Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-0515 Council Packet CITY OF ASHLAND AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL May 15, 2007 Civic Center Council Chambers 1175 E. Main Street 6:00 p.m. Executive Session to discuss pending litigation pursuant to ORS 192.660(2)(f) and ORS 192.660(2)(h) 7:00 p.m. Regular Meeting I. CALL TO ORDER II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. ROLL CALL IV. MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENT OF BOARD AND COMMISSION VACANCIES V. jAPPROVAL OF MINUTES [5 minutes] 1. Executive Session meeting minutes of May 1, 2007 \/,,2. Regular Council meeting minutes of May 1, 2007 VI. S CIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS Mayor's Proclamation of National Emergency Medical Services Week VII. CONSENT AGENDA [5 minutes] 1. Minutes of Boards, Commissions, and Committees 2. Approval of Public Contract for Legal Consultant Services Relating to the Mt. Ashland Association Ski Area Expansion VIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS (Testimony limited to 5 minutes per speaker, unless it is the subject of a Land Use Appeal. All hearings must conclude by 9:00 p.m., be continued to a subsequent meeting, or be extended to 9:30 p.m. by a two-thirds vote of council {AMC S2.04.040}) 1. Public Hearing of Adoption of a Resolution Levying Spedal Benefit Assessments for the Nevada Street Local Improvement District No. 85 and Adoption of Findings NOTE: Please refer to Mav 1, 2007 Agenda and Council Communication 2. Public Hearing to Declare Real Property on Strawberry Lane as Surplus and Authorize Sale of Lot #103 3. An Appeal of Planning Action 2006-01784 - Request for a Physical Constraints Review Permit for development in the Wrights Creek Floodplain an Riparian Preservation Area to improve and widen a portion of an existing driveway, re-grade a COUNCIL MEETINGS ARE BROADC:AST LIVE ON CHANNEL 9 VISIT TIlE CITY OF ASHLAND'S WEB SITE AT \VWW.ASHLAND.OR.LJS portion of Grandview Drive and extend utilities to serve a single-family residence for the property located at 720 Grandview Drive IX. PUBLIC FORUM Business from the audience not included on the agenda. (Total time allowed for Public Forum is 15 minutes. Speakers are limited to 5 minutes or less, depending on the number of individuals wishing to speak.) [15 minutes maximum] X. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. City Attorney Recruitment [15 Minutes] XI. NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS 1. Update on Solar Project/Permission to Proceed [20 Minutes] XII. ORDINANCES. RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS 1. Ethics ordinance XIII. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS/REPORTS FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS XIV. ADJOURNMENT In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Administrator's office at (541) 488-6002 (TTY phone number 1-800-735- 2900). Notification 72 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting (28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title I). COUNCIL MEETINCiS ARE BROADCAST LIVE ON CHANNEL 9 VISIT "TIlE CITY OF ASHLAND'S WEB Sill:: AT' WWW.ASHLAND.OR.US ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL ll1EETING MAY I, :;007 PAGE 1 of7 MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL May 1,2007 Civic Center Council Chambers 1175 E. Main Street CALL TO ORDER Mayor Morrison called the meeting to order at 7:00 p,m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers. ROLL CALL Councilor Hardesty, Navickas, Hartzell, Jackson, Silbiger and Chapman were present. MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENT OF BOARD AND COMMISSION VACANCIES Mayor Morrison announced vacancies on the Forest Lands, Historic, Housing, and Tree Commissions. APPROV AL OF MINUTES The minutes of the Executive Session meeting of April 17, 2007, Regular Council meeting of April 1 7, 2007 and Executive Session meeting of April 23, 2007 were approved as presented. SPECIAL PRESENT A TIONS & AWARDS Mayor's Proclamation of National Historic Preservation Week and Police Week and Peace Officer's Memorial Day were read aloud. Jim Olney presented information on the 2nd Annual Rogue Valley Ride with Leaders event. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Minutes of Boards, Commissions, and Committees. 2. Request for Approval of Easement for Public Trail Purposes. 3. Liquor License Application - Kobe Restaurant. 4. Third Quarter Financial Report: January - March 2007. Councilor Navickas/Chapman mls to approve Consent Agenda. Voice Vote: All AYES. Motion passed. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Council Appeal ofPA 2006-02354, Kistler. Mayor Morrison called the Public Hearing for a Land Use Hearing to order at 7:15 p.rn. to hear Planning Action No. 2006-02354, a request for an appeal by the Ashland City Council of the Planning Commission decision to approve a request for Site Review approval to construct a two-story office building located on the vacant parcel at the southeast comer of the intersection ofN. Main and Glenn Street. Mayor Morrison stated a variance is requested to allow a 10-foot front yard setback where a 20-foot front yard setback is required, and the applicant is also requesting an exception to the Street Standards to provide a curbside sidewalk on Glenn Street. Mayor Morrison announced the public hearing procedure that will be followed. ABSTENTIONS, CONFLICTS, EX PARTE CONTACT Councilor Jackson stated her only contact regarding this application was when Colin Swales addressed the Council. Councilor Chapman indicated he received emails from Colin Swales requesting the Council appeal this matter. He also conducted two site visits where he observed the setbacks and hiked along N. Main Street where he observed the positions of the buildings. ASHLAND ClTY COUNCIL A1EETlNG MA Y 1,2007 PAGE 2 of7 Councilor Hartzell stated she had met with the Community Development Director and conducted a site visit where she observed traffic conditions. She also declared that she had received emails from Colin Swales on the following dates: March 14,2007, March 15,2007, March 17,2007, March 19,2007, March 21,2007, March 22,2007, and April 3, 2007. Mayor Morrison stated he had read the packet materials for this action and received emails from Mr. Swales, which are already included in the record. He also indicated that he has driven by the property. Councilor Silbiger declared the following: 1) he has driven past the lot, 2) he read the articles in the Ashland Daily Tidings published on February 14, 2007 and March 26,2007,3) on March 15,2007 he received emails from Mr. Swales and Councilor Navickas, and received an additional email from Mr. Swales on March 22, 2007,4) he has reviewed the City Council meeting minutes from the March 23,2007 Continued Meeting and suggested these be included in the record, and 5) he overheard a conversation where Councilor Navickas was informing Mr. Philip Lang he could not discuss this matter. Councilor Silbiger stated that he does not feel he has prejudged this application in any way. Councilor Navickas stated he conducted a site visit and vaguely remembers a conversation between himself and Mr. Lang, and does not feel this will affect his opinion on this matter in any way. He indicated that he mistakenly placed a lawn sign on the property while campaigning and has also received and responded to an email from Colin Swales. Councilor Navickas stated that he could apply the facts to the law and make an objective and non-biased decision. Councilor Hardesty declared the following: 1) she received the emails from Colin Swales already mentioned, 2) Mr. Swales approached her at a previous Council meeting and questioned if the Council had received any information on this planning action, and she responded 'No', 3) she has read the articles in the Daily Tidings, 4) she attended a Joint Planning Commission meeting where the subject of the Council appeal came up, and 5) she frequently drives past the site. Councilor Hardesty stated she can judge this application on the facts and not be biased. Councilor Hartzell added that she also attended the Joint Meeting mentioned by Councilor Hardesty, but removed herself from the room when the issue of the appeal came up. Assistant City Attorney Richard Appicello recommended that the emails sent by Mr. Swales and the minutes from the March 23,2007 Continued Council Meeting be incorporated into the record. He also suggested the Council consider incorporating the minutes from the Joint Planning Commission Meeting into the record as well. Mr. Appicello read aloud the disclosure of bias and all members of the Council indicated that they have not prejudged this application or are biased by prior contacts and will make their decisions based solely on the application and the relevant criteria and standards. Councilor Chapman added that he had noticed, as buildings are placed closer to the street it is resulting in a loss of tree canopy and greenery. Councilor Hartzell noted a planning action from several years ago she was involved with and stated that her action with that particular application would not influence her decision on the planning action before them. Mayor Morrison explained that any person has the right to rebut the ex parte disclosed and noted the appropriate time to do so. He then read aloud the criteria pursuant to the City Land Use Code and ORS 197.763(5). Mayor Morrison asked the City Recorder if any challenges had been received and it was reported that three challenges had been submitted. ASHLAND CiTY COUNCiL A1EETlNG lvfA Y i. ::007 PAGE 3 of7 Mayor Morrison summarized the first challenge. He stated it was submitted by Mike Morris and is directed towards Councilors Hartzell and Navickas and includes a DVD of the March 23,2007 meeting. He stated the challenge requests that both councilors recuse themselves for bias or for the Council to vote for reconsideration of the motion to appeal PA 2006-02354. In the challenge, Mr. Morris outlines his claim that both Councilor Hartzell and Navickas made comments at the March 23, 2007 Continued Council Meeting that indicated preference of one policy over another and stated that these comments bring into the question the ability of these members to remain impartial. Councilor Navickas declared he can objectively apply the facts to the law and will do this in an unbiased manner. Councilor Hartzell commented on the discussion held on March 23,2007 and stated Council did not discuss the specifics, but policy that was in conflict with this planning action. She declared that she could address this matter in an unbiased manner. Councilor Chapman noted his discomfort with the discussion that was had on March 23,2007. Council agreed to allow Councilor Hartzell and Navickas to participate in the hearing. Councilor Jackson/Chapman m/s to incorporate all minutes of the meetings that were referenced and the DVD of March 23, 2007 which was submitted with the challenge into the record. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. Mayor Morrison noted challenge no. 2 submitted by Art Bullock is directed towards himself, and Councilor Silbiger was asked to summarize the challenge. Councilor Silbiger explained the challenge alleges that Mayor Morrison has actual and personal bias against Mr. Bullock and cites 17 points as evidence for bias. Copies of the challenge were provided to the Council. Mayor Morrison commented that there does not seem to be anything in the challenge that applies to the planning action before Council. Mayor Morrison announced he has no prejudgment of this case and is not prejudiced or biased by his prior contacts or involvement and will make any decision based solely on the application of the relevant criteria to the facts and evidence in the record. Council agreed to allow Mayor Morrison to participate in the hearing. Councilor Navickas commented on the process of written challenges and voiced his opinion that this is taking up substantial time and it might be better to allow individuals to come forward and express their challenge. Mayor Morrison explained challenge no. 3 submitted by Art Bullock is directed towards Councilor Jackson. He stated the challenge alleges that Councilor Jackson has an actual bias against Mr. Bullock and cites 3 points as evidence for bias. Copies of the challenge were provided to the Council. Mayor Morrison stated that there does not seem to be anything in the challenge that applies to the planning action before the Council. Councilor Jackson announced she has no bias applicable to this planning application, has not prejudged this application, and is not prejudiced or biased and will base any decision solely on the application of the relevant criteria to the facts and evidence in the record. Council agreed to allow Councilor Jackson to participate in the hearing. STAFF REPORT Community Development Director David Stalheim submitted to the Council copies of an aerial photograph and survey of the area (Exhibits #11 and #12). Mr. Stalheim explained this is a Council-initiated appeal of a Planning Commission decision to approve Site Review to construct a two-story building at the intersection of N. Main and Glenn Street. The planning application also asks for an exception to the Street Standards to install a curbside sidewalk on the Glenn St. property frontage as well as a variance request to reduce the special setback requirement for front yards abutting arterial streets from 20 feet to 10 feet. Mr. Stalheim stated the Planning Commission approved the request with support from the Historic ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING MA Y J, ]007 PAGE 4 of7 Commission and the Community Development staff. He stated staff believes the decision of the Planning Commission is supported by the facts in the case and there are not sufficient grounds to overturn the decision. He eXplained Council's options are to affirm, reverse, or modify the Planning Commission's decision. Mr. Stalheim noted the right-of-way width in this area varies between 69 ft. and 71 ft. He explained that staff had identified in a previous report to the Planning Commission that there appeared to be adequate space for N. Main Street to be a four-lane boulevard with parkrows and bicycle lanes. Mr. Stalheim stated Council would need to consider any associated impacts for the potential widening of the right-of-way. He noted the corridor is listed in the National Register of Historic Places, there are several historic and significant trees located within the corridor, and any street widening would need to comply with the Historic District standards. Mr. Stalheim explained the Council could consider adding a condition to this application that states a 7 ft. bicycle and pedestrian easement shall be granted to the City along N. Main Street, which would allow for any future widening of the road for sidewalks, parkrows, or bicycle lanes. Mr. Stalheim noted the City Planning and Engineering staff, the Oregon Department of Transportation, the Tree Commission, and the Historic Commission have supported this application. In addition, he stated there were no comments, either written or verbal, received from any property owner or residence within the immediate vicinity of the application. He stated at the public hearing before the Planning Commission, testimony was received both in favor and in opposition to the planning application, but based on the lack of immediate neighborhood concerns, the special setback requirement in AMC 18.68.050 regarding light, air, vision and to permit the widening of streets should not be compromised by granting the variance request. Mr. Stalheim commented on Planning Actions 2000-039 and 2000-074. He stated neither of these actions involved the required front yard setbacks. He added the Council never adopted Findings for P A 2000-039 and explained P A 2000-074 differs from the current planning action in that the term "adjacent" is not used in conjunction with the Historic District Design Standards. Mr. Stalheim also commented on Planning Action 2006-00088, which requested and was granted a 10 ft. setback on N. Main Street. He added that PA 2006- 00088 was not located in a Historic District, but the same variance criteria did apply. Mr. Stalheim listed the related City policies as AMC 18.108.110, the special setback requirements in AMC 18.68.050, the Site Review approval criteria in AMC 18.72.070, the exception to the Street Standards criteria in AMC 18.88.090, and the variance criteria in AMC 18.100. He noted Council's options outlined in the staff and stated a decision must be made by June 1,2007 because of the 120-day deadline. APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION (allowed 15 minutes) Applicant Raymond Kistler provided some background information and explained that 6-8 years ago he designed a 4,400 sq. ft. office building for this site, met with staff for a pre-application conference, and at that time heard nothing negative from staff about doing the project. After meeting with the Historic Commission, they stated the structure looked too commercial for N. Main and suggested a more mixed-use look. A few years later, he returned to staff with a smaller building design and at that time was informed about the 20 ft. setback requirement. Mr. Kistler explained his decision to request the setback variance and stated his opinion that the historic design is a better look for the street. He stated his proposed structure is not a large building for the site and stated his belief that the streetscape is enhanced by placing commercial buildings closer to the sidewalk. He noted the two building forms included in the packet materials and stated it is up to the Council to decide which one they feel is most appropriate for N. Main Street. Mr. Kistler clarified he would welcome a parkrow and sidewalk and would consent to such a condition. Councilor HartzelllNavickas m/s to extend the public hearing until 9:30 p.m. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING MAY I, :;007 PAGE 5 of7 THOSE WISIDNG TO PROVIDE TESTIMONY (allowed 5 minutes each) Bill Street/180 Meade Street/Submitted a print out from National Register of Historic Places for the Skidmore Academy Historic District and commented on period of significance, historic functions, and current functions. Mr. Street commented on the motel on N. Main Street, Big AI's Restaurant, and the historic property at Glenn and N. Main. He stated these three buildings in the immediate vicinity are not as applicable to the Historic District as the entire Historic District corridor. He stated the majority of the buildings in this corridor have a historic facade line that is close to 20 ft. or more and asked the Council to honor the original facade line that was established between 1850 and 1949. Art Bullock/Stated that the variance request approval criteria have not been met. Mr. Bullock stated there are no, "unusual circumstances" that would require a variance and it was willfully self-imposed. He also stated that all of the requirements need to be met and if the applicant has a building design that can accommodate the setback without a variance, it should be used. Mr. Bullock voiced his preference for parkrows on both N. Main Street and Glenn Street but stated it would be illegal for Council to impose an easement condition as a condition of approval. Mr. Bullock requested the record be kept open for 7 days. Jerome White/253 Third Street/Stated the property lines that the City inserted over the aerial map are inaccurate and submitted a drawing that that he claims accurately reflects the property line. Mr. White explained that drawing shows that they can accommodate a four-lane boulevard with parkrows and bike lanes within the existing street right-of-way. He stated it is not possible to meet both the historic setback and the 20 ft. setback requirements for this site and stated the project as approved by the Planning Commission would allow for future improvements to the street in conformance with the Ashland standards. Mr. White noted there are many different setbacks in this area and questioned how they decide which the right one is. He also noted that the Transportation Plan states that N. Main Street will not be widened and stated Council would need to update the Plan if they change this. Mayor Morrison noted the remaining time allotted for the public hearing. Assistant City Attorney Richard Appicello suggested the Council consider a motion to continue the hearing to a date certain. It was also recommended that the Mayor open the public hearing for the Nevada Street LID assessment and continue it to a date certain as well. Councilor Hartzell/Hardesty m/s to continue this public hearing to May 9, 2007 at 4 p.m. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Hardesty, Navickas, Silbiger, Hartzell, and Chapman, YES. Councilor Jackson, NO. Motion passed 5-1. 2. Adoption of a Resolution Levying Special Benefit Assessments for the Nevada Street Local Improvement District No. 85 and Adoption of Findings. Mayor Morrison opened the public hearing at 9:20 p.rn. Councilor Hartzell/Jackson m/s to continue the hearing on the Nevada Street LID to the May 15, 2007 City Council meeting. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. PUBLIC FORUM Ambuja Rosen/Spoke regarding an anti-tethering ordinance and noted that she has been campaigning for this law for 16 months. Ms. Rosen stated that she has contacted twelve communities with similar tethering laws and one animal control officer informed her that the law only takes about 1 hour to enforce. Based on the number of complaints these communities get, she expects that after a brief flurry of complaints, Ashland will only get a handful of complaints each month. Ms. Rosen voiced her opinion that the Police Department could find 4-5 hours each month to enforce this law and does not believe the City would need an animal control officer. Ms. Rosen briefly commented on the proposed City Charter and stated she no longer believes there is no money to support this chaining ordinance. ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL l..1EETlNG MA Y /, ::007 PAGE 6 017 Art Bullock/Commented on the revised charter placed on the May ballot and commented on the provision that allows four councilors to remove another councilor for violating the prohibition to indirectly coerce the city manager. Mr. Bullock stated this provision was removed by the Council with the stated intent to not allow this, but by removing the language they have actually expanded the power and requested the Council clarify their intent. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS/REPORTS FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS 1. Reading of a Resolution titled, "A Resolution Supporting Measure 15-75 Local Option Tax for Operation of Public Library." Councilor Silbiger noted there is a measure on the May ballot for the local option tax for operation of the public libraries and requested the Council adopt a City resolution supporting this measure. Councilor Silbiger/Hartzell mls to approve Resolution #2007-16. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Silbiger, Hardesty, Chapman, Hartzell, Navickas and Jackson, YES. Motion passed. Councilor Silbiger read the Resolution aloud in full. ORDINANCES. RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS 1. Second Reading of an Ordinance titled, "An Ordinance Amending the Ashland Municipal Code, Adding a New Chapter 10.115, Tenant Rights in Conversion of Existing Multi-Family Rental Units into For-Purchase Housing." Community Development Director David Stalheim noted the first reading of this ordinance occurred at the April 16, 2007 Council meeting and the following modifications were made based on the Council's motion: 1) section 10.1l5.030(c) further defines Fair Market Rent to specify "as defined by the Department of Housing and Urban Development, and 2) section 10.115.050 regarding recommendation to extend tenancy has been reworded. Councilor Hardesty/Hartzell mls to approve Ordinance #2939. DISCUSSION: Councilor Chapman explained that he is in favor of a tenants bill of rights, but voiced concern that the Planning Commission did not review the specifics of this ordinance. Councilor Jackson voiced her concern that this ordinance does not achieve the goal of improving the rental stock. Mr. Stalheim clarified this ordinance was part of the package that was presented to the Planning and Housing Commissions, however at that point all three ordinances were combined. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Navickas, Hardesty, and Hartzell, YES. Councilor Silbiger, Chapman, and Jackson, NO. Mayor Morrison, YES. Motion passed 4-3. 2. Second Reading by title only of an Ordinance titled, "An Ordinance Amending the Ashland Municipal Code, Chapter 15.04, Regarding Conversion of Existing Multi-Family Rental Units into For-Purchase Housing in Multi-Family Districts." Community Development Director David Stalheim noted the first reading of this ordinance took place at the April 17, 2007 Council meeting and a modification was made based on the Council's motion to omit "Owner shall also furnish a copy of the report and approve final inspections to the buyer, at least 10 days prior to the sale of the unit" from section 15.04.115. Mr. Stalheim clarified the building code standards that would be applied at the time of inspection and stated if there are no changes to the structure, staffwill use the existing building code requirements; however, if any improvements trigger new building permits, it will require consistency with the new standards. He also clarified that this is only for conversions to for-purchase units, and anything that remains as a rental would not require an inspection. Councilor Hartzell/Navickas mls to approve Ordinance #2938. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Hartzell, Navickas, Hardesty and Silbiger, YES. Councilor Jackson and Chapman, NO. Motion passed 4-2. ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL /'I1EETlNG MA Y I. 'lOm PAGE 7of7 Councilor Hartzell/Jackson mls to extend meeting to 10:30 p.m. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. 3. Reading of a Resolution titled, "A Resolution Repealing Resolution Nos. 81-20, 81-63, 89-14 and Appointing Park Commission to Facilitate Senior Program." Councilor Silbiger/Jackson mls to approve Resolution #2007-14. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Hardesty, Jackson, Silbiger, Hartzell, Chapman and Navickas, YES. Motion passed. 4. Reading of a Resolution titled, "A Resolution Updating the Forest Lands Commission Membership, Quorum, Powers and Duties and Repealing Resolution 2005-31." Councilor Hartzell/Jackson mls to approve Resolution #2007-15. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Hardesty, Jackson, Silbiger, Hartzell, Chapman, and Navickas, YES. Motion passed. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS/REPORTS FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS (Cont.) 2. Discussion of the Imperatrice Property Proposal. Councilor Chapman requested the Council begin discussing what to do with the Imperatrice Property and listed the following potential uses for this property: 1) preserve it as a natural area to be used for recreational purposes with corridors for hiking, biking, and equestrian access, 2) preserve the area as farmland to be used for agricultural purposes and the generation of local food, or 3) utilize the property for future energy generation. Councilor Chapman requested Council's permission to form a group of people, including a staff member, to start looking into this. Councilors Jackson, Chapman, and Navickas voiced their support for this effort. Councilor Hartzell also voiced support, but expressed concern because this relates to what they will be discussing during Council Goal setting. She also stated she is uncertain with the request for assistance from City staff and stated she is not comfortable with discussing a possible sale of the property. Mayor Morrison stated this is a subject that needs to be discussed, but stated this needs to be done in a manner that does not generate rumors and anxieties within the community. City Administrator Martha Bennett suggested they dedicate a small portion of staff time between now and the July goal setting session, in order to provide Council will some framework thoughts about what would be entailed in a master planning process. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 10:30 p.m. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder John W. Morrison, Mayor CITY OF ASHLAND ASHLAND TREE COMMISSION MINUTES April S, 2007 CALL TO ORDER -Chair Mary Pritchard called the Ashland Tree Commission meeting to order at 7:05 p.rn. on April 5, 2007 in the Siskiyou Room in the Community Development and Engineering Services Building located at 51 Winburn Way, Ashland, OR. Commissioners Present Council Liaison Mary Pritchard Russ Silbiger Kelly Cruser Laurie Sager Staff Present Steve Siewert Angela Barry, Assistant Planner Colin Guiley, absent Anne Rich, Parks Department, absent Carolyn Schwendener, Account Clerk APPROVAL OF MINUTES Sager/Cruser m/s to approve the minutes of February 8, 2007. Voice vote: all AYES, Motion passed. The minutes of February 8, 2007 were approved as presented. PUBLIC FORUM None present PUBLIC HEARINGS No Public Hearings ACTION ITEMS Earth Day Event - Set up is scheduled for 10:00 a.rn. at Science Works. Sager will work from 10:00am to 1:00p.rn., Pritchard will work 1 :00 p.rn. to 4:00 p.m. and Siewert will work the entire day. Sager is going to check with past Tree Commissioners to see if any of them would be interested in helping work a shift. Siewert volunteered to bring a round from a tree showing the growth rings and as an activity the kids can guess the age of the tree. Siewert would like to focus on proper planting and be available for questions. He will bring an example and offer the planting guides. It was decided to bring pictures of the previous Trees of the Year for display. Angela will put all the information and supplies together for the event so that Sager can pick it up on Friday. New Chair & Vice Chair positions - This is Pritchard's last meeting. Sager volunteered to Chair for the next three months and Siewert will be Vice Chair. DISCUSSION ITEMS Goals -The Heritage Tree program, Education and revision of the Street Tree Guide are the three goals the Commissioners previously decided on. Heritage Tree Program - A Heritage Tree is one that deserves a special status due to distinctive form, size, age, location, species, unique qualities or historical significance. When the home owner nominates their tree they will describe what the qualities are that makes it a Heritage Tree. Because this program seems to only have risks and no benefit to the home owner, after much discussion, the Commissioners decided to table this topic until Guiley is present at the meeting. Guiley was previously interested in working on the Heritage Tree Program. Education and Outreach - The Commissioners agreed that the backpage articles in the Daily Tidings are both informative and interesting. Their goal is to publish one article each quarter. Two suggested topics for upcoming articles are Common Tree Problems & Spring Flowering Trees. Revision of Street Tree Guide - Pritchard volunteered to help with the revision of the Street Tree Guide even though she will no longer be on the Commission. The money that pays for the reprinting of the guide is out of the General Fund not the Commissions money. The Commissions goal is to come up with ways to make it more user friendly and update the tree list. NEW ITEMS Arbor Day Membership - The Commissioners agreed they did not have enough money left in the fund to pay for the membership renewal. Angela handed out Commission vacancy flyers so that the Commissioners could help put them around town. Current Balance - $4.35 ADJOURNMENT - Commissioner Pritchard adjourned the meeting at 7:50 p.rn. The Commissioners thanked Mary Pritchard for her years of service on the Commission and expressed how much they will miss her. Respectfully submitted by Carolyn Schwendener, Account Clerk 2 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Approval, of Public Contract for Legal Consultant Services Relating to the Mt Ashland Association Ski Area Expansion Meeting Date: May 15, 2007 Department: Finance - Purchasing Contributing Departments: Fi!J'nan r{f Approval: Martha Benn Estimated Time: Consent Age da Primary Staff Contact: E-mail: Secondary Staff Contact: E-mail: Lee Tuneberg tuneberl@ashland,or,us Statement: This action is to request approval from the City Council, as the Local Contract Review Board, to enter into a public contract with Harrang Long Gary Rudnick, P.C., Attorneys & Counselors at Law, for legal services relating to negotiations with Mt Ashland Association. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the public contract for legal services for the above scope of services be awarded to Harrang Long et al for an amount not to exceed $75,000. Background: A direct award was made to Harrang Long for legal services regarding the lease agreement issues in October 2006. The charges were to be $300 per hour for attorney work plus fees and expenses. No cap on cost was established in the engagement letter but staff estimated $7400 as the potential obligation. At the time of award the Legal Department exempted the work from a solicitation process based upon non-repetitive legal services where the specific skills of this firm were necessary for the scope of work. Since that time, negotiations with MM have expanded requiring additional work by the firm. In March the additional amount was estimated at $20,000 for a total of $27,400. The current estimate puts the total at more than twice the $27,400 amount. For the current services being provided a revised engagement letter has been submitted by Harrang Long that should cover all work to date and anticipated work for mediation. Please note that additional charges are tentative based upon negotiations with MM. Staff believes it would be in the best interest of the City to execute a contract that incorporates the expanded scope, all expenses to date and estimates the remaining potential rA' cost of the work being done. If a greater scopes in service is needed a subsequent engagement letter and contract should be pursued at that time. Related City Policies: AMC 2.52.070 Selection Criteria (Personal Services) The following rules shall be followed in selecting a contractor for personal services: C. For personal service contracts that will cost $50,000 or more, the Department Head shall award the contract based on AMC 2.50.090 (Request for Proposal).. If specialized skills or services are needed the contract can be exempted from the bid process. Council Options: Local Contract Review Board can approve the award of the public contract or decline to extend the scope of work and resultant obligation, discharging Harrang Long immediately and requiring immediate payment of all obligations to date. Potential Motions: Local Contract Review Board moves to award the public contract to Harrang Long Gary Rudnick P.C. for an amount not to exceed $75,000. Attachments: Personal Services Contract Engagement letters are viewed as confidential communications between attorney and client and have not been included in this report. rj.' Contract for Legal Services CITY OF ASHLAND 20 East Main Street Ashland, Oregon 97520 Telephone: 541/488-6002 Fax: 541/488-5311 CONSULTANT: Jens Schmidt CONTACT: Harrang Long Gary Rudnick P.C. ADDRESS: 360 East 10th Avenue, Suite 300, Eugene, OR 97440 TELEPHONE: 541-485-0220 DATE AGREEMENT PREPARED: May 10, 2007 FAX: COMPLETION DATE: until services no longer BEGINNING DATE: May 15, 2007 desired by City COMPENSATION: $300 per hour for Jens Schmidt, lesser amounts for other attorneys or law clerks within the firm. SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED: Representation of the City in negotiations with the Mt. Ashland Association (MM) and advice to the City reqardinq contractual relationships with MM. ADDITIONAL TERMS: FINDINGS: Pursuant to AMC 2.52.040E and AMC 2.52.060, after reasonable inquiry and evaluation, the undersigned Department Head finds and determines that: (1) the services to be acquired are personal services; (2) the City does not have adequate personnel nor resources to perform the services; (3) the statement of work represents the department's plan for utilization of such personal services; (4) the undersigned consultant has specialized experience, education, training and capability sufficient to perform the quality, quantity and type of work requested in the scope of work within the time and financial constraints provided; (5) the consultant's proposal will best serve the needs of the City; and (6) the compensation negotiated herein is fair and reasonable. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein the CITY AND CONSULTANT AGREE as follows: 1. Findings I Recitations. The findings and recitations set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference. 2. All Costs by Consultant: Consultant shall, at its own risk and expense, perform the personal services described above and, unless otherwise specified, furnish all labor, equipment and materials required for the proper performance of such service. 3. Qualified Work: Consultant has represented, and by entering into this contract now represents, that all personnel assigned to the work required under this contract are fully qualified to perform the service to which they will be assigned in a skilled and worker-like manner and, if required to be registered, licensed or bonded by the State of Oregon, are so registered, licensed and bonded. 4. Completion Date: Consultant shall start performing the service under this contract by the beginning date indicated above and complete the service by the completion date indicated above. 5. Compensation: City shall pay Consultant for service performed, including costs and expenses, the sum specified above. Once work commences, invoices shall be prepared and submitted by the tenth of the month for work completed in the prior month. Payments shall be made within 30 days of the date of the invoice. Should the contract be prematurely terminated, payments will be made for work completed and accepted to date of termination. 6. Ownership of Documents: All documents prepared by Consultant pursuant to this contract shall be the property of City. 7. Living Wage Requirements: If the amount of this contract is $16,936 or more, Consultant is required to comply with chapter 3.12 of the Ashland Municipal Code by paying a living wage, as defined in this chapter, to all employees performing work under this contract and to any Subcontractor who performs 50% or more of the service work under this contract. Consultant is also required to post the notice attached hereto as Exhibit B predominantly in areas where it will be seen by all employees. Contract for Legal Services Page 1 8. Indemnification: Consultant agrees to defend, indemnify and save City, its officers, employees and agents harmless from any and all losses, claims, actions, costs, expenses, judgments, subrogations, or other damages resulting from injury to any person (including injury resulting in death), or damage (including loss or destruction) to property, of whatsoever nature arising out of or incident to the performance of this contract by Consultant (including but not limited to, Consultant's employees, agents, and others designated by Consultant to perform work or services attendant to this contract). Consultant shall not be held responsible for any losses, expenses, claims, subrogations, actions, costs, judgments, or other damages, directly, solely, and proximately caused by the negligence of City. 9. Termination: a. Mutual Consent. This contract may be terminated at any time by mutual consent of both parties. b. City's Convenience. This contract may be terminated at any time by City upon 30 days' notice in writing and delivered by certified mail or in person. c. For Cause. City may terminate or modify this contract, in whole or in part, effective upon delivery of written notice to Consultant, or at such later date as may be established by City under any of the following conditions: i. If City funding from federal, state, county or other sources is not obtained and continued at levels sufficient to allow for the purchase of the indicated quantity of services; ii. If federal or state regulations or guidelines are modified, changed, or interpreted in such a way that the services are no longer allowable or appropriate for purchase under this contract or are no longer eligible for the funding proposed for payments authorized by this contract; or iii. If any license or certificate required by law or regulation to be held by Consultant to provide the services required by this contract is for any reason denied, revoked, suspended, or not renewed. d. For Default or Breach. i. Either City or Consultant may terminate this contract in the event of a breach of the contract by the other. Prior to such termination the party seeking termination shall give to the other party written notice of the breach and intent to terminate. If the party committing the breach has not entirely cured the breach within 15 days of the date of the notice, or within such other period as the party giving the notice may authorize or require, then the contract may be terminated at any time thereafter by a written notice of termination by the party giving notice. ii. Time is of the essence for Consultant's performance of each and every obligation and duty under this contract. City by written notice to Consultant of default or breach may at any time terminate the whole or any part of this contract if Consultant fails to provide services called for by this contract within the time specified herein or in any extension thereof. iii. The rights and remedies of City provided in this subsection (d) are not exclusive and are in addition to any other rights and remedies provided by law or under this contract. e. ObliQation/Liability of Parties. Termination or modification of this contract pursuant to subsections a, b, or c above shall be without prejudice to any obligations or liabilities of either party already accrued prior to such termination or modification. However, upon receiving a notice of termination (regardless whether such notice is given pursuant to subsections a, b, cor d of this section, Consultant shall immediately cease all activities under this contract, unless expressly directed otherwise by City in the notice of termination. Further, upon termination, Consultant shall deliver to City all contract documents, information, works-in-progress and other property that are or would be deliverables had the contract been completed. City shall pay Consultant for work performed prior to the termination date if such work was performed in accordance with the Contract. 10. Independent Contractor Status: Consultant is an independent contractor and not an employee of the City. Consultant shall have the complete responsibility for the performance of this contract. Consultant shall provide workers' compensation coveraQe as required in ORS Ch 656 for all persons Contract for Legal Services Page 2 employed to perform work pursuant to this contract. Consultant is a subject employer that will comply with ORS 656.017. 