garfield Appeal Findings_Ex. A The Tree Commission reviewed the proposal at its regular meeting on October 11, 2018 andrecommended that the application be approved, that every effort be made to preserve the existing trees, that they be pruned professionally, and that synthetic turf not be used. A condition has been included below to make the recommendations of the Tree Commission conditions of approval, where consistent with applicable standards and criteria, and with final approval by the Staff Advisor. A condition has also been added to require a revised Tree Protection Plan be provided with the building permit submittal addressing a maintenance watering schedule for trees to be retained during construction and addressing Tree Protection any necessary tree protection measures for trees on adjacent properties within 15 feet of the property line. SECTION 3. DECISION - ff 3.1 Based on the record of the Public Hearing on this matter, the Planning Commission concludes that the proposal for Site Design Review, Exception to the Site Development and Design Standards, Exceptions to the Street Standards, and Tree Removal Permits to construct a 72-unit studio apartment community is supported by evidence contained within the whole record. Therefore, based on our overall conclusions, and upon the proposal being subject to each of the following conditions, we approve Planning Action #T2-2018-00003. Further, if any one or more of the conditions below are found to be invalid, for any reason whatsoever, then Planning Action 412-2018-00003 is denied. The following are the conditions and they are attached to the approval: 1) That all proposals of the applicant shall be conditions of approval unless otherwise modified herein, including that the final units' dimensions shall be adjusted in the building permit submittals so that each unit has less than 500 square feet of gross habitable floor area which is defined in AMC 18.6.1 as, "The total area of all floors in a dwelling measured to its outside surfaces that are under the horizontalProJ'ection ofthe roof orf f loop above with at least seven eet ofhead room excluding uninhabitable spaces accessed solely by an exterior door." 2) That the plans submitted for the building permit shall be in conformance with those approved as part of this application. If the plans submitted for the building permit are not in substantial conformance with those approved as part of this application, an application to modify this approval shall be submitted and approved prior to the issuance of a building permit. E 3) That the recommendations of the Ashland Tree Commission from their October 11, 2018 meeting, where consistent with the applicable ordinances and standards and with final approval of the Staff Advisor, shall be conditions of approval unless otherwise modified herein. 4) That the requirement of the Fire Department, including approved addressing; fire apparatus access including approach, turn-around, and any necessary easements; fire flow; hydrant distance and clearance; fire sprinklers where applicable; fire department connection; and provisions for "Knox Box" key boxes; shall be satisfactorily addressed. 5) That the building permit submittals shall include: PA-T2-2018-00003 MidTown Lofts November 13, 2018 Page 10 f` 2019-0115_18P'Garfield Appeal Findings_Ex. A ; a) The identification of all easements, including but not limited to any required public or private utility easements, mutual access easements, public pedestrian access easements, and fire apparatus access easements. b) The identification of exterior building materials and paint colors for the review and approval of the Staff Advisor. Very bright or neon paint colors shall not be used in accordance with the requirements of the Site Design Standards, and the colors and materials selected shall be consistent with those identified in the application. C) Specifications for all exterior lighting fixtures. Exterior lighting shall be directed on the property and shall not directly illuminate adjacent proprieties. d) Revised Landscape, Irrigation and Tree Protection Plans shall be provided for the review and approval of the Staff Advisor with the building permit submittals. These plans shall address: 1) Any recommendations of the Tree Commission from their October 11, 2018 meeting where consistent with the applicable Site Development and Design Standards and with final approval by the Staff Advisor; 2) The identification of replacement trees to 4 mitigate the trees to be removed. The mitigation trees shall be planted and irrigated according to the approved plan, inspected and approved by the Staff Advisor prior to occupancy; 3) a maintenance watering schedule for trees to be retained; 4) Tree Protection details for trees on adjacent properties within 15 feet of the property line; 5) Clear demonstration that a pedestrian connection is provided from the sidewalk to each semi private patio entrance on the street-fronting units, without obstruction by landscape r materials; and 6) The required irrigation plans, including the requirements for programmable automatic timer controllers and a maintenance watering schedule with seasonal modifications. The applicant shall also obtain the required plumbing permits and inspections for installation of any required double-check valve(s) associated with the irrigation system. e) Storm water from all new impervious surfaces and runoff associated with peak rainfalls must be collected on site and channeled to the City storm water collection system (i. e., curb gutter at public street, public storm pipe or public drainage way) or through ail approved alternative in accordance with Ashland Building Division policy BD-PP-0029. On-site collection systems shall be detailed on the building permit submittals. A revised stormwater drainage plan, including any necessary on-site detention measures, shall be G provided for the review and approval of the Engineering, Building and Planning Departments with the building permit submittal. The drainage plan shall be designed to ensure that post-development peak stormwater flows are less than or equal pre- development levels as required by the Engineering Division. f) Final utility, grading, erosion and sediment control plans for the project shall be provided for the review and approval of the Engineering, Planning and Building Divisions. The € utility plan shall include the location of connections to all public facilities in and adjacent to the development, including the locations of water lines and meter sizes to accormnodate necessary water and fire services, sewer mains and services, manholes and clean-outs, PA-T2-20 1 8-000 03 MidTown Lofts November 13, 2018 Page I1 k F 2019-0115_1 ~ Garfield Appeal Findings_Ex. A storm drainage pipes and catch basins. Any necessary service upgrades shall be completed by the applicant at applicant's expense. Meters, cabinets, and vaults shall be located outside of the pedestrian corridor in those areas least visible from streets, sidewalks and pedestrian areas, while considering vision clearance and the access needs of the utility departments. g) The applicant shall submit an electric design and distribution plan including load calculations and locations of all primary and secondary services including transformers, cabinets, street lights, and all other necessary equipment. This plan must be reviewed and approved by the Electric, Engineering, Building and Planning Departments prior to the issuance of demolition, excavation or building permits. Transformers, cabinets and vaults shall be located outside of the pedestrian corridor in those areas least visible from sheets, sidewalks and pedestrian areas, while considering the access needs of the Electric Department. Any necessary service upgrades shall be completed by the applicant at applicant's expense. h) That the applicant shall provide engineered plans for the installation of a seven-foot width parkrow with irrigated street trees, five-foot sidewalk, and pedestrian scale street lighting on the property's full Quincy Street frontage and the section of the Garfield Street frontage north of Tree ff23/tlnits 31-32 for the review of the Planning and Public Works/Engineering Departments. These plans shall detail the removal of any existing unused curb-cuts and the transition from the new sidewalks to the existing curbside sidewalks to the south, which are to be retained. If necessary to accommodate these street frontage improvements, the applicant shall dedicate additional right-of-way or provide public pedestrian access easements. Any necessary easements or right-of-way dedications shall be submitted for the review and approval of the Planning and Public Works/Engineering Departments. i) Engineering construction drawings for the new driveway approaches on Quincy and Garfield Streets. The centerline of the driveway on Garfield Street shall align with the centerline of the alley across the street, and the driveway on Quincy Sheet shall be limited i to a standard width in generally the current location (rather than combined with the driveway to the east) for the review and approval of the Public Works/Engineering and Plamilng Divisions. Driveway approach permits shall be obtained through the Public Works/Engineering Division, and new driveway approaches shall be installed, inspected 1 and approved, and any unused curb cuts closed, inspected and approved, prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. j) The building permit drawings shall include details demonstrating that the proposed parking area complies with the requirements of AMC 18.4.3.080.13.5 in providing a pervious pavement system for a minimum of 50 percent of the parking area surface. 1 ]c) Final lot coverage calculations including all building footprints, driveways, parking, and circulation areas. Lot coverage shall be limited to no more than 75 percent as allowed in the R-3 zoning district. I PA-T2-2018-00003 MidTown Lofts November 13, 2018 Page 12 e 2019-0115_ 188 Garfield Appeal Findings_Ex. A gg I ga 1) The building permit submittals shall verify that the bicycle parking is provided in accordance with 18.4.3.070 for the 72 required sheltered bicycle parking spaces. Bicycle ; parking provided shall include the interior bicycle parking areas with hanging racks provided within each unit and the 12 spaces of exterior bicycle parking proposed by the applicants. Inverted ii-racks shall be used for the exterior bicycle panting. All exterior bicycle parking shall be installed in accordance with design and rack standards in 18.4.3.070 and according to the approved plan prior to the issuance of the certificate of occupancy. m) Demonstrations that the conservation housing, additional recreation space and major 1 recreational facilities requirements are satisfied to meet the requirements for the requested density bonuses. n) Solar setback calculations demonstrating that all new construction complies with Solar Setback Standard A in the formula [(Height -6)/(0.445 + Slope) = Required Solar Setback] and elevations or cross section drawings clearly identifying the highest shadow producing point(s) and the height(s) from natural grade. o) A revised plan to demonstrate that the open and recreation space requirements are met illustrating all areas to be counted towards open and recreation space and their dimension and treatment, and shall include a final estimate of the cost of the major recreational facilities proposed consistent with the requirements of AMC 18.2.5.080.P.3.c. which does not include land cost in estimating the cost of the facilities. A minimum of 18 percent of the site must be provided in open/recreation space for the proposed density bonus. Landscaped areas counted toward recreation space need to be surfaced for recreational use and not include thoroughfares for pedestrian circulation. Individual patios or porch areas may be included provided that their dimensions are at least six-feet by eight-feet exclusive of any circulation areas. Areas containing above-ground utility infrastructure such as 9 transformers, vaults and cabinets, bio-swale/detentions ponds are not to be included as open/recreational space. 6) That prior to the issuance of a building permit: i a) That in lieu of providing city standard frontage improvements along the full frontages with the current application, the property owner shall sign in favor of local improvement j districts for the future street improvements, including but not limited to sidewalks, parkrow, curb, gutter and storm drainage, for Iowa and Garfield Streets prior to signature of the final survey plat. The agreement shall be signed and recorded prior to the issuance of a building permit. b) That prior to the issuance of the building, excavation, staging, storage of materials or the commencement of site work, a Tree Verification Permit shall be obtained, and tree protection measures installed, inspected and approved by Staff Advisor. The Verification Permit is to inspect the identification of trees to be removed and the installation of tree protection fencing for the trees to be retained and protected on and adjacent to the site. Tree PA-72-2018-00003 MidTown Lofts November 13, 2018 Page 13 1 2019-0115_1 q8 Garfield Appeal Findings_Ex. A protection measures shall be in the form of chain link fencing six feet tall, installed and maintained in accordance with the requirements of AMC 18.4.5.030.C. c) That all necessary building permits fees and associated charges, including permits and connections fees for new, separate, underground electrical services to each proposed unit, and system development charges (SDC's) for water, sewer, storm water, parks, and transportation (less any credits for previously demolished structures) shall be paid. 7) That prior to the final approval of the project and issuance of a certificate of occupancy: 1 a) That all open space areas and recreational facilities, landscaping and the irrigation system shall be installed according to the approved plan, inspected, and approved by the Staff Advisor. b) All hardscape improvements including courtyards, walkways, driveways, parking areas, fire apparatus and other accessways-shall be installed according to the approved plans, inspected and approved prior to issuance of the final certificate of occupancy. c) All utility service and equipment installations shall be completed according to Electric, Engineering, Planning, and Building Departments' specifications, inspected and approved by the Staff Advisor. d) The screening for the trash and recycling enclosure shall be installed in accordance with the approved plan, inspected and approved by the Staff Advisor. An opportunity to recycle site of equal or greater size than the solid waste receptacle shall be identified in the building permit submittals and shall be in place, inspected and approved by the Staff Advisor. e) That the bicycle parking facilities including interior bicycle parking areas with hanging 1 racks inside each unit and 12 sheltered exterior bicycle parking spaces shall be installed according to the approved plans, inspected, and approved by the Staff Advisor prior to the h issuance of the certificate of occupancy. The building permit submittals shall verify the design and placement of bicycle parking. f) That all exterior lighting shall be directed on the property and shall not directly illuminate adjacent residential proprieties, g) All required street frontage improvements, including but not limited to the sidewalk, park ow with irrigated street trees spaced at one tree per 30 feet of fiontage, and street lighting shall be installed under permit from the Public Works Department and m accordance with the approved plans, inspected and approved by the Staff Advisor. h) The applicant shall provide evidence of Earth Advantage certifications necessary to satisfy the requirements for the conservation housing density bonus requested. 