The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2008-0401 Council Mtg PACKET CITY OF ASHLAND Important: Any citizen may orally address the Council on non-agenda items during the Public Forum. Any citizen may submit written comments to the Council on any item on the Agenda, unless it is the subject of a public hearing and the record is closed. Except for public hearings, there is no absolute right to orally address the Council on an agenda item Time permitting, the Presiding Officer may allow oral testimony; however, public meetings law guarantees only public attendance, not public participation. If you wish to speak, please fill out the Speaker Request form located near the entrance to the Council Chambers. The chair will recognize you and inform you as to the amount of time allotted to you, if any. The time granted will be dependent to some extent on the nature of the item under discussion, the number of people who wish to be heard, and the length of the agenda. AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL April 1 , 2008 Council Chambers 1175 E. Main Street 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. SHOULD THE COUNCIL APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THESE MEETINGS? [5 minutes] 1. Study Session of March 17, 2008 2. Special Meeting of March 17, 2008 3. Executive Session of March 18, 2008 4. Regular Council of March 18, 2008 VI. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS 1. Mayor's Proclamation of Independent Media Week 2. Tree City USA Presentation 3. Will the Council approve the plan that Jackson County developed to comply with Senate Bill 111, which requires Counties to develop and implement a plan for investigations of law enforcement uses of deadly physical force in the line of duty? VII. CONSENT AGENDA [5 minutes) 1. Does the Council accept the Minutes of Boards, Commissions, and Committees? 2. Will Council authorize the Mayor to sign the partition plat and deed restriction in preparation for the sale of city-owned property on Westwood Street near Strawberry Lane? 3. Does the Council wish to approve the sale and subsequent transfer/assignment of rights of the Unicom customer base on the Ashland Fiber Network to Jim Teece as required by the ISP contract? 4. Should Council approve the contract for the North Main/Scenic Park development project? 5. Will Council approve a resolution in support of an ODOT Transportation Enhancement grant in the amount of $512,000 to construct sidewalks on Laurel Street? 6. Does the Council want to approve a resolution repealing and replacing Resolution 2008-05, correcting for information omitted when an attachment page was not included? 7. Does the Council wish to deny a Liquor License Application from Michael Rozenfeld dba Fresh Feast, LLC at 280 Hersey #6? COUNC1Livn:T:-rlNGS ARE: BROAI)C";\ST LIVE: ON C"IANNI], <) vrsrrrllE CTry or.- ASFILANIYS WEB SITE Ar W\V\V/\SHLAND.ORUS 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 ~2.04.040}) 1. Should the Council award a portion of the 2008 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Funds to the Fair Housing Council of Oregon, and direct staff to develop the 2008 Annual CDBG Action Plan to identify proposed used for CDBG funds? 2. Will the Council authorize the increase of fees for the Ashland Community Center, Pioneer Hall, and The Grove facilities to recover 50% of operational and maintenance expenses? 3. Does the Council wish to authorize a 9% rate increase for residential, commercial and medical waste services by Ashland Sanitary and Recycling? 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 None. XI. NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS 1. Does the Council have any feedback for staff about the proposed selection/interview process for the Public Works Director? XII. ORDINANCES. RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS 1. Does the Council wish to approve second reading of a proposed Ordinance titled, "An Ordinance amending the Ashland Municipal Code, Chapter 2.12, City Planning Commission"? 2. Should the Council approve Second Reading of an Ordinance adopting ALUO Amendments, including reading a new Section 112 "Delayed Effective Date" in full? 3. Should the City Council declare and emergency and unanimously adopt three ordinances titled, "An Ordinance relating to nuisances, amending code section 9.08.180 concerning distribution of written materials declaring an emergency", "An Ordinance relating to solicitation, requiring no trespassing signs, limiting solicitation hours, and repealing code chapter 6.24 concerning peddlers, and declaring and emergency", and "An Ordinance relating to public parks, repealing Code Sections 10.68.050, 10.68.070 and 10.68.160 and declaring and emergency"? 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). COUNC'IL T\lIr:TINGS ARt: BROADCAST LlVI: ON ('IJANNLT <) VJSITrrn: (Try ()r, ASJlLAND'S \VE.B SILr AT W\V\VASHLANDOIU)S CITY COUNCiL STUDY SESSION Iv!A RCH ! 7, 2()()8 PAGE! of! MINUTES FOR THE CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION Monday, March 17, 2008 at 6:00 p.m. Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street CALL TO ORDER Mayor Morrison called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street. ATTENDANCE Councilors Hardesty, Silbiger, Chapman, Navickas, and Jackson were present. Councilor Hartzell was absent. 1. Look Ahead Review. City Administrator Martha Bennett reviewed the items on the Council Look Ahead. She also submitted material pertaining to the Harrison/Morton Alley Local Improvement District and the Public Art Donation, which are listed on tomorrow nights agenda. 2. Review of Regular Meeting Agenda for March 18, 2008. BPA Interim Relief Payment Agreement/Determining the Allocation of the Refunded Money Electric Director Dick Wanderscheid clarified staff is recommending $300,000 of the refunded money be allocated towards Solar Pioneer II. He added staff would still actively market the selling of the solar panels. Council questioned if this money could be used for something else, such as paying down the AFN debt. City Administrator Martha Bennett clarified this is unrestricted money and Council could allocate it as they see fit. Harrison-Morton Alley LID Interim Public Works Director Jim Olson briefly commented on the improvements to the alley, including the request for a one-way traffic designation. He also commented on the accuracy of the traffic study and indicated it would have been beneficial to have obtained figures prior to the Siskiyou Blvd. improvements. Safety Measures to Siskiyou Blvd. Mr. Olson clarified the use of rumble strips to focus the attention of drivers. He stated these are not expensive to install and would definitely be felt by drivers traveling 25 mph. Mr. Olson also commented on the installation of the pedestrian activated flashing light system and clarified lights be would located on each side of the crosswalks as well as in the median. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 6:30 p.rn. Respectfully submitted, April Lucas, Assistant to City Recorder CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL il/fEET/NG ivfARCH /7, 2008 PAGE / of4 MINUTES FOR THE CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING Monday, March 17, 2008 at 6:30 p.m. Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street CALL TO ORDER Mayor Morrison called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street. ROLL CALL Councilors Hardesty, Silbiger, Chapman, Jackson and Navickas were present. Councilor Hartzell arrived at 6:34 p.m. NEW BUSINESS 1. Should the Council conduct first reading of an Ordinance titled, "An Ordinance Amending Chapter 18 of the Ashland Municipal Code, providing for revisions to definitions and zoning district classifications, providing for revisions to conditional use standards and general regulations for the following zoning districts: woodland residential, rural residential, single family residential, suburban residential, low density multi-family residential, high density multi family residential, North Mountain neighborhood, retail commercial, employment, industrial, health care services and Southern Oregon University; providing for revisions to chapters for tree preservation and protection, physical and environmental constraints, general regulations, site design review, partitions, performance standards option, parking, sign age, procedures and enforcement, providing also for corrections to and adoption of official maps, including zoning and overlay maps in digital format"? Community Development Director Bill Molnar and Senior Planner Maria Harris address the Council. Mr. Molnar briefly reviewed the ALva changes approved by the Council at the February 4, 2008 Special Meeting and indicated the remaining key issues Council needs to decide on are: · Does the Council want to permit there to be an Evidentiary Hearing by staff for Type II decisions? If so, does the Council wish to define specific criteria for these hearings? · Does the City Council want to adopt a process that requires appeals to the City Council from the Planning Commission to be held "on-the-record"? If yes, then the Council needs to discuss the scope of the proceedings, as well as define the criteria that the City Administrator would use when making a decision to allow a partial de-novo hearing? Councilor Navickas recommended the Council allow for a limited de-novo hearing. He explained this would require the appellant to put forward their argument and would allow the public the opportunity to speak before the Council regarding that specific argument. City Attorney Richard Appicello clarified staff had discussed this option, and if Council agreed to this process, the following sentence would need to be deleted from 18.108.110, Section 105(e), "A party shall not be permitted oral argument if written arguments have not been timely submitted." He added the Council would also need to define "party" in the ordinance. City Administrator Martha Bennett recommended if the above sentence is deleted, the subsequent sentence be amended to read, "Written arguments shall be submitted by the appellant no less than ten days prior to the Council consideration of the appeal. " Ms. Bennett indicated it would be difficult to hold the public to only speak to the appeal argument and asked for Council's input regarding this option. Council briefly discussed the best way to come to consensus on these issues and agreed to deliberate on the following decision points: 1) Does the Council want to allow oral testimony at the appeal? 2) Who would be allowed to speak? -r I CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL lvfEETfNG !\1ARCH /7, 200S PAGE 2 of4 3) Would they be required to submit written argument prior to speaking? 4) What would they be allowed to speak to? 5) How would the Council deal with new evidence? Does the Council want to allow oral testimony at the appeal? Council agreed they would allow oral testimony at the appeal. Who would be allowed to speak? Mr. Appicello clarified the proposed language indicates only parties who participated at a previous level (Planning Commission Meeting or Evidentiary Hearing) would be allowed to speak. Councilor Navickas voiced his preference to allow any member of the public to speak to the issues that have been raised, and to not define "party" as someone who has already participated in the process. The remainder of the Council voiced support for limiting testimony to parties who have participated at a previous level. Would parties be required to submit written argument prior to speaking? Mr. Appicello clarified the appellant would have to submit the basis of their appeal in writing, and staff would use this to prepare the Notice of Appeal that is mailed out to the parties along with instructions. Parties would then be required to submit their arguments in writing 14 days prior to the Council's consideration. Ms. Bennett commented that this requirement would force the parties to articulate their arguments. Councilor Navickas expressed concern that this would create a convoluted process and requested Council allow the public to give testimony before their elected officials. Councilor Hartzell suggested allowing only the parties to speak without first having submitted written argument. The remainder of the Council voiced support for requiring parties to submit written argument prior to speaking. What would parties be allowed to speak to? Mr. Appicello stated the testimony would be limited to the issues clearly and distinctly set forth in the Notice of Appeal. Council agreed with this requirement. How would the Council deal with new evidence? Mr. Appicello clarified there are several options in the event new facts are presented. He explained the decision could be remanded back to the Planning Commission, or there are instances where the City Administrator could determine that it should be heard by the Council. Councilor Navickas voiced his opposition to sending the decision back to the Planning Commission and stated this could result in a more lengthy process. Comment was made that if there are new facts, remanding to the Planning Commission was the appropriate action to take; however, if the 120 day rule is an issue, the proposed language provides adequately for staff to make the decision about whether it should come to Council. Councilors Jackson, Silbiger, Chapman, Hardesty and Hartzell voiced support for the proposed language. Ms. Bennett indicated staff needs clarification on whether the City Administrator or the Staff Advisor (Community Development Director) should have the authority to decide whether new facts should come to Council for a hearing. Support was voiced for the City Administrator to have this authority. Mr. Appicello commented on the provision for the Planning Commission decision to be final. He stated this was included mainly because of the 120-day rule and clarified the Planning Commission hearing would be de-novo and they could only address the new fact or procedural error. Mr. Appicello clarified the proposed language states the Council may elect to send the decision back to the Planning Commission; they are not required to. Ms. Bennett voiced her support for retaining this flexibility in the ordinance. Mayor Morrison suggested this language be revised to read, "If the City Council elects to remand a decision to the Planning Commission, either summarily or otherwise, the CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL lvfEETING AIARCH 17, 2008 PAGE 3 (~f4 Planning Commission shall be the final decision of the City unless the Council calls the matter up pursuant to 18.108. o 70.B. 5. "Council voiced support for this modification. Evidentiary Hearings Mr. Appicello clarified this hearing is not required by ORS, but would provide additional opportunity for the public to participate. Mr. Molnar explained the proposed ordinance allows the Staff Advisor to determine whether to hold an evidentiary hearing. He noted this hearing could be less formal than a Planning Commission hearing and would provide the public with an understanding of the application. Mr. Molnar questioned whether Council is comfortable leaving this discretion with the Staff Advisor or whether specific criteria should be set on when an evidentiary hearing would be held. Ms. Bennett voiced her support for not including criteria for specific types of projects and indicated staff would err on the side of more public participation. Mr. Molnar clarified staff would adhere to the existing noticing requirements for an evidentiary hearing. Suggestion was made for these hearings to also be noticed on the City's website. Mr. Appicello commented on the standards for participation and recommended a speaker request form be utilized to constitute participation. Support was voiced for the evidentiary hearing process included in the proposed ordinance. Questions submitted by Councilor Hartzell Fee Language: Councilor Hartzell suggested the zero fee language be removed from the ordinance and stated if the language is included there might be tendency to start charging a fee. Councilors Navickas and Hardesty voiced support for this suggestion. Councilors Jackson, Silbiger and Chapman disagreed. Mayor Morrison noted the limited time remaining and indicated this question would have to be resolved later. Councilor JacksonlHardesty m/s to extend meeting to 9:30 p.m. Voice Vote: Councilors Jackson, Chapman, Silbiger, Hardesty and Navickas, YES. Councilor Hartzell, NO. Motion passed 5-1. Fire Code Changes: 18.76.060.B Councilor Hartzell shared her concerns regarding the proposed Fire Code language listed on page 53, Section 89(B). Suggestion was made to modify the proposed language to remove consideration factors 2, 3 and 4 so that it the language would read, "The Staff Advisor, in coordination with the Fire Code Official, may extend the distance of the turnaround requirement up to a maximum of 250 feet in length as allowed by Oregon Fire Code access exemptions. " Support was voiced for this modification. Porous Surfaces: 18.08.160 Councilor Hartzell recommended the following sentence be removed from the ordinance, "Up to five percent of the lot area having porous solid surfaces, such as paths, patios, decks, and similar surfaces is exempt from lot coverage requirements. " Mr. Molnar explained this language was included to provide an incentive that would provide more ground water infiltration; however staff would be fine with removing it if that is Council's decision. Comment was made suggesting this language be removed and the Planning Commission could address this modification at second reading if it is an issue. ARU: 18.24.040 Councilor Hartzell recommended removing Section 32 beginning on page 13 of the ordinance. Mr. Molnar provided a brief explanation of why this was included and noted the intent was to "even the playing field" in R2 and R3 zones. He stated this language would allow for accessory units that are 500 ft. or less in size, and noted these structures would still have to comply with the lot requirements. Councilor Navickas also expressed concern with the proposed language. Suggestion was made for this issue to be CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL lvlEETlNG l'v1ARCH 17, l008 PAGE 4 of'4 dealt with at the second reading. Councilor Navickas indicated he would seek further clarification from staff. Ms. Bennett noted the limited amount of meeting time remaining and questioned how many other issues still needed to be addressed. She clarified Council could still approve first reading tonight if they so choose. Councilor Hartzell/Navickas mls to extend to meeting to 9:45 p.m. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed. Mr. Appicello read the title of the ordinance aloud along with the following changes requested by Council: 1) Page 2, Section 4: Delete sentence "Up to five percent of the lot area having porous solid surfaces, such as paths, patios, decks, and similar surfaces is exempt from lot coverage requirements. " 2) Page 53, Section 89: Modify sentence to read "The Staff Advisor, in coordination with the Fire Code Official, may extend the distance of the turnaround requirement up to a maximum of 250 feet in length as allowed by Oregon Fire Code access exemptions." Mr. Appicello noted this same change would also be made to page 55, Section 9l. 3) Page 79, Section 105(5): Modify sentence to read "If the City Council elects to remand a decision to the Planning Commission, either summarily or otherwise, the Planning Commission shall be the final decision of the City unless the Council calls the matter up pursuant to 18. 108. 070.B. 5. " Councilor Chapman/Hardesty mls to approve first reading that includes the proposed amendments to the Land Use Ordinance as recommended by the Planning Commission and Staff with the revisions as suggested by the Council, and request that the ordinance be brought back for second reading. Roll Call Vote: Councilors Hartzell, Jackson, Silbiger, Chapman, and Hardesty, YES. Councilor Navickas, NO. Motion Passed 5-1. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 9:45 p.m. April Lucas, Assistant to City Recorder John W. Morrison, Mayor ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING Mil RCH 18. 2008 PAGE 1018 MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL March 18, 2008 Council Chambers, 1175 E. Main Street CALL TO ORDER Mayor Morrison called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.rn. in the Civic Center Council Chambers. ROLL CALL Councilors Hardesty, Navickas, Hartzell, Jackson, Silbiger and Chapman were present. MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENT OF BOARD AND COMMISSION VACANCIES Mayor Morrison announced the City is in the process of determining the annual appointments to the various commissions, committees and boards. SHOULD THE COUNCIL APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THESE MEETINGS? The minutes ofthe Executive Session of March 4,2008, Executive Session of March 10,2008 and Regular Council Meeting of March 4,2008 were approved as presented. The minutes of the Study Session of March 3, 2008 were approved with the following amendment: Page 3, fourth bullet point, replace the word "Council" with "Could". SPECIAL PRESENT A TIONS & A WARDS Mayor's Proclamation of Autism Month was read aloud by Councilor Hartzell. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Does the Council accept the Minutes of Boards, Commissions, and Committees? 2. Will the Council, acting as the Local Contract Review Board, consent to extend an existing Intergovernmental Agreement #2005-2006-09 between Jackson County, Community Justice, and the City of Ashland until6/30/2010? 3. Does the Council wish to accept the recommendation of the Public Art Commission to accept the Lloyd Haines paintings as a gift of public art? 4. Will the Council authorize a contract with Carollo Engineers P.C. in the amount of $83,195 to complete the Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) Permit Renewal with Temperature Solution and Update to the Facilities Plan? Consent Agenda items #2, #3, and #4 were pulled for discussion. Councilor Jackson/Silbiger mls to approve Consent Agenda item #1. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed 6-0. City Administrator Martha Bennett clarified the City's Living Wage Ordinance would not apply to the Intergovernmental Agreement with Jackson County Community Justice. Councilor Jackson/Hartzell mls to approve Consent Agenda item #2. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed 6-0. Councilor Hartzell noted the email from Lloyd Haines that indicates his opposition to the planning fee and his desire to ensure the art is visible to the public and placed on public property. City Attorney Richard Appicello clarified the staff recommendation is to place the art under the viaduct and for the payment of the fees to be a condition of acceptance. Councilors Hartzell and Navickas expressed concern with the way this donation ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL AIEETlNC AIARCH /8, 2008 PAGE 2 oj'8 came about. Councilor Hardesty shared her perspective as the liaison to the Public Arts Commission and voiced support. Councilors Silbiger and Jackson also voiced their support. Approval of Consent Agenda item #3: Voice Vote: Councilors Jackson, Silbiger, Hardesty and Chapman, YES. Councilors Hartzell and Navickas, NO. Motion passed 4-2. Councilor Hartzell suggested future staff reports include information on what the other bids were and why staff selected the one they did. She also questioned if there was a way to stress to Carollo that the City be provided a full breadth of options and alternatives regarding the temperature issue. City Administrator Martha Bennett voiced her support of Council reinforcing this interest. Councilor Hartzell/Hardesty m/s to approve Consent Agenda item #4 with special emphasis on staffto emphasize alternatives to the temperature problem in what comes back to staff and in the expertise that goes on to the stakeholder group. DISCUSSION: Councilor Hardesty noted the cover letter states "including thermal load water quality trading alternatives with the Talent Irrigation District and others" and thinks this is a great idea and would like this pursued. Councilor Navickas stated he does not want the flows in Bear Creek to be reduced. Councilor Hartzell suggested the Council be involved earlier in the process, before the stakeholder group meets. V oice Vote: all A YES. Motion passed 6-0. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Will Council adopt a resolution authorizing and ordering the improvement of the alley between Harrison and Morton Streets by formation of a Local Improvement District? Will Council adopt the findings and orders pertaining to the formation of the Harrison to Morton Alley Local Improvement District? Public Hearin2 Opened: 7:28 p.m. Ex parte Contact Mayor Morrison and Councilors Navickas, Hartzell, Chapman, and Silbiger reported no ex parte contact. Councilor Hardesty indicated she had spoken with Diarmuid McGuire. She stated they spoke about the surface of the alley, the substance the neighbors used to mitigate dust and the increase in traffic since the Siskiyou Blvd. improvements. She stated no new information was exchanged and indicated she would be able to make a fair and unbiased decision. Councilor Jackson noted she lives near the proposed district and is familiar with the changes that have happened and the traffic patterns. She noted she was neighbors with Hamid Ghavam and had forwarded emails from Diarmuid McGuire to staff. Challen2es - None Staff Report Interim Public Works Director Jim Olson presented the staff report and explained this LID proposal is in response to petitions that were submitted from 5 of the 9 members of the neighborhood. Mr. Olson provided a history of the neighborhood meetings and the concerns expressed by some of the property owners. He explained the neighbors tried to reach a compromise and those that were opposed to the LID indicated they might be in favor if the alley was changed to a one-way. Mr. Olson noted the Traffic Safety Commission reviewed this request and approved it with the condition that the alley must also be paved. He stated a paved alley would allow for one-way markings on the surface and could allow for speed humps. ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL IHEETlNG lv/ARCH /8, 2008 PAGE3o{S Mr. Olson explained that staff was under the impression that the neighborhood had come to a consensus, but has since learned that three of the neighbors are still opposed the formation of the LID to pave the alleyway. Mr. Olson commented on the current condition of the alley and clarified it has a recycled asphalt surface. He also provided an explanation of the costs for the project. It was clarified the total cost for each property owner would be $2,526 and the City's portion would be $11,315. Mr. Olson noted this project would include some additional work on Harrison; however, these improvements would not be part of the assessment cost. Councilor Jackson relayed the following information she obtained fro the Traffic Safety Commission in regards to the traffic counts for the different segments of the alley: the first segment, which is the longest, has 166 vehicles per day with an average speed of 13.7 mph; the second segment has 34 vehicles per day with an average speed of 13.5 mph; the third segment has 49 vehicles per day with an average speed of 11.5 mph; and the last segment has 37 vehicles per day with an average speed of just under 10 mph. Mr. Olson clarified the suggestion to make the alley a one-way came from the neighborhood and stated that staff has determined the traffic levels have increased on this alley since the completion of the Siskiyou Blvd. improvements. Mr. Olson stated the cost for maintaining the recycled asphalt surface is approximately $2,500 per year. He added that alleys are problematic for the City to maintain because they are so narrow and it is difficult for the City's equipment to maneuver them. Those Wishine to Provide Testimonv Diarmuid McGuire/696 Siskiyou Blvd #l/Disagreed with the sediment and runoff issues raised by staff and noted there is no decomposed granite in this alley and it is relatively horizontal. He agreed that the dust is a problem, but questioned if there were other ways besides asphalt to address this. Mr. McGuire expressed concern that paving the alley would create unintended consequences and voiced support for improvements that would accommodate bicycles and pedestrians instead. He suggested a pervious block system and restoring the tlowerbeds along the alley, and urged the Council to look beyond asphalt as the solution. Ken Baker/684 Siskiyou Blvd/Questioned the accuracy of the traffic counts and stated these were obtained over SOU's Christmas break. Mr. Baker challenged staffs assertion that paving would not increase traffic and speeds, and voiced his opposition to the paving of this alley. He commented on the build up of rock and granite and stated there are other design issues that have not been accounted for. Mr. Baker stated the one-way designation would create turning issues onto the alley and requested the Council look at the bigger picture. Colin Swales/461 Allison/Noted he is a member of the City's Traffic Safety Commission, but abstained from voting on this issue since he lives in the area. Mr. Swales stated turning the alley into a one-way goes against the City's Comprehensive Plan, stated filling the potholes would not take a lot of effort, and the neighbors could do this themselves. Mr. Swales agreed that asphalt was not the best solution for this alley and suggested the neighbors work together to find a better solution. Abdol Hamid Ghavam/195 Morton St/Stated they never had any problems with the alley until the City decided to redesign Siskiyou Blvd. and close the medians at Liberty and Harrison Streets. He stated vehicles now use this alley as a shortcut and feels even more cars would use it if it were paved. Mr. Ghavam noted the dust issue, but recommended they look for another solution instead of paving. Toni DiLeo/162 HarrisonN oiced support for paving the alley and noted the enormous amounts of dust and mud. Ms. DiLeo stated the other sections of the alley are paved and encouraged the Council to support the proposed alley improvement. Letter from Victoria Hilden voicing support for the LID was read into the ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL /v/BET/NG lvfARCf! /8, 2008 PAGE 4 ol8 record by Ms. DiLeo. Erik Wallbank/162 Harrison/Stated there are 9 properties along the alley; 5 approve, 3 oppose and I has abstained. Mr. Wallbank stated the neighbor who abstained rents the property to the SOU football team and at times, there are 5 vehicles parked in the alley because of this one property. He suggested the traffic counts would be higher if the counts were not taken over SOU's Christmas break. Mr. Wallbank urged the Council to support the LID. He commented on the neighbors efforts to mitigate the dust and noted there are probably 20- 30 potholes along the alley. Richard Anderson/176 HarrisonN oiced support for the paving project and commented on the potholes, dust and mud. Mr. Anderson stated the City has re-graveled the alley several times, but it quickly falls back into disrepair. He noted the neighbors have applied a product to try to reduce the dust, but without consistent application, it does not last. He stated all of the neighbors would benefit from this improvement and stated paving the alley was the best long-term solution. Matt Warshawsky/821 Indiana Street/Noted he is Chair ofthe Traffic Safety Commission, but the following is his personal testimony. Mr. Warshawsky voiced his opposition to a one-way designation of this alley and noted the high use of this alley by bicyclists. He noted that cyclists are required to follow the laws of the road, and they would be required to observe the one-way designation as well. Public Hearin2 Closed: 8:33 p.m. Staff response Mr. Olson commented on the dust abatement measures the neighbors had been using and stated its effects were temporary. He clarified brick paving or cobblestones are not compliant with the City's Street Standards and stated asphalt paving is the desired surface. He added there have been instances where concrete has been used, however this is a much more expensive process and has never been done on a public street. Mr. Olson clarified if the one-way designation were approved; bicycles traveling the opposite direction would have to walk their bikes along this section of alley. He also clarified the Traffic Element of the Comprehensive Plan does not prohibit one-ways, but they are looked at with caution and considered on an individual basis. Mr. Olson stated the maintenance costs would be drastically reduced if this alley were paved and voiced support of the use of City funds for this project. Mayor Morrison announced that the Council deliberation would be continued later in the meeting. 2. Does the Council want to approve a resolution removing the BPA Surcharge (current average impact is 10.8% per account) and raising electric rates for usage by 8.7% for accounts subject to the electric user's tax and 10.8% for accounts not subject to the tax? Public Hearin2 Opened: 8:45 p.m. Electric Department Director Dick Wanderscheid presented the staff report and provided a brief history of the BP A surcharge. He stated staff recommends the Council adopt the proposed resolution that eliminates the BP A surcharge and increases electric rates for usage by 8.7% for accounts subject to the electric user's tax and 10.8% for accounts not subject to the tax. Mr. Wanderscheid clarified the reduction in the surcharge is equal to the increase in electric rates and individuals should not see a difference in their electric bills. Public Hearin2 Closed: 8:49 p.m. ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL lvlEETlNG /vfARCflI8,2008 PAGE 50(8 Mr. Wanderscheid clarified there are certain government accounts that do not pay the electric users tax. He stated those who do not pay the tax would have a higher increase in electric rates to make up for this. Administrative Services Director Lee Tuneberg commented that the new rate structure is set by class and those that use less power would pay less and those that use more would see a slightly larger bill. Councilor Hartzell/Silbiger m/s to approve Resolution #2008-05. Roll Call Vote: Councilors Hardesty, Silbiger, Chapman, Navickas, Hartzell and Jackson, YES. Motion passed 6-0. PUBLIC FORUM Dan Folliard/l032 Oak KnolllVoiced his concern with Oregon Department of Transportation's (ODOT) proposed plan to put a rest area south of Ashland. He expressed concern that oil from vehicles would end up in Bear Creek and voiced opposition to the rest area connecting to the City's water and sewer systems. Mr. Folliard requested the Council put the citizens of Ashland first and deny ODOT's access to the City's water and sewer systems. Brent Thompson/582 Allison/Concurred with Mr. F olliard' s testimony. He also commented on the Chamber of Commerce's "Living and Doing Business in Ashland" publication and recommended this publication focus more on sustainability instead of real estate. Allen Baker/l042 Oak Knoll/Stated he is President ofthe Oak Knoll Meadows Homeowners Association and stated the neighborhood strongly oppose 0 DOT's proposed rest area. Mr. Baker noted the rest area would only be three blocks away from their neighborhood and stated it would provide easy access to anyone with ill intent. He explained all of the houses in this development are backed by a common area that includes a system of pathways and expressed concern with the easy access to the backs of their homes. He stated there is no money available for the welcome center portion and urged the Council to stop this project. Ambuja Rosen/Commented on her research in regards to an anti-tethering ordinance. PUBLIC HEARINGS - Continued at 9: 15 p.m. 1. Will Council adopt a resolution authorizing and ordering the improvement of the alley between Harrison and Morton Streets by formation of a Local Improvement District? Will Council adopt the findings and orders pertaining to the formation of the Harrison to Morton Alley Local Improvement District? Councilor Jackson/Navickas m/s to establish the Local Improvement District to pave the alley, install speed bumps and drainage, and to evaluate whether the one-way designation is necessary. DISCUSSION: Councilor Jackson suggested they do not have enough information at this point to move forward with the one-way designation and recommended additional study on the traffic pattern. Councilor Navickas noted the majority of the neighbors support this LID, but agreed that there has not been enough study to justify the one-way. Councilor Hardesty indicated her reluctance to vote for this LID. Councilor Hartzell stated the unpaved surface seems to be an inhibitor to traffic and stated she is not in favor of paving the alley so that it can serve as vehicular access between streets. Councilor Chapman indicated he does not see the urgency in moving forward with the project and recommended they wait until this becomes a higher priority. City Administrator Martha Bennett clarified staff if in the process of working on the City's LID policy but does not have a date as to when this will come before Council. Mayor Morrison commented on City priorities and noted it was the Council who decided to schedule this hearing. Ms. Bennett noted when the Council set the hearing they were under the impression all of the neighbors were supportive of this LID. Roll Call Vote: Councilors Jackson and Navickas, YES. Councilors Hartzell, Chapman, Silbiger and ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL l\llEETlNG lv/ARCH/8,2008 PAGE 6 ors Hardesty, NO. Motion failed 4-2. NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS 1. Does the Council want to authorize the City Administrator to sign the Standstill & Interim Relief Payment Agreement with the Bonneville Power Administration? How much of the moneys distributed with this agreement should be distributed to the General Fund? How much should be distributed to the Electric Fund? Electric Director Dick Wanderscheid noted this issue is time sensitive. He stated the agreement needs to be approved tonight; however, Council does not need to make a decision on what to do with the funding at this time. Mr. Wanderscheid explained staff is recommending that $336,000 of the $636,000 be placed in the City's General Fund, and that $300,000 go to the Electric Utility Fund for Solar Pioneer II, which would eliminate the need to sell the Clean Renewable Energy bonds. He clarified this money from BP A has no strings attached and the Council can allocate it differently if they choose. City Administrator Martha Bennett clarified by signing the agreement, the City is giving up their right to sue BP A over the settlement. Councilor Hartzell/Navickas mls to authorize City Administrator to sign the Standstill & Interim Relief Payment Agreement with 'the Bonneville Power Administration. Roll Call Vote: Councilors Navickas, Chapman, Hartzell, Hardesty, Silbiger and Jackson, YES. Motion passed 6-0. Council discussed alternative uses for the money. Councilor Hartzell suggested putting some of the money towards electric rate relief for low-income citizens and to enhance the City's current program. Councilor Silbiger suggested placing the funds towards to the AFN debt. If the Council decides to put the money towards AFN, Ms. Bennett suggested they put the money towards the incremental increase the City will face for the AFN debt payment next year. She further clarified the debt payment will increase by $242,000 next year and will continue to increase. Councilor Hardesty/Silbiger mls to take $242,000 of the payment from BP A and apply it to the AFN debt and put the remainder of the money into the General Fund. DISCUSSION: Councilor Hardesty commented on not using the funds for the Solar Pioneer project, and noted the CREB bonds have a very low interest rate. Councilor Chapman voiced preference for putting the entire amount toward the AFN debt service payments. Councilor Hartzell suggested not putting all of the money towards this years AFN payment and putting some into the General Fund for subsequent year's payment. Councilor Chapman/Hardesty mls to amend motion to direct the remainder of the money to the 2009/10 AFN debt payment. DISCUSSION: Mayor Morrison clarified this amendment would allocate $242,000 to the upcoming AFN debt payment, and the balance would go towards the 2009/1 0 AFN debt payment. Ms. Bennett clarified staff would put the balance in the Debt Service Fund until it is needed. Roll Call Vote: Councilors Silbiger, Hartzell, Hardesty and Chapman, YES. Councilors Jackson and Navickas, NO. Motion passed 4-2. Roll Call Vote on Motion as Amended: Councilors Silbiger, Navickas, Hartzell, Hardesty and Chapman, YES. Councilor Jackson, NO. Motion passed 5-1. Councilor Hardesty motioned to direct staff to bring back at the next Council meeting a plan for marketing Solar Pioneer II. Motion died due to lack of second. Ms. Bennett clarified staff would provide the draft marketing materials and plan, and suggested the Council review this information before scheduling this as an agenda item. ASHLAND CiTY COUNCIL lv/BETlNG lvfARCl! /8, 2008 PAGE 70(8 2. Will Council review the Traffic Safety Commission's recommendations to improve pedestrian safety on Siskiyou Boulevard and provide input for additional measures? Interim Public Works Director Jim Olson listed the recommendations of the Traffic Safety Commission as the following: 1) Petition the state traffic engineer to lower the speed limit on Siskiyou Blvd. from E. Main to Walker Ave. to 25 mph. 2) Install thermoplastic rumple strips and pavement markings before the Bridge S1. and University Way crosswalks. 3) Install pedestrian activated amber flashing beacons at the Bridge and Garfield crosswalks. 4) Replace existing 70-watt lamps in the "cobra head" luminaries with ISO-watt lamps from the MorselBeach intersection to Frances Lane. 5) Install pedestrian activated amber flashing beacons at the Garfield crosswalk that are compatible and would support possible future installation of in-pavement flashing LEDs; and for the Garfield/Siskiyou intersection to be studied in further detail. Mr. Olson noted the issues related to the installation of the 150 watt lamps, and stated this is outside of staff s ability. He recommended staff could do a "test run" and switch out just a few lights; or they could contract with a professional for assistance. He also commented on the issues related to the Garfield intersection and crosswalk and suggested they might need to discuss possible closure of one or more lanes as this location. Colin Swales/461 Allison Street/Noted he is on the Traffic Safety Commission and stated their discussion was rushed and based on very little data. Mr. Swales felt some of the recommendations were made hastily and requested the Council look at this issue carefully and not rush into any decisions. He suggested the problem is with traffic speeds, not traffic counts, and suggested they concentrate their efforts on reducing vehicle speed. Eve Woods/l103 Withington Street, Medford/Stated she is a student at SOU and noted she has been conducting research. Ms. Woods recommended the Council move forward with the Traffic Safety Commission's recommendations and stated she had witnessed 10 near accidents in the past week, including one incident that involved her. She stated the students are still very concerned and urged the Council to take action soon. Tom Burnhaml1344 Apple Way/Stated he is a member of the City's Bicycle & Pedestrian Commission but is not speaking on behalf of the Commission. Mr. Burnham cautioned the Council against moving forward too hastily and suggested the use ofa subcommittee comprised of members from SOU, the Bicycle & Pedestrian Commission, Traffic Safety Commission, and Public Works and Police Department staff to develop a good solution to this problem. Matt Warshawsky/821 Indiana Street/Indicated he is Chair of the Traffic Safety Commission and clarified the Commission only examined the quick and inexpensive options to this issue and decided to conduct a more in-depth evaluation at subsequent meetings. He agreed that they should not move forward too hastily and stated more study is needed. Craig Morris/1250 Siskiyou Blvd/Stated he is Vice President for Finance and Administration at SOU. Mr. Morris expressed SOU's support for the Traffic Safety Commission's recommendations and stated they need to move quickly and take some quick and deliberate steps to increase safety. He commented on the proposal to install pedestrian activated lights at two of the crosswalks and stated SOU is willing to pay for the lighting systems at the remaining two crosswalks. Mr. Morris commented on the outpouring of concern from students and parents and recommended the Council move forward with short-term solutions. ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL ,\-fEET/lYG i'vfARCl! 18, 2008 PAGE 8 0(8 Councilor Hartzell/Jackson m/s to: 1) accept the Traffic Safety Commission's recommendation to petition the state traffic engineer to lower the speed limit on Siskiyou Blvd. from E Main St. to Walker Ave. to 25 mph, 2) direct staff to request proposals from qualified lighting engineering consultants to study and bring back recommendations to improve the boulevard lighting, and to include non- traditional models in this study, and 3) direct staffto request proposals to correct/modify the Garfield and Bridge intersections as soon as possible. DISCUSSION: Councilor Hartzell clarified the motion does not include the Traffic Safety Commission's recommendation regarding the pedestrian activated lighting or the installation of rumble strips. She stated that at this point she would rather focus staff s attention of getting specialized people in town as soon as possible to look at the situation and propose remedies. Councilor Chapman commented on the Traffic Safety Commission's recommendations and offered the following suggestions: 1) broaden the speed study to include Ashland Street up to Faith Avenue, 2) voiced support for the installation of thermal rumble strips and pedestrian activated beacons, 3) commented that it has not been determined that increasing the light wattage would improve pedestrian safety, and 4) noted the Garfield crosswalk is coming back before the Traffic Safety Commission at their next meeting. Councilor Chapman voiced support for the Traffic Safety Commission to continue their work on this issue and voiced opposition to the City hiring consultants at this point. Councilor Hardesty stated they need some short-term efforts and long- term solutions. She voiced support for the reduction of the speed limits, and suggested they proceed with the pedestrian lighting and rumble strips. Councilor Navickas/Jackson mls to amend motion to include rumble strips and the pedestrian activated amber flashing beacons. DISCUSSION: Councilor Navickas stated these are simple and quick things they can do to help improve the safety, but also voiced support for a thorough study and long-term plan. Roll Call Vote: Councilors Silbiger, Jackson, Hartzell, Navickas, Chapman and Hardesty, YES. Motion passed 6- o. DISCUSSION Continued on motion as amended: Councilor Hartzell stated she is interested in a long-term study as well, but would like to bring someone in during the short term to evaluate the two intersections. Mayor Morrison suggested Council return these issues to the Traffic Safety Commission for their continued analysis. Councilor Jackson/Chapman mls to table motion and allow the Traffic Safety Commission to continue with their deliberations on this subject. Roll Call Vote: Councilors Silbiger, Jackson, Chapman and Hardesty, YES. Councilors Navickas and Hartzell, NO. Motion passed 4-2. 3. Which of the public art funding options does the Council wish to explore through the public hearing process? Item delayed due to time constraints. ORDINANCES. RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS 1. Does the Council wish to approve second reading of a proposed Ordinance titled, "An Ordinance amending the Ashland Municipal Code, Chapter 2.12, City Planning Commission"? Item delayed due to time constraints. ADJOURNMENT Meeting adjourned at 10:30 p.rn. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder John W. Morrison, Mayor 'I' I CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Meeting Date: Department: Secondary Dept.: Tree City USA Presentation April 1, 2008 Primary Staff Contact: Community Development E-Mail: Planning Department Secondary Contact: Approval: Martha Bennett Estimated Time: Amy Anderson andersona@)ashland.or.us Bill Molnar molnarb@ashland.or.us 10 minutes Question: None. The National Arbor Day foundation and its sponsor, the Oregon Department of Forestry (ODF) have announced that the City of Ashland has been recognized as a Tree City USA for the 23rd consecutive year. Staff Recommendation: N/A Background: For the past 23 years the City of Ashland has meet the four criteria set forth by the National Arbor Day Foundation. The four criteria include a tree care ordinance, establishment of a tree board or commission, spending at least $2 per capita on a community tree care program and conducting an Arbor Day or Arbor Week ceremony. Related City Policies: The Comprehensive Plan has a policy in the Parks, Open Space and Aesthetics Chapter 8. 17which states: "The City shall take necessary steps to annually be a Tree City, USA." The City's ordinances related to this topic are the Street Tree Commission, Powers and Duties in Chapter 2.25 of the Ashland Municipal Code and the Tree Preservation and Protection Ordinance in Chapter 18.61 of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance. Council Options: N/A Potential Motions: N/A Attachments: National Arbor Day Foundation - Award Letter National Arbor Day Foundation - Press Release Page] of] 040] 08 Tree City USA Presentation.CC.doc r., ~ The National ~ Arbor Day Foundatiott' 211 N. 12th St. Lincoln. NE 68508.402-474-5655 .un~I'~~~!~ 'fe inspire people to plmlt, llurture. and celebrate trees. February 28, 2008 The Honorable John Morrison Mayor of the City of Ashland 20 E. Main Street Ashland, OR 97520 -., \ I .): . / ~ Dear Mayor Morrison, F L._~,~ ' Congratulations to Ashland on being named as a 2007 Tree City USA! Trees in our cities and towns help clean the air, conserve soil and water, moderate temperature, and bring nature into our daily lives. Trees are a vital component of the infrastructure in our cities and towns, and provide environmental and economical benefits. A community, and its citizens, that recognize these benefits and provide needed care for its trees deserves recognition and thanks. Tree City USA recognizes communities that have proven their commitment to an effective, ongoing community forestry program. Such a program is one marked by renewal and improvement. Tree City USA is sponsored in cooperation with the National Association of State Foresters and the USDA Forest Service. State foresters are responsible for the presentation of the Tree City USA flag and other materials. We will forward your awards to Paul D. Ries in your state forester's office. Ibey will be coordinating the presentation with you. It would be especially appropriate to make the Tree City USA award a part of your Arbor Day ceremony. Again, congratulations on receiving this national recognition for your tree-care program. Best regards, ~~~ John Rosenow Chief Executive cc: Amy D. Anderson @~~~=-~~~~:l. For more information, contact r-.' ark Derowitsch, Public Relations Manager at mderowitsch@arborday.org or call 888-448-7337 News from ~ The National ~ Arbor Day Foundation@ 211 N. 121h St. · Lincoln. NE 68508' 402.474-5655.~n_-''''' We inspire people to plant, nurture, tmd celebrate trees. FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Ashland Named Tree City USA Ashland has been named a Tree City USA community by the Arbor Day Foundation to honor its commitment to community forestry. It is the twenty-third year Ashland has received this national recognition. The Tree City USA program is sponsored by the Arbor Day Foundation in cooperation with the National Association of State Foresters and the USDA Forest Service. Ashland has met the four standards to become a Tree City USA community: a tree board or department, a tree care ordinance, a comprehensive community forestry program, and an Arbor Day observance. "Trees in our cities and towns help clean the air, conserve soil and water, moderate temperature and bring nature into our daily lives," said John Rosenow, Chief Executive of the Arbor Day Foundation. "Tree City USA designation recognizes the work of elected officials, staff and citizens who plant and care for the community forest. Trees are a vital component of the infrastructure in our cities and towns, and provide environmental and economical benefits. A community, and its citizens, that recognize these benefits and provide needed care for its trees deserves recognition and thanks." # # # ~~-.;;;.T.J; -'.-'1 . 1Ik~~___l~_~Y fNKJ_ 7:1~ CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Meeting Date: Department: Secondary Dept.: Approval: Senate Bill!!! Compliance April 1 , 2008 Primary Staff Contact: Police E-Mail: Secondary Contact: Martha Bennett Estimated Time: Terry Holderness Holderness@ashland.or.us 15 minutes Question: Will the Council approve the plan that Jackson County developed to comply with Senate Bill 111, which requires County's to develop and implement a plan for investigations of law enforcement uses of deadly physical force in the line of duty? Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that Council vote to support the plan developed in Jackson County to comply with Senate Bill 111. Background: Jackson County District Attorney Mark Huddleston will be making a presentation requesting that the City Council support the plan developed to comply with Senate Bill 111. The 2007 session of the Oregon legislative assembly passed Senate Bill 111 (SB 111), which was signed by the Governor on July 27, 2007. SB 111 requires that the District Attorney and Sheriff in each county convene a Deadly Physical Force Planning Authority (Planning Authority) to draft a plan which addresses the investigation and other aspects of situations in which a law enforcement officer uses deadly physical force in the line of duty. Pursuant to the legislation, the Jackson County Planning Authority was convened, and has been meeting regularly since November 29,2007. The members of the Planning Authority are listed in the attached draft plan. Planning for the implementation of SB 111 in Jackson County has been made much easier by the existence of a county-wide plan, which has been in effect since 1996, for investigation of these incidents. The existing plan is a part of the Jackson County Cooperative Policing Manual, and has been employed successfully a number of times since adoption. Once the plan is completed it must be submitted to the governing body of the county and every city within the county. Each governing body must then either approve or disapprove the plan. If two-thirds of the governing bodies within the county approve the plan it is adopted. If two-thirds of the governing bodies do not approve the plan it goes back to the Planning Authority to be revised. The legislation forbids the cities or county from making any modifications to the plan. Prior to submitting the to plan any government entity for approval, the Planning Authority presented a draft to the Jackson County Public Safety Coordinating Council, and in a public meeting held at Medford City Hall on February 27, 2008. The plan has been discussed with the Jackson County Law Enforcement Agency Heads group, which included Chief Holderness and Deputy Chief Walsh, and the Page I of2 CC-SBIII r~' CITY OF ASHLAND Interagency Major Assault and Death Investigation Unit. Copies of the draft plan have also been sent to area law enforcement unions/associations, attorneys and to local community groups. Police Department staff was part of the review process and made suggestions that were incorporated into the plan. Police Department staff believes the proposed plan does a good job addressing issues related to the investigation and other aspects of situations in which a law enforcement officer uses deadly physical force in the line of duty and recommends approval. Related City Policies: None Council Options: The Council may either approve the plan as presented or disapprove the plan as presented. Potential Motions: I make a motion to approve the plan developed by the Jackson County Deadly Physical Force Planning Authority to address the investigation and other aspects of situations in which a law enforcement officer uses deadly physical force in the line of duty. Attachments: Letter from District Attorney Huddleston Copy of final draft of Use of Deadly Physical Force Plan Page 2 0[2 CC-SBll1 r~' OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY JACKSON COUNTY, OREGON MARK HUDDLESTON DISTRICT ATTORNEY CRIMINAL DIVISION ______-c,--""__ .,...."."....,.....-. it [1'\\ i.., III ~J J March 17, 2008 Martha Bennett City Administrator City of Ashland 20 E. Main Street Ashland, OR 97520 tBy_ ~_,,"___'_H Re: SB 111 draft plan regarding police use of deadly physical force Dear Ms. Bennett: The 2007 session of the Oregon legislative assembly passed Senate Bill 111 (SB 111), which was signed by the Governor on July 27,2007. SB 111 requires that the District Attorney and Sheriff in each county convene a Deadly Physical Force Planning Authority (Planning Authority) to draft a plan which addresses the investigation and other aspects of situations in which a law enforcement officer uses deadly physical force in the line of duty. Pursuant to the legislation, the Jackson County Planning Authority was convened, and has been meeting regularly since November 29,2007. The members of the Planning Authority are listed in the attached draft plan. Planning for the implementation of SB 111 in Jackson County has been made much easier by the existence of a county-wide plan, which has been in effect since 1996, for investigation of these incidents. The existing plan is a part of the Jackson County Cooperative Policing Manual, and has been employed successfully a number oftimes since adoption. Pursuant to Section 2, paragraphs 7 through 10, of SB 111 (see attached copy of the Senate Bill), the Jackson County Planning Authority hereby submits the enclosed plan for your approval. As indicated in the Senate Bill, the city has 60 days from receipt to approve, or disapprove, the plan. The legislation forbids the city from making any modifications to the plan. Prior to submitting the draft plan to you for approval, the Planning Authority presented it to the Jackson County Public Safety Coordinating Council, and in a public meeting held at Medford City Hall on February 27,2008. The plan has been discussed with the Jackson County Law Enforcement Agency Heads group and the Interagency Major Assault and Death Investigation Unit. Copies of the draft plan have also been sent to area law enforcement unions/associations, attorneys and to local community groups. 715 WEST 10TH STREET, MEDFORD, OR 97501-3001 · Phone: 541-774-8181 · Fax: 541-608-2982 Martha Bennett Page Two March 17, 2008 Please check with your chief of police if you have any questions about the contents or merits of this plan. If your city feels the need for a formal presentation from me or a member of the Planning Authority, please let me know. You may reach me at 608-2903, my direct line at the District Attorney's Office. As Jackson County District Attorney, I believe that we have crafted a plan that builds upon and improves an already excellent plan. I hope the City of Ashland will agree and move quickly to approve the plan. Please advise me of the results of your deliberations and the date that the city voted to approve or disapprove the plan. ~(~ Mark Huddleston District Attorney MH/bev cc: Chief Terry Holderness FINAL DRAFT PLAN March 6. 2008 DEADLY PHYSICAL FORCE PLAN Jackson County, Oregon Deadly Physical Force Planning Authority Table of Contents Members ofthe Planning Authority........................ .................. .... ................. ......... ...... 1 Preamble .................................................................................... ....................................2 Section 1: Administration.......................... ................................................. .................. 