11. Assignment and Subcontracts: Consultant shall not assign this contract or subcontract any portion of the work without the written consent of City. Any attempted assignment or subcontract without written consent of City shall be void. Consultant shall be fully responsible for the acts or omissions of any assigns or Subcontractors and of all persons employed by them, and the approval by City of any assignment or subcontract shall not create any contractual relation between the assignee or subcontractor and City. 12. Default. The Consultant shall be in default of this agreement if Consultant: commits any material breach or default of any covenant, warranty, certification, or obligation it owes under the Contract; its QRF status pursuant to the QRF Rules or loses any license, certificate or certification that is required to perform the Services or to qualify as a QRF if consultant has qualified as a QRF for this agreement; institutes an action for relief in bankruptcy or has instituted against it an action for insolvency; makes a general assignment for the benefit of creditors; or ceases doing business on a regular basis of the type identified in its obligations under the Contract; or attempts to assign rights in, or delegate duties under, the Contract. 13. Insurance. Consultant shall at its own expense provide the following insurance: a. Worker's Compensation insurance in compliance with ORS 656.017, which requires subject employers to provide Oregon workers' compensation coverage for all their subject workers. b. Professional Liabilitv insurance with a combined single limit, or the equivalent, of not less than Enter one: $200,000, $500,000, $1,000,000, $2,000,000 or Not Applicable for each claim, incident or occurrence. This is to cover damages caused by error, omission or negligent acts related to the professional services to be provided under this contract. c. Notice of cancellation or chanQe. There shall be no cancellation, material change, reduction of limits or intent not to renew the insurance coverage(s) without 30 days' written notice from the Consultant or its insurer(s) to the City. 14. Governing Law; Jurisdiction; Venue: This contract shall be governed and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Oregon without resort to any jurisdiction's conflict of laws, rules or doctrines. Any claim, action, suit or proceeding (collectively, "the claim") between the City (and/or any other or department of the State of Oregon) and the Consultant that arises from or relates to this contract shall be brought and conducted solely and exclusively within the Circuit Court of Jackson County for the State of Oregon. If, however, the claim must be brought in a federal forum, then it shall be brought and conducted solely and exclusively within the United States District Court for the District of Oregon filed in Jackson County, Oregon. Consultant, by the signature herein of its authorized representative, hereby consents to the in personam jurisdiction of said courts. In no event shall this section be construed as a waiver by City of any form of defense or immunity, based on the Eleventh Amendment to the United States Constitution, or otherwise, from any claim or from the jurisdiction. CONSULTANT CITY OF ASHLAND: BY BY Signature FINANCE DIRECTOR Print Name TITLE DATE DATE CONTRACT AWARD AND FINDINGS DETERMINED BY: By: City Department Head Date: FederallD# ACCOUNT # (For City purposes only) 'Completed W9 form must be submitted with contract PURCHASE ORDER # Contract for Legal Services Page 3 HARRANG LONG GARY RUDNICK p,C, ATTORNEYS Ilc COUNSELORS AT LAW MAILING ADDRESS P.O. BOX 11620 EUGENE, OREGON 97440-3820 360 EAST 10TH AVENUE, SUITE 300 EUGENE, OR 9"401-3248 ')41.48').0220 WWW.HARRANG.COM TAXPAYERI.D NO. 93-0844033 Statement No. 53174 April 25, 2007 Aftl'ovl/d f(y fcyme;-.T /?eu,sRd PO 072- (OS f)e-fa;/ed bac k up oVQI/abre- /n -Ihli k ~ s~ 7 -07- 16285 JS City of Ashland Attn: Michael W. Franell City Attorney 20 E. Main Street Ashland, OR 97520 Balance From Prior Statement 15,128.20 Payments Received: 04/16/07 15,128.20 Summary of Current Charges Matter No. Description Fees Costs 435.73 0.00 14,751.23 390.00 16285-0001 Mt. Ashland Matter 16285-0002 Clean Water Act Matter 14,315.50 390.00 TOTAL CURRENT CHARGES 15,141.23 BALANCE DUE ALL CHARGES f)~~41.23 ~ RECE1\/F' ..., .", .. .. f MAY 0 7 2007 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE Page 1 / 1 ~.' CITY OF ASHLAND 20 E MAIN ST. ASHLAND, OR 97520 (541) 488-5300 DATE 12/11/2006 PO NUMBER 07265 VENDOR: 004254 HARRANG, LONG, GARY, RUDNICK, ATTORNEY~ POBOX 11620 EUGENE, OR 97440 SHIP TO: City of Ashland 20 E MAIN STREET ASHLAND, OR 97520 FOB Point: Terms: Net Req. Del. Date: Speciallnst: Req. No.: Dept.: ADMINISTRATION Contact: Mike Franell Confirming? No Quantity Unit Description Unit Price Ext. Price THIS IS A REVISED PURCHASE ORDER Leqal assessment of risks in a lawsuit 7,400.00 that could be filed by the Mt. Ashland Association aqainst the City of Ashland for breach of lease. Processed chanqe order 03/20/2007 20,000.00 Additional amount added to purchase order SUBTOTAL 27400.00 31LL TO: Account Payable TAX 0.00 20 EAST MAIN ST FREIGHT 0.00 541-552-2028 TOTAL 27,400.00 ASHLAND, OR 97520 Account Number Project Number Amount Account Number Project Number Amount E 71 0.01.03.00.60414( 27 400.00 ~4 / }~ ~~O7 <? Authl'frized Sri nature VENDOR COpy g Page 1 / 1 ~4. w_1I CITY OF ASHLAND 20 E MAIN ST. ASHLAND, OR 97520 (541) 488-5300 DATE 12/11/2006 PO NUMBER 07265 VENDOR: 004254 HARRANG, LONG, GARY, RUDNICK, ATTORNEY~ POBOX 11620 EUGENE, OR 97440 SHIP TO: City of Ashland 20 E MAIN STREET ASHLAND, OR 97520 FOB Point: Terms: Net Req. Del. Date: Speciallnst: Req. No.: Dept.: ADMINISTRATION Contact: Mike Franell Confirming? No Quantity Unit Description Unit Price Ext. Price Leqal assessment of risks in a lawsuit 7,400.00 that could be filed by the Mt. Ashland Association aqainst the City of Ashland for breach of lease. SUBTOTAL 7400.00 BILL TO: Account Payable TAX 0.00 20 EAST MAIN ST FREIGHT 0.00 541-552-2028 TOTAL 7,400.00 ASHLAND, OR 97520 Account Number Project Number Amount Account Number Project Number Amount E 71 0.01.03.00.60414( 7400.00 "-,, ---./} \. .,-- ~/ '{(~~h 1~ d7> c ~. ~ L Authorized Signature VENDOR COPY / CITY OF ASHLAND REQUISITION FORM THIS REQUEST IS A: o Change Order(existing PO # Date of Request: Ii'':'':;; - ':l- ,:, ~, I Required Date of Delivery/Service: /'. J::'I . / '\\c v . ,,4c \ "-~~ ,- \.. ;-0,."':"; "\- _r\(~.. _ Vendor Name \ ;. , '.' -=-" -J Address ,.......' - ,,~ '" \.' '''\...' ,j, ' '.~ " " . -- <::- City, State, Zip c... ~ ""," -.-'-... ' . "" Telephone Number C':;-",'-\'-\(., . ';:,(,~"C' Fax Number Contact Name i \ '. __ - _ \ _.. r_ ~ rl j \~ ~ __ t-\ C, \l '\ ~..i'- \, '. ,-" 1--( ->'.-....{.. ,'__~' .......'-.;..--'!.. 1 \ ~ ,.} ~ '\". \"... \ 1...- ~~, _'.....___ 2-..) \" 0 /- ,:;'!-..'\ I ( ) ~ \':.\ ,__~,__, ..' .__ c:,.. ,._ , -\ <_ :: > en , ~:~:. :~, f-O:-'::~~:~';; r~:,:~;~:.~~ t~ t.\_(~;~.~~~~~~~-\ :s '. / -\-J..:~h -~--.. '~--::.. '::,:,'., ~ \"\'... c...--" \ c-.>,.\- \-:"'\\-~'_.:'{ '~---'__'~_'-....P,_"___ c.> SOLICITATION PROCESS Small Procurement o less than $5,000 o Quotes (Not required) o Sole Source o Written findings attached o Invitation to Bid (Copies on file) Intermediate Procurement o (3) Written Quotes (Copies attached) Coooerative Procurement o State of ORIWA contract o Other government agency contract o Copy of contract attached o Contract # o ReQuest for Prooosal (Copies on file) ~ Soeciall Exemot o Written findings.attached .?'" 1_ o o Description of SERVICES ~ - C r- ~ ~ ',",' ",_.-\___ '"'. ~ -I"~ -~:..\{__~--> ;,,,........... ''-.- \~"'-"->';.:;>''''' ~ "+-\-...,!"~.:\- ~:~~~ ,~c'~~_,_c~~~'~\:...}~ ~~~~,_, .~.<~.~_ C-, _',\ . .\,~ _,_:-.., ,. c' _ {v_",c~_,<_\" ,', \- (\ ...., ~ ~ . ~ .,~ =-~ ~:.. ,.; ,: ._.c.:, '<- -\'\. ,-- '~--", - \, C.t, \ '-'C;;") < >.., '- ,<-<~,,' \.-", >-'. <, ~ ~- "1:" \"'--. ~ Per attached PROPOSAL ~ Total Cost Item # Quantity Unit Description of MATERIALS Unit Price Total Cost Project Number _ _ _ __ _ _ _ __ o Per attached QUOTE Account Number"':...'IJ ~"). ~.:: - S.>~:.. ~~~'. i::.!'d :.-L i_L\ () . Items and services must be charged to the appropriate account numbers for the financials to reflect the actual expenditures accurately. By signing this requisition form, I certify that the information provided above meets the City of Ashland public contracting require and the documentaffon 7.~ ro. d". ~.) I. ' Employee Slgnature.~~ Supervisor/Dept. Head Signature:; Updated on: 6/8/2005 G: FinancelProcedurelAPIFormsl8_Requisition form revised Memo CITY OF ASHLAND Date: From: To: Re: May 9,2007 Mayor Morrison & City Council Members James H. Olson~ ADDENDUM TclM~Y 1, 2007 COUNCIL COMMUNICATION ASSESSMENT RATE OPTIONS FOR THE NEVADA STREET LID OVERVIEW The purpose of the public hearing that was convened on May 1, 2007 was to hear written objections to the proposed assessments to be levied under the Nevada Street LID. All property owners within the district were apprised of the pending assessment amounts in the hearing notice, sent by first class mail by the City Recorder. The same information was also published in the Daily Tidings. Although it is common to have one or more owners within the district contest the assessment rate, in this instance no written objections have been received. Historically, the final assessment hearing has been the means by which small adjustments in individual assessments have been made as requested in writing by a property owner. Although it is not impossible to do so, large whole scale adjustments in the rates are generally not made without additional noticing with the new proposed rates and with adequate time provided for comments and objectives to the new rate. PROJECT COSTING The original 2004 estimate for this project was $173,500. The LID credits for City participation were computed based upon a flat 60 percent City participation for all construction activities. This approach was used as staff considered this project to be a sidewalk project rather than a street improvement project for which the participation rates as developed for Resolution 99-09. On a standard street improvement project, sidewalk costs generally total less than 10 percent of the cost with paving costs usually at 75 to 80 percent. The reverse is true in this instance and to apply a 60 percent participation rate to the entire project provided a more equitable and slightly reduced assessment rate. It was felt that the reduced rate and simplified method of computation would be more easily supported among the owners within the district. CIRCUIT COURT CASE NO. 04-397123(7), BULLOCK VS. CITY OF ASHLAND In the Bullock vs. City case, Judge Snively ruled on the City's behalf on nearly 80 allegations of wrong doing by Art Bullock. The identified an error in that the City did not have the option of varying from the specified formula for City participation as set forth in Resolution 99-09. The ENGINEERING DIVISION Tel: 541/488-5347 20 E. Main Street Fax: 541/488-6006 Ashland OR 97520 TTY: 800/735-2900 www.ashland.or.us G:\pub-wrks\eng\dept-adminILID\Nevada LID Public Hearing Option Memo 5 07.doc ~A' Judge further ruled that even though the City erred in its computation of credits, no harm was done to anyone within the district and the City was not required to revise the formula. RESOLUTION NO. 2004-31 On September 7,2004, following a public hearing, Council approved Resolution 2004-31 which ordered and authorized the improvement of Nevada Street and the formed the Nevada Street Local Improvement District No. 85. The assessment rate was computed at $575.20 per assessment unit which was based upon the following assumptions: 1. Estimated project cost of $173,500.00 2. City participation of$101,600.00 (60% of construction costs) 3. Assessment amount of$71,900.00 4. Number of assessment units - 125 Public hearing notices were sent to all owners within the district with rates and information included. PROJECT CONSTRUCTION Following the approval of Resolution 2004-31 staff completed the project design and requested bids for the work. Bidder interest was dismal and the first bid was rejected. In an effort to gain a more competitive cost the project was re-bid with results similar to the first bid. The single bid was received from LTM Inc. for $249,050.50. On January 17, 2006 the bid was reviewed by Council. Since the bid was over 40% higher than the 2004 estimate the following options were considered: 1. Reject the bid and attempt to find a lower cost method to accomplish the work. 2. Adjust the assessment to accommodate the costs based upon the bid. This would require that another public hearing be held with notices be sent to all owners with the new assessment rate shown. 3. Accept the bid and award a contract to LTM Inc. in the amount of$249,050.50, and in accordance with AMC 13.20.060 (B) the City would find additional funding sources to cover the extra cost. This option requires that the assessment rate as specified in Resolution 2004-31 can not be increased by more than 10 percent. Council selected Option No.3 and assurances were made to the district that any possible increase would be limited to 10 percent over the originally specified rate of$575.20 per unit. A contract was entered into with LTM Inc. and the project was constructed. FINAL PROJECT COSTS The final project development cost was $295,837.63 including engineering costs. ENGINEERING DIVISION Tel: 541/488-5347 20 E. Main Street Fax: 541/488-6006 Ashland OR 97520 TTY: 800n35-2900 www.ashland.or.us G:\pub-wrks\eng\dept-admin\LIDINevada LID Public Hearing Option Memo 5 07.doc r~' ASSESSMENT SCENARIOS 1. The assessment rate as specified under Resolution 2004-31 is $575.20/unit. 2. The maximum increase often percent results in a rate of$632.72. 3. If the formula specified under Resolution 99-09 had been strictly adhered to the rate would have been $716.48/unit, an increase of24.5% (based upon the original estimate). 4. If the assessment were to be recomputed based upon the final project cost and at the correct participation rate as specified under Resolution 99-09, the final assessment rate would be $1,347.08/unit, an increase of $134.2%. SUMMARY If the Council elects to vary the original assessment rate of $ 575.20/unit as stated in Resolution 2004-31 by more than 10 percent, than this public hearing should be terminated and property owners sent a notice of the new assessment rate and a new public hearing date be set with adequate time provided for written comments. ENGINEERING DIVISION Tel: 541/488-5347 20 E. Main Street Fax: 541/488-6006 Ashland OR 97520 TTY: 800n35-2900 www.ashland.or.us G:\pub-wrks\eng\dept-admin\LIDINevada LID Public Hearing Option Memo 5 07.doc r~' BEFORE THE ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL JACKSON COUNTY, OREGON May 1, 2007 IN THE MATTER OF RESOLUTION LEVYING SPECIAL BENEFIT ASSESSMENTS FOR THE NEVADA STREET LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT FOR SIDEWALKS, CURB EXTENSIONS, PLANTER AREAS, PEDESTRIAN SAFETY AND DRAINAGE IMPROVMENTS AND ASSOCIATED IMPROVEMENTS ON WEST NEVADA STREET FROM HELMAN STREET WEST TO THE BILLINGS RANCH SUBDIVISION APPLICANT: City of Ashland RECIT ALS: ) ) ) ) FINDINGS ) CONCLUSIONS ) AND ORDERS ) ) ) ) ) 1) The Findings, Conclusions and Orders adopted by Council on June 5, 2006 are hereby made a part of these findings. 2) On August 3, 2004, Council approved Resolution No. 04-30 to set a public hearing with intent to form a local improvement district for sidewalk and traffic calming improvements to West Nevada Street. 3) The Nevada Street LID boundary was approved by Council as being all those lots with frontage on Nevada Street from Helman Street west to the Billings Ranch Subdivision (53 lots) and all ofthose lots within the Billings Ranch Subdivision (72 lots). 4) The Council, following proper public notice held a public hearing on September 7,2004 at which time a staff presentation was made, citizen testimony received and exhibits presented. Council approved Resolution No. 04-31 authorizing and ordering the improvements to Nevada Street consisting of sidewalks, curb extensions, planter areas, pedestrian safety improvements and drainage and associated improvements. 5) As authorized under Resolution No. 2004-31, the City of Ashland solicited bids and awarded a contract to LTM Inc. for the construction of the Nevada Street LID. The final cost for the project was $295,837.63 of which $79,090.00 will be paid by assessment based upon a rate of$632.72 per assessment unit. 6) On March 23,2007, Council adopted Resolution No. 2007-09 setting a date of May 1, 2007 for a public hearing to consider objections to the proposed final assessments to be levied against owners within the Nevada Street Local Improvement District. Page I of6 7) On May 1, 2007 a public hearing was held at the Ashland City Council Chambers at 1175 East Main Street. Following the hearing Council adopted Resolution No. 2007- _ Levying Special Benefit Assessments for the construction of the Nevada Street Local Improvement District. 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 following exhibits will be used: Exhibit 1 - Council Communication dated August 3,2004 Exhibit 2 - Minutes of the August 3, 2004 Council meeting Exhibit 3 - Resolution No. 04-30 setting a public hearing Exhibit 4 - Council Communication dated September 7, 2004 Exhibit 5 - Minutes of the September 7, 2004 Council meeting Exhibit 6 - Resolution No. 04-31 authorizing and ordering the improvement of Nevada Street under the Nevada Street LID No. 85 Exhibit 7 - Council Communication dated March 20, 2007 Exhibit 8 - Minutes of the March 20, 2007 Council meeting Exhibit 9 - Council Communication dated May 1, 2007 SECTION 2. CONCLUSORY FINDINGS REGARDING BOUNDARY DETERMINATION 2.1 The City Council finds that it has received all information necessary to make a decision based on the Council Communication dated August 3,2004 and September 7, 2004, public hearing testimony and the exhibits received. 2.2 The proposed LID is in the best interest ofthe City. Evidence presented indicated that average traffic speeds along Nevada were in excess of posted speed limits. With the anticipated increases in traffic volume resulting from the construction of the Billings Ranch Subdivision, there would be an increased chance for pedestrian, vehicular conflict. Nevada Street did not have any sidewalks between Helman Street and the Billings Ranch Subdivision. The pedestrian improvement project was in the City's best interest as it provided for improved pedestrian safety by reducing overall vehicular traffic speeds through traffic calming and Page 2 of 6 provided sidewalks for pedestrian use in an area along a pedestrian route used by school children where none previously exist. 2.3 The proposed LID boundary included lots fronting on Nevada Street (53 properties) from Helman Street west to and including the new Billings Ranch Subdivision as depicted on the map attached to Resolution No. 04-30. This boundary was selected as these 53 properties would be directly benefited by the improvements along Nevada Street. Helman Street marks the beginning ofthe residential district and since sidewalks are already in place between Helman Street and Oak Street, that block was not considered for inclusion. The Billings Ranch Subdivision (72 properties) was included as a condition of their planning approval in accordance with the requirements of AMC 18.80.060 B.2. which reads: B. Improvements requirements. Improvements to be installed at the expense of the land divider are as follows: . . . 2. Exterior unimproved streets. When part of a proposed subdivision or major land partition abuts an existing unimproved street, the property owner, or a representative, shall satisfy the minor lands partition improvements requirements and sign an agreement in favor of improving said street in the future to full City standards as outlined in this Section. The proposed boundary was consistent with other neighborhood sidewalk and traffic calming LIDs (Helman, Penny/Palmer) as only those properties directly on the affected streets or within subdivisions for which participation was required pursuant to AMC 18.80.060 B.2. were included in the LID boundary area. There had been some discussion that all of the Quiet Village Neighborhood or at least all ofthe homes north of Nevada Street should be included in the LID boundary as all will be affected by the improvements as most all residents travel some part of Nevada Street to access their homes. The only LID in recent years that went beyond the immediate street improvement area was Tolman Creek Road. Tolman Creek Road is considered a major collector / arterial street and the improvements were full street improvements (street reconstruction and overlay, new storm drain system, sidewalks on both sides, traffic calming planters, etc.). In that case, the boundary was extended to include all homes that directly and indirectly accessed Tolman Creek Road. This requirement was further reinforced by the fact that nearly all subdivisions were required to participate in the LID as a condition of the planning approval pursuant to the requirements of AMC 18.80.060 B.2. 2.4 It was necessary that the Nevada Street Sidewalk and Traffic Calming LID be formed by Council initiative in accordance with AMC Section 13.20.020. Page 3 of6 Although staff has worked with the neighbors and has received general consensus for the formation ofthe LID, actual signed petitions in favor ofthe LID had not been collected by staff. However, in August, 2004 Staff sent a letter to each of the property owners within the LID boundary and requested they return a postcard marking their choice regarding formation of the LID. A clear majority of the respondents were in favor of the LID. This information was presented at the public hearing. 2.5 The proposed Nevada Street Local Improvement District is consistent with the 2002-2003 Capital Improvement Plan and identified in the 2002-2003 budget adopted by Council in June, 2001. 2.6 The City Council did not receive a remonstrance sufficient to postpone the construction of this project. SECTION 3. CONCLUSORY FINDINGS REGARDING CONFLICT OF INTEREST 3.1 The City Council finds that it received all information necessary to form the Local Improvement District based on the Council Communications dated August 3, 2004 and September 7, 2004, public hearing testimony and the exhibits received at the public hearing on September 7, 2004, and to allocate the assessment based upon the Council Communications for the City Council meeting held on May 1, 2007, together with public hearing testimony at the public hearing held May 1, 2007. 3.2 At the September 7,2004 Council meeting Public Works Director Paula Brown verbally declared a conflict of interest as she and her husband owned property at the comer of Nevada Street and Cambridge Street (800 Cambridge Street) which is located within the assessment district boundary and property which is located at 810 Cambridge which is immediately outside the LID boundary proposed by staff and adopted by the City Council. When Ms. Brown was initially assigned the task of putting together the LID, Ms. Brown notified then City Administrator, Gino Grimaldi, of her property ownership on Cambridge Street. Ms. Brown took efforts to mitigate any conflict by relegating all decisions regarding the formation of the assessment boundary, the allocation of the assessment to each benefited property and other similar issues to Project Manager James Olson. 3.3 Council determined that Ms. Brown did not benefit financially from her ownership of the property resulting from her position within the City and that she had taken the steps to ensure that any conflict was mitigated. Any defect in not following state law precisely was insignificant and had no bearing on the validity ofthe proposed formation of the Local Improvement District. It was further determined that Ms. Brown did not receive any benefits or considerations beyond that which would have been available to any other citizen. Council determined that the conflict should not stop the proposed formation of the local improvement district as nothing relating to the conflict would change the proposed boundary, the needed improvements, nor the proposed assessments. Page 4 of 6 SECTION 4 CONCLUSION FINDINGS REGARDING THE FINAL ASSESSMENT COST 4.1 On September 7,2004 Council, in accordance with AMC Section 13.20.060 (B), passed Resolution No. 2004-31 determined the assessment rate at $575.20 per equivalent dwelling unit. 4.2 A public bidding process for construction ofthe Nevada Street Local Improvement Project was completed on December 14,2005 with a single bid received from LTM, Inc. 4.3 On January 17, 2006, Council accepted the construction bid and entered into a contract with LTM, Inc. for $249,050.50 to construct the Nevada Street LID improvement project. The improvements were completed in September of 2006 for a total cost of$295,837.63. 4.4 Further, on January 17, 2006, Council modified the unit assessment cost by the maximum amount allowed (ten percent) under AMC Section 13.20.060 (B). The 1999-09 Resolution calculation of the amount using construction costs would be $1347.08. Since the Council elected to proceed with other services of funds (other than assessment), the assessment is limited to 110% figure or $632.72. SECTION 5. CONCLUSIONARY FINDINGS REGARDING COUNCIL ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION NO. 2007-09 SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING 5.1 Council heard a staff report and public comment on the final completed project and the cost associated therewith and, based on the evidence, adopted Resolution 2007-07 setting the date of May 1, 2007 for a public hearing to levy special benefit assessment costs. SECTION 6. CONCLUSIONARY FINDINGS REGARDING COUNCIL ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION LEVYING SPECIAL BENEFITS FOR THE NEVADA STREET LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 85 6.1 On May 1, 2007 Council heard a staff report and public comment regarding the final assessments to be levied against properties within the Nevada Street Local Improvement District and, based on the evidence, adopted Resolution No. 2007 - SECTION 7. DECISION Page 5 of6 7.1 Based on evidence contained within the whole record on this matter, the City Council concludes that the establishment of the LID boundary is in the City's best interest, is justified as presented by staff and is supported by evidence contained within the record. 7.2 Council further concludes that the conflict of interests as stated by Paula Brown have been fully mitigated and had no impact upon the formation ofthe LID, nor on the allocation of the assessment for the improvement 7.3 Based upon evident presented, Council determines that the LID was bid and constructed in accordance with City of Ashland standards and that the final construction costs represent the actual costs. 7.4 Therefore, based on our overall conclusions, the City Council finds the assessment rate to be fair and equitable and instruct $632.72 to be levied against each assessment unit within the Nevada Street Local Improvement District. CITY OF ASHLAND, OREGON By: John Morrison, Mayor Date G:\legal\Richard\PubWrks\Nevada St City Council Levy Assessments Findings 5. 07final .doc Page 6 of6 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Meeting Date: May 1, 2007 Department: Public Works Engineering Contributing Departments: I, Finance, Recorder Approval: Martha Benne Public Hearing, Adoption of a Resolution Levying Special Benefit Assessments for the Nevada Street Local Improvement District No. 85 and Adoption of Findings Primary Staff Contact: James H. Olson, 552-2412 JflJ E-mail: olsonj@ashland.or.us Secondary Staff Contact: Barbara Christensen, 552-2084 E-mail: christenb@ashland.or.us Estimated Time: 45 minutes Statement: A. Public Hearing In accordance with AMC Section 13.02.060(E), a public hearing shall be held to consider any objections to the proposed assessments to be levied against property owners within the Nevada Street Local Improvement District No. 85. On March 23,2007, Resolution No. 2007-09 was adopted setting a date for the public hearing of May 1,2007. All property owners within the district were sent notices of the hearing and a notice was also published in the Daily Tidings on March 31, 2007. B. Resolution Approval Approval of the attached resolution, following the public hearing, would establish the final amount of assessment to be charged against each lot within the assessment district and the interest rate to be applied to those owners opting to make payments as provided for under the Bancroft Bonding Act. C. Adoption of Findings Adoption of the attached findings would document the City's decisions regarding the formation of the district and allocation of the assessments. D. Written Objections to Proposed Assessments As of this date no letters of objection have been received. Any letters received subsequent to this communication will be provided to the council along with staffs response, at the public hearing. Background: The Nevada Street LID was developed in response to citizen requests to provide an opportunity to meet the following specific goals pertaining to Nevada Street: 1. Reduce speed of traffic 2. Encourage uniform traffic speed 3. Provide a safe and comfortable pedestrian route 4. Provide a safe and comfortable bike route 5. Provide a safe motorist route 6. Maintain safe and unimpeded emergency access 7. Maintain the street function as a neighborhood collector 8. Increase livability of the neighborhood (relating to noise, traffic speed, convenience of travel, maintain trees, and reduce clutter) 9. Balance street function, safety and livability, and 10. Reduce the anticipated impact of increased traffic G' puh-wrb l'ng d~rt-adl11in LID N~\ada LID CC r~ Adoption of Rl'solution 8:. Findings 4 II7.do~ r~' To meet these goals a comprehensive plan was developed with the assistance of a citizens panel comprised of a cross section of owners within the Quiet Village subdivision area, both from within and outside of the assessment district boundary. The design process was a rigorous one lasting nearly six months and culminating in seven different and distinct plans being submitted to the engineering staff. Staff was charged with refining the seven plans into a single acceptable design. This was accomplished by incorporating elements from the seven plans, into one single concept plan. This plan was reviewed and approved by the Council on August 3,2004. The final project plans were completed by Thomton Engineering of Medford and the project was advertised for construction in April 2005. To provide economies of scale and to reduce bidding and administration costs, the Nevada Street LID project was included as Bid Schedule C in conjunction with two other projects (Schedules A and B) within the 2004 Miscellaneous Concrete Construction Project No. 2004-04. This project was originally bid on May 10, 2005, with only a single bid received. Since that bid was 48% higher than the engineer's estimate, the single bid was rejected and the project was rebid later that year in the hopes of a more improved and competitive bidding atmosphere. Several changes were made to the project to help encourage a more competitive project including: 1. The project was rescheduled as a winter construction project to take advantage of what is generally considered to be the "slack" construction season. 2. The project construction time limits were extended through to May 31, 2006, to provide maximum construction time. 3. The bidding period was extended to six weeks to provide contractors with adequate time to prepare bids. 4. A concerted effort was made to contact prospective bidders. Plans and bid packages were distributed to ten plan centers, three newspapers and 20 contractions in the hopes that additional competition could be generated. The Miscellaneous Concrete Construction Project was rebid on December 14,2005 with results similar to the May 10, 2005 bid. Again, we received only a single bed from L TM, Inc. The results of the bid are as follows: Schedule A: Misc Concrete Repair & Construction Schedule B: Pedestrian Safety Improvements in the Central Business District Schedule C: Nevada Street LID ESTIMATE $105,674.00 $98,552.00 $175,525.50 TOTAL $379,751.50 L TM BID $166,750.00 $123,269.50 $249,050.50 $538,470.00 The original estimated construction cost from 2004 was for $148,500.00 which was revised in 2005 to $175,525.50. The final bid at $249,050.50 was 29.5% higher than the latest revised cost estimate and 40.4% higher than the original 2004 estimate. The construction contract was reviewed by Council on January 17, 2006, where it was determined that, due to the unlikelihood of receiving a more competitive and lesser bid, the single bid would be accepted and a contract be entered into with L TM Inc. to construct the Nevada Street Traffic Calming Improvements. In accordance with AMC Section 13.20.060 (B) it was further determined that the amount of increase to be allocated to the benefited assessment district would be limited to just 10% over the advertised rate with the balance to be assumed by the City and funded through altemative sources. The assessment rate as indicated on Resolution No. 2004-31 was $575.20 per equivalent dwelling unit. With the additional 10% over the stated assessment rate, the final rate is now projected at $632.72. Bullock vs. City of Ashland During the course of the Nevada Street LID project development, numerous legal suits were filed in the State Circuit Court by Art Bullock. In Mr. Bullock's many filings he contended that the City had erred in over 80 points of law or procedure in the formation of the Nevada Street assessment district. Judge Mark Schively has ruled in favor of the City on all counts except the following two points: G' puh-wrks eng dept-admin LID Neyada LID CC re Adoption of Resoluti,'n & Findll1gs 4 m.doc ~.t. 1 1. That the City should have adopted findings as to the determination of the LID boundaries. (Circuit Court Case No. 04-397123(7)). This condition was remedied on June 6,2006 when Council officially accepted findings which were promptly forward to the court where they were accepted. 2. The City did not have the ability to vary from the specified formula of assessment determination as specified in Resolution 99-09 which states that the city will contribute the following amounts to reduce the assessments to a local improvement district: 60% of the total costs for sidewalk improvements; 75% of the total costs for storm drain improvements; 20% of the total costs for street surface improvements; and 50% of the total costs for engineering and administration. City staff had considered this project to be a sidewalk improvements project which did not correlate well with the above standard formula, and elected to use a more equitable interpretation of the formula which resulted in a reduction in the assessment amount. In computing the assessment rate, the City chose to apply a 60% City participation to all categories of costs, except engineering costs. Rather than show a 20% and 75% participation for street improvement and storm drain costs, a uniform 60% reduction was applied overall. If the exact formula was to be followed the results would be as follows: Based upon the latest engineer's estimate for construction the full costs are allocated to each of the four categories. Sidewalk Costs $68,928.00 @ 60% = Storm Drain Costs: $17,155.00 @ 75% = Street Improvement Costs: $62,417.00 @ 20% = Engineering & Administration Costs: $25,000 @ 50% = Total Improvement Cost Total City Participation $41,356.80 $12.866.25 $17,216.60 $12,500.00 $173,500.00 $ 83,939.65 COST COMPARISON BETWEEN PROPOSED ASSESSMENT COST AND COSTS COMPUTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH RESOLUTION 99-09 Previous Proposal Costs Total Project Cost: $173,500.00 Total City Participation $101,600.00 (58.6%) Total Assessable Cost $71,900.00 Assessment Units 125 Estimated Cost Per Unit $575.20 Costs Per Resolution 99-09 Total Project Cost: $173,500.00 Total City Participation $83,939.65 (48.4%) Total Assessable Cost $89,560.35 Assessment Units 125 Estimated Cost Per Unit $716.48 Difference $141.28 (24.5% increase) As shown, the full formula interpretation would result in a 24.5% increase in individual assessments This has no impact upon the final assessment rate as it is legally established by Resolution No. 2004-31 plus 10% and additional costs in excess of that increase are already assumed by the City. G: pub-wrks c'ng dept-admin LID Necada LID CC re Adoption of Re,o!utlon & Findings 4 117.doc ~~, Final Costs The Nevada Street LID project was substantially completed in September of 2006 at a total project cost of $283,125.38. The final price included $34,074.88 in extra work and additional quantities resulting from unexpected site conditions. Engineering costs were $12,712.25 for a total project cost of $295,837.63. Following is a breakdown of the allocations of project costs: Estimated Project Cost $173,500.00 Assessment Units 125 Estimated Cost per unit $575.20 Estimated Assessment Total $71,900.00 Final Project Cost $295,837.63 Final Cost per Unit $632.72 Final City Participation $216,747.63 Final Assessment Total $79,090.00 Percentage of City Participation 73.3% Percentage of District Participation 26.7% FundinQ It is anticipated that this project will be funded as follows: LID Assessment District Transportation SDCs (15%) Transportation User Fees = $71,900.00 = $32,512.14 = $184,235.49 Related City Policies: AMC Chapter 13.20 Local Improvements and Special Assessments AMC Chapter 13.20.010 Definitions A. "Improvement resolution" means that resolution adopted by the council declaring its intention to make a local improvement. B. "Local Improvement" has the meaning given under ORS 223.001. C. "Local Improvement District" means the property that is to be assessed for all or any portion of the cost of a local improvement and the property on which the local improvement is located. D. "Lot" means a lot, block or parcel of land. E. "Owner" means the owner of the title to real property or the contract purchaser of real property of record as shown on the last available complete assessment role in the office of the County Assessor. Council Options: Council may accept the proposed assessments as shown on Exhibit A and approve the Resolution Levying Special Benefit Assessments for the Nevada Street LID No. 85, or: Council may elect to modify, correct or revise the assessments to be levied, based upon arguments presented at the public hearing. And Council may adopt the findings as prepared, or; Council may elect to modify, correct or revise the findings. G. puh-wrb.:ngd.:pt-admin LID "<.:\ada LID CC r.: Adoption or R.:solution & Findll1gs 4 117.do.: ~;., Staff Recommendation: A. Staff recommends approval of the attached resolution Levying Special Benefit Assessments for the Nevada Street Local Improvement District No. 85 as set forth in this communication and as further detailed on Exhibit A. B. Staff further recommends approval and adoption of the attached findings. Potential Motions: A. Council may move to adopt the attached resolution Levying Special Benefit Assessments for the Nevada Street Local Improvement District No. 85. B. Council may more to revise the resolution to accommodate changes to the assessments. C. Following approval of the resolution Council may move to adopt the findings or revise them as needed. Attachments: 1. Resolution / Exhibit A 2. Vicinity Map 3. Photographs 4. Findings G' puh-wrb ~ng d~pt-adll1in LID Nnada LID CC r~ Adoption oi' R~s"lullon & Findings 41l7.doc ~.l' BEFORE THE ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL JACKSON COUNTY, OREGON May 1,2007 IN THE MATTER OF RESOLUTION LEVYING SPECIAL BENEFIT ASSESSMENTS FOR THE NEVADA STREET LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT FOR SIDEWALKS, CURB EXTENSIONS, PLANTER AREAS, PEDESTRIAN SAFETY AND DRAINAGE IMPROVMENTS AND ASSOCIA TED IMPROVEMENTS ON WEST NEVADA STREET FROM HELMAN STREET WEST TO THE BILLINGS RANCH SUBDIVISION APPLICANT: City of Ashland RECIT ALS: ) ) ) ) FINDINGS ) CONCLUSIONS ) AND ORDERS ) ) ) ) ) ]) The Findings, Conclusions and Orders adopted by Council on June 5, 2006 are hereby made a part of these findings. 2) On August 3, 2004, Council approved Resolution No. 04-30 to set a public hearing with intent to form a local improvement district for sidewalk and traffic calming improvements to West Nevada Street. 3) The Nevada Street LID boundary was approved by Council as being all those lots with frontage on Nevada Street from Helman Street west to the Billings Ranch Subdivision (53 lots) and all of those lots within the Billings Ranch Subdivision (72 lots). 4) The Council, following proper public notice held a public hearing on September 7, 2004 at which time a staff presentation was made, citizen testimony received and exhibits presented. Council approved Resolution No. 04-31 authorizing and ordering the improvements to Nevada Street consisting of sidewalks, curb extensions, planter areas, pedestrian safety improvements and drainage and associated improvements. 5) As authorized under Resolution No. 2004-31, the City of Ashland solicited bids and awarded a contract to L TM Inc. for the construction of the Nevada Street LID. The final cost for the project was $295,837.63 of which $79,090.00 will be paid by assessment based upon a rate of$632.72 per assessment unit. 6) On March 23, 2007, Council adopted Resolution No. 2007-09 setting a date of May 1, 2007 for a public hearing to consider objections to the proposed final assessments to be levied against owners within the Nevada Street Local Improvement District. G ',pub-wrks,eng'dept-admin'L1D\Nevada 5t CIty Council Levy Assessments Findmgs 4 07.doc Page I "f6 7) On May 1, 2007 a public hearing was held at the Ashland City Council Chambers at 1175 East Main Street. Following the hearing Council adopted Resolution No. 2007 - _ Levying Special Benefit Assessments for the construction of the Nevada Street Local Improvement District. 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 following exhibits will be used: Exhibit 1 - Council Communication dated August 3, 2004 Exhibit 2 - Minutes of the August 3, 2004 Council meeting Exhibit 3 - Resolution No. 04-30 setting a public hearing Exhibit 4 - Council Communication dated September 7, 2004 Exhibit 5 - Minutes of the September 7, 2004 Council meeting Exhibit 6 - Resolution No. 04-31 authorizing and ordering the improvement of Nevada Street under the Nevada Street LID No. 85 Exhibit 7 - Council Communication dated March 20, 2007 Exhibit 8 - Minutes of the March 20, 2007 Council meeting Exhibit 9 - Council Communication dated May 1, 2007 SECTION 2. CONCLUSORY FINDINGS REGARDING BOUNDARY DETERMINATION 2.1 The City Council finds that it has received all information necessary to make a decision based on the Council Communication dated August 3, 2004 and September 7, 2004, public hearing testimony and the exhibits received. 