1 e i November 13, 2018 Planning Cor nission Approval Date PA-T2-2018-00003 MidTown Lofts November 13, 2018 n Page 14 P Council Business Meeting January 15, 2019 Agenda Item An Ordinance to Amend the Ashland Fire Prevention Code AMC Chapter 15.28 From Ralph Sartain Division Chief, Fire & Life Safety Contact ralph.sartainCa--)ashland.or.us (541) 552-2229 SUMMARY The Fire & Life Safety Division of Ashland Fire & Rescue wishes to amend the Ashland Municipal Fire Code to correct typographical errors, bring the code in line with the fee statement, allow the Ashland Police Department to enforce Fire Code Violations on private property, provide an exception for the 4th of July Community Aerial Display, and bring clarity to the inspection testing and maintenance requirements of the City of Ashland. POLICIES, PLANS & GOALS SUPPORTED 27.2 Inspections of Businesses and Multi-Family Residences 27.3 Target Hazard Fire Inspections 27.9 Burn Enforcement and Permits 27.11 Plans Review of Fire Protection Systems 49.1 Insure that codes and plan checks are consistently reviewed PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION Ord. 3104, 2014 to adopt 2014 Oregon Fire Code Ord. 3037 amended 09-07-2010 to adopt 2010 Oregon Fire Code Ord.2944 amended 11-06-2007 to adopt 2007 Oregon Fire Code BACKGROUND AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION A review of the current sections contained in AMC Chapter 15.28 showed the need to modify and/or amend language to bring the code up to current standards and requirements for the City. Because the City of Ashland is a nonexempt fire jurisdiction the modifications/amendments have been reviewed and approved by the Office of the Oregon State Fire Marshal. Please see listed changes per section: Section 1: Typographical and grammatical errors corrected. Section 2: Typographical / grammatical errors corrected. • Addition of definition for fire code official. • Re-numbering section. Section 3: Typographical and grammatical error corrected. Section 4: Typographical and grammatical errors corrected. • With the City of Ashland adopting and becoming a wildland urban interface community, this section was changed to provide a clear path of burning compliance, burning restrictions and relief for contractors during fire season. Section 5: Typographical and grammatical errors corrected. • Addition of operational and construction permits in several sections of section 5 to identify permits for which the city collects fees. • Identifying when and how after hour and re-inspection fees are calculated. Page 1 of 2 CITY OF ASHLAND • Oregon law does not allow law enforcement to enforce infractions on private property. Addition of section 503.4 allows law enforcement to issue fire lane, fire hydrant, and fire access citations under authority of the fire code official. • Explains how inspection, testing and maintenance contractors submit reports to the fire department for work being conducted in the City of Ashland as well as certifications they are required to carry. • Section 5601.1.3 Fireworks are prohibited in the City of Ashland. Added #5 which allows the city an exception to issue an Ariel display permit for the public (4th of July Chamber Festival fireworks show). • OFC Appendix A101.11/ OFC Appendix D105.1/ D105.2: In 1999 there were several changes to the land use code in the City of Ashland. The adopted fire code at the time was modified to meet the requirements of the land use. This section is more restrictive then the fire code for the State of Oregon. Because of this, the city council has to hear issues /complaints/ appeals related to grievances from contractors for the more restrictive section only. As a nonexempt jurisdiction all other complaints about the code or building issues must be heard by Oregon State Fire Marshal (OSFM) not city council. The previous adopted fire code had the complaints being sent to the OSFM office. OSFM cannot hear complaints related to a locally adopted fire code with changes. Section 6: Addition of the word Fire to (Fire) Chief. Section 7: Addition of clear statement for Ashland Municipal Court on how fines can be calculated. Section 8: No changes Section 9: No changes Section 10: No changes FISCAL IMPACTS N/A STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the 1st reading of Ordinance No. 3156 and move the ordinance to a 2"d reading on February 5, 2019. ACTIONS, OPTIONS & POTENTIAL MOTIONS I move to approve the 1st reading of Ordinance No. 3156 to amend the Ashland Fire Prevention Code AMC Chapter 15.28 and to send Ordinance No. 3156 to a 2nd reading on February 5, 2019. REFERENCES & ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1: Ordinance No. 3156 Page 2 of 2 CITY OF ASHLAND I 1 ORDINANCE NO. 3156 2 AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE ASHLAND FIRE PREVENTION CODE 3 AMC CHAPTER 15.28 4 Annotated to show deletions and additions to the Ashland Municipal Code sections being 5 modified. Deletions are bold lined through, and additions are bold underlined. 6 7 WHEREAS, the Fire and Life Safety Division wishes to amend the Ashland Municipal Fire 8 Code to correct typographical errors, bring the code in line with the fee statement, allow the 9 Ashland Police Department to enforce Fire Code violations on private property, provide an 10 exception for the 4s' of July Community Aerial Display and bring clarity to the inspection testing 11 and maintenance requirements to the City of Ashland. 12 THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: 13 SECTION 1. Ashland Municipal Code Section 15.28.010 is amended as follows: 14 Section 15.28.010 Adoption of Oregon Fire Code 15 Except as specifically excluded or modified by this Chapter, the City of Ashland adopts 16 -Tthe 2014 Oregon Fire Code and appendices A through D, F through N version„ which are 17 hereby adopted, exeept where speeiflealty exeluded or modified by this , will be 18 referred to in the Ashland Municipal Code as the Oregon Fire Code "OFC" . One copy of the 19 Oregon Fire Code and appendices shall be filed in the office of the City Recorder. 20 SECTION 2. Ashland Municipal Code Section 15.28.030 is amended as follows: 21 15.28.030 Definitions 22 The following definitions govern the construction of this Chapter: 23 1. "Jurisdiction" as used in the Oregon Fire Code, means the City of Ashland ("Ashland"). 24 2. "Department of Fire Prevention" as used in the Oregon Fire Code, means "Fire & Life Safety 25 Division." 26 3. "Fire Code Official", as used in the Oregon Fire Code, means the Division Chief of Fire 27 and Life Safety or designee. 28 34. "Apparatus cost" means the standardized cost, including repairs and depreciation, for the use 29 of Ashland Fire and Rescue ("AF&R") and public works apparatus or equipment, as set forth in 30 adopted regulations of the State Fire Marshal or in City resolution, and the cost for the use of ORDINANCE NO. 3156 Page 1 of 10 I apparatus or equipment of another jurisdiction which may respond to an incident pursuant to 2 statute or intergovernmental agreement. 3 45. "Direct costs" means those costs of supplies, apparatus and labor incurred by the City or 4 another jurisdiction in responding to an incident and as may be set forth in adopted regulations of 5 the State Fire Marshal or in City resolution. 6 -56. "Direct fire or rescue services" means any service provided by employees of the City, (1) to 7 a person whose person or property is injured or threatened with injury; or (2) to a person whose 8 property has injured or threatens to injure another person or another person's property, for which 9 a charge is not otherwise imposed under this code. "Direct fire or rescue services" includes, but 10 is not limited to, the suppression of fires, the rescue of persons or property, the provision of 11 medical assistance, and containment and cleanup of hazardous materials. 12 67. "Indirect costs" means those costs that are set forth in adopted regulations of the State Fire 13 Marshal or in City resolution, and which are the product of the state "average response 14 availability rate," and the time spent responding to an incident, together with the state "average 15 support services cost per incident," as defined by the State Fire Marshal. 16 78. "General costs" means direct or indirect costs that are not attributable to any particular 17 person who received direct fire and rescue services. 18 99. "Gross negligence" means conduct with conscious indifference to or reckless disregard of 19 the rights of others. 20 110. "Labor costs" means the compensation paid by the City to its employees, including but not 21 limited to base pay, overtime pay and fringe benefits, during the time spent responding to an 22 incident. 23 4911. "Railroad right-of-way" means a right-of-way used for rail transportation. 24 4412. "Transportation route" means a roadway or waterway against which no taxes or 25 assessments for fire protection are levied by the City. 26 SECTION 3. Ashland Municipal Code Section 15.28.050 is amended as follows: 27 15.28.050 €Fire Protection System Maintenance 28 Fire protection systems service providers providing inspections, tests, and maintenance required 29 by OFC 901.6. and the referenced standards shall be qualified and shall provide the inspections, 30 tests, and maintenance in accordance with the referenced standards. Failure by a company or individual service provider to follow the referenced standards is a Class I violation. ORDINANCE NO. 3156 Page 2 of 10 I SECTION 4. Ashland Municipal Code Section 15.28.060 is amended'as follows: 2 15.28.060 Restricted uses during fire'season 3 A. WhPfl thP FiFA Code Offleial deter-faines that an iner-eased fire risk exists in the City e 4 Ashland, the Fire Code nrr 1 may et a policy to str ct activities that ineFeaSe the 5 potential for- the ignition of fir-es that prpntp, n hAWA-rd to life, propeFty oF resour-ees. 6 The City of Ashland will follow the Oregon Department of Forestry ("ODF11) burn 7 restrictions and regulations during fire season. Open flame and fire pits are prohibited at 8 high fire index. 9 Exemption: A seasonal permit for contractors can be obtained for use within the City of 10 Ashland to allow for powered equipment use during fire season. (IE: Landscape, 11 Construction Etc.). Working on or within an 1/8 of a mile of ODF protected property 12 requires an additional permit issued from ODF. ii 13 B. The Yli J must in li ....te what ....tiyities a estrieted and the tifne period for- w1 ieh 14 the .-est.-ietion will be in effect 15 Q For- the purposes of eonsisteney and eeeWination between all eoeperating ageneies with 16 adjaeent boundaries, r r..n xshall be developed by the Fire t ode nrr ial in ration 17/ with the OregonT r.A..ent of Forestry and OtheF rederal state and local g ••'•t'•1 18 ageneies afleeted by the r-estrietions. The primary objeetive of the plan is to aehieve 19 uniformity of fire restrietions regardless of land ownership; however-, exaet UnifeFinity is 20 not a T1 plan Shall Feeognize variations in fire a^°^°r and it shall specify levels of 21 restr-ietions by r.y.. ✓ r-eeognizable geographie boundaries. 22 D. Per-fa:ts way be issue 1 by IThe Fire Code Official or designees; may issue a permit which 23 allows a person to conduct a restricted activity as long as specified fire prevention measures are 24 taken to reduce the potential for fire ignition. Contractors, such as those performing 25 landscape or construction work may obtain a seasonal permit for use within the City to 26 allow for powered equipment used during fire season. Working on or within one eighth of 27 a mile of ODF-protected property requires an additional permit issued by ODF. 28 SECTION 5. Ashland Municipal Code Section 15.28.070 is amended as follows: 29 15.28.070 Ainendments City of Ashland Modifications to the Oregon Fire Code 2014 30 Edition ORDINANCE NO. 3156 Page 3 of 10 I The OrOgOH FiFe Code is amended in the following r-espeets Ashland Fire Prevention 2 Code incorporates the Oregon Fire Code 2014 edition except that the following referenced 3 OFC sections are modified as set forth below: 4 B. OFC Section 104.6.3 is is modified by the addition of the following language: 5 Fire Investigation Reports for fires that are under investigation will not be released until 6 the investigation is complete. Exception: The Fire Chief may release incomplete Fire 7 Investigation Reports if warranted. 8 C. OFC Section 106.2 is modified by the addition of the following language: 9 1. Inspections outside of normal business hours: The Fire & Life Safety Division will 10 make every attempt to conduct inspections during normal business hours (Monday 11 thru Friday 8 am to 5 pm). If the applicant or business owner's agent requests an 12 inspection outside of normal business hours, or if the Fire Code Official determines a 13 ,permit inspection is required and there is no other alternative but to conduct the 14 inspection outside of normal business hours, the Fire Code Official shall inform the 15 applicant or business agent there will be an after-hours inspection fee of $150.00. The 16 inspection will not be performed until the required fees have been paid. 17 For additional information see City of Ashland Fee Schedule. 18 2.' Re-Inspection Fees, each Fire & Life Safety inspection is provided with one 19 additional re-inspection at no additional cost to the business. If a second re-inspection 20 is required, a fee of the base inspection plus $100 shall be assessed. If a third re- 21 inspection is required, a fee of the base inspection plus $200.00 shall be assessed. If a 22 fourth re-inspection is required, a fee of the base plus $400.00 shall be assessed. 23 For additional information see City of Ashland Fee Schedule. 24 D. OFC Section 105.1.1 is modified by the addition of the following language: 25 A schedule of permit and service fees not more than the actual or average cost of 26 providing service shall be established by resolution of the City Council and 27 periodically amended by Council resolution and kept at Ashland Fire & Rescue and 28 in the City Recorder's office. Required permits include, but may not be limited to, the 29 following list: 30 1. Operational Permits: l a. Fireworks, public display of b. Exhibits and trade shows ORDINANCE NO. 3156 Page 4 of 10 I c. Fumigation and thermal insecticidal fogging 2 d. Liquid or gas-fueled vehicles or equipment in assembly buildings e. Pyrotechnic and special effects material 3 f. Temporary membrane structures, tents and canopies over 400 square feet 4 g. Activities involving open flames h. Haunted Houses 5 i. Mariiuana processing 6 2. Construction/Use Permits: a. Automatic fire-extinguishing systems 7 b. Battery Systems 8 c. Compressed gases d. Fire alarm and detection systems 9 e. Fire Pumps 10 f. Flammable and Combustible Liquid Storage g. Hazardous Materials 11 h. Industrial Ovens 12 i. LP-gas >125 gallons i. Private Fire Hvdrants 13 k. Spraying or dipping operations 14 1. Standpipe systems m. Fire Sprinkler Systems 15 E. OFC Section 105.6.30 Open Burning is modified by deleting the current language of this 16 OFC provision entirely and adding the following language: See Ashland Municipal Code 17 10.30. 18 F. OFC Section 503.4 is modified by the addition of the following language: 19 1. The Ashland Police Department shall have the authority to issue fire code citations 20 for the following offenses on public and private properties: 21 a. Obstruction of marked fire apparatus access roads and fire lanes (Ref. OFC 22 503.4; 503.2.1) 23 b. Failure to maintain existing NO PARKING - FIRE LANE signs/markings (Ref. 24 OFC 503.3; D103.6) 25 c. Obstruction of fire hydrants and fire protection equipment (Ref. OFC 507.5.4; 26 ORS 811.550 (16)) 27 28 BG. OFC Section 506.1. Add the following sentence: The key box shall be installed and 29 maintained in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions, and shall contain keys to gain 30 necessary access as required by the Wire eCode eOfficial. ORDINANCE NO. 3156 Page 5 of 10 I CH. OFC Section 507.5. 1. Delete and replace with the following: Where required. Where a 2 portion of the facility or building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction is 3 more than 300 feet from a hydrant on a fire apparatus access road, as measured by an approved 4 route around the exterior of the facility or building, on-site fire hydrants and mains shall be 5 provided where required by the €Fire eCode eOfficial. 