Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-0106.JOINT.MIN MINUTES FOR THE JOINT STUDY SESSION MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL/OREGON SHAKESPEARE FESTIVAL BOARD MEMBERS January 6, 2000 Council Chambers, 275 E Main CALL TO ORDER Mayor Shaw called tbe meeting m order at 7:10 p.m. in the Council Chambers at 275 E Main. IN ATTENDANCE Cnuncilors: Laws, Reid, Hauck, Wheeldon and Fine; OSF Board Members: Paul Nicholson, Marty Lempke, Jed Meese, Dan Thorndike and Chuck Butler: City Staff: City Administrator Mike Freeman, City Attorney Paul Nolte, and Community Development Director John McLaughlin were present. I. JOINT OREGON SHAKESPEARE FESTIVAL (OSF) DISCUSSION RE: LEASE AGREEMENT Introductions of Council and Oregon Shakespeare Board members were made. Marry Lemke, presented to the council the following elements for discussion and the tollowing comments: I ) Future air rights for buildings above the parking lot. Stated that air rights probably should be held by the City with the understanding that any development above the parking lot would take place only with mutual agreement between OSF and the City. 2) Reimbursement for OSF's costs for the parking lot. Stated that there should be negotiation to have costs of the increased parking and the operation of the parking lot reimbursed to OSF through paid parking. That any additional revenues raised through parking fees could be paid to the City for alternative transportation activity. 3) Restrictions on the number of performances we can offer in the new theatre. Expressed the view that (~SF would be strongly resistant to any restrictions and believe any restricts on their use of the new theatre should be resisted in the strongest possible terms. 4) Limitations on OSF's use of the Black Swan as a performing space. Stated that they would be resistant to accepting restrictions on the use of the Black Swan. They do not see it operating as a primary perIi~rming space and be~ieve it c~u~d have use as an ~ccasi~na~ perf~rming space. 5) UseoftheBlack Swan by community groups. OSF feels that this would be acceptable as long as it did not conflict with their play development. rehearsal and educational activities. 6) Use of Carpenter Hall by community groups. Stated their %upport ofthis during those periods that the Festival is not in operation. 7) Inclusionoftheparkingstructureinthe lease. Stated that they are developing and paying for a parking structure, and it would seem appropriate that it should be included within the lease. 8) Length of lease. Stated that they are in favor of expanding the term of the lease into the future as possible. OSF suggested three 25 year terms. Discussion was made on the pros and cons of restricting the number of performances in the B lack Swan, and when these performances would take place. In addition, discussion took place regarding a request of allowing a set time period for use of Carpenter Hall by the community. Concern was voiced on the City getting involved in the operation and management of OSF, and that the direction of the City should be on planning, and how it impacts the community. Laws commented that the lease is an opportunity for the community to have some say in what the impact to the community may be. Discussion was made regarding the structural set-up in the lease for use of facilities by the community, the impact of restrictions to operations for OSF and to community businesses, access to OSF facilities, the increase of seating capacity lix the proposed expansion and the parking facilities. PUBLIC COMMENTS Chuck Keil/586 E. Main St./Feels that the city has some responsibility to the Festival due to the nurturing of the community by the festival. He urged the council to support the elements as presented by OSF and spoke regarding the possibility of creating a '~fringe" theatre group in the community. Bill Patton/1 !0 Terrace St./. Commented on his experience with the OSF Board, and their genuine commitment to the community. Ite voiced his concern regarding the city getting involved in operations for the Festival. He stated that the Festival paid for the parking lot, not the City. Joint Council/OSF Study Session 1/06/2000 Page I of 3 Brent Thompson/582 Allison/Shared concerns of citizens on the possibility of losing the "small town feel" due to growth by OSF. He suggested that OSF build on the Black Swan property, rather the proposed parking lot property. Michael Bingham/50 W Nevada St./Did not believe that the city should be involved in limiting OSF performances. George Kramer/386 North Laurel/Reminded the council that the property is an asset and the importance of this property to the community. l-It commented on the process that the community went through with OSF in regards to Carpenter Hall. }te stated that we should not be treating the relationship between the City and OSF as a "business relationship," and to form a lease, without any encumbrances, would be wrong. He feels that this in an unusual c~rcumstance, and that the City needs to take advantage of the opportunity in the lease agreement to address some of the concerns by the communit.