2.2 The proposed LID is in the best interest of the City. Evidence presented indicated that average traffic speeds along Nevada were in excess of posted speed limits. With the anticipated increases in traffic volume resulting from the construction of the Billings Ranch Subdivision, there would be an increased chance for pedestrian, vehicular conflict. Nevada Street did not have any sidewalks between Helman Street and the Billings Ranch Subdivision. The pedestrian improvement project was in the City's best interest as it provided for improved pedestrian safety by reducing overall vehicular traffic speeds through traffic calming and G'\puo-wrks'eng1dept-admin.,L1D1Nevada 5t City Council Levy Assessments Findings 4 07 doc Page2of6 provided sidewalks for pedestrian use in an area along a pedestrian route used by school children where none previously exist. 2.3 The proposed LID boundary included lots fronting on Nevada Street (53 properties) from Helman Street west to and including the new Billings Ranch Subdivision as depicted on the map attached to Resolution No. 04-30. This boundary was selected as these 53 properties would be directly benefited by the improvements along Nevada Street. Helman Street marks the beginning of the residential district and since sidewalks are already in place between Helman Street and Oak Street, that block was not considered for inclusion. The Billings Ranch Subdivision (72 properties) was included as a condition of their planning approval in accordance with the requirements of AMC 18.80.060 B.2. which reads: B. Improvements requirements. Improvements to be installed at the expense of the land divider are as follows: . . . 2. Exterior unimproved streets. When part of a proposed subdivision or major land partition abuts an existing unimproved street, the property owner, or a representative, shall satisfy the minor lands partition improvements requirements and sign an agreement in favor of improving said street in the future to full City standards as outlined in this Section. The proposed boundary was consistent with other neighborhood sidewalk and traffic calming LIDs (Helman, Penny/Palmer) as only those properties directly on the affected streets or within subdivisions for which participation was required pursuant to AMC 18.80.060 B.2. were included in the LID boundary area. There had been some discussion that all of the Quiet Village Neighborhood or at least all of the homes north of Nevada Street should be included in the LID boundary as all will be affected by the improvements as most all residents travel some part of Nevada Street to access their homes. The only LID in recent years that went beyond the immediate street improvement area was Tolman Creek Road. Tolman Creek Road is considered a major collector / arterial street and the improvements were full street improvements (street reconstruction and overlay, new storm drain system, sidewalks on both sides, traffic calming planters, etc.). In that case, the boundary was extended to include all homes that directly and indirectly accessed Tolman Creek Road. This requirement was further reinforced by the fact that nearly all subdivisions were required to participate in the LID as a condition of the planning approval pursuant to the requirements of AMC 18.80.060 B.2. 2.4 It was necessary that the Nevada Street Sidewalk and Traffic Calming LID be formed by Council initiative in accordance with AMC Section 13.20.020. Gpub-wrks\eng\dept-admin\L1D\Nevada St City Council Levy Assessments Findmgs 4 lJ7.doc Page 3 of 6 Although staff has worked with the neighbors and has received general consensus for the formation of the LID, actual signed petitions in favor of the LID had not been collected by staff. However, in August, 2004 Staff sent a letter to each of the property owners within the LID boundary and requested they return a postcard marking their choice regarding formation of the LID. A clear majority of the respondents were in favor of the LID. This information was presented at the public hearing. 2.5 The proposed Nevada Street Local Improvement District is consistent with the 2002-2003 Capital Improvement Plan and identified in the 2002-2003 budget adopted by Council in June, 2001. 2.6 The City Council did not receive a remonstrance sufficient to postpone the construction of this project. SECTION 3. CONCLUSORY FINDINGS REGARDING CONFLICT OF INTEREST 3.1 The City Council finds that it received all information necessary to form the Local Improvement District based on the Council Communications dated August 3, 2004 and September 7,2004, public hearing testimony and the exhibits received at the public hearing on September 7, 2004, and to allocate the assessment based upon the Council Communications for the City Council meeting held on May 1,2007, together with public hearing testimony at the public hearing held May 1,2007. 3.2 At the September 7, 200~ Council meeting Public Works Director Paula Brown verbally declared.a conflict of interest as she and her husband owned property at the comer of Nevada Street and Cambridge Street (800 Cambridge Street) which is located within the assessment district boundary and property which is located at 810 Cambridge which is immediately outside the LID boundary proposed by staff and adopted by the City Council. When Ms. Brown was initially assigned the task of putting together the LID, Ms. Brown notified then City Administrator, Gino Grimaldi, of her property ownership on Cambridge Street. Ms. Brown took efforts to mitigate any conflict by relegating all decisions regarding the formation of the assessment boundary, the allocation of the assessment to each benefited property and other similar issues to Project Manager James Olson. 3.3 Council determined that Ms. Brown did not benefit financially from her ownership of the property resulting from her position within the City and that she had taken the steps to ensure that any conflict was mitigated. Any defect in not following state law precisely was insignificant and had no bearing on the validity of the proposed formation of the Local Improvement District. It was further determined that Ms. Brown did not receive any benefits or considerations beyond that which would have been available to any other citizen. Council determined that the conflict should not stop the proposed formation of the local improvement district as nothing relating to the conflict would change the proposed boundary, the needed improvements, nor the proposed assessments. G.lpub-wrks\eng\dept-admin\L1D'Nevada 5t City Council Levy Assessments Findings 4 07 doc Page 4 ofb SECTION 4 CONCLUSION FINDINGS REGARDING THE FINAL ASSESSMENT COST 4.1 On September 7,2004 Council, in accordance with AMC Section 13.20.060 (B), passed Resolution No. 2004-31 determined the assessment rate at $575.20 per equivalent dwelling unit. 4.2 A public bidding process for construction of the Nevada Street Local Improvement Project was completed on December 14,2005 with a single bid received from L TM, Inc. 4.3 On January 17,2006, Council accepted the construction bid and entered into a contract with L TM, Inc. for $249,050.50 to construct the Nevada Street LID improvement project. The improvements were completed in September of 2006 for a total cost of$295,837.63. 4.4 Further, on January 17,2006, Council modified the unit assessment cost by the maximum amount allowed (ten percent) under AMC Section 13.20.060 (B). The revised assessment cost was increased to $632.72. SECTION 5. CONCLUSIONARY FINDINGS REGARDING COUNCIL ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION NO. 2007-09 SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING 5.1 Council heard a staff report and public comment on the final completed project and the cost associated therewith and, based on the evidence, adopted Resolution . 2007-07 setting the date of May 1, 2007 for a public hearing to levy special benefit assessment costs. SECTION 6. CONCLUSIONARY FINDINGS REGARDING COUNCIL ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION LEVYING SPECIAL BENEFITS FOR THE NEVADA STREET LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 85 6.1 On May I, 2007 Council heard a staff report and public comment regarding the final assessments to be levied against properties within the Nevada Street Local Improvement District and, based on the evidence, adopted Resolution No. 2007 - SECTION 7. DECISION 7.1 Based on evidence contained within the whole record on this matter, the City Council concludes that the establishment of the LID boundary is in the City's best interest, is justified as presented by staff and is supported by evidence contained within the record. G 'pub-wrks\engldept-admin'L1D1Nevada 5t City Council Levy Assessments Findings 4 07 doc Page 5 of6 7.2 Council further concludes that the conflict of interests as stated by Paula Brown have been fully mitigated and had no impact upon the formation of the LID, nor on the allocation of the assessment for the improvement 7.3 Based upon evident presented, Council determines that the LID was bid and constructed in accordance with City of Ashland standards and that the final construction costs represent the actual costs. 7.4 Therefore, based on our overall conclusions, the City Council finds the assessment rate to be fair and equitable and instruct $632.72 to be levied against each assessment unit within the Nevada Street Local Improvement District. CITY OF ASHLAND, OREGON By: John Morrison, Mayor Date G.pub-wrks' eng'dept-admin' L1D\NevaJa St City Council Levy Assessments Findings 4 07.doc Page (, of (, L~I IUP'I ~iDmmr1C CI 0 GO 'f6dO I ;;l ~o [)'^ c:::J If?: J . tJ c;] c J <l Eo"" ~~~-I~ ~~ ~ ,n, h~ ~ - ~ l:' :-"1w ~:o ""'I IV r;.1 l;J ~ ~ a~ (\ Orz (J~ ~ -] [) ~4i!~~.'~ ~ ~. 1 -= ~ h.\ '..\~<:J jPLrJI I~~ r ~l1~~~$' /U...., . ~O oT [J ..... ($$J Cl ~ '$ ~~ 'iJ> .:,>i ;......, ~ It /'fl--' CITY OF ASHLAND NEVADA STREET L.I.D. 0 .Miles 0.05 0.1 . ~ ) r \,. s;n o r'Y '......M ~, .-J tJ ~ ..: en CC ,a ~ w Z ~, o ':~j ~,;:J ::f].J;I~1 ~p'~~s~t-:r-r-} DRIDGEST -*..., . I' ~.:-~- f "t'" G'JF4P 0 rL ~ J i" :t l~ ~ !J .p r;i:iiil~ .~ ~ ~~. ~ V A [[)7 o~ 0 ~ 6& ~.~ ~ " ~o \ .' fl.. JC?"l \\' ~ '/' !/~'>1 J ~:I~tZf,~"; ~iG'l~ u~..'t, 0./ / 't';:; _ o~. .~\tJ:'~.; 'I~l;i-l :iE ~ D ;' / .... I.:!Il . I L '''I:'.':::1r:1 01 ~H-.~~;..~...r'{J . . .. r~:,';TT~f D . 'g ~~Jj F6 C;::= ,"L ~ r.... r\. 3:Jd w['.' ~ ~=- C? ~ ~ -l . \'~I'- [1 [., '~R~~1~r', ~ rI ft. f.l( "':"lhJL'.f 17 Ii ~-~( ,< ~~ :/, (::1::;:;1 ~ t;:: J 1'/' !0 ~>I$ / I:l ~~~' ~I ? .f.5 oJ :.--\J[l In- ~ ' ] {r1 '-' v J Orn ~-~ ~ g. . l.! OfF! IZ. AI3EfH AYE f--- @ ~ H: [] 12 r 15 [.J{:Jf] , ~ 0 . I/~ t' l.T iQ , rr- .-l'i m ..=.D IAn] I t.; g ,0 Vl CJ . ""'-'l! ~_ T;-~ ~ "'TT~. -r ~:J. ILL~..->hL~ - "-I ,~l J:, ' _ .' J~2~~ ~~'::Jl ;;-11 ~;; L~1', r~_ ,.' I 0 '--,:} --:J...:Jf.5' ~. ~ 1,-1 iE:~ rr 4 i '~~ ~,-. LJf1;J :J? i! 3~; :~ ':i [' I ~ I':::;." ~,,~'Ii:,[,~.~;~r .~C'~, '-'J'r~Il~~s~'~~ .-,;:: r:: k ct:.J n '. D. . -' -.1 ... h tJl'~ .... -,,.-. I "1. ..... k ..-,... IL~ , I r::.~~(1 . r' ij'.:J~J::J a,",- [] tJ ~~"\'i1" '. fjP-:r;:- s.. ,i I rO;;- , d, .-1 ~ . Ulftlriin] [:J_rt~J~"^ leT] -'I'~ .. "1' ~fi""llI.LALJREL.Sf. cr~..J .r.... :Jtl ~.]I?rr) >'1..JT ~ KM D ~i2,&C " nl.sy.'I~lJ ;;!Jlilb ~ ~. .... dC:1r -1J~: ~ 77 "'. -,. ~ P;!~~Ri:1?f{3i ~ cr~~]1 . . .fL, n ~C~2T II -, I 1 ',' ~Ll 1-'\ - . \ I J - (''') ~(r~ ! ,. ... ~'F'1, ~.... ..... "1Y.<.r~." ~,., .. ~,!~ \.J . ,:, '!Ii \'J'~~' j d~~tfH --- , ~tH , r ~J' , 'Lj I,' 'i' .. , ' ' ./--' -1 I ~HElMAN~ST' --, T-~LJ'lJ_'I' L) /' t'},: 1 'I _,-.J - _ .-------i 1, I ' I ,'II n ,\ ;.: C'). . -- ':.. Ii ~. .)i i... \ J 1 r't '\.'/'C-:..( ) ) !.!, " t...! '.. I. ii~ i ! i_~JJti Tf''- ~ i' /j /;///- ~ (()\lI'..\()II>\I\(,II\.' b . . III -wfk, adrnfll I'll ( P\lf] 'illll> ( c'.; 1 \ " . l'\ ," ,j ,d 1'11111) j-"rrn:ttipf] .~ .\ugll.l dill' .~1I RESOLUTION NO. 2007- A RESOLUTION LEVYING SPECIAL BENEFIT ASSESSMENTS IN THE AMOUNT OF $79,090.00 FOR THE NEVADA STREET LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO NEVADA STREET CONSISTING OF SIDEWALKS, CURB EXTENSIONS, PEDESTRIAN SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS, DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS AND OTHER ASSOCIATED IMPROVEMENTS THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: RECIT ALS: A. The City of Ashland has constructed sidewalks, curb extensions, pedestrian safety improvements, drainage and other improvements as a result of the Nevada Street Local Improvement District (LID) B. The total cost for these improvements is in the amount of$295,837.63 OF WHICH $79,090.00 shall be paid by property owners within the Nevada Street Local Improvement District at a rate of $632.72 per assessment unit. C. The total assessments in this district are reasonable assessments and the assessments charged against each lot is according to the special and peculiar benctits accruing to it from the improvements. The council finds that the evidence presented by Engineering Stan: in the Council Communication of May I, 2007, is convincing and accepts such evidence as the basis to support the conclusions recited above. D. Special benefit assessments should now be levied against properties benefited to detray the expense thereof. THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The amount of the assessment to be charged against each lot within the local improvement district according to the special and peculiar benctits accruing to each lot for these improvements are set forth in the attached Exhibit A. SECTION 2. Any owner of property assessed for $100.00 or more may request the payment be extended in the manner and under the provisions of the Bancroft Bonding Act, if the request is made within thirty days after notice of the assessment is received. SECTION 3. All assessments using the Bancroft Bonding Act are required to pay in 20 semi- annual (twice a year) installments together with interest. The initial interest to be charged is 10.00 percent. At the time that these assessments are bonded, the interest rate to be charged will be the actual bond sale rate plus 1.5 percent with a maximum of 10 percent. SECTION 4. Classification of the assessment. The assessments specified in sections I of this resolution are classified as not subject to the limits of Section 11 b of Article XI of the Oregon Constitution. SECTION 5 This Resolution takes etfect upon signing by the Mayor. This resolution was read by title only in accordance with Ashland Municipal Code 52.04.090 and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of ,2007. Barbara M. Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this _ day of ,2007. John W. Morrison, Mayor Reviewed as to form: Mike Franell, City Attorney &t) co "" ... o ~ ... en is ... z w :E w > o 0:: Q.. :E ..J <( o o ..J ... W w 0:: ... en <( c <( > w z . C Ql (ij E '0 ~ r- Ql <Jl <Jl <( Q) ~ . III 2 III .- Q) C Ill::::) ~ ..... o III ro III III Q) .... "0 "0 <(,..... "00 ~~ Q)-- EC") ro Z III -.... Q) C ~ o ..- .... 'c ::::) C C .Q o III 'E. :~ .;:: "0 u .0 III :) Q) (/) o III ro E g' .~ ..J ~ ..... o N ~ CD ~ (5 ..J ~ (5 ..J 0 ..- o U Z CD ~ Q.UJ ro ..- ~ ~ o Z III Q) C Q) Q. <( tQ) Q) Q) .0....0 <(U)~ o(l~b; Cii~~ >Q)O ~Z"O ~s:~ 19N1: iTI::!~ N ,..... N C") <D ~ N ,..... N C") <D ~ ~ ~ Ll'J <D N ..- ~ N EXHIBIT A N ,..... N C") <D ~ (;) .;:: ..c U ..... III o Cii {3 "0 Q) ....Q) C N Q) o:)coro Ll'J ....0 N..croN(/) 0) U)N ~~~~~....ct ~~ ...., Ci).!Q...., C Q) <( 19 ro ....' O~ (/).: -g O~ fi5 ~ U Q) iU O~ .... '::t:.(/)ro8z -g ro&-g o(l<.9 E <( .-g ~ -g Ll'J ~ ~,..... ~ .9- ~ ~ i3iU~i3~8Q)E~i3 <(Z..-<(..:::..-a..a..N<( C.... Q) Q) :) ~ 0).... o(/) <.9c III Q) Q)'::t:. Eco ro<D -,C") ..- .... C ::::) C o '00 :~ "0 .0 :) (/) III E .~ ~ ..... o N ~ CD N (5 ..J N o ..- U CD ~ UJ ..- 0) C") N ..- .... C ::::) C .Q en :~ "0 .0 :) (/) en E .~ ~ ..... o N ~ CD 0) o(l co (5 ..J C") o ..- U CD ~ UJ ..- 0) C") C") ..- .... C ::::) C o '00 :~ "0 .0 :) (/) en E .~ ~ ..... o ~ CD (5 ..J ~ o ..- U CD ~ UJ ..- 0) C") ~ ..- .... C ::::) C o :iZi .~ "0 .0 :) (/) en E .~ ~ ..... o ~ CD N (5 ..J Ll'J o ..- U CD ~ UJ ..- 0) C") Ll'J N ,..... N C") <D ~ .... Q) ..c ro ....Q)o a.. Q) ....N ~U) ~ .oQ)O) o....~ ~ :) o(ljO E -g .~ Z ro 0)1: ~~~ ..- .... C ::::) C .Q .!Q .~ "0 .0 :) (/) en E .~ ~ ..... o ~ CD C") (5 ..J <D o ..- U CD ~ UJ ..- 0) C") <D N ,..... N C") <D ~ Q) Q) ....0 U)N Ll'J ro,..... Q)"OO) E~~ :)Q)O IZ .~ >-g .S::!> ro ':<D1: &~~ .... C ::::) C .Q .!Q .~ "0 .0 :) (/) en E .~ ~ ..... o N ~ CD (5 ..J ,..... o ..- U CD ~ UJ ..- 0) C") ,..... N ,..... N C") <D ~ .:;; enQ) $ Q) :.c....O ~U)~ roro,..... ...."00) -g~~ roQ)O (/)Z"O o(l . C c~~ ..c<D..c o Ll'J en -,..-<( ..- .... C ::::) C o :iZi .~ "0 .0 :) (/) en E .~ ~ ..... o N ~ CD C") (5 ..J co o ..- U CD ~ UJ ..- 0) C") co N ,..... N C") <D ~ OQ) C Q) :)':0 m(/)~ Q)ro,..... 0"00) en~~ '0 ZQ) 0 ..J "0 o(l . C >-~ ~ co..c o C") en .....-<( C ::::) C o :iZi .~ "0 .0 :) (/) en E .~ ~ ..... o N ~ CD Ll'J (5 ..J 0) o ..- U CD ~ UJ ..- 0) C") 0) N ,..... N C") <D <Jl )( <Ii Ql (;j .~ u; w ~ l1l C .~ Qi ll: o :::i Q) ~ ii) l1l "0 l1l > Ql Z Q :::i C E "0 'Jl a. Ql "0 0, C Ql Vi ..>< ~ .6 :) c... o N ,..... N C") <D ~ ~ en EQ) .~ Q) ....0 ~U)~ Q)~b; ~~~ -'Q)O o(lZ"O iU' s: ~ ~co1: ~~~ ..- .... C ::::) C .Q en :~ "0 .0 :) (/) III E .~ ~ ..... o N ~ CD <!:i (5 ..J o ..- ..- U CD ~ UJ ..- 0) C") o ..- r-- o o N (0 N ~ Cll ~. III 2 III ,- Cll c: Ill:::> ~ It) OCI "*= I- U 0:: l- t/) 2i I- Z w ::lE w > o 0:: ll. ::lE ....l <( U o ....l I- W w 0:: l- t/) <( C <( > W Z . 'E Q) co E '0 ~ ~ Q) l/l l/l <( ..... o III ro III III Cll ... -0 -0 <(I'- -00 @~ Cll(V5 E ro Z III -... Cll c: ;: o III .S: 00) ()~~ c:OOL!) ffirod; :J-ga::: (/)>0 ~ Cll EZ-g ,~~ ~ ~~~ ..- - 'c :::> c: o g :~ "E.. ,~ ';:: -0 U .0 III :J Cll (/) o III ro E 0> ,~ Cll -I ~ ..... o N ~ in I'- '0 -I ~'O - ~ ;: ..- o () Z CO '<t Q.LU ro ..- ~ ~ o Z ..- ..- N I'- N C') to ~ ..- Cll c: >-j ..c ._ Q.c: ... ro :J_ ~ ro o>E ... ro o~ .000 Clll'- 0>..- C:'<t 0) 0) 00 0) ..- I L!) ~ c Cll E :J U o o -0 Cll Cll o o o C') ..- () CO '<t LU ..- 0) C') N ..- N N I'- I'- N N C') C') to to ~ ~ ..- ..- N 0) N ~ ~ ~-oOO~ ~I ro~O) ,!:: ro a::: ~<.9a>0 ':; @ Z -g Cll -0 'ro g c:s:- ';:: ~ L!) ~ a.. CO 00<( o '<t C') o ..- I 00 ~ c Cll E :J U o o -0 Cll Cll o o o '<t ..- () CO '<t LU ..- 0) C') C') ..- N N I'- I'- N N C') C') to to ~ ~ 0) Cll ... c:OO ro ro E-o "5 ~ e Cll r.-Z ~~ Q)L!) IO) ~ ~O) oin~o NtOON L!) Cll ro L!) d;.g-od; a:::a:::~a::: O~CllO -0 CllZ-o @ 'is ~ @ :c 'C L!) :c III ro 0 III <(~..-<( C') ..- C') o C') I L!) ~ 0) 0) '<t I'- N I 00 I'- ~ C Cll E :J U o o -0 Cll Cll o c Cll E :J U o o -0 Cll Cll o o o L!) ..- o o to ..- () CO '<t LU ..- 0) C') () CO '<t LU ..- 0) C') '<t ..- L!) ..- ... Cll 0> c: C') ro N 00 ~ >-"";0) Cll()<( ~ro() -I III ... ~~Cll -<(]! '6> ..- ,!:: L!) 0 >I'-I to L!) L!) '<t ..- I N ~ c Cll E :J U o o -0 Cll Cll o o o I'- ..- () CO '<t LU ..- 0) C') to ..- N I'- N C') to ~ ..- Q) EO) o Cll ()"'o roOO~ C:rol'- .~ -0 0) o~a::: ~CllO c:z-o Cll 'c: ..cS:ro g...- :c oo~~ '<t N to o ..- I 00 I'- ~ C Cll E :J U o o -0 Cll Cll o o o 00 ..- () CO '<t LU ..- 0) C') I'- ..- N I'- N C') to ~ N N I'- I'- N N C') C') to to ~ ~ 0) Cll ... 00 >-ro Cll-O - ro E > Cll Cll a:::z :G~ EL!) roC') ...., ..- c:0) Cll Cll o Cll'= 0 N...(/)N ~<.9ro~ ,- >--0 O)_roO) a::: ,5!1 > a::: Q...cCllO -o()z-o @~~@ - c: - ~~..-~ <(<(~<( c: o :~ .~ -0 .0 :J (/) III Cll 10 (j) LU c: >- -I C') ~ in c: .Q III ':; 'i5 .0 :J (/) III Cll 10 (j) LU c: >- -I N ~ in L!) '0 -I '0 -I o o 0) ..- o o o N () CO '<t LU ..- 0) C') () CO '<t LU ..- 0) C') 00 ..- 0) ..- N I'- N C') to l/l )( !Ii Q) ro E .~ w ~ ro c :~ a; 0: o :::i Q) ~ U5 ro '0 ro > Q) z o :::i C E '0 '1' a. Q) '0 0> c Q) lil "'" ~ ..c ::l Cl. o ~ ..- ... Cll E E ro ..c N c: jO) ....i~o ~(/)~ ..crol'- Q. -0 0) Cll~a::: IIlCllO ~Z-o t 'c: Cll s: ro .gC'):c a:::~~ N c: .Q III :~ -0 .0 :J (/) III Cll 10 (j) LU c: >- -I N ~ in '<t '0 -I o o ..- N () CO '<t LU ..- 0) C') o N ,.... o o N to N ~ Q.l ~~ III 2 III 0- Q.l C Ill=> ~ II) CO ~ .... o ~ .... (/) is .... z w :e w > o tt:: ll. :e -I c( o o -I .... W W tt:: .... (/) c( C c( > w z . C a> ro E (5 ~ ~ a> III ~ .... o III ro III III Q.l '- "0 "0 ~I'-- "00 c-- ro~ Q.l?; E ro Z III -'- Q.l c ~ o c o c 000 oQ :~ 0."0 0':; .0 c..> :J III en Q.l III o Q.l ro co Q)(;j .3 UJ c >. ...J N .:..:. Ci5 C'? o ...J ~:g ~ N o U Z CD -.t Cl.UJ ro ..- ~ ~ o Z ..- N III Q.l t Q.l 0 Q.l c :Jc N Cl. ro Q.l ~ 0 a3~0)a: Q.l.......0:: ~:JO _ c ~ro-g ~~~ rorn~ ~-.t~ N N I'-- I'-- N N C'? C'? <D <D ffi ffi ..- ..- c..> c <Xl I'-- o N I'-- 0:: ~ om <Xl Q.l ,-0);: 1-1.()> c )( c 000 Q) CD ~ Q.lo c..> oo..~ c o :~ o~ "0 .0 :J en III Q.l OJ (;j UJ c >. ...J N .:..:. Ci5 N o ...J o o C'? N U CD -.t UJ ..- 0) C'? N N N N I'-- I'-- N N C'? C'? <D <D ffi ffi ..- ..- G) Q.l '- en ro "0 ro III > :J Q.l Cl.Z ~~ o~ I.() 00) ...J ..- ~G) e Q.l o '- '- 0 N oenN I.() ~ I.() I'-- C ro I'-- 0) Q.l160) 0:: '- > 0:: o~~o -g~:>-g ro c..> > ro :E :J..-:E ~cDN~ c oQ III 0:;; ii .0 :J en III Q.l OJ (;j UJ c >. ...J N .:..:. Ci5 c o :~ o~ "0 .0 :J en CIl Q.l - ro (;j UJ c >. ...J .:..:. Ci5 o ...J ..- o ...J o o -.t N U CD -.t UJ ..- 0) C'? o o I.() N U CD -.t UJ ..- 0) C'? C'? N -.t N G) ~o enN CIl '- I.() Q.lQ.l8; t~o:: ~-go roQ.l"O :~ (5 ~ l:;N:E ro 0) CIl o..l'--~ c o :~ o~ "0 .0 :J en Q.l Q) ~ :> o~ :J a .:..:. Ci5 <D - o ...J o o N <D ~ I.() UJ ..- en C'? I.() N N I'-- N C'? <D ffi ~ roG) (5 ~ ~en~ rorol.() E"08; 5l~0:: OQ.lo O::Z"O c6 0 C c~~ .e0).e ~~~ c o 000 :~ "0 .0 :J en Q.l Q) ~ :> .~ :J a .:..:. Ci5 I.() o ...J o o C'? <D ~ I.() UJ ..- 0) C'? <D N N I'-- N C'? <D ffi CIl EG) Jg Q.l l:;0 ~en~ >.rol'-- Q.l"OO) :i=~o:: Q.lQ.lo -'z"o ~:>c Q.l > ro Cl'--:E ro I.() (/l -'N~ c oQ CIl S ii .0 :J en Q.l Q) ~ :> o~ :J a .:..:. Ci5 -.t o ...J o o -.t <D ~ I.() UJ ..- 0) C'? I'-- N N I'-- N C'? <D ffi o Q.lN o~ ~ '-0) 00:: "Eo o ><-g o..Oro ...JI'--:E LL<DCIl <.?C'?~ c oQ CIl :~ "0 .0 :J en Q.l Q) ~ :> o~ :J a .:..:. Ci5 C'? o ...J o o I.() <D ~ I.() UJ ..- 0) C'? <Xl N N I'-- N C'? <D ffi G) Q.l '-0 cen~ rorol'-- (160) c..>>o:: '-Q.lo 8z "0 tOe Q.l ~ ro .o1.():E o C'? CIl O::N~ c o 000 :~ "0 .0 :J en Q.l Q) ~ :> o~ :J a .:..:. Ci5 N o ...J o o <D <D ~ I.() UJ ..- 0) C'? 0) N N I'-- N C'? <D III X III a> <6 E ~ w ~ III C o~ a; a: o ::::i Q) ~ U5 III "0 III > a> Z 25 ::::i C E "0 '? c.. a> "0 en c a> Vi -" ~ .c ::I 11. o N I'-- N C'? <D ffi ffi G) o~ ~ 0 EenN UJro~ ro16O) ~>o:: c6~O "0 a3 ~ ~ >I.():E $NCIl enN~ M c o :~ o~ "0 .0 :J en Q.l Q) ~ :> .~ :J a .:..:. Ci5 o ...J o o I'-- <D ~ I.() UJ ..- 0) C'? o C'? t- o o N <0 N ~ . c Q) <ii E o ~ t- Q) '" '" <( ~ ro · lJ)~ lJ) .- Q) C lJ)::> ~ It) CO ,. .... o ~ .... m a .... z w :E w > o 0:: 0.. ! .J <C o o .J .... W w 0:: .... m <C c <C > w z '0 lJ) ro lJ) lJ) Q) .... "0 "0 <(,..... "00 cLt5 ro..- Q)-- E("'") ro Z lJ) -.... Q) C 3: o ~ Q) C C ro u: ~ Co) 'C ro 0 Q.. ~ o(!O)d; c"""a:: ~oO ...."- cox"O ro 0 C _coro f60~ Q..Q..<( C .Q lJ) g :~ '5.:8 'i:: =t ~ (/) Q) Q) o 0> (ij Jg 0>5 Q) - ...J .~ ::l a ("'") ~ co ..- "0 ...J ~"O 0 ...J ~ co o ~ Z I.() a.UJ ro ..- ~ ~ o Z ..- ("'") co ("'") co ..- ("'") !fi v I.() o - lJ) ::l ~ .... Q) 3: o "0 C c5Q5 ~o o;U)~ """w""" Q) 3: 0) :Soa:: 'O-go Q)Q)"O Q) - C _<.9ro lJ) - 2o;~ ....,.....<( C o :!Q .~ "0 .0 ::l (/) Q) 0> Jg 5 ~ ::l a N ~ co ..- "0 ...J o o N ..- ..- ~ I.() UJ ..- 0) ("'") N ("'") N ,..... N ("'") co !fi (;)Q) ::l Q) ~Ol~ :Qro~ 2:"00) <(~a:: g~o lJ) "0 ~ ~ ~ 0>..- E ro ..- lJ) ~("'")<( C .Q lJ) :~ "0 .0 ::l (/) Q) 0> Jg 5 .~ ::l a N ~ co N "0 ...J o o ("'") ..- ..- ~ I.() UJ ..- 0) ("'") ("'") ("'") N ,..... N ("'") co !fi Q5 Q) ""0 U)N a.ro~ i:-g0) Q) > a:: "OQ)o ~z ~~~ "01.().t: .S N lJ) ...J("'")<( C .Q lJ) :~ "0 .0 ::l (/) Q) 0> ~ 5 .~ ::l a N ~ co ("'") "0 ...J o o ~ ..- ...... ~ I.() UJ ..- 0) ("'") ~ ("'") N ,..... N ("'") co !fi Q5 Q) ""0 U)N I.() ro,..... "00) ~a:: >-~ 0 (ij ."0 o~~ lJ)I.()E 'C ("'") lJ) :::.r::::("'")<( C o '(jj :~ "0 .0 ::l (/) Q) 0> ~ 5 .~ ::l a N ~ co ~ "0 ...J o o I.() ..- ..- ~ I.() UJ ..- 0) ("'") I.() ("'") N ,..... N ("'") co !fi -gQ5 ro~o a::U)N ~ro~ .- "0 0) ...Jroa:: o(!~o gz"O ~~~ c("'").t: o ~ lJ) ....,("'")<( C .Q lJ) :~ "0 .0 ::l (/) Q) 0> ~ 5 ~ ::l a N ~ co I.() "0 ...J o o co ..- ..- ~ I.() UJ ..- 0) ("'") co ("'") N ,..... N ("'") co !fi N N ,..... ,..... N N ("'") ("'") co co !fi !fi ..- ..- Q5 Q) ~co ~o $~gCU)N 2~~~~~ "":Q<(a::~a:: w~<.) C Q)O cro"O::iz"O ::lQ..roo(! "C I..-~c~~ "O("'")-;::.t:O).t: Q)..-rooCOlJ) J-~<.)""'("'")<( C o '(jj :~ "0 .0 ::l (/) Q) 0> ~ 5 .~ ::l a N ~ co co "0 ...J o o ,..... ..- ..- C .Q lJ) "> 'i5 .0 ::l (/) Q) 0> ~ 5 .~ ::l a N ~ co ,..... "0 ...J o o co ..- ...... ~ I.() UJ ...... 0) ("'") ,..... ("'") ~ I.() UJ ..- 0) ("'") co ("'") Q5 Q) ""0 U)N I.() ro,..... .!!1 -g 0) o > a:: coQ)O ::lz"O o . C C ~ ro O.......t: 0> co lJ) UJ("'")<( C o '(jj :~ "0 .0 ::l (/) Q) 0> ~ 5 ~ ::l a N ~ co as "0 ...J o o 0) ...... ...... ~ I.() UJ ...... 0) ("'") 0) ("'") N ,..... N ("'") co N ,..... N ("'") co '" )( iii Q) 1ii E .~ w ~ ro c: .~ Qi Q: o ~ Q5 ~ en ro "C ro > Q) z o ~ c E "C '1' C. Q) "C 0, c: Q) (j; ~ ~ .c :J CL C) !fi !fi ...... ...... <.) ...J ...J a. ::l o .... <.9 .....~~ o.c g <.90,..... {3Q)0) c.g'a:: ro 'C 0 a::Ci)"O lJ) ro .... 0> UJ .2 .S _ "0 =;""Q) i:Ii~~ '<t C o '(jj :~ "0 .0 ::l (/) .t: Co) C ro a:: lJ) 0> C i:Ii o ...... "0 ...J o o 0) ~ <.) <t: I.() UJ ..- 0) ("'") o ~ I'- o o N <0 N ~ It) co '*I: .... o ii: .... en 2i .... z w ::lE w > o 0::: 11. ~ ..J ~ o o ..J .... W w 0::: .... en ~ c ~ > w z . c: Q) (ij E o ~ ~ Q) Vl Vl <( Q) ~ . 11l$ 11l "- Q) c: 11l=> ~ - o 11l CO 11l 11l Q) ... "0 "0 <{I'- "00 c:-- CO ':2 Q)-- EC"') CO Z 11l -... Q) c: ~ o U ...J ...J a. :J o ... <.9 c: c: o 0 E. :i2i .~ .~ U "0 11l .0 Q) :J o en ro ~ 0) U Q) c: ...J CO c::: 11l 0) ~ ai ..- ..- - o ...J ~:g g Lt) o U Z ~ Lt) a. ill CO ...- ~ ~ o Z ..- ~ ~Q)Lt) O"~ 0 <.90~ ~Q)O> U 0)"" C:"O~ CO ";::0 C:::oo"O 11l CO ... 0) ill .$? ~..-~ ai~~ N I'- N C"') CO Ell U ...J ...J a. :J o t5 ~Q)CO O"~ 0 <.90~ ~Q)O> U 0) "" C:"O~ CO ";::0 C:::oo"O 11l CO ... 0) ill .$? ~..-~ a:l~~ c: o '00 :~ "0 .0 :J en ~ U c: CO c::: 11l 0) c: ai N ..- "0 ...J o o ..- Lt) U <{ Lt) ill ...- 0> C"') N ~ N I'- N C"') CO Ell U ...J ...J a. :J o ... <.9 U ...J ...J a. :J o ... <.9 ~Q)I'- O.~ 0 <.90~ ~Q)O> U 0)"" C:"O~ CO ";::0 C:::oo"O 11l CO ... g> ill .$? =..-~ a:l~~ c: "Q 11l :~ "0 .0 :J en ~ U c: CO c::: 11l 0) c: ai ri ..- "0 ...J o o N Lt) U <{ Lt) ill ...- 0> C"') C"') ~ N N I'- I'- N N C"') C"') CO CO Ell Ell ...- ..- ~Q)CO O.~ 0 <.90~ ~Q)O> U 0) "" C:"O~ CO.;::O C:::OO"O 11l CO ... 0) ill .$? .~ ..- "0 Q) ai~~ c: o '00 :~ "0 .0 :J en ~ U c: CO c::: 11l 0) .~ ai ~ ...- "0 ...J o o C"') Lt) U <{ Lt) ill ...- 0> C"') ~ ~ N N I'- I'- N N C"') C"') CO CO Ell Ell ..- ..- U ...J <( -;. [j ~ U ... :JQ)0>~Q)0 > 0 O.~..- c .;:: Lt) <.9 0'" ~ Q) 0 I'- ,_ EQ)O>~alO> a.0)c::: ggc::: .2 :g 0 co.;:: 0 aloo"OC:::oo"O a>Jl 0 ~Jl.E OO"-~ ~..-~ I~~a:l~~ c: .Q 11l :~ "0 .0 :J en ~ U c: CO c::: 11l 0) c: c: "Q 11l :~ "0 .0 :J en ~ U c: CO c::: 11l 0) c: CD Lt) ..- CD CO ...- "0 ...J "0 ...J o o ~ Lt) U <{ Lt) ill ..- 0> C"') o o Lt) Lt) U <{ Lt) ill ...- 0> C"') Lt) ~ CO ~ U ...J ...J a. :J o t5 ~Q)..- o.~ ...- <.90~ ~Q)O> U 0)"" C:"O~ CO.;::O C:::oo"O ~Jl 0 .~ ..- ~ Q) ai~~ c: .Q 11l ":;: i5 .0 :J en ~ U c: CO c::: 11l 0) ~ ai I'- ..- "0 ...J o o CO Lt) U <{ Lt) ill ...- 0> C"') I'- ~ N I'- N C"') CO Ell U ...J ...J a. :J o ... <.9 ~alN O.~ ...- <.90~ ~Q)O> U 0) "" C:"O~ CO.;:: 0 C:::oo"O 11l CO ... 0) ill .$? ~..-"O -COal ail'-~ c: .Q 11l :~ "0 .0 :J (/) ~ U c: CO c::: 11l 0) c: ai ex) ..- "0 ...J o o I'- Lt) U <{ Lt) ill ...- 0> C"') CO ~ N I'- N C"') CO Ell U ...J ...J a. :J o t5 ~Q)C"') O.~ ...- <.90~ ~alO> U 0)"" C:"O~ CO.;:: 0 C:::oo"O 11l CO ... 0) ill .$? .~ ..- "0 al ai~~ c: o "00 :~ "0 .0 :J en ~ U c: CO c::: 11l 0) "~ ai 0> ...- "0 ...J o o CO Lt) U <{ Lt) ill ...- 0> C"') 0> ~ N I'- N C"') CO Vl X iii Q) ro ; iil w ~ CIl c: .~ Qi 0:: o ::J Ql ~ U5 CIl "0 CIl > Q) Z o ::J C E "0 'P a. Q) "0 0, c: Q) Vi .:x ~ 1:, ::> CL c.9 N I'- N C"') CO Ell Ell U ...J ...J a. :J o ... <.9 ~al~ O.~ ...- <.90~ ~alO> U 0) "" C:"O~ CO.;::O C:::OO"O 11l CO ... g> ill .$? ._ ..- "0 :==COQ) CDI'-~ ll) c: o "00 :~ "0 .0 :J en ~ U c: CO c::: 11l 0) .~ ai o N "0 ...J o o 0> Lt) U <{ Lt) ill ...- 0> C"') o Lt) "- a o N (0 N ~ Q) ~ . l/l2 l/l .- Q) e: l/l::) ~ It') co :a: ~ o D2 ~ rn i3 ~ z w :=E w > o 0::: Q. ! ...J c( o o ...J ~ W W 0::: ~ rn c( o c( > w z . c Q) (ij E o ~ I- Q) l/) l/) <( ...... o l/l ro l/l l/l Q) .... "0 "0 <(,.... "00 ffi~ Q)?) E ro Z l/l -.... Q) e: ~ o e: e: o 0 'E. .00 .;:: :~ () "0 l/l .D Q) :J o CJ) ro L: OJ () Q) e: --l [}. l/l OJ .S; as ~ 0 0 _ --l g <0 o U Z <( Ll) a.UJ ro .- ~ ~ ~Ib o N Ll) ,.... :JO'> g,o:: ~O .!Q "0 CJ) e: I-,....~ ~Ll)L: <(~~ l/l > ceo Q) E "(;) Q) > e: .- N o --l N ,.... N C") <0 !A o N Ll) ,.... 0'> 0:: o "0 e: ro >.UJE ~Ol/l UN<( "0 e:..... ~CJ) ~ .~ <( ro o~ e: .Q l/l :~ "0 .D :J CJ) L: () e: ro 0:: l/l OJ .~ as N N o --l o o .- <0 o <( Ll) UJ .- 0'> C") N Ll) N ,.... N C") <0 !A o N Ll) U58; e:co:: ~~o Q) e: "0 Z ro e: Q)>~ =NL: ~~~ e: .Q l/l :~ "0 .D :J CJ) L: () e: ro 0:: l/l OJ .~ as C") N o --l o o N <0 o <( Ll) UJ .- 0'> C") C") Ll) N ,.... N C") <0 !A N N ,.... ,.... N N C") C") <0 <0 !A !A l/l Q) e: .... ..... roCJ) Uc Q) ro e: l/l .(ii ffi E> roN L:C") U<o U --l --l a. :J o t5 0~Q)0'> ~<38~ O'>L:Q)O'> 0:: g.g 0:: o ro.;::o "00::"(;)"0 e: l/l ro .... ro OJUJ.E E~.-~ ~m~~ e: .Q .!Q .~ "0 .D :J CJ) L: () e: ro 0:: l/l OJ e: as o:i N o --l e: o .00 :~ "0 .D :J CJ) L: () e: ro 0:: l/l OJ e: as Ll) N o --l o o C") <0 o <( Ll) UJ .- 0'> C") ~ Ll) o o ~ <0 o <( Ll) UJ .- 0'> C") Ll) Ll) o --l --l a. :J o .... <..9 ~Q)o o.~ N <..90~ L:Q)O'> () OJ 0:: e:"O ro.;::O 0::"(;)"0 l/l ro .... OJ UJ .E .~ .- "0 - Q) m~~ e: .Q l/l :~ "0 .D :J CJ) L: () e: ro 0:: l/l OJ e: as CJ:i N o --l o o Ll) <0 () <( Ll) UJ .- 0'> C") <0 Ll) N ,.... N C") <0 !A U --l ...J a. :J o .... <..9 ~Q).- o.~ N <..90~ L:Q)O'> () OJ 0:: e:"O ro.;::O 0::"(;)"0 l/l ro .... OJ UJ .E ~.-~ m~~ e: o :ia .~ "0 .D :J CJ) L: () e: ro 0:: l/l OJ e: eo ,.... N o --l o o <0 <0 o <( Ll) UJ .- 0'> C") ,.... Ll) N ,.... N C") <0 !A Q) Q) "(;) o :J N .... > ~ l- e: <( 0'> OJ <0 _Q) :;; 0:: .~ 0'> ~ e: C") ~-O Q)C") ro ~ X ~~-g~~ .....O~ ...... '6NL:tO ~~~~Q. e: .Q .!Q .~ "0 .D :J CJ) L: () e: ro 0:: l/l OJ e: as CO N o --l o o 0'> <0 o <( Ll) UJ .- 0'> C") CO Ll) N ,.... N C") <0 !A e: o .00 :~ "0 .D :J CJ) L: () e: ro 0:: l/l OJ e: eo cri N o --l o o o ,.... o <( Ll) UJ .- 0'> C") 0'> Ll) N N ,.... ,.... N N C") C") <0 <0 l/) )( iii Q) i6 E ~ UJ ~ '" c .~ Qj Q: o ~ Q) !!! (j) '" "0 '" > Q) z o ~ c E "0 'P 0. Q) "0 0, c Q) (;; -'" ~ .0 :J a.. CJ !A !A ~ .!::? e: L: () o ro 0'> C").D ~ Ll) ro 0 ,....~ 0 0'> e: 0'> 0:: ro~<( o E 0 U Q) 00:: l/l ==z==~ ~06-2~ oe:oe: ~ ~eo <( () Q) Ll) l/l ro > 0 0 .,UJLl)--l <0 e: o .00 :~ "0 .D :J CJ) l/l Q) E o I .... ro "0 Q) o N ~ CO o --l .- o .- o <( Ll) UJ .- 0'> C") o <0 ,.... o o N <0 N ~ 0.> g. lJ).l!l lJ) ,- 0.> C lJ):::> ~ Il) co ~ I- U ~ I- ~ C I- Z W ::e w > o 0::: Q. ~ ..J <( U o ..J I- W w 0::: ?- m <( c <( > w z . c: Ql (ij E (5 ~ I- Ql fJl fJl <t: ..... o lJ) 11l lJ) lJ) 0.> .... -0 -0 <(I'-- -00 CLO 11l..- o.>e;:; E 11l Z lJ) -.... 0.> C ~ o C ,Q lJ) C :~ o -0 ~-g '5 CI) lJ) lJ) 0.> 0.> o E ro 0 O)I 0.> .... ....J ~ 0.> U N .::t:. CD N -0 ....J ~ ~ ~ o 0 Z <( l!) a.w 11l ..- ~ ~ L!<o N N I'-- I'-- N N (') (') <0 <0 {fl {fl C o lJ) CQ) 0.> 0.> ~""o 0 Cl)U)No.>Q) o.>l1ll!):O~~ 0.> -0 I'-- E CI)..... I'-- Cl1lO> 0> ~~~~~~ o(S Z -0 C > -0 ~ ~ ffi 'i5 ~ ffi 11l0:C:SCO:C L <0 lJ) 11l N lJ) CI)(')<(U(')<( C o :iZi ,~ -0 .0 :J CI) lJ) 0.> E o I .... 11l -0 0.> U N .::t:. CD LCi -0 ....J (') o ..- o <( l!) w ..- 0> (') N <0 N N I'-- I'-- N N (') (') <0 <0 {fl {fl ..- ..- C 0.> -0 C :::i .... 0.> Q) Q) 00.>0.> C.=O ....0 l1lCl)N U)N > 11l ~ 11l~ ~~~$~~ lJ)~0 Q)~o lJ) -0 ~ -0 'C 'C:::>::> C Co ~ .s!! .::t:. > 11l I-.:tL ....N:c ..- lJ) 11l 0 lJ) -)(')<(~(')<( C o 'Vi :~ -0 .0 :J CI) lJ) 0.> E o I C ,Q lJ) :~ -0 .0 :J CI) lJ) 0.> E o I .... 11l -0 0.> U .... 11l -0 0.> U N .::t:. CD I'-- -0 ....J N .::t:. CD <0 -0 ....J -.:t o ..- l!) o ..- o <( l!) w ..- OJ (') o <( l!) w ..- 0> (') (') <0 -.:t <0 N N I'-- I'-- N N (') (') <0 <0 {fl {fl O)Q) C 0.> :J'= OCl) >- 11l 0.>-0 = 11l :J > -, 0.> o(SZ ~~ Eo 11l-.:t -, N x o C :::.:::: .::t:. roQi ~ 0.> ~o(S'=~ l!) .... CI) l!) I'-- 0.> 11l I'-- 0> ~al 0> 0:: E > 0:: OLo.>O -0 Q) Z -0 c~::>c 11l 11l> ~ ~ 0 R ~ <(ZN<( C ,Q lJ) :~ -0 .0 :J CI) lJ) 0.> E o I C o 'Vi :~ -0 .0 :J CI) lJ) Q) E o I .... 11l -0 Q) U N .::t:. CD N ..- -0 ....J .... 11l -0 0.> U N .::t:. CD 0> -0 ....J <0 o ..- I'-- o ..- o <( l!) w ..- 0> (') o <( l!) w ..- 0> (') l!) <0 <0 <0 C o lJ) a. E..... ~ al 1-'=0 .....CI)N -ol1l~ (,)-00> CI)~o:: o(So.>o ~Z-o :;J~ffi lJ) _ 'C <0 L L<OlJ) UN<( C ,Q IJ) :~ -0 .0 :J CI) IJ) Q) E o I .... 11l -0 0.> U N .::t:. CD o ..- -0 ....J co o ..- o <( l!) w ..- 0> (') I'-- <0 N I'-- N (') <0 {fl 0) 11l 11l I 11l ..- ~ 0 E ~~ roIO> ~IJ)O:: o(S 0) 0 ,~ -0 0.> :::.:::: .... C 0 Q)l!)..... 0) co -0 :J 0> Q) UJ..-~ C ,Q ,~ ,~ -0 .0 :J CI) IJ) Q) E o I .... 11l -0 Q) U N .::t:. CD -.:t -0 ....J 0> o ..- o <( l!) w ..- 0> (') co <0 N I'-- N (') <0 {fl o(S 0) C 'Vi (,) ~ C I Q) Q)"5~0 ,~ ~ CI) N t.... l!) o::;l1ll'-- 2toalO> :J >- > 0:: CI):+::o.>O -oSZ:-o ffi E ~ ffi :cEo:C IJ) 0 0> lJ) <(UN<( C o 'Vi :~ -0 .0 :J CI) IJ) Q) E o I .... 11l -0 Q) U N .::t:. CD co -0 ....J o ..- ..- o <( l!) w ..- 0> (') 0> <0 N I'-- N (') <0 N I'-- N (') <0 {fl {fl Q) 0.> ....0 U)N l!) 11l1'-- -00> ~ 11l c>o:: 0.>Q)0 OZ:-o ai~~ 'c <0 L 11l ..- IJ) ON<( C ,Q IJ) :~ -0 .0 :J CI) IJ) 0.> E o I .... 11l -0 0.> U (') .::t:. CD -0 ....J ..- ..- ..- o <( l!) w ..- OJ (') o I'-- fJl X <Ii Ql iii .~ lii w ~ <'0 C ,~ Qj 0: o ::J <<> ~ UJ <'0 '0 <'0 > Ql Z o ::J C E '0 '? Ci. Ql '0 0, c Ql Vi -t: ;: .6 :J a.. (9 r- r- o o N (0 N ~ Q) ~ . III $ III 0- Q) C Ill:::> ~ It) CO :a: I- o D2 I- ~ C I- Z w :2 w > o c::: 0.. ! ...J 0( o o ...J I- W W c::: I- UJ 0( C 0( > W Z . 1: (I) roE (5 ~ I- (I) (/) (/) <( .... o III ro III III Q) .... "0 "0 <{I'- "00 C-- ro~ Q)-- EC') ro Z III -.... Q) C ~ o C o Oijj C :~ o "0 :;::; .0 a. ::l 0;: (/) U III ~ Q) o E ro 0 OlI Q) .... ....J ~ Q) U N ~ CO ri <5 ....J ~<5 ....J ~ ..- o 0 Z <{ LJ") a.LU ro ..- ~ ~ o Z ..- I'- .t:l C ro 0:: Q) CQ) ~~o odU)N o~ ro ~ ~-gOJ Q)>O:: ~Q)O >.z"o 5 ~ ~ -SoE C LJ") III <{C')<{ N I'- N C') <0 fA N <0 I'- C') N <0 C') ..- <0 C') fA fA .J::. U ro 5 ro o~ Q) o 5 ~ 0 N .... ...... N LJ") Q)(/)LJ") I'->rol'- OJod-gOJ 0:: "0 > 0:: O .... Q) 0 roz .... o-g~ o-g ~~~E~ro ro '<:t.J::. ro co E ~~~~~~ Q) Q) .... U) Q) "0 ro 0"0 E ro .... > Q) Q) ~z C o Oijj :~ "0 .0 ::l (/) III Q) E o I .... ro "0 Q) U N ~ CO ..- ..- <5 ....J LJ") ..- ..- o <{ LJ") LU ..- OJ C') N I'- C o Oijj :~ "0 .0 ::l (/) III Q) E o I .... ro "0 Q) U ..- ~ CO ..- <5 ....J <0 N ..- o <{ LJ") LU ..- OJ C') C') I'- v LJ") o U ....J ....J a. ::l o t5 ~Q)'<:t o o~ 0 <.9Ci~ .J::.Q)OJ U Ol tv' c"O...... ro 0;: 0 0:: en "0 III ro .... Ol LU .E ~ ..- "OQ) -,..,.. CDr::::~ C o Oijj :~ "0 .0 ::l (/) .J::. U C ro 0:: III Ol o~ CD <5 ....J o o C') ..- o <{ LJ") LU ..- OJ C') '<:t I'- N I'- N C') <0 fA U ....J ....J a. ::l o .... <.9 ~Q)LJ") o o~ 0 <.9Ci~ .J::.Q)OJ U Ol tv' c"O...... ro 0;: 0 0:: en "0 III ro .... Ol LU .E ~..-~ (D~~ C o Oijj :~ "0 .0 ::l (/) .J::. U C ro 0:: rJl Ol C CD N <5 ....J o o '<:t ..- o <{ LJ") LU ..- OJ C') LJ") I'- N I'- N C') <0 fA U ....J ....J a. ::l o t5 ~Q)<o o o~ 0 <.9Ci~ .J::.Q)OJ U Ol tv' c"O...... ro 0;: 0 0:: en "0 rJl ro .... Ol LU .E ~..-~ CD~~ C oQ o~ o~ "0 .0 ::l (/) .J::. U C ro 0:: rJl Ol o~ al C') <5 ....J o o LJ") ..- o <{ LJ") LU ..- OJ C') <0 I'- N I'- N C') <0 fA U ....J ....J a. ::l o t5 ~Q)I'- o o~ 0 <.9Ci~ .J::.Q)OJ U Ol tv' c"O...... ro 0;: 0 0:: en "0 rJl ro .... Ol LU .E o~ _ "0 =' Q) CD~~ C o Oijj :~ "0 .0 ::l (/) .J::. U C ro 0:: rJl Ol o~ CD '<:t <5 ....J o o I'- ..- o <{ LJ") LU ..- OJ C') I'- I'- N I'- N C') <0 fA U ....J ....J a. ::l o .... <.9 ~Q)co o o~ 0 <.9Ci~ .J::.Q)OJ U Ol tv' c"O...... ro 0;: 0 !Yen"O rJl ro .... g> LU .E 0- ..- ~ CD~~ C oQ rJl os: 'C .0 ::l (/) .J::. U C ro 0:: rJl Ol o~ CD Lt5 <5 ....J o o co ..- o <{ LJ") LU ..- OJ C') co I'- N I'- N C') <0 fA U ....J ....J a. ::l o .... <.9 ~Q)OJ o o~ 0 <.9Ci~ .J::.Q)OJ U Ol"" c"O...... ro 0;: 0 !Yen"O rJl ro .... Ol LU .E ~..-~ CD~~ C oQ rJl :~ "0 .0 ::l (/) .J::. U C ro 0:: rJl Ol C CD cD <5 ....J o o OJ ..- o <{ LJ") LU ..- OJ C') OJ I'- N I'- N C') <0 (/) )( <Ii (I) <0 E ~ w ~ ro c .~ Q) a: o :::i Q) ~ en ro "0 ro > (I) z Ci :::i C E "0 '? 0. (I) "0 C, C (I) (j; .:.:. ~ ..6 :J 0.. o N I'- N C') <0 fA fA ..- U ....J ....J a. ::l o t5 ....~o (5 0;: U; <.901'- -UQ)OJ c.g>o:: ro 0;: 0 !Yen"O rJl ro .... Ol LU .E o~ ..- "0 co Q) CDI'-~ co C o :ili o~ "0 .0 ::l (/) .J::. () C ro 0:: rJl Ol C CD I'- <5 ....J o o o N o <{ LJ") LU ..- OJ C') o co "- o o N (0 N ~ . c Q) (ij E (5 ~ I- Q) f/) f/) ~ m ~ . 1Il~ 1Il .- m c: lIl:J ~ It) ClCI :a: ~ o 0:: ~ UJ i5 ~ z w ::E w > o Q: D. ~ ..J <C o o ..J ~ W w Q: ~ UJ <C o <C > w z '0 1Il ro 1Il 1Il m L... -0 -0 <(I"-- -00 c:-- ro~ m?; E ro Z 1Il -L... m c: 3: o () ....J ....J a. :J o L... <.9 ~mor- o .~ or- <.90~ ..c:mO) u O'l rY' C:-ou.. ro 'C 0 a:::u;-o 1Il ro L... O'l LJ..J .E .!: or- -0 - m a:l~~ c: c: o 0 a :~ '6 .~ 1Il -0 m .0 o ~ ro ..c: O'l u m c: ....J ro a::: 1Il O'l .!: a5 05 - o ....J ~:g ~ N o 0 Z <C LJ") a.LJ..J ro or- ~ ~ o Z or- 00 N I"-- N ("') co fh () ....J ....J a. :J o L... <.9 ~mN o .~ or- <.9o~ ..c:mO) u O'l rY' c:-ou.. ro 'C 0 a:::u;-o 1Il ro L... O'l LJ..J .E ~or--g a:l~~ c: o :~ "~ -0 .0 :J (/) ..c: u c: ro a::: 1Il O'l .!: a5 0) - o ....J o o ("') N o <( LJ") LJ..J or- 0) ("') N 00 N I"-- N ("') co fh o c:c:N ro....JLJ") c: O'l I"-- Q5c:0) :X::'Ea::: umO ~u;-o 1Il ro c: m LJ..J ro EooE ~ffi~ c: o '00 :~ -0 .0 :J (/) ..c: u c: ro a::: 1Il O'l c: CD o ("') "0 ....J o o <<:t N o <( LJ") LJ..J or- 0) ("') ("') 00 N I"-- N ("') co fh c: 0 .Q :>. ("') t5roLJ") 2~8; u;oa::: 5 !?O ()~~ -O.!Q> c:-c: o m 0 E ~ 1Il L... ~ :JOu ..c:<<:tro I-N"""'l c: o '00 :~ -0 .0 :J (/) ..c: u c: ro a::: 1Il O'l c: a5 or- ("') "0 ....J o o LJ") N o <C LJ") LJ..J or- 0) ("') <<:t 00 N I"-- N ("') co fh c: 0 o :>. ("') ~~~ woo::: 5 !?O ()~~ -olll= c=~ o m 0 E~~ :JOu ..c:<<:tro I-N"""'l c: o '00 :~ -0 .0 :J (/) ..c: u c: ro a::: 1Il O'l c: CD N ("') "0 ....J o o co N o <C LJ") LJ..J or- 0) ("') LJ") 00 N I"-- N ("') co fh c: 0 o :>. ("') tsroLJ") 2~8; Ciioe::: 5 !?O ()~~ -O.!Q> 5-a>c: E~~ :Jou ..c:<<:tro I-N"""'l c: o '00 :~ -0 .0 :J (/) ..c: u c: ro a::: 1Il O'l c: a5 ("') ("') "0 ....J o o I"-- N o <C LJ") LJ..J or- 0) ("') co 00 N I"-- N ("') co fh o U5~ rol"-- L...-oO) "~ ro a::: m>o ~~-o :>. > c: m>ro ~oE ro or- 1Il I<<:t<( c: o '00 :~ -0 .0 :J (/) ..c: u c: ro a::: 1Il O'l .!: CD <<:t ("') "0 ....J o o 00 N o <C LJ") LJ..J or- 0) ("') I"-- 00 N I"-- N ("') co fh o N LJ") I"-- cO) ....Ja::: ~ 10'0 .!2-g-o () "_ c: c:....J.!2 ..c:N..c: ~~~ c: o '00 "> '6 .0 :J (/) ..c: u c: ro a::: 1Il O'l ~ a5 ll'i ("') "0 ....J o o 0) N o <C LJ") LJ..J or- 0) ("') 00 00 N I"-- N ("') co fh o N LJ") I"-- C:O) ....J Q5 :>. a::: c:roO "(j) ~ -0 I:.::i~ ENE ~~~ c: o '00 :~ -0 .0 :J (/) ..c: u c: ro a::: 1Il O'l .!: a5 (!) ("') "0 ....J o o o ("') o <C LJ") LJ..J or- 0) ("') 0) 00 N I"-- N ("') co N I"-- N ("') co f/) )( vi Q) iij "5 (jj w ~ ro c .~ a; 0: o ::::i Q) ~ U5 ro "0 ro > Q) z 25 ::::i C E "0 'll 0. Q) "0 0, C Q) Vi ~ ;: .0 ;:) a.. (9 fh fh or- or- c 0 o :>. ("') tsroLJ") 2~8; u;oa::: 5 !?o ()~~ -g ~ '> o m c: E ~ ~ :JO~ ..c:<<:tro t-N"""'l OJ c o "00 :~ -0 .0 :J (/) ..c: u c: ro a::: 1Il O'l c: CD I"-- ("') "0 ....J o o or- ("') o <( LJ") LJ..J or- 0) ("') o 0) r-- o o N CD N ~ Q) g. lIl2 III .- Q) c lIl::) ~ In i I- o ii2 l- f/) 2i I- Z w ::E w > o 0:: Q. ~ ..J <( o o ..J I- W w 0:: l- f/) <( c <( > w z . c Q) - E .l9 l/) o l/) I- Q) l/) l/) <( - o III m III III Q) ..... "0 "0 <(r-- "00 Cl(; mT"" Q)-- EC') m Z III -..... Q) C ~ o C g .9 '(jj .g. :~ u "0 III .0 Q) ::J o C/) ro ..c Ol u Q) C ....J m a:: III Ol C co co C') (5 ....J ~:g ~ C') o 0 Z <( LO o.UJ m T"" ~ ~ o Z T"" 0> ..... Q) C 'w I ~ m LO "Ocr-- C....JO> Q5 >. a:: ~rno o(l-g"O 0.'- C ._....J m =N:C a:~~ N r-- N C') CO ~ Q) :; "0 o 0 a:: N mc~ 2....J0> o >. a:: orno o(l"O"O o .!: C .;::....J ~ OT""..c "OCOlll <(-.;t<( C o '(jj :~ "0 .0 ::J C/) ..c u C m a:: III Ol .!: CO 0> C') (5 ....J o o C') C') o <( LO UJ T"" 0> C') N 0> N r-- N C') CO ~ g 0 :;::: ~~ 2~d; <noa:: g e'0 ()~..92 -g$5 o Q5 C E~~ ::J 0 U ..c-.;tm I-N, C o :~ .~ "0 .0 ::J C/) ..c u C m a:: III Ol .!: CO o -.;t - o ....J o o -.;t C') o <( LO UJ T"" 0> C') C') 0> N r-- N C') CO ~ T"" C 0 o >. C') umLO 2~d; <noa:: g e'0 ()~..92 -g ~ .:; o Q) C E ~ g ::Jo-D ..c-.;tm I-N, C .9 III :~ "0 .0 ::J C/) ..c u C m a:: III Ol C CO T"" -.;t (5 ....J o o LO C') o <( LO UJ T"" 0> C') -.;t 0> N r-- N C') CO ~ T"" C 0 o >. C') ~~ ~ III <noa::c g e'0 Q) ()~..92~ -g$5 Q) ~ ~ ~ E ::Jo-DI- ..c-.;tm~ I-N,<( C .Q III :~ "0 .0 ::J C/) ..c u C m a:: III Ol C co N -.;t (5 ....J o o CO C') o <( LO UJ T"" 0> C') LO 0> N r-- N C') CO ~ C .9 III :~ "0 .0 ::J C/) ..c u C m a:: III Ol .!: CO C') -.;t (5 ....J o o r-- C') o <( LO UJ T"" 0> C') CO 0> N r-- N C') CO ~ o > N III co~c ::J 0> Q) g, a:: S ~ 0 ~ .~"O > C/)cE r--~1- LO ..c ~ ~~<( C o :~ > '6 .0 ::J C/) ..c u C m a:: III Ol ~ CO -.i -.;t - o ....J o o co C') o <( LO UJ T"" 0> C') r-- 0> N r-- N C') CO ~ T"" o >N co~ ::JO> g,a:: ~O .~ "0 C/) C r--~ LO..c N III T""<( N N r-- r-- N N C') C') CO CO ~ ~ ..-- T"" ..... ..... Q) Q) C C "0 "0 ..... ..... m -.;t m -.;t <.9 0<.9 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ .000>.000> (1) CO a:: (1) CO a:: 000000 o(lco o(lco (1) X"O Q) X "0 0l000l00 .....co_ .....co_ ~O~ ~O~ <.9CL~<.9CL~ C .9 III :~ "0 .0 ::J C/) ..c u C m a:: III Ol C C ,9 III ':; '6 .0 ::J C/) ..c u C m a:: III Ol ,!: CO CO -.;t (5 ....J co LO -.;t (5 ....J o o 0> C') o <( LO UJ T"" 0> C') o o o -.;t o <( LO UJ T"" 0> C') co 0> 0> 0> N r-- N C') CO l/) )( <Ii Q) iV .s U; w c=:- C\l .!: .s Q) ct o :::i Q) ~ en C\l "0 C\l > Q) z (5 :::i ~ E "0 'l' 0. Q) "0 0, C Q) Cii ,:,(. ~ .0 :J a.. o ~ C 0 o >. C') ~~~ <noa:: g e'0 ()~~ -g ~ ':; o (1) C E ~ g ::Jo-D ..c-.;tm I-N, o ~ C o '(jj :~ "0 .0 ::J C/) ..c u C m a:: III Ol .!: CO r-- -.;t (5 ....J o o T"" -.;t o <( LO UJ T"" 0> C') o o ..-- .... o o N to N ~ It) ClCl 'It .... (,) Q2 .... tn 2i .... z w :e w > o 0::: c.. :e ..J <( (,) o ..J .... W w 0::: .... tn <( o <( > W Z << "E Q) ro E '0 ~ I- Q) III III <{ Q) ~ << l/)2 l/) .- Q) C l/)::J ~ '0 l/) ro l/) l/) Q) .... -c -c <(,.... -cO lij~ Q)(;'; E ro Z l/) -.... Q) C ~ o C o :~ .~ -c .0 :J en ..c (.) C ro 0::: l/) Ol ~ as CO ~ (5 ..J ~ ~ ~ ~ C o :a .;:: (.) l/) Q) o ro Ol Q) ..J o 0 Z <( LO a.W ro T"" ~ ~ o T"" Z 0 T"" () ...J ...J a. :J o .... <.9 ~Q)T"" O.~ C") <.90~ ..cQ)0> (.) Ol ^' C-cu... ro .;:: 0 O:::(j)-c l/) ro .... OlW.E ~ T"" -cQ) m~~ N ,.... N C") <D ffl () ...J ...J a. :J o t5 ~Q)N O.~ C") <.90~ ..cQ)0> (.) Ol tV C-cu... ro .;:: 0 O:::(j)-c l/) ro .... OlW.E ~~-g m~~ C .Q l/) :~ -c .0 :J en ..c (.) C ro 0::: l/) Ol C as 0> ~ (5 ...J o o C") ~ o <( LO W ~ 0> C") N o T"" N ,.... N C") <D ffl () ...J ...J a. :J o .... <.9 ~Q)C") O.~ C") <.90~ ..cQ)0> (.) Ol tV C-cu... ro .;:: 0 O:::(j)-c l/) ro .... OlW.E .~ T"" -c Q) as~~ C .Q l/) :~ -c .0 :J en ..c (.) C ro 0::: l/) Ol ~ as o LO (5 ...J o o ~ ~ o <( LO W T"" 0> C") C") o T"" N ,.... N C") <D ffl () ...J ...J a. :J o .... <.9 ~Q)~ o .~ C") <.90~ ..cQ)0> (.) Ol tV C-cu... ro .;:: 0 O:::(j)-c l/) ro .... OlW.E .~ T"" -c Q) as~~ C .Q l/) :~ -c .0 :J en ..c (.) C ro 0::: l/) Ol .~ co T"" LO (5 ...J o o LO ~ o <( LO W T"" 0> C") ~ o T"" N ,.... N C") <D ffl () ...J ...J a. :J o .... <.9 ~Q)LO O.~ C") <.90~ ..cQ)0> (.) Ol tV C-cu... ro .;:: 0 O:::(j)-c l/) ro .... OlW.E .~ ~ -c - Q) m~~ C .Q l/) :~ -c .0 :J en ..c (.) C ro 0::: l/) Ol C co N LO (5 ...J o o <D ~ o <( LO W T"" 0> C") LO o ~ N ,.... N C") <D ffl () ...J ...J a. :J o .... <.9 ~Q)<D O.~ C") <.90~ ..cQ)0> (.) Ol tV c-cu... ro .;:: 0 O:::(j)-c l/) ro .... OlW.E .~ T"" -c - Q) m~~ C .Q l/) :~ -c .0 :J en ..c (.) C ro 0::: l/) Ol C co C") LO (5 ...J o o ,.... ~ o <( LO W T"" 0> C") <D o T"" N ,.... N C") <D ffl () ...J ...J a. :J o .... <.9 ~Q),.... O.