6 Exceptions: 7 1. For Group R-3 and Group U occupancies, the distance requirement shall be 300 feet. 8 2. For buildings equipped throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system installed in 9 accordance with Section 903.3.1.1, 903.3.1.2, or 903.3.1.3, the distance requirement shall be 600 10 feet (183 m). 11 BI. OFC Section 307 is modified by deleting the current language of this OFC provision 12 entirely and adding the following language: Refer to AMC 10.30. 13 U. OFC Section 901.6. Records: is modified by deleting the current language of this OFC 14 provision entirely and adding the following language: 15 Records of all system inspections, tests, and maintenance (ITM) required by the referenced 16 standards shall be maintained on the premises for a minimum of three years and service c 17 contractors shall send reports of tests to the City of Ashland Fire & Life Safety Division within 18 30 days of performing the inspection and test. The manner in which contractors shall submit 19 ITM reports to Ashland Fire & Rescue shall be specified by the Fire Code Official. 20 K. OFC Section 904.1.1 is modified by the addition of the following language: 21 Fire protection system service providers providing inspections, tests, and maintenance 22 required by OFC 901.6 and the referenced standards shall be qualified and shall provide 23 the inspections, tests and maintenance in accordance with the referenced standards. 24 Where the manufacturer requires only manufacturer certified technicians to conduct 25 inspection, testing and maintenance service on their engineered fire protection systems, 26 uncertified technicians shall not service the system. Prior to conducting service in the City 27 of Ashland the technicians shall provide a current manufacturer certification in a manner 28 specified by the Fire Code Official. 29 FL. OFC Section 5601.1.3: is modified by the addition of the following language: 30 Notwithstanding ORS 480.110 through ORS 480.165 and OAR 837-012-0600 through OAR ORDINANCE NO. 3156 Page 6 of 10 1 837-012-0675, the sale of retail fireworks as defined in OAR 837-012-0610 is prohibited within 2 the City of Ashland. 3 1. The sale and/or use of retail fireworks as defined in OAR 837-012-0610 is prohibited at 4 all times within the City of Ashland; 5 2. The sale and/or use of sparklers as defined in ORS 480.110 is prohibited at all times; 6 3. The storage of retail fireworks within the City of Ashland is prohibited at all times; and 7 4. The advertising of retail fireworks or sparklers is prohibited within the City of Ashland in 8 accordance with ORS 480.152 and OAR 837-012-0665. 9 5. As a limited exception from the prohibitions in provisions 1 through 4 above, the use 10 of fireworks for public display is allowed in conformance with NFPA 1123 Code for 11 Fireworks Display, current edition, with a valid Ashland Fire & Rescue Fireworks 12 Permit. 13 GM. OFC Section 5601, Storage of Explosives -Prohibited, is modified by the addition of the 14 following language: The scope referred to in Chapter 5601 of the Oregon Fire Code which 15 references the Oregon Revised Statutes and Oregon Administrative Rules related to explosives is 16 amended as follows. The sale, manufacture, possession, transfer and storage of explosives as 17 defined by ORS 480200(3) are prohibited in all areas within the City of Ashland except as 18 specifically permitted in writing by the Fire Code Official. 19 FIN. OFC Section 5704, Above-Ground Storage of Flammable or Combustible Liquids, is 20 modified by the addition of the following language: The limits referred to in Section 21 5704.2.9.6.1 of the Oregon Fire Code in which the storage of flammable or combustible Class I 22 and II liquids in above-ground tanks outside of buildings is restricted are established as follows: 23 All City of Ashland residential and historical district areas as defined in the Comprehensive Plan. 24 All installation and removal of above ground storage units requires an operational permit 25 from Ashland Fire & Rescue. New above-ground bulk storage plants for flammable or 26 combustible liquids are prohibited within this iurisdiction. 27 IO. OFC Section 6104, Storage of Liquefied Petroleum Gases - Restricted,; The limits 28 referred to in Section 6104.2 of the Oregon Fire Code, in which storage of liquefied petroleum 29 gas is restricted, are established as follows: All City of Ashland residential and historical district 30 areas as defined in the Comprehensive Plan are limited to the aggregate capacity of anyone installation shall not exceed a water capacity of 500 gallons. ORDINANCE NO. 3156 Page 7 of 10 I Exception: In particular installations, this capacity limit shall be determined by the Fire Code 2 Official, after consideration of special features such as topographical conditions, nature of 3 occupancy, and proximity to buildings, capacity of proposed containers, degree of fire protection 4 to be provided and capabilities of the City of Ashland Fire & Rescue Department. 5 JP. OFC Appendix A101.11:, is modified by the addition of the following language: A 6 decision by the Ashland Fire Code Official may be appealed to a Board of Appeals 7 established pursuant to Oregon Fire Code Section 108 of the Oregon Fire Code. An 8 appellant aggrieved by the decision of the Board of Appeals may appeal to the Oregon State 9 Fire Marshal as provided in ORS 479.180 if the subject of the appeal concerns a matter 10 governed exclusively by the Oregon Fire Code and the appeal is filed within 10 days of the 11 Board's final order. If an appeal from the decision of the Board of Appeals, however, 12 concerns a matter reserved by this Ashland Fire Prevention Code (Ashland Municipal Code 13 Chapter 15.28) for local decision-making, such an appeal must be submitted in writing to the 14 Ashland City Council within 10 days of the Board's final order. A decision by the City 15 Council shall be the final decision of the City and may not be appealed to the State Fire 16 Marshal. 17 K.Q. OFC Appendix D105.1, Aerial Fire Apparatus Access Roads. Remove and rep 18 following, DIOSA with the is modified by deleting the current language of this OFC 19 provision entirely and adding the following language:: Where required. Buildings or 20 portions of buildings or facilities exceeding 24 feet in height above the lowest level of fire 21 department vehicle access shall be provided with approved fire apparatus access roads 22 capable of accommodating fire department aerial apparatus.) Where the vertical distance 23 between the grade plane and the highest roof surface exceeds 24 feet approved aerial fire 24 access roads shall be provided. For the purposes of this section, the highest roof surface 25 shall be determined by measurement to the eave of a pitched roof, the intersection of the 26 roof to the exterior wall, or the top of parapet walls, whichever is greater. Overhead utility 27 and power lines shall not be located within the aerial fire apparatus access roadway or between 28 the aerial fire access road and the building. 29 LIZ. OFC Appendix D105.2, D^ ^^a T,ne ^ r n is modified by 30 deleting the current language of this ofc provision entirely and adding the following language: Width. Fire apparatus access roads shall have a minimum unobstructed width of 26 ORDINANCE NO. 3156 Page 8 of 10 I feet in the immediate vicinity of any building or portion of building more than 24 feet in height. 2 (Ord. 3059, amended, 04/17/2012; Ord. 3037, amended, 09/07/2010; Ord. 3006, amended, 3 03/02/2010; Ord. 2944, amended, 11/06/2007; Ord. 2932, amended, 10/18/2006; Ord. 2929, 4 amended, 08/18/2006; Ord. 2925, amended, 04/18/2006; Ord. 2921, amended, 01/05/2006; Ord. 5 2876, amended, 09/04/2001; Ord. 2871, amended, 08/07/2001; Ord. 3104, amended, 2014) 6 7 SECTION 6. Ashland Municipal Code Section 15.28.090 is amended as follows: 8 15.28.090 New Materials, Processes, or Occupancies - Permits required 9 The Building Official, the Fire Chief and the Fire Marshal shall act as a committee to determine 10 and specify, after giving affected persons an opportunity to be heard, any new materials, 11 processes or occupancies for which permits are required in addition to those now enumerated in 12 the Oregon Fire Code. The Building Official, in accordance with section 104.9 of the Oregon 13 Structural Specialty Code, shall record and enter in the files of the building department any 14 action granting approval of new or alternate materials. 15 SECTION 7. Ashland Municipal Code Section 15.28.100 is amended as follows: 16 15.28.100 Penalties 17 A. Any person violating or causing violation of any of the provisions of this chapter, has 18 committed a Class I violation, and upon conviction thereof, is punishable as prescribed in 19 Section 1.08.020 of the Ashland Municipal Code. Such person, firm or corporation is guilty of a 20 separate violation for each and every day during which any violation of this Chapter is 21 committed or continued by such person, firm or corporation. This violation can be 22 retroactively applied to the first day the occupant or owner was made aware of the 23 violation by the Fire Code Official. 24 B. For any violations of this Chapter deemed to be life threatening, a citation can be issued for 25 each and every occurrence, including multiple occurrences in one day. Life threatening hazards 26 include but are not limited to overcrowding, locking or obstructing doors designated to remain 27 unlocked, and shutting off or removing designated fire protection equipment. 28 C. The application of the above penalty shall not be held to prevent the enforced removal of 29 prohibited conditions. 30 SECTION 8. Ashland Municipal Code Section 15.28.160 is amended as follows: 15.28.160 Code Compliance Inspection - Fees ORDINANCE NO. 3156 Page 9 of 10 I The schedule for fire code compliance inspections shall be established by resolution of the City 2 council. 3 SECTION 9. Codification. In preparing this ordinance for publication and distribution, the 4 City Recorder shall not alter the sense, meaning, effect, or substance of the ordinance, but within 5 6 such limitations, may: 7 (a) Renumber sections and parts of sections of the ordinance; 8 (b) Rearrange sections;. 9 (c) Change reference numbers to agree with renumbered chapters, sections or other parts; 10 (d) Delete references to repealed sections; 11 (e) Substitute the proper subsection, section, or chapter numbers; 12 (t) Change capitalization and spelling for the purpose of uniformity; 13 (g) Add headings for purposes of grouping like sections together for ease of reference; and 14 (h) Correct manifest clerical, grammatical, or typographical errors. 15 SECTION 10. Severability. Each section of this ordinance, and any part thereof, is severable, 16 and if any part of this ordinance is held invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the 17 remainder of this ordinance shall remain in full force and effect. 18 The foregoing ordinance was first read by title only in accordance with Article X, Section 2(C) 19 of the City Charter on the day of 2018, and duly PASSED and ADOPTED 20 this day of , 2018. 21 22 23 Melissa Huhtala, City Recorder 24 25 SIGNED and APPROVED this _ day of , 2018. 26 27 28 John Stromberg, Mayor 29 Reviewed as to form: 30 David H. Lohman, City Attorney ORDINANCE NO. 3156 Page 10 of 10 Council Business Meeting January 15, 2019 Agenda Item Solid Waste Franchise Ordinance Modification From Adam Hanks Assistant to the City Administrator Contact Adam. hanks(a~ashland.or.us 541-552-2046 SUMMARY The City of Ashland has a current franchise agreement for solid waste and recycling collection services with Recology Ashland that is executed via ordinance. The consumer price index (CPI) utilized in the current franchise ordinance to determine annual rate adjustments has been discontinued and is obsolete. The proposed ordinance rectifies that with the replacement of the now outdated CPI-U with a new index, the CPI-Pacific. This proposed ordinance modification only changes the index used to calculate solid waste and recycling rates and does not alter the existing rates, which are separately approved by Council annually via resolution. POLICIES, PLANS & GOALS SUPPORTED N/A PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION Council adopted the existing franchise agreement contained in Ordinance #3090 in October of 2013 which repealed Ordinances 2829 and 2582 as well as an accompanying resolution 2013-32 establishing administrative operations and rules and service rates for the solid waste and recycling collection franchise. Council has also annually approved rate adjustment resolutions consistent with both the franchise agreement ordinance and administrative operations and rules resolution each year since 2014. BACKGROUND AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION The current solid waste and recycling collection franchise agreement is a ten-year agreement. Each year after the initial term, the agreement renews automatically for an additional seven-year period, unless terminated under terms specified in the franchise ordinance. One of the key elements of the franchise agreement is the process and methodology utilized to develop and adjust service rates. A consumer price index (CPI) is utilized to allow for incremental and predictable rate adjustments rather than the past history of intermittent, but significant rate increases. The CPI specified in this franchise agreement was a common and often utilized Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U). City and Recology Ashland staff met several times since the CPI-U was announced to be discontinued and researched a variety of potential replacement indexes that would provide equal or better representation of cost drivers impacting expenses incurred by Recology Ashland to provide the services specified in the franchise agreement. Both City and Recology Ashland staff determined that the newly created CPI-Pacific regional index best fits as a replacement to the CPI-U. Other "finalists" included the Seattle-Bellevue index, the San Francisco index and the larger West Region index. Page 1 of 2 CITY OF -ASHLAND The Pacific index is recommended due to its larger geographic area which takes data samples from eleven areas within the five state region (Alaska, California, Hawaii, Oregon, and Washington) that it covers providing a good balance of being broad enough to minimize one particular market fluxuation but not so broad that it doesn't accurately represent actual regional cost changes effectively. Several documents from the US Bureau of Labor Statistics are attached for additional reference. FISCAL IMPACTS The recommendation to adopt the newly created CPI-Pacific index does not impact existing solid waste and recycling collection service rates and is intended to provide an equivalent index to use for future rate adjustment calculations that are completed and presented to Council annually in March, consistent with the rate adjustment process and methodology described in Section 8 of franchise Ordinance 3090. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends Council approves the replacement of the CPI-U with the newly created CPI-Pacific. ACTIONS. OPTIONS & POTENTIAL MOTIONS 1) I move to adopt by first reading an ordinance modifying a franchise agreement for solid waste management and collection within the City of Ashland and repealing Ordinance 3090. 