3 Section 2: Applicability of the Plan...... ........ ............. ...................... ............ .................3 Section 3: Definitions................................................................................................... 4 Section 4: Immediate Aftermath of a Deadly Force Incident....................................... 6 Section 5: The Criminal Investigation.......................................................................... 7 Section 6: Media Releases.................................... ...................................................... 10 Section 7: Access to Reports and Evidence................................................................ 10 Section 8: District Attorney........................................................................................ 11 Section 9: Internal Administration Investigation........................................................ 12 Section 10: Debriefing / Mental Health Counseling ..................................................12 Section 11: Agency Use of Force Plans, Reporting, Training and Outreach .............13 Section 12: Fiscal Impact............................... ....................... ..................................... 14 Section 13: Plan Revision........................................................................................... 14 Patrol Supervisor's Checklist.......... ....... ..................................................... Appendix A Role of Companion Officer................................ ...... ........ ..... ...................... Appendix B Members of the Planning Authority Mark Huddleston, Jackson County District Attorney (co-chair) Rod Countryman, Jackson County Undersheriff (co-chair) Chief Jon Zeliff, Central Point Police, police chief representative Sgt. Jeff Proulx, Oregon State Police, asp representative Det. Terry Newell, Medford Police, non-management representative Jim McKenzie, PSCC, citizen member On *,2008, this Plan was approved by a *-* vote of the Planning Authority, and submitted to governing bodies of the following jurisdictions: Jackson County... .... ............... ............. ....... ....................... Approved/Disapproved (date) City of Butte Falls............................................................... ApprovedlDisapproved ( date) City of Ashland............. ...................................................... ApprovedlDisapproved (date) City of Central Point........................................................... Approved/Disapproved (date) City of Eagle Point ............................................................. ApprovedlDisapproved ( date) City of Jacksonville ............................................................ ApprovedlDisapproved (date) City of Medford .................................................................. ApprovedlDisapproved ( date) City of Phoenix ................................................................... Approved/Disapproved ( date) City of Rogue River........... ...................... .................. ......... Approved/Disapproved (date) City of Shady Cove.......... ........ ................ ..... ...................... Approved/Disapproved (date) City of Talent.......... ............................................................ Approved/Disapproved (date) Upon receiving a vote of approval from 2/3 of the above jurisdictions, this Plan was submitted to the Attorney General, who approved the Plan on *-*. I Preamble The use of deadly physical force by law enforcement personnel is a matter of critical concern both to the public and to the law enforcement community. The purpose of this Plan is not to set the standards for the use of such force, or to be a substitute for agency policy regarding use of force, but rather to provide a framework for a consistent response to an officer's use of deadly physical force that treats the law enforcement officer fairly, and promotes public confidence in the criminal justice system. The investigation of these incidents presents a unique combination of complexities which have potential social, civil, administrative and criminal consequences. Public interest and scrutiny is acute; employee morale rests in tenuous balance, and legal issues compound. Proper resolution requires the trust and confidence of all concerned that the investigation will be conducted impartially, thoroughly and openly; without undue or unlawful infringement on the rights and privacy of those involved. The affected agencies recognize their responsibilities to meet those demands, which can be accomplished only through effective management of the investigation. This requires an approach that is: Well coordinated, to eliminate confusion; Knowledgeable and skillful, to ensure thoroughness; Defined, so that those involved and the pUQlic correctly interpret the investigative process; Informative, without compromise of the investigation or individual's rights, in order to restrict speculation and rumor by those who have an interest in the investigation. This Plan has been adopted by the Jackson County Deadly Force Planning Authority, duly constituted pursuant to SB 111, Chapter 842, Oregon Laws, 2007. As such, it sets out, among other things, the manner in which incidents which involve the use of deadly physical force by law enforcement personnel are to be investigated. It is anticipated that each incident will involve unique circumstances, and flexibility must be allowed for minor modifications. This protocol is not intended to increase the civil or criminal liability of member agencies or their employees, and it shall not be construed as creating any mandatory obligations to, or on behalf of, third parties. 2 SECTION 1: ADMINISTRATION A. In the event that a member of the Planning Authority is unable to continue to serve, a replacement shall be appointed as provided in Section 2(1) of Senate Bill 111, Chapter 842, Oregon Laws, 2007. B. There shall be six voting members of the Planning Authority. The approval of the Plan, or revisions thereof, shall be by majority vote. C. The presence of 2/3 of the voting members shall be required in order to hold any vote. D. The final Plan shall be incorporated into the Jackson County Cooperative Policing Manual. SECTION 2: APPLICABILITY OF THE PLAN A. Invocation of this Plan 1. Automatic and Immediate a) This Plan shall be applicable as set forth herein, to any use of deadly physical force by a law enforcement officer, acting in the course of his /her official duties, occurring within Jackson County. b) Investigation of these matters must be performed under two separate investigative formats: (1) the criminal investigation; and (2) the internal administrative investigation. 2. Optional a) This Plan may be invoked upon the occurrence of any sensitive or critical event involving a law enforcement officer which may have criminal liability attached. Examples include: (i) A fatality which did not involve the use of deadly physical force by an officer. (ii) An officer-involved motor vehicle incident. 3 (iii) Any death of a person while in law enforcement custody. (iv) Anytime when requested by an employer agency. SECTION 3: DEFINITIONS A. Law Enforcement Officer or Officer 1. Full-time, part-time and reserve sworn police officers, whether on duty or off duty and when acting in the course of his/her official duties in a law enforcement capacity. 2. Full-time or part-time non-sworn employees who are on duty at the time of an incident. 3. V olunteers who are on duty or are working under the direct control and supervision of a law enforcement officer. 4. Sworn parole and probation officers employed by Jackson County Community Justice, whether on duty or off duty and when acting in the course of his /her official duties. B. Involved Officer 1. The person who's official conduct, or official order, was the cause in fact of the death of a person. "Involved Officer" also means an officer whose conduct was not the cause in fact of the death, but who was involved in the incident before or during the use of deadly physical force, and this involvement was reasonably likely to expose the officer to a heightened level of stress or trauma. 2. This definition also applies to a situation in which no death occurs, but where the officer used deadly physical force. C. Employer Agency The agency by which the involved officer is employed or with which the person is affiliated. D. Agency of Primary Responsibility The agency within whose geographical jurisdiction the incident occurs. When an incident crosses jurisdiction boundaries, or occurs in the unincorporated areas of Jackson County, the agency of primary responsibility shall be jointly decided by the supervisors of the involved agencies. E. Deadly Physical Force 4 Means physical force that under the circumstances in which it is used is readily capable of causing death or serious physical injury. F. Serious Physical Injury Means physical injury which creates a substantial risk of death or which causes serious and protracted disfigurement, protracted impairment of health or protracted loss or impairment of the function of any bodily organ. G. Criminal Investigators Those investigators assigned by the agency of primary responsibility, the employer agency, and/or the Major Assault/Death Investigation Unit, to conduct the criminal investigation of the incident. H. Administrative Investigators Those investigators assigned by the employer agency to conduct the internal administrative investigation of the incident. I. Major Assault/Death Investigation Unit or MAlDIU The Jackson County interagency team that investigates serious assault and murder cases and cases involving the use of deadly physical force by a law enforcement officer. J. Case Agent The detective assigned to lead the criminal investigation, issue assignments to other investigators, and gather reports for submission to the District Attorney's office. The case agent should not be from the employer agency. K. Companion Officer An uninvolved officer either assigned by the involved officer's agency or requested by the involved officer. L. Plan Means the final document approved by the Planning Authority, adopted by two-thirds of the governing bodies employing law enforcement officers, and approved by the Attorney General. Any approved revisions shall become a part of the Plan. 5 SECTION 4: IMMEDIATE AFTERMATH OF A DEADLY FORCE INCIDENT A. Scene Procedure 1. Emergency life saving measures and protection of the public have first priority. 2. As soon as possible after the use of deadly physical force, the officer shall immediately notify his or her agency of the use of deadly physical force. The employer agency shall ensure that a MAlDIU call-out has been initiated, as described in Section 5.B. 3. If an injured person is transported to a hospital, an,officer should accompany that person in the same vehicle in order to: a) Locate, preserve, safeguard and maintain the chain of custody of physical evidence. b) Obtain a dying declaration, excited utterance or any other statement made by the injured person. c) Maintain custody of the person if that individual has been arrested. d) Provide information to medical personnel about the incident as it relates to treatment. e) Identify relevant people, including ambulance and medical personnel, and obtain from them information that is relevant to the investigation. f) Be available for contacts with the injured person's family, if appropriate. 4. The scene must be secured as soon as possible and a sufficient perimeter established to safeguard evidence. Access to the scene should be limited to those officials who must enter for investigative purposes. A written log should be established to identify all persons entering and leaving the crime scene. 5. Responding officers in shooting incidents should ensure that involved officers maintain their weapons in place, in the same condition as they were at the conclusion ofthe incident, until surrendered to the evidence officer. 6. A member of the Major AssaultlDeath Investigation Unit should be designated as evidence officer to ensure that all physical evidence is identified and collected in a legally appropriate manner, providing for an adequate chain of custody. B. Transporting Involved Officers 6 1. Officers who were present at the scene at the time of the incident, whether as involved officers or witnesses, will be relieved of their duties at the scene as promptly as possible and shall be taken to their own police station, unless other suitable arrangements are made for them. 2. Prior to transport, the officer(s) should be asked to provide information regarding the circumstances as necessary to protect persons and property, preserve any evidence, and to furnish a framework for the investigation. C. Assignment of Companion Officer 1. A companion officer shall be assigned by the employer agency to each involved officer, if practicable. The companion officer shall remain with the involved officer until the officer can be interviewed. 2. The companion officer is present to provide for the involved officer's privacy, to be certain that his/her needs are accommodated, and to ensure the integrity of the involved officer's later statements to investigators. 3. The companion officer should encourage the involved officer not to discuss the incident until the investigative interview. However, this is not intended to in any way prohibit the involved officer from speaking to family members. 4. The involved officer may also wish to speak to attorneys, union representatives, psychotherapists or other similar professionals. 5. After the involved officer is released from the scene by the officer in charge, the companion officer should remove the involved officer from the scene as soon as possible. D. For at least 72 hours immediately following an incident in which the use of deadly physical force by a law enforcement officer resulted in the death of a person, a law enforcement agency may not return an involved officer to duties that might place the officer in a situation in which the officer has to use deadly physical force. SECTION 5: THE CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION A. Investigation Team Composition and Objective 1. The investigative team will be composed of criminal investigators from the Major AssaultlDeath Investigation Unit. The participating agencies share responsibility for the integrity of the investigation; however, the agency of primary responsibility has the ultimate authority to decide any irreconcilable investigative Issues. 7 2. The criminal investigation has priority over the administrative investigation and it begins immediately after an incident has occurred. 3. The goal of the criminal investigation is to develop all available relevant information about the incident in such a manner as to minimize further trauma to the involved officer. This information will be used in two ways: a) To determine the PRESENCE OR ABSENCE of criminal culpability on the part of all those involved in the incident. Specifically: (i) To determine whether the conduct involved is prohibited or authorized by criminal statutes. (ii) If criminal conduct does exist: (a) Determine the identity of the person(s) responsible for that conduct; (b) Determine the type and degree of the crime(s); (c) Determine the existence of any factual or legal defenses to the crime; and (d) Determine the presence or absence of any factors which would mitigate or aggravate punishment for the crime. b) To incidentally provide factual information to the employer agency's management for its internal use. While the criminal investigators do not direct their investigative attention to administrative concerns, it is recognized that the criminal investigation's results are of proper interest to agency management for its internal use, and those results are fully available for that -purpose; 4. The criminal investigation is performed in a manner that provides both the appearance and the reality of a thorough, fair, complete and professional investigation which is free of conflicts of interest. B. Call-out procedure Upon identifying an occurrence as one involving the use of deadly physical force by an officer, the supervisor of the agency of primary responsibility shall make the following notifications as promptly as possible: 1. When the agency of primary responsibility is the Jackson County Sheriffs Office, the Oregon State Police, the Medford Police Department, Ashland Police Department, Central Point Police Department or Eagle Point Police Department, the supervisor shall determine the number of detectives needed from the Major 8 AssaultlDeath Investigation Unit. That supervisor will cause MA/DIU detectives to be contacted. 2. When the agency of primary responsibility is not one of those listed above, the on-scene supervisor of the agency of primary responsibility shall contact the Jackson County Sheriffs Office or the Oregon State Police and speak directly to a supervisor regarding the call-out of the Major AssaultlDeath Investigation Unit and will cause the supervisor of those detectives to be contacted. If a supervisor from the Oregon State Police or the Jackson County Sheriffs Office is unavailable, the on-scene supervisor shall leave a telephone number and wait for a return call, or take other appropriate action. 3. A case agent from the Major AssaultlDeath Investigation Unit shall be appointed by a supervisor of the agency of primary responsibility when the incident occurs within the jurisdiction of the Jackson County Sheriffs Office, the Oregon State Police, the Medford Police Department, Ashland Police Department, Central Point Police Department or Eagle Point Police Department. In other jurisdictions, the case agent shall be selected by agreement of the unit members. The case agent should not be from the employer agency. 4. As part of the Major AssaultlDeath Investigation Unit call-out, the following additional notifications shall be made: a) The District Attorney's Office Notification shall be made to the District Attorney first, and if unavailable, the Chief Deputy. If neither is available, notification should be made to a senior member of the District Attorney's staff. b) The medical examiner in the event of a death. c) The forensic laboratory division of the Oregon State Police, when this is determined necessary by the case agent. C. Interviewing involved officers 1. Interviewees will be considered witnesses unless circumstances dictate otherwise. 2. Prior to conducting the interview, the interviewer shall be briefed by the case agent and, if possible, view the scene. 3. The interview shall be conducted by detectives assigned to the Major AssaultlDeath Investigation Unit. Each interview shall be conducted by two detectives, at least one of whom shall be from an agency other than the employer agency. 9 4. Interviews will be conducted separately, and in a comfortable setting. Interviewers must remain aware of the perceptual distortions associated with traumatic incidents, and how these distortions may vary between officers. In- depth interviews may have to occur some time after the incident, depending upon the officer's condition. . 5. Interviews should be audio and/or visually recorded. 6. If the interview is custodial in nature, the officer shall be given Miranda warnings. D. Intoxicant testing: 1. Involved officers have the same rights and privileges that any civilian would have regarding intoxicant testing. Employees should be requested to voluntarily provide blood and/or urine samples for intoxicant testing. 2. If the involved officer refuses to voluntarily provide blood and/or urine, and it is necessary to obtain these, then the District Attorney's office should be contacted. E. Autopsy An autopsy shall be performed whenever a death results. A member of the investigative team shall attend the autopsy. A representative from the Oregon State Police Forensic Laboratory will attend the autopsy when appropriate, as determined by the investigative team. SECTION 6: MEDIA RELEASES A. Initial media releases are the responsibility of the agency of primary responsibility, after consultation with the case agent and District Attorney. This responsibility will normally continue until the final police reports are submitted to the District Attorney for review. B. The District Attorney will assume responsibility for media releases once the final police reports are submitted to the District Attorney's Office for review. This will assist in minimizing the release of information that may jeopardize the investigation or subsequent prosecution. SECTION 7: ACCESS TO REPORTS AND EVIDENCE A. Materials created or collected as a result of the criminal investigation will be made available to the employer agency for purposes of the internal administrative investigation at the conclusion of the criminal investigation, unless otherwise directed by the District Attorney. Materials may also be released to the employer agency while the criminal investigation is pending with prior approval of the District Attorney. 10 Materials may be made available to other agencies or individuals, including the involved officer and the officer's attorney, once the District Attorney had determined that no criminal charges will be brought against any individual as a result of the incident. If any criminal charges are filed, no materials will be released while charges are pending, except to the employer agency, without the approval of the District Attorney. B. The materials may include: 1. Reports 2. Access to physical evidence 3. Photographs and diagrams 4. Audio and visual recordings C. At the conclusion of the criminal investigation, all reports will be submitted to the District Attorney by the case agent for review. D. When the District Attorney's Office concludes that the physical evidence collected by the criminal investigators is no longer needed for criminal law purposes, the employer agency shall be notified of that decision so it can assume responsibility for preservation of such evidence. SECTION 8: DISTRICT ATTORNEY A. When an incident involving the use of deadly physical force by an officer occurs, the District Attorney's Office should be notified by the employer agency, agency of primary responsibility or MA/DIU case agent. B. The District Attorney's Office has the following roles in the incident investigation: 1. Participate co-equally with the investigative team performing the criminal investigation. It should be noted that the District Attorney has ultimate authority for the prosecution of criminal cases, and specific shared responsibility with the medical examiner in death investigations. 2. Assist and advise the investigative team on various criminal law issues which may arise, such as Miranda, voluntariness, search and seizure, probable cause to arrest, detentions and releases, elements of crimes, immunity, legal defenses, etc. 3. Upon completion of the criminal investigation, analyze the facts of the incident as well as the relevant law to determine if criminal laws were violated. 11 a) The District Attorney will normally present these matters to the Grand Jury for determination of criminal liability on the part of the involved officer. However, not all cases covered by this protocol may rise to a level that merits a Grand Jury determination. The District Attorney has the sole statutory and constitutional duty to make the decision whether to present the matter to a Grand Jury. b) The District Attorney will decide on the issue of criminal liability or present the matter to a Grand Jury as soon as practicable, but not before the District Attorney has determined that sufficient information is available to competently make the decision. c) When the District Attorney has made a final decision concerning criminal liability, or has presented the case to the Grand Jury, the District Attorney shall promptly communicate the result to the agency of primary responsibility, the employer agency, the involved officer's representative and the public. SECTION 9: INTERNAL ADMINISTRATIVE INVESTIGATION 1. Investigation Priority While both the criminal investigation and the internal administrative investigation are important and should be pursued, it is recommended that the criminal investigation have investigative priority and be completed before commencing the internal administrative investigation. It is intended that this prioritization will preclude competition between the two formats for access to witnesses, physical evidence and the involved parties. Additionally, it will prevent the criminal investigation from being compromised by an untimely exercise of the employer agency's administrative rights. 2. Information Excluded From the Criminal Investigation Interview statements, physical evidence, toxicology test results, and investigative leads that are obtained by internal administrative investigators by ordering police agency employees to cooperate, shall not be revealed to criminal investigators. SECTION 10: DEBRIEFING / MENTAL HEALTH COUNSELING A. The use of deadly physical force by an officer has the potential to create strong emotional reactions, which may interfere with an offic,er's ability to function effectively. These reactions may be manifested immediately, or over time. Further, these reactions may occur not only in an officer directly involved in the incident, but also in other officers within the agency. B. The requirements of this section provide a minimum framework, and are not intended to take the place of agency policy. Agencies are encouraged to develop formal 12 procedures to deal with an officer's stress response following a use of deadly force incident. Such policies should include a procedure that is implemented from the time of the incident and continues as long as necessary. 1. If the incident is of such a magnitude that agency-wide morale is implicated, the agency shall take such steps as it deems necessary to ensure professional police services are provided, and to develop strategies to restore morale. 2. Each agency shall provide for a process for any officer to participate in a facilitated critical stress incident debriefing. 3. If available, agencies should encourage officers to take advantage of employee assistance programs and, if needed, agencies should request assistance from other agencies that may have in place formal programs for dealing with critical incidents. C. In the six months following a use of deadly physical force incident that results in a death, the agency shall offer each involved officer a minimum of two opportunities for mental health counseling. The officer shall be required to attend at least one session of mental health counseling. 1. At agency expense, the involved officer(s) shall be scheduled for an appointment with a licensed mental health counselor for a counseling session, with a follow-up session scheduled at a date determined by the mental health professional. 2. The counseling sessions are not to be considered fitness for duty evaluations, and are to be considered privileged between the officer and counselor. SECTION 11: AGENCY USE OF FORCE PLANS, REPORTING, TRAINING AND OUTREACH A. Every law enforcement agency must adopt a policy dealing with the use of deadly physical force by its officers. At a minimum, such policies must include guidelines for the use of deadly physical force. B. Upon the conclusion of the criminal investigation, the announcement by the District Attorney pursuant to Section 8.B.3.c. ohhis Plan, and the debriefing, the agency shall complete the Attorney General's report regarding the use of force, and submit the report to the Attorney General. C. The Jackson County Deadly Force Planning Authority shall take steps to engage the Jackson County community in a discussion regarding the purpose of the Plan, and the elements contained therein. Such steps may include, but are not limited to, general public release of the draft, discussion with the media, providing the draft to agency 13 employees, union representatives, elected officials, and members of relevant community groups. D. Law enforcement agencies within Jackson County are responsible for training their officers on the specifics of their policies regarding the use of deadly physical force. That training should also include information about this Plan. Training may include, but is not limited to, firearms training and shooting scenarios, seminars, briefings, written materials, promulgation of this Plan along with the Patrol Supervisor's and Companion Officer's checklist, wallet cards and other written materials. Training should include suggestions for dealing with challenges that officers may encounter when responding to situations involving persons who appear to be suicidal, or who may have other mental health issues. Periodically, such training should be fashioned to include attorneys employed by state and local governments within the county. E. Public outreach regarding law enforcement use of deadly physical force is also an important component of effective and well-received law enforcement policies and of this Plan. Public outreach may be provided in numerous ways, including seminars, citizen's police academies, career day sessions at local schools, media releases, and the promulgation of written materials such as flyers. Entities which should take the lead in such outreach include: Jackson County law enforcement agencies, the Law Enforcement Agencies Heads group, MAlDIU, the Jackson County Public Safety Coordinating Counsel and the Deadly Physical Force Planning Authority. SECTION 12: FISCAL IMPACT Jackson County law enforcement agencies have incurred no reimbursable out of pocket costs associated with the development of this Plan. It is estimated that there will not be ongoing reimbursable costs associated with the implementation of the Plan. However, if any law enforcement agency covered by the Plan does sustain such costs in the future, that agency shall submit to the Department of Justice, in the fiscal year in which said costs are accrued, a report outlining the fiscal impact of each element of the Plan as described in Section 4 and Sections (a) to (e) of Section 2(4) of Senate Bill 111, Chapter 842, Oregon Laws, 2007. SECTION 13: PLAN REVISION If a revision of the Plan becomes advisable, the Planning Authority shall meet and discuss such a revision. Proposed revisions should be discussed with the Law Enforcement Agency Heads group, as well as the MA/DIU. If the Planning Authority adopts a revision, such revision shall be submitted to the Attorney General and included in the Jackson County Cooperative Policing Manual. 14 POLICE EMPLOYEE-INVOLVED F AT AL OR SERIOUS INJURY Patrol Supervisor's Checklist 1. Emergency life saving measures and protection of the public have first priority. 2. Request additional patrol officers as necessary. 3. If an injured person is transported to a hospital, an officer should accompany that person in the same vehicle in order to: a) Locate, preserve, safeguard and maintain the chain of custody of physical evidence. b) Obtain a dying declaration, excited utterance, or any other statement made by the injured person. c) Maintain custody of the person if that individual has been arrested. d) Provide information to medical personnel about the incident as it relates to treatment. e) Identify relevant people, including ambulance and medical personnel, and obtain from them information that is relevant to the investigation. f) Be available for contact with the injured person's family, if appropriate. 4. When the agency of primary responsibility is the Jackson County Sheriffs Office, the Oregon State Police, the Medford Police Department, Ashland Police Department, Central Point Police Department or Eagle Point Police Department, the supervisor shall determine the number of detectives needed from the Major Assault/Death Investigation Unit and will cause the supervisor of tho'se detectives to be contacted. 5. When the agency of primary responsibility is not one of those listed above, the on- scene supervisor of the agency of primary responsibility shall contact the Jackson County Sheriff s Office or the Oregon State Police and speak directly to a supervisor regarding the call-out of the Major AssaultlDeath Investigation Unit. That supervisor will cause MA/DIU detectives to be contacted. If a supervisor from the Oregon State Police or the Jackson County Sheriffs Office is unav8;ilable, the on-scene supervisor shall leave a telephone number and wait for a call, or take other appropriate action. 6. Determine what responding/scene officers have learned and what they've done. 7. LIMIT QUESTIONS of involved officers and other witnesses to those necessary for public safety and scene management. 8. Arrange for radio broadcasts on outstanding suspect, vehicle, witnesses, etc. Appendix A 9. Protect sensitive investigative information, including names of involved officers. Use caution on radio broadcasts. Use secure phone when possible. 10. Locate, identify, and sequester civilian witnesses for detectives' interviews. 11. The scene must be secured as soon as possible and a sufficient perimeter established to safeguard evidence. Access to the scene should be limited to those officials who must enter for an investigative purpose. A written log' should be established to identify all persons entering and leaving the crime scene. 12. Responding officers in shooting incidents should ensure that involved officers maintain their weapons in place, in the same condition as they were at the conclusion of the incident, until surrendered to the evidence officer. 13. Collect your information and thoughts to brief investigators. Appendix A ROLE OF THE COMPANlON OFFICER 1. A companion officer shall be assigned by the employer agency to each involved officer if practicable. The companion officer shall remain with the involved officer until the officer can be interviewed. 2. The companion officer is present to provide for the involved officer's privacy, to be certain that his/her needs are accommodated, and to insure the integrity of the involved officer's later statements to investigators. 3. The companion officer should encourage the involved officer not to discuss the incident until the investigative interview. However, this is not intended to in any way prohibit the involved officer from speaking to family members. 4. The involved officer may also wish to speak to attorneys, union representatives, psychotherapists or other similar professionals. 5. After the involved officer is released from the scene by the officer in charge, the companion officer should remove the involved officer from the scene as soon as possible. Appendix B 74th OREGON LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY--2007 Regular Session Enrolled Senate Bill 111 Printed pursuant to Senate Interim Rule 213.28 by order of the President of the Senate in conform- ance with presession filing rules, indicating neither advocacy nor opposition on the part of the President (at the request of Attorney General Hardy Myers for Department of Justice) CHAPTER AN ACT Relating to use of physical force; creating new provlslOns; amending ORS 181.640 and 181.662; ap- propriating money; and declaring an emergency. Be It Enacted by the People of the State of Oregon: SECTION 1. As used in sections 1 to 7 of this 2007 Act: (1) "Employ," when used in the context of the relationship between a law enforcement agency and a police officer, includes the assignment of law enforcement duties on a volunteer basis to a reserve officer. (2) "Law enforcement agency" means the Department of State Police, the Department of Justice, a district attorney, a political subdivision of the State of Oregon and a municipal corporation of the State of Oregon, that maintains a law enforcement unit as defined in ORS 181.610 (12)(a)(A). (3) "Police officer" means a person who is: (a) A police officer or reserve officer as defined in ORS 181.610; and (b) Employed by a law enforcement agency to enforce the criminal laws of this state. SECTION 2. (1) There is created in each county a deadly physical force planning au. thority consisting of the following members: (a) The district attorney and sheriff of the county. (b) A nonmanagement police officer selected by the district attorney and sheriff. If there are unions representing police officers within the county, the district attorney and sheriff shall select the police officer from among candidates nominated by any union representing police officers within the county. (c) If at least one city within the county employs a police chief, a police chief selected by the police chiefs within the county. (d) A representative of the public selected by the district attorney and sheriff. The person selected under this paragraph may not be employed by a law enforcement agency. (e) A representative of the Oregon State Police selected by the Superintendent of State Police. (2) The district attorney and sheriff are cochairpersons of the planning authority. (3) The law enforcement agency that employs the police officer selected under subsection (l)(b) of this section shall release the officer from other duties for at least Hj hours per year to enable the officer to serve on the planning authority. The agency shall compensaLe Lhe Enrolled Senate Bill 111 (SB 111-C) Page 1 officer at the officer's regular hourly wage while the officer is engaged in planning authority activities. (4) The planning authority shall develop a plan consisting of the following: (a) An element dealing with education, outreach and training regarding the use of deadly physical force for police officers, attorneys employed by state or local government within the county and members of the community. (b) An element dealing with the immediate aftermath of an incident in which a police officer used deadly physical force. (c) An element dealing with the investigation of an incident in which a police officer used deadly physical force. (d) An element dealing with the exercise of district attorney discretion to resolve issues of potential criminal responsibility resulting from a police officer" s use of deadly physical force. (e) An element dealing with collecting information regarding a police officer's use of deadly physical force, debriefing after an incident in which a police officer used deadly physical force and revising a plan developed under this subsection based on experience. (f) An estimate of the fiscal impact on the law enforcement agencies to which the plan applies of each element described in paragraphs (a) to (e) of this subsection. (5) The planning authority shall conduct at least one public hearing in the county before submitting a plan, or a revision of a plan, to the governing bodies in the county under sub- section (7) of this section. (6) The planning authority may consult with anyone the planning authority determines may be helpful in carrying out its responsibilities. (7) The planning authority shall submit the plan developed under subsection (4) of this section, and revisions of the plan, to the governing body of each law enforcement agency within the county except for the Department of State Police and the Department of Justice. (8) A governing body shall approve or disapprove the plan submitted to it under sub- section (7) of this section within 60 days after receiving the plan. The governing body may not amend the plan. (9) If the plan is not approved by at least two-thirds of the governing bodies to which the plan is submitted, the planning authority shall develop and submit a revised plan. (10) If the plan is approved by at least two-thirds of the governing bodies to which the plan is submitted, the planning authority shall submit the approved plan to the Attorney General. No later than 30 days after receiving the plan, the Attorney General shall review the plan for compliance with the minimum requirements described in section 3 of this 2007 Act. If the Attorney General determines that the plan complies with the minimum require- ments, the Attorney General shall approve the plan. Upon approval of the plan: (a) Each law enforcement agency within the county to which the plan applies is subject to the provisions of the plan; and (b) Each law enforcement agency subject to the plan is entitled to grants as provided in section 4 of this 2007 Act. (11) If the plan is not approved by the Attorney General, the planning authority shall develop and submit a revised plan. (12) Notwithstanding subsection (10)(a) of this section, a law enforcement agency is not subject to a provision of a plan approved under subsection (10) of this section that: (a) Conflicts with a provision of a city or county charter or a general ordinance that applies to the law enforcement agency; or (b) Imposes an obligation not required by section 5 of this 2007 Act if complying with the provision would require the law enforcement agency to budget moneys, or submit a revenue measure for a vote of the people, in order to comply with the provision. (13) The Attorney General shall periodically publish all approved plans. Enrolled Senate Bill 111 (SB 11I-C) Page 2 (14) A law enforcement agency within a county has a duty to participate in good faith in the planning process of the planning authority for the county. (15) A person bringing an action challenging the validity or enforceability of a plan ap- proved under subsection (10) of this section shall serve the Attorney General with a copy of the complaint. If the Attorney General is not a party to the action, the Attorney General may intervene in the action. SECTION 3. In the plan required by section 2 (4) of this 2007 Act, a deadly physical force planning authority shall, at a minimum: (1)(a) Address, under section 2 (4)(a) of this 2007 Act, the manner in which each law enforcement agency within the county will comply with section 5 (2) of this 2007 Act; and (b) Attach a copy of each policy adopted under section 5 (2) of this 2007 Act to the plan. (2) Address, under section 2 (4)(b) of this 2007 Act, the manner in which each law enforcement agency within the county will comply with section 5 (3)(a) and (4) of this 2007 Act. (3) Address, under section 2 (4)(c) of this 2007 Act, the manner in which each law enforcement agency within the county will comply with section 5 (5)(a) of this 2007 Act. (4) Address, under section 2 (4)(d) of this 2007 Act, the manner in which the district at- torney of the county will exercise discretion to resolve issues of potential criminal respon- sibility. (5) Address, under section 2 (4)(e) of this 2007 Act, the manner in which each law enforcement agency within the county will comply with section 5 (6) of this 2007 Act. SECTION 4. (1) As used in this section, "expenses" does not include personnel costs. (2) To the extent that funds are appropriated to it for such purposes, the Department of Justice shall make grants to law enforcement agencies to reimburse the law enforcement agencies for expenses incurred in implementing and revising the plans required by section 2 of this 2007 Act. A grant under this section may not exceed 75 percent of the expenses in- curred by the law enforcement agency. (3) The department may not make a grant under this section to a law enforcement agency unless the law enforcement agency is subject to a plan that has been approved by the Attorney General under section 2 (10) of this 2007 Act. (4) The department shall adopt rules necessary for the administration of this section. SECTION 5. (1) As used in this section, "involved officer" means: (a) A police officer whose official conduct, or official order to use deadly physical force, was a cause in fact of the death of a person. As used in this paragraph, "order to use deadly physical force" means an order issued to another officer to use deadly physical force in a specific incident or an order or directive establishing rules of engagement for the use of deadly physical force for a specific incident. (b) A police officer whose official conduct was not a cause in fact of the death of a person but whose official involvement in an incident in which the use of deadly physical force by a police officer resulted in the death of a person: (A) Began before or during the use of the deadly physical force; and (B) Was reasonably likely to have exposed the police officer to gn~ater stresses 0" trauma than other police officers experienced as a result of their involvement in the incident before or during the use of the deadly physical force. (2) A law enforcement agency shall adopt a policy dealing with the use of deadly physical force by its police officers. At a minimum, the policy must include guidelines for the use of deadly physical force. (3)(a) For each involved officer employed by a law enforcement agency, the law enforce- ment agency shall pay the costs of at least two sessions with a mental health professional that are attended by the officer. The sessions must be held within six months after the in- cident in which the officer was involved. Enrolled Senate Bill 111 (SB Ill-C) Page 3 (b) An involved officer shall attend at least one of the sessions described in paragraph (a) of this subsection. (c) Sessions with a mental health professional under this subsection may not be substi- tuted for a fitness for duty examination required or requested as a condition of emplo) menL by the law enforcement agency that employs the involved officer. (4) For at least 72 hours immediately following an incident in which the use of deadly physical force by a police officer resulted in the death of a person, a law enforcement agency may not return an involved officer to duties that might place the officer in a situation in which the officer has to use deadly physical force. A law enforcement agency may not reduce an involved officer's payor benefits as a result of the law enforcement agency's compliance with this subsection. Notwithstanding section 4 (1) of this 2007 Act, a personnel cost in- curred in complying with this subsection by a law enforcement agency employing 40 or fewer police officers is an expense for purposes of section 4 of this 2007 Act. (5)(a) A law enforcement agency employing an involved officer shall include at least one police officer from a different law enforcement agency in the investigation of the incident in which the involved officer was involved. (b) The failure of a law enforcement agency to comply with paragraph (a) of this sub- section is not grounds for suppressing evidence obtained in the investigation. (6)(a) A law enforcement agency shall collect at least the following information relating to incidents in which a police officer's use of deadly physical force resulted in the death of a person: (A) The name, gender, race, ethnicity and age of the decedent. (B) The date, time and location of the incident. (C) A brief description of the circumstances surrounding the incident. (b) A law enforcement agency shall promptly submit the information collected under paragraph (a) of this subsection to the Department of Justice. (7) The department shall compile and periodically publish information submitted under subsection (6) of this section. The department, by rule, may specify a form to be used by law enforcement agencies in submitting information under subsection (6) of this section. SECTION 6. Conclusions and recommendations for future action made by or for a law enforcement agency that result from activities conducted pursuant to the element of a plan described in section 2 (4)(e) of this 2007 Act are not admissible as evidence in any subsequent civil action or administrative proceeding. SECTION 7. Notwithstanding sections 2, 3 and 5 (3) and (6) of this 2007 Act, if sufficient moneys are not appropriated to the Department of Justice for purposes of making grants under section 4 of this 2007 Act, a deadly physical force planning authority created by section 2 of this 2007 Act or a law enforcement agency is not required to comply with any require- ment of section 2, 3 or 5 (3) or (6) of this 2007 Act for which the law enforcement agency is entitled to reimbursement under section 4 of this 2007 Act. SECTION 8. ORS 181.662 is amended to read: 181.662. (1) The Department of Public Safety Standards and Training may deny the application for training, or deny, suspend or revoke the certification, of any instructor or public safety officer, except a youth correction officer or fire service professional, after written notice and hearing con- sistent with the provisions of ORS 181.661, based upon a finding that: (a) The public safety officer or instructor falsified any information submitted on the application for certification or on any documents submitted to the Board on Public Safety Standards and Training or the department. (b) The public safety officer or instructor has been convicted of a crime or violation in this state or any other jurisdiction. (cl The public safety officer or instruct.or does not lTIf'pt till' 8ppllC'nblt. 11111l11l1l1111 SLIII<!;II'd, minimum training or the t.erms and conditions established under ORS 181.640 (l)(a) to (d). (d) The public safety officer failed to comply with section 5 (3)(b) of this 2007 Act. Enrolled Senate Bill 111 (SB lll-C) Page 4 (2) The department shall deny, suspend or revoke the certification of a fire service professional, after written notice and hearing consistent with the provisions of ORB 181.661, based upon a finding that the fire service professional has been convicted in this state of a crime listed in ORB 137.700 or in any other jurisdiction of a crime that, if committed in this state, would constitute a crime listed in ORB 137.700. (3) The department may deny, suspend or revoke the certification of any fire service professional after written notice and hearing consistent with the provisions of ORB 181.661, based upon a finding: (a) That the fire service professional falsified any information submitted on the application for certification or on any documents submitted to the board or the department; or (b) Consistent with ORB 670.280, that the fire service professional is not fit to receive or hold the certification as a result of conviction of a crime in this state. or ll1 anv otherpll'lsdicli()!l ()th('r than a crime described in subsection (2) of this section. (4) The department shall deny, suspend or revoke the certification of any public safety officer or instructor, except a youth correction officer, after written notice and hearing consistent with the provisions of ORB 181.661, based upon a finding that the public safety officer or instructor has been discharged for cause from employment as a public safety officer. (5) The department, in consultation with the board, shall adopt rules specifying those crimes and violations for which a conviction requires the denial, suspension or revocation of the certification of a public safety officer or instructor. (6) Notwithstanding the lapse, suspension, revocation or surrender of the certification of a pub- lic safety officer or instructor, the department may: (a) Proceed with any investigation of, or any action or disciplinary proceedings against, the public safety officer or instructor; or (b) Revise or render void an order suspending or revoking the certification. (7) The department shall deny, suspend or revoke the accreditation of a training or educational program or any course, subject, facility or instruction thereof if the program, course, subject, facility or instruction is not in compliance with rules adopted or conditions prescribed under ORB 181.640 (l)(g) or 181.650 (3). SECTION 9. (1) A deadly physical force planning authority created by section 2 of this 2007 Act shall submit the plan required by section 2 (4) of this 2007 Act to the governing bodies described in section 2 (7) of this 2007 Act no later than July 1, 2008. (2) Notwithstanding section 2 (3) of this 2007 Act, for the period of time from the effec- tive date of this 2007 Act to June 30, 2008, the law enforcement agency that employs the police officer selected under section 2 (l)(b) of this 2007 Act shall release the officer from other duties for at least 80 hours to enable the officer to serve on the planning authority. The agency shall compensate the officer at the officer's regular hourly wage while the officer is engaged in planning authority activities during that period of time. SECTION 10. A law enforcement agency shall adopt the policy required by section 5 (2) of this 2007 Act no later than July 1, 2008. SECTION 11. (1) A law enforcement agency that participates in the development of the plan required by section 2 (4) of this 2007 Act shall keep track of the expenses it incurs by reason of its participation. For purposes of this subsection and subsection (2) of this section, "expenses" includes, but is not limited to, personnel costs. (2) The Department of Justice shall award a law enforcement agency one credit for each dollar of expenses incurred before July 1, 2008, by reason of the law enforcement agency's participation in the development of the plan required by section 2 (4) of this 2007 Act. (3) Notwithstanding section 4 (2) of this 2007 Act, when a law enforcement agency applies for a grant under section 4 of this 2007 Act, the department, to the extent that funds are appropriated to the department for the purpose, shall make a grant that exceeds 75 percent of the expenses incurred by the law enforcement agency if the law enforcement agency has unused credits awarded under subsection (2) of this section. When the department makes a grant that exceeds 75 percent of the expenses incurred by a law enforcement agency, the Enrolled Senate Bill 111 (SB 111-C) Page 5 department shall deduct the amount of the grant that exceeds 75 percent from the credits awarded the law enforcement agency under subsection (2) of this section. (4) The department may adopt rules necessary for the administration of this section. SECTION 12. A law enforcement agency, as defined in section 1 of this 2007 Act, may not use moneys it receives under section 4 of this 2007 Act to supplant moneys from another source that the law enforcement agency has been previously authorized to expend. SECTION 13. There is appropriated to the Department of Justice, for the biennium be- ginning July 1, 2007, out of the General Fund, the amount of $182,161 for the purpose of carrying out the provisions of section 4 of this 2007 Act. SECTION 14. ORS 181.640 is amended to read: 181.640. (1) In accordance with any applicable provision of ORS chapter 183, to promote enforcement of law and fire services by improving the competence of public safety personnel and their support staffs, and in consultation with the agencies for which the Board on Public Safety Standards and Training and Department of Public Safety Standards and Training provide standards, certification, accreditation and training: (a) The department shall recommend and the board shall establish by rule reasonable minimum standards of physical, emotional, intellectual and moral fitness for public safety personnel and in- structors. (b) The department shall recommend and the board shall esLabhsh by rule reasonable llllJl1!llUlll training for all levels of professional development, basic through executive, including but not limited to courses or subjects for instruction and qualifications for public safety personnel and instructors. Training requirements shall be consistent with the funding available in the department's legislatively approved budget. (c) The department, in consultation with the board, shall establish by rule a procedure or pro- cedures to be used by law enforcement units, public or private safety agencies or the Oregon Youth Authority to determine whether public safety personnel meet minimum standards or have minimum training. (d) Subject to such terms and conditions as the department may impose, the department shall certify instructors and public safety personnel, except youth correction officers, as being qualified under the rules established by the board. (e) The department shall deny applications for training and deny, suspend and revoke certif- ication in the manner provided in ORS 181.661, 181.662 and 181.664 (1). (f) The department shall cause inspection of standards and training for instructors and public safety personnel, except youth correction officers, to be made. (g) The department may recommend and the board may establish by rule accreditation stand- ards, levels and categories for mandated and nonmandated public safety personnel training or edu- cational programs. The department and board, in consultation, may establish to what extent training or educational programs provided by an accredited university, college, community college or public safety agency may serve as equivalent to mandated training or as a prerequisite to mandated training. Programs offered by accredited universities, colleges or community colleges may be con- sidered equivalent to mandated training only in academic areas. (2) The department may: (a) Contract or otherwise cooperate with any person or agency of government for the procure- ment of services or property; (b) Accept gifts or grants of services or property; (c) Establish fees for determining whether a training or educational program meets the accred- itation standards established under subsection (l)(g) of this section; (d) Maintain and furnish to law enforcement units and public and private safety agencies infor- mation on applicants for appointment as instructors or public safety personnel, except youth cor- rection officers, in any part of the state; and (e) Establish fees to allow recovery of the full costs incurred in providing services to private entities or in providing services as experts or expert witnesses. Enrolled Senate Bill 111 (SB 111-C) Page 6 (3) The department, in consultation with the board, may: (a) Upon the request of a law enforcement unit or public safety agency, conduct surveys or aid cities and counties to conduct surveys through qualified public or pnvate agenl:les and assist 111 the implementation of any recommendations resulting from such surveys. (b) Upon the request of law enforcement units or public safety agencies, conduct studies and make recommendations concerning means by which requesting units can coordinate or combine their resources. (c) Stimulate research by public and private agencies to improve police, fire service, corrections and adult parole and probation administration and law enforcement. (d) Provide grants from funds appropriated or available therefor, to law enforcement units, public safety agencies, special districts, cities, counties and private entities to carry out the pro- visions of this subsection. (e) Provide optional training programs for persons who operate lockups. The term "lockup" has the meaning given it in ORS 169.005. CD Provide optional training programs for public safety personnel and their support staffs. (g) Enter into agreements with federal, state or other governmental agencies to provide training or other services in exchange for receiving training, fees or services of generally equivalent value. (h) Upon the request of a law enforcement unit or public safety agency employing public safety personnel, except youth correction officers, grant an officer, fire service professional, telecommu- nicator or emergency medical dispatcher a multidiscipline certification consistent with the minimum requirements adopted or approved by the board. Multidiscipline certification authorizes an officer, fire service professional, telecommunicator or emergency medical dispatcher to work in any of the disciplines for which the officer, fire service professional, telecommunicator or emergency medical dispatcher is certified. The provisions of ORS 181.652, 181.653 and 181.667 relating to lapse of cer- tification do not apply to an officer or fire service professional certified under this paragraph as long as the officer or rire service professional maintains full-time' emplovlTH'll\ ill Oil" of 111" (','rid'i,"! disciplines and meets the training standards established by the board. (i) Establish fees and guidelines for the use of the facilities of the training academy operated by the department and for nonmandated training provided to federal, state or other governmental agencies, private entities or individuals. (4) Pursuant to ORS chapter 183, the board, in consultation with the department, shall adopt rules necessary to carry out the board's duties and powers. (5) Pursuant to ORS chapter 183, the department, in consultation with the board, shall adopt rules necessary to carry out the department's duties and powers. (6) For efficiency, board and department rules may be adopted jointly as a single set of combined rules with the approval of the board and the department. (7) The department shall obtain approval of the board before submitting its legislative concepts, Emergency Board request or budget requests to the Oregon Department of Administrative Services. (8) The Department of Public Safety Standards and Training shall develop a training program for conducting investigations required under section 5 of this 2007 Act. SECTION 15. The Department of Public Safety Standards and Training shall complete development of the training program required by ORS 181.640 (8) no later than August 31, 2008. The department shall submit a report summarizing the training program to the legis- lative interim committees dealing with the judiciary no later than September 30, 2008. SECTION 16. Sections 4 and 12 of this 2007 Act and the amendments to ORS 181.640 and 181.662 by sections 8 and 14 of this 2007 Act become operative on July 1, 2008. SECTION 17. Notwithstanding the effective date of section 5 of this 2007 Act, section 5 (3) to (7) of this 2007 Act applies to incidents occurring on or after July 1, 2008. SECTION 18. This 2007 Act being necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health and safety, an emergency is declared to exist, and this ~U07 Act taKes effect on its passage. Enrolled Senate Bill III (SB Ill-C) Page 7 Passed by Senate June 24, 2007 Repassed by Senate June 28, 2007 Passed by House June 28, 2007 Enrolled Senate BIll J 11 (SB llJ-C) Secretary of Senate President of Senate Speaker of House Received by Governor: .M.,.. Approved: .M. Filed in Office of Secretary of State: ...,2007 . 