~ C") <.90~ ..cQ)0> (.) Ol tV C-cu... ro .;:: 0 O:::(j)-c l/) ro .... OlW.E ~T""-g as~~ C o .ijj :~ -c .0 :J en ..c (.) C ro 0::: l/) Ol C as ..; LO (5 ...J o o CO ~ o <( LO W ~ 0> C") ,.... o ~ N ,.... N C") <D ffl () ...J ...J a. :J o .... <.9 ~Q)CO O.~ C") <.90~ ..cQ)0> (.) Ol tV C-cu... ro .;:: 0 O:::(j)-c l/) ro .... OlW.E ~T""-g m~~ C o .ijj :~ -c .0 :J en ..c (.) C ro 0::: l/) Ol C as Lri LO (5 ...J o o 0> ~ o <( LO W ~ 0> C") CO o ~ N ,.... N C") <D ffl () ...J ...J a. :J o .... <.9 ~Q)o> O.~ C") <.90~ ..cQ)0> (.) Ol tV C-cu... ro .;:: 0 O:::(j)-c l/) ro .... OlW.E ~T""-g as~~ C o .ijj :~ -c .0 :J en ..c (.) C ro 0::: l/) Ol C as <0 LO (5 ...J o o o LO o <( LO W ~ 0> C") 0> o T"" N ,.... N C") <D III X iii ~ I1l .s tl w ~ I1l C .~ Qj a: o ...J Q3 ~ U5 I1l "0 I1l > Q) z o :J C E "0 '1' 0.. Q) "0 0, C Q) tii ~ ~ .0 ::3 Q. (9 N ,.... N C") <D ffl ffl () ...J ...J a. :J o .... <.9 ~Q)o O.~ ~ <.90~ ..cQ)0> (.) Ol ^' C-cu... ro .;:: 0 O:::(j)-c l/) ro .... OlW.E .~ T"" -c = Q) as~~ ~ ~ C o .ijj :~ -c .0 :J en ..c (.) C ro 0::: l/) Ol C CO ,..: LO (5 ...J o o T"" LO o <( LO W T"" 0> C") o T"" T"" r-- o o N CO N ~ It) ClC) 'II: ~ o ~ ~ (/) o ~ z w ::E w > o ~ 0.. ~ ...J c( o o ...J ~ W W ~ ~ (/) c( Q c( > w z . C Ql l1i E -0 ~ t- Ql '" '" ct: ~ ro .. rJ).l!l rJ) .- Ql C rJ)::::> ~ - a rJ) ro rJ) rJ) Ql .... -0 -0 <{I'- -00 C--- ro';2 Ql?) E ro Z rJ) -.... Ql C ~ o C C .Q a a. :!!l 'L: .2: t..J -0 rJ) ..c Ql :J o CI) Cii ~ OJ t..J Ql C -l r!}. rJ) OJ C co as LO (5 -l ~:g ~ LO a 0 Z <{ LO a.LU ro ...... :2 ~ a ...... Z ...... ...... o -l -l a. :J a t5 ~<1>~ a .2: '<t" l?o~ ~QlO> t..J OJ a:: C-o ro '': 0 a::en-o rJ) ro .... OJ LU .E ~......-o co~~ N I'- N C"') co ffi o 0 -l -l -l -l a. a. :J :J a a .... .... l? l? ~QlN a .2: '<t" l?o~ ~QlO> t..J OJ a:: C-o ro '': 0 a::en-o rJ) ro .... OJ LU .E ~......~ co~:2 C a ';n :2: -0 ..c :J CI) ~ t..J C ro a:: rJ) OJ .~ co 0> LO (5 -l o o C"') LO o <{ LO LU ...... 0> C"') N ...... ...... N N I'- I'- N N C"') C"') co co ffi ffi ...... ...... ~QlC"') a .2: '<t" In .... LO '-'01'- ~QlO> t..J OJ a:: C-o ro '': 0 a::en-o rJ) ro .... OJ LU .E ~......~ co~:2 C a :!!l .2: -0 ..c :J CI) ~ t..J C ro a:: rJ) OJ C co o co (5 -l o o LO LO o <{ LO LU ...... 0> C"') C"') ...... ...... o -l -l a. :J a t5 ~Ql'<t" a .2: '<t" l?o~ ~QlO> t..J OJ a:: C-o ro '': 0 a::en-o ~~ .E .~ ...... -0 - Ql co~:2 C .Q rJ) :2: -0 ..c :J CI) ~ t..J C ro a:: rJ) OJ .~ co ...... co (5 -l o o co LO o <{ LO LU ...... 0> C"') '<t" ...... ...... N I'- N C"') co ffi o -l -l a. :J a .... l? ~QlLO a .2: '<t" l?o~ ~QlO> t..J OJ^", C-oLL. ro '': 0 a::en-o ~~ .E ~......~ co~:2 C a ';n :2: -0 ..c :J CI) ~ t..J C ro a:: rJ) OJ C co N co (5 -l o o I'- LO o <{ LO LU ...... 0> C"') LO ...... ...... N I'- N C"') co ffi ...... o ...J -l a. :J a .... l? N N I'- I'- N N C"') C"') co co ffi ffi ...... ...... ~Qlco 0 a .2: '<t" rJ) > N In .... LO - LO '-'OI'-CCOI'- ~Qlo>Ql:JO> g .g> a:: E ~ a:: ro '': 0 ]'j ~ 0 a:: en -0 >.!!1-o g,~.E~~~ =......~:2LO~ CO~:2<{~~ C .Q rJ) :2: -0 ..c :J CI) ~ t..J C ro a:: rJ) OJ .~ CO C"') CO (5 -l o o <Xl LO o <{ LO LU ...... 0> C"') co ...... ...... C a ';n :2: -0 ..c :J CI) ~ t..J C ro a:: rJ) OJ .~ co '<t" co (5 -l o o o co o <{ LO LU ...... 0> C"') I'- ...... ...... N N I'- I'- N N C"') C"') co co ffi ffi C ~ a cO >. a ~ <tQl ~ - :J 0 rJ) 0 LUCNQl N N~LOC LO ~<{di roU5di tca::oca:: ~~o~~o C -0 'ro fij -0 .~ ~ fij E> fij coNE roNE QlNrJ)~C"')rJ) COco<{Oco<{ C a :!!l .2: -0 ..c :J CI) ~ t..J C ro a:: rJ) OJ C co LO co (5 -l o o N co o <{ LO LU ...... 0> C"') <Xl ...... ...... C a :!!l .2: -0 ..c :J CI) ~ t..J C ro a:: rJ) OJ C co co co (5 -l o o C"') co o <{ LO LU ...... 0> C"') 0> ...... ...... N I'- N C"') co '" )( ui Ql Cij .s: U; UJ ~ co c .~ Qi cl: o :J a; ~ (jj co "0 co > Ql Z (3 :J C E "0 'l' a. Ql "0 0, C Ql Vi ~ .6 :J ll. (9 ffi C 0 a >. C"') t5roLO 2~8; en a a:: 5 ~o oLf~ -O.!!?3 5 1) C E~~ :J 0 t..J ~'<t"ro r-N, N ~ C a '00 :2: -0 ..c :J CI) ~ t..J C ro a:: rJ) OJ C co I'- co (5 -l o o '<t" co o <{ LO LU ...... 0> C"') o N ...... l"- e e N CD N ~ (1) ~. Ill!! III .- (1) C Ill::::> ~ It) CO ~ .... (,) ii: .... tJ) c .... z w ::E w > o 0::: Q. :E ...J <( (,) o ...J .... W w 0::: .... tJ) <( c <( > w z C C .Q .Q a. III 'C :~ t) "0 III .D (1) ::J o (/) ro ..c OJ t) (1) C -I ro 0::: III OJ .S: en 00 c.o (5 -I ~ ~ g c.o ci 0 <( 1.0 UJ ..... OJ C"') . c Q) (ij E -0 ~ t- Q) C/) C/) <( '0 III ro III III (1) .... "0 "0 <(r--. "00 c-- ro~ (1)-- EC"') ro Z III -.... (1) C ~ o C 0 o >- C"') Urol.O 2~8; 0000::: 5 ~o u~~ -g ~ .:; o (1) C E ~ ~ ::Jon ..c..;tro ....N...., ..... N ..... N r--. N C"') c.o Efl C 0 .Q >- C"') t)rol.O 2~8; 0000::: 5 ~o u~~ -g~=s: 01) C E~~ ::J 0 t) ..c..;tro ....N...., C o '00 :~ "0 .D ::J (/) ..c t) C ro 0::: III OJ C en 0) c.o (5 -I o o c.o c.o o <( 1.0 UJ ..... en C"') N N ..... N r--. N C"') c.o Efl C 0 o >- C"') Urol.O 2~8; 0000::: 5 ~o u~~ -g~=s: o 1) C E~~ ::J 0 t) ..c..;tro ....N...., C .Q III :~ "0 .D ::J (/) ..c t) C ro 0::: III OJ .S: en o r--. (5 -I o o r--. c.o o <( 1.0 UJ ..... en C"') C"') N ..... N r--. N C"') c.o Efl C 0 o >- C"') ~~~ 0000::: 5 ~o u~~ "O~S C - C oE ~ 0 > III .... ..x: ::J 0 t) ~~~ C .Q III :~ "0 .D ::J (/) ..c t) C ro 0::: III OJ .S: en ..... r--. (5 -I o o 00 c.o o <( 1.0 UJ ..... en C"') ..;t N ..... N r--. N C"') c.o Efl C 0 .Q >- C"') t)rol.O 2~8; 0000::: 5 ~o u~~ -g~=s: 01) C E~~ ::J 0 t) ..c..;tro ....N...., C o :iZi .~ "0 .D ::J (/) ..c t) C ro 0::: III OJ C en N r--. (5 -I o o en c.o o <( 1.0 UJ ..... en C"') 1.0 N ..... N r--. N C"') c.o C/) x rJi Q) ro .~ iii LU ~ '" c .~ Q; Q: o :J Q) ~ en '" " '" > Q) z o -' ~ E " '1' 0. Q) " 0, c Q) Ii; -c :: 1:, :;J a- t? Efl 1.0 N C") ~ o N 1.0 r--. 1.0"0 Efl(1) u...... o ~ ....-= (/) III o 5 u t) <(~ ro Z ~ 0(1) 0.:2 ::::> III o~ UJ ',= (/) .~ <( x en (1) .... 0 z- UJ"O :E :~ (/)"0 (/) ~ LUu (/)..... (/) 0 <(-I . V "- a o N <D N ;a: / \ ~. 1 " -; .:..- ~,,>. - NEVADA STREET LOOKING WEST )' ,- tv ..t.". . ._- NEVADA STREET LOOKING WEST NEW CURB BUMP-OUT AT CROSSWALK ,"' NEVADA STREET LOOKING WEST , ;' r ! / .r '" 1 I I j I I I I I NEVADA STREET LOOKING WEST NEW CONCRETE CROSSWALK LOOKING SOUTH CROSSWALK WITH BUMP-OUT LOOKING WEST NEVADA STREET CONCRETE CROSSWALK NEVADA STREET LOOKING EAST LOOKING EAST FROM END OF PROJECT EXHIBIT 1 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Title: A Resolution Setting a Public Hearing with Intention to Form a Local Improvement District for Sidewalk and Traffic Calming Improvements to W. Nevada Street from Helman Street West to the Billings Ranch Subdivision Dept: Date: Public Works Department August 3, 2004 Submitted By: Reviewed BY: Approved By: Paula Brown Mike Franell Gino Grimaldi . Synopsis: For the past several months, staffhas been working with the Nevada Street neighbors to complete design for the installation. of sidewalks, pedestrian safety improvements and associated traffic calming elements to Nevada Street from Helman Street to the Billings Ranch Subdivision. This project will greatly improve pedestrian, bicycle and vehicle safety along Nevada Street by slowing traffic on this wide street The project will improve the pedestrian use within this busy neighborhood, which accesses Helman School, the entrance to the Dog Park and the Greenway will be significantly improved. The attached resolution establishes a public hearing date to consider forming the local improvement district for these enhancements. The proposed LID boundary includes lots fronting on Nevada Street from Helman Street west and includes the new Billings Ranch Subdivision as depicted on the map attached as Exhibit A. Recommendation: Staff recommends that Council adopt the attached resolution establishing the date and time for a public hearing to consider the formation of the Nevada Street Sidewalk and Traffic Calming Local Improvement District. Fiscal Impact: The total project estimate is $173,500. Under resolution 99-09 the City is obligated to pay a majority of sidewalk, street improvements related to traffic calming and engineering costs. The following is a breakdown of the City's obligation under this recommendation: Estimated Construction Cost (includes contingency) Engineering and Administration $148,500 25.000 G:\pub-wrlcs\admin\PB Council\LlDs\CC Nevada set PH LID Formation 3Aug04.doc !'A~ Total Project Costs $173,500 City Participation in LID per resolution 99-09 Sidewalks and Traffic Calming (60% of$148,500) Engineering (50% of $25,000) $89,100 12.500 $101,600 Remaining Assessment Participation Number of equivalent dwelling units Cost per equivalent dwelling unit $71,900 125 $575.20 Each equivalent dwelling unit or potential equivalent dwelling unit will pay $575~20, which may be Bancrofted over a 1 O-year period. The construction of improvements to Nevada Street is a priority in the City's Transportation System Plan and has been on the Capital Improvements Program project list for the past'several years. Background and Preparation for the Public Hearing Decisions: There will be two aciions for the Council at the conclusion of the Public Hearing on September 7th. The first is the formation of the district boundaries and the second is concurrence with the 900,10 design submission. LID BOUNDARY: The proposed LID boundary includes lots fronting on Nevada Street (53 properties) from Helman Street west to and including the new Billings Ranch Subdivision as depicted on the map attached as Exhibit A. This boundary was selected as these 53 property owners will be directly benefited by the improvements along Nevada Street The Billings Ranch Subdivisio~ (72 properties) was included as a condition of their planning approvals. This boundary is consistent with other neighborhood sidewalk and traffic calming LIDs (Helman, PennylPalmer) as only those properties directly on the affected streets were included in the LID boundary area. There has been some discussion that all oftbe Quiet Village Neighborhood or at least all of the homes north of Nevada Street should be included in the LID boundary as all will be affected by the improvements. The-only LID in recent years that went beyond the immediate street improvement area was Tolman Creek Road. Tolman Creek Road is considered a major collector I arterial street and the improvements were full street improvements (street reconstruction and overlay, new storm drain system, sidewalks on both sides, traffic calming planters, etc.). In that case, the boundary was extended to include all homes that directly and indirectly accessed Tolman Creek Road. Staff recommends retaining the boundary to the properties directly on Nevada Street It may be necessary that the Nevada Street Sidewalk and Traffic Calming LID be formed by Council initiative in accordance with AMC Section 13.20.020. Although staffhas worked with the neighbors and has received general consensus for the formation of the LID, actual signed petitions in favor of the LID have not been collected by staff. It is staff's intention to send information to each of the property owners within the LID boundary and to have them return a postcard acknowledging their consent to the LID. This information will be presented at the public hearing. DESIGN CONCURRANCE: With the past several LIDs, Council has participated by concurring with the design process at the 90% design stage. In this LID process, staff has been working toward design completion since December 2003. This project has been planned and on the City's Capital Improvements Project list for the past 5-6 years. This project is a high priority on the City's Transportation System Plan for sidewalks. As the current 36 foot wide street is wider than the G:\pub-wrks\admin\PB Council\LIDs\CC Nevada set PH LID Fonnation 3Aug04.doc ~~, current standards for a minor collector (residential neighborhood collector). Ashland's current standards (Ashland Street Standards Handbook) for a residential neighborhood collector are 32 feet from curb to curb; allows for two 9-foot travel lanes and parking on both sides. This current wider straight street section encourages faster speeds and it has been the City's practice to provide traffic calming elements.to slow those speeds down and allow for safe travel of bicyclists, pedestrians and vehicles. Initially staff hired an engineering firm (Thornton Engineering) to prepare a concept design for sidewalks and traffic calming on Nevada Street. This preliminary plan was shared with the Nevada Street and Quiet Village community at a neighborhood meeting in December 2003. There were significant concerns and a diverse set of reactions to this first plan. In the ensuing 5-6 months, a citizens committee was formed and met several times to help identify the community concerns and suggestions for improvement. In May, staffwas presented with seven different proposals from this citizen's committee with a request to incorporate the elements of seven concepts into three plan options. Staff used the following objectives to meet the primary goal improving safety: 1. Reduce speed of traffic; 2. Encourage uniform traffic speed; 3. Provide safe and comfortable pedestrian route; 4. Provide safe and comfortable bicycle route; 5. Provide safe motorist route; 6. Maintain safe and unimpeded emergency access; 7. Maintain street function as a neighborhood collector; 8. Increase livability of the neighborhood (noise, trees, sign, clutter); 9. Balance street function. safety and livability; and 10. Reduce impact of anticipated traffic increase. In June, staff distilled the seven proposals into 3 alternatives that would meet the critical safety concerns. These three alternatives were presented to the entire neighborhood during the June 21 It meeting, where each was discussed and the group consensus narrowed the three to one preferred alternative. Ai the July 19th meeting, the preferred alternative was again discussed and the neighborhood group was asked to add elements, but was not allowed to pull elements out as each provided a critical factor in traffic safety and traffic calming. The resulting preferred alternative will be presented to the City Council at the September 7th Public Hearing. There was some discussion about the need for more tiaffic calming, especially at the west end of the project between Laurel and Cambridge. There was also a desire expressed by some to have sidewalks on both sides of the street between Helman and Voris. Staff will review both of these elements and the engineer and a discussion will be presented to Council on the 7th. TIMING: 'With Council's approval, the public hearing will be scheduled for September 7th and final formation of the LID will be on September 21 st. Assuming there will be no major design changes upon LID formation, staff will finalize design for the September 21 st meeting and have the project out for bids at the end of October. Construction may begin as early as November and should be completed in April/May 2006. Attachments: Resolution LID Map G:\pub-wrks\admin\PB Council\LlDs\CC Nevada set PH LID Formation 3Aug04.doc er~~ City of Ashland, Oregon - Agendas And Minutes Page I of5 EXHIBIT 2 Tuesday, August 03, 2004 MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL August 3, 2004 - 7:00 p.m. Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 E. Main Street CALL TO ORDER Mayor called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers. ROLL CALL Councilor Laws, Amarotico, Hartzell, Morrison and Hearn were present; Councilor Jackson was absent. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of July 20, 2004 were approved as presented. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS 8t AWARDS Mayor's Declaration to commemorate Hiroshima Day (Aug 6th) and Nagasaki Day (Aug 7th) was read aloud. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Minutes of Boards, Commissions and Committees. 2. Liquor License Application from Chun H. Chan dba Chun's Palace, Inc. 3. Approval of Amendment No.1 to Fund Exchange Agreement No. 20521, Water Street Bridge Project, between the City of Ashland and the Oregon Department of Transportation. Councilor Hartzell/Morrison m/s to approve Consent Agenda. Voice Vote: All AYES. Motion passed. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Continuation of Public Hearing regarding Appeal of Planning Action 2004-052, 904 Garden Way, Ashland. Mayor DeBoer read aloud the Public Hearing procedure for Land Use Hearings. Public Hearing Continued: 7:09 p.m. EX PARTE CONTACT Mayor DeBoer and Councilor Morrison received an email from Oak Knoll Meadows Home Owners Association; however neither read the message due to the public hearing being closed. Mayor DeBoer stated he forwarded the email to Staff. IN OPPOSITION TO APPLICANT Lynn Costantino/892 Harmony Lane/Presented a poster displaying pictures of the subject property. Mr. Costantino voiced concern that no architecture was considered and noted the close proximity to the adjoining property. He also commented on the petition signed by the 46 neighbors and stated he is not the only one with concerns. STAFF RESPONSE Community Development Director John McLaughlin stated the Council should consider the options presented in the Staff Memo, which deal with the concerns raised during the first portion of the public hearing. Mr. McLaughlin clarified the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for the accessory unit is an allowed use of the zone under certain conditions. He stated there is only one other approved accessory unit in this zone, http://www.ashland.or.us/Agendas. asp?Display= Minutes&AMID= I 77 6&Print=T rue ') i? 1 /) OOn City of Ashland, Oregon - Agendas And Minutes Page 2 of5 however Staff has been notified of others that might be operating illegally and they will be investigating these claims. Mr. McLaughlin stated an ordinance amendment would be required if the Council wished to set a number of the allowed CUPs per neighborhood. Ms. Harris noted the neighbors have raised concerns regarding the need to protect the electric pole. Ms. Harris clarified that although the pole location is not ideal, there is nothing that prohibits its close location to the proposed driveway. However, Council could ask for a condition that would provide a barrier to protect the electric pole. The Electric Department would need to review this property in order to determine the potential risk. Mr. McLaughlin stated there are currently 94 approved accessory units and noted they are located throughout the City. It was noted that Staff has not had any experience with negative impacts to neighborhoods as a result of allowing accessory units. Mr. McLaughlin clarified that the ordinance does not require homeowners to occupy homes with accessory units. Mr. McLaughlin stated that the traffic generated by the proposed accessory unit would be no different than that of a normal single family unit. In regards to architectural compatibility, the accessory unit would not change the architecture and there is no reason to believe there will be any affect on air quality. In addition, Staff does not see this application as setting a precedent for future applicants. - Mr. Mclaughlin clarified the Council could deny the permit if they determine that the conditions are inappropriate. However they would need to specify which conditions they do not agree with. Mr. Mclaughlin clarified that remodeling can be done without obtaining permits. It is only when the owner wants to make a separate living unit that a CUP is required. City Attorney Mike Franell stated that the potential violation of not obtaining the necessary building permits should be handled as a separate issue. REBUTTAL Jane VanDyke/668 Leonard Street/Stated they were taken back by all of the negative comments. expressed at the last council meeting. She and her husband are attempting to do something that is positive, and were under the belief that this was something that the City supported and encouraged. Ms. VanDyke stated she would like to respond to some of the specific concerns and mis-information provided at the last meeting. First, they did not turn the garage into an apartment. The garage was converted to two bedrooms and a bath in the 1970's, 30 years before they purchased the house. Additionally, their house is 13 feet away from the neighbor's, not 5 feet as stated by the opponents. Ms. VanDyke stated that they want to have a legal unit, which is why they are going through this process. Ms. VanDyke stated she does not understand why this neighborhood is only willing to welcome "certain types" of people, and questioned if this property does not meet the affordable housing goals of the City, than what does? Public Hearing Closed: 8:13 p.m. COUNCIL DELIBERATION Mayor DeBoer expressed concern that this case was only heard in front of the 3 member Hearings Board, and felt that it should have been heard by the full Planning Commission. He also expressed concern that two rental units are being placed in a single-family residence. Mayor DeBoer stated he does not support this application based on the parking issues and the negative impacts on the livability of the neighborhood. Council discussed the seven factors that are to be considered, which include: 1) Similarity in scale, bulk, and coverage, 2) Generation of traffic and effects on surrounding streets. Increases in pedestrian, bicycle, and mass- transit use are considered beneficial regardless of capacity of facilities, 3) Architectural compatibility with the impact area, 4) Air quality, including the generation of dust, odors, or other environmental pollutants, 5) Generation of noise, light, and glare, http://www.ashland.or.us/Agendas.asP?Displav= Minutes&AMID= 177 6& Pri nt= Tme '\rnnOOf1 City of Ashland, Oregon - Agendas And Minutes Page 3 of5 6) The development of adjacent properties as envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan, and 7) Other factors found to be relevant by the Hearing Authority for review of the proposed use. Councilor Hartzell suggested two additional conditions to add to those recommended by the Hearings Board and Staff: Condition # 17 - Ask the Electric Department to review the driveway pole and make any recommendations that they see fit to ensure the electric pole meets safety standards. Condition # 18 - The accessory unit not be increased more than 500 sq. ft. Concern was raised regarding setting a condition that would limit the size of the house and the unit in the future. It was stated that building permits are required to add on to a house and questioned whether this would be more of a legal condition. Mr. Franell stated there are already building limitations in place. There is a condition that states the accessory unit cannot exceed more than 50% of the floor space of the primary unit. In addition, the Maximum Lot Coverage Ordinance would apply. However, Council could add an additional condition further limiting the size of the accessory unit. It was noted that the applicant would have to apply for a new application if they wanted to make any of these changes to the property in the future. Council discussed whether Staff's Condition #16 should be included at this time or handled separately. Councilor Hartzell/Morrison m/s to uphold the application, denying appeal, with the following conditions: Conditions #1-13 from the Hearings Board, Conditions #14 and #15 as stated in the Staff Memo dated July 28, 2004, an additional condition that states that the Electric Department review the driveway pole and make any recommendations they see appropriate to ensure protection of that pole and neighborhood safety, and a condition that states that the accessory unit will not be increased more than 550 sq. fti If the owner wants to increase size of the accessory unit they would pursue an amendment to the Conditional Use Permit. DISCUSSION: Mayor DeBoer voiced his concern with livability. Council Hartzell stated she shares in the Mayor's concerns. Voice Vote: Councilor Laws, NO. Councilor Amarotico, Hartzell, Morrison and Hearn, YES. Motion passed 4-1. Mayor DeBoer spoke to the owner of the house, and stated it is very critical with a rental situation like this to monitor the rental closely. Councilor Hartzell motion to direct Staff to take the action as noted in Condition #16 and that Council direct the Planning Department Staff to investigate any accessory units in that neighborhood that might be unpermitted and take necessary action. Motion dies due to lack of a second. Mayor DeBoer noted that Staff is already required to follow any illegal activities. He also noted that if neighbors are concerned, they can make a complaint to the Planning Department, and they will send someone out to investigate. Council discussed whether it was appropriate to direct Staff to only investigate this one neighborhood. Opinion was expressed that because a complaint was raised, it is appropriate to formally ask Staff to follow up. Opposing comment was made that Staff is already required to investigate complaints and Council should trust Staff's discretion on how to follow through. PUBLIC FORUM Ryan Navickas!711 Faith Avenue/Requested that the Council reconsider the most recent approved ordinance regarding public nudity. Mr. Navickas spoke regarding the cultural norm in regards to the human body and expressed his concern with the passive and compulsive nature on the passage of this ordinance. He noted there are already laws regarding lewd behavior and requested that this issue be placed on the agenda for council discussion. Erik Navickas/711 Faith Avenue/Spoke regarding the proposed Mt. Ashland Ski expansion. Mr. Navickas http://www.ashland.or.us/Agendas.aso?Disolav=Minutes&A MTf)= 177hJ&Print=Tn,p "n 1 ;')()()A City of Ashland, Oregon - Agendas And Minutes Page 4 of 5 requested that the Council move to halt the NEPA process until the Waste Treatment Facility on the Mt. Ashland development is dealt with. He stated there are high nitrogen levels in the effluent and others serious problems that exist in the current development. UNFINISHED BUSINESS (None) NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS 1. Eighth Annual Report on implementation of the Valdez Principles. Electric & Telecommunications Director Dick Wanderscheid stated the Valdez Principles were adopted in May of 1990 and require an annual report on implementation of the principles. The annual report was submitted to the Council and is included in the public record. Mr. Wanderscheid noted the new items are in italic and gave a brief explanation of each. Mayor DeBoer acknowledged the use of bio-diesel fuel being used by the Ashland School District buses. Public Works Director Paula Brown noted there is a Department of Energy program that will reimburse the City 25% of all of the costs associated with going to the bio-diesel fuel. Mayor DeBoer spoke regarding the styrofoam ban, and stated that it is his understanding that the new styrofoam now dissipates quicker in a land fill than plastic. Mr. Wanderscheid agreed and noted that CFCs are no longer being used to create styrofoam. Mr. Wanderscheid stated he will talk with Ashland Sanitary and the Conservation Commission to revisit this topic. It was noted the Cities for Climate Protection and the Community Wildfire Protection Plan was missing from the report. The BPA Power Shift Program was noted. Mr. Wanderscheid stated they have been disappointed in the response to this program. The City has the ability to do 100 homes, at last count Ashland was only at 40. It was noted that the bulk of the sign-ups came as a result of a front page article ran in the Daily Tidings. Mr. Wanderscheid stated he is currently working with BPA to do a direct mailing to residents. It was noted that the program offers a $100 rebate and residents can visit the City's website to sign up. Mr. Wanderscheid quoted an article on Good Watch, which explained that this is a home energy management system that employs technology that allows customers to automatically control their home energy uses. Homeowners can program their thermostat, pool pump, water heaters and other devices, at home or remotely, around the clock via the internet. They can also monitor their settings whenever and wherever they happen to be. ORDINANCES. RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS 1. Reading by title only of "A Resolution Setting a Public Hearing with Intention to Form a Local Improvement District for Sidewalk and Traffic Calming Improvements to W. Nevada Street from Helman Street North to the Billings Ranch Subdivision." Public Works Director Paula Brown presented the Staff Report on the intent to form an LID from W. Nevada and Helman Street, North to the Billings Ranch Subdivision. Ms. Brown stated they will be looking at the district boundary and also the costs. It was noted that the City may have over-estimated what the actual cost will be. It was also clarified that the City received seven plans, and from those seven Staff created one consensus plan. Council requested that both the original and consensus plans be provided to the Council for review. It was clarified that at the public hearing, Council will be able to view both plans and cost estimates and receive testimony from anyone who wishes to speak on this issue. Ms. Brown clarified the decision the Council is making tonight is to form a LID, they are not making a decision on design. Concern was expressed that the change in costs would result in the need to re-notice the neighborhood. htto://www.ashland.or.us/AQ:endas.asn?nisnliw=Mintlt~sXr A MTO=177f1j& Print=Tmp ,,/') 1 /'){){){.. City of Ashland, Oregon - Agendas And Minutes Page 5 of5 Councilor Hartzell/ Amarotico m/s to approve Resolution #2004-30. Roll Call Vote: Hartzell, Morrison, Hearn, Laws and Amarotico, YES. Motion passed. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS Mayor DeBoer stated there are currently opening on the Historic, Public Arts and Airport Commissions. He also noted that applications are kept on file for 6 months. A Study Session is scheduled for 'tomorrow at noon in the Council Chambers. Topics of discussion include making land use decisions and ex parte contact. In addition, Ashland Town Hall will be airing on RVlV at 6 p.m. tomorrow night. ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder Alan DeBoer, Mayor End of Document - Back to Top http://www.ashland.or.us/Agendas.aso?Disolav=Minutes&AMID= 1 770& Print=Tnlp. "ninnnfl EXHIBIT 3 RESOLUTION NO. 04- ~ A RESOLUTION SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING WITH INTENT TO FORM A LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT FOR SIDEWALK AND TRAFFIC CALMING IMPROVEMENTS TO W. NEVADA STREET THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. It is the intention of the Council to commence Sidewalk and Traffic Calming Improvements to W. Nevada Street from Helman Street west to and including the Billings Ranch Subdivision SECTION 2. The boundary deSCription of the local improvement district is described as those lots fronting on W. Nevada Street from Helman Street North to the Billings Ranch Subdivision as depicted on the map attached to Exhibit A. SECTION 3. The city engineer's estimated cost of the improvement, including engineering and administration costs, and the proposed allocation of the cost among each of the property owners specially benefited is $173,500 of which $71,900 will be paid by special assessments on benefited properties. Costs will be allocated based on $575.20 per equivalent dwelling unit or potential equivalent dwelling unit within the assessment area. SECTION 4. The council will hold a public hearing in the Council Chambers, Ashland Civic Center, 1175 East Main Street on September 7, 2004, at 7:00 p.m., at which time and place the owners of the benefited properties may appear or submit written comments prior to or at the hearing as to why the improvement should not be constructed or why the benefited properties should not be assessed in the manner proposed. SECTION 5. The city recorder is directed to serve notice to the property owners by publishing a notice of the public hearing once in the Daily Tidings, not less than 30 days prior to the hearing, and by mailing copies of the notice by first class mail to the owners of each lot benefited by the proposed improvement as shown on the latest tax and assessment roll. The notice shall be in the form of Exhibit " A" attached to this resolution. SECTION 6. This resolution takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. PAGE 1 G:\IegaI\Office\ORD\N\Nevada Set PH Reso.doc This resolution was read by title only in accordance with Ashland M~pal Code 92.04.090 and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this 3 day of 'rhO/- 2004. ~~ Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this 14 day of ~d~004. ~~ Alan W. DeBoer, Mayor PAGE 2 G:\JegaI\Office\ORD\N\Nevada Set PH Reso.doc EXHIBIT" A" NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING The City Council of the City of Ashland will meet on September 7, 2004, at 7 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street, to hold a public hearing to consider the formation of a local improvement district as follows: NATURE OF THE IMPROVEMENT: Sidewalk and Traffic Calming Improvements to W. Nevada Street from Helman Street west to the Billings Ranch Subdivision. BENEFITED: Those lots fronting on W. Nevada Street from Helman Street west to the Billings Ranch Subdivision as depicted on the map attached to Exhibit A. ESTIMATED COST: The estimated cost of the improvement, including engineering and administration costs, and the proposed allocation of the cost among each of the property owners specially benefited is $173,500 of which $71,900 will b~ paid by special assessments on benefited properties. Costs will be allocated based on $575.20 per equivalent dwelling unit or potential equivalent dwelling unit within the assessment area. Additional information regarding the proposed improvement or method of assessment may be obtained at the Engineering Division, 51 Winburn Way, Ashland OR, phone number 488-5347, weekdays during the hours of 8:00 AM to 4:30 PM. All affected property owners may appear at the hearing or submit written comments prior to or at the hearing, as to why the improvements should not be installed or why the benefited properties should not be assessed in the manner proposed. If two-thirds of the property owners to be benefited object to the improvement, the improvement will be suspended for six months. 13.20.040 Notice of Hearing Regarding Imorovement Resolution. A. Notice. Notice of the hearing regarding the improvement resolution shall be given at least 30 days prior to the scheduled date of the hearing. B. Method of Delivering Notice. Notice shall be made by publication in a newspaper of general circulation within the city and by mailing copies of the notice by first class mail to the owners of lots affected by the improvement. PAGE 3 G:\legaI\Office\ORD\N\Nevada Set PH Reso.doc CITY OF ASHLAND NEVADA STREET Ll.D. o . . 0.05 ,Miles 0,1 .~ ~ 6 [ 3Q cO OlJlj CODa (p:forms\Jidl.res) EXHIBIT 4 CITY Of ASHLAND Council Communication ..- - - -- -- ~.~-~- - -- --. - _..~.- -----.- _n __ _ _____ __0_ ~ _____ _____ _~ __ _____ __ Title: Public Hearing and Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing and Ordering the Formation of the Nevada Street Local Improvement District for Sidewalk and Traffic Calming Improvements to W. Nevada Street from Helman Street West to the Billings Ranch Subdivision Dept: Date: Public Works Department September 7, 2004 Submitted By: Reviewed By: Approved By: Paula Brown Mike Franell Gino Grimaldi Synopsis: For the past several months, staff has been working with the Nevada Street neighbors to complete the concept and engineering designs for the installation of sidewalks, pedestrian safety improvements and associated traffic calming elements to Nevada Street from Helman Street to the Billings Ranch Subdivision. There have been significant differences of opinion regarding the need for traffic speed reductions and amount of traffic calming elements necessary to improve safety. The final plan was developed in conjunction with the entire Nevada Street neighborhood, but with additional weight being given to those who reside on Nevada Street, receive the benefit and corresponds to those that are within the proposed LID boundary. This plan represents a lot of work on the neighborhood's part, a great deal of compromise of personal feelings, and a well thought out decision. This project will greatly improve pedestrian, bicycle and vehicle safety along Nevada Street by slowing traffic on this wide street. The project will improve the pedestrian use age within this busy neighborhood, which provides access to Helman School, the Dog Park and the Greenway multiuselbikepath. The attached resolution authorizes and orders the formation of the LID and construction improvements to Nevada Street including sidewalks, curb extension planter areas, pedestrian safety improvements, drainage and associated improvements. The resolution also authorizes the city to borrow money and issue and sell notes for the purpose of providing interim financing for the actual cost of the local improvement. The proposed LID boundary includes lots fronting on Nevada Street from Helman Street west and includes the new Billings Ranch Subdivision as depicted on the map attached as Exhibit A. Recommendation: Staff recommends that Council hold a public hearing to listen to comments and concerns regarding the intent to form the Nevada Street Local Improvement District for sidewalk and traffic calming improvements. Ifupon completion of the public hearing Council determines a need for the local . G:lpub-wrksladminIPB CouncillLIDslCC Nevada LID Formation 7Sep04.doc Page 1 of 14 ~j.' improvement district, staff recommends that Council form the LID by Council initiative in accordance with AMC Section 13.20.020. As such, staff recommends Council adopt the attached resolution authorizing and ordering the formation of a Local Improvement District for the Nevada Street Sidewalk and Traffic Calming Improvements. Fiscal Impact: The total project estimate is $173,500. Under resolution 99-09 the City is obligated to pay a majority of sidewalk, street improvements related to traffic calming and engineering costs. The following is a breakdown of the City's obligation under this recommendation: Estimated Construction Cost (includes contingency) Engineering and Administration Total Project Costs $148,500 25.000 $173,500 City Participation in LID per resolution 99-09 Sidewalks and Traffic Calming (60% of$148,500) Engineering (50% of$25,000) $89,100 12.500 $101,600 Remaining Assessment Participation Number of equivalent dwelling units Cost per equivalent dwelling unit $71,900 125 $575.20 Each equivalent dwelling unit or potential equivalent dwelling unit will pay $575.20, which may be Bancrofted over a I O-year period. The construction of improvements to Nevada Street is a priority in the City's Transportation System Plan and has been on the Capital Improvements Program project list for the past several years. These costs are only estimated construction costs. The City Recorder has provided the affected property owners this information through the assessment order. Should the actual construction costs come in higher than 110% of the estimated costs, the City would have to pay the difference. The assessment order has a provision that the property owner can pay as much as 11 0%. However, if the final construction costs are less, that difft:rence is shared with the property owner in relative proportion as shown above. Background and Preparation for the Public Hearing Decisions: Staffwill ask Council to take two actions at the conclusion of the Public Hearing on September 7th. The first is to adopt the attached resolution authorizing and ordering the formation of a Local Improvement District for the Nevada Street Sidewalk and Traffic Calming Improvements. This action will approve the district boundaries and the cost estimate of$173,500, which includes $101.600 of City funds and an assessment of$575.20 per dwelling unit. The second discussion item requests Council concurrence with the 90% design submission as depicted by the neighborhood design of July 2004. LID BOUNDARY: The proposed LID boundary includes lots fronting on Nevada Street (53 properties) from Helman Street west to and including the new Billings Ranch Subdivision as depicted on the map attached as Exhibit A. This boundary was selected as these 53 property owners will be directly benefited by the improvements along Nevada Street. The Billings Ranch Subdivision (72 properties) was included as a condition of their planning approvals. This boundary is consistent G.lpub-wrksladmin\PB CouncillLIDslCC Nevada LID Formation 7Sep04 doc Page 2 of 14 ~.. ._~ with other neighborhood sidewalk and traffic calming LIDs (Helman, PennylPalmer) as only those properties directly on the affected streets were included in the LID boundary area. There has been some discussion that all of the Quiet Village Neighborhood or at least all of the homes north of Nevada Street should be included in the LID boundary as all will be affected by the improvements. The only LID in recent years that went beyond the immediate street improvement area was Tolman Creek Road. Tolman Creek Road is considered a major collector / arterial street and the improvements were full street improvements (street reconstruction and overlay, new storm drain system, sidewalks on both sides, traffic calming planters, etc.). In that case, the boundary was extended to include all homes that directly and indirectly accessed Tolman Creek Road and included many new subdivisions that were required to participate in the LID as a condition of their planning approval. Staff recommends limiting the boundary to the properties directly on Nevada Street. It may be necessary that the Nevada Street Sidewalk and Traffic Calming LID be formed by Council initiative in accordance with AMC Section 13.20.020. Although staffhas worked with the neighbors and has received general consensus for the formation of the LID, actual signed petitions in favor of the LID have not been collected by staff. As indicated on the August 3, 2004 Council Communication, staff sent design information to each property owner within the LID boundary with a postcard with three options to respond to staff. To date, the results of the postcard survey are as follows: 1. I favor the formation of the LID and feel that the current plan is acceptable. 10 2. I favor the formation of the LID and feel that the current plans are not acceptable. 6 3. I do not favor the formation of an LID on Nevada Street. 