2) I move to continue this item for first reading to a future Council meeting to request additional information of staff. REFERENCES & ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1: Draft Ordinance replacing Ordinance 3090 (inclusion of CPI-Pacific) Attachment 2: US Bureau of Labor and Statistics - CPI Revisions for 2018 data sheets I Page 2 of 2 CITY OF ASHLAND ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE MODIFYING A FRANCHISE AGREEMENT FOR SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT & COLLECTION WITHIN THE CITY OF ASHLAND AND REPEALING ORDINANCE3090, WHEREAS, Oregon Revised Statutes Chapter 459 grants the City the authority to regulate solid waste collection and mandates the development of a recycling program; and WHEREAS, the City desires to insure efficient and comprehensive materials waste management and collection services are available to all residents, businesses and organizations in the City WHEREAS, ordinance 3090, adopted by Council October 1, 2013, contained a reference in section 5.8 that established the use of the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) as the means to adjust future solid waste and recycling rates that has been discontinued and thereby needs to be updated to reflect a currently available index for future rate adjustment requests. THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: Title. This ordinance shall be titled and referred to as the "Solid Waste Management Franchise Ordinance". SECTION 2: Purpose. It is the policy and purpose of the City of Ashland to protect the health, safety and welfare of the citizens and physical environment of Ashland through the regulation of solid waste management. This regulation will: a) Insure safe, economical, efficient and comprehensive solid waste management services (SWMS) as further defined in this Ordinance; b) Assist the community in reaching and surpassing recycling and waste diversion rates of the Jackson County waste shed; c) Insure fair and equitable service rates and charges across all customer classes to achieve safe and efficient collection, transportation and recover of solid waste, recyclables and compostable materials; d) Meet or exceed all applicable Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) 459 regulations relating to Solid Waste Management prescribed to local jurisdictions and their authorized franchisee; and e) Insure consistent and responsive service and communication with citizens regarding solid waste management operations, education and requirements including waste prevention, product life cycle impacts, waste diversion opportunities, recycling best practices and standards and general waste shed stewardship. Ordinance No. Page 1 of 21 SECTION 3: Scone. Services defined, regulated and authorized in this ordinance are applicable only within the city limits of the City of Ashland and all future urban growth boundary annexations occurring during the term of this ordinance. SECTION 4: Definitions. Except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning, or where a term is defined below, definitions contained within ORS 459.005 at the time of adoption or as further amended in the future, and regulations promulgated under state law are applicable to this ordinance. Administrative Operations Standards and Rules All standards and rules approved by resolution of Council defining specific operating rules and procedures that support and insure compliance with this Ordinance. Affiliated Company Any company which shares expenses and/or revenues with the Franchisee with respect,to the services under this Franchise and is: 1) the parent company (corporation, partnership or limited liability company) of Franchisee; or, 2) any subsidiary of such parent company; or, 3) any company of which thirty percent (30%) or more of the common stock or control is owned or controlled by Franchisee; or Franchisee's shareholders; Examples of such shared costs include, but are not limited to: labor, equipment, vehicles, insurance, or administrative costs. Allowable Expenses Those expenses incurred by Franchisee in the performance of this Franchise that are allowed by the City as reimbursable by the ratepayer as enumerated below. Allowable Expenses are allowable only to the extent that such expenses are known and measurable, calculated according to Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) on an accrual basis, and comply with the cost allocation methodology contained within this ordinance to the Franchisee's operations within the City, do not exceed the fair market value of comparable goods or services, and are commercially reasonable and prudently incurred by the Franchisee solely in the course of performing its obligations under the Franchise. Allowable expenses, shall include but not be limited to the following: a. The costs of complying with all laws, regulations or orders applicable to the obligations Franchisees under federal, state or local law, including this ordinance, as well as costs for financial reporting, accounting and regulatory processes associated with or required by this franchise or under law; as now or hereafter amended; b. Disposal costs; c. Labor costs, including operational and supervisory labor, payroll taxes, workers' compensation, and benefits, as well as third party transportation costs; d. Vehicle and equipment expenses, including vehicle registration fees, motor fuel, oil, tires, rental charges and/or operating lease payments and repairs and maintenance; e. Expenses of maintaining other capital assets, including rental charges and/or operating lease payments and repair and maintenance, to include container maintenance and repair costs; Ordinance No. Page 2 of 21 f. Performance bonds and insurance in at least the amounts and coverages required by the City; g. All administrative and management costs and expenses reasonably allocated for the services required under this Franchise, including, but not limited to compensation, management fees, and benefits for officers and employees, payroll taxes, data processing, billing, equipment or facility rental or lease costs, supplies, finance and accounting, administration, human resource and labor management, rate analysis, and regulatory compliance; h. Utilities; i. Training, worker safety and employee development expenses; j. Promotion and public education costs; k. Depreciation and amortization of capital assets, including any necessary stand-by or back-up equipment used on a regular and ongoing basis in the provision of services under this Franchise over standardized economic useful lives of the various assets; 1. Outside professional fees and costs, limited to two percentage points of revenue, unless an extraordinary circumstance exists; in. Interest expense, other than interest paid with respect to route or Franchise acquisition, that is not in excess of market rates ordinarily charged for the various types of financing required for purchases or leases; n. All surcharges, taxes or fees, other than state or federal income taxes or franchise fees, which are imposed upon the Franchisee or levied by federal, state or local government in connection with Franchisee's provision of collection services under this Franchise; o. Direct write-off charges for bad debts; and p. Franchise fees assessed by the City. Allowable expenses as defined above shall be reasonable if they are comparable with the expenses incurred by similarly situated solid waste and recycling collection companies on the West Coast of the United States. Automated Collection System A type of collection system that utilizes standardized toll carts and mechanically assisted collection equipment designed to minimize direct human handling of customer waste set out for collection. Bulky Wastes Large items of solid waste such as appliances, furniture large auto parts, trees, branches greater than four inches in diameter and 36 inches in length, stumps and other oversized wastes whose large size precludes or complicates their handling by normal collection, processing or disposal methods. City The existing city limits and future annexations of the City of Ashland, OR. City Council or Council The City Council of the City of Ashland. Commercial Ordinance No. Page 3 of 21 Stores; offices, including manufacturing and industrial offices; restaurants; warehouses; schools; colleges, universities; hospitals; and other non-manufacturing entities; manufacturing entities, but not including multifamily or residential condominium complexes. Container A receptacle used to store solid waste or recyclable materials that is designed for on-site unloading into a closed-bodied collection vehicle in which the contents of the receptacle are mixed with the contents of other similar receptacles. Construction and demolition debris Used or discarded construction materials removed from a premise during construction, demolition or renovation of a structure. Cost Allocation The following allocation methodology shall be used to determine expenses attributable to services rendered for City of Ashland solid waste management services franchise operations. 1) Residential and commercial labor hours The Franchisee will perform two annual surveys to estimate the time spent in each jurisdiction by residential and commercial route. Total annual hours will be estimated by jurisdiction for residential and commercial routes based on the two annual surveys. The annual total hours will be used to allocate labor and benefits, fuel, oil, maintenance, vehicle and container leases, vehicle licenses, and route costs by jurisdiction for residential and commercial services. 2) Debris box labor hours The Franchisee will estimate the average time spent per load by jurisdiction. This average will be applied to the actual annual load count by jurisdiction to calculate an annual total for each jurisdiction. The annual total hours will be used to allocate labor and benefits, fuel, oil, maintenance, vehicle and debris box leases, vehicle licenses, and route costs by jurisdiction for debris box. 3) Yardage Yardage by jurisdiction will be estimated by subscribed volumes for residential and commercial services and by box size for debris box service. This yardage will be used to allocate disposal costs by jurisdiction. 4) Residential and commercial weekly lifts The Franchisee will use two surveys to estimate the number of weekly services by jurisdiction. This measure will be used to allocate all other costs by jurisdiction. 5) Direct cost Franchise fees and other costs directly related to a specific jurisdiction will be applied to the appropriate jurisdiction. Curbside/Roadside Ordinance No. Page 4 of 21 I A location within three (3) feet of public right-of-way. This does not allow the garbage or recycling receptacle to be placed on the inside of a fence or enclosure even if the receptacle is within three (3) feet of said road or roads. For residences on "Flag Lots", private roads or driveways, "Curbside/Roadside" shall be the point where the private road or driveway intersects a City Road, Public Access Road, State Road or Federal Road. Customer Individuals, groups, businesses, corporations or other recognized entity receiving solid waste management services from the franchisee within the City of Ashland. Customer Classification List and definition of the different groupings utilized for rate making; i.e. residential, commercial, municipal, etc. Depot A facility for transferring containerized solid waste, recyclable materials or yard debris from one mode of transportation to another. The term also refers to a place for receiving source- separated recyclable materials. Disabled Customer A subscription customer in which all adult household members possess a DMV issued handicapped parking sticker/placard. Disposal Site Land and facilities used for the disposal, handling or transfer of, or resource recovery from solid wastes, including but not limited to dumps, landfills, sludge lagoons, sludge treatment facilities, disposal sites for septic tank pumping or cesspool cleaning service, transfer stations, resource recovery facilities, incinerators for solid waste delivered by the public or by a solid waste collection service, composting plants and land and facilities previously used for solid waste disposal at a land disposal site; Disposal site does not include the following: a facility authorized by a permit issued under ORS 466.005 to 466.385 to store, treat or dispose of both hazardous waste and solid waste; a facility subject to permit requirements of ORS 46813.050 or 468B.053; a landfill site which is used by the owner or person in control of the premises to dispose of soil, rock, concrete or other similar non decomposable material, unless the site is used by the public either directly or through a solid waste collection service; or a site operated by a wrecker issued a certificate under ORS 822.110. Drop Box A single receptacle used to store solid waste or recyclable materials that is designed to be removed from the generator's site on the back of a roll-off truck for unloading at a disposal site, material recovery facility, or other storage or processing facility. The contents of the receptacle are not mixed with the contents of other similar receptacles until delivery to a Disposal Site. Force majeure Ordinance No. Page 5 of 21 I Acts of god, fire, landslides, lightening, storms, floods, freezing, earthquakes, epidemics, volcanic eruptions, public riots, civil disturbances, acts of the public enemy, wars, blockades, embargoes, or acts of civil or military authority, breakage, explosions or accident to machines or other materials, pipelines or materials, governmental restraint, unavailability of a disposal site and any other event which could not with reasonable diligence be controlled or prevented by the party affected by the event. Franchise A contract with the City allowing the use of public right-of-way to collect and transport solid waste. Franchisee A person, persons, business or corporation who has been granted a franchise to operate within the City of Ashland pursuant to this Ordinance. Generator A person, who by virtue of ownership, management or control, is responsible for causing or allowing to be caused the creation of Solid Waste or Recyclable Materials. Gross Revenue "Gross Revenue" for any period shall mean: 1) Gross accrual-based billings by the Franchisee to customers for services provided under this Franchise; 2) The allocated gain on the sale of fixed assets, the depreciation or amortization from which, was an Allowable Expense under the terns of this Ordinance, and refunds, sales proceeds or other reimbursements for any other expense that was an Allowable Expense under this Ordinance, and 3) The accrual-based proceeds from the sales of recycled material collected within the Franchise. Hazardous Waste Solid Waste or Waste that may, by itself or in combination with other waste, be explosive, poisonous, caustic or toxic, or otherwise dangerous or injurious to human, plant or animal life, as defined by ORS 466.005. Household Hazardous Waste Any discarded, useless or unwanted chemical, material, substance, or product that is or may be hazardous or toxic to the public or the environment and is commonly used in or around households. Household hazardous waste includes, but is not limited to, some cleaners, solvents, pesticides, and automotive and paint products. Infectious Waste Infectious waste means biological waste, cultures and stocks, pathological waste, and sharps, as defined in ORS 459.386 Ordinance No. Page 6 of 21 Multifamily Any multi-dwelling building or group of buildings that (a) contain(s) five (5) or more dwelling units on a single lot, such as apartments, condominiums, and mobile home parks and (b) receives services on a per lot or per building basis, as opposed to a per unit basis. Multifamily complex also includes certified or licensed residential care housing, such as adult foster care homes, and group homes. Multifamily accounts are determined to be a residential waste stream. Material Recovery Any process of obtaining from solid waste, by pre-segregation or otherwise, materials that still have useful physical or chemical properties and can be reused or recycled for some purpose. Material Recovery Facility A solid waste management facility that separates or stores materials for the purposes of recycling from incoming, non-putrescible solid waste by using manual and/or mechanical methods. It also means a facility that primarily accepts previously separated recyclables. Operating Margin Gross revenues minus allowable expenses within a given period. Organic Waste Materials that can be biologically synthesized by