2007 Governor ... .................... .M.,............................................. ..........., 2007 Secretary of State Page D Bicycle & Pedestrian Commission February 21st, 2008 Regular Minutes Roll Call: Chair David Young, Vice Chair Julia Sommer, Jim Olney, Steve Ryan, Mick Church, Matthew Seiler (absent), Tom Burnham (absent) Council Liaison: David Chapman Staff: Derek Severson, Associate Planner Steve McLennan, Police Officer RVTD liaisons: Absent High school liaison: Vacant SOU liaison: Vacant Call to Order Chair Young called the meeting to order at 5: 19 p.m. Approval of Minutes - January 21st, 2008 Church/Olney m/s to approve the minutes as presented. Voice vote: All AYES. Motion passed. Public Forum Bill Heimann, League of American Bicyclists-certified bicycle safety instructor, noted that he would be conducting the League's "Road 1" course on March 8th from 8:00 to 3:00 p.m. at the Grove in cooperation with the Ashland Parks & Recreation Department. He encouraged all present to attend with a bike, helmet, lunch, and an open mind. Heimann noted that there are now three certified instructors in Ashland - himself, John Caldwell, and Kat Smith of the Bicycle Transportation Alliance (BT A). He noted that the class was open to adults 16 and over, but that children 14 and over could attend with an adult, and added that the Road 1 course is a pre-requisite for taking the Instructor class. Egon Dubois, bicycle safety instructor and cycling advocate with the BT A, discussed the inadequacy of the street crossings on Siskiyou Boulevard. He explained that the speeds are 30 m.p.h. or more, pedestrians dress in dark clothes, and both drivers and pedestrians are distracted. He stated that Siskiyou is unsafe and solutions are needed, and he recommended that the City reach out to other communities like Portland, Eugene, Boulder, and Santa Cruz to identify user- friendly, low-cost solutions. Young requested that Siskiyou Boulevard safety issues be added to this evening's agenda as a discussion item. Dubois noted that there seemed to be little momentum building for Car Free Day, and suggested that all Commissioners make a commitment to participate and divide up the work evenly to make 2008-0221 Bike & Ped minutes Page lof5 it seem less daunting. Severson noted that Steve Maluk was resigning from RVTD which could have an effect on their ability to support the event at least in the short-term. Subcommittee & Liaison Reports Church briefly recapped the Croman Mill Site meeting. Ryan noted that he was trying to recruit an SOU liaison, and had approached the ECOS club looking for interested members. Young noted that he had sent the letter discussed last month to ODOT regarding the lAMP proposals, and had received a response that they would be forwarding the letters to the bridge design team. Severson briefly recapped recent meetings dealing with the Transportation System Plan and the Wheeldon Memorial. Chapman noted that the five privately donated benches he'd been working on placing with Parks would be installed along the Central Ashland Bikepath (CAB) at Garfield Park, near the ball fields and at Walker. Pedicab Proposal - "Ashland Eco-Cab" Marco Alvarez explained the request for a pedicab permit and noted that he would like to potentially add two more bikes in the next year. He added that he would like to have the permit be free of restrictions on the area of operations, and suggested that his clientele would be split 80/20 between tourists and locals and should result in a reduction in traffic. He indicated that the primary hours of operations would be between noon and 2 a.m., and he discussed the details and features of the pedicab. Ryan/Olney m/s to recommend that the Traffic Safety Commission approve the permit request. Discussion: Alvarez noted that he had prior experience operating a pedicab for two months in Santa Barbara, and he added that the insurance would cost $1500 per year for the required coverage. Matt Warshawsky, Traffic Safety Commission Chair, noted that he like to see restrictions placed on the permit to require that the driver and passengers wear helmets and that the pedicab have and use brake lights, turn signals, headlights, etc. Alvarez noted that the pedicab was equipped for this, and added that he would be attending safety training in the next month and would send all of his operators as well. He indicated that he was interested in becoming a League-certified safety instructor. He added that he has talked to the Shakespeare Festival, the Hospital, and local restaurants about promoting the pedicab service as an alternative to driving and parking downtown. Young suggested that he also contact the Chamber of Commerce. Alvarez explained that pedicab service would work for tips but that the base service cost would be $10 for 15 minutes as a minimum, and that the pedicab could accommodate three adults. V oice vote: All AYES. Motion passed. 2008-022/ Bike & Ped minutes Page 2 of5 Siskiyou Boulevard Safety Young noted his experiences on the Siskiyou Boulevard redesign committee, and suggested that the project had not resulted in safety improvements. He also indicated that he felt the recent media coverage of the traffic fatality had been skewed to place blame on pedestrians. Warshawsky suggested that there was a need for information about exactly what had happened. Sommer suggested that lights were needed in the crosswalks; Warshawsky noted that these have some maintenance issues. Ryan suggested that the crossing at Bridge Street could be closed. Severson noted that he had distributed copies of a memo from Public Works Director Jim Olson detailing staff suggestions for safety improvements which were to be presented at the next Traffic Safety Commission meeting. Young emphasized that there was a need to act quickly, and to collaboratively involve SOu. He suggested that the Commission would work with Traffic Safety, the City, and the University to find money for long-term solutions and that in the meantime, there could be impermanent solutions, like repainting the crosswalks for improved visibility. Church noted that speeds are also a concern, and he emphasized that speeding is an issue that is tied to design. Warshawsky discussed the limits of engmeenng and the need to address education and enforcement as well. Dubois noted that student patterns also need to be taken into account, and suggested that crosswalk visibility is less important than pedestrian visibility. He emphasized the need for pedestrian controls at crossings. Members discussed lighting as a first step, and agam emphasized the need for a quick, collaborative process. Olney/Ryan mls to recommend that the Traffic Safety Commission and Engineering Division implement Olson's recommended increases in lighting wattages as a first step in improving pedestrian safety on Siskiyou. Discussion: Warshawsky noted that wattage is not as important as the heads and aiming of the lights. Members discussed where lights should be addressed; Chapman indicated that efforts needed to extend to Ashland Street as well and discussed the history of speed limit reduction requests. He explained that ODOT had previously indicated that a traffic study would be needed after completion of the redesign, which has yet to happen. He stated that he would prefer lighting upgrades on Siskiyou and out Ashland Street to the railroad crossing. Church emphasized that ODOT standards are geared toward moving traffic and result in an unfriendly environment toward pedestrians. There was discussion of mid-block crossings, median issues, and the road design in general. Members ultimately determined that it would be most effective to 2008-0221 Bike & Perl minutes Page 3 of 5 attend the Traffic Safety Commission meeting happening on February 28th. Motion and second were withdrawn. Members discussed educational efforts for pedestrian safety, noting the possibility of creating a diversion program, a pedestrian safety brochure, or looking at crossing guards. It was noted that there might be a possibility of using federal work study monies to pay crossing guards. Ryan indicated he would follow-up with the University. Severson noted the use of the Safety Chicken, the previous mascot for crosswalk safety. There was discussion of using the City Source as a means to distribute educational materials, and it was noted that there have been traffic volume increases. Members discussed focused enforcement efforts (aka stings) and it was noted by Warshawsky that these efforts need to be two-sided and recognize the pedestrians' responsibility as well by directing focused enforcement efforts to pedestrians and bicyclists too. Bike Swap Tablina Olney indicated that he would be willing to table at this event. Severson noted that he would also be present and could provide some coverage assistance. Sommer left the meeting. Bicvcle Friendlv Community Status This item was tabled until next month. Top 10 List Severson noted that this item had been intended to be a priority list of items to be addressed and that the Commission would monitor them to completion. He noted that Sommer had originally been the one to request it be placed on the agenda. In her absence, members suggested that it be tabled until next month. BuslTrollev Service for First Fridavs This item was tabled until next month. Bike Lane Maintenance and Bike Path Maintenance It was explained that this item was raised in to emphasize the need for removal of debris left in bike lanes after sanding and plowing during winter storms. Both Young and Warshawsky noted that family members had bicycle accidents due to debris in the bike lanes, and it was emphasized that sweeping of bike lanes should be given equal priority. It was noted that the bike lane striping on North Main and on Tolman Creek Road at East Main are gone, and Commissioners emphasized that these need to be reviewed and reinstalled more regularly. Members also emphasized that stop signs were in need of replacement along the Central Ashland Bike Path and that debris removal on the bike path also needed to be addressed. 2008-0221 Bike & Perl minutes Page 4 of 5 On-GoinQ Goal Discussion: Car Free Dav & Car Free LivinQ Severson noted that with Steve Maluk's resignation from RVTD and Seiler's planned move out of town, the Car Free Day event was in need of champions to take the lead in planning and carrying out the event. Dubois noted that he was working to recruit businesses to be involved in the event, and would speak to the YMCA, Oregon Shakespeare Festival, etc. Follow Up Items: Oak Street at February 28th Traffic Safety Severson noted that this item was on the agenda for Traffic Safety; he suggested that given the Siskiyou safety discussion and the Oak Street item, it would be a good meeting for members to consider attending. Ryan noted that he would be there and could give the Traffic Safety Commissioners background on this item. New Business There was discussion of reviewing bike route maps and informational slgnage locations to determine what revisions are necessary. Dubois noted that there would be a short, easy coffee ride beginning at the Plaza at 9:00 a.m. on the first Sunday of each month. Huelz Gutcheon noted that Dan Dorrell from ODOT in White City would be willing to come to a meeting to discuss signage along Main Street. Church noted that in his experience, signage tends to lose effectiveness as it becomes familiar and blends into the background. He noted that he'd seen communities rotate signage and use comedic messages to catch people's attention. AQenda Items for Next Month Siskiyou Boulevard Safety and Oak Street follow-up, Car Free Day/Car Free First Fridays/Car Free Living, Bicycle Friendly Community Status, Top 10 List. Adiournment The meeting was adjourned at 7:06 p.m. UpcominQ MeetinQs: TSC Meeting - February 28t\ 2008 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers Regular Meeting - March 20th, 2008 at 5: 15 p.m. in the Siskiyou Room 2008-022/ Bike & Ped minutes Page 5 of 5 ASHLAND CONSERVATION COMMISSION r.lINUTES 7 p.m. - February 27,2008 Community Development Building 51 Winburn Way CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Chapman at 7:00 pm. Attendees: Russ Chapman, Stuart Corns, Ross Finney, Jim Hartman, Jim McGinnis, and Tracy Harding. Risa Buck, and Kerry KenCairn were not present. City Council member and Chair: Dave Chapman Staff representative: Dick Wanderscheid APPROVAL OF MINUTES Chairperson Chapman called for the approval of the minutes for January 23,2007. Commissioner Chapman made a motion to approve the minutes and Commissioner Finney seconded the motion. Voice Vote: All Ayes. The motion passed with a unanimous vote. PUBLIC FORUM James Akins/1099 Oak Knoll introduced himself to the Commission. He has relocated to Ashland from Alaska and expressed interest in Health Safety and Environmental issues. ASHLAND SANITARY & RECYCLING UPDATE Commissioner Chapman reported on the following items for Ashland Sanitary: The Ashland Sanitary Web site has now been updated with spring event dates including Hazardous Waste collection, Latex Paint collection and Nursery Plastic collections Compost classes are set for Saturdays: June 14, July 12, August 23, and September 27. Earth Day Event is scheduled for April 19 Plans include a zero waste demonstration with hopefully manually operated grinder for compostable eat ware. Mike Broomfield will attend the March Conservation Commission to discuss the demolition ordinance. Green Business program (3 walk thrus so far out of 11 businesses). Commercial Compost program (24 and growing) Master Recycler program starting March 31st thru May 19. Contact OSU at 776-7371 if interested, 30 maximum and must apply by 03/14/08 OLD BUSINESS Goal Setting Memo Set aside for last item Solar Pioneer II update Dick Wanderscheid reported to the Commission the City Council approved Solar Pioneer II and to move ahead and build the system at 90 N. Mountain in Ashland, OR. BEF 's marketing staff will work on a whole marketing campaign including print and radio. Dick explained to the Commission the background regarding this project, and summarized the Sub- Committee meetings. The City is thinking of structuring the sale of the panels in whole increments or partial. He also hopes to complete the system by June 30, 2008. The Commission members discussed citizen purchases of Green Tags and the solar panels and different way to support these projects. Thank-you Ad Dick Wanderscheid explained the options for purchasing ads in the Tidings (insert), Sneak Preview and the Green Living Journal. Commissioner Hartman made a motion to approve the cost of the insert ($355.00 one sided) to the Daily Tidings Ad for a Thank- You to Green Businesses, Renewable Pioneers and Adopt a Street Programs. Commissioner McGinnis seconded the motion. Voice Vote: All Ayes. The motion passed with a unanimous vote. The members discussed a double sided insert for the Tidings, Mr. Wanderscheid would report back to the Commission on the possibilities. Memo, Bottled Water Dick Wanderscheid reported to the Commission that Martha Bennett, the City Administrator would develop a city policy to not allow bolted water purchases unless there was some sort of emergency. The members also acknowledged Kari Olson, purchaser for the City of Ashland, and her efforts to help with purchasing office materials that are recyclable. July 4th Recycling Discussion The Ashland Chamber of Commerce met and adopted Commitment to Community for the theme of the 2008 event. Commissioner McGinnis and Chapman attended and discussed different ways to incorporate some recycling/conservation efforts into this year's event. They reported the possibility of the Master Recyclers available to work the 4th of July event. Commission McGinnis will report back to the Commission at the next meeting. Sub-Committee Reports Education No report. Green .Business Commissioner Finney summarized the memo Robbin Pearce had written for the Conservation Commission highlighting that we have 15 green businesses with 10 applications in process. She recommended the City of Ashland, including Parks Department become a green business and that it is time to update the Conservation Commission logo of "Where Green Becomes Mainstream." Car sticker/Carbon offset Update-Jim Hartman Commissioner Hartman passed out another version of the flyer design that could be placed in the window of a vehicle. The group discussed different ways to promote and restructure parts of the flyer. NEW BUSINESS ICCEI Membership Fees After discussion, Dick Wanderscheid offered to pay this year's fees out of the Conservation Budget, to allow this project to continue forward. Goal Setting Memo The members went over potential goals and established a list including which members would work on which goals. The Commission asked Mr. Wanderscheid to bring back the goals for final adoption at the next meeting. COMMISSION ITEMS NOT ON AGENDA Heat recovered ventilators. ANNOUNCEMENTS Next Meeting is scheduled for April 23, 2008. ADJOURNMENT - The meeting was adjourned at 9:05 p.m. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the Community Development office at 541-488-5305 (TTY phone number is 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 Title1). CITY OF ASHLAND r~' CITY OF ASHLAND ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION MINUTES JANUARY 22, 2008 CALL TO ORDER Chair John Stromberg called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. at The Grove, 1195 E. Main Street, Ashland, OR. Commissioners Present: John Stromberg, Chair Michael Dawkins Mike Morris Olena Black John Fields Pam Marsh Dave Dotterrer Melanie Mindlin Tom Dimitre, arrived at 7: I 0 p.m. Absent Members: None Council Liaison: Cate Hartzell, Council Liaison, present (arrived at 7:20 p.m.) Staff Present: Bill Molnar, Community Development Director Maria Harris, Planning Manager Sue Yates, Executive Secretary APPROVAL OF AGENDA Dotterrer/Dawkins m/s to amend the agenda to include the Public Forum. ANNOUNCEMENTS o Dotterrer gave an ODOT Citizens Advisory Committee meeting report regarding rebuilding of overpasses, in particular Interchange 14. There are two pieces to what ODOT is doing: 1) The bridge upgrade and 2) the Area Management Plan and all the connections that go around the plan. The decision has been made that ODOT will not be replacing the overpass at Interchange 14. It is structurally sound enough that they can upgrade it. They are going to have a three-lane bridge with ten feet on either side of the travel lanes for bike lanes and an eight-foot sidewalk, making it significantly wider than it is now. With regard to the Area Management Plan, he sees the decisions we make around it, particularly the Croman property, will have an impact. ODOT will have recommendations to the City on short term traffic management changes immediately around the interchange area. o Time Length for Planning Commission Meetings - The Commission asked Staff to bring them wording to modify the Rules of Conduct in order to carry the public hearing an additional half hour, when necessary. o Stromberg is having Staff and the City Attorney approve a simplified version of the statement that is read before a public hearing. o Black notified Stromberg of a discrepancy in the terms of office of the Planning Commissioners. She made her report, and the Commission authorized her to move forward by checking the information with the City Recorder's office. o There will be a City Council Study Session on February 4,2008 at 6:00 p.rn. at the Council Chambers to discuss the relationship between the Planning Commission and City Council. Later tonight, Dotterrer will talk more about this (Powers & Duties and Goals). Following this discussion, the Council is holding a Special meeting to deliberate the Land Use Ordinance Amendments. PUBLIC FORUM - No one came forth to speak. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Adoption of Findings - PA2007-01939, 165 Lithia Way, Urban Development Services, LLC Ex Parte Contacts or Conflicts of Interest Dimitre was absent and is abstaining from the vote. Fields had recused himself from the hearing (not present) due to a potential conflict of interest because he might possibly be involved in the construction of the buildings. He recused himself from the approval of the Findings. Black, Dawkins, Dotterrer, Stromberg, Marsh, Morris and Mindlin reported no ex parte contacts or conflicts of interest. Marsh/Morris m/s to approve. Roll Call: The motion carried with Dawkins, Dotterrer, Stromberg, Marsh, Morris and Mindlin voting "yes," Black voting "no" and Dimitre and Fields abstaining. ARTERIAL SETBACK PRESENTATION bv Maria Harris and Bill Molnar. Draft Ordinance Language Molnar said this is the fourth opportunity for the Commission to talk about this. Hopefully the Commissioners and Staff have become better informed about the issues surrounding our Street Standards. There is a connection between our Street Standards document and some of our other design standards. They are all important and not necessarily in conflict. Weare often faced with balancing multiple standards. The purpose of tonight's meeting is to review the rough draft ordinance language that is included in the packet. The approach Staff has taken could easily be applied to the other arterials if that is how the Commission wishes to proceed. Molnar recommended the Commissioners not get hung up on the exact wording but focus on content and whether or not Staff s approach has addressed the issues that have been raised. When the City Attorney, Richard Appicello gets the ordinance, he will reformat it, reworks words but not disturb the content. Stafftook a little different approach with the draft. They are not proposing to repeal the 20 foot front yard requirement. Rather, they are looking at allowing some flexibility in that requirement (General Exception). If certain provisions are met, the Commission could grant a reduction in the requirement. It presents an option to a property owner. One option would be to build to the 20 foot requirement. The other option provides an opportunity to reduce the 20 foot requirement but still provides leverage to the community to insure that public improvements that are considered in the best interest of the community. For example, widening the street for the purposes of accommodating larger street tree grates in a larger sidewalk would allow a reduction in the setback. Staff has laid out three factors: 1) That the applicant reserve the space to accomplish the street improvement (sidewalk and street trees), 2) That often the applicant will be required to install the requirements to City standards, and 3) A requirement to enter into an agreement that acknowledges that the reduction or the general exception to the front yard setback is being allowed because of the reservation of space and the installation of improvements. Staff is offering another item that would allow them to consider, in some cases, not only reducing the 20 foot setback only to allow for the accomplishment of the street trees and the wider sidewalks, but in some instances, to allow for less than a complete reduction in order to preserve some public spaces. For example, when there are no other public spaces within a block. Staff is hoping tonight to get some direction to move forward to a public hearing with some draft language. Molnar asked the Commissioners to remember, that even ifthere is a public hearing, other issues can come out and hearings can continue to subsequent meetings. Harris said other issues that came up during Planning Commission discussions were existing language referring specifically to the setback from the front property line. The Council made an interpretation in May of 2006 that in a Downtown Design Standard zone that comer lots, regardless of which lot line was technically the front property line by definition, that the front property line on an arterial would be considered the front lot line. In this draft Staff has eliminated the front property line language and changed it to "yards" to capture side yards as well as front yards. To go further, there are some cases where there are rear yards on arterials. Harris said the other issue is the commercial parkrows. They have added draft language concerning how wide a commercial parkrow is supposed to be. They suggested five feet; the standard tree grate width. Staff believed that was the intent of the original ordinance. QUESTIONS Marsh referred to an e-mail sent by the Chair this week referring to bike lanes on Lithia Way. Are there bike lanes on both sides of Lithia Way? Harris said they were only on one side because it is one-way. The section from Oak Street where it transitions to North Main is the section of Lithia Way that is missing a bike lane. Mindlin thought the main intent of this process was to set a desirable design standard that we would pursue and that everything should be set back 15 feet. It seems we are stepping back from that now with the exception process. Once again we are in a place where there could be a couple of different standards and we aren't clean about which we are trying to do. Why did the original intent change? Molnar said they heard different views from Commissioners. They could have just repealed the language, however, Staff thought some Commissioners were concerned about using the 20 foot setback as leverage to insure the improvements are reserved and installed according to the City's standards. Oftentimes the projects we are seeing are infill projects. Along Lithia Way, we currently don't have the right-of-way behind the curb to accomplish the current City's street standards, sidewalk width and planting strips as well as the standard we are proposing. The Planning Commission often requires a dedication and at times that is not a big issue. But generally when requiring a reservation of space and a dedication, it has been found through court cases (Nolan and Dolan), proportionality needs to be shown in terms of what is being requested. Staffs feeling is that the City has a 20 foot ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION MINUTES JANUARY 22, 2009 2 setback standard and most applicants would look for a reduction to the point where they can accommodate the new standard, assuming we will always have the ability to get a dedication. We are recognizing one of the purposes for having the standard to begin with was for street widening. The values have changed. Weare not looking at it so much for reserving street widening to extend the curb but for the widening of a pedestrian improvement standard that has evolved since the ordinance was adopted 40 years ago. They are still noting the purpose is to improve upon the width of the street but for the purpose of street tree and pedestrian-scape. Staff was thinking about this post-Measure 37 to provide leverage. Don't give things away without insuring the public interest is protected. Fields is hearing Staff say that we are trying to retain our setback and allow us to have some flexibility. Stromberg added that by retaining the 20 foot setback requirement, we can do an agreement that says we will let the applicant out of that portion of the 20 foot front yard in exchange for the applicant dedicating the full IS foot sidewalk and parkrow. Harris said the required street improvement has to be proportional to the impact the development is going to make. By making it a volunteer option and working it out through an agreement, we don't have to deal with Nolan/Dolan issues. Molnar reminded the Commission we are just talking about Lithia Way right now. We review these options ifit triggers a planning application. It would involve someone coming forward with a commercial project. Harris said the Street Dedication section (pages 7 and 8 of the draft) goes through dedication issues. Dawkins wondered why the Jasmine building, the Elks and Trinity Labyrinth don't seem to follow the same standard that has been required for other developments. Molnar said the Elks landscaping was not a planning action. The Trinity Church submitted a long-term master plan for their campus showing a building at the corner in a future phase. The labyrinth was an interim offering of a public space. It was a decision made around that planning action. Mindlin asked about "Definitions - Back of curb" (page 1). Harris said generally the parking bays take the place ofthe parkrow. If there is a parking bay, extend an imaginary line from the back of curb through the parking bay and measure from there. Molnar said this would be easiest to put in a plan view. Fields referred to page 7, Section 7 - Plaza or public spaces. What is a public plaza and where are they? Is the Trinity Labyrinth public space or the area in front of the Jasmine building? He sees a need to identify all the existing public spaces. There are certain areas where we will want public spaces and several issues involved in how we get those. Molnar said there is a lot of redevelopment potential along Lithia Way. There are opportunities if these blocks develop in smaller, narrower buildings consistent with other parts of Main Street. Most often those buildings will be less than 10,000 square feet and won't trigger public space requirements. The Jasmine and the Labyrinth would all qualify under the current standard. They are trying to get one public space per block. Black asked what goal in the Comprehensive Plan is addressed. Molnar said the adopted Downtown Plan speaks to the merits of having public spaces or small stopping off spaces and identifies a number of places. The Comp Plan has general wording giving the merits of how these spaces add to a downtown, but doesn't get to the specifics of identifying any on the north side of Lithia Way. Dotterrer asked why with regard to plazas and public spaces the word "may" was used instead of "will" or "shall." Harris said they were trying to provide flexibility for the Planning Commission to look at the issues. Staff was concerned if a plaza already existed on the block, would we want another one? If there are two properties next to each other that were vacant or re- developable, there might be an opportunity for a shared plaza between lot lines. Dotterrer wondered what happens if the Planning Staff was giving one direction to an applicant and the Planning Commission asks for another direction. Is that a concern? Molnar said it is a valid concern. Harris said to keep in mind the way this is written is to preserve the 20 foot standard unless there is an agreement that can be reduced for some reason and one of those is meeting the new set of plaza requirements. Stromberg asked if the Historic Design Standards apply to Lithia Way. Have the standards been extended to apply to commercial properties? If that is true, what is its relationship to the sidewalk and parkrow requirements of the Street Standards? Molnar said in the Site Design and Use Standards there are Historic District Standards. A lot of the graphics resemble residential buildings. When we did our Downtown Design Standards we incorporated a lot of the residential standards in the Downtown Standards with the idea of maintaining the historic fal;ade of building to the property line. That is included in both documents. From a legal standpoint, Molnar understands that regardless of the graphics that accompany the residential district standards, they are binding ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION MINUTES JANUARY 22, 2009 3 on all projects in the Historic District regardless whether it is a commercial project or a residential project. There have been discussions at the Historic Commission since adopting the Downtown Design Standards, that should we suggest an ordinance change that those standards reflecting residential buildings should only apply to residentially zoned Historic Districts. That has not happened. But, just like in any application in the Downtown, both sets of standards apply. Neither standard trumps the other; neither takes precedence. (Molnar used the Kendrick building on Lithia Way as an excellent example of applying both standards.) Stromberg noted in the Street Standards we typically specify minimum and maximum width for parkrows and sidewalks. But it seems every time it is applied, we always do the minimum. What are the criteria by which we can determine whether the minimum or maximum or something in between is required? Molnar said just the range is given in the Street Standards. There are no criteria specified. He thinks the range is given to maintain some flexibility to accommodate for different types of commercial streets. In some instances along Lithia Way, some consideration has been given regarding flexibility because the minimum is still going to provide for a larger public improvement from the curb to the building than anywhere along East Main Street. It is providing a wider improvement than we have in more of our existing areas. AUDIENCE COMMENTS MARK KNOX, 700 Mistletoe Road, Suite 204, said the way he's seeing this now, it seems like we are still asking for the 15 feet of pedestrian way and still saying there is another 20 foot requirement along Lithia Way. It seems like we are going away from the idea and value we have been talking about to this point (streetscape, human scale elements, etc.). Hopefully it will be described with graphics. Questions & Suggestions: What is the definition of street furniture? Does that include newspaper racks, planter beds, bench seating, etc.? What is the special baseline setback (page 2)? Is it from the centerline of the street? What if the centerline is not in the center of the right-of-way? Properties abutting arterials (page 2) - the wording is too confusing. He's reading it as "all four yards." Under "Plans required" it states everyone must get a survey if they require a planning action or building permit. What if someone wants to upgrade their HV AC system that would require a building permit? Would that person have to get a survey? He likes the intent under II-C-2g (page 6) regarding the public spaces. It seems very discretionary. If we had a map that shows where plaza spaces are needed, it would be a lot easier for the property owner and planner to design something a particular way. He doesn't want the applicant to be subject to redesigning. Is the requirement for additional plaza space in addition to the ten percent required for large scale development? Knox will forward his notes to Harris for her review. COLIN SWALES, 461 Allison Street, sees that vision, light and air and protecting arterials have been scrubbed from the amendment. Questions and Suggestions: Definitions -Part of the Siegel Report said the Definitions should all be in one place. The draft ordinance is another set of definitions in this one section. If they apply in this section, they should apply throughout the code. For example the word "adjacent" has been used in different places. In this draft it means "abutting." It was redefined at one time to mean it could involve properties that are spread out down the block. Dedication of private property to the public - With any residential subdivider, sometimes 20 percent of a small lot is dedicated as public right-of-way. It is good through this process to get some dedicated public right-of-way where it is currently lacking. When the ordinance says there should be no building or improvements within the reserved space, does that include basements underneath the surface? What is a side yard and what is a front yard on a comer lot? What is a side yard and what is a front yard? (Used DeLuca project as an example.) Incorporate changes into R-l and also multi-family zones. ERIC NAVICKAS, 363 % Iowa, said as an elected representative, he is very discouraged by this proposal to give up the public right- of-way in part or in whole. He read from a book, The New Metropolis about New York City from 1840 to 1857 by Edward Spann. The book discusses New York City's spatial growth. With regard to the current ordinance, he finds it disturbing that the clause "to permit or afford better light, air and vision" has been removed. We will miss the opportunity for plaza seating and public space along Lithia Way. This could become a trellised or landscape zone that could add a nice public plaza area and cafe seating along the front of that part of the City and provide a transition from the harshness of the street and the harshness of the buildings. There is also the opportunity of future transit. We very well might be looking at a light rail in the future and this could be an excellent place for a transit stop. He sees the public right-of-way as the public commons. It's unfortunate that the American ideal of individualism, free market capitalism and a disdain for the commons is manifest in our built environment. Cities in American are nearly devoid of public space. His feeling is the Planning Commission should not agree to this ordinance at this point, but should ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION MINUTES JANUARY 22, 2009 4 look at a larger study and contextual plan of our Downtown. And, to send a message to Council that they would first like to see a Downtown Plan and secondly a Transportation Plan, before we give up this public right-of-way. Stromberg commented that when we have good planning processes, then we create something that is not only good for the public but it is good for commercial interests. As our elected official, Stromberg said to Navickas that he will be giving the Budget Committee his assumptions and guidance soon and he can push for the Downtown Plan as Navickas probably has more influence than the Planning Commissioners. Hartzell thought schematics for the draft ordinance would be useful. She would like an explanation of the dimensions of how the sidewalk cafe table ordinance will get protected in this proposal. Dimitre said, assuming someone came in for a planning application and there is a 20 foot setback from the property line, what is it we would be getting from a developer for us to give up 20 feet? Molnar responded that if there was property that followed Dimitre's scenario, we wouldn't be getting anything. It would be an exception . Dimitre asked the mechanism to get a sidewalk to 15 feet. Molnar said the most common way to make it standard, would be for the applicants to dedicate any additional right-of-way so that the entire sidewalk improvement from the curb to where it ended is either in public right-of-way or public easement. Dimitre asked what would happen if someone wanted to go 15 feet from back of curb and can't meet the requirements listed (Exception to Street Standards - page 12), does this mean they could get an Exception? Harris noted on page 2, the last sentence of D l.a states it could be processed under the Exception to Street Standards. She said it is practical to have ways for people to come up with alternative designs. Dimitre asked for specific examples"... no demonstrable difficulty in meeting the specific requirements of the Street Standards due to a unique or unusual aspect of the site..." Harris said there is a notation that this was an approach suggested in the Siegel Report. Molnar said this clause is like a relief valve. They are trying to give decision makers a method to weigh and balance the purpose. Is there demonstrable difficulty or is there a better approach to meet the standard? Dimitre's concern is that we may end up getting nothing from the applicants because they can go to the Exceptions section and do nothing. He would like to get something tangible, for example, affordable housing. He would like something to make it a more equitable transfer. Marsh asked Dimitre what he thought we are giving up. Dimitre said we would be giving up open space for potential cafe seating or other space. Marsh said it would be private open space. Morris said the ordinance states "equally or better achieves" the stated purpose of the Street Standards. Richard Appicello, City Attorney said Staff has explained the options. He added that Exceptions are a certain standard and Variances are another standard and if they don't want to approve an Exception or a Variance, just state that. Molnar said if the Commissioners wish to move forward, they will come back with draft language and visuals. If they insert the visuals they used a couple of months ago, it is very clear up front that the applicant has to agree to certain performance measures. Is it worth trying to consider public spaces by using a map or rework it to make it more absolute and less subjective? In addition, Molnar said they are trying to anticipate other long-range work items. This is coming to the point of making a decision. COMMENTS & SUGGESTIONS FROM EACH COMMISSIONER Fields is feeling ambivalent. All of it is subjective and we are in a place of not having a vision and not really knowing where we are going. Ifwe do this piecemeal, we are going to create other problems. We are still stuck with discretion. Light and air does playa part. We don't want to create canyons. Mindlin said Fields' comments make a lot of sense to her. What are we getting? What are we giving up? She was looking for something more definite so applicants would know what to do. She's feeling like "why bother." Morris would like to at least see this go forward for a public hearing. Right now we are trying to control development so it happens a certain way. It's odd to try and design a town this way. We are looking at trying to define everything on Lithia Way and he doesn't think we can write a process, procedure or ordinance to define every part of it and make it work. He would like to see flexibility. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION MINUTES JANUARY 22, 2009 5 Marsh would very much like to see this go forward, particularly for Lithia Way. It could make a significant difference in the pedestrian quality and development we will get along Lithia Way. Referring to Navickas' testimony, she said she visited Manhattan recently. The buildings are right up against the sidewalk and it is the most vital, interesting, compelling pedestrian environment in the entire world. It is by far the most energy efficient city in the world. She would like to see us get rid of the ridiculous 20 foot setback on Lithia Way. She is afraid we are going to wind up with an office park that will be 20 feet of setback. It is important to leave the ordinance as flexible as possible. She has reservations about the plaza issue and would leave setback exemptions as flexible as possible. We want to see people have the ability to build things that really engage pedestrians and give them the ability to insert some creativity into the process. Dotterrer would like to go forward with this. This is meant to be for guidance and not directive in nature. He likes the flexibility in that he doesn't want it to be stamped out and cookie cutter. He agrees that Lithia Way is the street that is of particular concern. He is perfectly comfortable doing away with the 20 foot setback. He doesn't believe we are giving up anything. We are taking less of something that we were taking before and we were taking it for an insufficient reason. Dawkins does not object to going forward. He believes we have never really decided what Lithia Way is going to be when it grows up. He appreciates the density part of the argument. There is nothing on Lithia Way currently besides office space. He doesn't find anything on Lithia Way he wants to walk by - real estate offices, title companies, etc. Ifwe have the 20 foot setback, we have the opportunity to guide some of what the development mayor may not be. He can't visualize the 20 feet. He'd like a field trip or some way to clarify what the 20 feet is, showing property line, sidewalk, setbacks, etc. Dimitre echoed Dawkins comments. He has plenty of questions tonight and needs answers. He would support doing a Downtown Plan before giving up the 20 foot setback. Black feels like "why bother." We are trying to solve a piece of bureaucratic ordinance making a design problem we haven't tackled. It has larger implications than just the setback. With regard to giving and taking, she believes we are giving applicants a vibrant community. By taking 20 feet from them is in the interest of a positive Downtown influence. She feels the 20 foot setback is holding the line to something. She believes we need to deal with light and air and how the north side of Lithia Way is going to develop. It is a transition area. Stromberg said we are past due re-conceptualizing what should be happening in this critical heart of town that runs from the park all the way to the Railroad property. Ifwe could get a vibrant, creative conception for all of that, then the more technical details would have the right context and it would all work well. He feels the town needs to a new conception. He is willing to move this forward and not add any more complexity than needed. He would let go of the plaza and not put any more work into that. On the other hand, he would favor an 18 foot parkrow/sidewalk (the maximum our Street Standards envisions). He likes big street trees and sidewalks broad enough that allow some excitement and playfulness for people when they have some room. The positive option on the Exceptions is worthwhile, but he believes it would be an experiment at this time. Morris/Dawkins m/s to direct Staff to move forward to prepare language for a public hearing. There are no changes to the draft tonight. Any comments from the Commissioners will be considered by Staff. Molnar said they have heard a lot of comments. They will come back with another draft ordinance so the Commissioners will have options, for example, whether or not the public plaza is deleted. Dotterrer suggested the Commission review the changes before the next meeting and come prepared enough to make a motion, discuss and vote on any well-thought out changes. Molnar said they are writing the ordinance specifically for Lithia Way, but they are trying to use a format that could be adaptable to other arterials. Dimitre/Black m/s to amend the motion to draft language for Lithia Way only. Roll Call: The motion carried unanimously. Roll Call vote on the amended motion: The motion carried with Dimitre, Stromberg, Morris, Dotterrer, Marsh, Fields and Dawkins. Mindlin and Black voted "no." POWERS AND DUTIES Dotterrer explained that a few months ago he, Fields and David Stalheim, former Community Development Director, went before the Council and presented their recommendations on changes to the Planning Commissioners' powers and duties. They listened to the Council, and what is front of us tonight is based upon what they (Stalheim and Martha Bennett, City Administrator) believed ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION MINUTES JANUARY 22, 2009 6 they heard. It includes a lot of thoughts from many Councilors. There was no attempt during their discussion to have any consensus. It was just discussion. The general concern of the Council was that the draft the Planning Commission had put together gave too much direct power to the Planning Commission over land use planning without discussing the Council's role. Dotterrer remembered when the Commissioners began writing the powers and duties; their goal was to tackle the overall land use issues of the City of Ashland. The question is: Do the words in the powers and duties still meet their goal while addressing the concerns ofthe Council? Dotterrer's personal opinion is that he intends to stick to his views. Ifwe think the new words don't meet our goal and intent, we need to say so. Stromberg said on February 4th, 6:00 p.m., the Planning Commission will talk to the Council about powers and duties as well as Planning Commission goals and Council goals. How is the relationship and delegation of power to work between them? He is hoping for a good conversation. He thinks the Council now has a better sense of who they are as a body and where they are going. Molnar has recapped the work plan into a goals format. COMMENTS: Morris does not find anything in the powers and duties document presented tonight that is worth spending time on. He is looking at the changes and it has been pretty watered down. The current powers and duties are probably adequate. It would be good, however, to have a discussion with the Council. Mindlin thinks it makes some sense to meet with the Council to discuss their relationship. She does not see how changing anything in the powers and duties document changes what they can and cannot do. The relationship that's been established between the Commission and the Council is historical. What's written in a document makes little difference. Fields said it's just words. What happens is what individuals think we should do. It would be good to build a relationship with the Council. Who cares what the document says? He thinks we can accomplish what we want with or without the document. Dimitre finds the changes troublesome. There are some things that can be salvaged such as sustainability and more involvement in regional planning. He is hopeful that it can give us some new direction Black said her big issue is that the Comprehensive Plan is out of date. The relationship of the Planning Commission to the Comp Plan and the document is saying the Planning Commission is advisory to the ad hoc committees. The Council is not giving us the big plan and the larger policy issues the Council needs to be dealing with are not being addressed. Marsh said this is about our desire to exercise leadership in the area of land use planning. Leadership and exercising leadership doesn't emanate from a document. If we want to move forward on issues we can do that, at least until the Council tells them otherwise. In a bit of self reflection, we have spent the fifth meeting talking about the same issue (arterial setbacks) and the dominant sentiment is ambivalence about where we are. We have a ways to go if we want to be leaders. Stromberg said the Planning Commission as he has known it, has primarily been a reactive group. He sees planning being a much more active thing. Part of our job is engaging the community in thinking about its future. The Croman Mill Redevelopment is an exciting opportunity. Hartzell thinks the Planning Commission and Council have had a number of study sessions over time and those kinds of meetings are important. She would encourage the Commissioners that more than being concerned about the words, there is a good role for leadership at this level and she has seen it exercised in a number of ways. With regard to the Comp Plan, the Council is thinking about doing some things in advance about visioning. Before that happens, the community can do some shared learning on a variety of topics. The role of the Planning Commission is under state law and does give them the authority to do what they are doing. ADJOURNMENT - The meeting was adjourned at 10:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted by, Susan Yates, Executive Secretary ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION MINUTES JANUARY 22, 2009 7 ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION HEARINGS BOARD Minutes FEBRUARY 12, 2008 Hearings Board Members: Mindlin, Stromberg, Fields I. CALL TO ORDER: 1 :30 P.M., Civic Center, 1175 East Main Street II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Hearings Board Minutes of January 8,2008 III. TYPE I PLANNING ACTIONS A. PLANNING ACTION: PA2008-00069 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 542 A Street OWNER/APPLICANT: David Gremme/s / Carlos Delgado DESCRIPTION: Request for a modification of a previous Site Review approval (PA #2007- 01400). The modification requested is a proposed increase to the size of the shed structure at the rear of the property. The existing shed was originally proposed to be reduced from its current size, 378 square feet to 125 square feet; the applicant has requested that the shed be reduced in size by 48 square feet. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Employment; ZONING: E-1; ASSESSOR'S MAP #: 39 1E 09AB; TAX LOT: 5400 B. PLANNING ACTION: 2007-02158 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 805 Oak Street OWNER/APPLICANT: Holden, Hugh and Liesa Fulton DECSCRIPTION: Planning Action #2007-02158 is a request for an amendment to the conditions of approval for a previously approved Land Partition (PA #2007-00985) for the property located at 805 Oak Street. The previous approval was to create two parcels, including one flag lot. The proposed amendment involves the modification of the previously approved building envelope, the removal of one tree (a 14-inch diameter Birch) that was previously proposed to be preserved, and the removal of a previously proposed pedestrian walkway located within the flag driveway. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Single Family Residential; ZONING: R-1-5-P; ASSESSOR'S MAP # 391E 04 CA; TAX LOT: 2803. Commissioners Mindlin, Fields and Stromberg reviewed the two actions and had no questions of staff, nor any desire to move either action to the full commission. IV. TYPE II PUBLIC HEARINGS A. PLANNING ACTION: PA2007-01940 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 172 Skidmore St. APPLICANT: Urban Development Services, LLC DESCRIPTION: Request for a Conditional Use Permit and Site Review to construct two bathroom additions totaling 115 square feet within the required setback to a historic, legal non-conforming multi-family residential development located at 172 Skidmore Street. The application includes a request for a Variance to the requirement of Section 18.92.070 that the off-street parking be paved and an Administrative Variance to Site Design and Use Standards to allow for parking between the building and the street. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: High Density Residential; ZONING: R-3-; ASSESSOR'S MAP #: 391E05DD; TAX LOT: 1000 Commissioner Mindlin read the introductory statement regarding public hearing procedure, ex-parte contact, and bias and stated that she made a site visit. Barry provided the staff report detailing the request and familiarizing the Hearings Board with the property layout. Commissioner Stromberg asked for the distance between structures on 172 Skidmore to those on other properties. Barry did not have that information, but noted that no one in the notice area called or complained about the request. Mark Knox, Urban Development Services 700 Mistletoe, acting as the agent for the owner/applicant provided a brief history of the site, primarily on the restoration of the site within the last year, but noted that the units are believed to have been moved onto the site from the old Lithia Auto Park in Lithia Park and that the units on the site have been in existence since 1948, with rentors from the units being proposed for additions having to walk from cottages to a common bathroom. Knox also noted that the property has had a history of Police Dept issues and that the current owner/applicant has upgraded and fixed many of the issues with this bathroom addition being the remaining piece of the restoration. James Beard of S & J Properties LLC , owner/applicant spoke and mentioned that these types of projects are what they specialize in and this one cost much more than they thought but felt it was worth it in many aspects and would like to complete the work with the approval of this request. Mindlin stated that she was concerned about the setbacks proposed as well as the separation between buildings and questioned the applicant about the Historic Commission meeting and comments. Knox stated those were two separate issues. Solving both would destroy the existing site. He stated that the Historic Commission had concerns about fa9ade on main building also and noted that the ear east property line, notches in to be 3 feet from property line to help break that up and is less than 15 feet in height so 18.68 is met. Overall, Knox felt it was a balance between competing code sections. The Public hearing and record closed at 1 :55 Mindlin stated that she felt the historic "cuteness" will be lost with additions and that the two units are cramped in the back of the property. Fields noted that the separation between buildings issue is a technicality as the applicant could connect the two with a simple trellis and not have that as an issue. Mindlin responded that she concerned about what drove the decision of the Historic Commission and didn't necessarily agree with the Historic Commission's recommendation. Stromberg made a motion to approve, with Mindlin providing the second to the motion Fields added he felt the bathrooms were needed as a health and quality of living issue and that historical issues aren't as important in this case. This motion motivates restoration rather than demo and start over and recognizes the balance between modernizing the site and retaining the historic character. Stromberg stated that the site currently has two legal nonconforming uses without bathrooms. With the choices available, the application is the better of the possibilities, noting that it is difficult dealing with historic structures and the applicant has made a decent attempt at a solution. Mindlin stated that she prefers a redesign of the project to maintain the same separation as the current set up. Fields noted that it is difficult not to micromanage the design elements of an application and Stromberg concurred that the Hearings Board should not do design/re-design. Stromberg, Fields voted to approve the request, with Mindlin voting no. The application was approved with a 2 to 1 vote. V. UNFINISHED BUSINESS - Adoption of Findinas. Orders & Conclusions 1. Adoption of Findings - PA2007-021 04, 1725 & 1729 Siskiyou Bv., Behnam Mehmanpazir Staff advised the Hearings Board that the findings for 1725/1729 Siskiyou will be available at the evening meeting to review and adopt. VI. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 1 :55. CITY OF ASHLAND ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES FEBRUARY 12, 2008 1. CALL TO ORDER Chair John Stromberg called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. at the Ashland Civic Center, 1175 E. Main Street, Ashland, OR. Commissioners Present: John Stromberg, Chair Michael Dawkins Mike Morris Olena Black John Fields Pam Marsh Melanie Mindlin Tom Dimitre, arrived at 7: 10 p.rn. Council Liaison: Cate Hartzell, Council Liaison, absent due to quasi- judicial items Absent Members: Dave Dotterrer, excused Staff Present: Bill Molnar, Community Development Director Derek Severson, Associate Planner Sue Yates, Executive Secretary 2. ANNOUNCEMENTS - There were no announcements. 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Add to the agenda the following: 1. Announce amendments to the Planning Commission Rules 2. Powers and Duties - Report from Stromberg and discussion 3. Approval of Findings from today's Hearings Board. Dimitre/Marsh rn/s to approve the agenda. V oice Vote: Approved. 