0 At the time this Council Communication was written, of the 55 properties (if you count Billings as only one property, not 72) only 16 residences had responded to our question. There were six packets returned with no forwarding address. Staff will continue to gather information and present it at the public hearing. DESIGN CONCURRANCE: With the past several LIDs, Council has participated by concurring with the design process at the 90% design stage. In this LID process, staff has been working toward design completion since December 2003. This project has been planned and on the City's Capital Improvements Project list for the past 5-6 years. This project is a high priority on the City's Transportation System Plan for sidewalks. As the existing 36-foot wide street is wider than the current standards for a minor collector (residential neighborhood collector). Ashland's current standards (Ashland Street Standards Handbook) for a residential neighborhood collector are 32 feet from curb to curb; allows for two 9-foot travel lanes and parking on both sides. This current wider straight street section encourages faster speeds and it has been the City's practice to provide traffic calming elements to slow those speeds down and allow for safe travel of bicyclists, pedestrians and vehicles. Staff has put into practice traffic safety design elements to slow traffic and improve safety in several of our neighborhood streets. There are two (of many) design publications that are routinely used by the Traffic Safety Commission: the first provided by Pat Noyes and Associates (Colorado), "Traffic Calming Primer" and the "Neighborhood Traffic Control" published by North Central Section Institute of Transportation Engineers. Both stress the advantages of curb extensions (neck-downs, chokers, bump outs) to provide increased visibility for pedestrians, reduce vehicular speeds, and provide neighborhood streetscape amenities. G:\pub-wrks\admin\PB Council\LIDs\CC Nevada LID Formation 7Sep04.doc Page 3 of 14 ~~, . Initially staff hired an engineering firm (Thornton Engineering) to prepare a concept design for sidewalks and traffic calming on Nevada Street. This preliminary concept plan was shared with the Nevada Street and Quiet Village community at a neighborhood meeting in December 2003. There were significant concerns and a diverse set of reactions to this first plan. In the ensuing 5-6 months, a citizens committee was formed and met bi-weekly to help identify the community concerns and suggestions for improvement. The goal of the citizens committee was to consolidate information and community desires and bring City staff one plan. In May, staff was presented with seven different proposals from this citizen's committee with a request to incorporate the elements of seven concepts into three plan options, which would ultimately be consolidated into one preferred plan.. The primary goal of this construction project is to improve safety. Staff used the following objectives for the design elements: 1. Reduce speed of traffic; 2. Encourage uniform traffic speed; 3. Provide safe and comfortable pedestrian route; 4. Provide safe and comfortable bicycle route; 5. Provide safe motorist route; 6. Maintain safe and unimpeded emergency access; 7. Maintain street function as a neighborhood collector; 8. Increase livability ofthe neighborhood (noise, trees, sign, clutter); 9. Balance street function, safety and livability; and 10. Reduce impact of anticipated traffic increase. In June, staff (a team of five personnel including staff from public works, fire, and planning) distilled the seven citizen proposals into three alternatives that meet all of the critical safety concerns. Each of the three options was designed with safety as the primary concern. Each will help to reduce speeds with the addition of curb extension or bumpouts. One plan focused on extending the entire curb out into the street for the addition ofthe sidewalk and narrowed the street entirely. Two of the plans used a combination of curb extensions and crosswalks to provide safety elements. The three alternatives were presented to the entire Nevada Street neighborhood during the June 21 st meeting, where each was discussed and the group consensus narrowed the three options to one preferred alternative. At the July 19th meeting, the preferred alternative was discussed again and the neighborhood group was asked to add elements, but was not allowed to pull elements out as each provided a critical factor in traffic safety and traffic calming. The resulting preferred alternative will be presented to the City Council at the September 7th Public Hearing. The preferred alternative (July 2004) is similar to the concept design originally presented in December 2003. However, there are some significant differences. The July preferred design has 2' x 2' scored concrete crosswalks, bumpouts and curb extensions on one of the comers at the intersections of Helman, Voris, Michelle, and Glendower and curb extensions at both comers on the south intersection of Cambridge. Primarily, the focus of the traffic calming and crosswalks is at the two entry points (Helman and Cambridge) and at the three streets that channel traffic to the rest of the Quiet Village neighborhood to the north (Glendower, Michelle and Voris). All of the traffic to the north of Nevada Street uses Nevada Street as a neighborhood collector transportation route. The bumpouts do not extend to the side streets with the exception of one comer on Cambridge and one comer on Helman. G:lpub-wrksladminIPB Councilll.lDslCC Nevada LID Formation 7Sep04doc Page 4 of 14 lI'.1I ._~ The original December 2003 design (attached) included more dramatic curb extensions. There were curb extensions on all four comers at Cambridge wrapping around from Nevada through the side street curbs, similar wrapped curb extensions on each of the 5 side street intersection with corresponding bumpouts/chokers directly across from each entry point onto Nevada. There were bumpouts on each side of Nevada to choke traffic just west of Helman. There was also one traffic diverter island in the section from Glendower to Cambridge. Again, these are easier seen on the attached drawings and will be discussed by staff at the meeting. There was some discussion about the need for more traffic calming, especially at the west end of the project between Laurel and Cambridge as this is a relatively longer section (1200 feet) with only two traffic calming elements in the preferred design. Staff has reviewed this idea and would support the addition of curb extensions on both sides at Glendower to provide traffic calming, but would have this be a planted curb extension only on the west side, not an ADA ramp as there is no crosswalk or need for that landing. There was also a desire expressed by some to have sidewalks on both sides of the street between Helman and Voris. Staff supports this idea as there is considerable pedestrian (and some bicycle) travels to the Dog Park at that end of the neighborhood, but the existing utilities (power poles, water meters, mailboxes) and landscaping makes this a very difficult addition. TIMING: The public hearing which is scheduled for September 7th will finalize the formation of the LID. Assuming there will be no major design changes upon LID formation, staffwill finalize design and have the project out for bids at the end of October. Construction may begin as early as November and should be completed in AprillMay 2006. Attachments: · Nevada Street LID Map Boundaries (page 6) · Ashland Municipal Code Section 13.20, Local Improvements and Special Assessments (pages 7- 14) · Resolution to form and construct the Nevada Street LID; with Exhibit A to the Resolution showing the effected properties and boundary map · July 2004 design (7 pages) · December 2003 design (2 pages - concept) G:\pub-wrks\adminIPB CouncillLIDs\CC Nevada LID Formation 7Sep04 doc Page 5 of 14 r~' City of Ashland, Oregon - Agendas And Minutes Page 1 of7 EXHIBIT 5 Tuesdav, September 07, 2004 MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL September 7,2004 - 7:00 p.m. Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 E. Main Street CALL TO ORDER Mayor DeBoer called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers. ROLL CALL Councilor Laws, Amarotico, Hartzell, Jackson, Morrison and Hearn were present. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of August 17, 2004 were approved as presented. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS Proclamation of September 2004 as National Alcohol and Drug Addiction Recovery Month was read aloud by Councilor Morrison. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Minutes of Boards, Commissions and Committees. 2. Confirmation of Mayor's appointment of Henry Baker to the Historic Commission for a term to expire April 30, 2005. 3. Confirmation of Mayor's appointment of Vicki Griesinger to the Airport Commission for a term to expire April 30, 2005. 4. Confirmation of Mayor's appointment of Melissa Markell to the Public Arts Commission for a term to expire April 30, 2005. 5. City's Investment Report. Consent Agenda item #5 was pulled for discussion. Councilor Hearn/Jackson m/s to approve Consent Agenda items #1-4. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. City Recorder Barbara Christensen spoke regarding the City's Investment Report. It was explained that a portion of the investment funds has been utilized for the completion of capital improvement projects. It was also noted that the recent financing for AFN is not included in data provided. Mrs. Christensen stated the portfolio has dwindled slightly due to the lower rate of interest on securities. Councilor Hartzell suggested that future reports include the influence of trends on the City's investments. Councilor Hartzell/Morrison m/s to approve Consent Agenda item #5. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Public Hearing on Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program Year Change. Housing Program Specialist Brandon Goldman stated there are three options for the Council to consider. 1) Shift the beginning of the program year from January 1, 2005 to July 1, 2005; 2) Opt to retain the existing program year (January I-December 31), which would require the City to immediately issue an RFP and only $274,000 of the anticipated $474,000 would be available; or 3) Approve the program year shift but immediately issue an RFP for the $274,000 through the existing process. httn://www.ashl:mclor lJ"/ A (J~nci:l" :l"n?Dj"nhv=Minlltp<;Rr A MTT)=l Sn'i~r Print=TnlP 'i rn n nnh City of Ashland, Oregon - Agendas And Minutes Page 2 of7 The Housing Commission recommended Option 3 and Staff recommended Option 1, however they both agreed that a shift from the calendar year to the fiscal year is advantageous. Public Hearing Open: 7:15 p.m. Rad Welles/381 N. Mountain Ave/Stated there is a property located in Ashland that could be used for affordable housing, but the City would have to act on this opportunity before January 2005. He voiced his support for retaining the current schedule so that the proposal for affordable housing could be heard. Rachel Whitley/289 Grant St/Stated the Council should seriously consider acting on RVCDC's proposal for affordable housing this year. Ron Demele/165 Crocker St/Executive Director of RVCDC/ Stated RVCDC has a proposal for affordable housing that they would like to submit to the City. He explained that they currently have an option on the property and the funding is in place. If the Council shifted the program to the fiscal year calendar, they would lose their opportunity to act on this affordable housing project which could create 16 new units in Ashland. Mr. Demele stated the proposed housing would target individuals at 50% of the median income and that the project is fully sponsored by the Federal Government. Mr. Demele voiced his support for Option #3. Teresa McCants/375 Kent St/Voiced support for RVCDC's proposal to provide affordable housing in Ashland. Floyd Pawlowskl/415 Pompadour Dr/RVCDC Board member/Stated the time change for the granting of CDBG funds would put their proposal in jeopardy. He asked that the Council retain the current funding timeline, which would allow RVCDC to present their proposal for affordable housing in Ashland. Public Hearing Closed: 7:23 p.m. Mr. Goldman clarified that, if the Council wanted to act on Option 3 and move forward with RVCDC's proposal, the Housing Commission would need to review the proposal in October. The City Council would then make a review in November, and Staff would complete an environmental review and action plan that would be submitted to HUD. Mr. Goldman stated that having this process completed by January may be too optimistic and that it would likely be late January or early February before funds could be awarded. He further clarified that HUD has a 30-day review period and occasionally a proposal is returned to the City for corrections and the 30-day period starts anew. Mr. Goldman stated that RVCDC had agreed with the program year shift, and that their concern regards the allocation of the 2004 funds. Council discussed the benefits of following through with the already started RFP process. Mr. Goldman clarified that if the property in question could not be purchased by January, the City would not lose anything and tl;le funds would be aggregated with the 2005 award. Councilor Morrison/Hartzell m/s to approve Option #3. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. o 2. Public Hearing and Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing and Ordering the Local Improvements for the Construction of Improvements to Nevada Street Consisting of Sidewalks, Curb Extension Planter Areas, Pedestrian Safety Improvements to Intersections, Drainage and Associated Improvements and Authorizing the City to borrow money and Issue and sell Notes for the Purpose of Providing Interim Financing for the Actual Cost of the Local Improvement. Public Works Director Paula Brown declared a potential conflict of interest, stating that she and her husband own the property located at 800 Cambridge Street and 810 Cambridge Street. Ms. Brown noted she was asked by both a Council member and the City Administrator to assist with this project. Ms. Brown stated the design presented to the Council would improve traffic and pedestrian safety and would slow speeds throughout the neighborhood. She explained that the primary goal of this project is to htto:/ /www.ashland.or.us!A1!endas.aso?Disolav=Minutes&AMID= 1 R2S&Print= True "l?lI?OOA City of Ashland, Oregon - Agendas And Minutes Page 3 of7 improve safety and noted the following objectives that were used for the design elements: · Reduce speed of traffic; · Encourage uniform traffic speed; · Provide safe and comfortable pedestrian route; · Provide safe and comfortable bicycle route; · Provide safe motorist route; · Maintain safe and unimpeded emergency access; · Maintain street function as a neighborhood collector; · Increase livability of the neighborhood (noise, trees, sign, clutter); · Balance street function, safety and livability; and · Reduce impact of anticipated traffic increase. City Engineer Jim Olson explained this process began over 2 years ago when a small group of citizens approached the Engineering Department with a proposal for sidewalks and traffic calming elements on Nevada Street. The proposal came forward at the same time the Billings Ranch subdivision was up for approval by the Planning Commission and concern was raised regarding the increase of traffic generated from the Billings development. Mr. Olson stated the assessment district was identified as those lots fronting Nevada Street and included the Billings Ranch subdivision, which was part of the plan of approval for the Billings development. Mr. Olson displayed the initial plan presented to the neighborhood in December 2003 and pOinted out the various elements of the plan. He explained that the initial plan was not well received at the December neighborhood meeting. A citizen's panel was then formed and met with Staff almost every other week from December 2003 to May 2004 to create a consensus plan that would be acceptable to the majority of the residents and not just the properties in the assessed district. Mr. Olson stated the culmination of the work of the citizen panel resulted in seven different plans which were condensed down to three options through the efforts of the Fire, Public Works, Engineering and Planning staff. All of the elements in the three proposals were taken directly from the seven plans submitted by the citizens. In May, the three proposals were presented to the neighborhood and it was narrowed down to one plan. In June, the neighborhood and Staff met once more and the design before the Council is the result of the June meeti ng. Mr. Olson pointed out the various elements of the current proposed plan. Ms. Brown clarified that sidewalks will only be placed on one side of the street and stated the proposed bump-outs will be large enough to sUPRort trees. Public Hearing Open: 8:01 p.m. Kristie Franks/290 W. Nevada St./Asked the Council to reconsider the inclusion of the bump-out at the corner of Glendower and Nevada, which would save the Cedar tree and hedge that protects her property from noise and light. Ms. Franks expressed concern regarding the lack of traffic calming in the plan. Dian Brandenburg/8S W; Nevada St/Expressed concern with the bump-outs, stating they can cause difficulties for large vehicles when passing oncoming motorists. She stated that embedded crosswalks can be difficult to see and suggested that the City start by installing painted crosswalks. Christina Lindquist/Spoke in favor of the LID due to safety issues and submitted a handout that noted the safety risks to children under the age of 10. John Semple/185 Almeda Dr/Stated he attended most of the meetings and noted the positive changes from the initial plan. He voiced his appreciation that the bump-outs had been toned down, but voiced concern with the "noisy crosswalks" and suggested instead that some sort of warning devise be placed before the vehicle reaches the crosswalk. AI Bodin/119 Cypress Circle/Noted he frequently bicycles on Nevada Street. Mr. Bodin stated he does not live within the LID boundary, but would like to be included in the assessment district so that his voice will be heard. He does not support the proposed bump-outs due to his physical impairments and expressed concern regarding the number of votes allocated to Mike Peru of the Billings Development. Mr. htto://www.ashland.or.us/A~endas.asn?Disn]av=Minlltes& A MTf)= 1 R? ,,& Print=Tnlf' "n~nnnfl City of Ashland, Oregon - Agendas And Minutes Page 40f7 Bodin stated he was berated by Staff during the neighborhood meetings and asked that the LID be postponed so that the problems could be rectified. Anne Bodin/119 Cypress Circle/Stated the conflict of interest issues had not been resolved and have impeded acceptable progress. She stated that all of Quiet Village will be affected by this project, but many have been excluded from the LID and Staff has neglected their opinions and ideas. Ms. Bodin voiced opposition to the proposed bump-outs, stating they fall to reduce traffic speeds. She stated that her comments along with others had been verbally denounced by Staff and requested that the Council postpone the formation of the LID so that a thorough investigation could take place. Nora Knox/276 W. Nevada St/Read aloud a newspaper article about an elderly man who was killed by a motorist on Nevada Street. Ms. Knox voiced support for the current plan as presented by Staff. She explained that this project began as a grass roots effort by residents along Nevada Street to improve their street and it has turned into a bitter process that has pitted neighbor against neighbor. Ms. Knox stated that instead of allowing the traffic engineering experts to plan the street improvements, the neighbors took it upon themselves to draw up the plans and were unwilling to allow outside information from the professionals. She commented on the speeding problem on Nevada and stated the problem will only increase once the subdivision in completed. Ms. Knox stated she supports the sidewalks, stamped concrete crosswalks and small bump-outs. She does not like the lack of traffic calming in the proposal, but is willing to accept the current plan because she would like to see something done. John Whitesitt/15-6 W. Nevada/Commented on his involvement with the citizen's committee and noted that he was their elected spokesperson. Mr. Whitesitt stated the consensus plan adequately reflects the concerns of the neighborhood and stated the committee agreed to the proposed plan. He noted that the seven plans were submitted to Staff because the group was not able to agree on a single plan. Mr. Whitesitt stated he personally supports the consensus plan and asked that the Council move quickly for the safety of the residents. He also asked that the Council not be swayed by those individuals who are unwilling to compromise. Jerry Mulloy/183 W. Nevada/Acknowledged that there are safety issues on Nevada Street. Mr. Mulloy stated the entire Quiet Village neighborhood should be part of the LID and does not agree with excluding the residents of the side streets. He expressed disappointment that the developer was given 69 votes, which is more than the votes given to the people who currently live on Nevada. Gail Patton/822 Michelle Ave/Stated she was involved with the citizen's panel and noted comparisons to the Tolman Creek LID. Ms. Patton stated the side street property owners are willing to shoulder some of the cost burden, but would like for their opinions to be heard as well. She stated that safety is the primary concern for everyone and noted that emergency crews will have a difficult time navigating a narrower street. Lyn Horstemeier/920 Cambridge St/Noted her involvement with the citizen's panel. She suggested that the plan be "road tested" first to determine the actual effects to each property owner. She stated that both the City of Portland and Corvallis perform road tests before beginning any construction and that the Nevada LID would benefit from this sort of action. Renee Swenson/360 W. Nevada St/Stated she is in favor of the LID and is in favor of the consensus plan. Jim Young/240 W. Nevada St/Acknowledged the work of Staff and his approval of the proposed plan, although he wished there was more traffic calming. Mr. Young stated there has always been a speed problem on Nevada and requested that something be done in regards to the safety issues. Tony Kerwin/350 W. Nevada St/Noted his involvement with the citizen panel. Mr. Kerwin stated the current plan addresses the issues raised by the neighborhood and asked the Council to move forward and accept the LID as proposed by Staff. Linda Vanderlip/325 W. Nevada St/Stated she approves of the assessment district and requested that http://www.ashland.or.us/Agendas.aso?Disolav= Minutes&AMID= 1 R25& Print=Tn I~ "I? ~ I? ()Ot. City of Ashland, Oregon - Agendas And Minutes Page 5 of7 the Council approve the proposed plan. Will Schmidt/85 W. Nevada St/Stated that he is an EMS and noted that any type of street narrowing would hinder emergency response times. Mr. Schmidt stated that there are other measure that can be taken to calm traffic and slow speeds other than bump-outs. He noted that motorists often swerve to avoid the bump-outs, which could put pedestrians at further risk. Mr. Schmidt stated that there are many children in the Quiet Village area and supports educational tools for children in regards to traffic safety. Bryan Holley/324 Liberty St/Stated that he had been following this matter closely even though he does not live in the neighborhood. He commented that bump-outs might seem like a good idea for pedestrians, but that they can create issues for emergency vehicles. He also commented on the "Three E's: Education, Enforcement and Engineering". Mr. Holley stated if the City enlarged the LID boundary, they could more effectively educate the neighborhood about the speed issues. He stated that the rumble strips would be noisy and that they don't always work, and that a ladder crosswalk with a white boundary might be more effective. Chris Hald/275 Cambridge St/Stated he participated in the community group and voiced opposition to the LID as presented by Staff. Mr. Hald stated he would like to see painted crosswalks and a sidewalk on the south side. He also commented that many of the homes on Nevada have multiple vehicles and the cars parked along the street create a traffic calming effect. Paige Morse/746 Cambridge St/Stated she lives on~a side street of Nevada and does not understand why side street property owners are not included in the LID. Ms. Morse voiced opposition to the Billings subdivision having the majority of the votes. She commented on the rumbling crosswalks and stated that conscience traffic calming makes more sense. She stated the sidewalks should be more noticeable and if they do insert rumbling, it should be placed before the crosswalk. Ms. Morse also noted the safety issues on Laurel Street and encouraged the Council to look into this street as well. Joaquin Saloma/368 York St/Stated the residents on the side streets should have a vote in regards to the LID as they also have to travel on Nevada to get to and from their homes. Tia Hatch/815 Michelle Ave/Statement was read aloud into the record. Art Bullock/791 Glendower St/Stated that he represented the majority of the Nevada Street property owners. Mr. Bullock explained that of the 53 properties in the assessment district, 30 of the property owners had signed a petition objecting to the plan presented by Staff. He explained that the majority of the residents do not support bump-outs, rumble strips, street narrowing, storm drain relocation and trees in the street. The majority does support a south side sidewalk, painted ladder crosswalks and side street stop signs for pedestrians to cross safely. Kris Daly/335 W. Nevada St/Stated that it is not fair that Mike Peru was given the right to vote for properties that do not sit on Nevada Street. He commented that it could be years before the project is complete and feels that the side streets residents should be allowed to vote on the project. Bob Armen/375 Oxford St/Stated he supports the opponents of the LID and that there are safety issues with the bump-outs. Mr. Armen questioned why Council didn't seek ODOT approval of the plans. He also disagreed with the number of votes given to developer and stated it is an insult to the residents of Quiet Village. Public Hearing Closed: 8:55 p.m. City Engineer Jim Olson clarified that the proposed crosswalks would have parallel lines painted on the outside of the concrete embedment, and that the reflective paint markings would be visible at night. The scored pattern in the crosswalks would be a two-foot square pattern and would serve as a paSSive reminder to motorists. It is not a rumble strip, which has scoring at 2 to 3 inch intervals. Mr. Olson also clarified the Fire Department was involved in the planning process from the very beginning httD:/ /www.ashland.or.us/Allendas.asn?Disolav=Minutes&A Mll)= 1 R? 'i& Print=Tmp. 'i/)~/)OO() City of Ashland, Oregon - Agendas And Minutes Page 6 of7 to eliminate any emergency response time concerns. Public Works Director Paula Brown clarified the plans were not submitted to ODOT because they do not manage city streets, only freeways and highways. However the design was prepared in concert with the ODOT requirements, especially in regards to the bicycle and pedestrian elements of the design. Mr. Olson clarified that ODOT is very supportive of bump-outs, embedded crosswalks and the other traffic calming measures included in the proposed plan. Mr. Olson clarified that adjusting the sidewalk around Ms. Frank's residence to save the hedge was an option and noted that Staff had already planned to save the Cedar tree mentioned. Ms. Brown clarified that in order to install sidewalks on both sides of the street, they would have to eliminate on-street parking. Mr. Olson added that the street is not wide enough to have bike lanes and parking on both sides. City Attorney Mike Franell clarified that the petitions submitted by the property owners, who reside within the LID assessment district, could count as remonstrances. However, with only the votes from the Billings Development, the 2/3 requirement in favor of the LID is fulfilled. Mr. Franell also noted that even with a 100% remonstrance, the City could still move forward with the sidewalk project. Councilor Morrison/Hartzell m/s to approve Resolution #2004-31. DISCUSSION: Councilor Laws stated that traffic would increase significantly once the Billings development is complete aAd stressed the importance of the Three E's: Engineering, Education and Enforcement. He commented that bump-outs provide the best means of giving the appearance of a narrow street and reducing traffic speeds, and that the disadvantages of the bump-outs are outweighed by their advantages. Councilor HartzellfJackson m/s to extend meeting to 10:30 p.m. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. Councilor Laws explained that the developer should be included in the LID assessment because their development would have a strong impact on the area and that they should pay for a substantial part of the improvements. In addition, he explained that Staff had abided by the precedent set by Council, in that those properties directly involved with the improvements are the ones that are charged. Roll Call Vote: Amarotico, Hearn, Hartzell, Morrison, Laws and Jackson, YES. Motion passed. Mr. Olson clarified that it is against the law to place a bike lane on only one side of the street. The only way to install just one lane would be to put a physical barrier between the traffic lanes and the bike lane. Councilor Morrison/Hartzell m/s approve the 90% plan and to allow Staff consideration in the final design of the LID to include the suggestions of sidewalks on both sides of the street between Helman Street and Voris Street, and to extend the bump out on the Frank property. DISCUSSION: Council asked that their suggestions not be given special attention over the concerns raised by the residents. Mr. Franell clarified that passing this motion would allow Staff to assemble the proposed assessment and move forward with the project. The next time this would come to Council would be at the final assessment hearing at the completion of the improvements. Mr. Franell also clarified that once the public hearing concluded there is no more opportunity to file a remonstrance. The only opportunity for an appeal is under the writ of review process, as stated in the Ashland Municipal Code. Roll Call Vote: Laws, Amarotico, Hartzell, Jackson, Morrison and Hearn, YES. Motion passed. PUBLIC FORUM Leslie Ormanian/4093 Tenino Terrace/Stated he was wrongfully terminated from his position with the City of Ashland and spoke regarding what he perceives as rampant abuse of the Ashland Fiber Network. Mr. Ormanian stated computer equipment was given to employees for personal use and noted a lack of proper records within the AFN department. UNFINISHED BUSINESS (None) htto:liwww.ashland.oLus/ A2:endas.asn?Disnlav=Minutes&A MTD= 1 R2S& Print=Tme )/) 1I?O()() City of Ashland, Oregon - Agendas And Minutes Page 7 of7 NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS 1. Ashland Fiber Network Quarterly Report. Electric and Telecommunications Director Dick Wanderscheid and Finance Director Lee Tuneberg presented the AFN Quarterly Report. Mr. Wanderscheid pointed out the comparisons in the report regarding revenue type between the Old Plan, the 2004 Plan and the Actual. He noted the promotion activities and the planned targets for acquired accounts. Mr. Wanderscheid stated that Staff would be revising the format of the Quarterly Report to better reflect the figures that need to be tracked. He also explained that the plan recognizes that accounts would increase with the beginning of the Southern Oregon University school year. Mr. Wanderscheid stated that they had not noticed any resistance to the price increase and that most of the lost accounts are due to people moving away. 2. Quarterly Financial Report - April - June, 2004. Finance Director Lee Tuneberg presented the Quarterly Financial Report. He pointed out items of interest in his report and commented that the auditors will be arriving soon. ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS 1. Reading by title only of "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Ashland Reiterating its Policy of Relating the Expenditure of Monies for Economic and Cultural Development to the Hotel/Motel (Transient Occupancy) Tax and Repealing Resolution 2004-11." Delayed due to time constraints. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS Councilor Jackson noted a Living with Wildfire in Ashland Forum on September 9, 2004 at the Community Center from 7 p.m. - 9 p.m. The Forest Lands Commission and Ashland Fire and Rescue will be present to speak about the Community Wildfire Protection Plan that is currently being developed. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 10:30 p.m. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder Alan DeBoer, Mayor End of Document - Back to Top http://www.ashland.or.us/A~endas.asD?DisDlav=Minutes&A MTD= 1 R2S& Print=Tme S/?i/?OOfl EXHIBIT 6 ~c.(-.$J RESOLUTION NO. iii. A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND ORDERING THE LOCAL IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF IMPROVEMENTS TO NEVADA STREET CONSISTING OF SIDEWALKS, CURB EXTENSION PLANTER AREAS, PEDESTRIAN SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS TO INTERSECTIONS, DRAINAGE AND ASSOCIATED IMPROVEMENTS AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY TO BORROW Mo"NEY AND ISSUE AND SELL NOTES FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING INTERIM FINANCING FOR THE ACTUAL COST OF THE LOCAL IMPROVEMENT RECITALS: _ A. The Council has declared by resolution its iJltention to develop the improvements described in the above title and in the improvement resolution previously adopted and to assess upon each lot or part of lot benefited by the improvement its proportional share of the cost of the improvement; and B. Notice of such intention was duly given, a public hearing was held and it appears to the Council that such improvements are of benefit to the city and all property to be assessed will be benefited to the extent of the probable amount of the respective assessments to be levied for the costs. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES: SECTION 1. A local improvement district is created and shall consist of all the tax lots described in the attached Exhibit A. The district shall be called the Nevada Street Local Improvement District, No. 85. SECTION 2. The council intends to make local improvements to provide the improvements described in the above title. Such improvements will be in accordance with costs estimated to be $173,500.00 of which $71.900.00 will be paid by special assessments on benefited properties. Costs will be allocated based on $575.20 per equivalent dwelling unit or potential equivalent dwelling unit within the assessment area. Lots will be assessed as specified on the attached Exhibit A. PAGE 1-FORMATION RESOLUTION IC IDOCUME-1\BERTEAUFILOCALS-1\TEMP\L1D NEVADA RESO DOC) SECTION 3. The City of Ashland is authorized to borrow money and issue and sell notes for the purpose of providing interim financing for the actual cost of the local improvement. The notes may be payable from the proceeds of any bonds, issuance of additional notes or from any other sources from which the bonds are payable. This borrowing shall be issued according to the terms of ORS 223.235(7}. SECTION 4. The City of Ashland expects to make expenditures from its available funds to pay for the costs of the improvement project. The City reasonably expects to issue bonds or other obligations (the "Reimbursement Bonds") and to use the proceeds of the Reimbursement Bonds to reimburse the City for the expenditures it makes from its available funds for the improvement project. To permit interest on the Reimbursement Bonds to be excludable from gross income, the Internal Revenue Code of the United States requires that the City declare its intent to reimburse itself from Reimbursement Bond proceeds within 60 days after the expenditures are made. The City expects that the principal amount of the Reimbursement Bonds will not exceed $90,850.00. SECTION 5. The assessment imposed upon benefitted properties is characterized as an assessment for local improvement pursuant to ORS 305.583(4}. SECTION 6. The city recorder is directed to prepare the estimated assessment of the respective lots within the local improvement district and file it in the lien records of the city. SECTION 7. This resolution takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. This resolution was read by title only in accordance with Ashland ~ ~2.04.090 and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this 7 day of . 2004. . / ~~ Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this 7 day of s.~r+ ,2004. ------ ~~ Alan W. DeBoer, Mayor "- ) / PAGE 2-FORMA TION RESOLUTION IC IDOCUME-lIBERTEAUFILOCALS-l\TEMPILlD NE'/ADA RESODOC) r~ ,,..~--or t-= TO ao I()~ lUFf I 1Ob4't.n~(;] CI 0 ~ '" "" 0/0 V~ (- ~ ~~~;n t:\J~: c ~;;g~ Ef tsl tj- rr, " . ~CJ I 'E=U '0.= '--- It ' ~-.o.-r' iii lqu ~ ~ :.0 ~ ~ v cJ 11ro ~ .~ 1.-.; IJ ,_ D M.t1~ a c '~~~ - ... ~ ~"' ~\ .~., .~~<:) 1-.. a ~ ji1, Ln' V\ ~~. . R."< '. \)P~$ . - .. ~ml' ~~. . .~~.'. 1;1 O.~ . ,;;lB 0 ~H ~~ II, CJ ~ . ~ ; .. ~ L/ \~~~R'" ~W . ~~ . ~ .~ en.. <:>~C!J == [J 11 . .~ [10 . .~. · g 0 .... .f} b ., ., ,... ~~' o _I- ,. a; .......... ,-- li1 U.J ~. I- H .~- ",;r T1!t ~ TT IT..J.R:' I L ':'0 0 ~I'.C- _ I~ .. r IU .1J.'11 ------- ~. ~~~r~T. fa qo~~rq 1 Exhibit A CITY OF ASHLAND NEVADA STREET L.LD. ,Miles o Q05 Q1 ~ ~ ~ ~ a !( > w Z Q~ .PT T 1 IJ-"W , ,. PJII .. .. ~O' IrJ :s rf1 ....I---r II 1 . ~ ~ ~~~ J ~ "z ,0 ) M..' [1- . ~f o ~, ..I )C ..1. ~ ~ I .TIIt1 U ss. ~.' i:!l ~"I -r 11-'1 . . .u:;,] 1:1'7'lJ~ '. .... 0 11: ~ I 'If i!!J ( 1Q ~q 'c,l:' cO 0 [] [\ qgo, . ~ Dc::J ~UlIlIIn ~ f~ /I 7 71 I, IClI . . L JEffS G:\pub-wrks\admin\PB Council\LIDs\CC Nevada set PH LID Formation 3Aug04.doc ~~, t.. c: Cl I9 E ~i ~ C1l ~ << (/) (/) (/):t:::: C1l c: ~:) o ~ 10 ,... 10 69 .-- o N Iri ,... 10 69 .-- o -t: o 10 .-- 69 N o N Iri ,... 10 69 .-- o N Iri ,... 10 69 o N Iri ,... 10 69 .-- o N Iri ,... 10 69 o ~ 10 ,... 10 69 o N Iri ,... 10 III !! to E ~ III W ~ to c: :~ e! 0.. o ::i o N Iri ,... 10 69 69 j en to '"0 ~ CD ~ o ::i C oe '"0 cp C. CD 3;! 01 ~ -t: ~ .0 :> 0.. c:; - o (/) lU 1;) (/) (/) oc (/) Q) .c:. ~ ~ U ~ ~ ... I!? .... ~ ~ 0 C1l C1l ~ C1l -~ - J::. ~ -.c:. - (/)- - ::J~ ~O~C1l ~ c: C1l m ~ ~m Oc:~ MC:~ C:OQ)~ ~~OlU N ~....~ .... ~ .... ~C1l~ lUM~~~ ~J::.lUN~ ~ ~~~C1l~ _OJ::. o2~~~>~ C1l~~ 10 IOU~~~ ~ IO~~IO ~~~~~m IO~Co> E ~lU""~i~_C1l'-~_O> ~""~~""C1l~""~~~QC1l~~~~C lU .... 16 0) ~ ~ VI ~ I/) 0> Q) C lU lU 0> 0 Q) 0> lU 0> lU w, lU"" M ~ z ~~~i~o~""~~~~u~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.... e lUZo~_ ~~O~~lU~ZO~~O~ZO~ZOSZo~W~ C1l ~>-gen~-g~~-g~~SC o"OE "OlU o"O~ o"O~ ."gj;Z::J ~ >>lUC1l~lU~lOlU~,...~~~j~~j~~jc:~j~~jc~8 6 ~N~E~~~N~ffiooS=~J::.=o)J::.~~J::.J::.~J::.C:oJ::.=.--c: m~~~~~z~~~~~&~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ It') i ... (J ii: ... U) 5 ... z w ::& w > o Q: a.. :1 ~ (J o ..J /jj w Q: ... U) < ~ w z ..- - Oc :J c: c: 0 o Oiij a os: Oc :;:; (,) .0 I/) ::J C1l (f) Q <II iii E ~~ ~~ - o N X co :i o ...J ~(5..- _...J 0 .-- o () z ~ Q.LU co .-- ~ ~ o Z .... - Oc :J c: o Oiij 0> :;:; .0 ::J ~ en E ~ ~ - o N ~ CO N (5 ...J N o .-- () CO ~ LU ..- 0) M N .... :t:::: c: :) c: o Oiij 0> :;:; .0 ::J ~ I/) E ~ ~ - o N ~ CD 0) 06 ~ (5 ...J M o .-- () CO o;t LU .-- 0) C'? C'? .-- - Oc :) c: o Ow 0> :;:; .0 ::J ~ en E ~ ~ ... o ~ CO .-- 15 ...J o;t o .-- () CO ~ LU .-- 0) C'? ~ .... - c: :) c: o Oiij 0> :;:; .0 ::J ~ I/) E ~ ~ - o - .... ~ CO N (5 ~ 10 o ..... () CO o;t LU ..- 0) C'? 10 .... - Oc :) c: o Ow oS; :;:; .0 ::J ~ I/) E ~ ~ .... o ~ CO <"'i (5 ...J ~ o .-- () CO o;t LU ..... 0) C'? ~ .... - Oc :) c: o Ow oS; :;:; .0 ::J ~ en E ~ ~ '0 N ~ CO 15 ...J ,.... o ..- () CO o;t LU ..... 0) C'? ,.... ..- - Oc :) c: o Oiij oS; :;:; .0 ::J ~ en E ~ ~ - o N ~ CO M (5 ...J co o ..... () CO ~ W .-- 0) C'? co .... - Oc :) c: o Ow oS; :;:; .0 ::J ~ en E ~ ~ ..- - .c :J c: o Oiij oS; :;:; .0 ::J ~ en E ~ ~ .... o N ~ CO 10 (5 ...J - o N ~ CD to 15 ...J 0) o .-- o .-- .-- () CO ~ LU ..... 0) C'? () CO o;t W ..- 0) C'? 0) o ..... ~ o N ~ II :..11 c Q) - E S I/) ~~ ~ It) i ~ o 0: ~ o Q ~ z w :IE w ~ D. ~ <l o o ..J Iu w a: .- o < ~ W Z CD g << 1IlJ!l III ,- CD C ~::> .... o III III III III ~ "'0 "'0 <'Ot "'OQ C:o roC") CD- E"" III Z III -... CD ~ o N Lri ,... 10 ~ .... o N Lri ,... 10 ~ .... o C'! It) ,... It) ~ .... o C'! It) ,... It) ~ .... o N Lri ,... It) ~ o N Lri ,... It) ~ o N Lri ,... It) ~ o C'! 10 ,... 10 ~ .... o N Lri ,... 10 ~ o N Lri ,... 10 ~ .... .... (I) E E III CI) ~ a; ~ ~- _ o~.... E~ ~ ~ lll~ OCD CDN CD ~ ~CD ~ OCD CD CD..JCD U~O lijNC)~O ~OCD~Oc: C")<..>~O ~o ~o.J.J=o ~O _N~..J""..._N _N~~Nlll Nlll~N ~~ ~N~~Nc:~~ C:~It)~ ~~~It)c:~It)CDlllIt)W OC:llllO III llllt)~rolOlllwU' 1ll1ll""~~mDlll""1ll1ll""D"'O"" It)ro"'O""~"'O"" "'O""~"'O""C:>"" CI)"'Om~lll-C"'Om~"'OmOlllm~~m-lllm~lllm lllm~lllmCD<m ~lll~~roI~ro~~lll~~>~~<"><O>~E>~C:>~CD>~~_~ ~~OC)E~C:~Oe~O~~03~~~~O&~O~~O~~O~~O E z "'0 ... 3 'S; ~ Z "'0 I- Z "'0 (I) ."0 ~ Ul CD.n ""'0 " "'O,n ,"'0 " "'0 ... III "'0 . c: 0 ~ CD CD . c: "C: "t: :> c: ~ 0:: _ w:> c: CI) :> c: ..., :> c: ~ :> c: III :> c: ~~~D~oC:~~~~~P:>~~<~~:>~CD:>~lll:>~CD:>~C)>~ ~~i~~~~lt)ia;lt)ii~i~~~$~i~~i~~i~~i~~i :>m<C:'Ot~O~~Im~~""~>""I~....~~....<~....~~....~~'Ot< .... - '2 ::> c: c: 0 '0_ 'in 'S; 0.'0 't: D o :J ~ ~ o Ul ~~ 5 ~ ..... o N ~ as ,... o ..J ~ 0 .... I-..J .... ...... c:i () z ~ ~w ro ...... ~ ~ c:i z ...... .... m m ~ m .... I It) i c CD E ~ o o o "'0 CD CD o o o (") .... u co 'Ot LU ..- (j) (") N ..- o ~ o .... I ~ ~ c CD E ~ o o o "'0 CD CD o o o 'Ot .... u co 'Ot W .... (j) C") ('I') .... ('I') .... C") o C") I It) ~ c CD E ~ o o o "'0 CD CD o o o It) .... u CD 'Ot LU .... (j) ('I') 'Ot .... en en 'Ot ,... N I ~ ,... =It: C CD E ~ o o o "'0 CD CD o o o ~ ..... u co 'Ot LU ..... (j) ("t) 10 .... to It) It) 'Ot .... I N i c CD E ~ o o o "'0 CD CD o o o ,... ..... u co 'Ot W ..- (j) ("t) to ..- 'Ot N to o ..... I ~ ,... =It: C CD E ~ o o o "'0 CD CD o o o ~ .... u co 'Ot W ..... (j) ("t) ,... .... c o 'in 'S; :a D ~ ~ CI) CD 1ti - CI) w c: ~ ..J M ~ iii o ..J o o Q) ..- u co 'Ot UJ ..... Q) ("t) ~ .... c: o 'in 'S; :a D :J ~ Ul $ 19 Ul w c: ~ ..J N ~ iii 10 o ..J o o o N U co 'Ot W .... Q) ("t) Q) ..... c: o 'in 'S; :a D ~ ~ Ul CD 1ti Ui w ~ ..J N ~ as 'Ot o ..J c: o 'in 'S; :a D ~ ~ Ul CD 1ti - Ul W c: ~ ..J N .:.: iii ("t) o ..J :5 o o N N U co 'Ot W .... Q) ("t) ..... N U CD 'Ot UJ ..... Q) ("t) o N .... N o N Lri ,... 10 I/) ~ E :::> I/) W ~ III C :~ 1! a. o ::J i en lQ '0 ~ Q) z o ;;:! c 'E '0 III a Gl :e Q c Gl J .Q ::> a. t; ~ N ~ o ~ N m It) I I- o 0: l- t/) C I- Z W == W > o ~ D.. ~ ;i o o .J t; W ~ l- t/) ~ c ~ w z . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C N N N C"'! N N C"'! C"'! C"'! CO N Gl Lri Lri Lri Lri Lri ,....: Lri S E ll) Il') ll) ll) ,... ,... ,... ,... ,... ,... ,... ,... ,... eX) ,... ~1Il ll) ll) Il') ll) ll) Il') Il') Il') Il') N Il') ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q) ~. v "'.!!! '" ,- Q) c:: Il') ",:J ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ :2 .... iij 0 ::l '" .... tU ~ I- '" Q) .... '" c:: Q) ~ U c:: ~ '0 oS tU 0 u: '0 '0 l3 eX) '" '" c:: <(~ - ~- ~o Eli E- li Q) ..ll: Q)- :e f:; Q) o ~ tU Q) 0 - Q) '0_ Q) 5~0 '" Q) :e 0 C>Q) C::o Q) N ~o 1::"'0 tU"'o 0 ~o .- .... 0 ~J:;O tUM C. ,... (J)N OOON oo~ CCOON ~(J)~ Q)N c::(J)~ 200N tU N m(J)~ Q)- e 0:: tUll') ~tUll') 8tU~ >Il') WtU~ a. Il') E"" '0"" C::'O"" "'...,... >.tU,... .- ,... tUtU,... ol:l ,... ,.......,... a. <( ~Q)m 'c '00) Q)'Om ....m ....'Om 1ll~0> Q)~O) III tUO> Q)1ll0) ..ll:~o:: 00:: 8~0:: 0)0> Z =eX)Q) ",>0:: "'>0:: ::l~o:: :E~o:: ,!!! > 0:: c::,...o:: =00:: eO)::: ::lQ)O tUQ)o goo UJQ)o ~~o 'Eo OQ)O ....IQ)O ~oo 'O-go '" I-Il')> ~z m-g .... c.Z. oOZ'O -E'O U~'O oO~'O ...~ Q) c:: >< c:: III .'0 ol:l . '0 1llQ)'O 00 ,'0 CC><'O Q)Q)'O 000 ~~ffi Q)~C: :!;?