HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-0120.REG.MINMINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL
January 20, 1998
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Golden called the meeting to order at 7:00p.m., in the Civic Center Council Chambers.
ROLL CALL
Councilors Reid, Hauck, Wheeldon and DeBoer were present. Councilors Laws and Hagen were absent.
APPROVALOF MINUTES
The minutes of the Regular meeting of January 6, 1998 were approved as presented, a correction to the
minutes of the January 6, 1998 Executive Session to reflect Greg Scoles as "Interim City Administrator".
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS
1. Introduction and Presentation by the Tree Commission.
Tree Commission members were introduced and presented their committee through a slide show
presentation. The presentation noted an award that the Tree Commission received and the annual
recognition of a favorite tree in our community. Commission commented on one of their goals, which
involved finding correct types of trees for particular areas and which were illustrated through the slide
presentation. Explained the responsibility of the commission in reviewing site plans and the types of
problems that trees present to the community. Commission explained how Arbor Day is celebrated and
some of the activities that surround this celebration.
2. Mayor's Proclamation of February 5, 1998 as Girls and Women in Sports Day.
Mayor read proclamation.
CONSENT AGENDA
1. Minutes of Boards, Commissions and Committees.
2. Monthly Departmental Reports - January, 1998.
3. Approval of National Register Nomination for 321 North Main Street.
4. Adoption of findings for approval of a three-lot Minor Land Partition at 610 Ashland Street
(applicant Steve Morjig).
Councilor Wheeldon requested that item 4 be pulled and placed under New & Misc. Business.
Councilors Reid/DeBoer m/s to approve consent agenda items I through 4. Voice vote: all AYES. Motion
passed.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
None
PUBLIC FORUM
Joe Eckhardt/108 Bush Street/Made comments regarding the community and government working together.
Made reference to actor Jerry geinfeld. Feels that meaningful interaction between government and some
citizens is not taking place. Strongly objects to the manner in which the search for a new city administrator
is being conducted. Noted a letter that he had previously sent to council and mayor. Questions the panel
selected by the Mayor for the interview process. Feels that some members of the panel are not taxpaying
citizens of the City of Ashland. Noted comments made during a previous study session regarding the hiring
of a new city administrator. Requested viewers to call into the public access phone line, channel 31.
City Council Meeting 01-20-98 1
Requested council to assure citizens that they will be heard during the interview process for the new city
administrator.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
None
NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS
1. Adoption of findings for approval of a three-lot Minor Land Partition at 610 Ashland Street
(applicant Steve Morjig).
Councilor Wheeldon commented on a letter received from attorney for Steve Morjig, and she did not feel
comfortable with the decision that was made at the January 6, 1998 council meeting regarding the appeal and
the condition that was added to the appeal. Felt that because the condition was added after the public
hearing was closed, it did not allow the council to explore this condition with the applicant.
Requested guidance from Planning Director or City Attorney regarding options the council had on this
matter.
Mayor clarified that the request would be for reconsideration, not to table the issue.
Councilor Reid confirmed with City Attorney that because she had viewed the tape of the past hearing, she
could now vote on a possible reconsideration of this matter. Requested clarification on what would happen
if council were to deny approval of findings.
City Attorney Paul Nolte explained that it was possible, because it was before the council on appeal, and
because it was a de novo hearing, council could have voted at that time to deny the application. To do so at
this time, council would have to move to reconsider.
Nolte explained that if council fails to adopt the findings, then the council has not come to a final decision.
Explained that the 120 day period is still running, and that the applicant may get an approval for the project
because the 120 day period had ended. Stated that in order for council to re-discuss this, the council could
move to reconsideration. If the council wants to take additional testimony, council would have to assure that
the applicant has granted an extension of the 120 days and then notice all involved to give them an
opportunity also.
Nolte clarified that council is not required to take additional testimony, and noted a complicating factor in
that the council had all read a letter from the applicants attorney. Council would need to make it clear that
any reconsideration given to this issue is not based on anything that the applicant's attorney has put before
them.
Nolte stated that once the findings become final and are adopted, there would not be an opportunity for
reconsideration according to our ordinances. Nolte stated that it is arguable that someone did not have a full
and fair hearing, if council were to add or delete to the findings before adoption.
Planning Director John McLaughlin clarified that Section 2.4 and Section 3, condition 2 were modified in the
findings.
Nolte stated that there is no provision for remanding it back to the Planning Commission if moved for
reconsideration.