~. Harry Skerry/270 Ridge Rd/Noted his 53-year history with OSF, and the growth that the Festival has faced in this time period. He feels that if the city tries to get involved in the operation of the Festival, it would only create additional problems for the Festival. Skerry noted that he was the attorney that drafted the original lease agreement with the City. }to explained that the property was actually given to the City and then leased to OSF in order to receive EDA grant limds. Cate Hartzell/Commented on the councils responsibility to encourage diversity in the community. She asked that council keep in mind that there may be other choices considered for the use of this property and that they consider the value of the parking lot property, She suggested that they trade assets for ownership of Carpenter Hall. Hartzell questioned who would pay for the parking structure if constructed and how paid parking would impact the neighborhood and community, Paul Mensch/451 W Main/Commented on Denver based theatre that is city owned. He explained that this group had entered into a 90-year lease at $1 a year with the City ofDenver. He cautioned the council not to put "nitpicky" items into the lease agreement. Pam Hammond/632 Walnut St./Voiced her support of OSF and explained how her business is dependent upon OSF. She urged the council not to lira it operations tbr OSF. She does not feel that the Festival is taking over the downtown area. but hopes that there will bca compromise regarding the parking problems. Debbie Miller/160 Normal Ave./Handout distributed for information only. Phil Selby/1762 Ashland St./Voiced his hope that future discussions will be positive and that the community, the City and the Festival, would work together harmoniously. He would like to see something in the lease that would express no Further growth in the future by Festival, but growth in performance. Bi II Street/180 Mead St./Commented that the reason he moved to the community was due to OSF. He noted the eraall comments by Colin Swales and voiced his confusion regarding the process and requested an explanation on what is allowed in the process and what is not. Street questioned the timing of the proposed building and requested that the lease be delayed until this is finalized. He questioned if there would be any financial exchange in the lease agreement between the City and the Festival. Street brought up the question 0fconsidering the financial status 0fthe Festival and their ability to subsidize their lease agreement. Street questioned if other cities had been contacted to see what their public subsidized theatres pay in rent. Mayor Shaw explained that because this may be an issue regarding land use law, that the council would become a quasi iudicial body. Anything that is said to the council in this process, has to be declared as ex parte contact. The council explained that they would need to keep a record of all discussion that they may have had, email that they may have received, etc. and it would better serve the public if this information was presented at the time of the planning action so kill inti3rmation is available to everyone at the same time. Joint Council/OSF Study Session I/06/2000 Page 2 of 3 Michael La Nier/211 Genessee St./Representing property owners that live across from the OSF facilities. He rein inded the council that there are larger issues at hand other than land use issues. He questioned how the impact of the proposed building would be dealt with, and made several suggestions regarding mixed uses in the neighborhood. Michael Donovan/125 Terrace/Noted h is Iongevity in the area as a business owner and past OSF President. He stated that the proposal needs to be looked at in the way that this could benefit the community, Donovan explained that OSF is a world class theatre and that they have to look at earnings gap in the future. He stated that OSF faces the same growth issnes as any other business and wants to work creatively to create alternative modes of transportation. Ron Roth/6950 Old 99S/Voiced his concern regarding parking, precedent and the process. He reminded the council ol' the need for more community involvement, and proposed the formation of an ad-hoc committee to study the issues. Colin Swales/143 Eighth St./Voiced his concern that there wasn't sufficient inquiry, by OSF, into actually building on their own property rather than on the city owned parking lot property. He felt that the perception by the community may be~ that the city is giving away valuable property. Swales voiced his concern with the city considering entering intu a lease agreement when plans tbr a building have not been approved or reviewed by the Planning Department. Hal Cloer/815 Creek Stone Way/Concerned with the message that the city may be giving to the Festival and noted the vibrance of the Festival and the economic benefits to the community. Shaw clarified some of the questions and points brought up by the public. She agreed that the relationship between the City and OSF is not typical and that it is important to keep this in mind that she does not view this as a subsidy, and explained the r,,t,d & B .... ag-2 Tax. She stated that this is would not set a precedent, and noted the lease agreement with Ski Ashland. Shaw questioned the need to know the financial status of OSF, and compared this to the past application of Albertson's grocery store. ~'tl'g/flr~Meese explained that as a member of the Finance Committee for OSF, that the OSF is not a wealthy corporation and that they have to raise large amounts of contributions to meet their needs on an annual basis. Lempke stated that OSF is dedicated to the community, and community issues including growth are considered in every decision and direction they take. Lempke explained that due to the need for additional space, OSF is currently doing company wide assessment for space needs. Butler explained that OSF would be willing to make some kind of firm commitment in regards to the use of Carpenter Hall. [.aws pointed out that the money that came from the EDA Grant was not to promote Shakespeare, but to promote jobs in a community where jobs were low. By helping Shakespeare to build and expand, it created additional jobs. He stated that the spirit o1' intent at that time, was to give the money to the community of Ashland, not to the Shakespearean Vestivah He explained that OSF was only a means by which to serve the community. Fhc council requested that OSF put into a memo, the elements brought forward, ~vith additional explanation and comments that could be reviewed at a publically noticed Council Study Session. A consensus by the group to set another meeting to continue discussion on the lease agreement was made. ADJOURNMENT I'he meeting was adjourned at 10:00 p.m. Submitted by Barbara Christensen, ('i~' Recorder/Treasurer Joint Council/OSF Study Session 1/06/2000 Page 3 of 3