(3 ffi '" . -~ffi a.offi i~ffi ~ ~ ffi tU 0 ffi Q) - c:: ~ ClCC~ o .!l1 'c ~ ffi _cc_ -C>1ll '" - ~N1: C::0)1: Q) - ....1,...1: J:)1l')1: >1l')1: ::lo.c '" - 0 ~ 0 0 '0 ~ ~ 2~.c c::,....c 2~.c III 0) '" Q)co~ tUll')~ U.co", OM~ jgN'" Oo.~ ....I~<( CCN~ 0.,...<( ON -'N C>M<( O::N (J)N<( ~a.~ I-~~ c:: c:: c:: c:: c:: c: c: c:: c:: c:: c:: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 'in 'in 'in 'in 'in 'in 'in 'in c: 'in 'in 'in '> '> '> '> '> '> '> '> ,Q '> '> '> '5 '5 '5 '5 '5 '5 '5 '5 a. '5 '5 '5 J:) J:) J:) .0 J:) J:) .0 J:) '-= J:) J:) J:) ::l ::l ::l ::l ::l ::l ::l ::l 0 ::l ::l ::l (J) (J) en en (J) (J) en (J) l3 en (J) (J) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) 0 '" '" '" Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Q) ~ Q) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1'5 ro III ro :> ::> ::> :> ::> ::> ::> :> Cl in in en Q) w w w Q) Q) Q) Q) Q) :i Q) Q) ....I c:: S. S. '5 '5 '5 '5 5 ::l '5 '5 >. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ....I ....I ....I C\i - - - - - - - N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ M N ..ll: ..ll: ..ll: ..ll: ..ll: ..ll: ..ll: ..ll: ..ll: ..ll: ..ll: iii in in CD in in in in CO in in C\i - - - - - ~ ~ CO Il') "f' M N T- ...... ~ (; (; (; (; (; (; (; (; (; (; (; ....I ....I ....I ....I ....I ....I ....I ....I ....I ....I ....I 0 ~(; 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N -....I ('t) '<t Il') N ('t) "f' ll) CO ,... CO ..... N N N co co co co CO co eX) ~ 0 u u u ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ z CD CD CD 't '<t '<t ll) ll) ll) ll) ll) ll) ll) LO a. L1J w UJ UJ UJ UJ UJ UJ UJ UJ UJ co ..- ~ ~ ~ ...... ~ ~ ~ ...... ~ ..... ~ '0> en en en en en Q) en Q) en en .:") ('t) ('t) ('t) ('t) ('t) ('t) ('t) ('t) ('t) ('t) 0 Z N ('t) '<t ll) co ,... co Q) 0 ..... N N N N N N N N N ('t) ('t) ('t) '" s ~ "" III W ~ II C :~ e! Q. o :J Qi l!! Cii II '0 ~ Q) z 25 :J c 'E '0 cp i5. Q) ~ c: Q) iii .:.!. ~ lJ If (; ('f) ..,. o o ~ ~ 0> ep ~. UI.!!l UI ,- ep c: ~::) It) I I- o i: l- V) C t- Z w ::IE w ~ It: Q. ~ ~ o o -I tu w It: l- V) or( ~ W Z :.. c: t) - E ~ l/J ..... WI ~ .'2 - o UI llJ UI ~ ~ "0 "0 <V "OQ C:O llJ(t) ep- EI"- llJ Z II) .... Q) c: ~ o N Iri I"- 10 EI9 ..... o C"! 10 I"- 10 EI9 o C"! 10 I'- 10 EI9 ..... o N Iri I'- 10 EI9 ..... o N Iri I"- 10 EI9 o N Iri I'- 10 EI9 o N Iri I'- 10 EI9 o N Iri I'- 10 EI9 o N Iri I'- 10 EI9 o C"! 10 I'- 10 EI9 () () () () ..J ..J ..J ..J -I -I -I -I 0. 0. a. a. ::J ::J ::J ::J -- - ~"O~ - - e e e e II)m m ep C:ep Q) m m G G G G 2~o ~o ~ollJ~oepu~ ~o ~O~~V~Q)IO~Q)~~epl'- I-mN WN WNO::wNSllJ8c:mN WNO-OO~OO~OO~O ~llJ~o.llJ~ llJ~llJllJlOII)~NepllJlO llJlOGOIOGOIOGOIOGCIO ~"O~~"O~ "Om'..J~"O~1-2epm~"O~ "O~~ep~~ep~~Q)~~Q)~ llJ Q)llJ llJ llJ "O~O::llJ II)llJ u_ u_ u~ u_ > 0:: > 0:: > 0:: > 0:: ~ 'iij..... - > 0:: '0 > 0:: c: -0' 0:: c: -0' 0:: c: -0' 0:: c: -0' 0:: c:epO~epO epO~Q)Oep~()~Q)omQ)OllJ~OllJ~OlU~OlU~O Oz lUZ ~Z"OC:Z"Ocm"O..JZ"O::JZ O::~"OO::~"OO::~"OO::~"O ~ '~> '~lU 'c:~ 'c:::Ja.lU~ 'c:O .-gll)llJ~lI)lU~lI)lU"'lI)lU~ C:~~lU~~O~~~~~~.....ic:~~c:~~~WS~WS~WS~WS ~""'~"OIO~II)IO~c:(t)~"o(t)~~m~o""'~=""'al=""'~=""'~=""'al ~""'~~N~~(t)~OVII)Q).....llJO~~Cl~II)=~~=~~=~~=~~ ~(t)~..J(t)~~(t)~~(t)or(I-V()~(t)~w(t)<ml'-~ml'-~ml'-~ml'-~ c: o iii '> :.0 .0 ::J (f) Q) Cl ~ :> Q) 'S o N ~ iD N '0 ..J o ~ '0 0 _..J ~ ,.... c: ,2 0.. ';: u II) Q) o iii Cl ~ o ~ Z It) a.w lU ..... ~ ~ o z C") C") c: o 'in '> 'i5 .0 ::J W Q) Cl ~ :> Q) 'S o N ~ CO (t) '0 ..J o o v ..... ..... ~ 10 W ..... m (t) v C") c: o 'iij '> :0 .a ::J W Q) Cl Jg :> Q) 'S o N ~ as -.i '0 ..J o o 10 ..... ..... ~ 10 W ..... O'l C") 10 Ct') c: ,2 II) '> 'i5 .a ::J en Q) Cl Jg :> Q) 'S o N ~ CO Lri' '0 ..J o o co ..... ..... ~ 10 W ..... OJ Ct') co Ct') c: o 'iij '> 'i5 .a ::J en Q) Cl Jl1 :> Q) 'S o N ~ as cO '0 ..J o o I'- ..... ..... ~ 10 W ..... OJ Ct') I"- Ct') c: o 'iij :~ '0 .a ::J en Q) Cl Jg :> ,1! ::J o N ~ as r-: '0 ..J o o ~ ..... ..... ~ 10 W ..... O'l Ct') co C") c: o 'iij '> :0 .a ::J en Q) Cl Jl1 :> ~ '5 o N ~ ai co '0 ..J o o OJ ..... ..... ~ 10 W ..... O'l C") O'l Ct') c: o 'iij '> :0 .a ::J en ~ u c: llJ 0:: II) Cl ,g iii o ..... - o ..J o o O'l v (). or( 10 W ..... O'l C") o v c: o 'in '> 'i5 .0 ::J en ~ u c: llJ 0:: II) Cl ,g co ..... ..... '0 ..J o o o 10 () or( 10 W ..... OJ Ct') ..... v c: o 'in '> :0 .0 ::J (f) ~ U c: lU 0:: II) Cl ~ co N ..... '0 ..J c: o 'iij '> :0 .a ::J en ~ u c: llJ 0:: II) Cl ~ iii Ct')- ..... (5 ..J o o ..... 10 () or( 10 W ..... O'l Ct') o o N 10 () or( 10 W ..... O'l Ct') N V Ct') "<t' o N Iri I'- 10 S IV E := l/J W ~ IV c: :~ ~ a. c ::J 'i ~ IV 'tl ~ t) ~ ~ c: 'E 'tl IV a t) :!2 2' ~ ! ::J a. (; EI9 ~ '<t o o N N m It) I I- U 0: I- eI) is I- Z W ~ W > o 0: ~ ~ ~ u o ...J I- W w 0: I- eI) <( ~ w Z . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C N N "! "! "! N N N N N N Gl &ri &ri I() I() I() &ri &ri &ri &ri &ri &ri 19 e f'-. f'-. f'-. f'-. f'-. f'-. f'-. f'-. f'-. f'-. f'-. ~:l I() I() I() I() I() I() I() I() I() I() I() 91 .'2 &9 &9 &9 &9 &9 &9 &9 &9 &9 &9 &9 CD g. 0J!l o ,- CD C .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... ..- ..- ..- 0:::> f2 '0 0 IV U U U U U U U U U U 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ...J ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ...J <i: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ...J -0 a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. -0 :J W :J :J :J :J :J :J :J :J :J <(~ 0 e e e e 0 e e e e '- u '- -0_ C) ::l~(J) C) C) C) C) C) C) C) C) C) Co ::~co ::~o ::~.... .....CDN ::~C") ::~-q- :: ~ I() ::~<O ::~f'-. ::~co IVC") 0,- 0 - 'I.: g 0,- .... o 'I: ..- O'~ ..- 0,- ..- 0,- .... 0,- ..- o 'I.: .... 0,- .... 0,- ..- CDj:::: C)'-I() C)'-I() C)O~ C)'-I() C)'-I() C)'-I() C)"'I() C)O~ C)'-I() C)'-I() E Of'-. &iOf'-. Of'-. Of'-. Of'-. Of'-. Of'-. Of'-. Of'-. ~CD(J) ECD(J) ~CD(J) ~CD(J) ~CD(J) ~CD(J) ~CI)(J) 13CD(J) ~CD(J) ~CD(J) ~CD(J) IV o 010::: o 010::: o 010::: o 010::: o 010::: o 010::: o 010::: o 010::: o 010::: Z a. 01 0::: C .g> 0::: C-o .Q:gO C-o C-o C-o C-o C-o C-o C-o c:-o 0 IV 'I.: 0 CtJ 'I.: 0 CtJ 'c 0 ~:.sO CtJ 'c 0 CtJ 'I.: 0 CtJ 'cO CtJ ,- 0 IV 'c 0 CtJ 'I.: 0 "I... O:::(;)"E ~(;)-o 0:::(;)-0 0:::(;)-0 0-0 0:::(;)-0 0:::(;)-0 0:::(;)-0 O::~-o 0:::(;)'C 0::(;)-0 CD CD CtJ ... en CtJ ... en IV '- en CtJ ... o IV '- en IV ... (/) CtJ ... o CtJ '- en IV '- o CtJ ... ~ ~~ ,g OW,g OlW,g OlW,g OlW,g OlW,g OlW 0 OlW,g OlW,g Olw,g OlW,g .s....'i O..-'i .s"-'i .s"-'i .s"-'i .s"-'i ,5 ..- i5 .s"-'i .s"-'i .s....'i ,5.... -0 - CD - CD cn~~ J:~~ cn~~ l:D~~ l:D~~ l:D~~ l:D~~ l:D~~ l:D~~ l:D~~ l:D~~ C c: c: c: c: c: c: c: c: c: c c ,2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 "iij 'iij 'iij 'iij 'iij 'iij 'iij 'iij 'iij '(i; '(i; a. "S; 'S; 'S; 'S; 'S; 'S; 'S; 'S; 'S; 'S; 'S; 'I.: :.0 :.0 :.0 :.0 :.0 :.0 :.0 :0 :0 :0 :0 0 III J:) J:) J:) J:) J:) J:) J:) J:) J:) J:) J:) CD :J :J :J :J :J ::l :J :J :J :J ::l 0 (/) en en en en en en en en en en iii ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ts ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 c: C c: c: c: c: c: c: C C C III CtJ IV IV IV IV IV IV CtJ IV IV IV ~ 0::: 0::: 0::: 0::: 0::: 0::: 0::: 0::: 0::: 0::: 0::: 0 en III 0 0 III III en en 0 en 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,5 ~ ~ ~ ~ in iD iD iD iD in m iD iD in iii ll'i cO r-: oi . N "'" co 0 ..... C") -q- .... .... ..... ..- ..- ..- N N N N N (5 (5 (5 (5 (5 (5 (5 (5 (5 (5 (5 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ...J ~ ~ ~ ~ x- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 IV 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ....~ C") "'" I() <0 f'-. co 0) 0 ..... N C"') LO LO LO I() I() LO I.{) CO co co <0 ci U U U U U U U () () U U Z <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( ~ l() l() l() l() l() l() l() l() LO l() a. W UJ UJ UJ UJ UJ UJ UJ UJ W UJ ell ..... .... .... ..... ..... .... .... ,.... ,.... .... .... ~ en en en en en en en 0> en en en C") C"') C"') C"') C"') C"') C"') C"') C"') C"') C"') 0 Z I; l() co f'-. co en 0 .... N C"') ~ -q- "'" "'" "'" "'" l() to l() l() '" oS ~ E ." '" UJ ~ lQ c: :~ ~ o ~ 1l ~ en ~ ~ ii z a ~ c: 'E "0 lQ i Gl :!? Cl c: -! j ::J D- c::; It) ..,. o o N N 05 ~ c: CII - E $= .. .. <( Q) rg. i~ ~:J In I ti Q2 l- f/) o I- Z w :E ~ o 0::: Q. ~ ~ o ..J Iu w 0::: l- f/) ct ~ w z ..... o II) tV II) II) e "C "C c{~ "CQ 1:0 tV('/') Q);::: E tV Z ~ j o 0 0 0 0 ~ I: ..J ..J ..J ..J ..J U Q) ~ ..J ..J ..J ..J ~ ~ E g. g. g. g. g. "5 g ::J ~ aI e e e e e tV ~~_ ~ Q)_ ~_ _ o 0 GOO ~ ~Q)~ ~ O~ ~~ o~ ~~~~~O~~~~~N~~('/')1- 0~=0Q)-oc=0Q)=05=0 O~~O~NO~NO~NO~Nc"C~f/)f/)Nm~NtVf/)NI-f/)NOf/)N OO~OO~OO~GO~OO~tVtVC{~tV~~=~~tV~~tV~>tV~ ~Q)~~Q)~fiQ)m~Q)mfiQ)~~~UI:~mtVf/)m~~mi~~~~~ g~~~~OCc~OCg~OCc~OCO_~Q)>OC..JtVOC~>OC~>OC3>OC tVEOtVEOtV~OtV~OtV~OZ=_OCQ)O~"CO Q)omQ)5'Q)O OCII)"c~II)"Coc~"Coc~"Coc~u~~~~~"cII)~uJ~u~~u~~u II)tV~lI)tV~lI)tV~lI)tV~lI)tV~co~Q)~cQ)Q)I:C~C ~CII)~I: owS owS owS ~ws ~ws ~a.:lct c~ tV gz tV ~> tVi~ tV Q)> tV ~~i~~i~~i=~i=~i~~lI)tVo~tV~~I~~nN~Eo~ =~~=~~=~~=~~=~~ >0 O~CO IIl....N III .~ 111-:;00 III tV~ III a.:l~~m~~m~~m~~m~~w~..Jf/)('/')ct~('I')ct'('I')ct~('I')ct'Nct c: l5 oQ Ou; a. 0> .5 i5 II) n II) ::J o (J) ~"5 Q) C ..J {}. II) o ~ iii Ll) C'\l (5 ..J ~ (5 0 ~ -J 0 ~ o () z ~ a.1.U ro .,..... ~ ,:)) ('f) o Z l() ~ o N to "- ~ ~ o C"! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I: o .(ij 0> i5 .0 ::J f/) ~ U I: tV OC II) 01 ~ ai cJ:i N (5 -J o o ~ co () c{ ~ UI ~ O'l M co ~ o N to ~ ~ ~ ~ C o O(ij 0> i5 n ::J f/) ~ U I: tV OC II) 01 ~ ai ,..: N (5 -J o o co co () c{ 1.0 UI ,..... O'l M ~ 1.0 o N to ~ 1.0 ~ ~ c: o .Cij 0> i5 .0 ::J f/) ~ U C ~ II) 01 ~ ai ~ N (5 -J o o ~ co () <( 1.0 UI ,..... O'l M ~ 1.0 o C"! 1.0 ~ 1.0 ~ ,..... C o OCij 0:;; i5 .0 ::J f/) ..c: U C tV OC II) 01 ~ a.:l ai N (5 ..J o o o ~ o <( l() UI ~ O'l M ~ ~ ~ ~ C o O(ij 0:;; i5 n ::J U) II) II) E o ::c ~ tV U II) o N ~ CD (5 -J ~ o ...... o c{ 1.0 UI ...... O'l M o co o N to ~ 1.0 00 C"! lO ~ lO ~ .,..... C "Q II) 0:;; i5 .0 ::J (f) II) Q) E o ::c ~ tV "C Q) o N ~ CD N (5 ..J N o .,..... o <( 1.0 UI ~ O'l M ~ co o N to ~ lO ~ .,..... C o OCij "50 i5 n ::J U) l3 E o ::c ~ tV i o N ~ CD to (5 ..J ('t) o ,..... o <( l() UI ,..... ~ ('t) N co o C"! 1.0 ~ ~ ~ ~ I: o OCij .5O i5 n ::J U) II) II) E o ::c ~ tV "C II) o N ~ CD co - o ..J ~ o ~ o <( 1.0 UI ,..... ~ ('I') o <( 1.0 UI ~ ~ M ('I') co '<t co o N to ~ lO ~ ... C o "Cij 0:;; i5 n ::J U) II) Q) E o ::c c: o O(ij 0:;; i5 n ::J U) II) Q) E o ::c ~ tV "C II) o N ~ iii ~. (5 ..J ~ tV "C Q) o N ~ CD N ~ (5 -J 1.0 o ,..... co o ,..... o <( ~ UI ,..... O'l ('I') l() co o N to ~ ~ 1i tU E :D II W ~ tU c: .e ~ a.. o :::::i ) en tU "C ~ Gl ~ o ~ Oe ~ a. CII :!;! 01 c: ~ t 1. ~ a.. ci ~ ,..... <0 v o o N N m t.. c Gl - E .l! III ~:l III III ct Q) ~. 1Il.!1 III ,- Q) C ~::> It) i ... (J Q! ... U) 0- ... z w :E w > o 0:: D. ::!! ~ (J o ~ ... w w 0:: t; < ~ w z ..... o III ltl III III ~ "lJ "lJ <~ "lJ~ Co ltlM Q)t::: E ltl Z III -.... Q) c: ~ o N uj ,... I() ~ .... o ~ I() ,... I() ~ o N uj ,... I() ~ o N uj ,... I() ~ o N uj ,... I() ~ o N uj ,... I() ~ o N uj ,... I() ~ o CO "..: ex) N ~ v I() o o N uj ,... I() ~ o ~ .... o ~ I() ,... I() ~ .... x ~ ~ U U U o C C U ~ ~ ~ C ltl ltl ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Cl cc: 5 a. a. a. ~ a. ltl III - ::::J::::J::::J ffi- E- ltl ~- - Q)- _ B- e e e ~$ ~$ I ~$ $ ~$ $ ~$ ~ ~ ~ ~~O~~Oltl ....~~o ~o'~o ~OO~O~~~~~I()~Q)co ... CI) ~ ::: CI) N"lJ 0 CI) N CI) N ~ CI) N Q) CI) N ~ CI) NO.;: gO.... g 0 'f: g Q)ltl""8ltl~~~~~ltl~ ltl~Cltl~"lJltl~>ltl~~O,...~O,...~O,... t"lJO) "lJo)~~-~"lJo)~"lJo)~"lJO)O"lJo)~"lJO)~Q)O)"5Q)O)~Q)O) E ~ cc: CI) ~ cc: ~ I cc: o~ ~ cc: Q) ~ cc: c ~ cc: E ~ cc: "lJ ~ cc: g Cl n:: C Cl cc: g Cl cc: ~Q)o~Q)O~aOCC:Q)O~Q)O~Q)OQ)Q)OffiQ)Oltl~Oltl~Oltl~O Q)Z"lJQ)Z"lJ ~"lJ~Z"lJOZ"lJ~Z"lJ~Z~~Z~n::~~CC:~~~'"lJ :s: 'cc 'cQ)~... 'c occ oc'" 'c 'CII)ltl"'lIlltl"'lIlltl... 1ll:S:~~:S:~~I()~~:S:~~~~~~~~:S:~E:S:~~W~~W~~W~ "'co~"'co~Clex)~~O~Cco~_O~~~~Illa)~=""~=",,~=,,,,~ O""~~co~::::JO)~"'O)~ltl""~~I()~>I()~"lJO)~=a)~=ex)~=a)~ ZN~UN~W""~~N~ON~~M~>N~~M~m,...~m,...~m,...~ C o 'ii) C :~ o ~ =a-g 0;: CI) U II) III Q) ~ E ~ 0 ClI Q) ... ~ ltl ~ U N ..'II:: iD oi (5 ~ ~(5 - ~ 1:; .... o 0 Z ~ a.w ro .... :2 ~ o Z 'D 'D c: o 'ii) oS; '6 .0 ::::J CI) III Q) E o I ... ro "lJ Q) U N ..'II:: iD o .... - o ~ a) o .... o ~ I() W .... Ol M r-.. CO C o 'ii) 'S; '6 .0 ::::J CI) III Q) E o I ... III "lJ Q) U N ..'II:: CD ~ (5 ~ O'l o .... o <{ I() W ..- O'l ("') co CO C o 'ii) oS; '6 .0 ::::J CI) III Q) E o I ... ltl "lJ Q) U N ..x: CD co (5 ~ o .... .... o <{ L() W .... Ol ("') O'l CO c: o 'ii) 'S; :0 .c ::::J CI) III Q) E o I ... ro "lJ Q) U M ..'II:: iD .... (5 ~ .... .... .... o <{ L() W .... O'l ("') o r-.. C o 'ii) 'S; '6 .0 ::::J CI) III Q) E o I L. ltl ~ Q) U N ..'II:: iD M (5 ~ N .... .... o <{ L() W .... Ol C"') .... ,... C o 'ii) 'S; '6 .0 ::::J CI) III Q) E o I ... ro ~ U N ..'II:: iD .... .... (5 ~ L() .... .... o ~ L() W .... O'l C"') N r-.. C o 'ii) 'S; :0 .0 ::::J CI) III Q) E o I L. ro "lJ Q) U ..'II:: iD .... (5 ~ CO N .... o ~ L() W .... O'l M C"') r-.. C o oii) 'S; '6 .0 ::::J CI) ~ U C IV a:: III Cl ~ CD (5 ~ o o M .... o <{ L() l.U .... 0) C"') ~ r-.. C o 'ii) oS; '6 .0 ::::J CI) ~ U C III cc: III Cl ~ OJ N (5 ~ C o oii) 'S; '6 .0 ::::J CI) ~ U C IV cc: III Cl ~ OJ ("') (5 ~ o o ~ .... o o L() .... o ~ L() W .... 0) C"') o <{ L() W .... O'l ("') L() ,... CO ,... o ~ I() ,... L() ~ l'lI E ::= III W ~ l! ~ ~ D- O :::i li ~ CJ) l'lI '0 l'lI > Gl Z o ~ c E '0 l'lI t Q) ~ c ~ i .Q :> D- C; ~ to- ~ o ~ ~ en t.. I: Q) - E .l!I Y./ {!.ij III ~ CD ~. 1IlJ!J III ,- CD c: ~::> o N ll'i ,.... 10 ~ ~ o C'! 10 ,.... 10 ~ .... o N ll'i ,.... 10 ~ ~ o N ll'i ,.... 10 ~ .... o N ll'i ,.... 10 ~ .... o C'! 10 ,.... 10 ~ .... o N ll'i ,.... 10 ~ o N ll'i ,.... 10 ~ .... o C'! 10 ,.... 10 ~ o N ll'i ,.... 10 ~ .... o III ro U U U U U U U U U U III ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ <(- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ W- ~ 0 0 0 0 000 000 <('lift'..... L... '- '- L.. L... '- '- .... .... ~ S2 " " ' C!> " C!> C!> C!> " " C!> U C:O~CD""'~~~~~m~~O~~""~~N~~M~~~~~IO~~~~~m roM0200-00~OO-""O~""O__O_""O_""O__O____O CD~"QIOC!>OIOC!>CIO"OIOC!>OIO"QIOC!>olOC!>olO"olOC!>olOC:olO E ,.... ,.... ,.... ,.... ,.... ,.... ,.... ,.... ,.... ""'CD,.... ~ UCDm~CDm~CDm~CDm~CDm~CDm~CDm~CDm~CDm~CDmECDm Z c:g~g~~g~~g~~g~~g~~gg~g~~g~~g~~~g~ III roEO~EOroEOro~Oro~O~~O~~O~~O~EOro~OREO ~ ~1Il~~IIl~~IIl~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~IIl~~~~CDIIl~ CD III ~ ~ III ~ ~ III ~ ~ III ro ~ III ~ ~ III ~ ~ III ~ ~ III ~ ~ III ~ ~ III ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ c>w.E c>w .E c>w.E c>w .E c>w.E c>w.E c>w .E c>w.E c>W .E c>w.E 0 w.E 6 ~~~~-~~~i~-i~-i~-i~~i~-~~-i~~~o~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I~~ It) I t- o D: t- t/) C t- Z w :E w > o a::: Q. ~ ~ o -I Iii w a::: t- (/) <C C ~ w z ,~ a i5. 'in 'c 'S; lil :0 CD .0 o ~ ro ~ c> (,,) CD c: ~ ~ a:: III c> ~ jjj ~ (5 ~ ~ (5 0 - ~ ~ ...... o Q z ~ ~w co .... ~ ~ o Z r-- r-.. c: o 'in 'S; :0 .0 ~ C/) ~ (,,) c: ~ ~ III c> ,!;; CD Lri' '0 ~ o o ~ .... o <( 10 UJ .... 0> M co ,.... c: o 'in 'S; :0 .0 ~ en ~ (,,) c: ~ ~ III c> ~ CD <0 '0 -I o o m o <( It) w .... 0) M 0> ,.... c: o 'in 'S; :0 .0 ~ en -5 c: ~ a::: III Ol ~ CD r--: (5 ~ o o o N o <( It) UJ .... 0> M o co c o 'iij 'S; :0 .0 :J C/) ~ (,,) c co ~ III Ol ~ as ~ - o ~ o o - N o <( It) UJ .... 0> l"') .... co c o 'iij 'S; :0 .0 :J C/) ~ (,,) c: ~ ~ III Ol ,!;; CD m (5 ~ o o l"') N o <( It) UJ .... 0> l"') N co c: o 'iij 'S; :0 .0 :J en ~ (,,) c ro ~ III Ol ,!;; CD ci l"') '0 ~ o o ~ N o <( It) UJ .... 0> l"') l"') co c o 'iij 'S; :0 .0 ~ en ~ (,,) c ro ~ III Ol ~ as .... l"') (5 ~ o o It) N o <( It) UJ .... 0) l"') ~ co c o 'iij 'S; :0 .0 ~ en ~ (,,) c: co ~ III Ol ~ as N l"') (5 ~ o o <0 N o <( It) UJ .... 0) l"') It) co c: o 'iij 'S; :0 .0 :J C/) ~ t) c: ro ~ III Ol ,!;; in l"') l"') (5 ~ c o 'in 'S; '5 .0 ~ en -5 c: ro ~ III 01 ~ as ~ - o ~ o o ,.... N o <( It) w o o co N o <( It) w ...... 0) l"') .... 0> l"') <0 co ,.... co o N lri ,.... 10 '" s ~ := III W ~ co I: :~ 1! Q. o ::J ~ j (/) co '0 co > CI) z Ci ::J c 'E '0 co '5. CIl ~ CI I: ~ '" ~ ~ D ~ Q. d co '<t a a ~ N 0; It) i I- U ~ I- U) 2i I- Z w ::i w > o 0:: Q. ! ct u o .... t; W 0:: I- U) c( o ~ w z 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N ~ N N ~ N N N ~ C\I C\I GI ari LO Lri Lri It) ari Lri Lri LO Iri ari - E J!I <II I'- I'- I'- I'- I'- I'- ...... I'- I'- ,... ,... ~ ~ It) LO It) It) It) LO LO LO LO LO LO <II ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ..,. ~ ~ (I) ~<< 0J!3 o .- (I) c: ..... ..... ..... ..... ~::> ..... ..... ..... .... .... ..... ..... '0 0 CO () (,) () (,) (,) (,) (,) (,) 0 (,) (,) (,) 0 -' ...J ...J -' ...J ...J -' ...J ...J ...J ...J ~ -' ...J ...J -' -' ...J ...J -' -' ...J ...J -0 a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. a. -0 ::l ::l ::l ::l ::l ::l :J ::l :J :J :J c(~ e e 0 e e 0 0 e 0 e e ... ... '- ... -00 " C) C) " C) C) C) " " " " C:o ~~co ~~O> ~~O ~~.... ~~N ~~C") ~~~ ~~It) ~~<O ~ ~...... -(I)CO COC") 0.- .... 0.- .... 0.- N 0,- N o .- C\I 0,- N 0,- N 0,- N o .- C\I o .- C\I 15 .~N (1)- ,,'-It) ,,'-LO ,,'-It) C)'-It) ,,'-It) ,,'-It) "'-It) ,,'-It) ,,'-It) C)'-I() "'-I() el'- 0...... 01'- 0...... 01'- 01'- 0...... 01'- 0...... 01'- 0,... 0...... .J::(I)O> .J::(I)O> .J::(I)O) .J::(I)O> .J::Q)O> ..c:(I)O) '5Q)0) .J::Q)O) '5(1)0) tiQ)O) .J::Q)O> CO o Ol IX: o Ol IX: o Ol IX: o Ol a:: o Ol IX: o Ol IX: o Ol IX: o Ol 0:: Z C-o c:-o c:-o C-o c:-o c:-o c:~IX: c:-o c: ~ 0:: c: ~ 0:: c:'O 0 COEa CO ,- a CO 'C a ~Ea CO .- a CO ,- a CO 'C a CO ,- a CO 'C a CO 'C 0 CO '- a -'- 0:::0'0 O::~-o IX:7i)'O a::~'O a::~'O a::7i)'O O::~-o a::7i)'O a::7i)'O 0::~'O Q) 0'0 II) CO "- III CO "- III co '- III CO "- III IV ... III CO "- III CO '- III CO "- III CO '- II) CO ... III CO '- ~ OlW.2 OlW.2 OlW.2 OlW.2 OlW.2 OlW.2 OlW.2 OlW.2 OlW.2 OlW.2 OlW.2 ,S .... '0 .S ..... '0 :E....i :E....i :E....i :E....i :E....i .S .... -0 :E....i ,!: .... '0 :E....-g - Q) - Q) - Q) - Q) m~::E ID~::E ID~::E ID~::E 1D~:2 1D~:2 1D~:2 ffi~:2 ffi~:2 m~:2 ffi~::E c: C c: c: c: c: c: c: c: c: c: c: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E. in 'in 'in 'in 'in 'in 'in 'in 'in 'in 'in 'S: 'S: 'S: 'S: 'S: 'S: 'S: 'S: 'S: 'S;: 'S: 'C '6 '6 '6 :8 '6 '6 '6 '6 '6 '6 '6 0 III .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 .0 Q) ::l :J :J :J :J ::l ::J ::J ::J :J :J 0 (/) en en en en (/) (/) (/) (/) en (/) ro ..c: ..c: .J:: .J:: .J:: ..c: ..c: ..c: ..c: ..c: ..c: 0 0 u u u u u u u u u Cl C c: c: c: c: c: c: c: c: c: c: CD CO CO IV CO IV CO CO CO CO CO CO ...J 0:: 0:: a:: 0:: a:: 0:: 0:: 0:: IX: a:: 0:: II) III III II) III II) III II) II) III III Ol Cl Ol Ol Cl Cl Cl Ol Ol Cl Ol @ ,!: ~ ,S ~ @ ~ :E ~ ~ @ CD CD iii iii iii iii iii iii iii iii iii Lri' cD - ~ ...... co 0> 0 .... N C") 1.0 C") C") M M M ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '0 '0 '0 '0 '0 '0 '0 '0 '0 '0 '0 ...J ...J -' -' ...J ...J ...J ...J -J ...J -J x- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 IV 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 _-J 0> 0 .... N M ~ LO <0 ...... co m N M C") M M M C") C") C") C") C") ci 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 z <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( <( 1.0 1.0 1.0 LO LO LO 1.0 LO 1.0 1.0 1.0 a. W W W W W W W W W W W 11l .... .... .... .... .... ..... .... .... ..... ..... ..... :2 m m m m m m m m m m m C") M M M M C") C") C") C") M C") ci z co m 0 .... N C") ~ LO <0 ...... co co co m m m m m m m m m <II !! III E :c <II W ~ III c:: :~ e! Q.. o ::; ! (/) III '0 ~ GI Z Ci ::; c 'E '0 'P a. Q) ~ c:: ~ ... ~ iJ :> Q.. (:; 01 ~ o o N N en . c E ~ ~i ~ C1l ~. I/),S I/) "- C1l c: ~::l o N .0 ,... L/') ~ ..... o N .0 ,... L/') ~ ..... o N .0 ,... L/') ~ o N .0 ,... L/') ~ o N .0 ,... L/') ~ o C'! L/') ,... L/') ~ ..... o C'! L/') ,... L/') ~ o N .0 ,... L/') ~ ..... o C'! L/') ,... L/') ~ ..... o N .0 ,... L/') ~ '0 I/) ro U U 0 0 0 000 000 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ oCt~e e '- '- '- '- '- e '- ... '- ~QC> (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) C:O~C1l~~~O~C1l""'~~N~~M~~~~~L/')~~~~~,...~~~~~~ roMO~NO-MO~MO-MO"c:MO",--MO"c:MO_MO_MO_MO"c:M ~,- '-L/'),n'-L/'),n"'L/')In'-L/'),n L/'),n L/'),n L/'),n'-L/'),n"'L/'),n'-L/')1n L/') E""C>O,...~O,...~O,...~O,...~O,...~O,...~O,...~O,...~O,...~O,...~O,... ro ~C1l~~C1l~~C1l~~C1l~~C1l~~C1l~uC1l~~C1l~nC1l~~C1l~~C1l~ z g Olo:: ggo:: gga:: ggo:: gga:: c:ga:: c:go:: gga:: c:go:: c:go:: gga:: m~oro~oro~om~om~om~om~om~oro~om~Om~o ~ o::~~o::~~a::~~o::~~o::~~o::~~o::~~o::~~a::~~o::~~o::~~ C1l I/) m '- I/) m ~ I/) m ... I/) m '- I/) m '- I/) m ... I/) m ... I/) m '- I/) m '- I/) m ~ I/) m '- i ow.2 OlW.2 OlW.2 OlW.2 OlW.g OlW.g OlW.g OlW.2 OlW.2 OlW.2 OlW.2 O ~-~~""'~~""'~~-~~""'~~""'i~-~~-i~-~~.....~~-~ ~~~ffi~~ffi~~ffi~~ffi~~ffi~~ffi~~ffi~~ffi~~ffi~~ffi~~ It') i I- o it: ?- m 5 - I- Z w :E w > o D:: D.. ~ ;i o o ~ tu w D:: ?- m . o ~ z c: c: o 0 :"'0.- 'iij '> '5 :0 I/) .0 C1l :l o rJ) Iii U Ol c: Q) m ~ 0:: I/) Ol ,g in ~ ~ '0 ~ ~ '0 0 - ~ g ~ o 0 Z ~ a.w m ..... ~ ~ o Z 0> 0> c: o 'iij '> :0 .0 :l rJ) ~ C,,) c: &. I/) Ol ,5 I:D ,... ~ '0 ~ o o ..... "'" o oCt l{') w ..... 0> C") o o ..... c: o 'iij ';> :0 .0 :l rJ) .c C,,) c: ro a:: I/) Ol ~ in co ~ '0 ~ o o N "'" o oCt l{') w ..... 0> C") ..... o ..... c: o 'iij '> :0 .0 :l rJ) .c C,,) c: m 0:: I/) Ol ,g in 0) "'" '0 ~ o o M "'" o oCt l{') w ..... 0> C") N o ..... c: o iij '> :0 .0 :l (J) .c C,,) c: m 0:: I/) Ol ,g in o l{') '0 ~ o o "'" "'" o oCt l{') w ..... 0> C") C") o ..... c: o "iij '> '5 .0 :l rJ) .c C,,) c: ro 0:: I/) Ol ~ co ..... l{') '0 ~ o o L/') "'" o oCt L/') w ..... 0> M ~ o ..... c: o "iij ";> '5 .0 :l rJ) .c C,,) c: m 0:: I/) Ol ~ in N L/') '0 ~ o o ~ ~ o oCt l{') w ..... 0> C") L/') o ..... c: o 'iij '> '5 .0 :l (J) .c C,,) c: m a:: I/) Ol ,g in M L/') '0 ~ o o ,... "'" o oCt L/') UJ ..... 0> C") (0 o ..... c: o 'iij ';> '5 .0 :J (J) .c C,,) c: m 0:: I/) Ol ,g in 'i '0 ~ o o co "'" o oCt L/') w ..... 0> C") ,.... o ..... c: o 'iij ';> :0 .0 :l (J) U c: ro 0:: I/) Ol ,5 in u-i l{') '0 ~ c: o "iij ";> '5 .0 :l (J) ~ C,,) c: ro 0:: I/) Ol ,g m <J5 L/') '0 ~ o o 0> ~ o oCt L/') w o o o l{') o oCt l{') w ..... 0> C") ..... 0> C") co o ..... 0> o ..... o N .0 ,... L/') .. .!! lll, E :Q .. W ~ III c: :~ 1! Cl. o :; ii ~ en III '0 III > Gl ~ ::i c: 'E '0 ! a. Gl ~ c: ~ ~ ~ .h ~ (; ~ o ~ o o N N 0; . C 1Il - E ~ :ll ~ 51 ~ Q) ~. 1/).l!3 I/) ,- Q) c::: ~::J It) I ~ o ii2 ~ U) o ~ z w ~ w > o D: 11. ~ ~ o o ..J ~ W w D: ~ U) <( ~ W Z - o I/) 111 I/) I/) ~ "0 ~~ "OQ C:::O 11lC"') Q)- E"" 111 Z I/) "I.... Q) c::: ~ u u u u u u u u u U ..J ..J ..J ..J ..J ..J ..J..J ..J..J ..J ..J ..J ..J ..J ..J ..J..J ..J..J ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ e e e e e e e e e e ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ <Q) ~ ~ ~~O~~~~~N~~C"')~~~~~~~~~~~""_~o~Q)m~~o O~~O~~O~~O~~O~~O~~O~~O~~W~NO~~O~~ ~O,...~O,...~O,...~O,...~O,...~O,...~O,...~O,...~>~~O,...~O~ ~Q)m~Q)m~Q)m~Q)m~Q)m~Q)m~Q)m~Q)mc:::<(m~Q)m~Q)m g ~a: g ~a: g .g>a: g .g>-a: c::: .g>a: g ~a: g .g>a: g .g>o:: :e E a: c::: 0>0:: g O>a: I1l~OI1lEOI1l~OI1l~OI1l~OI1l~OI1l-011lEOI1l~OI1l~Ol1l~O a:~"Oa:I/)"Oa:0"Oa:0"00::0"Oa:0"t:Ja:~"t:Ja:I/)"t:J~c:::"Oa:0~0::0"O o 111 ~ 0 111 ~ I/) 111 ~ I/) 111 ~ I/) 111 ~ I/) 111 ~ 0 111 ~ I/) 111 ~ N 111 c::: I/) 111 ~ 0 111 ~ o>w.E o>w.E o>w.E o>w.E o>w.E o>w.E o>w.E o>w.E E > 111 o>w.E o>w.E ~~"O~~"t:JQ)~~"t:JQ)~~"t:JQ)~~"t:J~~"t:J~~"t:JQ)~~"t:JQ)I1lN~~......"t:J~......"O - Q)- - - - Q)- Q)- - Q) 1/1- Q)- Q) ~~~ffi~~m~~m~~m~~m~~m~~m~~m~~m~~m~~ c::: :5 ,2 'ijj Q. 'S; '5 '0 I/) .0 Q) ~ o (f) tv .c::: 0> u Q) c::: ..J ~ I/) 0> ~ iD ,...: ~ (5 ..J ~ (5 0 _..J ~ ~ o 0 Z <( ~ ~UJ 111 ~ ~ ~ o 0 z ...... ...... o ~ ~ ,... ~ ~ o N Iri ,... ~ ~ ...... c::: o 'ijj 'S; :0 .0 ~ (f) ~ u c::: 111 0:: I/) 0> ~ iD to ~ (5 ..J o o N ~ o <( ~ UJ ~ Ol C"') ...... ~ ~ o N Iri ,... ~ ~ c::: o 'ijj :~ "0 .0 ~ (J) ~ u c::: 111 0:: I/) 0> ,S iD m ~ (5 ..J o o C"') ~ a <( ~ UJ ...... Ol (") N ~ ...... o N Iri ,... ~ ~ c::: o 'ijj 'S; :0 .0 ~ (J) ~ u c::: 111 a: I/) 0> ~ co o co (5 ..J o o ~ ~ o <( ~ w ...... OJ (Y) (Y) ...... ...... o N Iri ,... LO ~ c::: o 'ijj 'S; :0 .0 ~ (J) .c::: u c::: 111 0:: I/) 0> ~ in . ...... ~ (5 ..J o o <D LO a <( LO UJ ...... OJ (") '<t ...... ...... o N Iri ,... ~ ~ ...... c::: o 'ijj 'S; ii .0 ~ (J) ~ u c::: 111 0:: I/) 0> ~ co N <D (5 ..J o o ,... LO a <( LO UJ ...... Ol (") LO ...... ...... o ~ ~ ,... LO ~ c::: o 'ijj 'S; ii .0 ~ (J) .c::: u c::: ro 0:: I/) 0> ~ co C"') ~ (5 ..J o o to LO a <( ~ w ...... 0) C"') <D ...... ...... o ~ LO ,... LO ~ c::: o 'ijj 'S; ii .0 ~ (J) ~ o c::: 111 0:: o 0> ~ in ~ co (5 ..J o o o <D a <( LO UJ ...... 0) (Y) ,... ...... ~ o N Iri ,... ~ ~ c::: o 'ijj 'S; ii .0 ~ (J) .c::: u c::: 111 0:: I/) 0> ~ III Lri' <D (5 ..J o o N co a <( LO UJ ...... 0) (") to ...... ...... o N Lri ,... LO ~ c::: o 'ijj 'S; ii .0 ::J (J) ~ u c::: 111 0:: I/) 0> ~ in cO <D (5 ..J c::: o 'ijj 'S; ii .0 ~ (J) ~ u c::: 111 0:: I/) 0> ,S co ,... co (5 ..J o o ~ co a <( ~ w ...... 0) C"') o o C"') co a <( LO UJ ...... 0) (") 0) o N ...... ...... ...... o N Iri ,... ~ VI .s lQ E := VI W ~ lQ c: :~ e n. o :J J ii5 lQ '0 lQ ~ Z o ~ c: 'E "0 cp C. CD :!2 tII c: ~ j :3 n. c; ~ ~ o o N N 0; " It) GO - .... o 0: .... (/) 2i .... z W ::IE ~ o a: a. :!l ~ o o ~ /jj W 0:: .... (/) <( ~ W Z . i: - ~ ~ III ..... II ~ CD ~. enJ!J en ,- CD c: en=> ~ '0 en ro en en ~ '0 '0 <(",. '00 C:o roM CD- E"'" ro Z en "\.. CD c: ~ o N &ri ,.... 10 ~ o ~ 10 ,.... 10 ~ ~ o N &ri ,... 10 ~ o ~ 10 ,... 10 ~ u u u u u ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Co Co Co Co Co ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ e e e e e (!) (!) C> C> (!) ~~~~~N~~M~~",.~~IO o .- 10 0 ,r;. 10 0 .- 10 0 '- 10 0 ._ 10 n, ... 10 In ... 10 In ... 10 In ... 10 In ... 10 ""0"",""0""""0",,""0,,,,""0,... 'cCDOl'cCDOl'cCDOl'5CDOl'cCDOl g .g' 0:: g .g' 0:: g .g' 0:: c: .g' 0:: g .g' 0:: ro 'C 0 ro 'C 0 ro 'C 0 ro E 0 ro E 0 O::1ii'OO::1ii'OO::U;'OO::lIJ'OO::lIJ'O lIJ ro ... lIJ ro ... en ro ... en ro ... en (l) ... OW.E ow.E Ow.E ow.E OW .E ,5 ..- '0 .5 ..- '2 .5 ..- '0 .5 ..- '2 .5 ..- '2 - CD- ...- CD- ...- ... 1D~::Eai~::Eai~::Eai~::Eaile::E c: 5 ,Q 'in 0.. 'S; '5 :0 en LJ Q) ~ o U) ,C o c: ~ ro o CD ~ ~ (5 0 - ~ ~ to o 0 2 <( LO CoUJ ro ..... ~ ~ o ..... 2 N ..... lIJ o @ iXi CO to (5 ...J c: o 'in 'S; :0 LJ ~ en ,C u c: ~ lIJ o ,5 in ai CO (5 ...J o o CO CO o <( 10 W ..... en cry N N ...... 5 'in :~ '0 .0 ~ en ,C u c: ~ lIJ o @ in c;j ,.... (5 ...J o o ,.... to o <( LO W ..... en cry cry N ..... c: o 'in 's; :0 LJ ~ en .c u c: (l) 0:: lIJ o @ in c: o 'in 's; :0 .0 ~ en .c u c: (l) 0:: lIJ Cl @ in N ,.... (5 ...J . ..... ,.... o ...J o o CO to o <( LO W ..... en cry o o en CO o <( LO W ...... en C"') ..,. N ..... LO N ...... o N &ri ,... 10 ~ 10 N ..... III .!l nI E .. III W ~ nI c: :~ ~ ll. o :J Qi ~ CiS tV '0 nI > Gl Z o :J c: 'E , a. Gl J2 C>> c: ~ ~ ~ .Q :J ll. o N o N &ri ,.... 10'0 ~CD u..- o u ~S en 1II o 5 uu <(::!!: (l) 2 ~ o CD 0..:2 :::l 1II Og> W:;::: en .!!! <( >< al CD ... ~E 2-0 UJ CD ~ ,~ (/)'0 en ~ UJu (j)- en 0 <(...J V 3 o N N en EXHIBIT 7 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Adoption of a Resolution Setting a Public Hearing for the Final Assessment of the Nevada Street Local Improvement District No. 85 Meeting Date: March 20, 2007 Department: Public Works / Engineering Contributing Departments: Legal, Finance, City Recorder Approval: Martha Bennett Primary Staff Contact: James H. Olson, 552-2412 E-mail: olsonj@ashland.or.us Secondary Staff Contact: Barbara Chistensen, 552-2084 E-mail: chistenb@ashland.oLus Estimated Time: 15 minutes Statement: Resolution No. 2004-31, authorizing and ordering the implementation of the Nevada Street Local Improvement District was approved by Council on September 7,2004. All planned improvements have now been constructed and final costs compiled. In accordance with Ashland Municipal Code (AMC) Chapter 13.20 final assessments shall be levied against the benefiting property owners. A public hearing is required to provide an opportunity for the council to hear and consider written and oral testimony regarding the final assessment. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the attached resolution to set a public hearing to consider written and oral objections to the final assessment for the Nevada Street LID No. 85. Background: The Nevada Street LID was developed in response to citizen requests to provide an opportunity to meet the following specific goals pertaining to Nevada Street: 1. Reduce speed of traffic 2. Encourage uniform traffic speed 3. Provide a safe and comfortable pedestrian route 4. Provide a safe and comfortable bike route 5. Provide a safe motorist route 6. Maintain safe and unimpeded emergency access 7. Maintain the street function as a neighborhood collector 8. Increase livability of the neighborhood (relating to noise, traffic speed, convenience of travel, maintain trees, and reduce clutter) 9. Balance street function, safety and livability, and 10. Reduce the anticipated impact of increased traffic To meet these goals a comprehensive plan was developed with the assistance of a citizens panel comprised of a cross section of owners within the Quiet Village subdivision area, both from within and outside of the assessment district boundary. The design process was a rigorous one lasting nearly six months and culminating in seven different and distinct plans being submitted to the engineering staff. Staff was charged with refining the seven plans into a single acceptable design. This was accomplished by incorporating elements from the seven plans, into one single concept plan. This plan was reviewed and approved by the Council on August 3, 2004. The final project plans were completed by Thornton Engineering of Medford and the project was advertised for construction in April 2005. To provide economies of scale and to reduce bidding and administration costs, the Nevada Street LID project was included as Bid Schedule C in conjunction with two other projects (Schedules A and B) within the 2004 Miscellaneous Concrete Construction Project No. 2004-04. G:\pub-wrks\admin\PB CounciloLlDsICC Nevada LID Set PH for Final Assessment 20Mar07.doc Page I of 4 ,..W raa' This project was originally bid on May 10. 2005. with only a single bid received. Since that bid was 480~ higher than the engineer's estimate, the single bid was rejected and the project was rebid later that year in the hopes of a more improved and competitive bidding atmosphere. Several changes were made to the project to help encourage a more competitive project including: 1. The project was rescheduled as a winter construction project to take advantage of what is generally considered to be the "slack" construction season. 2. The project construction time limits were extended through to May 31. 2006, to provide maximum construction time. 3. The bidding period was extended to six weeks to provide contractors with adequate time to prepare bids. 4. A concerted effort was made to contact prospective bidders. Plans and bid packages were distributed to ten plan centers, three newspapers and 20 contractions in the hopes that additional competition could be generated. The Miscellaneous Concrete Construction Project was rebid on December 14, 2005 with results similar to the May 10,2005 bid. Again, we received only a single bed from L TM, Inc. The results of the bid are as follows: Schedule A: Misc Concrete Repair & Construction Schedule B: Pedestrian Safety Improvements in the Central Business District Schedule C: Nevada Street LID ESTIMATE $105,674.00 $98,552.00 $175.525.50 TOTAL $379,751.50 L TM BID $166,750.00 $123,269.50 $249.050.50 $538,470.00 The original estimated construction cost from 2004 was for $148,500.00 which was revised in 2005 to $175,525.50. The final bid at $249,050.50 was 29.5% higher than the latest revised cost estimate and 40.4% higher than the original 2004 estimate. The construction contract was reviewed by Council on January 17,2006, where it was determined that, due to the unlikelihood of receiving a more competitive and lesser bid, the single bid would be accepted and a contract be entered into with L TM Inc. to construct the Nevada Street Traffic Calming Improvements. In accordance with AMC Section 13.20.060 (B) it was further determined that the amount of increase to be allocated to the . benefited assessment district would be limited to just 10% over the advertised rate with the balance to be assumed by the . City and funded through altemative sources. The assessment rate as indicated on Resolution No. 2004-31 was $575.20 per equivalent dwelling unit. With the additional 1 0% over the stated assessment rate, the final rate is now projected at $632.72. Bullock vs. City of Ashland During the course of the Nevada Street LID project development. numerous legal suits were filed in the State Circuit Court by Art Bullock. In Mr. Bullock's many filings he contended that the City had erred in over 80 points of law or procedure in the formation of the Nevada Street assessment district. Judge Mark Schively has ruled in favor of the City on all counts except the following two pOints: 1. That the City should have adopted findings as to the determination of the LID boundaries. (Circuit Court Case No. 04-397123(7)). This condition was remedied on June 6, 2006 when Council officially accepted findings which were promptly forward to the court where they were accepted. 2. The City did not have the ability to vary from the specified formula of assessment determination as specified in Resolution 99-09 which states that the city will contribute the following amounts to reduce the assessments to a local improvement district: 60% of the total costs for sidewalk improvements; 75% of the total costs for storm drain improvements; 20% of the total costs for street surface improvements; and 50% of the total oosts for engineering and administration. City staff had considered this project to be a sidewalk improvements project which did not correlate well with the above standard formula, and elected to use a more equitable interpretation of the formula which resulted in a reduction in the assessment amount. In computing the assessment rate, the City chose to apply a 60% City participation to all categories of G:'pub-wrksadmin\PB Council\UDs,CC Nevada LID Set PH for Final Assessment 20Martl7.doc Page 2 of 4 ~.l' costs, except engineering costs. Rather than show a 200~ and 750~ participation for street improvement and storm drain costs, a uniform 60~'o reduction was applied overall. If the exact formula was to be followed the results would be as follows: Based upon the latest engineer's estimate for construction the full costs are allocated to each of the four categories. Sidewalk Costs $68,928.00 @ 60% = Storm Drain Costs: $17,155.00 @ 75% = Street Improvement Costs: $62,417.00 @ 20% = Engineering & Administration Costs: $25,000 @ 50% = Total Improvement Cost Total City Participation $41,356.80 $12.866.25 $17,216.60 $12,500.00 $173,500.00 $ 83,939.65 COST COMPARISON BETWEEN PROPOSED ASSESSMENT COST AND COSTS COMPUTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH RESOLUTION 99-09 Previous Proposal Costs Total Project Cost: $173,500.00 Total City Participation $101,600.00 (58.6%) Total Assessable Cost $71,900.00 Assessment Units 125 Estimated Cost Per Unit $575.20 Costs Per Resolution 99-09 Total Project Cost: $173,500.00 Total City Participation $83,939.65 (48.4%) Total Assessable Cost $89,560.35 Assessment Units 125 Estimated Cost Per Unit $716.48 Difference $141.28 (24.5% increase) As shown, the full formula interpretation would result in a 24.5% increase in individual assessments This has no impact upon the final assessment rate as ~ is legally established by Resolution No. 2004-31 plus 10% and additional costs in excess of that increase are already assumed by the City. Final Costs The Nevada Street LID project was substantially completed in September of 2006 at a total project cost of $283,125.38. The final price included $34,074.88 in extra work and additional quantities resulting from unexpected site conditions. Engineering costs were $12.712.25 for a total project cost of $295,837.63. Following is a breakdown of the allocations of project costs: Estimated Project Cost $173,500.00 Assessment Units 125 Estimated Cost per unit $575.20 Estimated Assessment Total $71,900.00 Final Project Cost $295,837.63 Final Cost per Unit $632.72 Final City Participation $216.747.63 Final Assessment Total $79,090.00 Percentage of City Participation 73.3% Percentage of District Participation 26.7% G:\pub-wrksladmin'.PB CouncilUDs\CC Nevada LID Set PH for Final Assessment 20MarQ7.doc Page 3 of 4 r~' Fundinq It is anticipated that this project will be funded as follows: LID Assessment District Transportation SDCs (15~o) Transportation User Fees = $71.900.00 = $32,512.14 = $184.235.49 Related City Policies: AMC Chapter 13.20 L6callmprovements and Special Assessments AMC Chapter 13.20.010 Definitions A. "Improvement resolution" means that resolution adopted by the council declaring its intention to make a local improvement. B. "Local Improvement" has the meaning given under ORS 223.001. C. "Local Improvement District" means the property that is to be assessed for all or any portion of the cost of a local improvement and the property on which the local improvement is located. D. "Lot" means a lot, block or parcel of land. E. 'Owner' means the owner of the title to real property or the contract purchaser of real property of record as shown on the last available complete assessment role in the office of the County Assessor. Council Options: Council may approve the attached resolution setting a public hearing for May 1,2007, or may elect to set a later date pending further study by Councilor staff. Potential Motions: Council may move to approve the attached resolution setting a public hearing date for May 1, 2007, or Council may move to delay the public hearing pending further analysis of the LID. Attachments: Resolution Setting a Public Hearing Resolution No. 2004-31 LID Boundary Map Final Construction Cost Summary Photos G:\pub-wrksladmin\PB CouncilUDs\CC Nevada LID Set PH for Final Assessment 20Martl7.doc Page 4 of 4 ~j.' RESOLUTION NO. 2007 - O~ A RESOLUTION SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR ASSESSMENTS TO BE CHARGED AGAINST LOTS WITHIN THE NEVADA STREET LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 85 THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOllOWS: SECTION 1. The City Council having received proposed assessments to be charged against each lot within the Nevada Street local Improvement District; orders that a public hearing be held to consider written or oral arguments to these assessments at 7:00 p.m. May 1,2007 in the City of Ashland, City Council Chambers at 1175 East Main Street. The City Recorder is directed to mail the attached notices of the proposed assessments to the owners of the lots to be assessed. SECTION 2. This resolution takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. SIGNED and APPROVED this ~ day of ~ ,2007. u 1- G:\recorder\City Council Packets\Packet Files\2006-2007\2007-0320\DONE\RESO _ Nevada St L1D.doc NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO HEAR OBJECTIONS TO FINAL ASSESSMENTS TO BE CHARGED AGAINST LOTS WITHIN THE NEVADA STREET LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 85 Please take notice that the Ashland City Council will hold a public hearing to consider written objections to the final assessments for the assessment districts described above. The final assessments, a description (by tax lot) of the property to be assessed, and the name of the property owner are attached to this notice. The public hearing will be held at: 7 p.m. May 1,2007 Council Chambers 1175 East Main Street The Ashland Municipal Code requires that any objections that are filed must be in writing and must state the specific grounds for the objection. Objections must be received by: 5 p.m., April 30, 2007 and may be delivered or mailed to the: City Administrator 20 East Main Street Ashland, Oregon 97520 Please note that assessments may be modified by the council and will be levied by the council after the hearing. Assessment will be charged against the property, and will be immediately payable in full or in installments (if applicable) following the levy. ~sen, City ReCO:der Publish: March 31, 2007 NEVADA STREET LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT #85 Tax Owner's Name and Address as of Total Map No Lot 3/15/07 Assessment 391 E4t:lC 101 losta weaver & Albert Apenes 632 72 391 E4BC 102 James Goguen 632.72 391 E4BC 103 Nevada Street Church of Christ 1.26544 391 E4BC 104 Mary & Kenneth Sanders 632 72 391 E4BC 105 Philip Accetta 632 72 391 E4BC 106 William & Robyn Prather i 391 E4BC 107 Patricia Hume 391E4BC 108 John & Sandra Whltesltt 391 E4BC 109 Tony & Lois DeBruno 391 E4BC 110 Jeffrey & Janet Williams 391E4BC 111 William & Susan Collins 391 E4BC 1300 Ingeborg Murphy OJ<. r< II 391 E4BC 1400 Brendan Girard 391E4BC 1500 Helen Troutman 391 E4BC 1600 MarjOrie & Robert Black 6 391E4BC 1700 Virgil & Linley Stanger 6 391E4BC 1800 Stephen & Diana Cornell 391 E4BC 1900 James Remley 391 E4BC 2000 Alan & Christy Green 391 E4BC 2100 Robert Joseph & L Lanzhammer 391E4BC 2200 Margaret Keenan 391 E4BC 2300 Oregon Trail Properties Inc 391 E4BC 2400 Lois Kapus 391 E4BC 2500 Bruce & Karen Morrow 632.72 391 E5AA 6200 Patricia Buckles 632.72 391E5AA 6300 John & Rosemary Graff 632.72 391E5AA 6400 Janet & Jeffrey Williams 632 72 391E5AA 6500 GFLP 632.72 391E5AA 6600 Robert Corcoran 632.72 391E5AA 6700 Steven & Lisa Ennis bJ~. 391E5AA 8600 Paula Brown & Patrick Flannery 316 391E5AA 11200 Trustee of the 791 Glendower Trust 632. 391E5AA 11300 Magnuson Arvid Trust o3~. 