4. CONSENT AGENDA Marsh/Dawkins rn/s to approve the minutes of the January 8,2008 Regular Planning Commission meeting and the January 22, 2008 Planning Commission Study Session. Voice Vote: Approved. 5. AMENDMENTS TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION RULES Molnar announced the Planning Commission is amending the Planning Commission Rules. The amendments have been distributed to the Commissioners this evening in order to have 14 days prior to consideration for adoption. The amendments are scheduled for adoption at the Planning Commission Study Session on Tuesday, February 26,2008. The amendments are available to the public at the Community Development and Engineering Services Building at 51 Winburn Way. 6. ADOPTION OF HEARINGS BOARD FINDINGS Fields/Mindlin rn/s to approve the Findings for P A2007 -02104, 1725 and 1729 Siskiyou Boulevard, Behnam Mehmanpazir. Voice Vote: Fields, Mindlin and Stromberg (Hearings Board members) approved. 7. PUBLIC FORUM - No one came forth to speak 8. TYPE II PUBLIC HEARINGS CONTINUATION OF: PLANNING ACTION: 2007-01941 ADDRESS: 1070 TOLMAN CREEK ROAD APPLICANT: OgdenRoemerWilkerson Architecture AlA DESCRIPTION: A request for Site Review approval to construct an approximately 52,163 square foot elementary school on the Bellview School site located at 1070 Tolman Creek Road. Ex Parte Contact/Bias/Conflict of Interest/Site Visit Morris had another site visit and talked to Superintendent of Schools, Juli DeChiro about some design features that are not under the Planning Commission's purview. Black got a phone call from Huelz stating the wording she should have used at the last meeting was "zero net energy" regarding the buildings. Mindlin received a call suggesting an underground walkway under Tolman Creek Road for pedestrians. Stromberg and Dawkins had a site visit but no ex parte contacts. Dimitre, Marsh and Fields had no site visit and no ex parte contact. There were no challenges of bias or conflict of interest. ST AFF REPORT Severson showed a 1967 photo of the site and the filling of the athletic field. A recap of the issues included: . The Staff recommendation for limiting the automobile circulation to one-way. . Bike circulation and bike parking. . Coordinating the pedestrian and bicycle circulation to the existing crosswalks. Since the last meeting, the applicants have withdrawn their request for a Variance to bicycle parking. They have submitted a revised overall site circulation plan that shows more bike parking better distributed throughout the site. Severson has presented a new set of Findings that removes that Variance. Another change is Condition 6-1 that refers to an access easement from the Grange. The Grange and School District are still in negotiations to determine how access will work. Condition 6-1 will read that the applicants will provided limited legal access whether through an easement or through some kind of property purchase or other arrangement. The site plan also shows a "right-out" option plan for the south driveway to allow a right turn only movement. Jim Olson, City Engineer, felt taking one turning movement out of that area should be sufficient. Severson continued that since the last meeting, the Historic Commission reviewed the application at their February 6th meeting. They recommended the central mass be downplayed to enhance its connection and transition to the historic building through embellishment, architectural detail and color. They are not looking for structural modification of the building, but they wanted to see some embellishments that would downplay the central mass. The Historic Commission recommendations are included in the record. Since the last meeting, Staff was recommending that the recent sidewalk installed by ODOT be extended through the bus loop. The applicants indicated that two additional trees will need to be removed. PUBLIC HEARING DAVID WILKERSON, OgdenRoemerWilkerson, 2950 E.. Barnett Road, Medford, OR 97504 and JIM CONWAY, DLR Group, 421 S.W. Sixth Avenue, Suite 1212, Portland, OR. WILKERSON explained the two-way drives. They wanted to make a clear separation between the different types of traffic. They got feedback from Jim Olson and the Bike Commission. They now have a clear separation between vehicular, bike and bus traffic as shown on the site plan. They are planning to eliminate the curb on the inside of the bus loop to avoid going down 15 inches into the tree root zone. The driveway sheds water to the outer edge. They are discussing the idea of narrowing the bus loop to 20 feet and still meeting the Fire Department requirements and allow buses to pass each other. The end result would keep them six feet further away from the root zone. Wilkerson explained the building design and materials. To meet the Historic Commission's concerns, they are developing a two to three part color scheme. By using color, they can minimize the appearance of the new building. They want the connecting piece to fade into the background. By using different materials, they will have more flexibility. Wilkerson explained that one tree will be removed because it is in the bus loop and the other is tight on the curb, therefore both will need to be removed. They will mitigate by planting more trees. GREG COVEY, Covey Pardee Landscape Architects, 295 E. Main Street, Suite 8, explained the two additional trees to be removed are trees #12A to allow entry to the drive to be constructed and tree #58 that will be removed to allow for extension of the sidewalk to the comer. Dimitre is concerned about the vehicle turning movements and wondered how many vehicles now use the drive and how many they anticipate using it after construction. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES FEBRUARY 12, 2008 2 JULI DICHIRO, Superintendent of Schools, 885 Siskiyou Boulevard, said they do not anticipate an increase in students and by putting the buses on Siskiyou should reduce the net traffic impact. Marsh asked if the automobile turnaround is wide enough for two lanes of cars. Wilkerson affirmed. JIM TEECE, 864 Neil Creek Road, is the parent of a fifth grader at Bellview. He has served on planning committee for the Bellview project. Prior to that he served as co-chair for the bond project and has served on at least two other committees. He shares his support of the process and the plan. Black recalled when the bond issue came along, there was a lot of discussion about energy efficiency and she got the idea there would be some zero net energy. She wondered why the building doesn't seem to have solar and other energy efficiencies. Teece said energy efficiency was one of the primary concerns they carried forward and has always been a priority. Black asked about CP AC - what is it? He said a citizen group will help oversee all projects going on under the bond. RENEE GARDENER, 808 Summit Avenue, Medford, OR, has been teaching for 19 years at Bellview Elementary. As one of the longer employed staff members at Bellview, she felt a need to make sure Bellview retained some of its "Bellview-ness" as they built the new school. They had three days of input from the entire staff. The staff unanimously agreed that a view of the space and mountains was really important to them. CHRISTINE MCCOLLUM, Principal of Bellview, 539 Clay Street, explained how their citizens committee came to be and some of the criteria for building. The process was open to public and families. They built a committee of 11 with a balanced group of people. Every aspect of the design was approached with teaching as the number one criteria. The other priorities were sustainability, green practices, balancing longevity with using more earth friendly resources, healthier choices with regard to paint, carpet, etc., were also factors. They chose a lot of materials based on those criteria. They added solar water heating and some other options that were added later. INGRID HANSEN, 115 Reiten Drive, said she has taught at Bellview for 13 years. She has been very impressed with all the avenues of input that all of the staff has been given from day one until the present. With regard to the east facing windows, in her experience she would much prefer the east facing windows that give light and air to the classrooms to a room with few to no windows. . HOWARD BARASH, President of the Bellview Grange, 1050 Tolman Creek Road (resides at 845 Valley View Road and SUSIE AUFDERHEIDE, 321 N. Mountain Avenue, Apt. A. BARASH said the Grange is here to support local economy, agriculture, environmental sustainability, and community. He read the letter from the Grange that he entered into the record dated February 11, 2008. They determined that a perpetual easement through their property is not in the best interest of the Grange and the community they serve. AUFDERHEIDE said they received two proposals today from the School District. Barash said they will continue to work toward a solution to the driveway easement that will be in the best interest of all parties. Severson said the existing drive and the proposed relocated drive are located on the Grange property. He said Condition 6-1 has been included in the Findings that states before a building permit is issued, Staff would have to have evidence they have a right to legal access. MAT MARR, 31 Union Street, is Chair of the Ashland School Board, Representative from the School Board to the Bellview Site Design Committee, and School Board Representative to the Executive Oversight Committee. The proposal is a culmination of a significant community process that began many years ago with the Bond Committee. From the very beginning, the Bond Committee made a top priority to make their projects as efficient and sustainable as possible. Specifically, when they were giving recommendations of how much to spend at each sight, the Bond Committee agreed to add ten percent to the overall budget at Bellview Elementary to make it as efficient a building as possible. Not just for altruistic reasons but also for educational purposes. In addition to the many efficiencies built into the Bellview design, the School Board added $1 million to their sustainability budgets throughout the district. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES FEBRUARY 12, 2008 3 Rebuttal - DiChiro said they began negotiations with the Grange some time ago. They have a legal opinion that they have both an implied easement and a prescriptive easement that they could go to, but their interest is to find a mutual agreeable solution with the current Grange board. They are more than willing to look for a garden plot that would meet the Grange's needs. They have not submitted any offers to the Grange. Today they gave them the appraisals of the property for both the section of land they would need for the driveway and for the whole portion of the land. They have so many common interests with the Grange that they feel they can come to a resolution. To clarify a budget item DiChiro said not only did they put an extra ten percent into this budget, but the Board also set aside $1 million in interest earnings from their bond investments also for sustainable solutions. Stromberg closed the public hearing and closed the record. Questions of Staff - Severson said there is a Condition addressing the requirements for legal access. Marsh asked if the access substantially changes, would that change require approval at the Stafflevel or would that need to come back to the Commission. Molnar said if a change to the circulation occurs it could require an amendment. It would come back to the Commission unless the Commission provides for some flexibility in the Condition, allowing Staff to make changes. It would still require public notice, but it could be done at the Staff level. Severson noted that the Tree Commission reviewed the uphill side of the driveway where the curb has been eliminated. They and Engineering were supportive. The Tree Commission said they would like the applicants to look at other innovative treatments as included in the Tree Commission recommendations that have been included in the record. With regard to the Historic Commission comments, the applicants have indicated they are willing to work on modifying the central mass with some color embellishments and texture. There is a Condition that states that all recommendations of the Historic Commission from their two meetings will ultimately go back to the Historic Commission Review Board to make sure the changes the applicants have made will meet the intent of the original condition. COMMISSIONERS' DELIBERATIONS AND DECISION Marsh said she is comfortable placing any modifications to the driveway circulation in the hands of Staff. If the applicants do need to make some minor changes in circulation, those changes would normally be under Staffs advisement anyway. If there are any significant changes, she trusts Staff will forward them to the Commission. Fields agreed. Severson explained with regard to the Historic Commission's recommendations, they would like to be sure that the original window design or proportion is maintained. He said the February recommendations supersede the January comments from the Historic Commission. Molnar said if the applicants make any changes beyond what has been discussed in the record, that is where the Staff Advisor makes the final call. They are asking that the applicants look at subtle non-structural changes. Morris/Fields m/s to approve PA2007.01941 including all the Conditions provided by Staff. Black is disappointed that there is nothing in the Findings that gives any indication of what the applicants have done with regard to providing for future solar panels. Stromberg reminded Black that Condition 1 states that all proposals of the applicants shall be conditions of approval unless otherwise modified herein. Black did not see anything in the packet with regard to this. Roll Call: The motion carried unanimously. Adoption of FindinQs - The Findings need a slight modification relative to removal of the two additional trees. Black/Morris m/s to approve the Findings for PA2007-01941 with the language change to 6D 3) "Identification ofthe 'seven' trees..." PUBLIC FORUM - Stromberg called Fred Caruso to speak. No one came forward. PLANNING ACTION: PA2008.00053 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 201 5. Mountain Avenue OWNER/APPLICANT: OgdenRoemerWilkersonaarchitecture AlA/School District #5 DESCRIPTION: Request for site review approval to construct an approximately 19,375 square foot auxiliary gym and music suite addition on the Ashland High School Campus located at 201 S. MOUNTAIN AVENUE. The application proposes demolition of the existing 10,800 square foot auxiliary gym building and of the 5,600 square foot music suite; renovation of the 22,024 square foot ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 4 REGULAR MEETING MINUTES FEBRUARY 12, 2008 main gym building; and a reconfiguration of the parking area located to the east of the existing gym building. The application also requires a variance to the required sideyard setback along S. Mountain Avenue; the applicants propose to construct a ramp, stairs and landings to the property line where a minimum ten-foot sideyard setback is required. Severson said after reviewing this application, Staff did not feel it was complete enough to recommend approval, and felt the most expeditious way to process this application is to have an evidentiary hearing tonight, allow the public to speak and allow time for the Commissioners to ask questions of the applicants and then continue the hearing to the March 11, 2008 Regular Planning Commission meeting. Ex Parte Contact/Bias/Conflict of Interest/Site Visit Marsh passes by the high school frequently. Her daughter was a member of the design committee last spring, so she heard about it over dinner. Her daughter has since gone away to college. Stromberg had no ex parte contacts but has had site visits. Dawkins has had a few site visits but no ex parte contacts. He graduated from Ashland High School. Morris also graduated from AHS; he's worked on the stadium and has attended a lot of sporting events. He had no ex parte contacts. Black's daughter was a student at AHS and Black was on campus daily. Her daughter was an active participant in activities from 2002 to 2007 within the buildings that are under consideration. Black was also in these buildings at least once a month for choir activities. She had firsthand experience with the ADA facility or lack thereof in the current buildings. She also noticed a significant amount of mold in the music rooms. She said at two of the performance she attended, the school staff suggested that they would have a scenic design area for the theater. Mindlin has driven by the site frequently. She had no ex parte contacts. Fields had no ex parte contacts and is familiar with the building. Dimitre had no site visit and no ex parte contacts. There were no challenges for bias or conflict of interest. STAFF REPORT Severson outlined the elements of the application that need to be better addressed by the applicant. 1. No Variance has been requested and no written findings in support of the Variance have been provided. The application requires a sideyard Variance along S. Mountain A venue and this was not addressed in the application. 2. The plans provided were limited to the portion of the campus that they were proposing to disturb. A site plan including buildings, landscaping, parking and circulation has not been provided. 3. Lot coverage is addressed only in terms of the gross building area footprint for all buildings. Nothing was addressed concerning all other impervious surfaces. 4. The findings do not identify the existing number of auto and bike parking spaces provided on site and do not include the stadium, the most significant public assembly space on campus. Staff is recommending the application be continued after the hearing tonight until the March 11, 2008 Planning Commission meeting. Severson explained the setback requirements require the yard from the ground up to be unobstructed. Adjacent to a public street, a ten foot sideyard has to be provided from the property line to the first obstruction. Things that don't count as structures are anything under 18 inches high or a fence. PUBLIC HEARING DAVID WILKERSON, OgdenRoemerWilkerson, 2950 E. Barnett Road, Medford, OR 97504 and JIM CONWAY, DLR Group, 421 SW Sixth Avenue, Suite 1212, Portland, OR WILKERSON explained the two components of the project: the renovation of the existing main gym and the replacement of the auxiliary gym with a new auxiliary gym. The standards don't specifically address the Variance required for the sideyard setback along Mountain A venue. In terms of overall site development, they are decreasing the amount of impervious area on the site and increasing the amount of landscaping. They will create a new public entrance on Mountain A venue. Due to the height of the floor, it requires a ramp (or stairs) into a new lobby. The lobby will serve as an entrance to games in the gym. The lobby can be entered by stairs or ramp. One elevation addresses the Site Review standard that buildings have their primary orientation to the street. The proximity of the existing building to the street is the driving need for a Variance. The raised plaza and the elements above it are the elements that will require a Variance. The applicants believe the difference between the existing floor elevation and the existing sidewalk grade is not self-imposed. There is nothing about this that will have a negative impact on adjacent developments. The flat roof over the boiler will be covered over to create new spaces for the music department. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES FEBRUARY 12, 2008 5 CONWAY said the critical thing they were challenged with on Mountain Avenue was to retain the entrance on Mountain and provide accessibility to the front with the height elevation of seven feet from the street to the floor. In order to get accessibility to the front door, they took advantage of the slope of Mountain Avenue and joined the sidewalk creating the plinth along the front. Wilkerson said they have a revised site plan showing street trees clustered in the front (nine street trees). The Tree commission requested the elm tree be removed. One of the things not currently included in the project is a black box theater. Conway said they are looking at other spaces on campus that could serve that function. KEN OGDEN, ORW Architecture, 2950 E. Barnett Road, Medford, OR 97504, said there is a black box theater but it is going to be converted to the scene shop. Dawkins asked about the main entrance on Mountain Avenue. Since a lot of parking happens to be on the west side of the building, will the alley between the theater and the gym be fixed up? Wilkerson said they will be moving some of the existing landscaping that isn't appropriate. Black wondered if it was going to be a problem to use the existing foundation for the walls of the main theater or will that wall be rebuilt? If they run into water/mold issues on the foundation, what will it take to revise or renovate it? Ogden said the method of removing water will be with foundation drains. Black had concerns about access and a sense of entrance to the music rooms. Wilkerson said the entrance to the music rooms will be through the lobby. KATE KENNEDY, Poplar Place, 495 Poplar Place, said she has taught for 18 years. She has been involved in the charrette process, the bond committee, and CPAC committee. In this process there has been a lot of give and take and sharing ideas. The school staff felt that they came together and found solutions. Kennedy noted that the heating and air conditioning of the high school has been a huge problem in the past. Part of the project is to solve this issue. JEFF SCHLECT, 489 Friendship Street, talked about the process. This has been an extremely inclusive process. Schlect believes the students will still use the north gym entrance. But for community spectators, they can still park on Morse, use Titus Alley, and the Iowa Street parking lot. The current entrance will remain open as well as the Mountain entrance. He said the foyer doors on Mountain might be closed during the day. TONY SHELTON, 121 Meade Street, stated his two kids attend AHS. He was happy to have been included in the process. It started with the charrette in the fall of 2006. It was an orderly, cooperative process and he believes everyone was pretty comfortable with it. DAHNA BLACK, 2976 Grizzly Drive, said she is an AHS student. She has been part of CP AC and the design team. The architects were open and flexible from the beginning. Through the cooperation of the committee, it was really interesting to see everything come together after almost falling apart several times. As a student, she was really excited to be part of the collaborative effort. The final product will be beneficial for years to come. Staff Response - Severson said they are in a residential zone trying to apply criteria that are either residential or commercial to a public building. Black asked for more legible drawings in their next packet. GREG COVEY, Covey Pardee Landscape Architecture, 295 E. Main Street, #8, said they are taking the main entrance to the gym and splitting it into a ramped entry from the south edge (five percent ramp). The width goes from about seven-and-a-half feet to 12 feet, far exceeding the code requirement. The reason is to soften the front plinth with some planting material below and at the same time allow pedestrians in the gym entrance to come in through either side. There is a second entry to the choir room. There is an additional accessible entry to main floor ofthe gym. The next time, they would like present a diagram and look at primary and secondary entrances as well as accessible entrances. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES FEBRUARY 12, 2008 6 Dawkins/Fields m/s to continue the public hearing to March 11,2008 at the Ashland Civic Center, 1175 E. Main Street. Roll Call: The motion carried unanimously. Black/Dimitre m/s to extend the meeting t010:15 p.rn. Voice Vote: Approved. 9. PLANNING COMMISSION POWERS AND DUTIES Stromberg stated that after most of the Planning Commissioners had left the Council Study Session on February 4th, he was startled to learn that Martha Bennett, City Administrator was taking the re-write of the Powers and Duties (2.12 of the Ashland Municipal Code) to the next Council meeting on February 19th. That document is in front of the Commissioners tonight. Stromberg intervened and asked if the Planning Commission could have a chance to digest the re-write and make a recommendation to the Council. Stromberg and Dotterrer felt the Council re-write had not lost the essence of what the Planning Commission was asking for initially. They felt the concern of the Council regarding the somewhat provocative language submitted originally to them by the Planning Commission was legitimate. Stromberg and Dotterrer reviewed the document with Bennett today via conference call. The three of them are all on the same page with the exception of Section 4.B.5. The Council will review the ordinance changes on March 4th. Marsh said if the items concerning sustainability in Section 4.B.5. are detailed in the Comprehensive Plan, then we don't need them in the Powers and Duties. The Powers and Duties should be about what we do, not what values we hold. Mindlin said we originally had a list of various types of activities. When sustainability was part of the whole list, it made sense. We got rid of the rest of the list and now sustainability stands out like a sore thumb. There was some question about the state planning goals (ORS 227.090). Stromberg said the Planning Commission is authorized to work on any of the issues that are in the Comprehensive Plan. There are chapters in the Comp Plan that pertain to sustainability, environmental quality, housing and economy. Black believes we are revising our current Comprehensive Plan methodology. Therefore, Stromberg asked if Molnar would call John Renz from the Department of Land Conservation and Development (D LCD) to see if this ordinance has to go to the state for acknowledgement. Stromberg noted a change was made to 2.12.010 that would read as follows: "There is created a City Planning Commission of nine (9) members, to be appointed by the Mayor and confirmed by the City Council, to serve without compensation, not more than two (2) of who may reside outside the City limits and within the area six (6) miles adjacent thereto." This would match the original state language. Marsh/Fields m/s to approve the document with the changes as suggested by Stromberg and Dotterrer. And eliminate the language to Section 4.B.5. Black amended the motion to get confirmation from John Renz that we won't have to have an acknowledgement to make this change. Marsh and Fields accepted the amendment. Mindlin and Dimitre preferred the unchanged wording under Section 4.B.5. because the language was more explicit. Stromberg reiterated that the Commission will still have the power to act on that list under the newer language. Black/Dimitre ms to extend the meeting to 10:30 p.m. Voice Vote: Approved. Dawkins said he too feels strongly about sustainability. However, he is comfortable eliminating the language knowing implicitly that we can still do those items that are listed. He is ready to simplify this and get it off our plate. Roll Call: The motion carried with Fields, Black, Mindlin, Stromberg, Dawkins, Marsh, and Morris voting "yes" and Dimitre voting "no." 10. ADJOURNMENT - The meeting was adjourned at 10:20 P.M. Respectfully submitted by, Susan Yates, Executive Secretary ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES FEBRUARY 12. 2008 7 CITY OF ASHLAND ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION MINUTES FEBRUARY 26, 2008 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chair John Stromberg at 7:05 p.m. at the Ashland Civic Center, 1175 E. Main Street, Ashland, OR. Commissioners Present: Council Liaison: John Stromberg, Chair Cate Hartzell, present Michael Dawkins Pam Marsh Staff Present: Mike Morris Maria Harris, Planning Manager Melanie Mindlin Brandon Goldman, Senior Planner Dave Dotterrer Richard Appicello, City Attorney Absent Members: Sue Yates, Executive Secretary John Fields Tom Dimitre 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Stromberg asked to add to the agenda a discussion item concerning the upcoming retreat in May. Dotterrer/Dawkins m/s to approve the amended agenda. Voice Vote: Approved. 3. ANNOUNCEMENTS Stromberg noted that Olena Black's resignation was received, effective immediately. Marsh said she is representing the Planning Commission on the SDC (Systems Development Charge) Committee that has now begun meeting. Her agenda will be to look for ways in which the SDC structure could be used to further land use goals. Marsh talked about the activities that are underway in response to the recent tragic death that occurred on Siskiyou Boulevard. There is going to be a joint meeting of the Bike and Pedestrian and Traffic Safety Commissions. She believes that anything engineered for pedestrian safety is critical to land use decisions. If our idea is to build a city in which pedestrians and bicyclists bear a good brunt of the traffic, we have to make sure it is a safe experience. She hopes the Planning Commission can stay informed. Hartzell said the joint meeting Marsh referred to will be held Thursday night at the Council Chambers. She offered to forward the memo prepared by Public Works staff to the Planning Commission outlining some of their suggestions. Marsh offered to attend the meeting and report back to the Commission. 4. PUBLIC FORUM - No one came forth to speak. 5. PUBLIC ARTS MASTER PLAN PRESENTATION Ann Seltzer, Staff Liaison, introduced Commissioners Melissa Markell and David Wilkerson. Melissa Markell, Chair, Public Arts Commission, reviewed the steps they have gone through to put together the Public Arts Master Plan. Through a series of meetings and surveys, they established ten goals. David Wilkerson, Public Arts Commission member said the Master Plan is the culmination of a lot of hard work and a response to what they heard through the public process. Each goal targets the particular issues offunding, location and types of public art. The goals that will require the most collaboration with the Planning Commission are: . Require a component of public art in all developments over 10,000 square feet or 100 feet in length in the Detailed Site Review Zone. They would like to make this mandatory. . Collaborate and encourage the City departments, especially Public Works and the Parks Department to incorporate functional pieces such as benches, sidewalks, other public works streetscape type items. . Seek changes to the sign code ordinance to allow for murals. They want to allow for more public art that could go onto private property. Wilkerson indicated there are policies, procedures and parameters they will use in reviewing projects. A community panel will be established based on each individual project to select the art. Appicello interjected that the Planning Commission works with the sign code as a land development regulation. Under State law the Planning Commission can exempt city projects from land development regulations. What will probably come forward to the Planning Commission is something that says, "If public art is formally accepted into the Ashland public art inventory through a given process, it will be exempt from the sign code ordinance." Seltzer reminded the Commission that there is a section in the 1988 Downtown Plan on public art, identifying locations for public art. Marsh expressed her hope that they can continue to partner with the Public Arts Commission because without a doubt, public art makes a difference. She hoped the Arts Commission would consider using the full public as the jury for potential art pieces, when appropriate. Wilkerson invited any Planning Commissioner to attend their meetings Seltzer credited Carissa Moddison, an SOU student who worked with the Public Arts Commission for an entire year as her capstone project. She was invaluable resource. 6. HOUSING INCENTIVES AND REGULATORY BARRIERS Brandon Goldman, Planning Manager, explained that this item is before the Commission tonight because the Council, after reviewing the Lithia Lot housing development, questioned what incentives there are to promote the development of multi-family housing in Ashland. The Council suggested there be a joint meeting with Planning Commissioners, Housing Commissioners and City Councilors. In order for that meeting to have maximum benefit, it seemed to make sense to have each individual Commission/Council member look at the list of incentives and barriers in order to become educated prior to the joint meeting. Goldman provided a PowerPoint presentation. He said regulatory barriers are regulatory requirements that may have the impact of significantly increasing the cost of development and as a result, impeding the development of affordable housing or a needed housing type without providing a commensurate health or safety benefit. Some barriers include: 1. Insufficient land availability. 2. Density limitations. 3. Discretionary approval process subject to "NIMBY" arguments. 4. Insufficient land availability. 5 Limitations on mixed use, high density, residential development in commercial or industrial property. 6. Excessive off-street parking requirements. 7. Landscaping standards and open space. 8. Prescriptive lot sizes. 9. Land use ordinance complexity and regional inconsistencies. Goldman said housing incentives are any variety of incentives used to encourage new development and needed housing types. Additional housing incentives include: 1. If higher residential density permitted for needed housing types. 2. Increase in land supply availability for needed housing types. 3. Tax exemptions for affordable housing. 4. Tax exemptions for multi-family housing 5. Fee waivers. 6. Provide city owned land or airspace for needed housing types. 7. Direct financial assistance. a. Grants (local, state federal) b. Loans (low interest) Goldman said this is a list to begin the conversation as to what incentives could be flushed out further in the joint CounciVPlanning/Housing meeting. The meeting has not yet been scheduled. Dotterrer wondered if Goldman had considered bringing together a group of developers, including out-of-town developers who do business in the valley, and asking them about their thoughts and concerns. For example, what would it take for them to come to Ashland to build a multi-family house? Morris agreed developers should be part of the discussion. Mindlin commented that our tendency is to confuse the public and private when talking about affordable housing. We assume private land can be developed just as the way we like regardless of the desires of the owners. In terms of the list of incentives, she would like to get it down to our local level. Some items don't pertain to us. The biggest thing for Mindlin as we deal with affordable housing is where is the real financial analysis that will tell us whether a particular policy that we pursue is going to pay off in terms of what developers or non-profits can or cannot do. ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION 2 STUDY SESSION MINUTES FEBRUARY 26, 2008 Stromberg asked if Dotterrer would bring to the next meeting a proposal for a committee of the Planning Commission to invite developers together in preparation for the upcoming joint meeting. Dotterrer agreed and thought getting private and non-profit financial analyses would be helpful. This item will go on our agenda when Dotterrer is ready. Marsh thought we should be clear about our definition of multi-family. Are we looking only at those limited pockets of rental and affordable or is the concern much broader in terms of multi-family development with smaller units and smaller yards? She is interested in the broader look too. Goldman said initially it was looking at an affordable housing development but asking the broader question, "Why aren't we having apartments built as rentals?" Perhaps there could be some clarity as to the needed housing types at the joint meeting. Harris said the direction Staff received from the City Council was to prepare this general list, and the next step is to take it to the session. It seems a little early to start doing a lot of research and analysis on all of the items on the list until the joint session occurs. At that point, we should receive direction from Council on what areas to focus on. Hartzell thought it would be helpful if Staff would give some suggestions for the type of criteria that we' II listen and talk about at the joint meeting. It is challenging to figure out how we talk about it without more information. Ifwe could add the additional information to the presentation when it comes before the joint meeting, that would help inform the discussion. 7. MEASURE 49 TRANSFEROF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS Richard Appicello, City Attorney, explained the transfer of development rights. It is just a tool to preserve something you want to preserve and transferring that development density and intensity to areas where it is more appropriate to develop. This has come up because Measure 49 expressly provides in Section 11 that there may be an agreement between a county and city to transfer development rights from rural areas to other areas. He referred to ORS 271.715, Sections 5-11. Everything under Sections 5-11 is permitted to be transferred. Example: A farmer living in the county has one house and under a Measure 49 claim that allows up to ten units. The farmer wants to sell nine pieces, but he'd be looking at nine houses. Or, the farmer could sell the nine pieces and they would be located someplace in the city or UGB wherever the city would deem them appropriate, and the farmer can still live on his farm and look at the farm instead of nine units. There is a restriction put on the farmer's property in order to preserve what is there. In the county there has to be an area that's designated where the density can be transferred from and in the city there has to be a receptor zone Marsh applauded Appicello for doing this. This is a real opportunity for the City to take on some of the responsibility of keeping some our rural lands uncluttered. 8. 1.5 VISITOR'S INFORMATION CENTER UPDATE Harris said this item went to City Council last week. ODOT is proposing a new visitor's center located off the northbound lanes of 1-5 (near radio towers and Crowson Road). ODOT has already acquired the property and now they are trying to get it approved. The public hearing before the County Commissioners will be held at 9:00 a.m. Thursday, February 28th.at the Jackson County Courthouse. The proposal is to build a whole new visitor's center/rest stop. It will be a little more involved than the standard rest stop because it has a visitor's center that will serve as the gateway to Oregon. There will be a State Police substation incorporated in one of the buildings. The stop will not be for truck traffic. Trucks will have to go to the Port of Entry between the two Ashland exits. They hope to have the project built by the summer of 2009. 9. RETREAT IN MAY Stromberg asked the Commissioners to look at their calendars to find an available Saturday in May for the Planning Commission retreat. What would be a good way of using their time together? Assuming the Council approves their Powers and Duties, that document would create a framework for discussion. They can look at the categories and within those they could look at what they can do in the coming year. E-mail Sue with your available Saturdays. 10. PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION - March 25th This item will be on the March 11 th agenda. Several Commissioners will be gone for this meeting. There will be two Croman Mill Redevelopment workshops the prior week. 11. ADJOURNMENT - The meeting was adjourned at 9:10 p.m. Respectfully submitted by, Sue Yates Executive Secretary ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION MINUTES FEBRUARY 26, 2008 3 CITY OF ASHLAND ASHLAND TREE COMMISSION MINUTES February 4, 2008 CALL TO ORDER -Chair Laurie Sager called the Ashland Tree Commission meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. on February 4, 2008 in the Siskiyou Room in the Community Development and Engineering Services Building located at 51 Winburn Way, Ashland, OR. Commissioners Present Council Liaison Laurie Sager Russ Silbiger, Absent Kelly Cruser John Rinaldi Jr. Staff Present Zane Jones Amy Anderson, Assistant Planner Anne Rich, Parks Department APPROVAL OF MINUTES November 8, 2007 Tree Commission Minutes - Rinaldi/Jones m/s to approve the minutes of November 8, 2007. Voice vote: all A YES, Motion passed. The minutes of November 8, 2007 were approved as presented. PUBLIC FORUM None present PUBLIC HEARINGS PLANNING ACTION: PA2007-01940 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 172 Skidmore St. APPLICANT: Urban Development Services, LLC DESCRIPTION: Request for a Conditional Use Permit and Site Review to construct two bathroom additions totaling 115 square feet within the required setback to a historic, legal non-conforming multi-family residential development located at 172 Skidmore Street. The application includes a request for a Variance to the requirement of Section 18.92.070 that the off-street parking be paved and an Administrative Variance to Site Design and Use Standards to allow for parking between the building and the street. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: High Density Residential; ZONING: R-3-; ASSESSOR'S MAP #: 391E05DD; TAX LOT: 1000 Site Visits and Ex Parte Contacts - Site visits by Rinaldi, Sager, Jones and Rich. Amy reviewed the staff report and explained the project. The Commission discussed the application and the variance request to not pave the parking area adjacent to the alley due to the proximity of the parking areas and a tree on this site and a tree on the neighbor's property. The Commission felt that the paving could potentially harm the tree and they gave their support to the applicants request to not pave the parking area. Applicant testimony - None present. Recommendations: 1) Tree Commission supports the Variance request to not pave the parking area in the vicinity of the trees as the paving will only hasten the decline of the trees. PLANNING ACTION #: PA-2007-01941 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 1070 Tolman Creek Rd APPLICANT: OgdenRoemerWilkerson Architecture AlA DESCRIPTION: A request for Site Review approval to construct an approximately 52,163 square foot elementary school on the Bellview School site located at 1070 Tolman Creek Road. The application proposes partial demolition of the existing buildings and construction of a new 42,678 square foot elementary school facility. The 9,485 square foot original Bellview School building (circa 1929) is to be retained and renovated as part of the proposal. Also included are requests for a Variance to the required number of bicycle parking spaces to allow 33 bicycle parking spaces where 6S spaces are required; and Tree Removal Permits to remove three Oak trees and one Sequoia greater than IS-inches in diameter at breast height (d.b.h.). The application includes the removal of six smaller trees; because these six trees are less than IS-inches (d.b.h.) and located on public school property they do not require Tree Removal Permits. [The Planning Director has determined the proposal is not subject to the Development Standards for Floodplain Corridor Lands because the applicants have provided a survey establishing the floodplain boundary as outside of the proposed area of disturbance.] MAP: 39 IE 14 CA; TAX LOT #: 4700; ZONING: R-I-5; COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Single Family Residential Site Visits and Ex Parte Contacts - Site visits by Rinaldi, Sager, Jones and Rich. Amy gave the staff report and read the conditions of approval pertaining to trees, tree protection and landscaping. Applicant testimony - Greg Covey and Heather Armstrong from Pardee/Covey Landscape Architects and David Wilkerson from Ogden/Romer/Wilkerson Architecture were present to represent the applicants, Ashland School District. The applicants explained the constraints of the site which lead to the proposed layout for the addition to the Bellview School. They stated that there are a number of site constraints, such as the existing, historic 1920s building, the floodplain, bad soils, Oregon Department of Transportation requirements and the City's Site Design and Use Standards. Neighbors to the north of the project requested that the grove of Sequoias along the northern property line be saved. The trees were initially proposed for removal but at this point one tree will be removed and the others will be retained. They discussed the proposed school bus loop off of Siskiyou Blvd. on the south side of the project site. There are a number of trees that will be impacted by the proposed development. The applicants showed the commission some civil changes that were made between the time the commission received their packets and the meeting. An additional tree is going to be removed since the sidewalk that was originally proposed to stop half way around the loop will be continued to connect to Siskiyou Blvd. Commission Discussion - Commissioner Rinaldi asked about tree mitigation and whether the trees that do not require permit for removal will be mitigated. Amy explained that since the trees are not subject to the requirements of the land use ordinance conditions cannot be imposed beyond what is required by code. The trees that are subject to the tree removal permit process will be mitigated for on-site. The Commission expressed an interest in having the applicant provide more clear information regarding how many tree will be mitigated for on-site. The Commission discussed grade changes in the area of the bus loop and expressed concerns with the amount of cuts in the area of the large trees adjacent to the bus loop. The applicant indicated a willingness to work with the Civil Engineers for the project on how to minimize cuts in the areas of the significant tree roots. Commissioner Jones stated the removal of the curbing on the S. side of the bus loop is a good plan and will help with trees have fewer impacts from excavation and concrete pouring. The Tree Commission expressed concern about the retention of the Sequoias due to their location under the overhead power lines and the improper pruning they have received over the years. The Commission understands that the trees will be retained for the privacy screening they provide the neighbors. The tree Commission supports the applicant's proposal for hiring a certified arborist prior to construction. Recommendations: 1) The Tree Commission supports the applicant's proposal to remove the curb along the south side of the future bus loop. 2) The Tree Commission recommends and supports the applicant's further exploration of innovative techniques to preserve additional root systems and minimize cuts in the root zones of the significant trees identified by the Arborist near the future bus loop. PLANNING ACTION #: PA-200S-00053 SUBJECT PROPERTY: 201 Mountain Av S APPLICANT: Ogden Roemer Wilkerson Architecture AlA / School District #5 DESCRIPTION: A request for Site Review approval to construct an approximately 19,375 square foot auxiliary gym and music suite addition on the Ashland High School campus located at 201 South Mountain Avenue. The application proposes demolition of the existing 10,SOO square foot auxiliary gym building and of the 5,600 square foot music suite; renovation of the 22,024 square foot main gym building; and a reconfiguration of the parking area located to the east of the existing gym building. The application also requires a Variance to the required sideyard setback along South Mountain Avenue; the applicants propose to construct a ramp, stairs and landings to the property line where a minimum ten-foot sideyard setback is required. MAP: 39 IE 09DA & 09AD TAX LOTS #:100 and 6200; ZONING: R-2; COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Low-Density Multi-Family Residential Site Visits and Ex Parte Contacts - Site visits by Rinaldi, Sager, Jones and Rich. 2 Amy gave the staff report and read conditions of approval pertaining to trees, tree protection and landscaping. This project is recommended for continuance at the Planning Commission meeting. Applicant testimony - The applicant explained the issues that Amy addressed from the staff report. The applicant spoke about the desire to increase the street presence of the Mountain A venue side of the high school and grade change issues from the finished floor of the new gym and the sidewalk on Mountain. The applicant had not intended on removing the Elm tree at the northeast comer of the gym but said that if the commission felt it was necessary they could remove it. The applicant also stated that the new proposed landscaping plan will have street trees added. The plan was available for the Commission review. Armstrong Maples are proposed for the street trees. They are very columnar and grow upright. Commission Discussion - The Commissioners expressed their concern about the Elm tree and that with the existing site conditions the tree could become an issue since the Elm trees grow very fast, and are a weak wood tree and may need to be removed in the near future. The Commission decided to recommend removal with on-site mitigation. Recommendations: 1) Tree Commission recommends the applicant consider removal of the Elm tree at the Northeast comer of the gym building due to the invasive growth pattern of this type of tree. The tree removal shall be mitigated on-site. 2) The Tree Commission supports the applicants revised landscaping plans. ACTION ITEMS Type 1 Review Sign-Ups March 6th Rinaldi/Sager April 3rd Sager/Cruser May 8th Cruser/Jones June 5th Jones/Rinaldi DISCUSSION ITEMS Quorum Issue The Commission expressed concern with the lack of quorum issues they have been having and it was decided that if a Tree Commissioner cannot attend the regularly scheduled meeting that a new meeting would be called so that planning actions do not move forward without the Tree Commission review. Amy explained the history and proposed changes to Chapter 2.25 which is the Tree Commission powers and duties chapter of the Municipal Code. The proposed changes include changing the number of commissioners from 7 to 5. The Commissioners preferred language regarding 'five to seven commissioners as determined by the City Council.' Amy also explained the language added by the City Attorney pertaining to when an application is not heard at a Tree Commission meeting that does not invalidate the planning action. Also language was added pertaining to 'donations of property' regarding that donations are not made to the Commission but to the 'City' by approval of the City Council. Amy will pass the Commissions concerns regarding not having enough members along to the City Attorney and let the commission know what their stance is on changing the number of Commissioners. Amy also addressed the proposed resolutions that were passed onto the City Attorney for his review and City Council adoption. She will provide a copy of the proposed resolutions in the March packet. Distinctive Tree List (findings from ground truthing) Zane took everyone's review of the previous distinctive tree lists and will be consolidating the lists, adding, removing, etc., and an updated list will provided for the March meeting. Revision of Street Tree Guide (Next steps) The Tree Commission had previously expressed interest in adding notes to the Street Tree Guide that designates trees as a 'good for small spaces' or other designations but staff feels that it would be best to not dilute the guide and that there are a number of other resources for landscaping information. The Commission decided that at this point they will focus on the Distinctive Tree list and that the Street Tree Guide will be worked on once the Distinctive List is completed. ITEMS FROM COMMISSIONERS Liaison Reports Ann Rich explained the Parks and Recreation Department tree removal report. The annual report is required under 18.61. The majority of the trees in the report are storm damaged trees that needed removal or major pruning. Thirty five trees were 3 rem'wed anG the majority of the trees in the report were less than 18" in diameter at breast height. The report also includes all tree removals in Ashland Parks as well as at the schools, and dead trees. OLD BUSINESS None NEW ITEMS Arbor Week/Day Planning The Mayor will read the proclamation of Arbor Week on April I, 2008 at the City Council meeting, held at Council Chambers at 7:00 p.m. The Tree Commission expressed interest in doing the Tree of the Year plaque installation and the ceremonial tree planting on the same day so that the 'events' are combined. Earth Day Event - The Commissioners agreed to do a booth again this year. The booth is a exposure for the Tree Commission for people that are not 'seeking out' the Tree Commission. It is also a good recruiting too\. They will offer an activity for the children; Commissioner Rinaldi suggested a 'mystery box' of tree parts for kids to guess which part they have felt in the box. The Commission also thought it would be good to have the 'Distinctive Tree List' and map ready for that day. The Tree Commission approved a $30.00 donation to the Earth Day event to become a Community Partner. Current Balance - $518.24 ADJOURNMENT - Commissioner Sager adjourned the meeting at 8:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted by Amy Anderson, Assistant Planner 4 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Approval of a Land Partition Plat and Deed Restriction in Preparation for the Sale of City-Owned Property on Westwood Street April 1, 2008 Primary Staff Contact: James Olson (552-2412) Public Works/Engineering E-Mail: olsoni(a).ashland.or.us Community Development Secondary Contact: Brandon Goldman Martha Bennett Estimated Time: Consent Agenda Meeting Date: Department: Secondary Dept.: Approval: Question: Will Council authorize the Mayor to sign the partition plat and deed restriction in preparation for the sale of city-owned property on Westwood Street near Strawberry Lane? Staff Recommendation: It is recommended that Council adopt a motion to approve the attached land partition plat and deed restriction and authorize the Mayor to sign both documents. Background: In 1987 the City acquired two tracts of land totaling 11.66 acres from Harold Gentry for $90,000. In 1990 the larger of the two tracts was dedicated for parks purposes. The remaining two acre parcel located at the intersection of Strawberry Lane and Westwood Street was retained by the City for future development and eventual sale. Early in 2003 Council approved the sale of certain surplus properties including this two acre parcel. Planning Action No. 2004-031 was approved on May 11, 2004 creating three lots consisting of two 0.5 acre lots fronting on Strawberry Lane and a single one acre lot with frontage on Westwood Street. It was intended that the one acre parcel be further divided at a later date. On September 7,2004, Council approved the resulting partition plat and deed restriction to legally create the three lots. Two of the lots were immediately offered for sale. Council directed that the proceeds from the sale of these lots be used to establish an Affordable Housing Trust Fund as would the proceeds from the future sale of the two lots to be created. On October 9,2007, the Ashland Planning Commission approved Planning Action No. 2007-00980, a request to divide the remaining one acre parcel into two lots. The westerly of two lots would contain 0.50 acres with the easterly lot being a flag lot with an area of 0.55 acres. A deed restriction, similar to the one created for the previous lot sales would also apply to these new lots and would be recorded along with the land partition plat. The deed restriction contains Council directed revisions. Both the partition plat and the deed restriction require the Mayor's signature. Related City Policies: Rules and regulations governing the division of land by partition are contained in the Ashland Land Use Ordinance under Chapter 18.76. Council Options: Page 1 of2 H:\ShipletD\Council\Council Communication\2008\March 31 and April 1\040108 Westwood Partition ApprovaLCCdoc r~' CITY OF ASHLAND The Council may approve the attached land partition plat and deed restriction, may make changes to either, or may delay any action on the partition process. Potential Motions: Council may move to approve the partition plat and deed restriction and direct the mayor to sign both documents; Council may move to approve the partition plat and deed restriction with changes and direct the Mayor to sign the documents once those changes are made to the documents; Council may move to delay action on the partition pending further information to be provided by staff. Attachments: Vicinity map Photographs Reduced copy of partition plat Draft deed restriction Page 2 of2 H:\ShipletD\Council\Council Communication\2008\March 31 and April 1\040108 Westwood Partition Approval.CC.doc rA' .,. I o~ ..z~ o<~ >-.J:g "':c>C - ~ 1-01 UtJ)~ <t;: () z~ '" .J!! ~ ~~,,~ s!,,"~ ~~Il<; ..~ffi~ ouwlil ~::;...~ Ci~h Ll'l ..... ci Ll'l ci Ll'l C\I ci o 'J- I G:\pub-wrks\eng\depl-admin\SURVEYOR\39 IE 08BD 102 Westwood Photos 208.doc '" >- a ~>-i~ i;J - cc ~ -< ~Ie~ ~ i~~~ I~ ZoO '" t: ~ ~! ~ ~ ~8!~t;1 ;:i~~ -", ~o II~ ~ J j \!! h~~~1 I:!~ -'- ~., 0( ~ .~~<~ ih i ...l o ~ >-il~," I ~i " w~"' ~~ ~ 08 ~ 151.t Ii: "'~~......" '" CC ;; ~2 ~ I:l "\ 1= ~r-S~U II!~~- '" 0.. II lS ~ .:: i ~ ~ ~~if~~~ ~~~: ~ z >- . ! ~: J .. <I!i ~~~~ ~~I!I~ ~ ~ !~ III:! ,,~ :i . i"'!t~i~ ~ >- ~~ ~ ~ ~o~ ~ I o(~~~ ~ ~ ~~~!d bi~~! ~ ~ I~ ~ " ~ '" I-",~~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~:!I!i i ~~ o ~q S ~ t: i ~~!~~ ~ ~;in!~ ;dli ~ ~U~i g I-~~ ~ ~ >- ~ UJ ~ > "~I CC u d :J ~- Z~ gj ifJ. ~ Ii <" bl~1 -,.. "'" ~ ,,0 i!l ~ l!s! . f'.l i ~:J. ~ Z ~ >-~ ~ 1!!~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~~ W", ~" ~ h~ ( iO.~ V> I i: - ~ l!s >~ it " ? 50 ~~ 2 - f- i;!~! i vi ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ >-~ ".:5 :> r-- < ~ ~ III 0 ~< ~~ 0", \ h~ .::a ~ ~ ~ _ ..J ~ ~ ~ :i ,,~ <> r-- (l. ii!~ ~ ;1 I ~~ :i ~ ~ CC5 l!sit >- -<~ :?~ S to! ~ .... "i2 -: ~ I i3 ~ < I< ,,~ '!'< Q .. -< f: -I 'a 15 Cl. f= III ~ Wll; iO.~ o ~ l- Z (l. ! -< ! ...l ~ ~.... 'il~lii r; i ~ Ul~~ Il I ~ I-I!I i ~~I!I I!! ~ ;;~~~I~ al: " hll ~ 0 >- I . I~~:I~I 0 Ui I .... I ll! Io!~ II ~ I ~ ri11il !I z " .. ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ il~<i vi ~i il:" . vi ill ~ 8 .. bl i~!~~~~ I ~~ ~n~ 's 0 " 0 f N Z ~ ~ ~~ :> ZIIl II 0,", I .. ~ i o r ~I:~ ,,!) ~~2! " .:i i S .:i F >- ~I!I a" ..< ~I!~ ~ i ~ 0( i I!I ~~....lf ~.., 5 <> 0( . 0 0( ~a 0.. I. U '" > U > ~ II: I:l~ ~n !~ ~o l!=i a 0 o 8 0 o I k · ~ "lIi~~ I II: j : II: i I , t:~ Q. Q. " d ~ ~I !t1i ~~ ~ ~ ! ;~ ~ ." " Q. i " Q. ~ ~ ~~u ~o ~~~E i \)/ . . ~ 0( U Ill!) ... << ~ ~ >- I d V:Q " I Ii ~ E ... ~ -< . (8 i >-:;:. ~ ~ ~ ~ Z oJ h~ ~ :lJ ~ . ~ ~ g 7:~ I ~ ~II ""~ ~Ii ~ ;>!7. ~~ , ~ ~~ ~ ul ~ ~ IQ ft ::c ::i~r, - .~ ~ 9'l c _ ~ D.~ :J::g~. - ~ ~. ~ Ig .J . ~ tfI is 5~ ., ~ a ~~ !I ~ !~I w (":) ~ '1 ~ i ~ ~r I" f! lid II ~ 0 '. i~ ~ i h ",8 ~ H=-~~ . -; f- .1 ~-L _ __~ ~~ _nn, tl '~_nn-.....-" \ _ _ _ A~ ~ _:j II! .. ,'.. ....... - - - -.. 01 :>... .~"-- - -------r: -'-----, / 0 _ ~ iI i ==, = ------ -\' h/":-"', ;~~ j ~!i~: le~ I i! "'" ". (1) CIl J 0 ~ ~:Il I!. ~~i l: d '\ ~~~ I<~' II 1M : j! ~ : .! \ I ill 1;1 ~ -< , ! il! 't~ ! ~I: II" I~ "\ \ I I '!h ~ \ ~~. iU '1! ~ I " _ I I ! 11;:\ ! ,/ rl_______~ :>; h ~ ff" ~ I I I Ii:. ~ :\:1 . : f-.-j I " , l! I, . , .: :'1, -el I:: !. I!:i i Ii I ;1 :~~~ ~I ~ :.~ i !_: Ii; Ii! I L ~ I ~ , : I~:I it -. I~I ~r:" -hi <( I ! I 'I ~lli ~: 5~i lO L-t r ~ II VJ ) ~ I lD · I I lir: II ( I Cl:: I ~.. f-"~1-J I" :y__ / '-' ~ ' ~ ~\--J--~~~-~=--l---=---L ~ I --. :'-~-T-- - lr) : - "00 "."nrw 1.JllI7' _ i ""STWOOD STREE'---__ _ _ ~_ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ --I :>- w > 0:: :> lfJ ~ Z "'..., ~ o o' ~~~/f 1= 7. :~U - <l..~U t- ~ ti!~tllll\ 0:: z g ~~:s~ -< g ~hi~ 0.. : ~~ ~ Cl ;;: ~! ~ z i lll~ 6 -< ...J i il I ~ I I! ~ I ~ ~ ~ : I I I . · hi I I ! il i I ~ f -8 - I I t I Uti I III ~j ~I ~ II ~i H Ii d II 1!lo.. !!i!e8 I I I I 1~llil ~i:il !