Councilor Reid voiced her frustration in that there are questions that she would ask and explore, but is not
allowed because it is not up for discussion due to the lack of motion to reconsider. Commented on her
desire to have consistency in the city for people to follow.
Nolte clarified for council, that if new information is brought to the table, either side could argue that council
discussed new information and they weren't given opportunity to respond.
Councilors Reid/Wheeldon m/s to approve Findings with amendment to delete section 2.4 and the
language of the condition that follows section 2.4.
DISCUSSION: Councilor DeBoer concerned that council is approving a subdivision. Noted that anywayin
or out of this would be an 18 degree street to a dead end. Stated that the reason for supporting the initial
addition to the appeal is because of safety and development issues. Does not feel it is in the best interest
of the citizens of Ashland to approve any subdivision that you could possibly not get out of in bad weather.
Does not disagree with development, only believes there should be two ways in or out.
Councilor Wheeldon disagreed with initial amendment because she felt they were jumping ahead as this
was only for a minor land partition. Felt it was complicated by the fact that there is a driveway in the
middle of the street that was asked to be dedicated. Felt it was an issue for a minor land partition and
that other things came up that made it more than a minor land partition, and that council went too far by
putting a condition on this planning action of this nature.
Mayor questioned whether denying a minor !and partition in development in an area that is designated for
development, because of counci!'s perceived ingress/egress issues, places a moratorium in this area? Nolte
explained that this argument could be made, but doesn't believe that an isolated denial of a partition would
be considered as a moratorium.
Strawberry Lane subdivision was discussed as an example compared to this issue. Planning Director John
McLaughlin clarified that the moratorium on Strawberry Lane was due to inadequate water and there is
not a moratorium on Strawberry Lane any longer. McLaughlin clarified that council did not deny action
based on resolution of grade, nor prohibited people from applying for application. Mayor reminded
council that this is a minor !and partition that is before the council, not development. Mayor questioned if
council denies building, because it is thought there is not adequate gridding, it may in essence be putting a
moratorium on a property owner.
McLaughlin explained that minimum standards for transportation have to be determined for access and if
it is found that those minimum standards are not met, in application, it can be denied. Stated that you
can equate this to water supply.
Councilor Reid commented that she believes that the same goals should be set for each application. Felt
that council may have been developing a new standard with a single application rather than through an
appropriate process.
Councilor Hauck clarified that based on his interpretation of the minimum standards and the testimony he
heard at the time of the public hearing, he felt that the additional condition was necessary in order to meet
those standards.
Roll Call vote: Councilors Reid and Wheeldon, YES. Councilors Hauck and DeBoer, NO. Mayor Golden
stated that she believed this is a minor land partition and meets minimum standards. Agrees that there
should be alternative routes in and out of properties. Does not believe that it is the right time, when a
planning action is before the council, to come up with new ideas. Believes it should be brought forward as
a concern from a policy board, that there are a number of planning actions where they do not have ingress
and egress in more than one way. The change should be made at the policy level and then this would be
applied to all future planning actions. Felt that if council tries to make changes or adjust planning actions
after they have been introduced it creates an inconsistent system for either neighbors or developers. Urges
council, if they do not like this policy, to change it. Mayor Golden, YES. Motion passed. 3-2.
City Council Meeting 01-20-98 3
ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS
1. First reading by title only of "An Ordinance Amending Chapter 2.32 of the Ashland Municipal
Code to Repeal Specification of Rates for Compensation of Counsel Appointed to Defend Indigents
Accused of Crimes."
Councilors Hauck/Wheeldon m/s to approve first reading and put on agenda for second reading. Roll
call vote: Reid, Hauck, Wheeldon and DeBoer, YES. Motion passed.
OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS
Mayor Golden confirmed for Councilor DeBoer that the committee regarding LID's was being formed and
that he would be welcome be on that committee when it is formed.
Councilor Wheeldon commented on a recent meeting with the League of Women Voters where the issue of
Public Forums was discussed. Frustration was voiced in that issues are brought to the council at this time,
but there is no way to bring them forward past the public forum.
Council discussed ways to make the public forum more user friendly. Discussion and suggestions regarding
changing the format of the council agenda.
Councilor Reid voiced appreciation to Director of Electric Department, Pete Lovrovich for information on
the Greensprings Power Plant.
Council was reminded of Study Session scheduled for January 21, 1998 at 12:30on the topic of water needs.
ADJOURNMENT
Meeting was adjourned at 8:10p.m.
Barbara Christensen, City Recorder
Catherine M. Golden, Mayor