391E5AA 11400 Linda Vanderlip 632.72 391E5AA 11500 Kris Daly 632 72 391 E5AA 11600 Jonathon & Lisa Rand OJ< ,< 391E5AA 11700 Ted Hunter Trustee 632.72 391E5AA 11800 John & Lin Roden bJ< r< 391E5AA 11900 Egon DuBois 632 72 3'91 E5AC 4900 Billings Ranch Golf Group LLC iI 391 E5AC 5000 Billings Ranch Golf Group LLC 391 E5AC 5100 Billings Ranch Golf Group LLC 391 E5AC 5200 Billings Ranch Golf Group LLC 391 E5AC 5300 Billings Ranch Golf Group LLC 391 E5AC 5400 HD Development LLC El AI bJ<. '< 391 E5AC 5500 Billings Ranch Golf Group LLC 632 72 391 E5AC 5600 Billings Ranch Golf Group LLC I 391 E5AC 5700 Billings Ranch Golf Group LLC 391 E5AC 5800 Billings Ranch Golf Group LLC 632 391E5AC 5900 Billings Ranch Golf Group LLC 632.72 391E5AC 6000 AMT Investments 632.72 391 E5AC 6100 City of Ashland 632 72 391 E5AC 6200 Julie Nelson oJ~ f~ 391 E5AC 6300 Charmaine Carnes 632.72 391 E5AC 6400 Billings Ranch Golf Group LLC 03Z.7Z 391E5AC 6500 Billings Ranch Golf Group LLC 632.72 391 E5AC 6600 Billings Ranch Golf Group LLC 632.72 391 E5AC 6900 Judith Paulen 632 72 391 E5AC 7000 Kurt Wilkening Trustee 632 72 391 E5AD 101 Evelyn & Norman Tabachnlck 632 72 391 E5AD 102 Shane & Renee Swenson 632 72 391 E5AD 103 Catherine Lemble 632 72 391 E5AD 104 J Harnss & K Van Der LInden 632 72 391 E5AD 105 Marl< Ursetta 632 72 3/26/2007 G Pub-wrks/eng/dept-admlnILiDIT:drngs Pcb:,c Notice List NEVADA STREET LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT #85 Tax Owner's Name and Address as of Total Map No Lot 3/15/07 Assessment 391 E5AD 106 James & Julie Young 632 72 391 E5AD 107 Nora Wehmeyer & Mark Knox 632 72 391 E5AD 108 Chnstlne & Scott Thompson 632.72 391E5AD 109 Eugene & Mathilda Haag 632 72 391 E5AD 110 Ashland Supportive Hous"'g & CommUnity Outreach Inc 632 72 391 E5AD 111 Daniel Deneul 632.72 391E5AD 112 Anthony Kerwin & Janet Rantz 6~1 391 E5AD 115 Walker Kermode 632 391 E5AD 126 Adam Ward & Veronica Vlach 31636 391 E5AD 1300 Billings Ranch Golf Group LLC 632 72 391 E5AD 1400 Billings Ranch Golf Group LLC 632.72 391 E5AD 1500 Billings Ranch Golf Group LLC 632.72 391E5AD 1700 Billings Ranch Golf Group LLC 632 72 391E5AD 1800 Billings Ranch Golf Group LLC 632.72 391E5AD 1900 Billings Ranch Golf Group LLC 632.72 391 E5AD 2000 Billings Ranch Golf Group LLC 632.72 391 E5AD 2100 Billings Ranch Golf Group LLC 632.72 391E5AD 2300 Billings Ranch Golf Group LLC 632.72 391E5AD 2400 James McKernan 632.72 391E5AD 2500 Thurmond Construction 632.72 391 E5AD 2600 Thurmond Construction 632.72 391E5AD 2700 Thurmond Construction 632 391 E5AD 2800 Harvey Meier 632 391 E5AD 2900 John Clark 63272 391 E5AD 3000 Tom Heiner 632.72 391 E5AD 3100 Thurmond Construction 632.72 391 E5AD 3200 Phillip & Melinda He"'er 632.72 391 E5AD 3300 Adono & Donna Rodute 63212 391 E5AD 3400 Thurmond Construction 632 72 391 E5AD 3500 Thurmond Construction 632 72 391 E5AD 3600 Thurmond Construction 632] 391 E5AD 3700 AMT Investments 632 391 E5AD 3800 AMT Investments 632.72 391E5AD 3900 George & Debra Gardner 632 72 391E5AD 4000 George & Debra Gardner 632.72 391E5AD 4100 Thurmond Construction 632 72 391E5AD 4200 Billings Ranch Golf Group LLC 632.72 391 E5AD 4300 Billings Ranch Golf Group LLC 632 72 391 E5AD 4400 Billings Ranch Golf Group LLC 632.72 391 E5AD 4500 Billings Ranch Golf Group LLC 632 72 391 E5AD 4600 Billings Ranch Golf Group LLC 632.72 391E5AD 4700 Billings Ranch Golf Group LLC 632.72 391 E5AD 4800 Billings Ranch Golf Group LLC 632 72 391 E5AD 4900 Billings Ranch Golf Group LLC 632.72 391 E5AD 5000 Billings Ranch Golf Group LLC 632.72 391E5AD 5100 Billings Ranch Golf Group LLC 632 72 391E5AD 5200 Billings Ranch Golf Group LLC 391 E5AD 5300 Billings Ranch Golf Group LLC 632.72 391 E5AD 5500 Billings Ranch Golf Group LLC 632 72 391 E5AD 5600 Billings Ranch Golf Group LLC 632 72 391 E5AD 5700 Billings Ranch Golf Group LLC 632 72 391 E5AD 5800 Billings Ranch Golf Group LLC 632 72 391 E5AD 6000 AMT Investments 632 72 391E5AD 6200 Beatnz Mart",ez EI AI 632 72 391 E5AD 6300 Charmaine Carnes & Troy Brown 632 72 391 E5AD 6400 Thurmond Construction 632 72 :;/26.2007 G Pub-wrksieng/dept-adm"'/LiDfTldlngs PuOllc Nollce LIst NEVADA STREET LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT #85 Tax Owner's Name and Address as Of Total Map No. Lot 3/15/07 Assessment 391E5AO 6500 Thurmond Construclion 632 72 391E5AO 6600 Thurmond Construction 632.72 391E5AO 6700 Thurmond Construction 632.72 391E5AO 6800 Thurmond Construction 632.72 391E5AD 6900 Thurmond Construction 632.72 City of Ashland, Oregon - Agendas And Minutes EXHIBIT 8 Page 1 of 4 City of Ashland. Ore-9on / City_Council City Council - Minutes Friday, March 23, 2007 MINUTES FOR THE CONTINUED MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL March 23, 2007 Civic Center Council Chambers 1175 E. Main Street CALL TO-.OJmER Mayor Morrison reconvened the continued Council meeting of March 20, 2007 at 1:00 p.m. Councilors Hartzell, Hardesty, Silbiger, Chapman and Navickas were present. Councilor Jackson was absent. NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS 1. Request for Council to appeal PA #2006-02354 (as outlined by AMC 18.108.110). Mayor Morrison informed the Council that there was a split vote on this action when it was before the Planning Commission and two City policies may be in conflict. He clarified the Council is not making a decision on the merits of the Planning Action, but rather whether they wish to review this to see if there are conflicting policies. City Attorney Mike Franell explained the Council has the authority to call for an appeal, but generally, this type of action is reserved for issues that are of significant policy consideration for the City. Mr. Franell noted the applicants and the other parties involved in the action also have the ability to appeal. He explained this issue involves a conflict between two City policies. The first is the arterial setback standards and the other is the historical design standards. The Planning Commission weighed these issues seriously and determined that the historical design standards took precedence. Mr. Franell stated if the Council wishes to look at the policy implications involved, bring them forward, and provide guidance to the Planning Commission, it would be appropriate for them to bring forward the appeal. Mr. Franell cautioned the Council to not discuss the merits of this action until there is a full hearing, and to limit their discussion today to whether there is a policy implication significant enough to warrant the Council taking action. Ex Parte Contact: Councilor Hartzell noted she is the liaison to the Planning Commission, but did not attend this meeting or review the meeting materials. She indicated she met with the Planning Director on site to discuss the policy question she had and how it would relate to this action. She noted Councilor Chapman was also present at the site visit. Mr. Franell clarified communications with staff are not necessarily ex parte contact; however any information gleamed from the site visit would need to be a more detailed disclosure if this issue is called up for appeal. Councilor Hardesty stated she spoke with the Planning Director about this issue and also spoke briefly with Mr. Swales to let him know she had not received any information from staff on this issue. She also indicated that she read the Daily Tidings article on this issue. Councilor Chapman stated he conducted a site visit and indicated he was on the Tree Commission when the landscaping for this project came before them. Councilor Navickas noted he has been involved in the broader issue for some time and has made comments at Planning Commission meetings in the past, but not in regards to this specific project. He also noted he accidentally placed a lawn sign on this property when he was running for office. http://www.ashland.or.us/Agendas.asp?Display= Minutes&AMID=2971 &Print=True 4/26/2007 City of Ashland, Oregon - Agendas And Minutes Page 2 of 4 Councilor Silbiger stated he read the Daily Tidings article, has driven past the site, and has received letters from Mr. Swales and one from Councilor Navickas suggesting an appeal. Mayor Morrison indicated he has read the staff memos and reviewed the emails from Mr. Swales. He stated he does not believe there was anything he reviewed that would have an impact on any decision he would make. All councilors indicated they had no bias and could make objective decisions. Councilor Silbiger explained that he would have to leave early and urged the Council to not make an appeal. Councilor Silbiger left the meeting at 1: 13 p.m. Council offered their comments and preferences in regards to this issue. Councilor Hartzell voiced her interest in making sure they are protecting arterials and ensuring the City has the space it needs to make future bicycle and pedestrian improvements on North Main Street. Councilor Navickas commented on integrity in the land use process and stated when citizens perceive land use decisions that contradict each other, it is the Council's responsibility to step in and issue a ruling. Councilor Chapman voiced his preference for a citizen to bring forward an appeal, rather than the Council. He stated he has not researched the issue enough to know what the conflict and policies are. Councilor Hardesty also indicated that she does not know enough about the policies in question and the degree of conflict, but stated that this is a problem that needs to be solved. Mayor Morrison noted the City is currently in the process of reviewing the Land Use Ordinance and stated he is reluctant for the Council to call this up. He added developing good policy and legislation is usually not best achieved through a judicial or quasi- judicial process. Mr. Franell clarified there are ordinance provisions that require the design standards to be applied, and clarified the issue is balancing between which standard is more important. He stated that Council's role is to set the mechanisms by which that balance occurs and to have a process where an appointed commission applies the mechanisms the Council provides. He added that it would be appropriate for the Council to step in if they feel they need to provide additional guideance to the Planning Commission in the balancing between standards. Councilor Hartzell/Navickas m/s that Council appeal PA #2006-02354 for a hearing. DISCUSSION: Councilor Hardesty voiced support for calling this forward. Councilor Chapman shared his concern that they are getting dangerously close to prejudging this. Councilors Hartzell and Navickas clarified their general concerns are not with this specific proposal. Roll Call Vote: Councilors Hardesty, Navickas and Hartzell, YES. Councilor Chapman, NO. Motion passed 3-1. ORDINANCES, RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS 1. Reading of a Resolution titled, "A Resolution Setting a Public Hearing for Assesments to be Charged Against Lots Within the Nevada Street Local Improvement District No. 85." Art Bullock/Request the Council not schedule the final public hearing and final assessment until the appeals process has been completed. He asserted that there were problems with this project that need to be resolved. Mr. Bullock also requested that Council alter the requirements listed at the bottom of the Speaker Request Form and stated this language could cause an unnecessary court case. City Administrator Martha Bennett requested Council not debate the question of the Speaker Request Form until she has had the opportunity to consult with legal. In regards to the Nevada LID, she indicated staff would brief the Council on the status of the lawsuits during an Executive Session in April, and recommended Council proceed with scheduling the public hearing. She added if Council decides to postpone the hearing after the Executive Session it can be rescheduled. She encouraged them to adopt the proposed resolution and noted that staff cannot proceed with any of the next steps until Council sets the hearing. http://www.ashland.or.us/Agendas. asp?Display=Minutes&AMID=297I &Print=True 4/2612007 City of Ashland, Oregon - Agendas And Minutes Page 3 of 4 City Attorney Mike Franell clarified that Mr. Bullock did not prevail at the Circuit Court level and stated that he was unable to show that the City acted inappropriately or in contradiction to the ordinances. He noted that Mr. Bullock has now appealed the Circuit Court decision. Mr. Franell stated he is confident that the Court of Appeals will uphold the Circuit Court decision and indicated that it is appropriate and financially prudent for the City to continue with the process. Councilor Hartzell/Chapman m/s to approve Resolution #2007-09. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Chapman, Hardesty and Hartzell, YES. Councilor Navickas, NO. Motion passed 3-1. 2. First Reading by title only of an Ordinance Titled "An Ordinance Amending AMC 3.08.020 To Apply Ethics Provisions to Employees, Appointed Officials and Elected Officials." Mayor Morrison noted that Councilor Jackson reqeusted that this item be deferred until she could be present to participate. He noted that he would be willing to hear public testimony at today's meeting since there are individuals present who signed up to speak. Councilor Hartzell requested that Council honor these types of requests by other councilors and suggested possibly scheduling a special meeting to discuss this issue and stated she would like a better analysis of some of the issues. Councilor Chapman left the meeting at 1:57 p.m. Council agreed to take public testimony but defer a decision to the next meeting. Colin Swales/461 Allison Street/Stated that citizens are fed up with what has been perceived as a lack of ethics and noted that this item has been on the Council agenda since September, but has repeatedly been delayed. Mr. Swales commented that the proposed ethics ordinance is not perfect, but stated it goes a long way to solving some of the problems experienced in the past and urged the Council to recognize the urgency of this ordinance. Art Bullock/Provided the following three complaints in regards to the proposed ordinance: 1) the ordinance does not apply the same provisions of the current policy applicable to city employees to elected and appointed officials, 2) there are no provisions in the ordinance that would allow for any kind of independent resolution of an ethics violation, and 3) claimed there is a serious problem with trust and integrity in the Planning Department and commented on the provision that prohibits commission members from representing clients before another body of the city. Dale Shostrom/1240 Tolman Creek Road/Chairman of the Historic Commission. Expressed concerns with the proposed changes to the ethics ordinance and stated the changes would adversely impact the Historic Commission and its membership. Mr. Shostrom commented on Section E, Conflict of Interest, subsection 4 and expressed concern with the second part of the regulation which reads"... or in any action or proceeding before another board, commission or the City Council..." He stated this portion of the ordinance is too restrictive and would create a loss of professional members to the Historic Commission, Tree Commission, and the Building Appeals Board. He noted the Historic Commission could lose funds as a result of this ordinance, and the quality of plan review could also be affected. Mayor Morrison noted this item would be scheduled appropriately. 3. Second Reading by title only of an Ordinance Titled "An Ordinance Amending Sections 10.30.005, 10.30.020 A. and 10.30.030 A. of the Ashland Municipal Code Addressing Outdoor Burning and Requirements for Permitted Fires." Suggestion was made for was made for staff to come forward to answer Council's questions, but for Council to postpone a decision until the full Council is present. Fire Chief Keith Woodley addressed the Council and noted there are four options presented in the staff report. He commented on Councilor Chapman's request for staff to consider a burning ban in Ashland that would only be lifted on a site specific basis if the Fire Department felt there were no other http://www.ashland.or.us/Agendas.asp?Display=Minutes&AMID=2971 &Print=True 4/2612007 City of Ashland, Oregon - Agendas And Minutes Page 4 of 4 alternatives to open burning. He noted staffs proposal is to restrict open burning to wildfire fuels and noxious weed eradication only. Request was made for staff to provided an amended staff memo with the new alternatives when this item is presented to the Council. Mr. Woodley asked that Council share their preferences for burning outside of the zone. 4. Second Reading by title only of an Ordinance Titled "An Ordinance Amending Ashland Municipal Code Chapter 9.24 to Require Removal and Disposal of Non-Certified Wood stoves and Fireplace Inserts Upon Conveyance of Real Property, Requiring Disclosure and Removal Certification. " Councilor Hardesty/Hartzell m/s to approve Ordinance #2936. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Navickas, Hardesty and Hartzell, YES. Motion passed. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS/REPORTS FROM COUNCIL UAISONS 1. Tripartite Housing Committee Report. Item will be placed on future agenda. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 2:24 p.m. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder John W. Morrison, Mayor End of Document - Back to Top http://www.ashland.or.us/Agendas.asp?Display= Minutes&AMID=2971 &Print=True 4/26/2007 EXHIBIT 9 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Public Hearing, Adoption of a Resolution Levying Special Benefit Assessments for the Nevada Street Local Improvement District No. 85 and Adoption of Findings Meeting Date: May 1, 2007 Department: Public Works Engineering Contributing Departments: Legal, Finance, Recorder Approval: Martha Bennett Primary Staff Contact: James H. Olson, 552-2412 E-mail: olsonj@ashland.or.us Secondary Staff Contact: Barbara Christensen, 552-2084 E-mail: christenb@ashland.or.us Estimated Time: 45 minutes Statement: A. Public Hearing In accordance with AMC Section 13.02.060(E), a public hearing shall be held to consider any objections to the proposed assessments to be levied against property owners within the Nevada Street Local Improvement District No. 85. On March 23,2007, Resolution No. 2007-09 was adopted setting a date for the public hearing of May 1, 2007. All property owners within the district were sent notices of the hearing and a notice was also published in the Daily Tidings on March 31, 2007. B. Resolution Approval Approval of the attached resolution, following the public hearing, would establish the final amount of assessment to be charged against each lot within the assessment district and the interest rate to be applied to those owners opting to make payments as provided for under the Bancroft Bonding Act. C. Adoption of Findings Adoption of the attached findings would document the City's decisions regarding the formation of the district and allocation of the assessments. D. Written Objections to Proposed Assessments As of this date no letters of objection have been received. Any letters received subsequent to this communication will be provided to the council along with staffs response, at the public hearing. Background: The Nevada Street LID was developed in response to citizen requests to provide an opportunity to meet the following specific goals pertaining to Nevada Street: 1. Reduce speed of traffic 2. Encourage uniform traffic speed 3. Provide a safe and comfortable pedestrian route 4. Provide a safe and comfortable bike route 5. Provide a safe motorist route 6. Maintain safe and unimpeded emergency access 7. Maintain the street function as a neighborhood collector 8. Increase livability of the neighborhood (relating to noise, traffic speed, convenience of travel, maintain trees, and reduce clutter) g. Balance street function, safety and livability, and 10. Reduce the anticipated impact of increased traffic G: puh-wrk;, l'ng dcPI-admin LID Nnada LID CC rc Adoption of Rl'Solulion & Findings 4 07.doc -.. w_~ To meet these goals a comprehensive plan was developed with the assistance of a citizens panel comprised of a cross section of owners within the Quiet Village subdivision area, both from within and outside of the assessment district boundary. The design process was a rigorous one lasting nearly six months and culminating in seven different and distinct plans being submitted to the engineering staff. Staff was charged with refining the seven plans into a single acceptable design. This was accomplished by incorporating elements from the seven plans, into one single concept plan. This plan was reviewed and approved by the Council on August 3, 2004. The final project plans were completed by Thomton Engineering of Medford and the project was advertised for construction in April 2005. To provide economies of scale and to reduce bidding and administration costs, the Nevada Street LID project was included as Bid Schedule C in conjunction with two other projects (Schedules A and B) within the 2004 Miscellaneous Concrete Construction Project No. 2004-04. This project was originally bid on May 10, 2005, with only a single bid received. Since that bid was 48% higher than the engineer's estimate, the single bid was rejected and the project was rebid later that year in the hopes of a more improved and competitive bidding atmosphere. Several changes were made to the project to help encourage a more competitive project including: 1. The project was rescheduled as a winter construction project to take advantage of what is generally considered to be the "slack" construction season. 2. The project construction time limits were extended through to May 31,2006, to provide maximum construction time. 3. The bidding period was extended to six weeks to provide contractors with adequate time to prepare bids. 4. A concerted effort was made to contact prospective bidders. Plans and bid packages were distributed to ten plan centers, three newspapers and 20 contractions in the hopes that additional competition could be generated. The Miscellaneous Concrete Construction Project was rebid on December 14,2005 with results similar to the May 10, 2005 bid. Again, we received only a single bed from l TM, Inc. The results of the bid are as follows: Schedule A: Misc Concrete Repair & Construction Schedule B: Pedestrian Safety Improvements in the Central Business District Schedule C: Nevada Street LID ESTIMA TE $105,674.00 $98,552.00 $175.525.50 TOTAL $379,751.50 l TM BID $166,750.00 $123,269.50 $249,050.50 $538,470.00 The original estimated construction cost from 2004 was for $148,500.00 which was revised in 2005 to $175,525.50. The final bid at $249,050.50 was 29.5% higher than the latest revised cost estimate and 40.4% higher than the original 2004 estimate. The construction contract was reviewed by Council on January 17, 2006, where it was determined that, due to the unlikelihood of receiving a more competitive and lesser bid, the single bid would be accepted and a contract be entered into with l TM Inc. to construct the Nevada Street Traffic Calming Improvements. In accordance with AMC Section 13.20.060 (B) it was further determined that the amount of increase to be allocated to the benefited assessment district would be limited to just 10% over the advertised rate with the balance to be assumed by the City and funded through altemative sources. The assessment rate as indicated on Resolution No. 2004-31 was $575.20 per equivalent dwelling unit. With the additional 10% over the stated assessment rate. the final rate is now projected at $632.72. Bullock vs. City of Ashland During the course of the Nevada Street LID project development, numerous legal suits were filed in the State Circuit Court by Art Bullock. In Mr. Bullock's many filings he contended that the City had erred in over 80 points of law or procedure in the formation of the Nevada Street assessment district. Judge Mark Schively has ruled in favor of the City on all counts except the following two points: G: pub-wrks engdept-admin:L1D' Nevada LID CC re Adoption or Rl'Solulion & Findings 4 07.doc r~' 1. That the City should have adopted findings as to the determination of the LID boundaries. (Circuit Court Case No. 04-397123(7)). This condition was remedied on June 6, 2006 when Council officially accepted findings which were promptly forward to the court where they were accepted. 2. The City did not have the ability to vary from the specified formula of assessment determination as specified in Resolution 99-09 which states that the city will contribute the following amounts to reduce the assessments to a local improvement district: 60% of the total costs for sidewalk improvements; 75% of the total costs for storm drain improvements; 20% of the total costs for street surface improvements; and 50% of the total costs for engineering and administration. City staff had considered this project to be a sidewalk improvements project which did not correlate well with the above standard formula, and elected to use a more equitable interpretation of the formula which resulted in a reduction in the assessment amount. In computing the assessment rate, the City chose to apply a 60% City participation to all categories of costs, except engineering costs. Rather than show a 20% and 75% participation for street improvement and storm drain costs, a uniform 60% reduction was applied overall. If the exact formula was to be followed the results would be as follows: Based upon the latest engineer's estimate for construction the full costs are allocated to each of the four categories. Sidewalk Costs $68,928.00 @ 60% = Storm Drain Costs: $17,155.00@ 75% = Street Improvement Costs: $62,417.00 @ 20% = Engineering & Administration Costs: $25,000 @ 50% = Tatallmprovement Cost T atal City Participation $41,356.80 $12.866.25 $17,216.60 $12,500.00 $173.500.00 $ 83,939.65 COST COMPARISON BETWEEN PROPOSED ASSESSMENT COST AND COSTS COMPUTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH RESOLUTION 99-09 Previous Prooosal Costs Total Project Cost: $173,500.00 Total City Participation $101,600.00 (58.6%) Total Assessable Cost $71,900.00 Assessment Units 125 Estimated Cost Per Unit $575.20 Costs Per Resolution 99-09 Total Project Cost: $173,500.00 Total City Participation $83,939.65 (48.4%) Total Assessable Cost $89,560.35 Assessment Units 125 Estimated Cost Per Unit $716.48 Difference $141.28 (24.5% increase) As shown, the full formula interpretation would result in a 24.5% increase in individual assessments This has no impact upon the final assessment rate as it is legally established by Resolution No. 2004-31 plus 10% and additional costs in excess of that increase are already assumed by the City. G pub-wrks eng dept-adminLlD Nl'vada LID CC re Adoption of Rt'Solulion & Findings 4 07.doc _.11 ..."1 Final Costs The Nevada Street LID project was substantially completed in September of 2006 at a total project cost of $283,125.38. The final price included $34,074.88 in extra wor\( and additional quantities resulting from unexpected site conditions. Engineering costs were $12,712.25 for a total project cost of $295,837.63. Following is a breakdown of the allocations of project costs: Estimated Project Cost $173,500.00 Assessment Units 125 Estimated Cost per unit . $575.20 Estimated Assessment Total $71,900.00 Final Project Cost $295,837.63 Final Cost per Unit $632.72 Final City Participation $216,747.63 Final Assessment Total $79,090.00 Percentage of City Participation 73.3% Percentage of District Participation 26.7% Fundina It is anticipated that this project will be funded as follows: LID Assessment District Transportation SDCs (15%) Transportation User Fees = $71,900.00 = $32,512.14 = $184,235.49 Related City Policies: AMC Chapter 13.20 Local Improvements and Special Assessments AMC Chapter 13.20.010 Definitions A. "Improvement resolution" means that resolution adopted by the council declaring its intention to make a local improvement. B. "Local Improvement" has the meaning given under ORS 223.001. C. "Local Improvement District" means the property that is to be assessed for all or any portion of the cost of a local improvement and the property on which the local improvement is located. D. "Lot" means a lot, block or parcel of land. E. "Owner" means the owner of the title to real property or the contract purchaser of real property of record as shown on the last available complete assessment role in the office of the County Assessor. . Council Options: Council may accept the proposed assessments as shown on Exhibit A and approve the Resolution Levying Special Benefit Assessments for the Nevada Street LID No. 85, or: Council may elect to modify, correct or revise the assessments to be levied, based upon arguments presented at the public hearing. And Council may adopt the findings as prepared, or; Council may elect to modify, correct or revise the findings. G: pub-wrksengdept-adminLlDNevada LID CC re Adoption of Resolution & Findings 4 07.doe -.. ._~ Staff Recommendation: A. Staff recommends approval of the attached resolution Levying Special Benefit Assessments for the Nevada Street Local Improvement District No. 85 as set forth in this communication and as further detailed on Exhibit A. B. Staff further recommends approval and adoption of the attached findings. Potential Motions: A. Council may move to adopt the attached resolution Levying Special Benefit Assessments for the Nevada Street Local Improvement District No. 85. B. Council may more to revise the resolution to accommodate changes to the assessments. C. Following approval of the resolution Council may move to adopt the findings or revise them as needed. Attachments: 1. Resolution / Exhibit A 2. Vicinity Map 3. Photographs 4. Findings G:pub-wrks eng dept-admin LID, Nevada LID CC re Aduption ur Resulutiun & Findings 4 07.doc ~.1I ._~ CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Meeting Date: May 15, 2007 Department: Finance Department Contributing Departments: Public Approval: Martha Benne Estimated Time: 15 Minutes Public Hearing to Declare Real Property on Strawberry Lane as Surplus and Authorize Sale of Lot #103 Primary Staff Contact: Lee Tuneberg IH- d--- E-mail: tuneberl@ashland.or.us Secondary Staff Contact: E-mail: Statement: This action is to request the City Council, as the Local Contract Review Board, to hold a public hearing to gather input on the use of said real property, declaring unneeded parcels as surplus. A public hearing to declare the real property as surplus and authorize the sale is required by ORS Section 221.725 and this public hearing complies with that requirement, authorizing the immediate sale of Lot #103 and requiring future Council approval before sale or trade of the remaining surplus property. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that Council declare the real property listed below as surplus and to authorize disposal by sale of Lot #103 to the high bid received on April 30, 2007, with the other lots to be brought back to Council for approval of disposal before sale or trade. Background: City Council identified the City owned, residentially zoned, property located near Westwood and Strawberry as surplus and directed staff to prepare it for sale on October 15, 2002. Sale of the property and use of the proceeds in the best interest of the City has been discussed many times since then including the use of the funds to repay the City for obligations on The Grove (relieving COBG restrictions) and to go toward affordable housing projects. On November 16, 2004, Council approved by motion the land partition and preparation to sell the parcels. On June 22, 2005, Council approved Resolution 2005-27 pledging a portion ($215,000) of the proceeds from the sale to repay the General Fund for reimbursing HUO for the COBG monies used to build the Grove. The proceeds were budgeted as revenue for FY 2006-2007 and the use of funds per Council direction are in this year's and next year's budgets. All parcels were appraised in October 2007. All parcels are zoned RR-.5-P. In late March and early April, staff advertised lots #103 & #104 (each .5 acre in size) for a sealed bid sale with a minimum bid of $400,000. Although there were many inquiries regarding the sale or possible trade, only one bid was received for lot if 103 at $462,000. No bid was received for lot #104. Lot #102 is 1.05 acres and can be sold at that size or subdivided. Subdividing it into two smaller parcels will probably generate more money than selling it as one parcel. Community Development is in the process of subdividing lot #102. Lot #104 can be re- advertised for sale by itself or in conjunction with Lot #102, sub-divided or not. r~' The properties proposed as surplus are: Legal Description 391 E08BD 391 E08BD 391 E08BD Tax Lot 102 103 104 Lot Size 1.05 .50 .50 Appraised Value $580,000 $375,000 $375,000 Bid Amount Not Advertised $462,000 No Bid Related City Policies: Council authorizaL.:l is required prior to disposing of surplus property having a residual value of more than $10,000, per the following: AMC 2.50.127 Exhibit B Under the Ashland Municipal Code, Chapter 2.50 Public Contracts, Section 2.50.115, Disposal of Surplus and Aband",;.:;d Property, the City of Ashland Finance [Director is authorized to dispose of surplus or abandoned property by} :.':rlsfer to other departments, direct transfer or sale to political subdivisions, state agencies, or non- profit organ' .. : i :;ns, sale, trade, auction, or destruction; provided however, that disposal of surplus property having residual value of more than $10,000 shall be subject to authorization by the City of Ashland, Local Contract Review Board. Council Options: The Council, actin~ ., ~he Local Contract Review Board, can declare any or all of the parcels as "Surplus Property" and auU,. ...; a public sale or can decline to do so, preventing disposal until further action is taken. Potential Motion:>: Council moves to ce:;!are the real property listed above as surplus property and to authorize the sale of lot #103 to the successful bidd.~ '..;th any subsequent conversion of lots #104 and #102 to come before Council for approval prior to sale or disr _ Attachments: Notice of Public Hearing to Declare Property Surplus Legal Notice of Sale, Invitation to Bid Resolution 2005-27 rA' Notice of Public Hearing on May 10, 2007: There will be a Public Hearing declaring surplus property at the City Council meeting scheduled for May 15, 2007 at 7:00 PM at Council Chambers, located at 1175 East Main Street, Ashland, Oregon. The Public Hearing will be held to declare Residential Property not needed for City purposes and to authorize the sale of lot 39 1 E 08 BD Tax Lot 103 . The real property is located at the East side of Westwood Street North of Strawberry Lane, Ashland, Jackson County, Oregon. The tax lots are 39 1E 08 BD Tax Lot 102, 39 1E 08 BD Tax Lot 103, and 39 1E 08 BD Tax Lot 104. Council authorization is required prior to disposing of surplus property having a residual value of more than $10,000, per the following: Under the Ashland Municipal Code, Chapter 2.50 Public Contracts, Section 2.50.115, Disposal of Surplus and Abandoned Property, the City of Ashland Finance Director is authorized to dispose of surplus or abandoned property by transfer to other departments, direct transfer or sale to political subdivisions, state agencies, or non-profit organizations, sale, trade, auction, or destruction; provided however, that disposal of surplus property having residual value of more than $10,000 shall be subject to authorization by the City of Ashland, Local Contract Review Board. A public hearing to declare the real property as surplus and authorize the sale is required by ORS Section 221.725 and this public hearing complies with that requirement for declaring all parcels surplus and authorizing the immediate sale of Lot #103. LEGAL NOTICE OF SALE INVITATION TO BID Sale of Two Parcels, Approximately .50 Acres each of Real Property TAX LOTS 103 AND 104, EAST SIDE OF WESTWOOD STREET, NORTH OF STRAWBERRY LANE ASHLAND, OREGON Notice is hereby given that the City of Ashland invites bids for the sale of two parcels of property, approximately .50 acres each, located East of Westwood Street, North of Strawberry Lane in Ashland, Oregon. Bids shall be submitted to Lee Tuneberg, Purchasing Agent, City of Ashland at 20 E. Main St., Ashland, Oregon before 4:00 PM April 30th, 2007. Bids may not be accepted after this hour and date. Informational and bidding documents may be obtained from the address above, by calling (541 )552-2003 or may be downloaded from the City of Ashland's website at www.ashland.or.us All bids shall be submitted as set forth in Section 1- Instructions to Bidders. The City of Ashland is not responsible for bids submitted in any manner, format or to any delivery point other than as required by the bidding documents. No bid may be withdrawn after the hour set for the opening thereof until the elapse of 30 days from the date and time set for opening. Public acquisitions or disposals of real property or interest in real property are exempt from Oregon public contracting laws and rules (ORS279A.025 (e)). Publication of this Notice on the City of Ashland's web site is for convenience and not subject to any laws and rules that may be mentioned on this site. This sale of property shall be conducted in a manner that results in the most advantageous bid to the City of Ashland. All exhibits are provided as a courtesy to Bidder. Bidder shall not rely on any exhibit information, but must determine for themselves the value and quality of the property. The City of Ashland makes no guarantees or warrants that the property is fit for any particular purpose for which the bidder may have an interest. The City of Ashland reserves the right to waive any or all informalities and irregularities; may cancel this Invitation to Bid; and may reject any or all bids if it is the City of Ashland's interest to do so. Dated this 27th day of March, 2007. Lee Tuneberg Purchasing Agent RESOLUTION NO. 2005- '2-1 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AN INTERFUND LOAN TO THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUND FROM THE GENERAL FUND Recitals: A. ORS 294.460 requires an ordinance or resolution to permit a loan from one fund to another; and B. A loan cannot be made from a debt service fund to any other fund, and C. If the loan will not be repaid by the end of the fiscal year, it must be a budgeted requirement in the following year's budget. THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOllOWS: SECTION 1. The Finance Director is hereby authorized to borrow up to $215,000 from the General Fund for the Community Development Grant Fund as interim financing for repaying HUD for the CDBG money used to construct The Grove, releasing it for non-qualifying activities that meet the community's needs. SECTION 2. The loan will be made starting immediately and will be budgeted for repayment in FY 2005-06 as proceeds from the sale of City of Ashland property on Strawberry Lane are sold and made available. SECTION 3. Interest will be charged at the Local Government Investment Pool interest rate at the date of the loan or the date of repayment, whichever is higher. Interest shall be paid quarterly. SECTION 4. This resolution takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. This resolution was read by title only in accordance with Ashland Municipal Code ~2.04 90 duly PASSED and ADOPTED this 21st day of June, 2005. ~ Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this 2-2 day of June, 2005: ~~. Kate Jackson, Council Chair CITY Of ASHLAND Council Communication Update on Solar Project/Permission to Proceed Meeting Date: Department: Contributing Depart. Approval: May 15,2007 ~~:~ ,nneJJJ A { Martha Bj'f'lJ} Primary Staff Contact: Dick Wanderscheid, 2061 wandersd@ashland.or.us Secondary Staff Contact: Lee Tuneberg, 488- 5300 tuneberl@ashland.or.lIs Estimated Time: 20 minutes Statement: The City has been authorized to sell Clean Renewable Energy Bonds (CREB's) to fund Solar Pioneer II, the next phase of the Community Solar Project. Staff is now ready to begin implementation of the program and wanted to update the Council on the status, seek some policy direction and get final permission to proceed. Staff Recommendation: Authorize staff to proceed with implementation of Solar Pioneer II based on the attached program design as amended. Background: The City successfully received approval from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to sell up to $500,000 in CREBonds to erect a Solar Electric System on City facilities at 90 N. Mountain Ave. Approval from the IRS occurred about 4 months later than anticipated, which has delayed implementation ofthe project. Also, the revisions to the Oregon Business Energy Tax Credit (BETC) are currently being considered by the Oregon Legislature. These revisions, coupled with finding a business to purchase the credit, could provide an additional $300,000 for this project. Staff has worked with a financial advisor for 3 months on both the bond sale and BETC pass through purchase and we are close to proceeding on both fronts. Bids have been solicited for the Solar System and we hope to have a portion of it installed before June 30, 2007, as authorized by this year's budget. The remainder of the system would be completed in late summer, and the proposed budget includes funds to complete this project. City staff, in conjunction with the Bonneville Environmental Foundation's staff, has developed the draft program description, which is attached to this communication. We wanted to share the draft program design with the Mayor and Council to get input and ultimately final permission to proceed before actual implementation begins. Staff is seeking direction from the Mayor and Council on a number of policy issues that need to be decided before program design is finalized. The program description that is attached to this communication makes some assumptions about to handle these issue but we need to clarify the following areas: 1 r6' 1. Does the City want to limited the amount of equity shares that one citizen or business can purchase? The program as described in the attachment is silent on this issue. One argument is that by limiting the numbers of shares that can be purchased by one entity more people will be able to buy into the program. However this could also result in not fully subscribing the system output. A middle ground might be to limit the initial purchase to a set number of shares but then allow people to purchase additional shares if they are still available after the initial offering. 