plants or animals from simpler substances, are no longer suited for their intended purpose, and are readily broken down by biological processes into soil constituents. Examples include, but are not limited to, food waste, yard debris, contaminated paper, and putrescible materials that are generally a source of food for bacteria. Putrescible Waste Solid waste containing organic material that can be rapidly decomposed by microorganisms, and which may give rise to foul smelling, offensive products during such decomposition or which is capable of attracting or providing food for birds and potential disease vectors such as rodents and flies. Receptacle A can, cart, container, drop box, compactor or recycling bin or any other means of containment of Solid Waste or Waste or Recyclable Materials. Recyclable Material, Recyclable, Recyclables Material that has or retains useful physical, chemical, or biological properties after serving its original purpose(s) or function(s), and, is separated from solid waste by the generator or at a material recovery facility. Recycling Any process by which waste materials are transformed into new products in such a manner that the original products may lose their identity. Ordinance No. Page 7 of 21 Residence, Residential Any dwelling unit where at least 50 percent of the use of the entire building is for home use. Self-Haul Collection and transportation of solid waste from a commercial, multifamily, or residential entity by the generator, owner or occupant of the property, rather than by a third party hired to perform this function. Senior Discount Rate A discounted collection rate provided to customers that meet the discounted utility rate provision of resolution 92-22 or future related amendments. Solid Waste or Waste The terms "solid waste" and "waste" are interchangeable. Solid waste shall include all putrescible and non-putrescible waste, including but not limited to, garbage; compost; organic waste; yard debris; brush and branches; land clearing debris; sewer sludge; residential, commercial and industrial building demolition or construction waste; discarded residential, commercial and industrial appliances, equipment and furniture; discarded, inoperable or abandoned vehicles or vehicle parts and vehicle tires; manure; feces; vegetable or animal solid and semi-solid waste and dead animals; and infectious waste. Waste shall mean useless, unwanted or discarded materials. The fact that materials, which would otherwise come within the definition of Solid Waste, may, from time to time, have value and thus be utilized shall not remove them from the definition. The terms Solid Waste or Waste do not include: 1) Recyclable materials or yard debris separated from solid waste and properly prepared for collection; 2) Hazardous wastes as defined in ORS 466.005; 3) Materials used for fertilizer or for other productive purposes on land in agricultural operations in the growing and harvesting of crops or the raising of fowl or animals; 4) Septic tank and cesspool pumping or chemical toilet waste; 5) Source separated, principal recyclable materials as defined in ORS 459A and the Rules promulgated there under and under this Ordinance, which have been purchased or exchanged for fair market value, unless the City declares a site of uncollected principal recyclable materials to be public nuisance; 6) Applications of industrial sludges or industrial waste by-products authorized through a Land Use Compatibility Statement or Management Plan approval and that have been applied to agricultural lands according to accepted agronomic practices or accepted method approved by the Land Use Compatibility Statement or Management Plan, but not to exceed 100 dry tons per acre annually; and 7) Stabilized municipal sewage sludge applied for accepted beneficial uses on land in agricultural, non-agricultural, or silvicultural operations. Sludge-derived products applied for beneficial uses on land in landscaping projects. Ordinance No. Page 8 of 21 Solid Waste Management and Collection Services Prevention, reduction, management of the storage, collection, transportation, treatment, utilization, processing and final disposal of solid waste; or recycling, reuse and material recovery from solid waste; and facilities necessary or convenient to such activities. Source Separated Materials Recyclable materials that have been separated by type of recyclable material and removed from the solid waste stream by the person who last used the recyclable materials. Transfer Station A fixed or mobile facility, other than a transportation vehicle, where solid waste is deposited temporarily after being removed from the site of generation but before being transported to a final disposal location. Unallowable Expenses Shall include the following: 1) All charitable and political contributions; 2) Fines and penalties, including without limitation judgments for violation of applicable laws, incurred by a licensee; 3) Payments for services provided by individuals related by blood or marriage or by affiliated companies to a licensee to the extent that such payments exceed the reasonable cost that would be charged by an independent third party to provide the substantially equivalent service; 4) Accruals for future unknown regulatory changes; 5) Costs associated with purchase of other companies including, but not limited to, employee stock ownership plan payments, goodwill, amortization of goodwill and premiums on key-person life insurance policies; 6) Principal or interest payments on the acquisition of solid waste, recyclable materials and yard debris collection routes; the purchase of equipment and/or facilities to the extent that the price includes goodwill or a premium in excess of fair market value at the time of acquisition; State and federal income taxes; 7) Fees paid to a Franchisee's Board of Directors; 8) Attorney's fees and related expenses resulting from: a. Any judicial proceeding in which the city and a Franchisee are adverse parties, unless the Franchisee is the prevailing party; b. Any judicial proceeding in which a Franchisee is ruled to be liable due to willful misconduct or gross negligence or in violation of law or regulation, excluding judicial proceedings involving traffic accidents; 9) Operation of community access recycling depot not physically located or operated in conjunction with the Franchisee's transfer station 10) Recycling operations expenses already calculated and incorporated into Franchisee's tipping fees 11) Any other expenses defined as "unallowable" and approved by mutual consent of the Franchisee and the council. Ordinance No. Page 9 of 21 I Utilization The terms utilize, utilization, or utilization of Solid Waste or Waste shall mean productive use through recycling, reuse, salvage, resource recovery, energy recovery, or land filling for reclamation, habitation, or rehabilitation of land. Waste Evaluation An evaluation completed by the City or a Franchisee of a commercial entity's waste management practices, for the purpose of providing guidance to a multi-family or commercial customer on effective means to reduce waste, increase recycling, and purchase recycled products. Yard Debris Grass clippings, leaves, tree and shrub prunings of no greater than four (4) inches in diameter or similar yard and garden vegetation. Yard debris does not include such items as: dirt, sod, stumps, logs, tree and shrub prunings greater than four (4) inches in diameter, rocks, plastic, animal waste or manure, cat litter, potting soil, prepared food wastes or nonputrescible material. SECTION 5: Franchise Agreement. 5.1 Franchise Award No person shall do business in the collection and transport of solid waste generated within the City without a current, valid City franchise. A Franchise to provide solid waste management and collection services, including recyclable materials and yard debris in the service area of the City shall be granted only after a determination of need for the service. The determination of need is the responsibility of the City Council, which will seek the best balance of the following objectives: I) To insure safe, efficient, economical, equitable and comprehensive solid waste service; 2) To avoid duplication of service that will cause inefficiency, excessive use of fuel, increased traffic, and greater wear on streets; 3) To provide service in areas of marginal return; 4) To promote and encourage recycling and resource recovery; 5) To improve the likelihood of the Franchise holder making a reasonable profit and thereby encourage investment in modern equipment; 6) To cooperate with other governmental bodies by recognizing their service arrangements; and 7) To otherwise provide for the service in a manner appropriate to the public interest. 5.2 Renewal of Franchises In granting a franchise renewal, the Council may, in addition to the above, consider the following: 1) Volumes of solid waste collection and disposal; 2) (2) Volumes of recyclable materials and rate of participation in recycling; 3) Customer satisfaction, including but not limited to customer complaints; Ordinance No. Page 10 of 21 4) Analysis of solid waste collection and recycling programs in other cities as compared to those of the City, including but not limited to program costs, funding mechanisms and overall rates of participation in recycling; 5) Franchisee performance of its obligations under the franchise, including a Franchisee's technical and financial capabilities; 6) Franchisee ability to provide evidence of required insurance; and 7) Franchisee responsiveness to customer or City complaints. Franchises granted by the City shall be non-exclusive, however it is understood that during the term of franchises granted under this Ordinance, the City shall not grant any other person a franchise for Solid Waste Management Services unless there is a showing by the applicant of the need for such additional service in the proposed service area. As to such application(s) the existing Franchisee shall have first right of refusal to provide such services. In evaluating whether a need exists for additional service, the City Council may consider, among any other criteria deemed relevant by the City Council, the following items: 1) An increase in the population of the City; 2) An extension of the boundaries of the City; 3) Intensive residential, commercial or industrial development within the boundaries of the City; 4) Changes in solid waste technology and/or recycling collection technology that could substantially improve collection service or reduce collection costs to residents of the City; 5) The effect that an additional franchise would have on each existing Franchisee's ability to meet the City's service standards and maintain a fair return on its investment; 6) Changes in federal or state laws, rules or regulations that substantially affect solid waste or recycling collection requirements. 7) The Franchisee cannot or will not perform or subcontract the proposed service. This ordinance does not prohibit any person from self-hauling solid waste and/or recyclables. A generator may self-haul his or her own material, and a generator's contractor may haul materials a that are generated as a direct result of the service-provider's activity. For example, landscapers, roofers, and remodelers may self-haul materials, but may not contract with third parties other than Franchisees for collection and transport. 5.3 Franchise Terms A franchise to provide solid waste management and collection services shall be granted for a period of ten (10) years, beginning December 1, 2013 with subsequent seven year terms renewing annually, unless prior notice of request to terminate is submitted by either the City or the Franchisee a minimum of 90 days prior to the renewal date. 5.4 Franchise Fee 1) Annual Fee. In consideration of the rights and benefits of the terms of this franchise, Franchisee shall pay to the City each year during the life of this franchise beginning November 1, 2013 an annual fee derived from revenue received by that franchisee from Ordinance No. Page 11 of 21 Solid Waste Management and Collection Service boundaries of the City. The franchise fee shall be five percent (5%) of gross revenues. 2) Quarterly Payments. The franchise fee required in 7(a) above shall be paid quarterly, and, shall be due and payable within thirty (30) days of the end of the calendar quarter. Accompanying the payments described above, Franchisee shall file with the City Administrator or designee, a statement showing the amount of the gross revenues received by that company within the City for the calendar quarter immediately preceding the calendar quarter in which such statement is filed. There will be a reconciliation of final gross revenues on the quarterly report ending September 30th of each year for the prior fiscal period, which is October I" through September 30th. I 3) Review of Records; Annual Audit. Franchisee shall make available for inspection, . copying and review by the City Administrator or designee at any time during normal work hours all records in the Franchisees' possession that the City Administrator or designee deems relevant to verifying the accuracy of fees paid to the City, to regulating rates or to carrying out any responsibility that the Franchisees or the City has under this Ordinance. No more often than once during any twelve (12) month period, City may request an audit of the books, records and accounts of Franchisee by a certified public accountant or such other professional chosen by the City to verify accuracy of fees paid to the City, subject to the approval of the audited Franchisee; provided, however, that such approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. Franchisee agrees to have their books, records and accounts audited and further agree to pay for such auditing services. The report of the certified public accountant or other professional shall be conclusive and final. In the event such audit report discloses any difference of payment due either to the City or Franchisee through error or otherwise, such payment shall be due and payable within thirty (30) days of discovery or determination of the error. If payment is owed by the City to Franchisee, the City shall reimburse the Franchisee for payment for the portion of the services attributable to the audit of the Franchisee receiving such payment from the City. If payment is owed by Franchisee to the City, and the difference of payment due is more than the greater of five hundred dollars ($500) or two and one-half percent (2'/2 of the Franchisee franchise fee, or if the Franchisee is found to have violated any other term or condition of the franchise then, notwithstanding any other provision of this Section or the franchise, the City may request an additional audit during the next twelve (12) month period with all expenses of such additional audit paid by such Franchisee. 4) Late Payments; Interest. Should Franchisee fail or neglect, for thirty (30) days after any quarterly payment shall become due and payable, to make the quarterly payment, the City shall provide written notice of failure of payment to Franchisee. Upon notification of failure to pay, Franchisee will have thirty (30) days to remit payment to the City. If Franchisee fails to pay within said thirty (30) day period, the City may charge interest retroactive to the due date, at a rate of nine percent (9%) per annum, and may at its option either continue the franchise in force and proceed by suit or action to collect the payment, Ordinance No. Page 12 of 21 or declare a forfeiture of the franchise because of the failure to make payment, but without waiving its right to collect earned franchise payments and interest. 