~II! ~ I~~U ~ Ai i~ ~ ~llli ~ ~3~1~ In I.U~ i ~ill!, ~ a II. I ! fti ill ~ II : i .1 , 'i I; i !, ~I I I I; · j!n i d " ~lli Ig ~ I 'I IA ~alli II b b U AI.!I idhih 8~ ~~ ~ 0" ^~ lS , ~ ~~ ~ " ~~ I ~~ . ii ~ ~ '" ~ ~ When Recorded Return Original to: Barbara Christensen. City RElCOfder 20 East Main Street. Ashland. Oregon 97520 DEED RESTRICTIONS All the property described herein (Exhibit A) held and shall be held, occupied and improved, subject to the following protective restrictions which are attached and agreed upon for the purpose of enhancing and protecting the value, desirability and attractiveness of said land. These restrictions shall run with the land and remain in full force and effect until the last day of December of the year 2015 A.D., and shall be binding on the owner or owners of any equity or title therein. 1. DWELLING: No building, structure or improvement shall be constructed, erected, altered, placed or permitted to remain on any lot other than single family dwellings designed for occupancy by not more than one family, together with appurtenant outbuildings and garages. Said outbuildings and garages shall conform generally in architectural design and exterior appearance to the dwelling house to which they are appurtenant and may be, but need not be attached to said dwelling. No building or structure shall be constructed, erected or permitted on any portion of said lot until complete building plans, in accordance with the building code of the City of Ashland, have been approved in writing by the city. 2. DWELLING PLACEMENT: The placement of buildings, planting of new trees, maintenance of existing trees, shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 18.70, Solar Access, of the Municipal Code of the City of Ashland 3. OUTBUILDINGS: Except for accessory residential units authorized and approved in accordance with the provisions of ALUO 99 18.20.030H. and 18.108.040, no shed, garage, basement, trailer, camper, mobile home, motor home, or other outbuildings with unfinished exterior walls, shall at any time be used, temporarily or permanently, as a residence. Nor shall any structure of a temporary character be used, temporarily or permanently, as a residence. 4. AUTOS: No unlicensed autos shall be visible on lots or permitted to be parked on the street(s) and or driveways. Recreational vehicles shall be no less than 30 feet from neighboring lot lines. Recreational vehicles shall not be parked in driveways for more than 14 consecutive days. No logging equipment, truck, house trailer (as distinguished from camping trailer) or any other heavy equipment of any kind shall be stored or allowed to remain upon any lot. There shall be no repairs of vehicles outside of a garage or suitable outbuilding. 5. CLEANUP: No rubbish shall be stored or allowed to accumulate on the lot. All the lot and adjoining road rights of way shall be kept free of weeds and trash and shall be kept under reasonable cultivation and care by the respective owners of such real property. All rubbish and trash shall be regularly removed and disposed of properly. PAGE 1-Strawberry Deed Restrictions .,' I 6. LANDSCAPE: Each lot owner, within twelve (12) months of the issuance of a building permit by the City of Ashland, shall, if no acceptable trees exist, plant "street trees." Those trees are to be of a species with a native appearance and selected by the lot owner from a list available from the City of Ashland Planning Department, and further approved by the Ashland Street Tree Commission. The selected trees are to be planted on a nominal spacing of 25' and within 25' of the curb line along each owners' street frontage. A minimum offour (4) additional owner selected trees must be planted on each lot within 12 months of the issuance of a building permit by the City of Ashland. 7. PETS: A pet's owner shall be responsible for any damage or injuries caused by such pet. (City Ordinance 9.16.070 Dogs-Noise) It shall be unlawful for any person to keep within the City of Ashland, any dog which by long continued barking disturbs or annoys another person within the City. (City Ordinance 1847, 1975) The number and kind of pets shall be as permitted by City of Ashland ordinance. 8. FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEMS: Each single family dwelling constructed upon the property shall contain a residential fire sprinkler system reviewed and approved by the Ashland Fire Department prior to issuance of a building permit for the residence. 9. OUTDOOR LIGHTING: No continuously lit unshielded lamp or light of any kind is permitted. A security light, or lights, mounted on a building is permitted so long as it has a shade or shield that prevents direct illumination of any adjoining residential properties. 10. PRIOR DEED RESTRICTION SUPERSEDED: This Amended and Restated Deed of Restrictions supersedes and replaces the prior restrictions established on the property described herein through Jackson County Official Records instrument #2007-073712 which was recorded on December 21, 2004. Signed and approved this _ day of ,2008 John Morrison, Mayor City of Ashland STATE OF OREGON COUNTY OF JACKSON This instrument was acknowledged before me on by Notary Public for Oregon My commission expires: PAGE 2-Strawberry Deed Restrictions '" I EXHIBIT A LAND APPLICABLE TO DEED RESTRICTION Parcel Numbers 1 and 3 of that Land Partition filed for record on January 3, 2005 (Recorded plat incorrectly dated January 3,2004) as Partition Plat Number P-01-2005 of "Record of Partition Plats" in January County, Oregon and filed as Survey Number 18559 in the office of the Jackson County Surveyor. March 13,2008 39 IE 08BD 100, 102 G:\pub-wrks\eng\dept-admin\SlJRVEYOR\39 IE 08BD 102 CC Westwood Partition Exhibit A Deed Restriction 3 08.doc ".. I CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Approval of Purchase ofUnicom's Ashland Customer Base Meeting Date: April 1, 2008 Primary Staff Contact: Joseph Franell, Dir ofIT Department: Information Technology E-Mail: franellj@ashland.or.us Secondary Dept.: Legal Secondary Contact: Richard Appicello Approval: City Administrator Estimated Time: Consent Question: Does the Council wish to approve the sale and subsequent transfer/assignment of rights of the Unicorn customer base on the Ashland Fiber Network to Jim Teece as required by the ISP contract? Staff Recommendation: By motion action, authorize the sale and subsequent transfer/assignment of rights of Unicorn to Jim Teece. Background: Integra Telecom, the parent company of Unicorn has notified the City of Jim Teece's intent to purchase the Unicorn customer base that is served by the Ashland Fiber Network (see attached letter). The ISP contract currently in force says, "ASSIGNMENT OR TRANSFER ISP shall not sell assign or in any other manner transfer its rights under this agreement or any interest of ISP in this agreement without the prior consent of AFN which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed." Related City Policies: None. Council Options: Approve or deny the sale and subsequent transfer/assignment of rights of Unicorn. Potential Motions: I move that the Council authorize the sale and subsequent transfer/assignment of rights of Unicorn to Jim Teece. Attachments: Notification letter from Integra Telecom. Page 1 of 1 040108 Sale ofUnicom.CC.doc ~~, rategra' TELECOM 1201 tiE l\Q)'<l ~Swlill500 . POOIand orogon 97232 OtIlECT 0lM.: SllJ.453.8000 Fax W1453.8221 March 20, 2008 Joseph Franell Director oflnfoJtrtation Technology City of Ashland 20 N. Mountain Ave. Ashland, OR 97520 Re: Assignment and Assumption of Un.icom ISP Customers to Project A Dear Mr. Franel1: This letter is to infonn you that United Communications, Inc. ("Unicorn"), an Oregon corporation, and wholly-owned subsidiary of Integra Telecom Holdings, Inc. ("Integra"), and Project A, Inc., also an Oregon corporation. have entered into a confidential agreement whereby Project A, me., will purchase all rights Unicom bas in the end-user customers of Unicoxn ",'bo receive services from Unicompursuant t{) the Certified mternet Service Provider Cooperative Agreements dated January 18, 2000, and July 1,2004, between Unicom and Ashland Fiber NetwOrks (the "Apements"). Further, Proj~ A win assume aU dghts and obHptions of the Agreements as of the execution of the foregoing agreement. Pursuant to Section 9 of the Agreements, Ashland Fiber Networks ("AFN'') must provide prior consent in the event of any transfer of the Agreements to a third party. Uwcoro hereby requests that you cons.e,nt to the deemed transfer of the Ag..eement to Project A, Inc., pursuant to the foregoing transaction and agree that the Agreements will remain in full force and effect on the same terms and conditions after closing of the foregoing transaction. You may confirm your consent by executing one copy of this letter md returning it to me at the following f~ number: (503) 453-1881. Your consent and confirm.mon wiUbecome effective as of the clQsing of the foregQing tranSaction and win have no effect unless the closing occurs. We will promptly notify you of the closing. Thank you very much for your prompt consideration of this re.quest. SIGNATURE PAGE FOLLOWS ... I . Page 2 oD AfN Assig1'1'tlent Consent lAtter P19JCct NUnicrym United Communications, Inc. By: Narne: Matt Fahey Title: Senior Vice Presiden ..QfFinance [Lessor] Acknowledgement of Notice and Consent to Assignment and Transfer dated this _ day of , 2008. By: Name: Title: '1' I CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Contract Approval for North Main / Scenic Park Meeting Date: Department: Secondary Dept. Approval: April 1, 2008 Ashland Parks and Recreation N/A Martha Bennett Primary Staff Contact: E-Mail: Secondary Contact: Estimated Time: Steve Gies giess@ashland.or.us Don Robertson Consent Agenda Question: Should City Council approve the contract for the North Main / Scenic Park development project? Staff Recommendation: Recommend approval. Background: Three years ago, the Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission designated the development and completion of the North Main / Scenic Park project as one of their top goals. The 1.5-acre site, purchased in 1999 utilizing food and beverage taxes, has been identified on the Open Space Plan as a potential neighborhood park site since the plan's inception. The project went out to bid in February and five bids were received, ranging in price from $429,183 to $575,370.05. Batzer was the lowest bidder, at $429,183. That figure includes sidewalks, a small parking area, utilities, grading, playground areas, and overlook areas. Once this phase of the project is completed, the Parks Department will complete the irrigation and landscaping portions of the project. Funds have been budgeted within the Parks Department's Capital Improvement Fund for this project. Another funding source will include SDCs. Related City Policies: City Council serves as the contract review board for the City. Council Options: 1. Approve as presented. 2. Reject contract. Potential Motions: Move to approve the contract with Batzer for $429,183 for the construction of North Main / Scenic Park. Attachments: Bid schedule Site plan Page 1 of 1 CC-Contract Approval.doc r., '.. I ~ < ~ ~ ~ rJJ ~ ~ ~ ....:- Q) Q) $-; .... r:/) $-; Q) Q) ~ ::: U .s ~o.., ..., . or:/) ~O ~;; r:/) ~ ~ 8 Z\.i::: ~'B ~ en ~~ > C\l o o..,~ ~~ ~N .....0 ;s <I ~~ UO .....N Z .......~ ~N U...c: r:/) U $-; "0 C\l =::;8 ~ - 01) -= ::: <I} ....... < ::: .. Q) o 0.. .,..,0 ...--0 u05 Q)\O", ;::iNO :::"'....... Q)r--...... en'::"" ><: [) ....... p::: Q) --0 --0 0 ~ ........::: 00 .S ~ en~~ co i1 ~ C( --0 ....... 0.., \0 ~::r:enr-- ........"'"E~ enMC\l....... ;::i "" $-; ~ -<MO", ::: o 01) Q) $-; o -d' ~ :a en -< o M '" r-- "" U p::: ::: 0 ....... ~oo ~"" Q)~ ~OOS;; U ><: > I .,..,0:::0 sco~~ .Eo~""'" o .C\l~ ......0..,......'" N o '" --or-- C\l"" op::: p:::o ~ ~'" U....N .C .s r-- SON C\l 0.., I ..,..,........N .......C\lM ::;8""tlt-;- c....."':::....... """Q)~ ......:lMU", en Q) en .C e- ~ 2~~~ :::\O""M ~M............. .......~~ 8 ><: 0 I .... 0 ~ "" .C co . 5 ~ co . i:: ~ .q ~ ~ 00..,,.,::;,,, ....... "" "" M r-- ~ o '" ~ '" o o r-- l"'l '" r-- '" ~ '" \0 '" "" r-- M ~ ~ ~ 00 \0 r-- \0 '" M M ~ ~ ........ C\l .... o E-< --0 05 '$. '" en Q) >< '$. '" en Q) >< '$. '" en Q) >< ~ o '" en Q) >< .... ::: ;::i o ~ 01) ::: ....... --0 ::: o co --0 Q) 01) --0 Q) C\l........ --0 ~ ::: 0 Q) ::: --o~ --0 U -<-< C\l ~ C\l ~ C\l ~ C\l ~ --0 Q) ~ ....... "@ ;::i CI I Q) $-; 0.., ....... o '" r-- 0"" \Op:::M u~O~ ::: ><: ~ r-- """'o--orA ~ $-; r-- [)COt.8r-- N .--0 ....OQ)....... C\l . '=:::' ~ CO 0..,,.,::;,,, o o M 00 ....... "" N ~ ~ ........ C\l .... o E-< --0 05 ~ o '" en Q) >< .... ::: ;::i o S -< 01) ::: :.a ::: o co --0 Q) 01) --0 Q) C\l........ --0 ~ ::: 0 .g~ --0 U -<-< C\l ~ --0 Q) ~ ....... "@ ;::i CI 1 Q) $-; 0.., ~ ~f !~M ~~o .,., ~ c:- ~<~ ~~$ ;:;~~ ~&f~ ~:i~ ~~~ " 1 , 't J'- '\',- . '-.'1 \ ' Pfop8'l1'y Lme '- \ '~, I '+, ^ I .", ~'" ! ReYlslon Date: Drawn By: Scale 1" .'6'-4" Z ~OO ~Z<9 ....<(W ~...Ja:: a.. I 0 if) _ U<(O -IJ..Z ZO<( W>-...J Uf-I -if) cnU<( August 17, 2007 AN OS CAPE SITE PLAN L-1 CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Approval of a Resolution supporting the request for Oregon Department of Transportation's Transportation Enhancement Funds in the amount of $152,000 to be used to construct the Laurel Street Sidewalk Project Meeting Date: Department: Secondary Dept.: Approval: April 1, 2008 Public Warks/Engineering Community Development Martha Bennett Primary Staff Contact: E-Mail: Secondary Contact: Estimated Time: James H. Olson (552-2412) olsoni (cV,ashland.or. us Karl Johnson Consent Agenda Question: Will Council approve a resolution in support of an ODOT Transportation Enhancement grant in the amount of$512,000 to construct sidewalks on Laurel Street? Staff Recommendation: The Public Works Department is preparing to submit the 2008 application for a grant under the Transportation Enhancement program to fund sidewalk construction on Laurel Street between Hersey Street and Randy Street. The condition of the grant require that the Council document their support for the project and indicate their willingness to accept the grant if it is offered. Staff recommends approval at the attached resolution authorizing the City Administration to sign the statement of grant acceptance in the amount of $512,000 for the construction of sidewalks on Laurel Street. Background: The Transportation Enhancement program, administered through ODOT, provides federal funds for projects that strengthen the cultural, aesthetic and environmental value of our transportation system. These funds are somewhat limited in their scope and can be applied only as follows: 1. Provision of facilities for pedestrians and bicyclists. 2. Provision of safety and educational activities for pedestrians and bicyclists. 3. Acquisition of scenic easements and scenic or historic sites (including historic battlefields). 4. Scenic of historic highway programs (including the provision of tourist and welcome center facilities). 5. Landscaping and other scenic beautification. 6. Historic preservation. 7. Rehabilitation and operation of historic transportation buildings, structures, or facilities (including historic railroad facilities and canals). Page 1 of 3 r~' CITY OF ASHLAND 8. Preservation of abandoned railway corridors (including the conversion and use of the corridors for pedestrians or bicycle trails). 9. Inventory, control and removal of outdoor advertising. 10. Archaeological planning and research. 11. Environmental mitigation (i) to address water pollution due to highway runoff; or (ii) reduce vehicle-caused wildlife mortality while maintaining habitat connectivity. 12. Establishment of transportation museums. The City used "T.E." funds to construct the Central Ashland Multiuse path several years ago. Last year we submitted a similar application for sidewalk construction on Laurel Street. It was not approved because the grant administrators felt it necessary to deal with the Hersey / Laurel Railroad crossing within the project and we were not in a position to do so at that time. Since that time, the Public Works Department has received Council authorization to proceed with the Hersey / Laurel Railroad crossing improvement project. An application has been made to the ODOT Rail Division for permission to improve the crossing. ODOT has responded favorably, has accepted the City's application and has issued a proposed final order calling for the improvement of the crossing. It is anticipated that the Transportation Enhancement funds will pay for the portion of this project which pertains to the bike and pedestrian crossings. The Laurel Street sidewalk proj ect consists of the construction of sidewalks on one side of the street and includes sidewalk access ramps, improved crosswalks and other pedestrian friendly amenities. The total estimated cost for this project is $582,000 of which $70,000 is City matching funds. Te City has received preliminary approval of the grant application with the final application being due on May 2008. The proposed Laurel Street sidewalk project meets current City Council goals to improve pedestrian and traffic safety and is supported by the Ashland Traffic Safety Commission and the Bike and Pedestrian Commission. Related City Policies: As a governmental agency the City is empowered to receive federal funds for the construction of public facilities. Council Options: Council may approve or reject the attached resolution authorizing the City Administor to sign the grant acceptance of offered. Page 2 of 3 r6' CITY OF ASHLAND Potential Motions: Council may move to approve or reject attached resolution, or Council may move to delay approval pending acquisition of additional information. Attachments: Resolution Vicinity Map Grant Application Maintenance Agreement Photos Page 3 of3 rA' RESOLUTION NO. 08- A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE REQUEST FOR OREGON DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION'S TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENT FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $512,000 TO BE USED TO CONSTRUCT THE LAUREL STREET SIDEWALK PROJECT. THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The City of Ashland supports and will accept a grant offer of the State of Oregon in the amount of $512,000 for the purpose of constructing the Laurel Street Sidewalk Project. SECTION 2. The Ashland City Administrator is authorized and directed to sign the statement of acceptance of the grant offer on behalf of the City of Ashland. SECTION 3. A true copy of the grant application is attached. SECTION 4. This resolution takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. This resolution was read by title only in accordance with Ashland Municipal Code 92.04.090 duly PASSED and ADOPTED this _ day of ,2008. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of ,2008. John Morrison, Mayor Reviewed as to form: City Attorney H:\ShipletD\CounciI\Council Communication\2008\March 31 and April 1\040108 Laurel Street Sidewalk.atch1.doc o~ "'z~ o<~ >or ..J ~ "':I >- _ E-t ~ UtJ)~ <t> CI1 ..~ Z~ 9<r: E--~ <r:u.:l ~Cl ~- ll..CI1 ll..E-- <r:u.:l E--~ ZE-- <r:CI1 ~~ ~~ ~<r: ~ (J c:> z~ 11 ~ ~5g: 120 ~. ",::1,,~ <~",,, ~~~t> . ~~~ t:"I(> C;E:~i:1 10 j ci 8 10 N 10 .:!: 0 o .E CI) 8 10 C\I o o PART 1 Section 1: Project Summary and Certification Use this page or a replica. Keep this section on one page. APPLICANT Agency City of Ashland Address 20 East Main Street Ashland OR 97520 Contact Title Telephone Email James H. Olson Interim Public Warks Director 541 488-5347 olsoni@ashland.or.us CO-APPLICANT (if any) Name Address Contact Title Telephone PROJECT NAME AND LOCATION The Laurel Street Sidewalks project is located within Ashland city limits on North Laurel Street between Hersey Street and Randy Street. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed pedestrian and bicyclists{acilities construction project consists of 2000 linear feet of sidewalks, sidewalk ramps, driveway aprons and parkrows. The proposed project, if funded, will serve as the final sidewalk connection along this important neighborhood collector that serves Helman Elementary School, the highly popular Ashland Dog Park, the Greenway Bicycle Trail System and the downtown core. COST SUMMARY RIGHT-OF-WAY NEEDS Project site owned by Sponsor? [-/] yes [ ] no [ ] partly [ ] N/A TE Funds Requested Matching funds Subtotal Additional Non- TE costs Total Project Cost $512,000 $70,000 $582,000 $0 $582,000 Property to be purchased? [ ] yes [-/J no Easements or donated property? [ ] yes [-/] no CERTIFICATION I certify that the City of Ashland supports the proposed project, has the legal authority to pledge matching funds, and has the legal authority to apply for Transportation Enhancement funds. I further certify that matching funds are available or will be available for the proposed project. I understand that this is not a grant application, that it is a request for reimbursement through the federal aid system, and that all federal rules for contracting, auditing, and payment will apply to this project. /u/ / Signature St ~(f v'L- Date Printed (/James H. Olson Title Interim Public Works Director Name Section 2: Project Funding Information Matching Funds Available Type $ Value Name of Source(s) Date Avail. Sponsor's Cash on Hand Sponsor's Future Cash $55,000 SDC Street Fees 7/1/2009 Cash from other sources Total HARD MATCH $55,000 Donated Materials Donated Property Donated Agency Staff Time $15,000 Engineering Division StatfTime Volunteer Labor/Services Total SOFT MATCH $15,000 11% TOTAL MATCH $70,000 If total includes any contributions from sources other than the applicant, include signatures below or submit separate letters of commitment (see Supporting Documents-Part 2). Agency or organization Agency or organization Signature Date Signature Date PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING(PE) Proiect Administration 1. Sponsor's administrative costs 2. OOOT administrative costs Desian and Development 1. Engineering Environmental Process Coordination 1. Partnering with other agencies 2. Partnering with local neighborhood groups Information I Interpretive 1.Public input process 2. Commission/Council review Other Proiect Development or PE 1. Bidding 2. Contract award RIGHT-OF-WAY (ROW) CONSTRUCTION (CONST) 1. Mobilization 2. Traffic control, TP&OT 3. Erosion control 4. Remove existing AC surface 5. Remove concrete curb and gutter 6. Remove concrete surface 7. Clearing and grubbing 8. Install curb and gutter 9. Construct sidewalk 10. Construct driveway apron 11. Adjust water meter 12. AC patching 13. Striping and marking 14. Relocate signs 15. Landscaping Cost Estimate Quantity (Q) Unit Price (UP) Cost (Q x UP) 60 hours $50.00 $3,000 $10,000 560 hours $150.00 $84,000 200 hours $150.00 $30,000 40 hours $50.00 $2,000 100 hours $150.00 $15,000 20 hours $50.00 $1,000 20 hours $50.00 $1,000 80 hours $150.00 $12,000 20 hours $150.00 $3,000 None Total PE $161,000 Total ROW $0 Lump sum $55,000 $25,000 Lump sum $10,000 $10,000 Lump sum $5,000 $5,000 500 SF $4.00 $2,000 200 LF $8.00 $1,600 375 SF $4.00 $1,500 Lump sum $10,000 $10,000 200 LF $25 $5,000 9300 SF $8 $74,400 1140 SF $10 $11,400 20 each $150 $3,000 20 Tons $400 $8,000 Lump sum $1,000 $1,000 8 Each $250 $2,000 Lump sum $20,000 $20,000 16. Railroad Crossing 17. 12" Storm Drain 18. Catch Basins 19. Topsoil 20. Sleeves under walk 21. Sidewalk access ramp 22. Retaining Walls (MSE) Continaencv Construction Enaineering Quantity (Q) Unit Price (UP) Cost (Q x UP) Lump Sum $31,250 $31,250 250 LF $45.00 $11,250 4 each $1,200 $4,800 100 CY $100 $10,000 150 LF $8 $1,200 8 each $1 ,200 $9,600 100 SF $40.00 $4 ,000 Subtotal $282,000.00 20-30% of total construction costs above $84,000.00 Approx. 15% of construction with contingency $55,000.00 Total CONST $421,000,00 Total Cost: $582,000,00 PE + ROW + CONST Section 3: Narrative Project Description: The proposed Laurel Street Sidewalk Project meets the first approved TE activity: provision of facilities for pedestrians and bicyclists. The project is located on 2000 feet of a busy neighborhood collector (1661 ADT measured in 2003). The preliminary design includes construction of a five foot sidewalk on the east side of North Laurel Street from Hersey Street to Randy Street within the existing street right-of-way. [t also includes handicap ramps, crosswalks, driveway approaches and parkrows wherever feasible. The project also includes a series of neighborhood meetings to involve effected property owners in the final design. Like ODOT's primary aim, Ashland's City Council has identified improving pedestrian and traffic safety as an im ortant oal for 2005-2007. Purpose and Need: "Families get to know one another better when there are sidewalks. Without them, it is awkward to take a walk. You feel you're intruding. A man walking along a sidewalk appears to have a purpose; a man walking in the street or across your front yard looks suspicious... Without sidewalks, houses are just houses. When sidewalks tie them together with a neat ribbon of concrete, they become part of something more: a neighborhood" (Pearce, 1980 as quoted in Rural by Design by Randall Arendt). Ashland currently has a network of sidewalks and paths that serve pedestrians in the City. This network is not continuous, however, particularly outside the downtown core. A systematic approach has been used to identify the routes most used by pedestrians that provide system-wide access, circulation and continuity, and hence, are most in need of sidewalks or other facilities. In order to identif these routes, the edestrian enerators (schools, arks, civic attractions and services, downtown core and retail) destinations or origins likely to promote pedestrian use were first identified. This unimproved section of Laurel Street (Hersey Street to Randy Street) is identified in the Transportation System Plan as a "Pedestrian Corridor" and contains Helman Elementary School. The project is within 040 of a mile to the R VTD bus stop, within .45 of a mile of downtown core, and within .38 mile of the dog park. The area is within an older established residential zone with many school age children present. This project completes the sidewalks along the entire length of Laurel Street. If the project is not funded, the City will seek additional funding sources including the formation of a Local Improvement District (LID) to complete the project. This project is crucial to the safety of edestrians and street users and the Cit is committed to constructin these im rovements. Quality of Experience: The number of people who regularly walk is one measure of a city's quality of life. Walking improves an individual's health and sense of well-being and allows people to more directly appreciate Ashland's natural beauty. A walking citizenry indicates that people feel safe and confident outdoors. Sidewalks encourage walking by providing separation from traffic, all- weather surfaces and a place for casual socializing. Sidewalks benefit people of all ages, motorists, employers, the community and the environment. How residential sidewalks enhance the environmental, cultural and aesthetic values of a multi-modal transportation system is well documented by the US Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration, ODOT, Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan, Oregon Transportation Safety Action Plan, Oregon Benchmarks, Trans ortation S stem 1m rovement Pro'ects and all the Ieadin ex erts. Technical Merit: Incorporating sidewalks into an existing street network is economical, efficient and reduces the need for additional easements or maintenance. The project will be designed in accordance with the Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan and conform to all federal and state requirements. The City is asking for $512,000 in TE funding and will match $70,000 or 12% of eligible TE costs in staff services and local funds. The proposed project will conform to federal and state requirements on environmental protection, consultant selection, labor and civil rights, and procurement of materials. The City of Ashland has a long history of experience with these types of projects and a strong commitment to providing alternative transportation venues. Ashland's sidewalk system is continually expanding to provide safe and convenient routes throughout the City. School routes have the highest priority for sidewalk construction and with the completion of the Laurel Street Sidewalk Project all Ashland schools will have complete sidewalk routes to each school. In addition, the proposed sidewalks will connect to existing sidewalks on either project border and will complete a critical sidewalk connection along this important collector and local street network serving not only Helman Elementary School, but the City's dog park, Greenway bicycle trail system and the downtown core. The project concept has been discussed and approved by the Ashland Traffic Safety and Bicycle and Pedestrian Commissions. There is strong support from the local neighborhood and initial contacts have alread been made with man of the citizen stakeholders. Support: The ro osed Laurel Street Sidewalk pedestrian and traffic safety and is supported by effected neighbors (letter of support on file), the City's Traffic Safety Commission (see attached letter of support) and the Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission (letter of support on file). In addition, a council resolution endorsing the project has been approved and is attached in Part 2 documentation. The Laurel Street Sidewalk Project is also listed in the current Capital Improvement Projects for implementation within the TE Program timeline. The City's match will consist of 12% or $70,000. Match funds consist of $55,000 in cash from the City's System Development Charges street fees fund and $15,000 in donated staff time. The project is relatively small and, after the design and public hearing segment; construction can be easily completed within four or five months. The right of way is pre-existing, no additional easements are anticipated, there are no wetland issues, historical impacts or environmental concerns. In Ashland, as in many communities, the responsibility for maintenance for sidewalks rests with the adjacent property owner. Importance: There is only one missing sidewalk connection along this important collector and local street network to reach Helman Elementary School. This project is vitally important to those elementary school children walking along Laurel Street to school as well as those students recently displaced by the closure of nearby Briscoe School. The project will also serve as a pedestrian conne~tion to the highly popular dog park off Nevada Street, the Greenway Bicycle Trail System .and the downtown core. The City of Ashland's Transportation Element of our Comprehensive Plan includes 35 transportation policies under the heading of Pedestrian and Bicycle Transportation. The City Council has a long term goal to provide sidewalks on every street where sidewalks do not currently exist and where physically possible. Over the past five years the Public Works Department has constructed 5.3 miles of sidewalks along existing streets concentrating on sidewalks around schools and within the downtown core. The City of Ashland is committed to completing this project regardless of whether or not it is funded through the Transportation Enhancement Program. This project is too vital to the safety and convenience of Ashland's elementary school students and all pedestrians to leave it unfinished. Special Emphasis I Focus Areas: This proposed bicycle/pedestrian facility project consisting of sidewalks, crosswalks, driveway aprons and parkrows meets ODOT's TE Program special emphasis criteria by virtue of its pedestrian fnendly design. There are no permits or approvals needed for this project that could delay the implementation of this project. The Laurel Street Sidewalk Improvement Project will be designed in conjunction with the impacted neighbors. Although generally neighborhoods are in favor of sidewalks and other pedestrian safety amenities, there is always a degree of un predictability involved. The railroad crossing at Hersey Street will be improved, under separate contract, to provide a concrete crossing for bikes and pedestrians. This project is being designed by OBEC Engineering under City of Ashland Public Works Project No. 2005-15. PART 2 -- Endorsements Metropolitan Planning Organization (required it project is within MPO jurisdiction) Name: See attached letter from Pat Fisher, Rogue Valley MPO dated May 23, 2006 Signature: Date: Public Agency or Indian Tribe Approval (to propose a project on land not owned by applicant) Name: NA Title: Signature: Date: ODOT Region Manager Approval (it non-ODOT applicant proposing project in state highway right-at-way) Name: NA Title: Signature: Date: Local Government Commitment (tor cities over 50,000. Cities < 50,000 must provide council resolution.) I confirm that the City ot Ashland supports the proposed project. I have the authority to commit all funds and resources needed from my agency to deliver the project. (See attached council resolution.) Name: Ja~s H. Olson ~ '\ ~ Title: Interim Public Works Director Signature: r-.?-- 0 J Uk Date: 2.. j 2.57 O~ Railroad ErVdorsement (aware and willing to accommodate project adjacent to or crossing RR property) Name: Title: Signature: Date: ODOT Rail Division Record of Contact (for project at or near a railroad crossing) , _ '.\. \""- ( . r" Name: '\ f-:-;>'..., \-\"(,,, Title>~\ "'<,',\ r ."\),, .\ ,,\ \ \ ...... """'. .... '..- .....4.~. '....., Sign~~:'<'\.",_.', Date: c'- '- ~ \ \ \ [.... .... ~ Maintenance Endorsement (commitment for long-term maintenance by other than applicant agency) Name: NA Title: Signature: Date: PART 2 -- Endorsements Metropolitan Planning Organization (required if project is within MPO jurisdiction) Name: See attached letter from Pat Fisher. Rogue Valley MPO dated May 23. 2006 Signature: Date: Public Agency or Indian Tribe Approval (to propose a project on land not owned by applicant) Name: NA Title: Signature: Date: ODOT Region Manager Approval (if non-ODOT applicant proposing project in state highway right-of-way) Name: NA Title: Signature: Date: Local Government Commitment (for cities over 50,000. Cities < 50,000 must provide council resolution.) I confirm that the City of Ashland supports the proposed project. I have the authority to commit all funds and resources needed from my agency to deliver the project. (See attached council resolution.) Name: James H. Olson Title: Interim Public Works Director Signature: Date: Railroad Endorsement (aware and willing to accommodate project adjacent to or crossing RR property) Name: Title: Signature: Date: ODOT Rail Division Record of Contact (for project at or near a railroad crossing) Name: Title: Signature: Date: Maintenance Endorsement (commitment for long-term maintenance by other than applicant agency) Name: NA Title: Signature: Date: Supporting Document COPy of maintenance agreement or signed commitment to provide long-term maintenance or management: Ashland Municipal Code Chapter 13 Streets and Sidewalks 13.40 Construction, Repair and Alteration of Sidewalks 13.04.020 Duty to Repair and Clear Sidewalks It is the duty of the owners ofland adjoining any street to maintain in good repair and to remove obstructions from the adjacent sidewalk. A. The owner of real property responsible for maintaining the adjacent sidewalk shall be primarily liable to any person injured because of any negligence of such person in failing to maintain the sidewalk in good condition. B. If the City is required to pay damages for the injury to persons or property caused by the failure of the owner to perform the duty which this section imposes, such owner shall compensate the City for the amount of the damages thus paid, plus court costs and fees incurred by the City. The City may maintain an action in any court of competent jurisdiction to enforce the provisions of this Section. (Ord 1515 S2, 1967; Ord 2223, 1982) H:\ShipletD\Council\Council Communication\2008\March 31 and April 1\040108 Laurel Street Sidewalk.atch3.doc VIEW NORTH - INTERSECTION OF LAUREL / ORANGE VIEW SOUTH - FROM ORANGE AVENUE H:\ShipletD\Council\Council Communication\2008\March 31 and April 1 \040108 Laurel Street Sidewalk.atcM.doc VIEW NORTH - FROM ORANGE AVENUE VIEW NORTH - HERSEY / LAUREL / RAILROAD INTERSECTION H:IShipletDlCouncillCouncil Communication\2008\March 31 and April 11040108 Laurel Street Sidewalk.atcM.doc CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication A Resolution to repeal and replace Resolution 2008-05 that removed the BP A surcharge and increased electric rates for usage by 8.70/0 for accounts subject to the Electric user's tax and 10.8 % for accounts not subject to the tax, correcting for an omitted page. Martha Bennett Primary Staff Contact: E-Mail: Secondary Contact: Estimated Time: Lee Tuneberg tuneberl@ashland.or.us Meeting Date Department: Secondary Dept.: Approval: April 1, 2008 Finance Consent Question: Does the Council want to approve a resolution repealing and replacing Resolution 2008-05, correcting for information omitted when an attachment page was not included? Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Council adopt the attached Rate Resolution to correct for the error. Background: The attachment tables to the original resolution did not include all tables necessary to complete the change in rates. The attachments to this resolution are complete. Related City Policies: N/A Council Options: Approve this resolution correcting for the error and adjusting rates as discussed in the public hearing held March 18, 2008, or take no action awaiting more information. Potential Motions: Move to adopt the attached rate resolution as presented, adjusting rates as approved March 18,2008. Attachments: Rate Resolution Rate Tables Resolution 2008-05 Page I of I 040108 Reso to repeal Reso 2008 05.CC.doc ~~, RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION REVISING RATES FOR ELECTRIC SERVICE PURSUANT TO ASHLAND MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 14.16.030 AND REPEALING RESOLUTION 2008-05 THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOllOWS: SECTION 1. The electric rate schedules used to support Resolution 2008-05, raising electric rates 8.7% for usage rates in all rate classes except the governmental class and 10.8% for usage rates in the governmental class for electric service provided by the City of Ashland effective with usage beginning May 1, 2008, as per the attached rate tables, had a page missing. This resolution corrects for that error and adjusts rates as intended. Monthly base charges remain unchanged. Miscellaneous Charges and Connection Fees established by the previous rate resolution remain in effect as per the attached until revised by separate Council Action. SECTION 2. The City of Ashland's surcharge on billings for electric usage to help pay for wholesale rate increases on power supplied to the City of Ashland by the Bonneville Power Administration was eliminated effective and in conjunction with the rate increase implemented by Resolution 2008-05 and remains eliminated with this resolution. SECTION 3. Copies of this resolution shall be maintained in the Office of the City Recorder. SECTION 4. Classification of the fee. The fees specified in Section 1 of this resolution are classified as not subject to the limits of Section 11 b of Article XI of the Oregon Constitution (Ballot Measure 5). SECTION 5. Resolutions 2008-05 is repealed. SECTION 6. This resolution takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. This resolution was read by title only in accordance with Ashland Municipal Code ~2.04.090 duly PASSED and ADOPTED this 1 st day of April, 2008. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of ,2008. John Morrison, Mayor Reviewed as to form: Richard Appicello, City Attorney City of Ashland, Oregon SCHEDULES R 01 and R 03 RESIDENTIAL SERVICE Energy Charge: 5.057c per kWh for the first 500 kWh 6.221c for all additional kWh Three-Phase Service (R 03) For residential customers requiring three-phase service, whose single-phase requirements are, or will be supplied under any residential schedule, three- phase service will be supplied only when service is available from the City's presently existing facilities, or where such facilities can be reasonably installed, and in any event, only when deliveries can be made by using one service for customer's single phase and three-phase requirements. The demand charge applicable only to customer's three-phase demand shall be $3.04 for each kilowatt of demand, but not less than $7.44 minimum basic charge. The energy charge shall be in accordance with the schedule set forth herein. Applicable: To single-family residential customers when all service is supplied to one point of delivery. Monthly Billing: The Monthly Billing shall be the sum of the Basic and Energy Charges and BPA Surcharges Basic Charge: 7.44 Per month c= cents Minimum Charge: The monthly minimum charge shall be the Basic Charge. A higher minimum may be required under contract to cover special conditions. Continuing Service This schedule is based on continuing service at each service location. Disconnect and reconnect trans- actions shall not operate to relieve a customer from monthly minimum charges. Special Conditions: No motor load shall exceed a total of 7 1/2 horsepower connected at one time. City of Ashland, Oregon SEASONAL RESIDENTIAL SERVICE SCHEDULE 4 Applicable: This rate is applicable to seasonal residential uses such as owner occupied single-family residential customers providing travelers accommodations, and when all service is supplied at one point of delivery. Monthly Billing: The Monthly Billing shall be the sum of the Basic and Energy Charges. Basic Charge: 7.44 per month Energy Charge: 5.619c per kWh for the first 600 kWh 6.211c for all additional kWh c = cents Minimum Charge: The monthly minimum charge shall be the Basic Charge. A higher minimum may be required under contract to cover special conditions. Special Conditions: No motor load shall exceed a total of 7 1/2 horsepower connected at one time. Three-Phase Service (R 03) For residential customers requiring three-phase service, whose single-phase requirements are, or will be supplied under any residential schedule, three- phase service will be supplied only when service is available from the City's presently existing facilities, or where such facilities can be reasonably installed, and in any event, only when deliveries can be made by using one service for customer's single phase and three-phase requirements. The demand charge applicable only to customer's three-phase demand shall be $3.04 for each kilowatt of demand, but not less than $7.44 minimum Basic charge. The energy charge shall be in accordance with the schedule set forth herein. Continuing Service This schedule is based on continuing service at each service location. Disconnect and reconnect trans- actions shall not operate to relieve a customer from monthly minimum charges. City of Ashland, Oregon RENEWABLE RESOURCE GENERATION SCHEDULE 5 Applicable: This schedule is applicable to qualifying facilities with a generating design of 100 kilowatts or less. Monthly billing: The monthly billing for takings from the City shall be in accordance with the applicable schedule or schedules for the type of service received. Generation credit: City shall pay 7.764 cents per kWh for the first 1000 kWH's separately metered and generated from a qualifying facility. (Per Contract) Parallel Operation: Interconnection of a qualifying facility with City's system will be permitted only under the terms of a contract between the qualifying facility and the City. The contract must meet requirements of the Department of Electric Utilities. The form of such contract shall include but not be limited to the following: (1) The qualifying facility shall indemnify and hold harmless the City of Ashland from any and all liability arising from the operation and interconnection of qualifying facility. (2) The qualifying facility shall provide a lockable disconnect switch to isolate qualifying facility's generation from City's system. Such switch shall be accessible to City and City shall have the right to lock such disconnect switch open whenever necessary to maintain safe electrical operating conditions or whenever the qualifying facility adversely affects City's system. (3) Qualifying facility shall provide an additional meter base adjacent to the delivery meter to measure the qualifying facility's total generation independently from the qualifying facility's load. For three-phase generation the qualifying facility will also provide a meter base for a Kvar meter. (4) Except for the metering, qualifying facility shall own and maintain all facilities on the qualifying facility's side of a single point of delivery as specified by the City. Qualifying facility's system, including inter- connected equipment, shall meet the requirements of and be inspected and approved by state electrical inspector and any other public authority having jurisdiction before any connection is made to City. Unmetered Generation: If the qualifying facility does not desire to make sales to City, the requirements for separate metering of the generation shall be waived. Such generation may reduce the net delivery and billing to the qualifying facility by City. The delivery meter will be of a type that will not be compensated for unmetered incidental flows to City. City of Ashland, Oregon Commercial Service Applicable: This schedule is applicable to non-residential and multiple-family residential customers whose entire requirements are supplied hereunder, and whose loads have never registered 1,000 kilowatts or more, more than once in any consecutive 18-month period. Deliveries at more than one point, or more than one voltage and phase classification, will be separately metered and billed. Service for intermittent, partial requirements or highly fluctuating loads, or where service is seasonally disconnected during anyone year period will be provided only by special contract for such service. Monthly billing: The monthly billing shall be the sum of the Basic, Demand, Energy, and Reactive Power Charges, plus applicable Metering and Delivery adjustments. Basic Charge: Basic Single Three Charge Phase Phase C 01 C03 30 kW 13.28 26.57 or less Over 49.83 86.36 30 kW * Note: Kilowatt load size, for determination of Basic Charge, shall be the average of the two greatest non-zero monthly demands established during the 12 month period which includes and ends with the current billing month. SCHEDULE C01 &C03 Basic etc. Demand Charge: No charge for the first 15 kW of demand. Price per kW for all kW in excess of 15 kW 3.18 E C nergy harge: Energy Charge Single Phase Three Phase C 01 C03 Per KWh for the 6.013 5.505 first 3,000 KWh Per KWh for the 6.032 5.543 next 17,000 KWh Per KWh for all 6.061 5.557 additional KWh . Note: Rates are shown as cents per kWh Effective on usage as of May 1, 2008 Page 1 City of Ashland, Oregon Commercial Service SCHEDULE C01 &C03 Basic etc. Page 2 Seasonal Definition: Seasonal rates no longer in affect as of July 2004. Previously, summer months were defined as the six regular billing periods May through October. Minimum Charge. The monthly charge shall be the basic charge. A higher minimum may be required under contract to cover special conditions. Reactive Power Charges. The maximum 30-minute reactive demand for the month in kilovolt-amperes in excess of 40% of the measured kilowatt demand the same month will be billed, in addition to the above charges, at 60cents per kvar of such excess reactive demand. Demand: Demand shall be the kilowatts shown by, or computed from the readings of the City's demand meter for the 30-minute period of customers greatest use during the month, determined to the nearest kilowatt. Metering & Delivery Voltage Adjustments: The above monthly charges are applicable without adjustment for voltage with delivery and metering are at the City's standard secondary voltage. Metering: For as long as metering voltage is at the City's available primary distribution voltage of 11 kV or greater, the above charges shall be reduced by one and one-half percent (1 1/2 %) to compensate for losses. Delivery: For as long as delivery voltage is at City's available primary distribution voltage of 11 kV or greater, the total of the above charges will be reduced by 15 Cents per kilowatt of load size used for the determination of the Basic Charge billed in the month. A High Voltage Charge of $35 per month will be added where such deliveries are metered at the delivery voltage. When a new delivery, or an increase in capacity for an existing delivery is, at the request of the customer, made by means of City-owned transformers at a voltage other than a locally standard distribution voltage, the above charges for any month will be increased by 15 Cents per kilowatt of load size used for the determination of the Basic Charge billed in the month. The City retains the right to change its line voltage or classification thereof at any time, and after reasonable advance notice to any customer affected by such change, such customer then has the option to take service at the new line voltage or to accept service through transformers to be supplied by City subject to the voltage adjustments above. Contract: The City may require the customer to sign a written contract which shall have a term of not less than one (1) year. Installation and Maintenance: The City may contract for the installation and maintenance of electric facilities on the customer's premises. The terms of such service shall be set forth in a contract, the form and terms of which shall be approved by the City Council. Monthly charges made by the City as reimbursement for ownership, operation and maintenance costs applicable to facilities installed to furnish service under Page 2 City of Ashland, Oregon Commercial Service SCHEDULE C01 &C03 Basic etc. Page 3 rules of this schedule shall be determined in accordance with the following: (1) Operating Charge -- shall be equal to 2/3 of 1 % per month of the installed cost of facilities paid for by the customer. (2) Facilities Charge -- shall be equal to 1 1/2 % per month of the installed cost of facilities paid for by the customer. (3) Transformer Capacity Charge -- shall be equal to 15 Cents per nameplate kva. Special Conditions: Customers shall not resell electric service received from the City under provisions of this schedule to any person, except by written permission of the City, and where customer meters and bills any of his/her tenants at City's regular rates for the type of service which such tenant may actually receive. Continuing Service: This schedule is based on continuing service at each service location. Disconnect and reconnect transactions shall not operate to relieve a customer from monthly minimum charge. Page 3 City of Ashland, Oregon GOVERNMENTAL SERVICE Applicable: This schedule is applicable to governmental customers whose entire requirements are supplied hereunder, and whose loads have never registered 1,000 kilowatts or more, more than once in any consecutive 18-month period. Deliveries at more than one point, or more than one voltage and phase classification, will be separately metered and billed. Monthly billing: The monthly billing shall be the sum of the Basic, Demand, Energy, and Reactive Power Charges, plus applicable Metering and Delivery adjustments. Basic Charge: Basic Single Three Charge Phase Phase G01 G03 30 kW 13.28 26.57 or less Over 49.82 86.36 30 kW * Note: Kilowatt load size, for determination of Basic Charge, shall be the average of the two greatest non-zero monthly demands established during the 12 month period which includes and ends with the current billing month. Schedule G01 & G03 Page 1 Demand Charge: No charge for the first 15 kW of demand. Price per kW for all kW in excess of 15 kW $3.25 E Ch nergy arge: Energy Charge Single Phase Three Phase G 01 G03 Per kWh 7.272 7.767 for the first 3,000 kWh Per kWh 5.453 5.890 for the next 17,000 kWh Per kWh 5.111 5.522 for all additional kWh * Note: Rates are shown as cents per kWh Seasonal Definition: Seasonal rates no longer in affect as of July 2004 Cycle Seven. Previously, summer months were defined as the six regular billing periods, May through October. City of Ashland, Oregon GOVERNMENTAL SERVICE Minimum Charge: The monthly minimum charge shall be the basic charge. A higher minimum may be required under contract to cover special conditions. Reactive Power Charges: The maximum 30-minute reactive demand for the month in kilovolt-amperes in excess of 40% of the measured kilowatt demand the same month will be billed, in addition to the above charges, at 60 (cents) per kvar of such excess reactive demand. Demand: Demands shall be the kilowatts shown by, or computed from the readings of the City's demand meter for the 30-minute period of customer's greatest us during the month, determined to the nearest kilowatt. Metering & Delivery Voltage Adjustments: The above monthly charges are applicable without adjustment for voltage when delivery and metering are at the City's standard secondary voltage. Metering: For as long as metering voltage is at the City's available primary distribution voltage of 11 kV or greater, the above charges shall be reduced by (1-1/2%) to compensate for losses. Delivery: For as long as delivery voltage is at City's available primary distribution voltage of 11 kV or greater, the total of the above charges will be reduced by 15 (cents) per kilowatt of load size used for the determination of the Basic Charge billed in the month. A High Voltage charge of $35.00 per month will be added where such deliveries are metered at the delivery voltage. When a new delivery, or an increase in capacity for an existing delivery is at the request of the Schedule G01 & G03 Page 2 Delivery: Con't. customer, made by means of City owned trans- formers at a voltage other than a locally standard distribution voltage, the above charges for any month will be increased by 15 (cents) per kilowatt of load size used for the determination of the Basic Charge billed in the month. The City retains the right to change its line voltage or classifications thereof at any time, and after reasonable advance notice to customer affected by such change. Such customer then has the option to take service at the new line voltage or to accept service through transformers to be supplied by City, subject to the voltage adjustments above. Contract: The City may require the customer to sign a written contract which shall have a term of not less than one (1) year. Installation and Maintenance: The City may contract for the installation and Maintenance of the E24electric facilities on the customer's premises. The terms of such service shall be set forth in a contract, the form and terms of which shall be ap- proved by the City Council. Monthly charges made by the City as reimbursement for ownership, operation and maintenance costs applicable to facilities installed to furnish service under rules of this schedule shall be determined in accordance with the following: (1) Operating Charge -- shall be equal to 2/3 of 1 % per month of the installed cost of facilities paid for by the customer. (2) Facilities Charge -- shall be equal to 1 1/2% per month of the installed cost of the facilities as determined by the City for facilities installed at City's expense. (3) Transformer Capacity Charge -- shall be equal to 15 (cents) per nameplate kva. City of Ashland, Oregon GOVERNMENTAL SERVICE Schedule G01 & G03 Page 3 Special Conditions: Customers shall not resell electric service received from the City under provisions of the schedule to any person, except by written permission of the City, and where customer meters and bills any of his/her tenants at City's regular rates for the type of service which such tenant may actually receive. Continuing Service: This schedule is based on continuing service at each service location. Disconnect and reconnect transactions shall not operate to relieve a customer from monthly minimum charges. City of Ashland, Oregon LARGE GENERAL SERVICE - METERED TIME OF USE OVER 2,000 KILOWATTS SCHEDULE 48 Applicable: This schedule is applicable to electric service loads which have registered over 2,000 kilowatts more than once in any consecutive 18-month period. Deliveries at more than one point, or more than one voltage and phase classification, will be separately metered and billed. Service for intermittent, partial requirements, or highly fluctuating loads, or where service is seasonally disconnected during anyone-year period will be provided only by special contract for such service. Monthly billing: The City will negotiate with a customer a rate structure and rate levels based upon the specific circumstances of the customer. At a minimum, the rates developed for this schedule will be set at a sufficient level to recover all of the costs incurred by the City to serve the customer, including a minimum contribution to fixed assets. Metering & Delivery Voltage Adjustments: The City retains the right to change its line voltage or classifications thereof at any time, and after reasonable advance notice to any customer affected by such change, such customer then has the option to take service through transformers to be supplied by City subject to the voltage adjustments above. Contract: The City may require the customer to sign a written contract which shall have a term of not less than one (1) year. Installation and Maintenance: The City may contract for the installation and maintenance of electric facilities on the customer's premises. The terms of such service shall be set forth in a contract, the form and terms of which shall be approved by the City Council. Monthly charges made by the City shall be approved by the City Council. Monthly charges made by the City as reimbursement for ownership, operation and maintenance costs applicable to facilities installed to furnish service under rules of the Schedule shall be determined in accordance with the following: (1) Operating Charge -- shall be equal to 2/3 of 1 % per month of the installed cost of facilities paid for by the customer. (2) Facilities Charge -- shall be equal to 1 1/2% per month of the installed cost of the facilities as determined by the City for facilities installed at City's expense. (3) Transformer Capacity Charge -- shall be equal to 15 (cents) per nameplate kva. Special Conditions: Customers shall not resell electric service received from the City under provisions of this schedule to any person, except by written permission of the City, and where customer meters and bills any of his/her tenants at City's regular rates for the type of service which such tenant may actually receive. Effective on Usage as of May 1, 2008 City of Ashland, Oregon GENERAL SERVICE. GOVERNMENTAL LARGE SERVICE SCHEDULE 50 Page 1 Applicable: This schedule is applicable to electric service loads which have registered from 1,000 to 3,000 kilowatts more than once in any consecutive 18-month period. Deliveries at more than one point, or more than one voltage and phase classification, will be separately metered and billed. Service for intermittent, partial requirements, or highly fluctuating loads, or where service is seasonally disconnected during anyone-year period will be provided only by special contract for such service. Monthly billing: The Monthly Billing shall be the sum of the Basic, Demand, Energy, and Reactive Power Charges, plus appropriate Metering and Delivery adjustments. Basic Charge: 2,032.85 Per month Demand Charge: For each kilowatt of Billing Demand. 3.7876 Energy Charge: per kWh 4.444 rates (for usage) shown as cents Minimum Charge: The monthly minimum charge shall be the basic charge. A higher minimum charge may be required by contract. On.Peak Period Billing Demand: The on peak period kilowatts shown by or computed from the readings of City's demand meter for the 30-minute period of customer's greatest use during the month, determined to the nearest kilowatt. Reactive Power Charge: The maximum 30-minute reactive demand for the month in kilovolt-amperes in excess of 40% of the measured kilowatt demand for the same month will be billed, in addition to the above charges, at rate shown below, per kvar of such excess reactive demand. 