2. Does the City want to subsidize this project or should purchasers pay the entire costs? The attached version includes city subsidy of about $27,000 per year. Staff recommends this to try and improve the payback period to a point where it would be attractive for purchasers. This is accomplished by a direct City rebate upfront Gust like we do currently for privately owned PV systems) and paying higher rates for produced solar kWh's than power we could purchase from BPA. 3. Should the City become a default purchaser of equity from a citizen or business that wants to sell its equity? This is a complex decision which could impact the future operation and success of the program. The attached draft doesn't include that role for the City and would only rely on individual transactions between equity owners and sellers to provide a private market. If sufficient demand exists for these shares this could work quite well and we could learn a lot about the values that is placed on the solar equity. However, if the City accepts this role, the shares would always have a minimum value which could result in greater participation because there would be little risk that sellers wouldn't be able to sell their equity in the future. However, it will be quite challenging to create an equity floor purchase price that will assure people that there is a market for their share that does not encourage the sale back to the City for direct financial gain. Related City Policies: The City's Comprehensive Plan, the Valdez Principles, and the ICLEI initiatives all support increased use of renewable resources. Council Options: Option 1: Staffs recommendation is that initial purchase be limited to ten shares per customer. If the shares are not all sold out during the first offering then customers could purchase more than 10 shares. Staff also recommends the City subsidize the program as described, with an initial rebate and the purchase of the Solar kWh's at the higher rate. Finally staff recommends the City not assume the role of back up purchaser of equity shares at least initially. If this proves to be a problem later in the program the City could take on this role in the future. Option 2 Authorize staff to proceed with implementation based on a different program design. Option 3 Decide not to implement the Solar Project 2 CITY OF ASHLAND Potential Motions: Move to authorize staff to proceed with implementation of the Solar Pioneer II, Community Solar Project as outlined in the amended attached program description. Attachments: Solar Pioneer II Program Description 3 r.l' Solar Pioneer II Program Description Purpose of the Proiect The purpose of the Solar Pioneer II program is to: Increase community awareness of the role solar energy needs to play in meeting the Community's future energy needs; Allow Ashland citizens and businesses who have limited solar access or limited financial resources to invest in a solar electric system; Overcome several hurdles to widespread adoption of solar electricity systems. These hurdles include: lack of knowledge about the technology and the vendors of solar PV systems, high initial capital costs, shading and aesthetic concerns of solar modules located on private residences and businesses, and ongoing maintenance and care of solar systems. Financing the Proiect The City successfully applied for and received authority from the Federal Internal Revenue Service to sell $500,000 of Clean Renewable Energy Bonds (CREB's). This coupled with a State of Oregon Business Energy Tax Credit (BETC) pass - through of38% could result in a system of about 85 kW's In SIze. The CREBs have a 10-year term and the City will allow Solar Pioneer Contributors to purchase equity ownership in the output of their share of the system either in a lump sum payment or via a monthly Solar Pioneer II surcharge on their electric bill. Solar Pioneer II contributors will receive an annual credit toward their electric bills based on at least the retail value of the kWh's produced by their equity share of the project. Therefore, the contributor's credit should improve as retail electric rates go up. After the initiallO-year financing period is completed, debt service for those financing the system will sunset but energy credits will continue for at least an additional 10 years. Contributors making up front lump sum payments will receive at least 20 years of annual solar energy credits on their electricity bills. The City will own, operate and maintain the system for 20 years. The Ashland City Council will have the authority to extend the operational period of the system if the power produced continues to meet utility standards and operating costs do not exceed the value of the power produced. After 20 years the City Council will have the authority to terminate the operation of the system if it determines that the value of the projects falls below the cost to maintain and operate the system. Transfer of Ownership Solar Pioneer II contributors may sell or donate their equity to another person or entity at any time. The person or entity purchasing or receiving the equity must receive electric service from the City of Page 1 of5 Ashland. Equity can be transferred to a new location inside the city by the owner. Any sale of transfer of equity will need to provide a Transfer of Equity Agreement signed by all parties involved and notarized. The city will develop and provide this form. We could also require the equity to reside at the same address unless it is actively sold by the owner. Green Tags Green tags are the environmental attributes associated with the power generated from specified renewable energy generation facilities. One Green Tag represents 1 mWh of renewable energy. The Green Tags associated with the Solar Pioneer II generation system will remain with the electricity produced by the system. The ownership of the tags will therefore be allocated to the Solar Pioneer II Contributor who received the solar credit on their electric bill. The Contributor however, will not be allowed to reallocate the environmental attributes separately from the power, to any other party for any purpose. System & Contributor Economics While final numbers will not be known until the system is built and paid for, it is possible to give some preliminary estimates on the economics and payment structure for illustrative purposes. System Costs $800,000 ($304.000)-38% $496,000 ($123.000) $373,000 Total Cost BETC Tax Credit City of Ashland Rebate Contributor Costs For discussion purposes, let's assume 373 participants agree to purchase $1,000 shares of the system. If they were to finance the share over the 10-year period of the CREB bonds, their monthly solar pioneer II contribution would be $8.50, or about $102/annually. Assuming that the $800,000 system ends up being about 85kW of net AC output, the system should generate about 1,500 kWh's per kW or 127,500 kWh's annually. 1/373 or $1,000 share would equal 342 kWh of credit per year on their electric bill. At current retail rates plus tax of about 7 cents/k Wh, the annual credit initially would be about $24.00/yr. Simple payback on the initial $1,000 would be about 32.5 years. These economics are not very favorable and may not be attractive enough to entice 373 participants that would be needed to sell out the entire output of the system. Any shortfall of sales would have to be made up by the City's Electric Utility. By increasing the solar credit amount to 10 cents/kWh produced, the simple payback period is reduced to 19.4 years, which then would allow the 20 year participants be repaid during the operational life of the system. If the system were to remain operational beyond 20 years, contributors would see positive cash flow after 19 years and would continue to receive credits beyond the 20 year time frame. If the initial rate was set at 10 cents/kWh but allowed to rise above this rate if retail rates exceed 10 cents/kWh, then the economics become more favorable and this strategy also provides a hedge against future electric rate increases. Page 2 of5 During Solar Pioneer I, the City requested voluntary solar surcharges on customer bills of $4/month for 2 years and the participant received nothing in return other than satisfaction that they were helping to promote local solar energy generation. Over 260 people signed up for that program so there is hope that this program will also be popular and the 373 share holders will be easily recruited. Since paying only retail rates for the power produced could result in payback s in excess of 31 years, there is some risk that the project will not to be fully subscribed. Setting the floor at 10 cents and moving it up beyond 10 cents if retail rates rise above 10 cents, will probably be an easier sale and thus there would be less risk of not fully subscribing the systems output. This is a program design decision that will need to be made by the Council before the program details are finalized. The Role of The Bonneville Environmental Foundation The Bonneville Environmental Foundation (BEF) was one of our partners in the Solar Pioneer I program by providing funding ($62,500), program and design assistance, marketing assistance, and technical expertise. They have helped us brainstorm this draft design of the Solar Pioneer II project and have committed to aid us to bring the program successfully to completion. They have agreed to help us design the theme and peripherals for the marketing campaign along with a marketing strategy for rolling out the initiative. In addition, they have agreed to fund the monitoring system which will provide real time solar generation data via the internet for not only the new systems, but also for the existing systems that were installed as a part of Solar Pioneer 1. They have also agreed to sell reduced priced Green Tags to Solar Pioneer II contributors, who want to further reduce their carbon footprint through the direct purchase of Green Tags from BEF. Monitoring the System and Providing Solar Credits The system will be metered and this data will be made available via the internet. The output will be measured on an annual basis and the contributors will be credited once per year with a dollar amount reduction on their electric bill based on the number of output equity shares purchased by the contributor. Contributors will be able to purchase as many output shares at $1,000 as they desire. The shares can be purchased up front as a lump sum payment or financed over the 10 year life of the CREBonds as a monthly charge on their electric bill of $8.50/month. Credits will begin annually after one year of solar production and will continue for up to 20 years. As mentioned earlier, the Council can extend the 20 year period if they desire in the future. Contributors can donate or sell their output share to other citizens or businesses that are served by the City of Ashland's electric utility. They also can transfer the credit from one address to another in the City. The Source of Funds The City's Electric Department has been working with the Finance Department and a financial advisor to arrange a sale of CREBonds and also to find a Oregon Business Energy Tax Credit (BETC) pass - through partner. We have received several proposals for the Bonds and some interest in the BETC. There may be an advantage to doing both financial operations through the same entity and we are exploring that option. Page 3 of5 The City is authorized to sell up to $500,000 in CREBs, and the BETC pass through would be in addition to these funds. Currently the Oregon Legislature is in the process of approving some changes in the BETC program which will increase the tax credit from its current 35% over 5 years to 50% over 5 years. The pass through can be purchased up front for the net present value which the Oregon Department of Energy estimates will be 38% after this Legislative amendment. An $800,000 system could then be funded with $500,000 for CREB's and an additional $300,000 from BETC. Because we are trying to model this system with economics somewhat equal to a system that a citizen or business might put on their building, we would apply a solar rebate of$I.00/Watt as an upfront payment from the Electric Utility to reduce the initial system costs that must be born by Solar Contributors. Also, we will not be charging interest to customers that choose to finance the equity purchase even though we will be incurring about 1.25% interest rate on the CREBonds. Program Schedule The City has issued an RFP for the Solar installation which was due on May 8th. We hope to have one system (1/2 to 1/3 of the total system) installed in June-July. A second system would be installed after the Electric Department's covered storage building is enclosed. That will soon go out to bid with a completion date anticipated in late summer. The second system for the remainder of the PV would be done soon after that project is completed. Project marketing would begin as soon as bids, CREB's, and BETC amounts are known and we can finalize the economics for marketing purposes. Fiscal Impact on the Electric Utility Annual debt service on the CREB is estimated to vary from about $51,000 to $56,500 for 10 years. In addition, if the electric utility pays 10 cents/kWh for power produced annually the margin above displaced BPA Power is about 6 cents/kWh. At 127,500 kWh's produced annually, this will cost an additional $7,650 per year. If we fully subscribe 373 shares at $1 ,OOO/share, and all are financed over 10 years, annual revenue would be $38,046/yr. The overall fiscal impact looks like this: ENERGY Purchase CREB Costs Maintenance,Etc. Annual Debt Service payments Total Cost over 10 yrs Cost per year $76,500 $536,250 $ 40,000 ($380.460) $272,290 $ 27,229 In addition, a one time payment of$123,000 would be made in year 1. This could be partially offset by a BP A C&R credit of $45,000-$50,000. Future Stel'S . Gain final approval from the Council to proceed with implementation. . Sell the CREBonds. . Get the BETC pre-approved and purchased. . Award the contract to build the system. . Get Planning and Building permits. · Develop and Implement the marketing plan. Page 4 of5 · Develop the necessary changes to the City's Utility Billing system for payment and solar credits. · Develop the Contribution Agreement. . Develop the Transfer of Equity Agreement. . Install the metering and monitoring system. Page 5 of5 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication An Ordinance Revising Ashland Ethics Provisions (AMC 3.08.020) Meeting Date: May 15, 2007 Department: Legal Contributing Departments: Approval: Martha Benne Primary Staff Contact: Richard Appicello E-mail: appicelr@ashland.or.us Secondary Staff Contact: E-mail: Estimated Time: 20 minutes Statement: Attached please find two ordinances. The first ordinance is the marked up version the Council has seen thru April 2007. The second ordinance (version 2) is a clean copy of the first ordinance with a few recommended changes made after I discussed the ordinance with the Planning Commission. You have seen this ordinance once before. The differences occur in Paragraph E, E.7 and H and are discussed below. Both ordinances would amend the ethics provisions in Ashland Municipal Code in accordance with Council direction from last year. The primary change is to also include elected officials and appointed officials in its applicability. A provision restricting appointed officials from representing clients for hire before any body of the city on a matter that will or has come before the body to which the official is appointed to serve has been added. (Paragraph EA) Additionally, procedures for addressing the applicability of the code provisions has been added, with the City Administrator making that determination for applicability to employees and the City Council (1st ordinance) or Mayor (2nd ordinance) making the determination of applicability to appointed and elected officials. The Council will be asked to consider additional Judicial Ethics in a separate ordinance. Background: The Ashland City Council held a study session March 6, 2006, to discuss the possibility of amending the ethics provisions within the Ashland Municipal Code. After careful consideration the City Council indicated an interest in: 1) Amending the Ethics provisions currently in the Ashland Municipal Code to be applicable to elected and appointed officials in addition to applicability to city employees; 2) Adding in a procedure for investigating and enforcing the ethics provisions; 3) Adding a provision similar to provisions in the Gresham City Charter which would require Ashland to have ethics provisions in its municipal code which can be enforced locally. The proposed ordinance would amend the ethics provisions in the Ashland Municipal Code to apply to elected and appointed officials in addition to employees. Additionally, the amendments would prevent an appointed official from representing clients for hire before any board or commission or before the City Council on matters which would come before the board or commission on which the appointed official sits. (Paragraph EA) The proposed changes also add exceptions for the use of public property for private benefit for instances which are specifically set forth as a benefit of employment and for the granting of special treatment or advantage to a citizen when provided for by law. (Paragraph 0.2) Finally, the proposed ordinance permits determinations of applicability by the City Administrator for applicability to employees and determinations of applicability by the City Council (1st) or Mayor (2nd) for applicability to appointed and/or elected officials. The sanctions paragraph has been amended to provide violations are considered cause for discipline. After informal discussion of the ordinance with the Planning Commission I recommended a few changes to the draft ordinance. To address statutory requirements for some Boards and Commissions, the first Paragraph under E now contains the following disclaimer at the end: r., Nothing herein prohibits a public officer from engaging in any business, profession or employment that is permitted or required as regards the composition of a Board, Commission or Committee, (e.g. Planning Commissioners engaged in real estate pursuant to ORS 227.030 or Building Code Board of Appeals, [AMC 15.04.200] members engaged in specific trades). Similarly, because state law is sometimes stricter, clarification was added in a new paragraph E. 7 7. More Restrictive State Law Provisions. Nothing in this ordinance relieves or excuses public officers and employees from compliance with more restrictive state laws applicable to the particular public position, (e.g. Planning Commissioners are subject to more restrictive Conflict of Interest Provisions pursuant to ORS 244.135.) Finally, for efficiency, under paragraph H, the determination was given to the Mayor with a possible call up by the Council: The determination of the Mayor as to the applicability of a provision of this code to a particular situation shall be final, unless a majority of the Council calls up the determination for review by the full Council at the meeting following the determination. Related City Policies: None. Council Options: The Council could adopt the proposed ordinance (version 1 or 2) amending the Ashland ethics provisions as stated above. The Council could suggest changes to amend the proposed draft ordinances. The Council could reject the proposed changes, thereby, leaving the ethics provisions applicable only to City of Ashland employees. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends the City Council adopt (Version 2) An Ordinance Amending AMC 3.08.020 To Apply Ethics Provisions To Employees, Appointed Officials And Elected Officials by title only on first reading and move to second reading. Potential Motions: I move the Council adopt (version 1 or 2) An Ordinance Amending AMC 3.08.020 To Apply Ethics Provisions To Employees, Appointed Officials And Elected Officials by title only on first reading and move to second reading. I move the Council adopt (version 1 or 2) An Ordinance Amending AMC 3.08.020 To Apply Ethics Provisions To Employees, Appointed Officials And Elected Officials by title only on first reading as amended. . . and move to second reading. (Note: If you make amendments, please be sure to identify the included amendments when making this motion). Attachments: Proposed ordinance (version 1 and 2). r~' ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING AMC 3.08.020 TO APPLY ETHICS PROVISIONS TO EMPLOYEES, APPOINTED OFFICIALS AND ELECTED OFFICIALS Annotated to show deletions and additions to the code sections being modified. Deletions are Iinoa throu~h and additions are underlined. RECITALS: 1. The City of Ashland is committed to the highest ethical standards for its public officials. 2. As a statement in that regard, in addition to any standards set forth by the state, Ashland has had its own ethics provision applicable to public employees for more than 25 years. 3. As a sign of continuing commitment to the highest ethical standards Ashland desires to extend application of its ethics provisions to appointed and elected officials. THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Section 3.08.020 of the Ashland Municipal Code is amended to read: SECTION 3.08.020 Code of Ethics. A. Declaration of Policy. The proper operation of democratic government requir~s that public officials. including elected officials. appointed officials and employees be independent, impartial and responsible to the people; that governmental decisions and policy be made in the proper channels of the governmental structure; that public office not be used for personal gain; and that the public have confidence in the integrity of its government. In recognition of these goals, there is hereby established a Code of Ethics for all empl6)'eespublic officials, whether paid or unpaid. The purpose of this Code is to establish ethical standards of conduct for all empleyeespublic officials by setting forth those acts or actions that are incompatible with the best interests of the City of Ashland. It is also the purpose of this Code to assist emplayeespublic officials in determining the proper course of action when faced with uncertainty regarding the propriety of a contemplated action, thereby preventing them from unwittingly entangling public and private interests. Through adoption of this Code the City hereby expresses its intent to maintain high ethical standards in the City service, and to increase public confidence in the integrity of City empleyeespublic officials. B. Responsibilities of Public Office. EmplayeesPublic officials are agents of public purpose and are empleyedengaged for the benefit of the public. They are bound to uphold the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of this State and to carry out impartially the laws of the nation, state and the City, and thus to foster respect for all government. They are bound to observe in their official acts the highest standards of morality and to discharge faithfully the duties of their office regardless of personal considerations, recognizing that the public interest must be their primary concern. Page 1 of 4 FILENAME \p G:\leial\Mike\Ordinances\Ethics Amendments Ord - 2.docG:\legal\Mike\Ordiftftftees\Ethies :\flleadmeats ore ~G:\legal\Mike\oreiftllftees\Ethies 1\meadlfleats.dae C. Dedicated Service. All employee3public officials of the City should be loyal work to support the political objectives expressed by the electorate and the programs developed to attain those objectives. Appointive officials and employees should adhere to the rules of work and performance established as the standard for their positions by the appropriate authority. Employees Public officials should not exceed their authority or breach the law or ask others to do so, and they should work in full cooperation with other emplo)'ee3public officials unless prohibited from so doing by law or by officially recognized confidentiality of their work. D. Fair and Equal Treatment. 1. Interest in Ap'pointments. Canvassing of members of the Councilor Mayor, directly or indirectly, in order to obtain preferential consideration in connection with any appointment to the City service shall disqualify the candidate for appointment except with reference to positions filled by appointment by the Mayor or Council. 2. Use of Public Property. No employee public official shall request or permit the use of city-owned vehicles, equipment, materials or property for personal convenience or profit, except when such services are available to the public generally or are provided as municipal policy for the use of such employee in the conduct of official business or as a specifically defmed benefit in cOIIlPensation of ~loyment. 3. Obligations to Citizens. No empleyeepublic official shall grant any special consideration, treatment or advantage to any citizen beyond that which is available to every other citizen excq>t as otherwise permitted by law or ordinance. E. Conflict of Interest. No employeepublic official, whether paid or unpaid, shall engage in any business or transaction or shall have a fmancial or other personal interest, direct or indirect, which is incompatible with the proper discharge of that ~loyee's public official's official duties in the public interest or would tend to impair independence of judgment or action in the performance of that empleyee'spublic official's official duties. Personal, as distinguished from financial, interest includes an interest arising from blood or marriage relationships or close business or political association. Specific conflicts of interest are enumerated below for ~guidance of employee3.~ 1. IncoIIlPatible EIIlPloyment. No employee shall engage in or accept private employment or render services for private interests when such employment or service is incompatible with the proper discharge of that employee's official duties or would tend to impair independence of judgment or action in the performance of that employee's official duties. 2. Disclosure of Confidential Information. No epublic official mployee shall, without proper legal authorization, disclose confidential information concerning the property, government or affairs of the City. Nor shall any employee public official use such information to advance their fmancial or private interest, or the fmancial or private interest of others. 3. Gifts and Favors. No employee public official shall accept any valuable gift, whether in the form of service, loan, thing or promise, from any person, firm or corporation which to their knowledge is interested directly or indirectly in any manner whatsoever in business dealings with the City; nor shall any such employee (l) accept any gift, favor or thing of value that may tend to influence the employee in the discharge of their duties, or (2) grant, in the discharge of their duties, any improper favor, service or thing of value. 4. Rq>resenting Private Interests Before City Agencies or Courts. No employee whose salary is paid in whole or in part by the City shall appear in behalf of private interests before any agency of the City. An employee shall not represent private interests in any action or proceeding against the interests of the City in any litigation to which the City is a party, unless the employee is Page 2 of 4 FILENAME \p G:\le~al\Mike\Ordinances\Ethics Amendments Ord - 2.docC:\IeraI'MikelQffiifl8f1ees\Ethies Aft18f\8meft5 OM ~:\Iegal\MikelOFtiiftanees\Etfl.ies !.meft8metlts.t1ee representing himseltlherself as a private citizen on purely personal business. No appointed official shall represent a client for hire before the board or commission to which that official is appointed or in any action of proceeding before another board. commission or the City Council on a matter which came or will come before the board or commission to which that official is appointed. No emplayee public official shall accept a retainer or compensation that is contingent upon a specific action by a-the City ageaey. 5. Contracts with the City. Any employeepublic official who has a substantial or controlling financial interest in any business entity, transaction or contract with the City, or in the sale of real estate, materials, supplies or services to the City, shall make known to the proper authority such interest in any matter on which that emplayeepublic official may be called to act in an official capacity. The employeepublic official shall refrain from participating in the transaction or the making of such contract or sale. Aft eBil'loyeepublic official shall not be deemed interested in any contract or purchase or sale of land or other thing of value unless such contract or sale is recommended. approved, awarded, entered into, or authorized by the etBl'loyeepublic official in an official capacity. 6. Disclosure of Interest in Legislation. Any employee or appointed official who has a financial or other private interest, and who participates in discussion with or gives an official opinion to the Council, shall disclose on the records of the Council or other appropriate authority the nature and extent of such interest. F. Political Activity. No employee in the administrative service shall use the prestige of their position in behalf of any political party. No employee in the administrative service shall orally, by letter or otherwise, solicit or be in any manner concerned in soliciting any assessment, subscription or contribution to any political party; nor shall an employee be a party to such solicitation by others; nor shall an employee take an active part in political campaigns for candidates while in the performance of duties in an official capacity. No employeepublic official -shall promise an appointment to any municipal position as a reward for any political activity. I G. Ap'plicability of Code - Employees. When an employee has doubt as to the applicability of a provision of this code to a particular situation, they should apply to the City Administrator, who is charged with the implementation of this code for an advisory opinion, and be guided by that opinion when given. The employee shall have the opportunity to present their interpretation of the facts at issue and of the applicable provision(s) of the code before such advisory decision is made. All such requests for advice shall be treated as confidential. This code shall be operative in all instances covered by its provisions except when superseded by an applicable statute, ordinance or resolution, and each statute, ordinance or resolution action is mandatory, or when the application of a statute, ordinance or resolution provision is discretionary but determined to be more appropriate or desirable. H. Applicability of Code - Appointed and Elected Officials. When an appointed official or an elected official has doubt as to the applicability of a provision of this code to a particular situation. they should ap'ply to the City Council for a determination. The official seeking a determination shall have the opportunity to present any facts they deem relevant to the determination. They shall also have the opportunity to present any argument they may have as to what they deem an appropriate Page 3 of 4 FILENAME \p G:\legaI\Mike\Ordinances\Ethics Amendments Ord - 2.docG:\le~81\Mik-e\Or6iR&II~ie~ ;'dBCft6meRt3 0rtI ~:\legltl\Mike\OFeiR8ftee9\Ethies l\RlCftdmCftts.tlee determination. The City Council. the Mayor or the City Administrator may request the City Attorney to provide an advisory opinion based upon the facts presented. The determination of the City Council as to the applicability of a provision of this code to a particular situation shall be ftnal. I. Definitions: 1) Employee - for the purposes of this section. the term employee shall mean one who is hired and paid a wage or salary to work for the City other than elected or appointed officials. 2) Ap,pointed Official - for the purposes of this section. the term "appointed official" shall mean a person who is appointed to serve on one of the City's boards or commissions and shall also mean the City Administrator and City Attorney. 3) Elected Official - for the pw:poses of this section. elected official shall mean one who is elected by the registered voters of the City of Ashland to serve the city and shall include: the Mayor. the city councilors. the city recorder. the municipal judge and the parks commissioners. III. Sanctions. ViolatioB of any J31'6visions of this eode shottlEl mise eOHSeiefttio\:lS qtlestisM for the eHlI'loyee eOBeemeEl B5 to '.vhether velWltaIy resigB&tioB or other aetioB is intIieateEl to promete the hest mtel'est of the City. Violation of any provision of this section. determined after notice and an opportunity to be heard. shall constitute cause for disciplinary action. The foregoing ordinance was first read by title only in accordance with Article X, Section 2(C) of the City Charter on the and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of day of ,2006, ,2006. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of ,2006. John W. Morrison, Mayor Reviewed as to form: Michael W. Franell, City Attorney Page 4 of 4 FILENAME \p G:\legal\Mike\Ordinances\Ethics Amendments Ord - 2.docG:\Ier81\Mike\Ortlift8ftees\Ethies Amendments Ortl ~:\Iege1\Mike\Ortlift8fteesl.Ethies .~efttlmeftts.d6e ORDINANCE NO. . AN ORDINANCE AMENDING AMC 3.08.020 TO APPLY ETHICS PROVISIONS TO EMPLOYEES, APPOINTED OFFICIALS AND ELECTED OFFICIALS Annotated to show deletions and additions to the code sections being modified. Deletions are linea through and additions are underlined. RECITALS: 1. The City of Ashland is committed to the highest ethical standards for its public officials. 2. As a statement in that regard, in addition to any standards set forth by the state, Ashland has had its own ethics provision applicable to public employees for more than 25 years. 3. As a sign of continuing commitment to the highest ethical standards Ashland desires to extend application of its ethics provisions to appointed and elected officials. THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOllOWS: SECTION 1. Section 3.08.020 of the Ashland Municipal Code is amended to read: SECTION 3.08.020 Code of Ethics. A. Declaration of Policy. The proper operation of democratic government requires that public officials, including elected officials, appointed officials and employees be independent, impartial and responsible to the people; that governmental decisions and policy be made in the proper channels of the governmental structure; that public office not be used for personal gain; and that the public have confidence in the integrity of its government. In recognition of these goals, there is hereby established a Code of Ethics for all public officials, whether paid or unpaid. The purpose of this Code is to establish ethical standards of conduct for all public officials by setting forth those acts or actions that are incompatible with the best interests of the City of Ashland. It is also the purpose of this Code to assist public officials in determining the proper course of action when faced with uncertainty regarding the propriety of a contemplated action, thereby preventing them from unwittingly entangling public and private interests. Through adoption of this Code the City hereby expresses its intent to maintain high ethical standards in the City service, and to increase public confidence in the integrity of City public officials. B. Responsibilities of Public Office. Public officials are agents of public purpose and are engaged for the benefit of the public. They are bound to uphold the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of this State and to carry out impartially the laws of the nation, state and the City, and thus to foster respect for all government. They are bound to observe in their official acts the highest standards of morality and to discharge faithfully the duties of their office regardless of personal considerations, recognizing that the public interest must be their primary concern. C. Dedicated Service. All public officials of the City should work to support the political objectives expressed by the electorate and the programs developed to attain those objectives. Appointive Page 1 of 4 o FILENAME \p C:\DOCUME-l\shipletd\LOCALS--l\Temp\Ethics Amendments Ord. 2PC-changes.docD officials and employees should adhere to the rules of work and performance established as the standard for their positions by the appropriate authority. Public officials should not exceed their authority or breach the law or ask others to do so, and they should work in full cooperation with other public officials unless prohibited from so doing by law or by officially recognized confidentiality of their work. D. Fair and EQual Treatment. I. Interest in Appointments. Canvassing of members of the Councilor Mayor, directly or indirectly, in order to obtain preferential consideration in connection with any appointment to the City service shall disqualify the candidate for appointment except with reference to positions filled by appointment by the Mayor or Council. 2. Use of Public Property. No public official shall request or permit the use of city-owned vehicles, equipment, materials or property for personal convenience or profit, except when such services are available to the public generally or are provided as municipal policy for the use of such employee in the conduct of official business or as a specifically defmed benefit in compensation of employment. 3. Obligations to Citizens. No public official shall grant any special consideration, treatment or advantage to any citizen beyond that which is available to every other citizen except as otherwise permitted by law or ordinance. E. Conflict of Interest. Nopublic official, whether paid or unpaid, shall engage in any business or transaction or shall have a financial or other personal interest, direct or indirect, which is incompatible with the proper discharge ofthat public official's official duties in the public interest or would tend to impair independence of judgment or action in the performance of that public official's official duties. Personal, as distinguished from financial, interest includes an interest arising from blood or marriage relationships or close business or political association. Nothing herein prohibits a public officer from engaging in any business, profession or employment that is permitted or required as regards the composition of a Board, Commission or Committee, (e.g. Planning Commissioners engaged in real estate pursuant to ORS 227.030 or Building Code Board of Appeals, [AMC 15.04.200] members engaged in specific trades). Specific conflicts of interest are enumerated below for guidance: I. Incompatible Employment. No employee shall engage in or accept private employment or render services for private interests when such employment or service is incompatible with the proper discharge of that employee's official duties or would tend to impair independence of judgment or action in the performance of that employee's official duties. 2. Disclosure of Confidential Information. No public official shall, without proper legal authorization, disclose confidential information concerning the property, government or affairs of the City. Nor shall any public official use such information to advance their financial or private interest, or the financial or private interest of others. 3. Gifts and Favors. No public official shall accept any valuable gift, whether in the form of service, loan, thing or promise, from any person, firm or corporation which to their knowledge is interested directly or indirectly in any manner whatsoever in business dealings with the City; nor shall any such employee (1) accept any gift, favor or thing of value that may tend to influence the employee in the discharge of their duties, or (2) grant, in the discharge of their duties, any improper favor, service or thing of value. 4. Representing Private Interests Before City Agencies or Courts. No employee whose salary is paid in whole or in part by the City shall appear in behalf of private interests before any agency of the City. An employee shall not represent private interests in any action or proceeding against the Page 2 of 4 o FILENAME \p C:\DOCUME-I\shipletd\LOCALS-l\Temp\Ethics Amendments Ord - 2PC-changes.docD interests of the City in any litigation to which the City is a party, unless the employee is representing himselflherse1f as a private citizen on purely personal business. No appointed official shall represent a client for hire before the board or commission to which that official is appointed or in any action of proceeding before another board, commission or the City Council on a matter which came or will come before the board or commission to which that official is appointed. No public official shall accept a retainer or compensation that is contingent upon a specific action by the City. 5. Contracts with the City. Any public official who has a substantial or controlling financial interest in any business entity, transaction or contract with the City, or in the sale of real estate, materials, supplies or services to the City, shall make known to the proper authority such interest in any matter on which that public official may be called to act in an official capacity. The public official shall refrain from participating in the transaction or the making of such contract or sale. A public official shall not be deemed interested in any contract or purchase or sale of land or other thing of value unless such contract or sale is recommended, approved, awarded, entered into, or authorized by the public official in an official capacity. 6. Disclosure of Interest in Legislation. Any employee or appointed official who has a financial or other private interest, and who participates in discussion with or gives an official opinion to the Council, shall disclose on the records of the Councilor other appropriate authority the nature and extent of such interest. 7. More Restrictive State Law Provisions. Nothing in this ordinance relieves or excuses public officers and employees from compliance with more restrictive state laws applicable to the particular public position, (e.g. Planning Commissioners are subject to more restrictive Conflict of Interest Provisions pursuant to ORS 244.135.) F. Political Activitv. No employee in the administrative service shall use the prestige of their position in behalf of any political party. No employee in the administrative service shall orally, by letter or otherwise, solicit or be in any manner concerned in soliciting any assessment, subscription or contribution to any political party; nor shall an employee be a party to such solicitation by others; nor shall an employee take an active part in political campaigns for candidates while in the performance of duties in an official capacity. No public official shall promise an appointment to any municipal position as a reward for any political activity. G. Aoolicabilitv of Code - Employees. When an employee has doubt as to the applicability of a provision of this code to a particular situation, they should apply to the City Administrator, who is charged with the implementation of this code for an advisory opinion, and be guided by that opinion when given. The employee shall have the opportunity to present their interpretation of the facts at issue and of the applicable provision(s) of the code before such advisory decision is made. All such requests for advice shall be treated as confidential. This code shall be operative in all instances covered by its provisions except when superseded by an applicable statute, ordinance or resolution, and each statute, ordinance or resolution action is mandatory, or when the application of a statute, ordinance or resolution provision is discretionary but determined to be more appropriate or desirable. Page 3 of 4 o FILENAME \p C:\DOCUME-I\shipletd\LOCALS-l\Temp\Ethics Amendments Ord - 2PC-changes.docO H. Aoolicability of Code - Appointed and Elected Officials. When an appointed official or an elected official has doubt as to the applicability of a provision of this code to a particular situation, they should apply to the Mayor for a determination. The official seeking a determination shall have the opportunity to present any facts they deem relevant to the determination. They shall also have the opportunity to present any argument they may have as to what they deem an appropriate determination. The Mayor may request the City Attorney to provide an advisory opinion based upon the facts presented. The deteimination of the Mayor as to the applicability of a provision of this code to a particular situation shall be final, unless a majority of the Council calls up the determination for review by the full Council at the meeting following the determination.. I. Definitions: I) Employee - for the purposes of this section, the term employee shall mean one who is hired and paid a wage or salary to work for the City other than elected or appointed officials. 2) Appointed Official - for the purposes of this section, the term "appointed official" shall mean a person who is appointed to serve on one of the City's boards or commissions and shall also mean the City Administrator and City Attorney. 3) Elected Official - for the purposes of this section, elected official shall mean one who is elected by the registered voters of the City of Ashland to serve the city and shall include: the Mayor, the city councilors, the city recorder, the municipal judge and the parks commissioners. . J. Sanctions.. Violation of any provision of this section, determined after notice and an opportunity to be heard, shall constitute cause for disciplinary action. The foregoing ordinance was first read by title only in accordance with Article X, Section 2(C) of the City Charter on the and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of ,2006, ,2006. day of Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of ,2006. John W. Morrison, Mayor Reviewed as to form: Michael W. Franell, City Attorney Page 4 of 4 o FILENAME \p C:\DOCUME-I \shipletd\LOCAL8-1\Temp\Ethics Amendments Ord - 2PC-changes.docD