HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-0116 REG MINMINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL
January 16, 1996
CALLFX} TO ORDER
Mayor Golden called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m., Civic Center Council
Chambers.
ROLL CALL
Councilors Laws, Reid, Hauck, Hagen, Wheeldon and Thompson were present.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes of the Regular meeting of January 2, 1996 were approved as presented.
CONSENT AGENDA
1. Minutes of boards, COmmisSiOnS, and committeeS.
2. Monthly departmental reports - December 1995.
3. Liquor license application from Ashland Creek Bar & Grill, 92% North Main
Street.
4. Memorandum from director of Community Development regarding County
Health Department's inspection requirements for Trave!lers' Accommodations
by Jackson County.
5. Approval of request to cut pavement on Hersey Street (under moratorium
until 9-18-97).
Councilor Wheeldon questioned if the Planning Department could include a narrative report
in Council packets giving status of projects. Planning Director John McLaughlin clarified
for Council that those reports would be included in their packets beginning next month.
January actions would be reported in the February packets.
Councilor Hagen requested that there be a narrative from both the Planning Department and
the Building Department to address issues.
Councilors Hauck/Hagen m/s to approve consent agenda. Voice vote: aH AYES. Motion
passed.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Request for modification of Chapter 18.92 of the Ashland Municipal Code
Land Use Ordinance pertaining to off-street parking. Modifications
include changes to the bicycle parking section and other general
housekeeping changes.
Planning Director John McLaughlin presented the proposed modification to the off-street
parking chapter of the Ashland Municipal Code Land Use Ordinance. He stated that it was
an opportunity to clean up the chapter and make some improvements in the way the off-street
parking issues are handled. Changes are made throughout the chapter making better
references, cleaning up language, making it more specific and making improvements in the
bike parking requirements. Reported that the modifications have gone through many
reviews, including the Planning Commission. Staff recommends approval and adoption of
the ordinance as presented.
Councilor Reid stated that it had been brought to her attention that when a new business is
requested by the City to install a bicycle rack, it doesn't happen. She questioned how this is
enforced.
McLaughin explained those are items that are required before issuance of certificate of
occupancy. He stated that there have been problems with code enforcement, but in general
is working well.
Thresholds listed under residential uses was discussed and it was clarified by McLaughlin
that there had been research by observation made. He explained that in some sections an
update was done, using state wide standards. Compared to what most cities had, our current
requirements were greater for off-street parking.
Discussion by Council relating to decreasing the spaces allowed for single family dwellings
and parking for Business. McLaughlin explained that under Business, parking area went
from 250 square feet to 350 square feet. He states that this matches up with the current
demand.
McLaughlin clarified that on page 4, section D, item 3 regarding golf course spaces is an
industry standard. Councilor Thompson suggested that the section providing additional
spaces for auxiliary uses, be striked out.
Councilor Hagen commented that on the sketches prepared for the handicap parking it should
indicate where to locate the signpost.
PUBLIC HEARING: OPEN 7:20 p.m.
Rees Jones/107 N. Wightman/Concerned that the bicycle ordinance was not being enforced.
Felt that the ordinance was very good in regards to bicycle parking. He requested that
2
council reconsider the way bicycle parking is dealt with downtown. Stated two concepts,
long-term parking for employees and short term parking for patrons of businesses. Currently
there is no long-term parking provided downtown. He felt that although the Bicycle
Commission recommendation would have only effected new construction, the Planning
Commission decided that was too much.
He reported that the Planning Commission had stated the City should provide long-term
parking and secured sheltered parking downtown, the same as they provide other parking.
There was no dollar figure attached to this recommendation and there was no request made
for the Budget, he stated they just said, "do it".
He requested a commitment from Council to go ahead with the next step in funding and
pursue getting parking provided for bicycle riders who work in the downtown area, if the
City is not going to require the businesses to provide the parking.
It was clarified for Council that this would be a budget item for Public Works.
McLaughlin stated that we currently have sheltered spaces downtown for bicycle parking. He
explained that what Mr. Jones is speaking of is a bike locker system, with lease
arrangements for long-term employee parking. These would encourage employees to ride to
work.