0.8838 Metering: For as long as metering voltage is at the City's available primary distribution voltage of 11 kV or greater, the above charges shall be reduced by (1-1/2%) to compensate for losses. Delivery: For as long as delivery voltage is at City's current locally available primary or transmission voltage the total of the above charges will be reduced by the following amount per kilowatt of load size used for the determination of the Basic Charge billed in the month; and where such deliveries are metered at the delivery voltage, the following high voltage charges shall be added. Standard Service Reduction Hiah Voltaae Voltaae Charae Primary voltage of 15 cents $35.00 11 kV or greater per kW per month Transmission 27 cents $340.00 voltage of 60 kV per kW per month or greater When a new delivery, or an increase in capacity for an existing delivery is, at the request of the customer, made by means of City-owned transformers at a voltage other than a locally standard distribution voltage, the above charges for any month will be increased by 15 cents per kilowatt of load size used for the determination of the Basic Charge billed in the month. The City retains the right to change its line voltage or classifications thereof at any time and after reasonable advance notice to any customer affected by such change, such customer then has the option to take service at the new line voltage or to accept service through transformers to be supplied by City subject to the voltage adjustments above. CITY OF ASHLAND, OREGON GENERAL SERVICE - GOVERNMENTAL LARGE SERVICE 1,000 TO 3,000 KILOWATTS SCHEDULE 50 Page 2 CONTRACT: The City may require the customer to sign a written contract which shall have a term of not less than one (1) year. Installation and Maintenance: The City may contract for the installation and maintenance of electric facilities on the customer's premises. The terms of such service shall be set forth in a contract, the form and terms of which shall be approved by the City Council. Monthly charges made by the City shall be approved by the City Council. Monthly charges made by the City as reimbursement for ownership, operation and maintenance costs applicable to facilities installed to furnish service under rules of the Schedule shall be determined in accordance with the following: (1) Operating Charge -- shall be equal to 2/3 of 1 % per month of the installed cost of facilities paid for by the customer. (2) Facilities Charge -- shall be equal to 1 1/2% per month of the installed cost of the facilities as determined by the City for facilities installed at City's expense. (3) Transformer Capacity Charge -- shall be equal to 15 (cents) per nameplate kva. Special Conditions: Customers shall not resell electric service received from the City under provisions of this schedule to any person, except by written permission of the City, and where customer meters and bills any of his/her tenants at City's regular rates for the type of service which such tenant may actually receive. City of Ashland, Oregon OUTDOOR AREA LIGHTING SERVICE Monthly Billing: The rate schedule for outdoor area lighting service furnished from dusk to dawn by City-owned high pressure sodium luminaries which may be served by secondary voltage circuits from City's existing overhead distribution system, and mounted on City-owned wood poles and served in accordance with City's specifications as to equipment and facilities, shall be as follows: (1) Net Monthly Rate: Inc Percent Type of Nominal Rate Per Luminaire Lumen Luminaire Rating High- 5,800 13.39 Pressure Sodium High 22,000 19.31 Pressure Sodium High 50,000 30.88 Pressure Sodium (2) Pole Charge: A monthly charge of ($1.48) per pole shall be made for each additional pole required in excess of the luminaries installed. Elec-Sch 15 Lite Guard 3-18-08.xls SCHEDULE 15 Maintenance: Maintenance will be performed during regular working hours as soon as practicable after customer has notified City of service failure. The City reserves the right to contract for the installation and/or maintenance of lighting service provided hereunder. Suspension of Service: The customer may request temporary suspension of power for lighting by written notice. During such periods the monthly rate will be reduced by the City's estimated average monthly re-Iamping and energy costs for the luminaire. Contract: Due to the investment involved and cost of initial installation, the term of the contract shall be by written agreement with the Electric Department, the form of which shall have prior approval by the City Council, and the term of which shall be for not less than three (3) years. 3/13/2008 City of Ashland Electric Connection Fee Effective Date, August 1, 2007 May 2007 ENR @ 7942.00 Service Effective 7/1/2006 Effective 8/1/2007 A. Temporary Service Drop: Single Phase Three phase B. Meter Charges: Meter Test for accuracy Once in twelve months Second or more times in twelve months Meter repairs/replacement (Damaged by Customer) C. Returned Check Charge D. Reconnection Charge: Normal working hours Other hours or on Holidays E. Service Calls (second or more times in 12 months) Normal working hours Other hours or on Holidays F. Service Connection for applicant: Normal working hours Other hours or on Holidays G. Unauthorized Connection H. Line Extension Charges: 1. Single-family Residential Service: a. Overhead service in existing developed areas from distribution line to and including meter b. Overhead service extension or increased service for 300 amps or less c. Partial Underground service installation, extension, increased service for 300 amps or less, or replacement of service from overhead to underground. Customer provides all trenching, back filling and compaction as directed by the City $ 122.00 $ $ 252.00 $ 125.00 259.00 No charge No charge $ 63.00 $ 64.00 Actual Costs Actual Costs $ 24.00 $ 24.00 $ 18.00 $ 18.00 $ 69.00 $ 71.00 $ 18.00 $ 18.00 $ 69.00 $ 71.00 $ 10.00 $ 10.00 $ 69.00 $ 71.00 $ 194.00 $ 200.00 $ 389.00 $ 401.00 $ 259.00 $ 267.00 $ 455.00 $ 469.00 Electric Connection Fee Effective Date, August 1, 2007 May 2007 ENR @ 7942.00 Effective Effective Service 7/1/2006 8/1/2007 d. Underground service of 300 amps or less that have not $ 389.00 $ 401.00 been previously paid under subsection 1. Customer provides all trenching, back filling and compaction as directed by the City. e. After hours service crew $ 259.00 $ 267.00 2. Any service over 300 amps Actual Costs Actual Costs 3. Commercial, Institutional and Industrial. Actual Costs Actual Costs I. Underground Distribution Installation Charges: Per Lot $ 847.00 $ 873.00 J. Subdivisions of 0 to 20 engineering fee per lot $ 124.00 $ 127.00 Note: If a three - Phase meter is used for less than 21 lot subdivision $ 187.00 $ 192.00 Subdivisions of 21+ engineering fee per lot $ 187.00 $ 192.00 The above numbers are rounded down to the previous whole dollar. Methodology: Current ENR Rate - Old ENR Rate / Old ENR Rate = % x Old Rate = New Rate 7942-7690.72/7942= 3.16% Factor: 103.16% 103.16% Source: Engineering News Record Construction cost Index (ENR) RESOLUTION NO. ~OCy~ - C) S A RESOLUTION REVISING RATES FOR ELECTRIC SERVICE PURSUANT TO ASHLAND MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 14.16.030 AND REPEALING RESOLUTION 2004-14 and RESOLUTION 2005-39. THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The electric rate schedules are increased 8.7% for usage rates in all rate classes except the governmental class and 10.8% for usage rates in the governmental class for electric service provided by the City of Ashland effective with usage beginning May 1, 2008, as per the attached rate tables. Monthly base charges remain unchanged. Miscellaneous Charges and Connection Fees established by the previous rate resolution remain in effect as per the attached until revised by separate Council Action. SECTION 2. The City of Ashland's surcharge on billings for electric usage to help pay for wholesale rate increases on power supplied to the City of Ashland by the Bonneville Power Administration is eliminated effective and in conjunction with the rate increase implemented by this resolution. SECTION 3. Copies of this resolution shall be maintained in the Office of the City Recorder. SECTION 4. Classification of the fee. The fees specified in Section 1 of this resolution are classified as not subject to the limits of Section 11 b of Article XI of the Oregon Constitution (Ballot Measure 5). SECTION 5. Resolutions 2004-14 and 2005-39 are repealed. SECTION 6. This resolution takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. This resolution was read by title only in accordance with Ashland Municipal Code 92.0 90 duly PASSED and ADOPTED this 18th day of March, 2008. . ~ Barbara Christensen, City Recorder /1 ,2008. SIGNED and APPROVED this , c:... __ Reviewed as to form: CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Meeting Date: Department: Secondary Dept.: Approval: Liquor License Application April 1, 2008 hi ~ Primary Staff Contact: City Recorder 11- E-Mail: Secondary Contact: Martha Bennett Estimated Time: Barbara Christensen christeb@ashland.or.us Consent Agenda Question: Does the Council wish to deny a Liquor License Application from Michael Rozenfeld dba Fresh Feast LLC at 280 E Hersey #6? Staff Recommendation: Deny the application with the following: The city has determined that the location of this business does not comply with the city's land use requirements to operate a restaurant which serves the publico Clarification from the Oregon Liquor License Commission (OLCC) indicated that a catering business cannot operate without first having privileges under a fully licensed restaurant with an approved liquor license. Because the location prohibits this business from becoming a restaurant at the current location OLCC will be taking this under consideration during the application process. In addition, OLCC confirmed that this business has been operating under numerous "temporary" permits and that this is not their customary process for issuing "temporary" permits. The business owner was requested by OLCC to complete the application for the standard Liquor License, which has resulted in the city becoming aware of the activities at this location. The city council recommends that the OLCC deny the approval of this application. Background: Application is for a new application. The City has determined that the license application review by the city is set forth in AMC Chapter 6.32 which requires that a determination be made to determine if the applicant complies with the city's land use, business license and restaurant registration requirements (AMC Chapter 6.32). Related City Policies: In May 1999, the council decided it would make the above recommendations on all liquor license applications. Council Options: Approve or disapprove Liquor License application. Potential Motions: Approve or disapprove Liquor License application. r.l' CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Meeting Date: Department: Secondary Dept.: Approval: Public Hearing on the 2008 Community Development Block Grant Award and CDBG Action Plan Development April 1, 2008 Primary Staff Contact: Community Development E-Mail: none Secondary Contact: Martha Bennett, Estimated Time: Brandon Goldman goldmanb@ashland.or.us Bill Molnar 30 min Question: Should the Council award a portion of the 2008 Community Development Block Grant Funds to the Fair Housing Council of Oregon (FHCO), and direct Staff to develop the 2008 Annual CDBG Action Plan to identify proposed uses for CDBG funds? Recommendations: The City of Ashland Housing Commission is scheduled to hold a public hearing on March 2i\ 2008. Their award recommendations shall be provided to Council the Council public hearing on April 1 st, 2008. Staff recommendations are included on page six within an attachment to this Council Communication titled Staff Evaluation, dated March 27, 2008. Background: The attached Staff Evaluation, dated March 27, 2008, contains a complete background of funding availability, the award process, and CDBG program criteria relating to the award of CDBG funds. Council Options: The Council can award funds as requested, or deny the request, and direct Staff to develop an annual CDBG Action Plan according to that selection. Potential Motions: I move to: . Award the Fair Housing Council of Oregon $10,000 in CDBG funds to undertake fair housing counseling, education and enforcement within Ashland during the 2008 CDBG program year, and to designate that the remaining CDBG funds shall be made available to support eligible affordable housing related activities such as land acquisition, public facility improvements, and/or housing preservation in the 2008 Annual CDBG Action Plan. Attachments: Staff Evaluation dated March 27, 2008 FHCO Proposal Housing Authority of Jackson County Letter dated 2-19-08 Page 1 of 1 040108 CDBG award.CC.doc r~' CITY OF ASHLAND Staff Evaluation DATE: TO: FROM: RE: March 27, 2008 Ashland Housing Commission and City Council Brandon Goldman, Housing Program Specialist Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) 2008 Request for Proposals The City of Ashland received only one proposal requesting $10,000 of $356,522 in Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds that are competitively available. This is the second consecutive year in which no affordable housing providers submitted application for the CDBG funds. The available funds comprise a carryover of $192,657 in prior year CDBG funds that were unexpended. The total City of Allocation for the 2008 CDBG program year is $204,831 of which 20% ($40,966) is reserved for administration of the CDBG program. In the 2008 Request for Proposals (RFP) it was noted that 15% (initially estimated at $30,000) of the total 2008 allocation was potentially available to projects that provided direct services to Homeless or Special needs populations. The sole proposal the City received is a request to utilize CDBG funds to provide education, outreach, and enforcement regarding Fair Housing law by the Fair Housing Council of Oregon (FHCO). The City of Ashland Housing Commission is to hold a public hearing and review the grant request on March 27, 2008. The Housing Commission shall make a recommendation on a grant award to the City Council. Subsequently, the City Council will hold a public hearing on April 1 st, 2008 to make a final decision on the grant award. Staff's recommendations regarding the allocation of the 2008 CDBG funds and prior year carry-over is provided on page six of this document. Department of Community Development Tel: 541-488-5305 20 E. Main St Fax: 541-552-2059 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.oLus r~' 2008 CDBG Proposals- Staff Evaluation pg 1 Proposals Received One proposal was received and is listed below: Organization Proposed Project CDBG Funds Requested Fair Housing Council of Fair Housing education, $10,000 for public Oregon outreach and enforcement services Fundina Requested/Available A total of $356,522 is available to distribute to eligible recipients for projects meeting the CDBG national objectives, and are consistent with the City of Ashland 2005- 2009 Consolidated Plan. The maximum allocation allowable to be used to support public services is limited to 15% of our annual allocation which equals 30,724 for the 2008-2009 program year. The annual 20% allocation to be used for administration is not included in the $356,522 total above. The 2007-2008 Administrative set aside is $42,397, and it is $40,966 for 2008-2009. These funds will be available upon approval of the 2008 Action Plan, and upon completion of any regulatory requirements including but not limited to environmental review clearance. The funds will likely be available on July 1, 2008, or upon final approval of the Federal Budget by the US Congress, which ever is later. Although funding will be available, CDBG funds are only distributed to reimburse expenditures following completion of the projects or at specified intervals through the scope of work. Upon final selection of the award recipients by the Ashland City Council, the City will develop an Action Plan outlining how the CDBG funds will be used by the selected Subrecipient(s). This 2008 Action Plan will go before the Ashland Housing Commission at as public hearing for review and approval to ensure consistency with the awards designated by the City Council. The US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) must review the annual Action Plan submitted by the City to ensure the activities funded are constant with federal requirements, and with the local Consolidated Plan. Department of Community Development Tel: 541-488-5305 20 E. Main St Fax: 541-552-2059 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.or.us rj.' 2008 CDBG Proposals- Staff Evaluation pg2 Assessment Staff has assessed the Fair Housing Council of Oregon proposal to determine whether it meets the Federal COBG regulations, and if the proposal addresses the priorities within the City of Ashland 2005-2009 Consolidated Plan. Three areas are evaluated for each proposal regarding compliance with federal regulations. · First the proposed projects must meet the national objective of the Community Oevelopment Block Grant program. . Second, all COBG funded projects must be an "eligible" use under the COBG federal regulations. . Finally, if the proposals meet all federal requirements and are selected for a COBG award, then many federal regulations must be met throughout the course of the project. For instance, all projects funded, in whole or in part, with COBG dollars require an environmental review in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), construction projects must use federal Oavis-Bacon wage rates, housing involving structures built prior to 1978 must undergo lead-based paint abatement, and any project involving displacement of residents or businesses as a result of the federal funded project are entitled to assistance under the Uniform Relocation Act, and most importantly the beneficiaries from the application of COBG funds must qualify as eligible populations under the Federal requirements. Areas of concern are described for each proposal received. The Housing Commission, and City Council, can only award COBG funds to projects that can meet all federal requirements and meets an objective as outlined in the City's 2005-2009 Consolidated Plan. Should it be determined by the Housing Commission and City Council, that the proposed project does not constitute an efficient or eligible use of COBG funds, the Council could determine that the City will act directly as the grantee to develop a project that is consistent with COBG program requirements. This is particularly relevance in this 2008 round of funding in that the City only received one request for $10,000 of the approximately $356,522 available, thus there remains $346,522 left un-requested. In recent years the City has aimed to expend accumulated past carryover to avoid a determination of non-compliance with the HUO timeliness standard and had made significant progress in this regard. However, as no award was made in 2007-2008, it is imperative that the City expend a significant portion of our accumulated carryover during this coming program year. Staff believes the City will be classified as "untimely" on July 1, 2008 and will have one year to come into compliance face potential HUO sanctions unless carryover funds are expended prior to that date. Department of Community Development Tel: 541-488-5305 20 E. Main St Fax: 541-552-2059 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.OLUS r~' 2008 CDBG Proposals- Staff Evaluation pg3 PROPOSAL EVALUATION Fair HousinQ Council of Oregon Proposal Proposal Summary The project proposed by the Fair Housing Council of Oregon (FHCO) is one intended to provide fair housing services to Ashland residents. FHCO intends to provide services to low- and moderate-income tenants, to housing providers, and advocates and service providers in an effort to limit, or eliminate, discrimination in housing. In addition to operating a toll free hotline to receive complaints of housing discrimination, assist individuals in reporting violations, and testing for violations of the Fair Housing Law. As part of the grant award requested FHCO proposes to conduct two general fair housing training sessions. These trainings will provide participants with a greater understanding of their rights and responsibilities under Fair Housing law. Lastly as part of providing services to residents of Ashland per the terms of a grant award, the FHCO will provide fair housing information to tenants and landlords that call their office. Meeting National Objectives A strong commitment to affirmatively further fair housing is not only one of the a guiding principle for the Department of Housing and Urban Development, it is a requirement for participating in the CDBG program The Fair Housing Act specifies that the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development shall administer programs and activities relating to housing and urban development in a manner that affirmatively furthers the policies outlined in Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968 (Fair Housing Act). This Act prohibits discrimination in the sale, rental, and financing of dwellings, and in other housing-related transactions, based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, familial status (including children under the age of 18 living with parents of legal custodians, pregnant women, and people securing custody of children under the age of 18), and handicap (disability). Further in Ashland, and the State of Oregon, housing discrimination based on sexual orientation is also prohibited in furtherance of Fair Housing. The FHCO is considered a Qualified Fair Housing Organization (QFHO) per the definitions presented the HUD Memorandum dated January 11, 2008. This memorandum (attached) directs CDBG entitlement Communities to ensure that recipients of CDBG funds for Fair Housing activities meet the HUD definitions of a fair housing organization The FHCO proposal meets the national objective of the Community Development Block Grant program. Department of Community Development Tel: 541-488-5305 20 E. Main St Fax: 541-552-2059 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.or.us r., 2008 CDBG Proposals- Staff Evaluation pg4 Defined as an Eligible Use per CDBG federal regulations Use of CDBG funds to support Fair Housing activities is an "eligible" use under the CDBG federal regulations. Specifically as the provision of public services Fair Housing Counseling is an eligible use under CFR 24.570.201 (e). Further, provision of Fair Housing Services is listed as an eligible program administration cost under CFR 24.570.206(c). Meeting Local CDBG Consolidated Plan Goals Staff finds that the FHCO proposal is consistent with Ashland's local CDBG 2005- 2009 Consolidated Plan: Goal 9: To affirmatively further fair housing. . 9.1 Establish a local means for citizens to get specific information about fair housing, and report fair housing violations. Review current fair housing violation process, improve as needed. (8) . 9.2 Develop and provide brochures and advertisements on how to file fair housing complaints (8). . 9.3 Continue to support the activities of the Fair Housing Council of Oregon (8). Performance Outcomes and Measures for Fair Housing goals: Improved public access to information about housing discrimination and fair housing rights and responsibilities . Number of existing or potential multifamily property owners provided with landlord responsibility materials relating to the Fair Housing Act. . Number of educational opportunities provided to the Citizenry including seminars, television broadcasts and informational items within City publications sent as direct mail to all households in Ashland. . Number of individuals assisted in reporting fair housing violations. In evaluating the proposal and the Fair Housing goal above the classification of "B" as a priority next to each of the sub-goals indicates that although the City did not directly anticipate using CDBG funds for such an activity it is an acceptable application (see A, B, C key below). Further, Goal 9.3 explicitly states supporting the activities of FHCO is something the City may support with CDBG funding in affirmatively furthering Fair Housing. A: The City of Ashland plans to use CDBG funds for projects that meet these needs. B: The City of Ashland may use COBG for projects that meet these needs [emphasis added]. C: The City of Ashland does not plan to use CDBG funds for projects meeting these needs but will consider certifications of consistency for other entities which are applying for federal assistance to meet these needs. Additionally such needs may also be addressed by the City through the allocation of Economic Development and or Social Service Grants from the City General Fund. Department of Community Development Tel: 541-488-5305 20 E. Main St Fax: 541-552-2059 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.or.us ~~, 2008 CDBG Proposals- Staff Evaluation pg5 CDBG Proiect Proposal RatinQ Criteria The final step in the process of evaluating the proposals typically is for the Housing Commission to apply the following compliance criteria to determine which project(s) best meet the City's spending priorities. However as the City only received one proposal in the 2008 year establishing a rank is irrelevant as no comparison with alternative proposals is possible. However the categories proposed do provide a valuable way for individual Commissioners to gauge the effectiveness of the proposal in meeting City objectives. A. The Project provides benefit to a demographic group that has a need documented in the City of Ashland CDBG Consolidated Plan B. The project assists low and moderate-income households in substantially improving their living conditions. The proposed project must have or be part of a comprehensive approach that takes clients from the beginning to the end of the process that improves their living conditions. "Safety net" services. or services that meet basic needs shall only be funded if it can be demonstrated that clients receiving those benefits are part of a program that will eventually help them obtain self sufficiency. Exceptions to this requirement are projects targeted at helping people with special needs. C. The project is a proven effective strategy to improve conditions or solve an identified problem. D. If the project is related to affordable housing, the project retains the units as affordable. The longer the period of time the units remain affordable, the higher ranking the project shall be given E. If the project is related to economic development for jobs for low and moderate-income people, at least 51% of the jobs shall be held by low and moderate income people. The longer period of time the jobs are held by low and moderate- income persons, the higher the ranking the project shall be given. The larger percentage of jobs held by low and moderate-income persons the higher the ranking the project shall be given. F. The project maximizes partnerships in the community G. The project has at least 10% of the total project in matching funds. The larger the amount of matching funds the higher the ranking the project shall be given H. The project utilizes already existing resources in effective and innovative ways. The project shall not duplicate service provided by another organization I. The agency submitting the proposal has the capacity to carry out the project J. The budget and time line are well thought out and realistic K. The proposal demonstrates CDBG funds are the most appropriate funding source for the project L. The project is ready for implementation within a year of a CDBG award notification M. The organization proposing the project has the experience and capacity to undertake the proposed activity. Staff Recommendation Staff sees that FHCQ's proposal is an eligible use of CDBG funds and is consistent with the City of Ashland Strategies as outlined in the 5 year Consolidated Plan for use of CDBG funds. The proposed activity provides vital assistance toward meeting our goal of affirmatively furthering fair housing, and in doing so will assist Ashland residents in understanding their rights and responsibilities under fair housing law. . Staff recommends an award of $10,000 to the Fair Housing Council of Oregon for the proposed Fair Housing Project. UnreQuested funds In the event FHCO is awarded $10,000 the City will still have an unallocated remainder of $346,522 in our HUD line of credit. The city has not received any funding requests in 2008 to meet the objective of providing of affordable ownership and/or rental housing. In support of these goals (Goals 1,2, and 3 in the Consolidated Plan) staff believes the City must actively work with community groups and organizations to identify a project whereby this goal and objective can be achieved in the 2008 fiscal year. As the City of Ashland is the recipient of funds from HUD, we can act directly to apply funds to projects that meet our Consolidated Plan goals. Once a project is identified in which the $346,522 would be contributed, it will be incumbent upon the Department of Community Development Tel: 541-488-5305 20 E. Main SI Fax: 541-552-2059 Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.or.us r~' 2008 CDBG Proposals- Staff Evaluation pg6 City to modify the annual Action Plan to reference the specific project and hold public hearings regarding the proposed use of the CDBG funds. The accumulation of unexpended funds from prior program years means we will exceed the maximum balance of CDBG funds permitted by HUD (no more than 1.5 times an annual allocation) upon receiving Ashland's 2008 allocation in July of this year. Should the City have a balance of 1.5 times our annual allocation on June 30, 2009 (one year after being found untimely) HUD sanctions can include recapture of unspent funds exceeding the 1.5 cap. In addition to the unexpended competitive award amount of $356,522, the City also has $83,363 unexpended in administration funds (2007 and 2008) which can only be drawn down after the primary allocation is expended. These two amounts combine for a total of $439,885 in our HUD line of credit available as of July 1, 2008. Given the 1.5 threshold, and our annual allocation most recently being $204,831, we must expend a minimum of $132,638 by the timeliness test on June 30, 2009 to avoid potential sanctions and loss of allocated funds. Staff believes the City can expedite the expenditure of all un-requested CDBG funds through application on qualified projects in this program year and ensure we are not found untimely by the program year's end. Potential projects that would be eligible uses of the unallocated CDBG funds include: 1) Public facility improvements within public right of ways. This use would include the installation of street improvements in low-income neighborhoods or in direct support of a specified affordable housing project. The existing affordable housing project at the terminus of Chitwood Lane along Clay Creek is one such development that could benefit through the extension of a street. Further, other land acquisitions in support of affordable housing could be assisted through a contribution of CDBG toward street improvements necessary to support the future affordable housing. 2) Land Acquisition for an affordable housing development. This application of funds is the most familiar to the City of Ashland, where following prerequisite environmental reviews a property is purchased in whole or in part with the available CDBG funds. Given past subsidy for affordable units has typically ranged between $40,000 and $50,000 per unit, it is anticipated an expenditure of $346,522 could assist in the development of up to 8 units. 3) Rehabilitation of housing to be secured as affordable. As an example of this use The Housing Authority of Jackson County (HAJC)has submitted a letter to the City indicating that they are working to acquire the Stratford Apartments, a 52 unit affordable housing complex on Clay Street, to maintain them as affordable housing. The application of CDBG to assist with rehabilitation of these units, and thereby extend their term of use as affordable housing, would be an eligible use of the funds. As the rehab costs are estimated to be between $750,000 and $1,000,000, this application of CDBG funds is one potential means of expending the funds within the program year in the event HAJC is successful at acquiring the property. Department of Community Development Tel: 541-488-5305 20 E. Main St Fax: 541-552-2059 Ashland. Oregon 97520 TTY: 800-735-2900 www.ashland.or.us r~' 2008 CDBG Proposals- Staff Evaluation pg7 r~' CITY OF ASHLAND 2007 Program Year Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Application These completed Sheets shall be included as the first pages on all submittals. I. APPLICANT INFORMATION Applicant Organization Name: Fair Housing Council of Oregon Executive Director's Name(s): Molov K. Good Board Member Names (attach separate sheet) Applicant Mailing Address: 1020 SW Taylor Street, Suite 700 Portland, OR 97205 Applicant Street Address: Same as above IRS Classification: 501 (c)(3l Federal Tax 10#: 93-0144769 Mission Statement: (may be attached) The Fair Housing Council of Oregon's (FHCO) mission is to eliminate illegal housing discrimination in Oregon and Southwest Washington. FHCO is a private non-profit organization, and we accomplish our goal through education, outreach and enforcement of fair housing laws. Total Employees: 9 Total Volunteers: 0 II. CONTACT PERSON (designate a contact person who is familiar with the project) Name: Moloy K. Good Title: Actin!:! Executive Director Phone Number: (503) 402-1157 Fax Number: (503) 223-3396 E-mail Address: mkQood@fhco.orQ III. PROJECT INFORMATION SUMMARY Project Name or Title: Fair Housing Proiect Expected Completion Date: 6/30/2009 Funds from Other Sources: $10,000 $3000 $0 $13,000 Requested CDBG Funds: Organizational Match: Total Project Cost: of Oregon 1020 SW Taylor Street, Suite 700 . Portland, Oregon 97205 Phone: 503-223-8295 or 1-800-424-3247 (TTY) . Fax: 503-223-3396 Visit us at: www.fhco.org . EmaiJ: information@fhco.org Application Contents A complete proposal shall include a brief narrative summary on applicant letterhead, full project cost, all federal, state and local subsidies requested for the project, proposed ownership entity, phone number and mailing address of contact person for the designated non-profit or certified Community Housing Development Organization. 1) Complete Application Form (see page 16). 2) A project summary including a brief description, project background and a list of project o bj cctives The Fair Housing Project will provide fair housing services, including outreach, education, and enforcement, to residents of Ashland, Oregon. FHeO will provide services to low and moderate-income tenants and other housing consumers, to housing providers, and to advocates and service providers afthis targeted population. We coordinate outreach training, and enforcement with The Center for Non-Profit Legal Services and other local agencies. 3) Property and Project Information relating to acquisition, rehabilitation, site clearance, and development (section not applicable for social service applications involving direct services to qualified low- or extremely low- income persons) Not Applicable 4) Briefly describe the services to be provided, if any, and describe the eligible target population receiving direct benefit from these services (low-income, homeless, special needs). Services FHCO operates a tollfi.eefair housing complaint hotline in the service area. FHCO staff specialists screen calls for fair housing issues and then provide complaint evaluation and/or technical assistance to callers who may be housing consumers or providers. lv1ediation is provided if it is determined that this will infonnally resolve the concerns of the parties to a housing trc/nsoction. FHeD pe~forms paired testing and other types of investigations as necessary to determine ifan allegation of discrimination can be substantiated. Fair housing testing is a method of showing credible and independent evidence that a housing provider illegally discriminated against another person, based upon the complainant's protected class. In a test, two or more trained individuals, who are matched in all characteristics (income, age, credit history, etc.) except for the protected class factor, contact the housing provider to inquire about renting or buying a dwelling unit. The testers report their observations to staff at FHCD in aformat which is specialized to assure the objectivity of the tester's experience. Staff members compare each tester's reported treatment to determine if it supports a complainant's elaim. FRCD is aU. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development qualifiedfair housing testinf.; organization (QFHD). Not all complaints can be tested. In some situations, FRCD works with callers to request a reasonable accommodation or modification from a housing provider because of the housing consumer's disability. In other situations, FHCD may conduct other types of investigation (such as interviewing witnesses). FHCD refers fair housing complainants to appropriate resources, including the Center for Non-Profit Legal Services, members of our attorney pool, and government enforcement agencies. FHCD will provide two general fair housing training sessions per year for housing providers, housing consumers, government agencies, housing advocates and social services providers of the City of Ashland. These two-hour workshops, suitable for tenants, landlords, agency staff, and others, will inform attendees about their rights and responsibilities under fair housing law. FHCD will also providejocused training to staff of one social service agency that serves clients in the service area. This workshop will address how fair housing laws may affect their clients. In addition to these workshops, FHCD will provide general fair housing information and technical assistance to Ashland landlords and others who call our office. From time-to- time, FHCO provides other workshops in Jackson County. These other workshops will be reflected as in-kind contributions for this project. Beneficiaries Beneficiaries of our program are those people who are victims of housing discrimination based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, disability, family status, marital status or source of income. The assistance we provide with reasonable accommodations for disabilities is especially beneficial to areas with a population of retirees and others who are aging in place. As part of our screening process, FRCO gathers income and family size data. FHCD staff then compares this data with the appropriate income guidelines to determine whether or not the householdfalls at or below 80% of median family income. 5) A work program and time line including a complete list of tasks with estimated start and completion of each task (please complete attached Fom1 A - Project Schedule). See Attached Form A-Project Schedule 6) Financial Information A budget describing total cost, cost per task; existing (secured) project funds and unfunded costs. Identify any and all source(s) of funding. This would include other Federal and State grants and loans, monetary donations, in-kind contributions, volunteer labor, donation of materials and supplies, etc. In addition to addressing the questions below please complete attached Form B - Uses of Funding & Form C - Sources of Funding. See Attached Form B-Uses of Funding & Form C-Sources of Funding Provide a detailed financial description of the proposed project, including Rent Schedule, Sources/Uses of Funding and Operating Budget Income/Expense, and utility allowances a) Describe the assumptions used to detennine the total project cost. Indicate the sources consulted and how costs were determined. FlICO based its assumptions on the total project cost on our past experience providing these services throughout Oregon and southwest Washington. The costfor materials is based on the current cost to FlICO to produce them. JvJarketing and outreach costs include mileage, accommodation and per diem costs for conducting trainings, and were based on current costs for those items. The wages were based on FIICO 's current staff salaries and the estimated ajnount of time staffwill spend on the project. This includes time spent answering hotline calls from Ashland residents, or prospective residents, investigating fair housing complaints, conductingfair housing trainings, and travel time to andfrom Ashland. b) Was consideration given to remaining economic life of the property and potential cost increases such as unanticipated repair or relocation costs? Maintenance costs? Operating costs? (not applicable for social service applications involving direct services to qualified low- or extremclylow- income persons) Not Applicable c) Describe the financial assumptions used to develop the operating budget. Include projected rent increases, other sources of income for operation and maintenance expenses, and inflationary factors. For social service award requests please include financial assumptions relating to increases in wages, materials and overhead, or other costs associated with the proposed activity. The cost for materials is based on the current cost to FIICO to produce them. Marketing and outreach costs include mileage, accommodation and per diem costs for conducting trainings, and were based on current costs for those items. The project does not anticipate an increase in wages or other costs. d) Discuss non-typical expenses or those outside industry standards. All costs includedfor this project are typical and inside industry standards. 7) Eligibility for Federal Funding Will any of the following activities be part of the proposed project? . Property Acquisition . New Constmction (non-residential) . Removal of Architectural Barriers . Rehabilitation Costs . Development Costs . Client Services General Information a) Is the proposed project within the Ashland City limits? If not, explain. The proposed project is within Ashland City limits. We receive funds fi'om other CDBG entitlement jurisdictions for those areas and from the State of Oregon for non-entitlement areas, including Jackson County outside of the Ashland city limits. b) Specify the proposed tenant or client income level; state in terms of percentage below area median for the Medford-Ashland standard metropolitan statistical area (MSA). The current income guidelines are included on page 10 above. FRCO estimates that 90% of tenants contacting us will be below 80% of area median income. Of that amount, 50% will be below 60% area median income, and 50% will be below 30% of area median incorne c) Describe any financial or legal commitments made to the project. FRCO has committed an in-kind contribution to cover the total cost of this project. No other financial or legal commitments have been made. 8) Briefly describe the agency's mission and service history. The City may request copies of the agency's financial audit or review for the last two years prior to contract signing in order to determine agency's capability to successfully complete the project. The Fair Housing Council o/Oregon '.'I (FlICO) mission is to eliminate illegal housing discrimination in Oregon and Southwest Washington. F'HCO is a private non-profit organization, and we accomplish our goal through education, outreach and enforcement of fair housing laws. We have performed similar types of activities throughout Oregon and SW Washington, with varying project foci, for more than 15 years. 9) Will the project promote self-sufficiency for extremely low-, low- moderate-income families, or individuals with special needs? The proposed project will promote self-sufficiency for individuals with special needs by assisting them in getting reasonable accommodations that allow them to equalize housing opportunities. Collaborating with landlords to create reasonable adjustments in rules allows disabled tenants to acquire and maintain housing to the same extent as tenants without disabilities. FlIca's empowerment model of services promotes self-stiffzciencyfor all clients. By engaging clients in gathering information and making choices in the pursuit of their fair housing claims, as well as by providingfair housing information to all callers, we encourage the individuals we serve to understand and protect their right to fair housing. 10) Please identify how your project benefits extremely low-, low- and moderate-income individuals or individuals with special needs. a) For proposed projects serving a low-income area (ie public facility improvements, community center or other neighborhood serving facility), provide the following data, including documentation of the sources of information for the following statistics: . Number of extremely low-, low- and moderate-income individuals served in the project area on an annual basis. . Total number of individuals served in project area on an annual basis. Not Applicable b) For proposed projects serving a target population (i.e. homeless families, battered women, people with AIDS, special needs populations, etc.) provide the following data, including document sources of infomlation for statistics. . Specify the target population to be served. FlIca 's proposal does not target specific populations. However, FHCO routinely receives calls from, and provides assistance to, the following targeted populations: racial, ethnic and sexual minorities, immigrant populations, homeless families, battered women, people with disabilities (including people with HIV/AIDS and special needs populations) . Number oflow and moderate-income individuals in target population to be served on an annual basis. (This count camlot include repeated visits or use by the same individuals. ) FlIca anticipates serving 50 non-repeating individuals through this project. As staled in answer to Question 7(b) above, approximately 90% of these individuals (45) will be below 80% AMI (moderate), and 50% of that number (22 or 23) will be below 60% AMi (low). . Total number of individuals in target population to be served on an arumal basis. FHCO anticipates serving 50 non-repeating individuals through this project. . Percent low and moderate income. 90% 11) Briefly describe how your proposal will ensure that moderate-income individuals do not benefit to the exclusion of extremely-low or low-income individuals. FHCO's performance under the Enforcement Program depend) on receipt offair housing complaints. Under this contract, activities are driven by complaints from low and moderate- income individuals who live in or are seeking housing in the service area. The Enforcement Program already exists and is set up to handle complaints. Therefore, there is no start-up time necessary for this contract. Outreach to the program area will occur in co,?junction with other projects such as brochure mailings or when collaborative outreach opportunities arise. To assure that extremely-low and low-income individuals can access our services FHCO operates a toll-free hotline throughout the state of Oregon, including Ashland. Residents are encouraged to contact FHCO via this hotline. FHCO is also capable of communicating and receiving documents by fax machine as well as e-mail. 5,'ince FHeO provides its services throughout Oregon, we have developed expertise at how to communicate with and contact people in remote and isolated areas. Outreach to tenants and other consumers about their civil rights and the procedure to investigate and adjudicate illegal housing discrimination complaints is an important part of the enforcement process. Without continuous outreach, fewer people would know to call FHCO 's hot line. Therefore, FHCO also spreads the word about fair housing through a variety of means, such as brochure and poster distribution to libraries and other public places, PSA's and interviews on local radio (both English and Spanish language stations), periodic appearances on cable access television, and other outreach methods. FHCO has already built a strong relationship with Rogue Valley Community Television 12) Indicate if you expect the project to cause low and moderate-income housing to be demolished or converted to another use (see attachment "Relocation Strategy Guidance"). If so, explain. Not Applicable 13) Project Feasibility Please describe your readiness to proceed concerning whether land use issues have been resolved and whether your organization has the administrative capacity to complete the project proposed. Describe the feasibility of the project: a) Does the applicant have the experience and capacity to complete and or manage the project proposed? Briefly describe applicants capacity and experience in providing, maintaining and managing housing, particularly low-income housing similar to the proposed project. FHCO has successfully performed more than thirteen grants for HUD under the Fair Housing Initiatives Program. Three of the current nine staffmembers (including the executive director) have worked for the FHCO for more than three years. During this time, each of these individuals has participated in numerous aspects of projects that were similar in scope and purpose throughout our service delivery area. FHCO's Enforcement staff has substantial experience in operating our hotline, and screening calls for potential fair housing complaints. FHCO's Testing Coordinator will have been at that position for over a year by the time this grant begins. Previously she served as an administrative law judge for the State of Oregon Employment Department, and prior to that she was a staff attorney for Legal Aid Services of Oregon. FHCO's intake specialists have worked on over 100 fair housing cases, and have developed excellent skills in identifying and investigating fair housing complaints. FHCO's Education and Outreach staff conducts several hundred educational workshops each year in areas covered by our funding sources, and provide education and information to thousands of housing providers, consumers and advocacy agency staff members each year. Additionally, we have produced and dubbed numerous videos, archived and done web streaming of video productions, pelformed webcast trainings and have collaborated with schools throughout our service area for the past ten years on a statewide poster contest for students. FHCO's Executive Director and Education Director have a combined total of more than 30 years of project management. This experience includes but is not limited to project administrative oversight and reporting; personnel, records andfinaneial management; and reporting to boards and funding representatives. FlICO staff and management regularly gather data on all FHCO clients and workshop attendees in order to verify income, demographic, and residential data for service delivery eligibility, accounting, and reporting purposes. Both individuals routinely have contact with elected officials to provide input and information regarding housing related issues and are recognized community resources due to this public activity. b) Are the ongoing operating expense and maintenance reserve estimates reasonable? The ongoing operating expenses are reasonable. There are no maintenance reserve estimates required. c) Does the applicant have a purchase option on the property, letter of support from the property owner(s), or some other assurance that the property is available for acquisition? Not Applicable d) Does the project require temporary or pennanent relocation and if so have comparable units been identified and costs of relocation been accurately determined? Provide a tenant relocation strategy, cost estimate and existing tenant survey to address federal Uniform Relocation Act requirements which may impact your project. Not Applicable e) Describe relocation strategy for the project. Not Applicable 1) Does the project require land use approvals such as Site Review, Annexation, Zone Change, Minor Land Partition, Demolition, or Conditional Use permits? Not Applicable g) Has a pre-application been completed with the Ashland Planning Department? Not Applicable h) What is the condition of any improvements on the property and what is the expected life of the property? Not Applicable i) Describe commitment of project funding from other sources FHCO has committed an in-kind contribution to cover a portion of the total cost of this project. No other sources offunding are being sought. 14) Indicate whether the project will have any negative impacts on historic or architecturally significant properties on the environment. All projects will be subjected to an Environmental Review Report and certain projects depending on scale, i.e. new construction, must undergo an EnvirOlU11ental Assessment. Not Applicable 15) Please attach any other statistical data, letters of support, applicable experience of the sponsor, evidence of financial support from other funding sources, or other material you believe will assist the City in its review of your proposal. A statistically significant phone survey conducted by the State of Oregon of entitlement jurisdiction residents showed that only 49% of individuals surveyed believed it was illegal to steer people to particular neighborhoods based on the person's national origin. Additionally, only 51 % believe it is illegal to refuse to rent to families with children, and only 54% believe such discrimination should be illegal. In fact, the survey consistently shows that knowledge affair housing laws in entitlement areas lags that in non- entitlement areas on issues ranging from familial status discrimination, illegal steering based on race/national origin, charging different interest rates based on national origin, the right of a person in a wheelchair to build a ramp into their apartment; and refusing to offer a rental to people because of their religion. The Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries (the state agency with enforcement authority) for many years after the addition offamilial status as a protected class in 1988 did not enforce these complaints claiming budget constraints prevented augmenting their enforcement staff to accommodate the increase in complaints. This gave unscrupulous and/or uninformed Oregon housing providers the impression that they could continue to refuse to rent to families with children. Because many families were not aware of the legal changes, they continued to believe this form of discrimination was acceptable. The state survey mirrors a similar national survey and leads us to interpret this as evidence that this attitude is also prevalent in the City of Gresham. During the past 15 years of providing education and outreach to housing consumers, providers and advocates for protected class populations, we have learned a lot about reaching our targeted groups. We have learned that housing consumers seldom attend informational trainings about their rights unless they are already in a crisis situation, which may then be too late for enforcement of their rights to prevent homelessness and/or derogatory rental/credit issues from attaching to their history. We have learned that most of the housing providers who are affiliated with professional trade organizations operate their business in ways that fulfill their legal and ethical obligations. Conversely, we have learned that many landlords who own and/or operate only one or a handful of rental units, and are unaffiliated with professional trade associations are among the most uninformed and egregious violators of the rights of the consumers. We have also identified advocacy agency staff members as gatekeepers for initial indications of housing consumers' rights violations. And, interestingly enough, we have discovered that school children are more likely than their parents to spot fair housing and landlord - tenant violations by housing providers (when the children receive education about these laws). We have also learned that while many individuals may not read materials that are given to them (because they lack the time, the skill, the linguistic ability, the interest, etc.) they are likely to watch a television program or video about the subject with great interest. The state survey additionally identified that nearly 44% of the individuals surveyed would lookfor fair housing information on the internet. Illegal discrimination limits access to housingfor people of color, immigrants, people with disabilities, families with children, and other protected class populations. The U S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development recognizes this problem in its mandate to states and other CDBG entitlement jurisdictions by directing them to affirmativelyfurther fair housing in their jurisdiction. 16) CDBG Application Checklist (see pages 23-24). Attach Forms A, B, & C. CITY OF ASHLAND 2005 Program Year CDBG APPLICATION CHECKLIST In order to determine compliance with all applicable HUD regulations and to help to ensure that projects will be eligible for CDBG funding, the City of Ashland will need to address all HUD requirements. The purpose of this checklist is to point out areas where potential problems could arise. Obviously, this is a comprehensive list, which must evaluate a wide array of different kinds of proposals. Therefore, not every item will be applicable to every project. Please fill it out entirely indicating all items which are not applicable and include it as part of your proposal application. A. Applicant's Background Yes No N/A 1. Is the applicant a legal non-profit organization or unit X of government? 2. Do the proposed clients or users of the project meet X HUD Income Guidelines (see page 10 for guidelines)? 3. Does applicant have the capability to maintain written X income documentation? 4. Has the applicant made a legal or financial X commitment to a proposed project? 5. Is the applicant primarily a religious organization? X 6. Has the applicant administered a COBG project X oreviouslv? 7. Is your agency willing and able to provide all required X reports and accountability to the City as required by HUD? B.PrQiect .location and land Use Issues Yes No N/A 1. Has a location for the project been selected? X 2. Is the proposed project within the Ashland City X limits? 3. Does the proposed project meet local zoning and X land use laws? -~- _.....-'-_.~- 4. Are any land use permits such as a Site Review, X partition, annexation or Conditional Use Permit required? " -. 5. Have these approvals been obtained? X n...,__._" 6. Does the project comply with current building code IX requirements? 7. Does the project meet handicapped accessibility X requirements? .- C. Environmental Issues Yes No NJA 1. Is the project located in the 1 OO-year floodplain? X 2. Is a wetland located on the project site? X 3. Has any environmental contamination been identified X on the proiect site? 4. Has asbestos been identified on the project site? X 5. If project involves an exiting structure, was it built X 1978 or earlier? If year built is known, please specify. 6. Is the proposed project located on a major arterial or X near the railroad? 7. Is the proposed project located adjacent to an above X qround flammable storage tank? 8. Does the proposed project involve a structure that is X 50 years or older? 9. Will the applicant complete a Phase I environmental X review upon receivinq a CDBG award? D. labor Requirements Yes No NJA 1. Does the project involve construction over $2,000 in X cost? 2. Will the project trigger Davis-Bacon wage X requirements? I 3. Will the project trigger BOll wage requirements? X 4. Does the project involve over $15,000 in City X awarded Qrants or contracts? E. DisDlacementand .Relocation Yes No NJA 1. Will tenants be displaced by the project? X 2. Will a business be displaced by the project? X 3. Will housing units be demolished or converted? X F. Property Data Yes No NJA 1. Does the applicant own the property by fee simple X title? 2. Are taxes on the property current? X 3. Is insurance current? X 4. What is the current debt against the property? X 5. What is the current use of the property? X 6. Has an appraisal on the property been conducted? X If yes, what is the assessed value of the property? Form A-2 To be co'mpleted for Social Service Proposals S . IS P oCla ervlces roposa s Activity Start Date Completion Date Initiation of direct client 7/1/2008 6/30/2008 1 seNices Outreach for fair housing 7/1/2008 4/30/2008 trainings -,~_._~--_?