5.5 Franchise Administrative Operations Standards and Rules The Solid waste management and collections franchisee will operate within operations standards set by resolution of Council. Standards and rules will be developed across all customer classifications including, but not limited to, the following: Service Rates and Fees a. Rate and fee schedule for all collection services, programs by customer classification Collections a. Regular, holiday and hazardous weather schedules b. Procedures for missed, bulky waste, vacation hold, etc collections c. Collection receptacle standards and requirements d. Receptacle location requirements for pick-up e. Private property access rights and limitations f. Responsibilities of the customer g. Vehicle minimum equipment, maintenance standards, identification/signage and standards Customer Service & Communications a. Billing standards and frequency b. Billing/collection procedures for past due/non-pay accounts c. Descriptions, objectives and targets for all services provided across all customer classifications d. Solid waste related programs, education and event promotion e. Complaint/dispute resolution procedures f. Community Communications and outreach plan coordination with City outlining roles and responsibilities of City and Franchisee. Reporting (in addition to Ordinance required reporting) a. Efficiency analysis reports for routes, billing/collections, etc b. Revenue and subscription volume reports by solid waste category (trash, recycle, yard waste) for various customer classifications (residential, and commercial,). Debris box volumes will be measured by dump and return and/or pull activities. c. Customer counts and trends over time for residential and commercial customer classifications Debris box load counts will be reported in lieu of debris box customer counts. 5.6 Subcontracting Services A Franchisee may contract with another person to provide specific components of solid waste management and collection services within the Franchisee's service area with the written approval of the City Administrator or designee, provided that the subcontract does not amount to a transfer of the collection franchise and the subcontracting party agrees to: 1) Abide by the conditions of this ordinance and associated resolutions; and Ordinance No. _ Page 13 of 21 I - 2) In written application to the City, show how they will meet the criteria applying to the current franchise 5.7 Transfer of Franchise A proposed assignment or transfer of a Franchise must be requested by the Franchisee if the following occur, but shall not be limited to: 1) A sale, exchange or other transfer of 50% or more of Franchisee's assets dedicated to service in the City; 2) A sale, exchange, or other transfer of fifty percent (50%) or more of the outstanding common stock of a Franchisee; 3) Any reorganization, consolidation, merger, recapitalization, voting trust, pooling agreement, escrow arrangement, liquidation or other transaction to which Franchisee or any of its shareholders is a party which results in a change of ownership or control of fifty (50%) or more of the value or voting rights in the stock of the Franchisee; and 4) Any combination of the foregoing that has the effect of a transfer or change of ownership and control. The Franchisee shall provide no less than 90 days' advance written notice to the City of any proposed transfer or assignment. Except as specifically authorized by the City, the Franchisee shall not assign any of its rights or delegate or otherwise transfer any of its obligations to any other person without the prior consent of the City Council. Any such assignment without the consent of City Council shall be void and any such attempted assignment shall constitute default and grounds for termination of the Franchise. If a Franchisee requests the City's consent to transfer the Franchise, the City shall act on such request within sixty (60) days of the receipt of the Franchisee's written request together with all information, as set forth below, required for the City's action on the request. The City and Franchisee may consent in writing to additional time for the City to review and approve the consent to transfer the Franchise. The City shall not unreasonably refuse to consent to an assignment of the Franchise to a proposed assignee that has sufficient knowledge, experience, and financial resources so as to be able to meet, to the satisfaction of the City Council, in its sole discretion, all obligations of the Franchisee hereunder. An application to the City to consider a sale or other transfer of a Franchise shall include the following: 1) A nonrefundable application fee of two thousand dollars ($2,000) payable at the time of application to the City in advance to defray the City's anticipated expenses and costs resulting from the Franchisee's request; 2) Financial statements audited or reviewed by a Certified Public Accountant of the Proposed Assignee's operations for the three immediately preceding operating years together with any additional evidence of financial ability to perform its Franchise obligations; and 3) A showing that the proposed Assignee meets all City criteria for the grant of a Franchise as enumerated in this Ordinance. Ordinance No. Page 14 of 21 5.8 Establishment and Modification of Service Rates and Fees Except as set forth herein, the City Council may review and set rates on an annual basis by Council resolution that considers the following goals: I) Rates shall be established to the greatest extent practicable on a cost of service basis based on the ordinance established cost allocation methodology. 2) Rates shall be adjusted annually by Council resolution equal to the percentage change in the January to January Consumer Price Index for Pacific Division (CPI - Pacific) but not to exceed the twelve percent operating margin cap. The City Administrator or designee shall certify the CPI - Pacific rate in writing to Franchisee by March I of each year to initiate the rate resolution. 3) Rates shall be adequate to provide an Operating Margin equal to ten percent (10%) of Franchise-wide Gross Revenues; however, the City shall not be required to change rates if the expected Operating Margin in the next future year falls between eight and twelve percent of Gross Revenues. The ten percent target return on Gross Revenues is considered sufficient to reflect the level of business risk assumed by the Franchisee, to allow investment in equipment, and to ensure quality collection service. Accordingly, the City shall have the authority to commission audits, reviews, or analysis of Franchisee Annual Reports to validate submissions. The expected Operating Margin in a future year would incorporate expected inflation factors, and the effect of known or expected increases or decreases in expenses or revenues. The rates charged by Franchisees shall conform to the most current Council resolution. Prior to implementation, the Council must approve any interim rate for services not included in the current resolution. If the Franchisee notifies the City in writing that they believe a material change outside the Franchisees' control has occurred, and the change will have an adverse effect on operating margins, such that the next future year operating margins will be less than eight percent, a material change will be deemed to have occurred. At that time, the City may undertake any type of review it finds necessary to validate the existence of the material change and estimate its effect on the operating margin. If the results of the review are such that no rate adjustment is warranted, persons requesting the review shall reimburse the City for reasonable costs incurred during the investigation at the time the next payment of franchise fees is due. If the City believes that a material change has occurred that will result in next future year operating margins falling under eight percent or over twelve percent, the City may undertake an abbreviated rate review at its own expense. SECTION 6: Franchise Reporting Requirements. 6.1 Informational Reports Each Franchisee shall provide the City Administrator or designee by the last day of each quarter for the previous quarter: Ordinance No. Page 15 of 21 1) A quarterly report listing the quantities of solid waste, yard waste and recyclable materials by customer classification collected within the City during the previous calendar quarter, the locations to which these materials were delivered, the number of customer accounts, and other information requested by the City Administrator or designee and mutually agreed upon with Franchisee. 2) A quarterly report listing the names and addresses of multi-family and commercial customers that received waste evaluations during the reported quarter. 3) A summary of communication, marketing and educational outreach conducted by Franchisee during the reported quarter. 6.2 Quarterly Franchise Fee Reports Franchisee shall complete and remit to the City a Quarterly Franchise Fee report not later than the last day of the month immediately following the end of the quarter. At the time of payment of the quarterly Franchise Fees, the Franchisee shall file with the City Administrator or designee, a verified statement of quarterly gross revenues for the period covered by the tendered fee. Such statements shall be public records. Franchisee shall maintain books and records disclosing the gross receipts derived from business conducted within the City, which shall be open at reasonable times for audit by the City Administrator or designee. Misrepresentation of gross revenue shall be deemed material and a breach of the Franchise contract and shall be cause to initiate the process to terminate the franchise. 6.3 Annual Franchise Reports Franchisees shall report revenues and expenses (allowable and unallowable), in an income statement format, and provide a variety of information about customer counts, service levels, . disposal volumes, and recycling activities for all customer classifications and for all programs identified in the Administrative Operations Standards and Rules resolution adopted by Council. Franchisees shall report totals for all operations necessary to adequately verify compliance with the cost allocation methodology as defined in this for expenses that share significant operational, management, and administrative expenses with the City of Ashland Franchise. Resources allocated from regional or corporate offices or affiliates shall be distributed to appropriate expense line items, and, shall also be disclosed in a schedule describing total allocations and their distribution to individual expense line items. All allocations from Affiliated Companies must be described and must be equal to or less than the fair market value of similar goods and services purchased from a non-affiliated company. The report will also include a synopsis of the operating year, a description of the measures each franchisee has taken in the preceding year to make its operation more efficient, a listing of the efficiency measures which each Franchisee proposes to take in the next year, a composite table showing the type and number of customer service complaints and a description of the measures that the Franchisee has taken or is planning to take to correct the cause of commonly reported complaints, and such other information as requested by the City Administrator or designee. The report shall also describe and quantify communication, outreach and educational activities as described in the Administrative Operations Standards and Rules resolution. Ordinance No. Page 16 of 21 Franchisees may identify specific information submitted to the City in the Annual Report as confidential. The City shall treat any information marked "Confidential" as such, and, shall not subject the confidential information to public disclosure except as required by law. If the City receives a request for disclosure of confidential information, the City Administrator or designee shall notify the Franchisee within a reasonable time after receiving the request so as to allow the Franchisee a reasonable opportunity to defend against the requested disclosure through appropriate legal process. SECTION 7: Franchise Responsibilities and Requirements. 7.1 Access for Inspections and Delivery of Notices Franchisees shall make all company premises, facilities and records related to their solid waste, recyclable materials and yard debris collection services (including, but not limited to: offices, storage areas, financial records, non-financial records, records pertaining to the origin of any solid waste collected by the Franchisee, receipts for sale or delivery of collected recyclable materials, customer lists, and all records related to vehicle maintenance and safety which are required under ODOT motor carrier requirements and regulations and ORS 767) available for inspection by the City Administrator or designee within 24 hours of notice by registered mail. Such inspections are only for purposes of enforcing this ordinance, and, are restricted to normal business hours. During normal business hours, the Franchisee shall make all company premises and facility accessible to City employees for delivery of any written notices. Collection vehicles must be accessible for inspection during the normal operating hours for collection, in addition to normal business hours. Where receptacles are stored in the public right- of-way or when the City is inspecting a situation where the Franchisee is allegedly commingling Recyclable Materials or Yard Debris with Solid Waste, the need for 24-hour notice does not apply to inspection of receptacles or vehicles. 7.2 Indemnification, Bond, and Insurance A Franchisee shall pay, save harmless and indemnify the City from any loss, damage, penalty or claim against the City on account of or in connection with any activity of the Franchisee in the operation of the Franchisee's solid waste collection business including activity by any approved subcontractor providing solid waste management collections and services. If such suit shall be filed against the City either independently or jointly with the Franchisee or its subcontractor to recover for any claim or damages, the Franchisee upon notice to it by the City shall defend the City against the action, and in the event of a final judgment being obtained against the City, either independently or jointly with the Franchisee or its subcontractor, the Franchisee will pay said judgment and all costs and hold the City harmless there from. Franchisee shall furnish a performance bond, in a form approved by the City Attorney, by an acceptable surety company in the amount of twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000.00),-but may, in lieu of a bond, furnish an irrevocable letter of credit or assign a savings account or deposit in any federally insured financial institution in the amount of twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000.00) on a form approved by the City Attorney. The Security shall guarantee faithful performance of all the obligations contained herein with the premium for such bond or cost of Ordinance No. Page 17 of 21 such assignment to be paid by the Franchisee furnishing the bond, letter of credit or making the assignment. A Franchisee shall maintain commercial general liability insurance on an occurrence basis in such forms and with such companies as shall be approved by the City Attorney, which will cover the Franchisee's business operation, including each vehicle operated by it. The insurance coverage shall include not less than $1,000,000.00 for one person, nor less than $5,000,000.00 for bodily injury due to each occurrence, and not less than $1,000,000.00 for damage to property due to each occurrence and coverage of at least $5,000,000 in the aggregate per occurrence. All such insurance coverage shall provide a 30-day notice to the City Administrator or designee in the event of material alteration or cancellation of any coverage afforded in the policies prior to the date the material alteration or cancellation shall become effective. Copies of all policies required hereunder shall be furnished to and filed with the City Administrator or designee prior to the commencement of operations or the expiration of prior policies, as the case may be. The Franchisee shall furnish proof annually to the City Administrator or designee that the insurance remains in effect. The provisions of this section, any bonds accepted by the City pursuant thereto, and any damage recovered by the City hereunder shall not be construed to excuse unfaithful performance by the Franchisee or limit the liability of the Franchisee under this ordinance or the Franchisee for damages, either to the full amount of the bond, or otherwise. SECTION 8: Enforcement, Suspension, or Termination of Franchise. 