An additional issue raised by Mr. Jones dealt with the question of the number of sheltered
spaces per unit in multi-family residential. He stated that the first thing on the Council's
priority for Goal Setting was, encouragement of multi-modal transportation. He requests that
the City require bicycle parking and provide the opportunity to have bicycle parking when it
occurs.
Mclaughin clad fled for Council that enforcement of the ordinance on existing facilities is
dealt with in the ordinance that applies to all parking. It states that the required bicycle
parking facilities shall be constructed when an existing residential building or dwelling is
altered or enlarged by the addition or creation of dwelling units, or when a non-residential
use is intensified by the addition of floor space, seating capacity, or change in use.
Councilor Wheeldon stated that she would like to explore and look further at the disparity of
this issue.
Councilor Laws suggested that this should be referred to the Bicycle Commission, TPAC and
then sent back to the Planning Commission to review their comments.
Councilor Hauck noted that for auto parking, there is differentiation made on the non-parking
required, based on multi-family size of units. That same kind of differentiation is not made
between bicycles. It was questioned as to why there isn't a differentiation.
Discussion by Council to determine the cost by the city for downtown bicycle parking for
budget purposes. The costs involved would not be used to weigh a decision but as an
alternative toward a requirement.
Council discussed sending ordinance back to Bicycle Commission and TPAC. McLaughlin
stated that the Planning Department could prepare the background information on focused
issues to help explain items of concern. It was pointed out that the majority members of
TPAC were in attendance at this time, and it would not be necessary to send it back to
TPAC. Councilor Laws suggested that just the relevant items be sent to the Bicycle
Commission for review.
It was clarified for Council that the Bicycle Commission did review the ordinance and made
recommendations to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission also reviewed the
ordinance and changed the recommendations by the Bicycle Commission. Councilor Hauck
requested that Council move forward and if additional comments are directed from the
Bicycle Commission, they can be part of the first reading of the ordinance.
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 7:50 p.m.
Councilors Thompson/Laws m/s to place modification of Chapter 18.92 on next agenda
for f'wst reading. Staff is directed to re-examine and offer some alternatives to the
number of bike parking places required in multi-family units, other thresholds to
compare and a proposal for a more structured parking scenario in the downtown with
DISCUSSION: Councilor Hagen commented that in designing multi-family residential, when
there is shelter for one space per unit, two could be accommodated by better planning.
Councilor Hauck would like to look at ways to differentiate the size of the unit in a multi-
family unit dwelling. City Administrator concerned with how cost would be formulated.
Roll Call vote: Hauck, Thompson, Laws, Wheeldon, Reid and Hagen; YES. Motion
passed.
It was clarified for Almquist that Council is not requesting a large scale cost report, but to
pull the information from magazines that have structures and quotes of prices.
Councilor Reid stated that she is concerned with enforcement of existing ordinance and
would like to look at how well our present bicycle structures are being used. She would like
to see full utilization of what is present, enforcement of what is on the books and
encouragement of the proposed ordinance.
It was agreed to determine the number of parldng spaces downtown currently and what that
compares to.
4
PUBLIC FORUM
None
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
1. Mayor's assignment of council liaison to various boards, commi~ious, and
committees.
Assignment post-poned until next Council meeting in February. Election of Council
president will also be included at the next Council meeting in February.
NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS
1. Request of Councilor Hagen for the Council to consider an appeal from a
decision of the Planning Commition on Plannine Action No. 95-131, a
request for a site review to construct a health spa and residential units
located at 665 and 685 "A" Street.
Councilor Hagen was concerned because the driveway that accesses this development is right
along the Central Ashland Bicycle Path. He stated that the design was an alley system and
the intent was to access as many of these properties as possible from the rear.
It was noted that the property has a parking lot facing A SWeet. When it was first envisioned
it was to have parking in the rear.
Councilor Reid voiced support for Councilor Hagen's appeal. Council voiced their concern
with Planning Commission re-designing proposals. It was felt that the proposals were
presented in one form, processed through pre-application and then an entirely different
proposal was presented to the Planning Commission, without going back to staff to review
changes. It was noted that in the second proposal the design standards were ignored.
Councilor Hauck felt the general policy question, as to where parking should go and how it
has been encouraged in the back areas, should be explored.
Councilors Hauck/Laws m/s to appeal Planning Action No. 95-131. Voice vote; aH
AYES. Motion passed.
Request of Ashland Parks and Recreation Commir, sion to direct staff to
prepare a ballot title for the May 1996 primary election for the renewal of
Recreational Serial Property Tax Levy for swimming programs and
maintenance of non-dedicated park properties.
the
City Administrator read memo submitted by Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission.
The current Recreational Serial Levy property tax expires on June 30, 1996.
5
It was clarified for Council that the pennies per thousand is less than ten cents and that the
Parks Commission does not have the ability to increase their tax base for recreation
purposes, only for dedicated land.
Mayor Golden stated that this may jeopardize the Counties tax base by putting a competing
measure on the ballot. She felt that this should be incorporated into the tax base. Discussion
was made as to whether the Levy could be renewed and at the same time a measure be put
on the ballot to pull it into the general tax base. It was determined that at the present there
is no other source for this money.
It was noted that the Parks Commission was asked three years ago to put this into the general
tax base, but nothing was done. It is also brought up at each Budget season.
Councilors Laws/Reid m/s to take steps necessary to place on the ballot. Voice vote; aH
AYES. Motion passed.
ORDINANCES. RESOLUTIONS, AND CONTRACTS
1. Second reading of "An Ordinance Amending Chapters 6.12, 6.16, 6.28, and
6.32 of the Ashland Municipal Code to Standardize Permit Procedures for
Business Licenses; Amending Chapter 6.24 to Conform Regulation of
Peddlers to Existing Law and Deleting Chapter 6.08 Pertaining to Dance
Hail Licenses and Chapter 6.20 Pertaining to Places of Amusement."
City Attorney Nolte noted three changes to sections 6.24.020D; 6.24.030A and 6.24.045A.
Councilors Hauck/Hagen m/s approve Ordinance # 2774 with proposed changes. Roll
Call vote: Thompson, Laws, Wheeldon, Reid, Hagen and Hauck; YES. Motion passed.
Second reading by title only of "An Ordinance Amending the Procedures
Chapter of the Land Use Ordinance; Reconciling Other Sections of the
Land Use Ordinance and the AMC to the Amendments; Amending the
Various Criteria and Repealing Resolutions 78-38 and 88-20."
City Attorney Nolte noted changes on page 8, sub-section 3; page 13, section 18.108.160B;
page 17, section 8, amends section 18.04.020 of AMC.
It was clarified that there were no changes to building permit issuances.
Councilors Hauck/Wheeldon m/s to approve Ordinance ir277~ with proposed changes.
Roll Call vote: Reid, Hagen, Thompson, Laws, Hauck, Wheeidon; YES. Motion
passed.
6
F'wst reading of an Ordinance Amending Section 18.24.030.K.7 and
18.28.030.K.7 of the AMC -- the Land Use Ordinance Regarding Health
Inspections for TraveHers' Accommodations.
Council voiced concern with information provided to them indicating they were under the
mistaken impression that any facility that serves meals would be inspected. The correct
information is that two unit or less Bed & Breakfast's, do not fall in this category.
Councilor Reid stated that because there is a Bed & Breakfast ordinance that regulates all
lodging businesses outside the commercial district, they have to be in compliance with that
ordinance. She stated that for some small businesses they are nothing like the larger Bed &
Breakfast's. She felt that the proposed ordinance helped to better define the difference
between two unit or less B&B's and larger B&B's.
It was noted that the State and County has responsibility for matters of health in restaurants
and dwellings that provide food. This is a function that is already being done. Council not
convinced that our ordinance needs to be more strict than what is being enforced by the State
and County.
Councilors Laws/Thompson m/s to approve rust reading and place on next agenda for
second reading. DISCUSSION: Councilor Hauck noted that the County does not have a
choice on what they exempt, they have to follow State statute. Voice vote: Wheeldon,
Laws, Hagen, Thompson; YES. Hauck; NO. Reid; declared conflict of interest. Motion
passed 4-1.
Reading by title only of "A Resolution Authorizing an Interfund Loan for
the Ambulance Fund."
Finance Director Jill Turner explained that the Ambulance Fund will need to borrow to
finance the initial down payment as well as for initial cash flow needs.
Requests authorization for the Director of Finance to borrow up to $150,000 from the
Insurance Services Fund. It was explained that an Enterprise Fund would be set-up and it
would become a self supporting entity, the money that it brings in and expends would stay
within the Enterprise Fund.