8.1 Responsibility of City Franchisees are subject to the exercise of the police power of the City and to such regulations as the City may provide by resolution, ordinance, rule or regulation. 8.2 Enforcement of Standards The City Administrator or designee shall administer and enforce this ordinance and pursue remedies for non-compliance as laid out within this ordinance. The City Administrator or designee shall also administer and enforce Administrative Operations Standards and Rules as adopted by Council. These standards and rules shall be enforceable with penalties allowed in section 1.08 of the Ashland Municipal Code. Upon recommendation by the City Administrator or designee, the Council may declare a Franchisee who fails to abide by the rules to be in default. 8.3 Initiation of Enforcement Actions In addition to enforcement under State law, the City may prosecute any infraction as defined in this Ordinance or the Rules issued hereunder, based on any information coming to the City, in Ashland Municipal Court. The burden of proof is on the City to prove an infraction by a preponderance of the evidence. 8.4 Penalties for Infractions Each Franchise provision, including rules adopted hereunder, is subject to penalties as described in section 1.08 of the Ashland Municipal Code for each day from the initial citation of the offense that the offense continues to violate the terms of this ordinance or associated resolutions. Ordinance No. Page 18 of 21 8.5 Termination of Franchise for Default In addition to default for accrued penalties, upon recommendation by the City Administrator or designee, the City Council may terminate a Franchise for the Franchise holder's default in performing any material term or condition of the Franchise. An event of default also shall include, but not be limited to entry of a judgment against the Franchise holder for material misrepresentation or deceit committed against the City or a customer or entry of a judgment of conviction (including conviction on a plea of no contest) against the Franchise holder or any principal of same for a crime involving dishonesty. Notice to a Franchisee of default shall be delivered to the Franchisee by certified mail requiring the Franchisee to show cause in a public hearing before the City Council at a place and time to be stated in the notice, but no earlier than 14 days from the date the notice is mailed, why the Franchise should not be terminated. At the hearing the Franchisee shall demonstrate the measures it has taken or commenced to cure the default. 8.6 Service Interruption Except for the right to refuse service for nonpayment or if Customer has attempted to improperly dispose of Hazardous Waste in violation of the City's Standards and Rules as set forth in this ordinance, Franchisees shall not interrupt service unless: 1) Access, roads, streets and highways necessary for collection operations are unusable or unsafe and there are no alternative routes. Franchisees shall resume service within 24 hours after access is restored. 2) A Force Majeure event occurs. Upon the occurrence of a Force Majeure event that prevents or impairs a Franchisee's ability to perform any of its Franchise obligations, the Franchisee shall: 1) Provide immediate notice, either verbal or written to the City Administrator or designee of the nature of the event and extent and anticipated duration of Franchisee's inability to perform any obligation under this Franchise. If verbal notice is given, then written notice must be delivered to the City within 24 hours of verbal notice; 2) Commence immediately to develop, in communication and cooperation with the City, an interim plan for the restoration of full performance; and 3) Take all such other reasonable actions requested by the City to assist the City in protecting the public health and safety and to restore service as soon as practicable. Labor unrest, including, but not limited to, strike, work stoppage or slowdown, sick-out, picketing, or other concerted job action conducted by Franchisee employees or directed at the Franchisee is not an event of Force Majeure, and the Franchisee shall be obligated to continue to provide service notwithstanding the occurrence of any or all of events. Ordinance No. Page 19 of 21 8.7 City's Right to Perform Service Except as provided under Section 8.6, in the event that a Franchisee, for any reason whatsoever, fails, refuses or is unable to collect or transport any or all solid waste for a period of more than forty eight (48) hours, and if, as a result thereof, solid waste or recyclable materials should accumulate in the City to such an extent that the City finds that such accumulation endangers the public health, safety, or welfare, then the City shall have the right, but not the obligation, upon twenty-four (24) hour prior written notice to the Franchisee, to perform or cause to be performed collection services with its own or other personnel at the Franchisee's expense. This right shall be in addition to and not in lieu of any other remedy available to the City. If necessary, the City may take temporary possession of, and a Franchisee shall peacefully surrender, any or all the Franchisee's land, equipment, and other property used or useful in the collection of Solid Waste or Recyclable Materials until such time as the emergency is resolved. If such possession occurs, the City assumes all responsibility and liability for the equipment and land used to perform such temporary collection services. 8.8 Dispute Resolution with Customers Upon receipt of any notice of dispute from a customer about any bill, charge, or service, the Franchisee shall thoroughly investigate the matter and promptly report the results of its investigation to the customer. Except in the event a Customer has attempted to improperly dispose of Hazardous Waste in violation of the City's Standards and Rules, a Franchisee shall not refuse service to any customer during a time of dispute. If the Franchisee is not able to resolve a dispute with the customer, the customer may contact the City Administrator or designee who will act as an informal arbitrator in an attempt to resolve the matter. Should the dispute remain unresolved, the Franchisee or customer may then pursue the matter in any Court with jurisdiction. 8.9 Dispute Resolution with City During all disputes arising under this Franchise, the City and Franchisee shall continue performance of their respective obligations under this Franchise unless and until the Franchisee is terminated for default, in which case the Franchisee's obligation to pay a franchise fee based on cash receipts generated from services provided under the Franchise during said dispute shall survive such termination. In addition to and without waiving any rights and remedies under civil or common law, in the event of a dispute under this Franchise, the parties shall mutually agree to arbitration. Within fifteen (15) days after agreement to Arbitration has been reached, each party shall submit the name of its own arbitrator, selected from the American Arbitration Association, and the two arbitrators shall select a third arbitrator selected from such panel within 15 days, or in case of a disagreement concerning the appointment of the third arbitrator, the third arbitrator shall be appointed from such panel by the presiding judge for the Circuit Court of the State of Oregon for Jackson County. During such time that the arbitrators are being selected or appointed, the parties shall continue to negotiate in good faith to resolve their dispute in a cooperative manner. Ordinance No. _ Page 20 of 21 The decision of the arbitrators in the matter shall be final and binding on the parties, and any judgment upon the award rendered pursuant to such arbitration may be entered in any court having jurisdiction thereof. SECTION 9. 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 10. Codification. Provisions of this Ordinance shall be incorporated in the City Code and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "code", "article", "section", "chapter" or another word, and the sections of this Ordinance may be renumbered, or re-lettered, provided however that any Whereas clauses and boilerplate provisions (i.e. Sections 1-3) need not be codified and the City Recorder is authorized to correct any cross-references and any typographical errors. The foregoing ordinance was first read by title only in accordance with Article X, Section 2(C) of the City Charter on the day of , 2019, and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of , 2019. Melissa Huhtula, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of , 2019. John Stromberg, Mayor Reviewed as to form: David H. Lohman, City Attorney Ordinance No. Page 21 of 21 Consumer Price Index Geographic Revision for 2018: U.S. Bureau of L... https://www.bls.gov/cpi/additional-resources/geographic-revision-2018.htm A to Z Index I FAQs I About BLS I Contact Us Subscribe to E-rr Follow Us J I What's New I Rele Search BLS.gov Home Subjects Data Tools Publications Economic Releases Students Beta Consumer Price Index PRINT: J5 Search Consumer Price Index CPI Home CPI Publications CPI Data CPI Methods CPI FAQs Contact CPI Consumer Price Index > Methods > Consumer Price Index Geographic Revision for 2018 Consumer Price Index Geographic Revision for 2018 Starting in 2002, the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) moved away from comprehensive revisions implemented every ten years or so in favor of incremental updates implemented on an ongoing basis. For example, expenditure weight updates are now introduced every two years, and item structure changes occur whenever they are deemed appropriate given changes in the marketplace. One element of the CPI that has not seen more frequent revisions, however, is the geographic sample. In January 2018, BLS will introduce a new geographic area sample for the Consumer Price Index (CPI). The last time the sample was revised was in 1998. The new sample consists of 75 urban areas-large, medium, and small. There are 87 urban areas in the current sample. I Changes to the Geographic Structure The CPI geographic sample is selected to be representative of the demographics of the United States. The 2018 revision utilizes the 2010 Decennial Census and it incorporates an updated area sample design, changes the frequency of publication for several local area indexes, and establishes some new local area and aggregate indexes. It also introduces Census division-level indexes. i Core Based Statistical Areas For the 2018 revision, primary sampling units (PSUs) are defined using Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Core Based Statistical Area (CBSA) definitions. This is different from the previous definition of PSUs as metropolitan statistical areas. Table 1. Publication differences between the old and the new geographic sample designs Number of areas Number of areas Number of areas Number of areas published published published monthly published bimonthly semi-annually Old design 27 3 it 13 New 23 3 20 0 design + I Riverside, CA, which was previously included in the Los Angeles-Riverside-Orange County, CA MSA, will now be its own CBSA, and will be considered a new index, starting at 100.000. The combined Washington-Baltimore index (one of the bimonthly indexes) will be discontinued. The Washington and Baltimore areas will be independent 1 of 4 2/20/2018 9:38 AM Consumer Price Index Geographic Revision for 2018 : U.S. Bureau of L... https://www.bls.gov/cpi/additional-resources/geographic-revision-2018.htm CBSAs. The new CBSAs for Washington and Baltimore will be considered continuous with the independent areas Washington (A312) and Baltimore (A313) under the old schedule. Existing indexes for A312 and A313, not previously published for January 1998-December 2017, will be published, with a footnote to indicate that indexes are based on a substantially smaller sample, and allowing the post-revision indexes to be continuous back to 1914. Under the old design, indexes were published for Pittsburgh PA, Cincinnati-Hamilton OH-KY-IN, Cleveland-Akron OH, Milwaukee-Racine WI, andiPortland-Salem OR=WA! Because they did not meet a population threshold, tt hey will] iidt_be,published under the new design? In addition, the index for Kansas City MO-KS will no longer be published because it was not selected as part of the sample. Table 2. Publication list of CBSAs including publication frequency and schedule New Publication Old Publication New CBSA Old MSA Frequency Schedule Frequency Schedule Chicago-Naperville-Elgin, Chicago-Gary-Kenosha, IL-IN-WI IL-IN-WI Monthly Monthly Monthly Monthly Los Angeles-Long Beach- Los Angeles-Riverside-Orange Anaheim, CA County, CA Monthly Monthly Monthly Monthly New York-Northern New New York-Newark-Jersey Jersey-Long Island, Monthly Monthly Monthly Monthly City, NY-N7-PA NY-NJ-CT-PA Atlanta-Sandy Springs- Atlanta, GA Bimonthly Even Bimonthly Even Roswell, GA months months Baltimore-Columbia-Towson, Washington-Baltimore, Even MD DC-MD- VA-WV Bimonthly months Bimonthly Odd months Boston-Cambridge-Newton, Boston-Brockton'Nashua, Bimonthly Odd Bimonthly Odd months MA-NH MA-NH- ME-CT months Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX Dallas-Fort Worth, TX Bimonthly montOdd hs Bimonthly Odd months Denver-Aurora-Lakewood, CO Denver-Boulder-Greeley, CO Bimonthly months Semi-annual Semi-annual Detroit-Warren-Dearborn, MI Detroit-Ann Arbor-Flint, MI Bimonthly m ven Bimonthly m ven Houston-The Houston-Galveston-Brazoria, Even Even Woodlands-Sugar Land, TX TX Bimonthly months Bimonthly months Miami-Fort Lauderdale-West Miami-Fart Lauderdale, FL Bimonthly Even Bimonthly Even Palm Beach, FL months months Minneapolis-St. Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN-WI Bimonthly Odd Semi-annual Semi-annual Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI months Philadelhia-Camden- Phephia-Wilmgton- Even Even Wilm ngton, PA-NI-DE-MD AtanticClty, PA-NJ-DE-MD Bimonthly months Bimonthly months Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale, AZ Phoenix-Mesa, AZ Bimonthly Even Semi-annual Semi-annual months Riverside-San Bernardino- Los Angeles-Riverside-Orange Bimonthly Odd Monthly Monthly Ontario, CA County, CA months San Diego-Carlsbad, CA San Diego, CA Bimonthly monOdd Semi-annual Semi-annual San Francisco-Oakland- San Francisco-Oakland-San Even Even j Bimonthly Bimonthly Hayward, CA Jose, CA months months , Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA Seattle-Tacoma-Bremerton, Bimonthly Even Bimonthly Even WA months months St. Louis, MO-IL St. Louis, MO-IL Bimonthly m ven Semi-annual Semi-annual j Tampa-St. Petersburg- Tampa-St. Petersburg- Bimonthly Odd Semi-annual Semi-annual Clearwater, FL Clearwater, FL months Urban Alaska Anchorage, AK Bimonthly Even Semi-annual Semi-annual months I 2 of 4 2/20/2018 9:38 AM Consumer Price Index Geographic Revision for 2018: U.S. Bureau of L... https://www.bls.gov/cpi/additional-resources/geographic-revision-2018.htm New Publication Old Publication New CBSA Old MSA Frequency Schedule Frequency Schedule Urban Hawaii Honolulu, HI Bimonthly mo011 Semi-annual Semi-annual Washington-Arlington- Washington-Baltimore, Bimonthly Odd Bimonthly Odd months Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV DC-MD- VA-WV months Region, division, and size-class indexes Two additional major changes with the new design are: (1) the number of size classes and (2) the publication of Census division-level indexes in addition to the current Census region-level indexes. Under the area redesign, the CPI now has two size classes, A and B/C (corresponding to population size greater than 2,500,000 for size class A and 2,500,000 or less for size class B/C), rather than the three size classes under the old design (A, B/C, and D, with population size of more than 1,500,000 for size class A, 50,000 to 1,500,000 for size class B/C, and less than 50,000 for size class D). The current size class B/C and size class D are consolidated in order to reduce small sample bias and to reduce the standard error of indexes. I Census regions are now split into divisions, three in the South and two each in the Northeast, Midwest, and West. Table 3. Published monthly region and division indexes in 2018 Northeast Midwest South West Divisions New England East North Central South Atlantic Mountain , i Middle Atlantic West North Central East South Central Pacific West South Central BLS will continue to publish monthly region-size class indexes for A-sized and B/C-sized cities in the four regions. Additional information is available in the Monthly Labor Review article The 2018 revision of the Consumer Price Index geographic sample. Publication of additional items below the national level The following items will be published at the region, division, and area level. Series for new areas will have a base period of December 2017=100; base periods for continuing areas will vary by area. Table 4. Newly published items below the national level Item name Item code I Cereal and bakery products SAFIll Meats, poultry, fish, and eggs SAF112 Dairy and related products SEF] Fruits and vegetables SAF113 Nonalcoholic beverages - SAF114 Other food at home SAF115 New and used motor vehicles SETA (1) New vehicles SETA01 (1) Used cars and trucks SETA02 (1) I - Motor vehicle insurance SEI'E Footnotes: (11 Currently published at the region level. I i 3 of 4 2/20/2018 9:38 AM Consumer Price Index Geographic Revision for 2018 : U.S. Bureau of L... https://www.bls.gov/cpi/additional-resources/geographic-revision-2018.htm Item name Item code Tuition, other school fees, and child care SEES Footnotes: rj Currently published at the region level. i Additional Documents: ® 2018 Geographic Revision Area Concordance XLSX) Post-2018 Geographic Revision Mock-Up of CPI Press Release Table 4 (PDF) I Last Modified Date: December 6, 2017 l RECOMMEND THIS PAGE USING: ® Facebook hJ Twitter ® LinkedIn TOOLS CALCULATORS HELP INFO RESOURCES Areas at a Glance Inflation Help & Tutorials What's New Inspector General (OIG) Industries at a Glance Injury And Illness FAOs Careers @ BLS Budget and Performance Economic Releases Glossary Find It! DOL No Fear Act Databases & Tables About BLS Join our Mailing Lists USA.gov Maps Contact Us Linking & Copyright Info Benefits.gov Disability.gov Freedom of Information Act I Privacy & Security Statement I Disclaimers I Customer Survey I Important Web Site Notices U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics I Division of Consumer Prices and Price Indexes, PSB Suite 3130, 2 Massachusetts Avenue, NE Washington, DC 20212-0001 www.bls.cov/CPI I Telephone: 1-202-691-7000 1 Contact CPI 4 of 4 2/20/2018 9:38 AM Consumer Price Index (CPI) Information on Changes in the West Region Due to the 2018 CPI Geographic Revsion The Consumer Price index (CPI) relies on a sample of households in different metropolitan areas to represent urban households across the nation. Periodically, the CPI program needs to adjust the sample to reflect changes in the distribution of the population across the country. The CPI program has updated its sample to reflect the data from the 2010 Decennial Census on the distribution of the urban population. Below are changes in the U.S. and West Region indexes. Contact the West Region Information Office with questions at (415) 625-2270 or BlSinfoSF@bls.gov. 2018 1998-2017 Title Publication Area Composition Title Schedule Publication Schedule Area Composition . U.S. City Average Monthly 75 areas sampled U.S. City Average Monthly 87 areas sampled United States United States Wert Monthly 17 areas sampled West Urban Monthly 18 areas sampled West Census Region' West Census Region- West - Size ClassA Monthly West population size class more West -Size Class A Monthly West population size class more than 2,500,000 than 1,500,000 West population size class West population size class West-Size Class B/C Monthly 2,500,000 and under Wes[-Size Class B/C Monthly 1,500,000 and under Mountain Monthly 6 areas sampled N/A Mountain Census Division" 11 areas sampled Pacifc Monthly N/A Pacific Census Division"' Los Angeles-Long Beach- Los Angeles-Riverside-Orange CA: LOs Angeles, Orange, Anaheim, CA Monthly CA: Los Angeles, Orange County, CA Monthly Riverside, San Bernardino, Ventura Phoenix-Mesa-Scuttsdale, AZ Bimonthly' AZ: Maricopa, Final Phoenix-Mesa, AZ Semianually AZ: Maricopa, Final Riverside-San Bernardino- Ontario, CA Bimonthlyz CA: Riverside, San Bernardino N/A San Diego-Carlsbad, CA Bimonthlyz CA: San Diego San Diego, CA Semiannually CA: San Diego CA: Alameda, Contra Costa, San Francisco-Oakland- a CA: Alameda, Contra Costa, San Francisco-Oakland-San a Marin,Napa, Santa Clara, Santa Hayward, CA Bimonthly Mann, San Francisco, San Mateo Jose, CA Bimonthly Cruz, San Francisco, San Mateo, Solaro, Sonoma Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA Bimonthly 3 WA: King, Pierce, Snohomish Seattle-Tacoma-Bremerton, WA Bimonthly3 WA: Island, King, Kinap, Pierce, Snohomish, Thurston Urban Alaska Bmonthlya AK: Anchorage, Matanuska-Susitna Anchorage, AK Semianually AK: Anchorage Urban Hawaii Bimanthlyz HI: Honolulu Honolulu, Hl Semianually HI: Honolulu OR Clackamas, Columbia, Portland area d&ontmued. Portland Salem, OR_ WA Semianually Ma}ion Multnomah, Polk; - Washington, YZmill, WAY Clark ' Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington, Wyoming. "Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, Wyoming. Twelve-month percent changes will be available with January 2019 data. "'Alaska, California, Hawaii, Oregon, Washington. Twelve-month percent changes will be available with January 2019 data. I Reference months of February, April, June, August, October, December (Twelve-month percent changes will be available with December 2018 data). Semiannual data will continue to be published. z Reference months of January, March, May, July, September, November (Twelve-month percent changes will be available with January 2019 data). Semiannual data will continue to be published. 3 February, April, June, August, October, December. NOTE: All existing indexes are considered continuous, regardless of name or composition changes. Mountain, Pacific, and Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA are new indexes. NOTE: Monthly CPIs are averages of prices for the reference month as a whole - not for a particular day such as the 1st, 15th or 31st. Bimonthly indexes-those covering a two-month period-use a single month title to Identify the reference period. Monthly and bimonthly indexes are published approximately midway during the month following the reference month. NOTE: Local area indexes are byproducts of the national CPI program. Each local index has a smaller sample size than the national index and is, therefore, subject to substantially more sampling and other measurement error. Asa result, local area indexes show greater volatility than the national index, although their long-term trends are similar. Therefore, the Bureau of Labor Statistics strongly urges users to consider adapting the national average CPI for use in their escalator clauses. last Modifiad Date?Marchn 2pIS Council Business Meeting January 15, 2019 Ordinance No. 3165 Related to Vehicles For Hire, Amending Ashland Agenda Item Municipal Code (AMC) 6.28.080 and AMC 6.28.190 and Deleting AMC 6.28.090 From Katrina L. Brown Assistant City Attorney Contact katrina.brown(a.ashland.or.us SUMMARY Ordinance No. 3165 would amend two sections and delete one section of the recently adopted Ashland Municipal Code (AMC) Chapter 6.28 related to vehicles for hire. The proposed changes the AMC Chapter 6.28 would align Ashland's requirements for vehicles for hire more closely with the City of Medford's requirements and further encourage Transportation Network Companies such as Uber and Lyft to operate in Ashland. POLICIES. PLANS, AND GOALS SUPPORTED 1. Nurture emerging new technologies. (Council Goal 16). 2. Provide, promote, and enhance the security/safety, environmental health, and livability of the community. (Quality of Life Administrative Goal). PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION On September 18, 2018, Council adopted new AMC Chapter 6.28 to allow Transportation Network Companies (TNC's) to operate within the City of Ashland. However, TNC's are objecting to the City of Ashland's requirements for vehicle inspections and mandatory Wheelchair Accessible Vehicles. Ordinance No. 3165 would amend AMC Chapter 6.28 by removing these requirements. BACKGROUND AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION City staff was initially contacted in late October of 2017 by a representative from Uber after Medford adopted its new ordinance regulating vehicles for hire. Uber's representative proposed that Ashland adopt Medford's exact regulatory regime since the two cities are in such close proximity to each other, or that Ashland deregulate vehicle for hire services altogether, in effect leaving regulation of vehicles for hire to Medford. As the City of Ashland has been regulating taxicabs and taxi agencies for over twenty years, Council chose to amend the AMC to allow for these new forms of vehicle for hire services in lieu of deregulation. When Council adopted new AMC Chapter 6.28 on September 18, 2018, it was aware that the AMC would contain a few requirements for vehicles for hire that were not present in Medford's regulatory regime. At the time Council felt that the additional requirements were not prohibitive and would further accessibility and community safety. As of today's date, no TNC's have chosen to apply to operate within the City of Ashland. Both Uber and Lyft have cited the vehicle inspection and the Wheelchair Accessible Vehicle requirements as the primary reasons. Ordinance No. 3165 would remove these requirements. Page 1 of 2 CITY OF ASHLAND FISCAL IMPACTS The fiscal impact to the City would be minimal. ACTIONS, OPTIONS, AND POTENTIAL MOTIONS 1. Approve First Reading of Ordinance No. 3165 and advance it to Second Reading for enactment. 2. Decline to approve First Reading of Ordinance No. 3165. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff is neutral on First Reading of Ordinance No. 3165. The City's original Ordinance had two provisions that provided opportunities for equity in TNC services by requiring a Wheelchair Accessible Vehicle to be available and requiring vehicle safety inspections. Uber has expressed that they will not provide their services in Ashland because of those two provisions. Lyft has stated that while they don't like the provisions, they may offer services in the Spring/Summer. It is unknown at this time if the Council makes the changes that Uber or Lyft will offer their services in Ashland. REFERENCES AND ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1: Proposed Ordinance No. 3165 Page 2 of 2 CITY OF ASHLAND 1 ORDINANCE NO. 3165 2 AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO VEHICLES FOR HIRE; AMENDING AMC 6.28.080 3 AND AMC 6.28.190; AND DELETING AMC 6.28.090. 4 Annotated to show deletions and additions to the Ashland Municipal Code sections being 5 modified. Deletions are bold lifted through, and additions are bold underlined. 6 7 THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: 8 SECTION 1. Ashland Municipal Code Section 6.28.080 is hereby amended to read as follows: 9 6.28.080. Reasonable Accommodations. 10 A. Vehicle for Hire Agencies must provide reasonable accommodations to 11 passengers with disabilities, including passengers accompanied by a service animal, 12 passengers with hearing and visual impairments, and passengers with mobility devices. 13 Vehicle for Hire Agencies must comply with all applicable requirements of the 14 Americans with Disabilities Act. 15 B. Vehicle for Hire Agencies and their Drivers shall provide services in a manner that 16 ensures the equal protection, treatment, and representation of all persons and shall not 17 discriminate against any person for any reason, including, but not limited to, age, 18 citizenship status, color, familial status, gender identity or expression, marital status, 19 mental disability, national origin, physical disability, race, religion, sex, sexual 20 orientation, and source or level of income. 21 C- Taxi Companies and TNC-s must provide serviee to any passenger with a severve 22 mobility lintit`ti`n that . ests a 1xlheelehai' A eeessible Vehi.d. Taxi Companies 23 and TNGs shall provide 3* 4N' ........:..e within a reasonable a...ount of time by 24 maintaining one or more a ffiliated 1R heelehai. Accessible 17..6iele . ntraet:.......a6 25 permitted . rotor- of Wheelchair- A..eessn.le V..hiele 1 or- a mbin^tion thereof-. 26 it is ..rebuttable ...es ption that failing to oyide a lE7 A [7 within forty five /AG\ 27 minutes of receipt of a request for eh a ,..1.:,.1..: unreasonable. 28 A viirv rates for- 3ALAAZs shal]HAt A*PAAd the fare rates for comparable non WAIA 29 6: 1 and shall not 6 ..6: t t Dynamie D.d..: - 30 SECTION 2. Ashland Municipal Code Section 6.28.190 is hereby amended to read as follows: 6.28.190. Violations, Penalties. ORDINANCE NO. 3165 Page 1 of 3 I A. It shall be unlawful to operate or provide services as a Vehicle for Hire Agency or 2 Vehicle for Hire Driver in the City without a valid Permit issued pursuant to this Chapter. 3 B. It shall be unlawful to refuse service to a person with a disability. 4 C. it shall be ....1aw fi,1 to o ....t.... 146:^7^ lbr Hire in the Git y without having a 5 annual yehiele : eetion red by A AIC 6.28.090. 6 CD. A violation of subsection A of this section is a Class I violation. A violation of 7 subsection B of this section is a Class I violation. A vielation of subsection C of this 8 section is a Class H violation A violation of any other provision of this Chapter is a 9 Class II violation. Each day that a violation continues shall constitute a separate 10 violation. 11 SECTION 3. Ashland Municipal Code Section 6.28.090 is hereby deleted in its entirety: 12 6.19.090. °^6:^1^ Safety inspeetio 13 Eneh Vehiele for- Hire operating in the City shall pass Fin Am annsini hasis a standardized 14 vehiele safety test as performed by a National institute f;nr- -4 liMmAtive setwiee B*eellenee 15 (ASE) Blue Sea! reeegnized shop or by tin automotive teehnieian with a eurrent, valid ASE 16 e .tifiention in any of the areas of ASE A4 A8. Any ..Male that is less than twe M\ years 17 eld, based an made! yeflF, or- has less thnn 20,000 miles An its; ed-effi-eter -is exempt &om this 18 requir-ement. Proof of passage of a standardized vehiele safety test shall be kept in the 19 .ehiele at all times. 20 SECTION 4. Codification. In preparing this ordinance for publication and distribution, the 21 City Recorder shall not alter the sense, meaning, effect, or substance of the ordinance, but within 22 such limitations, may: 23 (a) Renumber and rearrange sections and parts of sections of the ordinance; 24 (b) Change reference numbers to agree with renumbered chapters, sections or other parts; 25 (e) Delete references to repealed sections; 26 (d) Substitute the proper subsection, section, or chapter numbers; 27 (e) Change capitalization and spelling for the purpose of uniformity; and 28 (f) Correct manifest clerical, grammatical, or typographical errors. 29 SECTION 5. Severability. Each section of this ordinance, and any part thereof, is severable, 30 and if any part of this ordinance is held invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of this ordinance shall remain in full force and effect. ORDINANCE NO. 3165 Page 2 of 3 I PASSED by the City Council this day of '2019. 2 3 4 ATTEST: 5 6 7 Melissa Huhtala, City Recorder 8 9 SIGNED and APPROVED this day of 2019. 10 11 12 John Stromberg, Mayor 13 14 15 16 Reviewed as to form: 17 18 19 Katrina L Brown, Assistant City Attorney 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 ORDINANCE NO. 3165 Page 3 of 3