Turner explained that what was presented to Council was a short summary. She is getting
ready now to do the formal application to the County and it appears that there will need to be
authorization to borrow up to $150,000. She estimates that we will borrow around $130,000
to $140,000 of which $100,00 is for the down payment and the $30,000-$40,000 is for the
up front working capital.
7
Turner informed Council that the plan in the Fail is to work with a subscription service,
where you purchase pre-need ambulance. This will help with the cash flow and the
subscription service will extend into other parts of the state. The program should start
sometime in October or November.
Mayor explained that the intention is to set-up an Independent Fund with the Fire Department
and it not necessarily, be a part of the General Fund. Turner stated that the General Fund
pays for basic fire support. When extra costs are incurred over providing basic fire support,
those are the costs that will be charged to the Ambulance Fund.
Councilor Laws questioned how you get money from the Enterprise Fund into the Generai
Fund. Turner felt that there will be some adequate revenue string to transfer some monies in
the future. For example; charge a rental fee for the ambulance portion or build another
facility where 4051; is Ambulance and 60% is General Fund, jointly owned and split for the
debt service. Laws questioned if it were legitimate to charge as much as was possible from
the ambulance toward new buildings, without doing tricky book work. Turner stated that
you would need to have a justifiable basis. Turner stated that it is not illegai, but not aiways
the most logical.
Turner clarified that an Enterprise Fund does not restrict you with what can be done within
that Enterprise. An Enterprise Fund can legaily give money to another public function.
Councilors Hauck/Reid m/s to approve Resolution ~s)6-06. Roll Call vote: Hagen,
Wheeidon, Thompson, Reid, Hauck and Laws; YES. Motion passed.
Reading by title only of "A Resolution Transferring appropriations for the
1995-96 Budget."
Councilors Laws/Reid m/s to approve Resolution//96-07. Roll Call vote: Thompson,
Wheeldon, Hagen, Laws, Hauck and Reid; YES. Motion passed.
5
Reading by title only of "A Resolution Authorizing Reimbursement of
Ambulance Capital Costs with Tax-Exempt Borrowing."
Councilors Hauck/Reid m/s to approve Resolution//96-08. Roll Call vote: Hagen,
Thompson, Reid, Wheeldon, Laws and Hauck; YES. Motion passed.
5
Approval of contract with ODOT for inCtaHation of opticom traffic signal
control at eleven intersections.
City Administrator Almquist explained to Council that this installation would ailow
Ambulance and Fire the ability to control traffic signais.
Councilors Reid/Hagen m/s to approve ODO T contract. Voice vote; all AYES. Motion
passed.
OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL M'EMBERS
Councilor Thompson reminded Council to return the Regional Planning questionnaire to him.
He stated that he had an open and frank discussion with County Commissioner Jack Walker.
Councilor Hagen voiced his concern with the Ashland Community Hospital disclosure issue
with the Mail Tribune.
Councilors Hagen/Hauck m/s to place ACH disclosure issue with Mail Tribune on
agenda. Voice vote; all AYES. Motion passed.
City Attorney Nolte stated that he had read the material the Hospital Administrator did not
want to disclose. It was his opinion, that there was nothing in those materials that would
make them exempt from disclosure. The Hospital Administrator does not agree with this
opinion and opinion was discussed with Hospital Administrator and his retained Council.
His Council articulated an argument supporting the Administrators desire, Nolte disagrees
with the argument.
Councilors Hauck/Reid m/s to direct City Attorney Noite to release the packet to the
press from the November meeting of the Board of Trustees and to direct City Attorney
Nolte to review 12 months of records as requested by the Mail Tribune. City Attorney
Noite is directed to do what he deter...ines is legally correct. Roll Call vote: Reid,
Laws, Hauck, Hagen, Wheeldon and Thompson; YES. Motion passed.
Councilor Reid requested that interim Public Works Director Jim Olson share plans of
Highway 66 planting of trees at Council Study Session.
Study Session scheduled for January 17 would include update of sidewalks on Highway 66
and Oak Street; possible report on computer services and additional discussion on bike
parking.
ADJOURNMF~NT
Meeting was adjourned at 8:47 p.m.
~Barbara Christensen, Recorder
Catherine M. Golden, Mayor