_= ,----,-_. E[oviQ.e fair housing traini~.g~ 8/1/2008 6/30/2008 _,~m.__m__~.~....<< social services provides should list key benchmarks in the table above for their proposed projects (IE hire of personel, application for further funding, initiation of direct client services, etc) Form B-2 To be completed for Social Service Proposals Social Service. roposals Total Cost CDBG Request Other Source(s) Direct Client Services Wages (of personal $9051 $9051 $0 providing direct client services) Materials/Supplies $300 $210 $90 Marketing/Outreach $1000 $739 $261 Program Administration $2649 CDBG Funds $2649 Includes overhead and general are not staffing necessary to administer the available for program (accounting, management, grant administration) but that does program not provide direct benefits to the client. administration Total Project Cost $13,000 $10,000 $3000 p Form C SOURCE(S} OF FUNDS FOR OPERATING EXPENSES WORKSHEET Completeness of this worksheet establishes the capacity of the organization to sustain the operations of the program(s). Sources Secured Conditional Tentative Commitment (awarded with Date conditions) Federal Grants -,-~--- State Grants Local Grants '''''.'.~. Non Governmental G ra nts Donations/Gifts Applicant Contribution Program Income $3000 7/1/2008 - Loans Other (specify) Other (specify) TOTAL Please provide a description the timeline of loan and grant application dates as related to the proposed project. Specifically, for any tentative funding sources please provide application dates, award dates and funding availability dates. Not Applicable Form D DISCLOSURE OF INTERESTS To assist the City of Ashland in determining whether there may be a potential conflict of interest related to the expenditure of Community Development Block Grant funds we request the following information be provided by applicants: ORGANIZATION NAME: Fair Housing Council of OreQon Organization is: 1. Corporation ( ) 2. Non-Profit 501 C3 (X) 3. Partnership ( ) 4. Sole Owner ( ) 5. Association ( ) 6. Other ( ) DISCLOSURE QUESTIONS If additional space is necessary, please attach a separate sheet. 1. State the names of each "employee" of the City of Ashland having a financial or personal interest in the above mentioned "organization" or project proposed. Name, Job Title and City Department None 2. State the name(s} of any current or prior elected or appointed "official", of the City of Ashland having a potential "financial interest" in the organization or project. NamelTitle None 3. Provide the names of each "board member" of the Organization seeking CDBG funding Name Board, Commission, or Committee (may be attached as a separate Sheet) 1 See Attached 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 additional If the applicant has provided names in question 1 or 2, please provide details regarding any known potential conflicts of interest in an attached narrative. Position Name Vocation President LeRoy Patton Retired, Portland Public Schools Administrator Vice- Charles D. Hauk Resident SeNices Director, Housing and Comm. SeNices President Agency (HACSA) of Lane Co. Secretary Janet Hawkins Staff Assistant, Multnomah Co. Commission on Children, Families. and Community Treasurer Charlie Harris Housing Developer, CASA of Oregon Member J Norton Cabell Private Consultant and Property Owner, Cabell Enterprises Member John Van Attorney, Lane Co. Law and Advocacy Center Landingham Member Miranda Byrd City Planning Member Kris McVicar Washington Mutual Member W. Jody Heady Architect, Housing and Comm. SeNices Agency (HACSA) of Lane Co. HOUSING AUTHORITY OF JACKSON COUNTY 2251 TABLE ROCK ROAD MEDFORD OR 97501 PHITDD (541) 779.5785 FAX (541) 857.1118 / FAX 779.4656 February 19, 2008 Brandon Goldman City of Ashland Planning Dept. 20 East Main St. Ashland, OR 97520 Re: Scenic Heights Dear Mr. Goldman The Housing Authority reviewed with great interest the City's CDBG Request for Proposals for Affordable Housing Projects. The Authority is acutely aware of Ashland's ever increasing need to increase and preserve the existing supply of affordable housing and applaud the City in its efforts to accomplish this goal through the CDSG Program. It's therefore with regret we are presently unable to respond to the City's RFP with a comprehensive proposal. Please be aware, the Authority is actively pursuing affordable housing opportunities within Ashland at present time. In fact we are currently pursuing an affordable housing acquisition and preservation project, known as Stratford Arms, located on Clay Street. This project is an existing USDA, Rural Development subsidized project consisting of fifty-one (51) low to extremely low-income dwelling units. The present owner of the project has expressed interest in selling this project to a local, not for profit, housing provider. The Authority may have the ability to negotiate the acquisition of this project within the next six months following the presentation of a formal incentive offer made by USDA, Rural Development to the present owner. Acquisition of this property would require rehabilitation of the project's 28-year old dwelling units. Required rehabilitation costs are estimated at $750,000 to $1,000,000. CDSG funds combined with Low Income Housing Tax Credit (L1HTC) equity could be a great asset to accomplish this work. The uncertaintities surrounding the early predevelopment stage of this potential project however prohibits our ability to present a comprehensive proposal for CDBG funds to the City at present time. As you're aware the Authority is also seeking developable land within Ashland to accommodate new construction of affordable housing units. The Authority realizes CDBG funds could also be a valuable financial tool for land acquisition upon a successful purchase option. On behalf of the Housing Authority's development staff, please allow me to express appreciation for continued interest and support in the provision and preservation of affordable housing within the Ashland Community. We look forward to continuing our collaboration in achieving this mutually significant goal and would appreciate continued notification of available housing finance opportunities should they become available. Scott Foster Executive Director G) tQU,t." ~OVSlttG O"'''O''-lVttllY CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Fee Increases for City-Owned Facilities Meeting Date: Department: Secondary Dept. Approval: April 1, 2008 Ashland Parks and Recreation N/A City Council Primary Staff Contact: E-Mail: Secondary Contact: Estimated Time: Rachel Teige teiger@ashland.or.us Don Robertson 10 minutes Question: Will the City Council authorize the increase of fees for the Ashland Community Center, Pioneer Hall, and The Grove facilities to recover 50% of operations and maintenance expenses? Staff Recommendation: Staff, along with the Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission, recommends increasing fees for the use of these facilities. Background: A review of fees and charges began two years ago when the Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission set a goal of reviewing all fees and charges each November. In fall 2007, the Commission began another round of discussions on fees and charges for all recreation programs and services. Topics in the study sessions included fees al)d charges related to the Calle Guanajuato, Nature Center, Ashland Senior Center, adult and youth recreation programs, indoor and outdoor reservable facilities, the Oak Knoll Golf Course, the Daniel Meyer Pool, and the Darex Family Ice Rink. Currently, the department is recovering 31 % of its expenses (average over all categories). During study sessions over the past few years, two goals remained at the forefront: 1. The goal of reaching a 50% recovery rate with small increases. 2. The goal of keeping the fee schedule as simple as possible. At its February 2008 regular meeting, the Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission approved increasing fees and charges related to most recreation programs and services and all facility rentals. The fees under discussion are those associated with City-owned facilities. These include the Ashland Community Center, Pioneer Hall, and The Grove. On behalf of the Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission, staff recommends approval of the proposed fee increases. Related City Policies: None Page I of2 CC-Fee Increases.doc ~A' CITY OF ASHLAND Council Options: 1. Approve recommendations proposed by the Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission. 2. Send back recommendations for adjustments. 3. Deny recommendations. No change to current fee structure. Potential Motions: Move to approve, on behalf of the Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission, the recommended fee and policy schedule for indoor facilities at a cost recovery of 50% beginning on July 1, 2008. Attachment: Rental fee sheet with proposed fee adjustments Page 2 of2 CC-Fee Increases.doc ~A' FACILITY Community Center Tables Chairs Capacity - Table seating Capacity - Chair seating / standing Pioneer Hall Tables Chairs Capacity - Table seating 56 Capacity - Chair seating / standing SECURITY DEPOSIT $ 150.00 - (refundable) RENTAL FEE SHEET HOURLY FEES Hourly/weekday: $13.00 Hourly/Weekend: $21.00 12 100 99 186 Hourly/weekday: $ 13.00 Hourly/Weekend: $21.00 10 100 99 ALCOHOL FEE $ 100.00 (non-refundable) ****************************************************** FACILITY The Grove - Full Facility Tables Chairs Capacity - Dancing / chair seating Capacity - Dinning / conference 135 The Grove - Conference. Room. Capacity-Conference seating SECURITY DEPOSIT $ 150.00 (refundable) HOURLY FEES Hr. Weekday: $27.00 Hr. Weekend: $32.00 12 150 290 Hr. Weekday $14.00 Hr. Weekend $16.00 49 ALCOHOL FEE $ 100.00 (non-refundable) ****************************************************** FACILITY Hunter Park. Sr. Center Capacity - Chair seating Capacity - Table seating Chairs Tables HOURLY FEES For-Profit - $14.00 Non-Profit - $12.00 98 46 80 8 SECURITY DEPOSIT $ 150.00 (refundable) * Alcohol is not allowed in the Hunter Park Senior Center * 50% $15.50 $25.00 $15.50 $25.00 All Security Deposits $180.00 All Alcohol Fees $120.00 $33.00 $40.00 $18.00 $20.00 $18.00 $16.00 50% Long:- Term User Rate $10.00 per hour iffacility is rented more than 6 times per year Long-Term Rate $12.00 LITHIA PARK WEDDINGS Wedding Package includes Lithia Park site and use of Pioneer Hall or Community Center all day. (7am-12pm) WEDDING PACKAGE $ 750.00 Wedding Package $900 Park Site Only $550 SECURITY DEPOSIT $ 50.00 (refundable) WEDDING PARK SITE ONLY $ 450.00 All Lithia Park Security Deposits $60.00 LITHIA PARK GROUP PICNIC SITES Cotton Memorial Area Capacity - 250 Madrone Picnic Area Capacity - 50 Top Southern Lawn Area Capacity - 25 Hillside Picnic Area Capacity - 25 $ 50.00 per 4 Hours $ 40.00 per 4 Hours $ 35.00 per 4 Hours $ 35.00 per 4 Hours Group Picnic Sites $60.00 $48.00 $42.00 $42.00 SECURITY DEPOSIT $ 50.00 (refundable) LITHIA PARK BUTLER BANDSHELL Butler Bandshell Performance Fee - $ 150.00 - Limit 8 Hours Butler Bandshell $179.00 SECURITY DEPOSIT $ 50.00 (refundable) ********************************************************************~ FIELD USAGE $24.00 Tournaments: $ 20.00 per team/per day $30.00 $12.00 Lights: $ 25.00 per day $ 10.00 per hour CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Meeting Date: Department: Secondary Dept.: Approval: Ashland Sanitary and Recycling Rate Increase April 1, 2008 Primary Staff Contact: Ann Seltzer Administration E-Mail: ann@ashland.or.us Finance/Admin Svcs. Secondary Contact: Lee Tuneberg Martha Bennett Estimated Time: 15 minutes Question: Does the Council wish to authorize a 9% rate increase for residential, commercial and medical waste services provided by Ashland Sanitary and Recycling? Staff Recommendation: Authorize the rate increase. Background: The City of Ashland entered into a franchise agreement, Ordinance 2582, with Ashland Sanitary & Recycling in 1990 and extended the agreement in 1998. Two rate increases have occurred since 1990: a 10% increase in 1995 and a 7.2% increase in 2004. In 1995, the City Council asked that customers not be given a discount for each additional trash can as a means of encouraging people to recycle. Ashland Sanitary is requesting a 9% rate increase for residential, commercial and medical waste services. Expenses associated with fuel, wages, disposal fees, health insurance and liability insurance have risen significantly since 2004 (see Appendix 1). Section 9 of Ordinance 2582 states "Ashland Sanitary Service, Inc. shall have the right each year to present to the City Council a petition for an increase in rates based upon an increase in the cost of rendering solid waste disposal services to the citizens of the City of Ashland". The current rate for a single residential trash can is $14.15. A 9% increase is $1.27 bringing the rate to $15.42. Ashland Sanitary & Recycling uses the Portland Area CPI to calculate its proposed rate increase. The Portland Area CPI, the only CPI published for goods and services in Oregon, has risen 11.5% since 2004 (Source: US Department of Labor west urban areas, series ID: CUUR0400SAO, CUDS0400SAO). The City of Ashland receives 5% of the franchise holder's gross receipts. At the current rate, the city receives approximately $125,000 per year. A 9% increase will generate approximately $136,250 per year in the general fund. Ashland Sanitary & Recycling would like to implement the new rates this month. Related City Policies: Ordinance 2582 Page 1 of2 040108 Ashland Sanitary.CC.doc r~' CITY OF ASHLAND Council Options: . Approve the rate increase. . Do not approve the rate increase. Potential Motions: . Move to authorize Ashland Sanitary & Recycling rate increase o(~~%. . Move to decline authorization for a rate increase of 9%. Attachments: . Letter of request from Ashland Sanitary and Recycling . Description of cost increases since 2004 (Appendix 1) . Rate comparisons with proposed rates (Appendix 2) . Recycle update (Appendix 3) . Discount programs (Appendix 4) . Draft Resolution . Franchise Ordinance Page 2 of2 040108 Ashland Sanitary.CC.doc ~A' 5ls1i{and Sanitary Service Co., Inc 170 Oak Street. Ashland, Oregon 97520 . (541) 482-1471 March 111h, 2008 Martha Bennet City of Ashland City Hall 20 E Main Street Ashland, Oregon 97520 Re: City of Ashland, Solid Waste Franchise Request for Rate Increase Ashland Sanitary Service Co., Inc. Dear Ms. Bennet: Gary and I appreciated the opportunity to meet with you and Lee on December 29th, 2007 to discuss our request for a rate increase in Ashland. Weare requesting a 9% increase in rates for residential, commercial and medical waste services provided within City Limits of Ashland. Section 9 of Ashland Sanitary's Franchise agreement with the City of Ashland provides that "Ashland Sanitary ... shall have the right ... to present to the City Council a petition for an increase in rates based upon increases in the cost of rendering solid waste disposal services to the Citizens of Ashland". Ashland Sanitary's last rate increase was in April of2004. Since then the Portland Conswner Price Index (PCPI) has risen 11.5%. Fuel costs per gallon have increased 139% during this time period. Wages.AND benefits have risen II.%. Our liability insurance and workmen's compensation rates have increased 35%. Our tipping fee at Dry Creek Landfill has increased 9.79%. Our health insurance has increased 14%. As a result Ashland Sanitary fmds itself unable to absorb these increases under our current rate structure. Included with this letter one will find appendices detailing our cost increases since April 2004, a rate sheet showing the current rates and the proposed new rates, our Recycling and Green Debris Programs to divert material, and a summary of our discount programs. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Gary and I would be pleased to meet with you and provide any additional information that may be helpful in your review. Respectfully, i~dRu~el;P/~ :Asfifancf Sanitary Service Co., Inc 170 Oak Street - Ashland, Oregon 97520 - (541) 482-1471 Appendix (1) Fuel per Gallon In December 2007 fuel per gallon was $3.44 In January 2004 fuel per gallori was $1.44 $2.00 has increased 139% Fuel Cost At the end of 2007 Ashland Sanitary fuel costs were $196,780 At the end of 2003 Ashland Sanitary fuel costs were $93.059 $103,721 has increased 111% Wo(!es and Benefits (401 J(,) In 2007 Ashland SanitarY paid employees $18.41 per hour In 2004 Ashland Sanitary paid employees $16.58 per hour $1.83 has increased 11 % Disposal Fee at Dn' Creek Landfm In 2007 the cost of disposal was $33.62 a Ton In 2004 the cost of disposal was $30.62 a Ton $3.00 has increased 9.79% Health Insurance In 2005,2006, and 2007 the average health insurance costs were $195,000 In 2004 the average health insurance costs were $171.000 $24,000 has increased 14% Liabililv Insurance and Workmen's Compensation In 2007 Ashland Sanitary paid out $85,00 In 2004 Ashland Sanitary paid out $63.00 $22,000 has increased 35% From 2004 thru 2007, new recycling trucks and packers were purchased at a cost of $271,000. During the same period $293,000 worth of recycle carts and glass bins were purchased and placed in service. Ashland Sanitary & Recycling Services Rate Comparison Appendix (2) Residential Container Rates Monthly Old Rate New Rate Medford 1 Can $14.15 $15.42 $14.19 2 Cans* $28.30 $30.85 $23.78 3 Cans $42.45 $46.27 $33.37 *In 1995, Council directed Ashland Sanitary not to offer a discount for additional cans as a means to encourage people to recycle. Commercial Container Rates 1- Yard Container (Medford does not offer this size) Once Weekly $71.93 Twice Weekly $118.51 Three times Weekly $165.09 Four times Weekly $211.67 Five times Weekly $258.24 Six times Weekly $304.82 $78.40 $129.18 $179.95 $230.72 $281.48 $332.25 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 11/2 Yard Container Once Weekly Twice Weekly Three times Weekly Four times Weekly Five times Weekly Six times Weekly $80.19 $137.38 $189.85 $247.04 $300.70 $355.53 $87.41 $149.74 $206.94 $269.27 $327.76 $387.53 $94.99 $153.89 $222.39 $290.93 $347.43 $394.30 2- Yard Container Once Weekly Twice Weekly Three times Weekly Four times Weekly Five times Weekly Six times Weekly $102.59 $179.27 $255.89 $333.12 $410.36 $485.83 $111.82 $195.40 $278.92 $363.10 , $447.29 $529.55 $123.83 $199.54 $283.72 $357.03 $430.34 $515.76 Drop Boxes 25- Yard Box daily rent 10- Yard box daily rent $242.54 $10.00 $144.72 $10.00 $264.37 $10.90 $154.74 $10.90 $359.47 27- Yard $6.18 $193.66 $6.18 Compactor Boxes 1 to 4-yard rear loader box IS-yard drop box 20-yard drop box 25-yard drop box 3D-yard drop box 22.94/Yard $274.94 $339.82 $404.68 $469.54 25.00/Yard $299.68 $370.40 $441.10 $511.80 27.52/Yard $412.80 $509.20 $636.50 $763.80 I 'Miscellaneous Rates 5-pack 5-pack 10-pack Senior Bags $21.44 $23.37 $48.20 Stickers $32.16 $35.05 N/A Green Waste $4.82 $4.68 $3.74 Medical Waste Pickup Rates 1- Gallon Sharps Container $12.86 $14.02 $15.93 2- Gallon Sharps Container $19.30 $21.04 $19.89 15- Gallon Sharps Container $18.22 $19.86 $28.90 34- Gallon Sharps Container $36.45 $39.73 $38.31 Appendix 3 .Jtsfi{and Sanitary Service Co., Inc 170 Oak Street - Ashland, Oregon 97520 - (541) 482-] 47] Green Debris Program In 2003 Ashland Sanitary recycled 1082 tons of yard waste In 2007 Ashland Sanitary recycled 2107 tons of yard waste That is a 95% increase and 21 % of customers participate in the program Curb Side Recycling In 2003 Ashland Sanitary recycled 2022 tons In 2007 Ashland Sanitary recycled 3364 tons That is a 66% increase and 73% of customers participate in the program Tonnage to Dry Creek In 2006 24,526 tons were taken to Dry Creek Landfill In 2007 23,745 tons were taken to Dry Creek Landfill That is a 3.1 % decrease Appendix 4 :As Ii (ana Sanitary Service Co., Inc 170 Oak Street. Ashland, Oregon 97520. (541) 482-1471 Discount Pro grams Pre-Paid Bags - This program is for customer's who do not need regular weekly service. These are pre-paid bags purchased at our office at 170 Oak St, Ashland. They come in a package offive. The bags are bright yellow so the driver is able to see them. Customers that live inside city limits currently pay $21.44 (proposed rate $23.37). Customers need to set out their trash for pick up on the same day as your area's trash pick-up by 7:00 am. In 2007, we sold 1,155 bags. Sticker clIstomers - The sticker program is for customers that do not generate large amounts of trash. The stickers are pre-paid and must be purchased at our office. Customers that live inside city limits currently pay $32.16 (proposed rate $35.05). They come in a package of five, have an adhesive back and are fluorescent, so they are easy to see. The customer uses their own trash can and when they have a full can they peel off the back of the sticker and stick it on the can and face it towards the street. Trash cans need to be set out for pick-up on the same day as your area's trash pick-up by 7:00 am. In 2007 we sold 3,190 stickers. New Programs - Curbside Leaf Bag Collection in November and December, Clearstream Lending Program, Compact Fluorescent Recycling, Ink Cartridge, Toner and Cell Phone Recycling, Free Nursery Plastics Recycling, Commercial Compost (pre-Consumer Fruit And Vegetable Scraps) Program, Plastic Tubs added to Commingle Carts, 2008 Master Recycle Program, Oregon Green Schools Program, Part of the Green Team for the AsWand Green Business Program. RESOLUTION NO. 2008- A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A RATE INCREASE FOR RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL AND MEDICAL WASTE SERVICES PROVIDED BY ASHLAND SANIT ARY & RECYCLING RECITALS: A. Ashland Sanitary & Recycling has a franchise with the City of Ashland to provide solid waste and recyclable materials collection and disposal services within the City. B. The Franchise agreement, Ordinance 2582, provides that Ashland Sanitary & Recycling can petition the City Council to increase its solid waste collection and disposal rates. c. The franchise requires that rate increases must be approved by Council resolution. THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS SECTION 1 The rates for the collection of residential, commercial and medical waste services and recyclable materials and disposal within the city of Ashland as indicated in Appendix 2 are approved. SECTION 2 The adopted rates will take effect in April 2008. SECTION 3 This resolution takes effect upon signing by the Mayor. This resolution was read by title only in accordance with Ashland Municipal Code. Duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of , 2008. Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this _ day of ,2008 John Morrison, Mayor Reviewed as to form: Richard Appicello, City Attorney ORDINANCE NO. ::z ~.?::z AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A FRANCHISE FOR THE COLLECTION OF SOLID WASTE, REFUSE AND MEDICAL WASTE WITHIN THE CITY OF ASHLAND, JACKSON COUNTY, OREGON TO ASHLAND SANITARY SERVICE, INC. FOR THE PERIOD FROM APRIL 1, 1990, TO MARCH 31, 2005; REGULATING THE DISPOSITION OF SOLID WASTE IN SAID CITY; PROVIDING A PENALTY FOR THE VIOLATION HEREOF; REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 2069 AND ANY AMENDMENTS THERETO; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That there is hereby granted to Ashland Sanitary service, Inc. the exclusive right, franchise and privilege of collecting, gathering and hauling over the streets of the City of Ashland, Jackson County, Oregon, all solid waste, refuse and medical waste accumulating in said city, with the right to exact charges and collect from persons, firms or corporations served as specifically hereinafter set forth, for the period from April 1, 1990, to March 31, 2005. SECTION 2. That the term "solid waste" as used herein shall be construed to mean every refuse accumulation of animal, fruit or vegetable matter, liquid or otherwise, ashes, tin cans, bottles, glass, medical waste, and discarded articles of similar matter. SECTION 3. That it is hereby made the duty of every person, firm or corporation within the limits of the city of Ashland to cause their solid waste accumulation to be removed through the year within the times specified as follows: (1) Residences and apartments - once every seven (7) days. (2) Hotels, restaurants, boarding houses, meat markets, grocery stores and other places where meats, fruits and vegetables are kept, sold or offered for sale, or where cooking is done for the public - twice every seven (7) days. (3) Medical facilities - within seventy-two (72) hours of disposal. (4) All other places - once every seven (7) days. SECTION 4. That every person, firm or corporation having garbage or medical waste for disposition, shall place all such matter in containers which shall be water-tight and fly-proof, and be placed in a location convenient for the collectors. SECTION 5. That it shall be unlawful for any other person, firm or corporation, excepting citizens hauling their own solid waste, and excepting the City of Ashland when the same is functioning in a governmental capacity hauling its own solid waste or refuse, to collect, gather and/or haul solid waste or refuse over the streets of the City of Ashland, Jackson County, Oregon, during the term of this franchise. SECTION 6. That all vehicles used by the said Ashland Sanitary Service, Inc. in the transportation of solid waste through the streets of the City of Ashland shall be so constructed and equipped so as to be water-tight and fly-proof, and which comply with all state laws and rules, regulations and requirements of the State of Oregon. SEC~ION 7. Any person, firm or corporation, whether as principal agent, employee or otherwise, violating or causing the violation of any of the provisions of this Ordinance, shall have committed an infraction, and upon conviction thereof is punishable as prescribed in Section 1.08.020 of the Ashland Municipal Code. Such a person, firm or corporation is guilty of a separate violation for each and every day during any portion of which any violation of this Ordinance is committed or continued by such person, firm or corporation. SECTION 8. The fees to be charged and collected, both as to residential and commercial customers, shall be in the amounts as hereafter approved by resolution of the city Council and which have been requested by Ashland sanitary service, Inc. SECTION 9. Ashland Sanitary Service, Inc. shall have the right each year to present to the City council a petition for an increase in rates based upon an increase in the cost of rendering solid waste disposal services to the citizens of the city of Ashland. The. same right shall exist where the regulations are changed concerning the operation of the landfill so as to cause an increase in capital outlay or operational expense of Ashland Sanitary Service, Inc., and this petition may be made at any time. In the event the parties cannot agree on the amount of a rate increase, if any, the matter shall be submitted to a board of arbitrators, one being selected by each party and a third by the first two arbitrators. The decision of the majority of the board shall be final and binding on the parties. The arbitrators shall be experienced people familiar with standard business practices. The third arbitrator shall be a Certified Public Accountant certified to audit municipal accounts. The arbitrators shall not be residents of the area served by Ashland Sanitary Service, Inc. In the event costs should decrease, the City Council shall have the same right to request a decrease in rates under the foregoing procedure. SECTION 10. In consideration for the granting of this exclusive franchise, franchise holders shall pay to the City of Ashland for and as a franchise fee, the sum of five percent (5%) of the franchise holder's gross receipts from revenues received for the services rendered to customers situated within the corporate limits of the City of Ashland. Said payments shall be made monthly, no later than the 20th day of the month following the month of service upon which the charge is predicated. Said payment shall be accompanied by a statement, subscribed to by an 3utho~ized representative of franchise holder, certifying the gross revenue. The city of Ashland reserves the right to perform such audits as it may from time to time desire for the sole purpose of ascertaining the accuracy and propriety of revenue representations. Said audits shall be done at reasonable times, and at the cost of the city of Ashland. SECTION 11. Ashland Sanitary Service, Inc. shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the city of Ashland, its officials and employees, from any claim arising from the performance of the service provided under the terms of this franchise; and further, shall maintain comprehensive general liability insurance in amounts not less than the statutory limits of tort liability of Oregon Municipalities as set forth in ORS 30.270, and shall provide certificates of said insurance to the city Finance Director. SECTION 12. The city reserves the right to grant franchises for collecting goods for recycling to other individuals, firms or corporations. If the city Council determines that it wishes to grant a franchise for such service, it shall first submit any proposal to Ashland sanitary Service, Inc. which shall have the first right of refusal of said franchise. SECTION 13. That in the event the said Ashland Sanitary Service, Inc. shall violate any of the agreements by it to be performed hereunder, then and in that event the city Council, upon giving the franchise holder and surety company thirty (30) days written notice of an alleged violation, in order that said franchise holder or surety may have an opportunity to explain or refute the same, may terminate this franchise and all rights of the franchise holders shall cease and its bond in the sum of Twenty-five Thousand Dollars ($25,000.00) shall be forfeited. The franchise holder is required to provide to the city of Ashland a bond in the sum of $25,000.00 securing its faithful performance of this franchise renewable annually, and a certificate of continuance filed with the city. SECTION 14. That Ordinance No. 2069 as amended and all other ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed. SECTION 15. The franchise holder agrees that its rights hereunder may not be assigned, sold, pledged or given in any manner to a third party, nor may any stock of the franchise holder corporation be sold, pledged or assigned in any manner without the consent of the city of Ashland first having been received, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. In the event there is a dispute as to any sale or transfer under this provision, then the matter shall be settled in the manner as provided for arbitration in section 9 hereof. SECTION 16. That inasmuch as the current franchise ordinance expired on April 1, 1990, the public interest requires that an emergency be declared, and this ordinance shall be effective upon its second reading and approval by the Mayor. The foregoing Ordinance was first read at a regular meeting of the City council on the .!;Cl. day of June, 1990, and DULY PASSED and ADOPTED this /1' l?'- day of \ .. -/-<r d...{" , 1990. /. '.' ~-/ -.L~;:" to -/Lk /-. tiitl'- Nan E. Franklin City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this.:1[ 1'7l day of ) .~~/.:f.;_ , 1990. ~ ~.l4~ Catherine M. Golden Mayor CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Meeting Date: Department: Secondary Dept.: Approval: Public Works Director Selection Process April 1, 2008 Primary Staff Contact: Martha J. Bennett Administration E-Mail: bennettm@ashland.or.us None Secondary Contact: Tina Gray Martha J. Bennett Estimated Time: 15 minutes Question: Does the Council have any feedback for staff about the proposed selection! interview process for the Public Works Director? ' Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends: · Holding a selection process that includes interview panels that include City representatives, citizen volunteers, and subject matter experts. Including an opportunity for the public to meet the candidates and provide feedback, including a brief presentation by each final candidate that could be televised. Including an opportunity for the candidates to meet department staff. · Including a thorough background check and site visit prior to extending a job offer to any candidate. Background: The City began advertising the position of Public Works Director in December 2007 after the resignation of Paula Brown. As you recall, the city extended the application deadline to March 21 because the first open period did not produce a sufficient number of candidates likely to be successful in Ashland. Staff has tentatively scheduled interviews for this position for April 17 and 18. Bobbi Peckam, the City's recruiter, will be recommending candidates to the Mayor and City Administrator after your Council meeting on April 1. If any conditions change we will notify the Council and public as soon as possible. Staff recommends that the April 17 and 18 process include the following elements: Opportunity to meet staff. As with the Police Chief interview, staff recommends that the final candidates have an opportunity to meet with key staff people to talk about the department and the key internal issues facing it. This has benefited both the candidates and department staff, and this likely will include other department directors. As with previous selections, staff can provide feedback, but will not be asked to recommend a candidate Reception and Presentation. Staff recommends that the City hold a Thursday evening function that includes both an informal reception that would allow people to meet the candidates personally and an opportunity for the candidates to make a five to seven minute presentation about themselves and the challenges of this position. These presentations could be televised. Page 1 of2 040108 Public Works Director Process.CC.doc r~' CITY OF ASHLAND Panel Interviews. Staff recommends that on Friday, the City conduct formal interviews with two panels. Staff recommends the panels have no more than 16 total members, and consist of some members of the City Council, representatives of several City boards and commissions, citizens, and subject matter experts such as a Public Works Director from another agency. These panels would be asked to make recommendations on the candidate or candidates the City should consider. Background and Follow Up. Staff recommends that the City conduct a thorough background check on any candidates that will receive final consideration and that the City Administrator and/or Mayor make a site visit before extending a job offer to the final candidate. Related City Policies: The City Administrator will recommend appointment of a Public Works Director to the Mayor. The Mayor will make the appointment, with confirmation by the City Council. Council Options: Council should provide feedback on the process. Potential Motions: None needed unless desired by Council. Page 2 of2 040108 Public Works Director Process.CC.doc r~' CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Revised Planning Commission Powers and Duties Ordinance Meeting Date: April 1, 2008 Primary Staff Contact: Martha J. Bennett Department: Administration E-Mail: bennettm@ashland.or.us Secondary Dept.: Community Development Secondary Contact: Bill Molnar Approval: Martha J. Bennett Estimated Time: 10 minutes Question: Does the Council wish to approve second reading of a proposed ordinance to revise AMC Chapter 2.12, which governs the Planning Commission? Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends adoption of the attached ordinance, which has been revised following your February 4, 2008 study session to incorporate suggestions of the Planning Commission. Background: The Planning Commission originally presented a proposed ordinance to the Council on August 7, 2008. Council had extensive feedback on the draft, which staff used to revise the ordinance. Those revisions were included with the Council's study session with the Planning Commission on February 4,2008. At Council's request, the Planning Commission looked at the revised ordinance at their February 12,2008 meeting. The Commission recommended six changes, and staff concurs with those recommendations. Four of the recommendations are minor wording changes to Sections 2.12.060.A, 2.12.060.B.1, 2.12.060.B.3 and 2.12.060.B.4. The fifth recommendation involves deleting section 2.12.060.B.5 concerning studying environmental quality, sustainability, multi-modal transportation and creation and retention of family wage jobs. This language was originally suggested by the Planning Commission. However, the Commission agreed listing specific issues or values is out of place in the list ofthe work outlined in the powers and duties section. The final recommendation is to require members living outside of the city limits to live within six miles of the city limits rather than the language requiring residency in the UGB. Related City Policies: Council should review other boards and commission powers and duties, found in Chapter 2 of the AMC. Staff believes that the revisions made since August 2007 make the proposed ordinance more consistent with other delegations. Council Options: Council can · Approve first reading of the attached ordinance as drafted. · Revise the ordinance and then approve first reading or direct staff to make additional revisions and return at a later date · Table the ordinance Page 1 of2 040108 PC Powers and Duties Ordinance.CC.doc ~., CITY OF ASHLAND Potential Motions: I move to: · Approve first reading of an ordinance amending the Ashland Municipal Code, Chapter 2.12., City Planning Commission. · Approve first reading of an ordinance amending the Ashland Municipal Code, Chapter 2.12., City Planning Commission, with the following revisions to the proposed ordinance. · Direct staff to make the following revisions and return the ordinance to Council for reading at a later date. · Table the proposed ordinance Attachments: Ordinance ready for adoption 040108 PC Powers and Duties Ordinance.CC.doc Page 2 of2 r6' ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ASHLAND MUNICIPAL CODE, CHAPTER 2.12, CITY PLANNING COMMISSION Annotated to show deletions and additions to the code sections being modified. Deletions are . in bold and additions are in bold underline. WHEREAS, Article 2. Section 1 of the Ashland City Charter provides: Powers of the City The City shall have all powers which the constitutions, statutes, and common law of the United States and of this State expressly or impliedly grant or allow municipalities, as fully as though this Charter specifically enumerated each of those powers, as well as all powers not inconsistent with the foregoing; and, in addition thereto, shall possess all powers hereinafter specifically granted. All the authority thereof shall have perpetual succession. WHEREAS, the above referenced grant of power has been interpreted as affording all legislative powers home rule constitutional provisions reserved to Oregon Cities. City of Beaverton v. International Ass'n of Firefiqhters, Local 1660. Beaverton Shop, 20 Or. App. 293, 531 P 2d 730, 734 (1975} and WHEREAS, ORS 227.090 sets forth the powers and duties of Planning Commissions and Chapter 2.12 of the City of Ashland Municipal Code further enumerates such powers for the City of Ashland Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, the City of Ashland Planning Commission has requested staff to update Chapter 2.12 as set forth below. THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: Section 2.12.010, City Planning Commission - Create.d, is hereby amended to read as follows: Section 2.12.010 CITY PLANNING COMMISSION - Created. There is created a City Planning Commission of nine (9) members, to be appointed by the Mayor and confirmed by the City Council, to serve without compensation, not more than two (2) of whom may be nonresidents of the City reside outside the City limits, within the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). The Mayor City Attorney and City Engineer shall be an ex officio, non-voting members of the City Planning Commission. SECTION 2: Section 2.12.040, City Planning Commission- Elections of Officers- Annual Report, is hereby amended to read as follows: Second Reading 3-18-08 Chapter 2.12-City Planning Commission 1. Section 2.12.040 CITY PLANNING COMMISSION - Elections of officers-- Annual report. The Commission, at its first meeting, or as set forth in the Plannina Commission bylaws, shall elect a Chair and a Vice-Chair, and shall appoint a Secretary who need not be a member of the Commission, all of whom shall hold office at the pleasure of the Commission. The Secretary shall keep an accurate record of all proceedings, and the City Planning Commission shall, on the first day of October of each year, make and file a report of all its transactions with the City Council. SECTION 3: Section 2.12.050, City Planning Commission - Quorum-Rules and regulations, is hereby amended to read as follows: Section 2.12.050 CITY PLANNING COMMISSION - Quorum--Rules and regulations. Five (5) members of the City Planning Commission constitute a quorum. The Commission may make and alter rules and regulations for its government and procedure, consistent with the laws of the state and shall meet at least once every thirty (30) days. The recommendation to the City Council of any amendment to the Land Use Ordinance or Comprehensive Plan shall be by the affirmative vote of not less than a maiority of the total members of the commission. SECTION 4: Section 2.12.060, City Planning Commission -Powers and Duties, is hereby amended to read as follows: Section 2.12.060 CITY PLANNING COMMISSION - Powers and duties-- Generally. A. The Plannina Commission is the appointed citizen body with the primary responsibility of providina recommendations to the Mayor and City Council reaardina the overall direction of land use plannina. The Commission reviews and makes recommendations reaardina comprehensive land use plannina and fosters mutual communication on land use issues. The Commission is responsible to the City Council for makina recommendations on land use plans and policies that are coordinated with other City plans, policies, and functions. ft.. The pOlJ:ers and duties of the City Planning Commission may be, but shall not be limited to, those set forth in O.R.S. 227.090, et. seq., as follows: 1. Recommend and make suggestions to the City Council and to all other public authorities concerning laying out, widening, extending, and locating streets, side':Jalks and boule'/ards; parking; relief of traffic congestions, betterment of housing and sanitation conditions; and establishment of zones or districts limiting the use, height, area and bulk of buildings and structures; Second Reading 3-18-08 Chapter 2.12-City Planning Commission 2. 2. Recommend to the City Council and all other public authorities, plans f-or regulation of the future growth, development and beautification of the municipality in respect to its public and private buildings and 'Norks, streets, parks, grounds and vacant lots; plans consistent with future growth and development of the City in order to secure to the City and its inhabitants sanitation, proper service to all public utilities; and transportation facilities; J. Recommend to the City Council and all other public authorities, plans for promotion, development and regulation of industrial and economic needs of the community in respect to private and public enterprises engaged in industrial pursuits; 4. Advertise the industrial advantages and opportunities of the municipality and availability of real estate within the municipality for industrial settlement; 5. Encourage industrial settlement .....ithin the municipality; 6. Make an economic survey of present and potential possibilities of the municipality with a ',iew to ascertaining its industrial needs; 7. Study needs of existing local industries with a vie'I" to strengtheFling and developing local industries and stabilizing employment conditions; 8. Do and perf-orm all other acts and things necessary or proper to carry out the provisions of O.R.S. 227.010 to 227.150; 9. Study and propose, in general, such measures as may be advisable f-or promotion of the public interest, health, morals, safety, comfort, convenience, and welfare of the City and of the area six (6) miles adjacent thereto. B. In addition, The Plannina Commission it shall have the powers and duties to: 1. Periodically review the Comprehensive Plan and make recommendations to the City Council on public processes, studies, and potential revisions to the Plan. Work in coniunction with other City citizen advisory commissions, boards, and committees to ensure coordination of various elements of the Comprehensive Plan. 2. Render Quasi-iudicial decisions on land use applications and appeals of administrative land use decisions as prescribed by the Ashland Code and Oreaon state law. 3. Conduct public hearinas and make recommendations to the City Council on plannina issues and leaislative chanaes to land use reaulations and ordinances. 4. When needed to implement City aoals and policies, meet with other plannina bodies in the reaion on issues that affect City land use plannina. Make recommendations to the City Council on reaionalland use issues in aeneral. Second Reading 3-18-08 Chapler 2.12-Cily Planning Commission 3. 5. Foster public awareness and involvement in all aspects of land use plannina in the community. 1. (Repealed by Ord. 1833, 1974) 2. Review all proposed ordinances regulating or limiting the use, height, area, bulk and construction of buildings and appurtenant facilities, hold the necessary public hearings thereon, and make its recommendations thereon in \\'riting to the City Council; 3. Act as the urban rene...:al agency in lieu of the former Ashland Development Commission, to which reference is made in Resolution No. 68 2, adopted by the City Council on January 9, 1968. (Ord.1720, 87, 1972) C. Except as otherwise set forth by the City Council, the Plannina Commission may exercise any or all of the powers and duties enumerated in ORS 227.090 et. sea., as well as such additional powers and duties as are set forth herein. SECTION 5: Severability. If any section, provision, clause, sentence, or paragraph of this Ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstances shall be held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other sections, provisions, clauses, or paragraphs of this Ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this Ordinance are declared to be severable. SECTION 6: Savings Clause. Notwithstanding this amendment/repeal, the City ordinances in existence at the time any criminal or civil enforcement or other actions were commenced, shall remain valid and in full force and effect for purposes of all cases filed or actions commenced during the times said ordinance(s) or portions thereof were operative. SECTION 7: Codification. Provisions of this Ordinance shall be incorporated in the City Code and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "code", "article", "section", or another word, and the sections of this Ordinance may be renumbered, or re-Iettered, provided however that any Whereas clauses and boilerplate provisions (Le. Sections 5-7 ) need not be codified. I I I l I l l The foregoing ordinance was first read by title only in accordance with Article X, Section 2(C) of the City Charter on the day of , 2008, Second Reading 3-18-08 Chapter 2.l2-City Planning Commission 4. and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this Barbara M. Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this _ day of Reviewed as to form: Richard Appicello, City Attorney Second Reading 3-18-08 day of ,2008. John W. Morrison, Mayor Chapter 2.12-City Planning Commission ,2008. 5. CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Meeting Date: Department: Secondary Dept.: Approval: Second Reading ALUO Amendments April 1, 2008 Primary Staff Contact: City Attorney's Office E-Mail: Community Development Secondary Contact: Martha Bennett Estimated Time: Richard Appicello Appicelr@ashland.or.us Bill Molnar 10 minutes / Ordinance Question: Should the City Council approve Second Reading of an Ordinance adopting ALUO Amendments, including reading a new Section 112 "Delayed Effective Date" in full? Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the Ordinance after the new effective date provision is read in full and the ordinance is read [second reading] by title only. Background: Ordinarily an ordinance is effective within thirty (30) days of Second Reading. In order to facilitate training of staff and creation /modification of forms, and to provide notice to the public, Planning Staff recommends a delayed effective for these amendments. July 1, 2008 is suggested by staff Related City Policies: City Charter Article 10, Section 3. Council Options: (1) Conduct Second Reading with changed effective date. (2) Do not conduct second reading and/or change the effective date. Potential Motions: Staff: [Conduct Second Reading by Title only} [Read new Section 112 infull] SECTION 112, Delayed Effective Date. In accordance with Article 10, Section 3 of the Ashland Charter, the Council deems it advisable to delay the effective date of this ordinance. Accordingly this ordinance shall be effective on July 1, 2008. Move to approve the Second Reading of the proposed ALUO amendment with the Delayed effective date as read. Attachments: ALUO Amendment Page 1 040108 Second Reading ALUO.CC.doc rA' ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 18 OF THE ASHLAND MUNICIPAL CODE; PROVIDING FOR REVISIONS TO DEFINITIONS AND,ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATIONS, PROVIDING FOR REVISIONS TO CONDITIONAL USE STANDARDS AND GENERAL REGULATIONS FOR THE FOLLOWING ZONING DISTRICTS: WOODLAND RESIDENTIAL, RURAL RESIDENTIAL, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL, LOW DENSITY MUL TI- FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, HIGH DENSITY MULTI FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, NORTH MOUNTAIN NEIGHBORHOOD, RETAIL COMMERCIAL, EMPLOYMENT, INDUSTRIAL, HEALTH CARE SERVICES AND SOUTHERN OREGON UNIVERSITY; PROVIDING FOR REVISIONS TO CHAPTERS FOR TREE PRESERVATION AND PROTECTION, PHYSICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS, GENERAL REGULATIONS, SITE DESIGN REVIEW, PARTITIONS, PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OPTION , PARKING, SIGNAGE, PROCEDURES AND ENFORCEMENT, PROVIDING ALSO FOR CORRECTIONS TO AND ADOPTION OF OFFICAL MAPS, INCLUDING ZONING AND OVERLAY MAPS IN DIGITAL FORMAT (PA: 2007-01283). Annotated to show deletions and additions to the code sections being modified. Deletions are bold struck through and additions are bold underlined. WHEREAS, Article 2. Section 1 of the Ashland City Charter provides: Powers of the City The City shall have all powers which the constitutions, statutes, and common law of the United States and of this State expressly or impliedly grant or allow municipalities, as fully as though this Charter specifically enumerated each of those powers, as well as all powers not inconsistent with the foregoing; and, in addition thereto, shall possess all powers hereinafter specifically granted. All the authority thereof shall have perpetual succession. WHEREAS, the above referenced grant of power has been interpreted as affording all legislative powers home rule constitutional provisions reserved to Oregon Cities. City of Beaverton v. International Ass'n of Firefiqhters. Local 1660. Beaverton Shop 20 Or. App. 293,531 P 2d 730, 734 (1975; and WHEREAS, pursuant to ORS 227.186 the Ashland Planning Department provided written individual notice of the initial hearing of the above-described proposed changes to all property owners in the City of Ashland; and WHEREAS, the City of Ashland Planning Commission considered the above-referenced ordinance amendments and recommended approval to the City Council on October 23, 2007; and Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 1 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Ashland conducted a public hearing on the above- referenced amendments on December 18, 2007 and left the record open until January 15, 2008. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Ashland has determined that in order to protect and benefit the health, safety and welfare 'of existing and future residents of the City, it is necessary to amend the Ashland Land Use Ordinance in manner proposed, that an adequate factual base exists for the amendments, the amendments are consistent with the comprehensive plan and that such amendments are fully supported by the record of this proceed i ng. NOW THEREFORE, THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1, Section 18.08.019 - Definition: Accessory Residential Unit, is added to the Ashland Municipal Code, and reads as follows: 18.08.019 Accessorv Residential Unit, A second dwellina unit either attached to a sinale familv dwellina or located on the same lot with a sinale familv dwellina and havina an indeoendent means of access. SECTION 2, Section 18.08.078 - Definition: Basement, is added to the Ashland Municipal Code, and reads as follows: 18.08.078 Basement. That oortion of a buildina with a floor-to-ceilina heiaht of not less than 6.5 feet and where fifty oercent (500/0) or more of its oerimeter walls are less than six (6) feet above natural arade and does not exceed twelve (12) feet above finish arade at any ooint. SECTION 3, Section 18.08.090, Boarding-room house, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.08.090, Boarding-room house. A dwelling or part thereof, other than a hotel or motel, where lodging with or without means is provided, for compensation, for three (3) or more persons, for a minimum oeriod of thirty (30) days. SECTION 4, Section 18.08.160 - Definition: Coverage, lot or site, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.08.160, Coverage, lot or site. Total area of all strl:letl:lres, buildinas. oarkina areas, I'B",-eEl driveways, as well as --ef other solid surfaces sail Elistl:lrbBAees that will not allow normal water infiltration to the around. The coverage is expressed as a percentage of such area in relation to the total gross area of the lot or site. Landscaping which does not negatively impact the natural water retention and soil characteristics of the site shall not be deemed part of the lot or site coverage. SECTION 5, Section18.08.256 - Definition: Floor areas, gross habitable, is added To the Ashland Municipal Code, and reads as follows: Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 2 - 18.08.256 Floor areas. aross habitable. The total area of all floors in a dwellina measured to its outside surfaces that are under the horizontal oroiection of the roof or floor above with at least seven (7) feet of head room. excludina uninhabitable soaces accessed solelv bv an exterior door. SECTION 6, Section 18.08.257 - Definition: Floor area, gross, is added to the Ashland Municipal Code, and reads as follows: 18.08.257 Floor Area. aross. The total area of all floors in a buildina measured to the outside surfaces that are under the horizontal oroiection of the roof or floor above. SECTION 7, Section18.08.281 - Definition: Ground floor, is added to the Ashland Municipal Code, and reads as follows: 18.08.281 Ground Floor. The first floor of a buildina other than a cellar or basement. SECTION 8, Section 18.08.291 - Definition: Historic District, is added to the Ashland Municipal Code, and reads as follows: 18.08.291 Historic District. A district identified as historicallv sianificant under the City of Ashland Comorehensive Plan and its imolementina reaulations (e.a. overlav zones). SECTION 9, Section 18.08.485 - Definition: Mechanical Equipment, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.08.485, Mechanical equipment. Equipment or devices installed for a use appurtenant to the primary use. Such equipment shall include heating and air conditioning equipment, solar collectors, parabolic antennas, disc antenna, radio or TV receiving or transmitting antennas, and any power generating devices. l=he fallowing eql:lipftu:nt or Ele'.iees are exeft'lpt: A. Private, non eaft'lft'lereial raElia anEl television antennas not exceeEling a height of se~'ent)' (79) feet aba....e graEle or thirt't' (39) feet aba'..e an existing strl:letl:lre, whiehej..er height is greater. No part of sl:lch antenna shall be within the ",'arEls reql:lireEl by this Chapter, A bl:lilEling perft'lit shall be reql:lireEl far any antenna ft'Iast, or tower a'.er tift'," (59) feet aba.....e graEle or thirt.~. (39) feet aba'"Te an existing strl:letl:lre when the saft'le is eanstrl:ldeEl an the roof at the strl:ldl:lre. B. Parabolic antennas I:InEler three (3) feet in Eliaft'leter. SECTION 10, Section 18.05.530 - Definition: Parking Space, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.05.530, Parking Space. A soace desianed and desianated to orovide oarkina for a motor vehicle and in comoliance with Chaoter 18.92 oarkina standards. A redangle not less than eighteen (18) feet long anEl nine (9) feet ,..tiEle together with access anEl ft'Ianel:lvering space sl:lfficient to perft'lit a stanElarEl al:ltaft'labile to be parl(eEl "',ithin the redangle withal:lt the necessity of ft'Ia\;ing ather '..ehieles, saiEl reetangle to be lacateEl off of the street right of way. Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 3 - SECTION 11, Section 18.08.595 - Definition: Planning Application, Planning Action, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.08.595, Planning aoolication: olannina action, A olannina aoolication is an aoolication. other than an aoolication for leaislative amendment. filed oursuant to the reauirements of this ordinance. A olannina action is a proceeding pursuant to this ordinance in which the legal rights, duties or privileges of specific parties are determined, and any appeal or review of such proceeding, pursuant to the provisions of this ordinance. A planning action does not include a ministerial action or a legislative amendment. SECTION 12, Section 18.08.601 - Definition: Porch, enclosed/unenclosed, is added to the Ashland Municipal Code, and reads as follows: 18.08.601 Porch. enclosed/unenclosed. Covered oorches. exterior balconies. or other similar areas attached to a buildina and havina dimensions of not less than six (6) feet in deoth bv eiaht (8) feet in lenath. "Enclosed means the Dorch contains wall(s) that are more than forty-two (42) inches in heiaht measured from finished floor level. for fifty oercent (500/0) or more of the Dorch oerimeter. "Unenclosed" means the Dorch contains no such walls. but it may be covered. SECTION 13, Section 18.08.602 - Definition: Porous Solid Surface, is added to the Ashland Municipal Code, and reads as follows: 18.08.602 Porous Solid Surface. Porous solid surface is a oermeable surface built with an underlyina stone reservoir that temoorarily stores surface runoff before it infiltrates into the subsoil. Porous solid surfaces include oervious asohalt. oervious concrete. arass or oermeable oavers. or decks that allow runoff to infiltrate the subsoil beneath the deck. SECTION 14, Section 18.08.616 - Definition: Reconstruct, is added to the Ashland Municipal Code, and reads as follows: 18.08.616 Reconstruct. To recreate or reassemble a structure or buildina with a new or reolacement structure that recreates or reoroduces its form. shaoe and location as oriainally built. Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 4 - SECTION 15, Section 18.08.650 - Definition: Setback, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.08.650, Setback. The horizontal DerDendicular distance from a lot line to the closest Dart of a buildina or structure that is subiect to a setback or yard reauirement. Architectural Droiections may intrude into reauired setbacks as set forth in Section 18.68.040. When multi-story setbacks are sDecified. the setback for a story above the around floor is measured horizontallY from the lot line to the Diane of the nearest wall of the UDDer stOry. The Elista.u:e bebvecA the ceAtcr IiAe ef a street aAEI the special base IiAe setbacl( frem -..,hieh ",arEl meaSl:lremeAts are maEle, measl:lreEl herizeAtall't" aAEI at right aAgles frem saiEl ceAter IiAe. SECTION 16, Section 18.08.651 - Definition: Setback, Special, is added to the Ashland Municipal Code, and reads as follows: 18.08.651 Setback. SDecial. The distance between the center line of a street and the sDecial base line setback from which yard measurements are made. measured horizontally and at riaht anales from said center line. SECTION 17, Section 18.08.661 - Definition: Story, half, is added to the Ashland Municipal Code, and reads as follows: 18.08.661- Story. half. A half story is a SDace under a sloDina roof that has the line of intersection of the roof and exterior wall face not more than three (3) feet above the floor leyel below and in which SDace the floor area with head room of five (5) feet or more occuDies no more than fifty Dercent (500/0) of the total floor area of the story directly beneath. .,. , rr. (M"".) ~- I -'n::>llty _ 1 Sloping Roof Half Story. If Floor Area "Au is no more than 50% of Floor Area "Bu - then "Au is a half story. If the wall face is more than three (3) feet above the floor level below at the rear or side yard setback line, then it shall be considered a full story for purposes of setback measurements. Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 5 - SECTION 18, Section 18.08.662 - Definition: Story, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is added to read as follows: 18.08.662 Storv. That Dortion of a buildina included between the UDDer surface of anv floor and the UDDer surface of the floor next above. exceDt that the too stOry shall be that Dortion of a buildina included between the UDDer surface of the too floor and the ceilina above. A basement shall not be considered a stOry. If the wall face of the UDDer most floor at the rear or side vard setback line is more than three (3) feet above the floor level below. the UDDer floor shall be considered a stOry for DurDoses of setbacks. Unenclosed decks. Dorches. balconies and similar features are not considered stories. SECTION 19, Section 18.08.740 - Definition: Story, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.98.749. Ster..,-. That pertie" ef a buildi"g i"c1uded betvJee" the upper surfac~ ef a"'{ fleer a"d the upper surface ef th~ fleer "ext abe'.'e, except that the tel' ster'l shall be that pertie" ef a buildi"g i"clud~d betvJe~" the upper surface ef th~ tel' fleer a"d the ceili"g abe"'-~. If th~ fi"ished fleer leyel directl)" abe',ie a baseRte"t er cellar is Rter~ tha" six (6) f~~t abe',1e grad~, the bas~Rte"t er cellar shall be ce"sidered a ster'f. SECTION 20, Section 18.08.750 - Definition: Structure or building, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.08.750, Structure or building. That which is built or constructed; an edifice or building of any kind or any piece of work artificially built up or composed of parts joined together in some definite manner and which requires location on, in, or above the ground or which is attached to something having a location on, in or above the ground. Structures eightee" thirtv (30) f!-8t inches in height or less. includina entrv stairs. uncovered Dorches. Datios and similar structures. are exempt from the side and rear yard setback requirements and from half (1/2) the yard requirements for the front yard and side yard abutting a public street. SECTION 21, Section 18.08.795 - Definition: Traveler's Accommodations, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.08.795. Traveler's Accommodations. Any establishment in a residential zone having rooms or dwellings rented or kept for rent to travelers or transients for a charge or fee paid or to be paid for rental or use of such facilities for a period of less than thirty (30) days. SECTION 22, Section 18.08.830 - Definition: Yard, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.08.830. Yard - An open space on a lot which is unobstructed by a structure fref'I't the greuftEl uJJ~varEl. SECTION 23, Section 18.12.020, Classification of Districts, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 6 - 18.12.020. Classification of Districts. For the purpose of this Title, the City is divided into zoning districts designated as follows: Zoning Districts and Overlavs Map Symbol and Abbreviated Designation Airport Overlay Residential - Rural Residential - Single Family Residential - Low Density Multiple Family Residential - High Density Multiple Family Commercial Commercial - Downtown Employment Industrial Woodland Residential SOU - Southern Oregon UniversitvState Cellege Performance Standards CPl - Overlay Detail Site Review Zone Health Care Services Zone North Mountain Neiahborhood ResidentialOverlav Freewav Sian Overlav A RR R-1 R-2 R-3 C-1 C-1-D E-1 M-1 WR SOU P DSR HC NM R f SECTION 24, Section 18.12.030, Zoning Map, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.12.030, Zoning and Land Use Control Maps. A. The location and boundaries of the zonina districts designated in Section 18.12.020,L Dhvsical and environmental constraints desianated in Section 18.62.060. Detail Site Review Zone desianated in ChaDter 18.72 are established as shown on the map entitled "Zoning and Land Use Control Map~ of the City of Ashland," dated with the effective date of the ordinance codified herein, and signed by the Mayor and City Recorder and hereafter referred to as the "~~oning and Land Use Control fftMap~." B. The signed copy of said ~roning and Land Use Control fftMap~ shall be maintained on file in the office of the City Recorder and is made a part of this Title. SECTION 25, Section 18.14.030, W-R, Conditional Uses, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.14.030 Conditional Uses. The following uses and their accessory uses are permitted when authorized in accordance with Chapter 18.104, Conditional Use Permits: A. Churches and similar religious institutions. B. Public and public utility buildings, structures and uses, but not including corporation, storage or repair yards, warehouses and similar uses. C. Private recreational uses and facilities, provided that the forested character of the area is not disturbed. D. Public and quasi-public halls, lodges and clubs. Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 7 - E. Schools, both public and private. F. Daycare centers. G. Homes for the elderly and nursing homes. H. A"}' re""a'li'al af three (3) ar ""are Ii....i"g trees af a...er six (6) i"ches i" Elia""eter fra"" a"~- tax lat Eltlri"g a"y a"e (1) eale"Elar year, ar a"', far"" af ca""""erdal laggi"g. Stleh tlse shall be per""itteEl a'll,. whe", i" aElElitia" ta the Ca"Elitia"al Use Per""it fi"Eli"gs, the fallawi"g fi"Eli"gs ha-.-e bee" Eleter""i"eEl: 1. Tra"spartatia" ta a"EI fra"" the site ea" be acca""plisheEl safel,. a"EI withatlt Elisttlrba"ee ta resiEle"ts. 2. That aEleEltlate pra....isia"s ha.-e bee" ""aEle far erasia" ea"tral. 3. That aEleEltlate pravisia"s ha,,'e bee" ""aEle far refarestatia". 4. That appra'..al has bee" abtai"eEl fra"" all apprapriate Catl"ty, State a"EI FeEleral age"eies. S. That there is "a prabable Ela"ger af wilElfire. 6. That there is aEleEltlate stlret.,. ba"Eli"g praYiEleEl ta the City ta e"stlre that a"'; reEltlireEl refarestatia" a"EI erasia" ca"tral will be aeea""plisheEl. H. Disc antenna for commercial use. I. Nonconforming use or structure changes reguired bv Section 18.68.090. J. TemDorarv uses. K. Wireless Communication Facilities when attached to existing structures and authorized Dursuant to Section 18.72.180. SECTION 26, Section 18.16.030, R-R, Conditional Uses, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.16.030 Conditional Uses. The following uses and their accessory uses are permitted outright: The following uses and their accessory uses are permitted when authorized in accordance with Chapter 18.104, Conditional Use Permits: A. Churches and similar religious institutions. B. Hospitals, rest, nursing and convalescent homes. C. Parochial and private schools, including nursery schools, kindergarten, and day nurseries; business, dancing, trade technical, or similar school. D. Public and public utility buildings, structures and uses; but not including corporation, storage or repair yards, warehouses, and similar uses. E. Private recreational uses and facilities, including country clubs, golf courses, swimming clubs, and tennis clubs, but not including such intensive commercial recreational uses as a driving range, race track, or amusement park. F. Riding instructions and academies. G. Cemeteries, mausoleums, columbariums, crematoriums. H. Excavation and removal of sand, gravel, stone, loam, dirt, or other earth products, subject to Section 18.68.080, Commercial Excavation. I. Public and quasi-public halls, lodges and clubs. J. Accessory residential units, subject to the Type I procedure and criteria, and the following additional criteria: 1. The proposal must conform with the overall maximum lot coverage and setback requirements of the underlying zone. 2. The maximum number of dwelling units shall not exceed 2 per lot. Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 8 - 3. The maximum gross habitable floor area (GHFA) of the accessory residential structure shall not exceed 50% of the GHFA of the primary residence on the lot, and shall not exceed 1000 sq. ft. GHFA. 4. Additional parking shall be in conformance with the off-street Parking provisions for single-family dwellings of this Title. 5. If the accessory residential unit is not part of the primary dwelling, all construction and land disturbance associated with the accessory residential unit shall occur on lands with less than 25% slope. 6. If located in the Wildfire zone, the accessory residential unit shall have a residential sprinkler system installed. 7. The lot on which the accessory residential unit is located shall have access to an improved city street, paved to a minimum of 20' in width, with curbs, gutters, and sidewalks. 8. No on-street parking credits shall be allowed for accessory residential units in the RR-.5 zone." K. Disc antenna for commercial use. L. NonconforminQ use or structure chanQes required by Section 18.68.090. M. TemDOrary uses. N. Wireless Communication Facilities when attached to existinQ structures and authorized Dursuant to Section 18.72.180. SECTION 27, Section 18.16.040, R-R, General Regulations, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.16.040 General Regulations A. Minimum lot area: Minimum lot areas in the RR zone may be one-half (V2), one (1), and two and one-half (2 V2) acres, depending on the topographic nature, service availability and surrounding land uses, and other relevant characteristics of the area. B. Maximum lot coverage: 1. One-half (112) acre lots (RR-.5): twenty (20%) percent maximum. 2. One (1) acre lots (RR-l): twelve (12%) percent maximum. 3. Two and one-half (2 V2) acre lots (RR-2.5): seven (7%) percent maximum. C. Minimum lot width: All lots shall be at least one hundred (100) feet in width. D. Lot depth: All lots shall be at least one hundred fifty (150) feet in depth. No lot depth shall be more than three (3) times its width. E. Minimum front yard: There shall be a front yard of at least twenty (20) feet. F. Minimum side yard: There shall be a minimum side yard of five six (~5) feet, except ten (10) feet along the side yard facing the street on a corner lot. G. Minimum rear yard: There shall be a minimum rear yard of ten (10) feet Dlus ten (10) feet for each story in excess of one (1) stOry. H. Maximum building height: No structure shall be over thirty-five (35) feet or two and one-half (2 112) stories in height, whichever is less. This does not include agricultural structures fifty (50) feet or more from any property line. SECTION 28, Section 18.20.030, R-l, Conditional Uses, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.20.030 Conditional Uses The following uses and their accessory uses are permitted when authorized in accordance with Chapter 18.104, Conditional Use Permits. A. Churches and similar religious institutions. Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 9 - B. Hospitals, rest, nursing or convalescent homes. C. Parochial and private schools, including nursery schools, kindergartens, day nurseries, business, dancing, trade, technical or similar schools. D. Public and public utility buildings, structures and uses. (Ord. 2121 52, 1981) E. Recreational uses and facilities, including country clubs, golf courses, swimming clubs and tennis clubs; but not including such intensive commercial recreational uses as a driving range, race track or amusement park. F. Off-street parking lots adjoining a C or M district subject to the provisions of Chapter 18.92, Off-Street Parking. G. Public and quasi-public halls, lodges and clubs. H. Accessory residential units, subject to the Type I procedure and criteria, and the following additional criteria: 1. The proposal must conform with the overall maximum lot coverage and setback requirements of the underlying zone. 2. The maximum number of dwelling units shall not exceed 2 per lot. 3. The maximum gross habitable floor area (GHFA) of the accessory residential structure shall not exceed 50% of the GHFA of the primary residence on the lot, and shall not exceed 1000 sq. ft. GHFA. 4. Additional parking shall be in conformance with the off-street Parking provisions for single-family dwellings of this Title. I. Group Homes. (Ord. 234851, 1985; Ord. 262451, 1991) J. Disc antenna for commercial use. K. DwellinQs in the Historic District exceedinQ the maximum Dermitted floor area Dursuant to Section 18.20.040. L. NonconforminQ use or structure chanQes required by Section 18.68.090. M. TemDOrary uses. N. Wireless Communication Facilities when attached to existinQ structures and authorized Dursuant to Section 18.72.180. Section 29, Section 18.22.030, R-1-3.5, Conditional Uses, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.22.030 Conditional Uses A. Churches and similar religious institutions. B. Hospitals, rest, nursing or convalescent homes. C. Parochial and private schools, including nursery schools, kindergartens, day nurseries, dancing, trade, technical or similar schools. D. Public and public utility buildings, structures and uses. E. Recreational uses and facilities, including country clubs, golf courses, swimming clubs and tennis clubs, but not including such intensive commercial recreational uses as a driving range, race track or amusement park. F. Public and quasi-public halls, lodges and clubs. G. Limited personal service establishments in the home, such as beauticians, masseurs, etc. H. Disc antenna for commercial use. I. NonconforminQ use or structure chanQes required by Section 18.68.090. J. TemDOrary uses. K. Wireless Communication Facilities when attached to existinQ structures and authorized Dursuant to Section 18.72.180. Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 10 - SECTION 30 Section 18.22.040, R-1-3.S, General Regulations, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.22.040 General Regulations A. Minimum Lot Area. The minimum lot area shall be five thousand (5,000) square feet, far the first Et,,',eIliAg I:IAit aAEt exceot that a lot three thousand five hundred (3,500) square feet or laraer may be created far eaeh aEtEtitiaAal when the lot wftIt contains an existing single-family residence which meetsaA it; bath the existiAg aAEt Aew strl:letl:lres ml:lst meet the setback, density, and lot coverage aAEt lat size requirements.aAEt eriteria af Chapter 18.76,the ~4iAar LaAEt PartitiaA SediaA af the OrEtiAaAee, jl:lst as if eaeh strl:ldl:lre wal:llEt be laeateEt aA its aWA lat, regarEtless af whether a Aew pared is beiAg ereateEt ar Aat. IA the AshlaAEt Histarie Distrid, all resiEteAtial strl:letl:lres shall alsa be sl:lbjeet ta these reEll:liremeAts. Variances under this Section are subject to Type I procedures. B. Minimum Lot Width. The minimum lot width shall be fifty (50) feet. C. Lot Depth. All lots shall have a minimum depth of eighty (80) feet. No lot depth shall be more than two and one-half (2 112) times its width. D. Standard Yard Requirements. Front yard, twenty (20) feet; side yards, six (6) feet; rear yard, ten (10) feet plus ten (10) feet for each story in excess of one (1) story. In addition, the setbacks must comply with Section 18.70 which provides for solar access. The side yard of a corner lot abutting a public street shall have a ten (10) foot setback. E. Special YardsnDistances Between Buildings. 1. The distance between any principal building and an accessory building shall be a minimum of ten (10) feet. 2. An inner court providing access to a double-row dwelling group shall be a minimum of twenty (20) feet. 3. The distance between principal buildings shall be at least one-half (V2) the sum of the height of both buildings; provided, however, that in no case shall the distance be less than twelve (12) feet. F. Maximum Height. No structure shall be over thirty-five (35) feet or two and one-half (2 112) stories in height, whichever is less. G. Maximum Coverage. Maximum lot coverage shall be fifty-five (55%) percent. (Ord. 2228, 1982) SECTION 31, Section 18.24.030, R-2, Conditional Uses, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.24.030, Conditional Uses The following uses and their accessory uses are permitted when authorized in accordance with the chapter on conditional use permits: A. Churches and similar religious institutions. B. Parochial and private schools, business, dancing, trade, technical, or similar schools. C. Manufactured housing developments subject to Chapter 18.84. D. Public and quasi-public halls, lodges and clubs. Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 11 - E. Professional offices or clinics for an accountant, architect, attorney, dentist, designer, doctor or other practitioner of the healing arts, engineer, insurance agent or adjuster, investment or management counselor or surveyor. F. Hospitals, rest, nursing and convalescent homes. G. Limited personal service establishments in the home, such as beauticians, masseurs and the uses listed in subsection E above. H. Wholesale plant nurseries, including accessory structures. I. Retail commercial uses located in a dwelling unit within the Railroad Historic District as idel'ltified b'~' the Ashlal'ld HisteriE Ceft'lft'lissiel'l al'ld approved by the City Council. Such business shall be no greater than six hundred (600) sq. ft. in total area, including all storage and accessory uses, and shall be operated only by the occupant of the dwelling unit uses, and the equivalent of one (1) half (112) time employee (up to twenty-five (25) hours per week). Such use shall be designed to serve primarily pedestrian traffic, and shall be located on a street having a fully improved sidewalk on at least the side occupied by the business. The street shall be a fully improved street of residential City standards or greater. J. (Ord. 2624 S2, 1991; deleted Ord. 2942 S2, 2007) K. Traveler's accommodations, subject to the following: 1. That all residences used for travelers accommodation be business-owner occupied. The business-owner shall be required to reside on the property occupied by the accommodation, and occupancy shall be determined as the travelers accommodation location being the primary residence of the owner during operation of the accommodation. "Business-owner" shall be defined as a person or persons who own the property and accommodation outright; or who have entered into a lease agreement with the property owner(s) allowing for the operation of the accommodation. Such lease agreement to specifically state that the property owner is not involved in the day to day operation or financial management of the accommodation, and that the business-owner is wholly responsible for all operations associated with the accommodation, and has actual ownership of the business. (ORD 2806 Sl, 1997) 2. That each accommodation unit shall have 1 off-street parking space, and the owners shall have 2 parking spaces. All spaces shall be in conformance with the requirements of the Off-Street Parking section of this Title. 3. That only one ground or wall sign, constructed of a non-plastic material, non- interior illuminated of 6 sq. ft. maximum size be allowed. Any exterior illumination of signage shall be installed such that it does not directly illuminate any residential structures adjacent or nearby the travelers's accommodation in violation of 18.72.110. 4. That the number of accommodation units allowed shall be determined by the following criteria: a. That the total number of units, including the owner's unit, shall be determined by dividing the total square footage of the lot by 1800 sq. ft. Contiguous lots under the same ownership may be combined to increase lot area and the number of units, but not in excess of the maximum established by this ordinance. The maximum number of accommodation units shall not exceed 9 per approved travelers accommodation with primary lot frontage on arterial streets. The maximum number of units shall be 7 per approved travelers accommodation with primary lot frontage on designated collector streets; or for travelers's accommodations not having primary frontage on an arterial and within 200 feet of an arterial. Street designations shall be as determined by the Ashland Comprehensive Plan. Distances shall be measured via public street or alley access to the site from the collector or arterial. Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 12 - b. Excluding the business-owner's unit and the area of the structure it will occupy, there must be at least 400 sq. ft. of gross interior floor space remaining per unit. 5. That the primary residence on the site be at least 20 years old. The primary residence may be altered and adapted for travelers's accommodation use, including expansion of floor area. Additional structures may be allowed to accommodate additional units, but must be in conformance with all setbacks and lot coverages of the underlying zone. 6. Transfer of business-ownership of a traveler's accommodation shall be subject to all requirements of this section, a.ul sl:Ibjed te Cefulitie..al Use Per",it al'l're'/;al and conformance with the criteria of this section. All traveler's accommodations receiving their initial approvals prior to the effective date of this ordinance shall be considered as approved, conforming uses, with all previous approvals, conditions and requirements remaining in effect upon change of business-ownership. Any further modifications beyond the existing approvals shall be in conformance with all requirements of this section. 7. An annual inspection by the Jackson County Health Department shall be conducted as required by the laws of Jackson County or the State of Oregon. 8. That the property on which the travelers accommodation is operated is located within 200 feet of a collector or arterial street as designated in the City's Comprehensive Plan. Distances shall be measured via public street or alley access to the site from the collector or arterial. L. Hostels, I're~'ided that the facilit'~" be sl:Ibjeet te a.. a....l:lal TYl'e I re~iew fer at least the first three (3) years, after w'hich ti",e the Pla....i..g Ce",,,,issie.. ",at" al'l're'."e, l:I..der a T'il'e II I'recedl:lre, a I'er",a..e..t I'er",it fer the facilitv. M, Disc antenna for commercial use, N. Nonconformina use or structure chanaes reauired by Section 18.68.090. O. New structures and additions to existina structures within a desianated Historic District which exceeds the Maximum Permitted Floor Area (MPFA), subiect to the aeneral reaulations set forth in Section 18.24.040. P. TemDOrary uses. O. Wireless Communication Facilities when attached to existina structures and authorized Dursuant to Section 18.72.180. SECTION 32, - 18.24.040 A.(l), R-2, General Regulations, Permitted Density, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.24.040 General Regulations A. Permitted Density and Minimum Lot Dimensions. 1. Base Densities and Minimum Lot Dimensions. The density of the development, including the density gained through bonus points, shall not exceed the density established by this section. The density shall be computed by dividing the total number of dwelling units by the acreage of the project, including land dedicated to the public. The minimum density shall be 80% of the calculated base density. Fractional portions of the answer shall not apply towards the total density. Base density for the R-2 zone shall be 13.5 dwelling units per acre, in addition to the fOllowina standards and exceDtions: a. An accessory residential unit is not reauired to meet density or minimum lot area reauirements. Droyided the unit is not areater than fifty Dercent (500/0) of the aross habitable floor area of the sinale Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 13 - familv residence on the lot and does not exceed 500 sauare feet of aross habitable floor area. .b..~_J'ewe'..er, I:IUnits. not considered as an accessory residential unit and at less than 500 square feet of gross habitable area shall count as 0.75 units for the purposes of density calculations, "."ith the fellewing restridiens. s;a. Minimum lot area for less than 2 units tJ-Att-l shall be 5000 sq. ft. with a minimum width of 50' and minimum depth of 80'. ge.Minimum lot area for 2 units shall be 7,000 sq. ft. with a minimum width of 50' and a minimum depth of 80'. ge. Developments of 3 units or greater shall have minimum lot area in excess of 9000 sq. ft. atHI exceDt as determined by the base density and allowable bonus point calculations, and shall have a minimum width of 50' and a minimum depth of 80'. SECTION 33, 18.24.0401.1., R-2, General Regulations, Maximum Permitted Floor Area for single family dwellings on individual lots within the Historic District, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.24.040 General Regulations 1. Maximum Permitted Floor Area for single family dwellings on individual lots within the Historic District. The maximum permitted floor area for single family primary dwellings on individual lots within the an Historic District shall be determined by the following: 1. The maximum permitted floor area shall include the total floor space of all floors (gross floor area) of the primary dwelling measured to the outside surfaces of the building, including but not limited to exterior walls, potential living spaces within the structure with at least 7' of head room and attached garages. The floor area shall not include basements, detached garages, detached accessory structures, or detached accessory residential units. Detached garages, accessory structures, or accessory residential units shall be separated from other structures by a minimum of 6', except that unenclosed breezeways or similar open structures may connect the structures. SECTION 34, 18.24.040 J.l., R-2, General Regulations, Maximum Permitted Floor Area for multiple dwellings on a single lot and new residential construction in Performance Standards Options land divisions created within an Historic District., of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.24.040 General Regulations J. Maximum Permitted Floor Area for multiple dwellings on a single lot and new residential construction in Performance Standards ODtions land divisions created within the !m Historic District. The MPFA fer ""l:Iltil'le E1wellings en a single let within the Histeric District shall be determined by the following: 1. The MPFA shall include the total floor space of all floors (gross floor area) of the I'ri""ary dwelling units measured to the outside surfaces of the buildingW, including but not limited to exterior walls, potential living spaces within the structure with at least 7' of head room and attached gara.ges. The floor area shall not include basements, detached garages, detached accessory structures, or detached accessory residential units. Detached garages, accessory structures, or accessory residential units shall be separated from other structures by a Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 14 - minimum of 6', except that unenclosed breezeways or similar open structures may connect the structures. SECTION 35, Section 18.28.030, R-3, Conditional Uses, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.28.030 Conditional Uses The following uses and their accessory uses are permitted when authorized in accordance with the Chapter on Conditional Use Permits: A. Churches and similar religious institutions. B. Parochial and private schools, business, dancing, trade, technical or similar schools. C. Manufactured housing developments, subject to Chapter 18.84. D. Public and quasi-public halls, lodges and clubs. E. Professional offices or clinics for an accountant, architect, attorney, dentist, designer, doctor, or other practitioner of the healing arts, engineer, insurance agent or adjuster, investment or management counselor or surveyor. F. Hospitals, rest, nursing and convalescent homes. G. Limited personal service establishments in the home, such as beauticians, masseurs, and the uses listed in subsection E above. H. Wholesale plant nurseries, including accessory structures. I. (Ord. 262453, 1991; DELETED Ord 294255;2007) J. Travelers accommodations, subject to the following: 1. That all residences used for travelers accommodation be business-owner occupied. The business-owner shall be required to reside on the property occupied by the accommodation, and occupancy shall be determined as the travelers accommodation location being the primary residence of the owner during operation of the accommodation. "Business-owner" shall be defined as a person or persons who own the property and accommodation outright; or who have entered into a lease agreement with the property owner(s) allowing for the operation of the accommodation. Such lease agreement to specifically state that the property owner is not involved in the day to day operation or financial management of the accommodation, and that the business-owner is wholly responsible for all operations associated with the accommodation, and has actual ownership of the business. (ORD 2806 52, 1997) 2. That each accommodation unit shall have 1 off-street parking space, and the owners shall have 2 parking spaces. All spaces shall be in conformance with the requirements of the Off-Street Parking section of this Title. 3. That only one ground or wall sign, constructed of a non-plastic material, non- interior illuminated of 6 sq. ft. maximum size be allowed. Any exterior illumination of signage shall be installed such that it does not directly illuminate any residential structures adjacent or nearby the travelers's accommodation in violation of 18.72.110. 4. That the number of accommodation units allowed shall be determined by the followi ng criteria: a. That the total number of units, including the owner's unit, shall be determined by dividing the total square footage of the lot by 1800 sq. ft. Contiguous lots under the same ownership may be combined to increase lot area and the number of units, but not in excess of the maximum established by this ordinance. The maximum number of accommodation units shall not exceed 9 per approved travelers accommodation with primary lot frontage on arterial streets. The maximum number of units shall be 7 per approved travelers accommodation with primary lot frontage on designated collector streets; or Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 15 - for travelers's accommodations not having primary frontage on an arterial and within 200 feet of an arterial. Street designations shall be as determined by the Ashland Comprehensive Plan. Distances shall be measured via public street or alley access to the site from the collector or arterial. b. Excluding the business-owner's unit and the area of the structure it will occupy, there must be at least 400 sq. ft. of gross interior floor space remaining per unit. 5. That the primary residence on the site be at least 20 years old. The primary residence may be altered and adapted for travelers's accommodation use, including expansion of floor area. Additional structures may be allowed to accommodate additional units, but must be in conformance with all setbacks and lot coverages of the underlying zone. 6. Transfer of business-ownership of a travelers accommodation shall be subject to all requirements of this section, aREI stlbjed te CeRElitieRal Use per...it al'l're'"al and conformance with the criteria of this section. All travelers's accommodations receiving their initial approvals prior to the effective date of this ordinance shall be considered as approved, conforming uses, with all previous approvals, conditions and requirements remaining in effect upon change of business-ownership. Any further modifications beyond the existing approvals shall be in conformance with all requirements of this section. L. Hostels, I'reyiEleEl that the faeilit., be stlbjed te aR aRRtlal TYl'e I re....iew fer at least the first three (3) 'fears, after vJhieh ti...e the PlaRRiRg Ce......issieR ...a"tO al'l'reve, tlREler a T,;ol'e II I'reeeEltlre, a l'er...aReRt I'er...it fer the faeilit", . M. Disc antenna for commercial use. N. Enlaraement. extension. reconstruction. substitution. structural alteration or reactivation of nonconformina uses and structures oursuant to Section 18.68.090. O. New structures and additions to existina structures within a desianated Historic District which exceeds the Maximum Permitted Floor Area (MPFAl. subiect to the aeneral reaulations set forth in Section 18.28.040. P. Temoorary uses. O. Wireless Communication Facilities when attached to existina structures and authorized oursuant to Section 18.72.180. SECTION 36, Section 18.28.040 A.l., R-3, General Regulations, Permitted Density, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.28.040 General Regulations A. Permitted Density and Minimum Lot Dimensions 1. Base Densities and Minimum Lot Dimensions. The density of the development, including the density gained through bonus points, shall not exceed the density established by this section. The density shall be computed by dividing the total number of dwelling units by the acreage of the project, including land dedicated to the public. The minimum density shall be 80% of the calculated base density. Fractional portions of the answer shall not apply towards the total density. Base density for the R-3 zone shall be 20.0 dwelling units per acre, in addition to the fOllowina standards and exceotions: a. An accessory residential unit is not reauired to meet density or minimum lot area reauirements oroyided the unit is not areater than fifty oercent (500/0 l of the aross habitable floor area of the sinale Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 16 - familv residence on the lot and does not exceed 500 SQuare feet of Qross habitable floor area. b. heVle..er, uUnits. not considered as an acceSSOry residential unit and ef-Iess than 500 square feet of gross habitable area shall count as 0.75 units for the purposes of density calculations, with the felle."..,i"!!J restridie..s. ~a. Minimum lot area for less than two (2) unit~ -l- shall be 5000 sq. ft. with a minimum width of 50' and minimum depth of 80' ge. Minimum lot area for 2 units shall be 6,500 sq. ft. with a minimum width of 50' and a minimum depth of 80'. ge. Developments of 3 units or greater shall have minimum lot area in excess of 8000 sq. ft. aft& exceDt as determined by the base density and allowable bonus point calculations, and shall have a minimum width of 50' and a minimum depth of 80'. SECTION 37, Section 18.28.0401.1., R-3, General Regulations, Maximum Permitted Floor Area for single family dwellings on individual lots within the Historic District of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: I. Maximum Permitted Floor Area for single family dwellings on individual lots within the Historic District. The maximum permitted floor area for single family primary dwellings on individual lots within tfte--!ln...-Historic District shall be determined by the following: 1. The maximum permitted floor area shall include the total floor space of all floors (gross floor area) of the primary dwelling measured to the outside surfaces of the building, including but not limited to exterior walls, potential living spaces within the structure with at least 7' of head room and attached garages. The floor area shall not include basements, detached garages, detached accessory structures, or detached accessory residential units. Detached garages, accessory structures, or accessory residential units shall be separated from other structures by a minimum of 6', except that unenclosed breezeways or similar open structures may connect the structures. SECTION 38, Section 18.28.040 J.l., R-3, General Regulations, Maximum Permitted Floor Area for multiple dwellings on a single lot and new residential construction in Performance Standards Options land divisions created within an Historic District. of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: J. Maximum Permitted Floor Area for multiple dwellings on a single lot and new residential construction in Performance Standards Options land divisions created within the an Historic District. The MPFA fer I'ftultil'le Elwelli"!!Js e.. a si"!!Jle let withi.. the Histerie Distriet shall be determined by the following: 1. The MPFA shall include the total floor space of all floors (gross floor area) of the I'ril'ftar}" dwelling units measured to the outside surfaces of the building{0, including but not limited to exterior walls, potential living spaces within the structure with at least 7' of head room and attached garages. The floor area shall not include basements, detached garages, detached accessory structures, or detached accessory residential units. Detached garages, accessory structures, or accessory residential units shall be separated from other structures by a minimum of 6', except that unenclosed breezeways or similar open structures may connect the structures. SECTION 39, Section 18.30.020, NM General Regulations, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: . Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 17 - 18.30.020 , NM General Regulations A. Conformance with North Mountain Neighborhood Plan. Land uses, streets, alleys and pedestrian/bicycle access ways shall be located in accordance with those shown on the North Mountain Neighborhood Plan adoDted bv Ordinance No. 2800. 1. Major and Minor Amendments a. Major amendments are those which result in any of the following: (1) A change in land use. (2) A change in the street layout plan that requires a street to be eliminated or to be located in such a manner as to not be consistent with the neighborhood plan. (3) A change in the North Mountain Neighborhood Design Standards. (4) A change in planned residential density. (5) A change not specifically listed under the major and minor amendment definitions. b. Minor amendments are those which result in any of the following: (1) Changes related to street trees, street furniture, fencing, or signage. (2) A change in the street layout that requires a local street, alley, easement, pedestrian/bicycle accessway or utility to be shifted more than 50 feet in any direction, as long as the change maintains the connectivity established by the neighborhood plan. 2. Major Amendment Type II Procedure. A major amendment to the neighborhood plan shall be processed as a Type II planning action concurrently with specific development proposals. In addition to complying with the standards of this section, findings must demonstrate that: a. The proposed modification maintains the connectivity established by the neighborhood plan; b. The proposed modification furthers the design and access concepts advocated by the neighborhood plan, including but not limited to pedestrian access, bicycle access, and de-emphasis on garages as a residential design feature; c. The proposed modification will not adversely affect the purpose, objectives, or functioning of the neighborhood plan. d. The proposed modification is necessary to adjust to physical constraints evident on the property, or to protect significant natural features such as trees, rock outcroppings, wetlands, ete..-.or similar natural features, or to adjust to existing property lines between project boundaries. 3. Minor Amendment Type I Procedure. A minor amendment to the neighborhood plan may be approved as a Type I planning action concurrently with specific development proposals. The request for a minor amendment shall include findings that demonstrate that the change will not adversely affect the purpose, objectives, or functioning of the neighborhood plan. 4. Utilities shall be installed underground to the greatest extent feasible. Where possible, alleys shall be utilized for utility location, including transformers, pumping stations, etc... B. Lots With Alley Access. If the site is served by an alley, access and egress for motor vehicles shall be to and from the alley. In such cases, curb openings along the street frontage are prohibited. C. Street, Alley and Pedestrian/bicycle Accessway Standards. The standards for street, alley, and pedestrian/bicycle accessway improvements shall be as designated in the North Mountain Neighborhood Design Standards. Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 18 - D. Minimum Density. Proposals resulting in the creation of additional parcels or greater than three units on a single parcel shall provide for residential densities between 75 to 110 percent of the base density for a given overlay, unless reductions in the total number of units is necessary to accommodate significant natural features, topography, access limitations or similar physical constraints. (Proposals involving the development of neighborhood commercial businesses and services shall be exempt from the above requirements). E. Density Transfer. Density transfer within a project from one overlay to another may be approved if it can be shown that the proposed density transfer furthers the design and access concepts advocated by the neighborhood plan, and provides for a variety of residential unit sizes, tYDeS and architectural styles. a E1i'.-ersity i" size B"E1 st'/le af hatlsi"g t'il'es. F. Drive-Up Uses. Drive-Up uses are not permitted within the North Mountain Neighborhood Plan area. G. Performance Standards Overlay. All applications involving the creation of three or more lots shall be processed under the Performance Standards Option chapter 18.88. H. Fencing. No fencing exceeding three feet in height shall be allowed in the front lot area between the structure and the street. No fencing shall be allowed in areas designated as Floodplain Corridor. I. Adjustment of Lot Lines. As part of the approval process for specific development proposals, adjustments to proposed lot lines may be approved consistent with the density standards of the neighborhood plan zoning district. SECTION 40, Section 18.30.030, NM-C Neighborhood Central Overlay, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.30.030, NM-C Neighborhood Central Overlay A. Permitted Density. The density shall be computed by dividing the total number of dwelling units by the acreage of the project, including land dedicated to the public. Fractional portions of the answer shall not apply towards the total density. Base density for the Neighborhood Central Overlay shall be 20 units per acre, however, units of less than 500 square feet of gross habitable area shall count as 0.75 units for the purposes of density calculations. B. Off-Street Parking. In all areas within the Neighborhood Central Overlay, all uses are not required to provide off-street parking or loading areas, except for residential uses where one space shall be provided per residential unit. All parking areas shall comply with the Off-Street Parking chapter and the Site Review chapter. C. Area, Yard Requirements: There shall be no minimum lot area, lot coverage, front yard, side yard or rear yard requirement, except as required under the Off-Street Parking Chapter or where required by the Site Review Chapter. D. Solar Access: The solar setback shall not apply in the Neighborhood Central Overlay. E. Permitted Uses. The following uses are permitted in the NM-C overlay subject to conditions limiting the hours and impact of operation; 1. Residential Uses, subject to the above density requirements. 2. Home Occupations. 3. Parks and Open Spaces. 4. Agriculture. 5. Neighborhood Oriented Retail Sales and Personal Services, with each building limited to 3,500 square feet of total floor area. Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 19 - 6. Professional Offices, with each building limited to 3,500 square feet of total floor area. 7. Restaurants. 8. Manufacturing or assembly of items sold in a permitted use, provided such manufacturing or assembly occupies 600 square feet or less, and is contiguous to the permitted retail outlet. 9. Basic Utility Providers, such as telephone or electric providers, with each building limited to 3,500 square feet of total floor area. 10. Community Services, with each building to 3,500 square feet of total floor area. 11. Churches or Similar Religious Institutions, when the same such use is not located on a contiguous property, nor more than two such uses in a given Overlay. 12. Neighborhood Clinics, with each building limited to 3,500 square feet of total floor area. F. Conditional Uses. 1. Temporary Uses. 2. Public Parking Lots. G. Lot Coverage: Maximum lot coverage shall be seventv-five (75) oercent. SECTION 41, Section 18.30.040. C., NM-MF Neighborhood Core Overlay, Yard Requirements, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.30.040, Neighborhood Core Overlay NM-MF C. Yard Requirements 1. Front Yards. Front vard setbacks sShall be a minimum of ten (101 feet and a maximum of twentv-five (251 feet, excluding garages. Front yards may be reduced to five (51 feet for unenclosed porches with a minimum depth of six 1fil..feet and a minimum width of eight (8) feet. Garages shall be setback a minimum of fifteen (151 feet from the front building facade and twenty (201 feet from the sidewalk. No greater than 50 percent (500/0) of the total lineal building facade facing the street shall consist of garage, carport or other covered parking space. 2. Side Yards. Side yard setbacks shall be a minimum of fFive ill feet ~ for the first story, excluding half-stories and upper floor dormer space. five (5) feet for each additional story. and. =F ten LMUJeet when abutting a public street. Single story, detached garages and accessory structures shall have a minimum three Ul.foot side yard, except that no side yard is required for accessory buildings sharing a common wall. 3. Rear Yards. Ten feet per story, with the exception of upper floor dormer space which may be setback 15 feet. Single story, detached garages and accessory buildings, and two story accessory buildings adjacent to an alley shall have a minimum rear yard of four feet. SECTION 42, Section 18.30.0S0.C. and F, NM-R-1-S Neighborhood General Overlay, Yard Requirements, and Lot Coverage of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.30.050, Neighborhood General Overlay NM-R-1-5 C. Yard Requirements Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 20 - 1. Front Yards. Front vard setbacks s5hall be a minimum of ten (10} feet and a maximum of twentv-five (25} feet, excluding garages. Front yards may be reduced to five (5} feet for unenclosed porches with a minimum depth of six ill-feet and a minimum width of eiaht (8) feet. Garages shall be setback a minimum of fifteen (15} feet from the front building facade and twentv (20} feet from the sidewalk. No greater than 50 percent (500/0) of the total lineal building facade facing the street shall consist of garage, carport or other covered parking space. 2. Side Yards. Side vard setbacks shall be a minimum of fFive ill feet pet" for the first story/ excluding half-stories and upper floor dormer space, five (5) feet for each additional stOry, and. =F ten ,U"Q1Jeet when abutting a public street. Single story/ detached garages and accessory structures shall have a minimum three Ul.foot side yard, except that no side yard is required for accessory buildings sharing a common wall. 3. Rear Yards. Ten feet per story / with the exception of upper floor dormer space which may be setback 15 feet. Single story, detached garages and accessory buildings, and two story accessory buildings adjacent to an alley shall have a minimum rear yard of four feet. D. Permitted Uses. 1. Residential Uses, subject to the above density requirements. 2. Home Occupations. 3. Parks and Open Spaces. 4. Agriculture. E. Special Permitted Uses. 1. Accessory Residential Units, subject to the following requirements: a. The proposal must comply with lot coverage and setback requirements of the underlying zone. b. That the maximum number of dwellings not exceed two per lot. c. That the maximum gross habitable floor area (GHFA) of the a'ccessory residential unit not exceed 50% of the GHFA of the primary residence on the lot, and shall not exceed 750 sq. ft. GHFA. Second story accessory residential units constructed above a detached accessory building shall not exceed 500 sq. ft. GHFA. d. Additional parking shall be in conformance with the Off-Street Parking provisions for single-family dwellings of this title. 2. Community Services, with each building limited to 2/500 square feet of total floor area. F. Lot Coverage: Maximum lot coverage shall be fifty percent (500/0). SECTION 43, Section 18.30.060.C.and G, NM-R-1-7.5 Neighborhood Edge Overlay, Yard Requirements and Lot Coverage, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.30.060/ Neighborhood Edge Overlay NM-R-1-7.5 C. Yard Requirements Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1/ 2008-p. 21 - 1. Front Yards. Front yard setbacks sShal1 be a minimum of ten (10} feet and a maximum of twenty-five (25} feet, excluding garages. Front yards may be reduced to five (51 feet for unenclosed porches with a minimum depth of six LID...feet and a minimum width of eiaht (8) feet. Garages shall be setback a minimum of fifteen (15} feet from the front building facade and twenty (20} feet from the sidewalk. No greater than 50 percent (500/0) of the total lineal building facade facing the street shall consist of garage, carport or other covered parking space. 2. Side Yards. Side yard setbacks shall be a minimum of fFive !S.l.feet ~ for the first story, excluding half-stories and upper floor dormer spaceL five (5) feet for each additional story, and. =F ten 1!Ql.feet when abutting a public street. Single story, detached garages and accessory structures shall have a minimum three ill..foot side yard, except that no side yard is required for accessory buildings sharing a common wall. 3. Rear Yards. Ten feet per story, with the exception of upper floor dormer space which may be setback 15 feet. Single story, detached garages and accessory buildings, and two story accessory buildings adjacent to an alley shall have a minimum rear yard of four feet. D. Permitted Uses. 1. Residential Uses, subject to the above density calculations. 2. Home Occupations. 3. Parks and Open Spaces. 4. Agriculture E. Special Permitted Uses. 1. Accessory Residential Units, subject to Site Review approval under a Type I Procedure and the following requirements: a. The proposal must comply with lot coverage and setback requirements of the underlying zone. b. That the maximum number of dwellings not exceed two per lot. c. That the maximum gross habitable floor area (GHFA) of the accessory residential unit not exceed 50% of the GHFA of the primary residence on the lot, and shall not exceed 750 sq. ft. GHFA. Second story accessory residential units constructed above a detached accessory building shall not exceed 500 sq. ft. GHFA. d. Additional parking shall be in conformance with the Off-Street Parking provisions for single-family dwellings of this title. F. Floodplain Corridor 1. Developments including lands within the identified floodplain corridor, including street development, shall comply with the following requirements: a. A hydrologic study prepared by a geotechnical expert shall be submitted concurrently with specific development proposals indicating the impact of the development on the floodplain corridor, and all efforts to be taken to mitigate negative impacts from flooding in the area of the floodplain corridor and areas of historic flooding. b. The design of Greenway Drive, as indicated on the neighborhood plan, shall incorporate flood protection measures, as determined by a geotechnical expert, in the overall design of the new street. Such protection measures shall address flooding in the floodplain corridor and in areas of historic flooding. c. A grading plan for the overall development, indicating grade relationships between the development and the floodplain corridor, shall be included with the specific development proposal. A statement shall be included, prepared by a geotechnical expert or licensed surveyor, indicating that the finish grade for all buildable areas outside of the floodplain corridor shall be at or above the Ashland floodplain corridor elevations indicated on the officially adopted city maps. Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 22 - G. Lot Coveraae: Maximum lot coveraae shall be fortv-five oercent (450/0 ). SECTION 44, 18.32.025.D., C-1, Retail Commercial District, Special Permitted Uses, Residential Uses, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.32.025 Special Permitted Uses D. Residential uses. 1. At least 65% of the total gross floor area of the ground floor, or at least 50% of the total lot area if there are multiple buildings shall be designated for permitted or special permitted uses, excluding residential. 2. Residential densities shall not exceed 30 dwelling units per acre in the C-1 District, and 60 dwelling units per acre in the C-1-D District. For the Duroose of densitv calculations, units of less than 500 sauare feet of aross habitable floor area shall count as 0.75 of a unit. 3. Residential uses shall be subject to the same setback, landscaping, and design standards as for permitted uses in the underlying C-1 or C-1-D District. 4. Off-street parking shall not be required for residential uses in the C-1-D District. 5. If the number of residential units exceeds 10, then at least 10% of the residential units shall be affordable for moderate income persons in accord with the standards established by resolution of the Ashland City Council through procedures contained in the resolution. The number of units required to be affordable shall be rounded down to the nearest whole unit. SECTION 45, 18.32.025.E., C-1, Retail Commercial District, Special Permitted Uses, Drive Up uses, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.32.025 SpeCial Permitted Uses E. Drive-up uses as defined and regulated as follows: 1. Drive-up uses may be approved in the C-l District only, and onlv in the area east of a line drawn oeroendicular to Ashland Street at the intersection of Ashland Street and Siskivou Boulevard. 2. Drive-up uses are prohibited in Ashland's Historic Interest Area as defined in the Comprehensive Plan. 3. Drh'e 1:11' I:Ises ma;' ani)" be allawed in the C 1 distriets east af a line drawn I'erl'endiel:llar ta Ashland Street, at the intersedian af Ashland Street and Sisldyal:l Bal:lle....ard. 3.4 Drive-up uses are subject to the following criteria: a. The average waiting time in line for each vehicle shall not exceed five minutes. Failure to maintain this average waiting time may be grounds for revocation of the approval. b. All facilities providing drive-up service shall provide at least two designated parking spaces immediately beyond the service window or provide other satisfactory methods to allow customers requiring excessive waiting time to receive service while parked. c. A means of egress for vehicular customers who wish to leave the waiting line shall be provided. Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 23 - d. The grade of the stacking area to the drive-up shall either be flat or downhill to eliminate excessive fuel consumption and exhaust during the wait in line. e. The drive-up shall be designed to provide as much natural ventilation as possible to eliminate the buildup of exhaust gases. f. Sufficient stacking area shall be provided to ensure that public rights-of-way are not obstructed. g. The sound level of communications systems shall not exceed 55 decibels at the property line and shall otherwise comply with the Ashland Municipal Code regarding sound levels. h. The number of drive-up uses shall not exceed the 12 in existence on July 1, 1984. Drive-up uses may be transferred to another location in accord with all requirements of this section. The number of drive-up window stalls shall not exceed 1 per location, even if the transferred use had greater than one stall. SECTION 46, 18.32.030, C-1, Retail Commercial District Conditional Uses, of the Ashland Municipal Code, Is amended to read as follows: 18.32.030 Conditional Uses. The following uses and their accessory uses are permitted when authorized in accordance with the chapter on Conditional Use Permits: A. Electrical substations. B. Automobile fuel sales, and automobile and truck repair facilities, except as allowed as a special permitted use in 18.32.025. C. New and used car sales, boat, trailer, and recreational vehicles sales and storage areas, except within the Historic Interest Area as defined in the Comprehensive Plan. D. Hotels and motels. E. Temporary uses. F. Outdoor storage of commodities associated with a permitted, special permitted or conditional use. G. Hostels, provided that the facility be subject to an annual Type I review for at least the first three years, after which time the Planning Commission may approve, under a Type II procedure, a permanent permit for the facility. H. Building material sales yards, but not including concrete or asphalt batch or mixing plants. 1. Churches or similar religious institutions. J. Wireless Communication Facilities not Dermitted outriaht and authorized Dursuant to Section 18.72.180. K. Structures which are areater than forty (40) feet in heiaht. but less than fifty-five (55) feet. in the "0" Downtown Overlay District. SECTION 47, 18.40.020, E-1, Employment District, Permitted Uses, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.40.020 Permitted Uses. The following uses and their accessory uses are permitted outright, subject to the requirements of Chapter 18.72, Site Design and Use Standards: A. Professional, financial, and business and medical offices, and personal service establishments. B. Stores, shops and offices supplying commodities or performing services, except that retail uses shall be limited to no greater than 20,000 sq. ft. of gross leasable floor space per lot. Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 24 - C. Restaurants. (Ord 2812, S4 1998) D. Electrical, furniture, plumbing shop, printing, publishing, lithography or upholstery. E. Light manufacturing, assembly, fabricating, or packaging of products from previously prepared materials, such as cloth, plastic, wood (not including saw, planing, or lumber mills or molding plants), paper, cotton, precious or semi-precious metals or stone. F. Manufacture of electric, electronic, or optical instruments and devices. G. Administrative or research establishments. H. Motion picture, television, or radio broadcasting studios operating at an established or fixed location. I. Mortuaries and crematoriums. J. Building material sales yards, but not including concrete or asphalt batch or mixing plants. K. Kennels and veterinary clinics, with all animals housed within structures. L. Bakeries M. Public and quasi-public utility and service buildings and yards, structures, and public parking lots, but excluding electrical substations. N. Manufacture of pharmaceutical and similar items. O. Wireless Communication Facilities oermitted outright oursuant to Section 18.72.180. SECTION 48, 18.40.030.E., E-1, Employment District, Special Permitted Uses, Residential Uses, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.40.030, Special Permitted Uses E. Residential uses. 1. At least 65% of the total gross floor area of the ground floor, or at least 50% of the total lot area if there are multiple buildings shall be designated for permitted or special permitted uses, excluding residential. 2. Residential densities shall not exceed 15 dwelling units per acre. For the ouroose of density calculations. units of less than 500 sguare feet of gross habitable floor area shall count as 0.75 of a unit. 3. Residential uses shall be subject to the same setback, landscaping, and design standards as for permitted uses in the E-1 District. 4. Residential uses shall only be located in those areas indicated as R-Overlay within the E-1 District, and shown on the official zoning map. 5. If the number of residential units exceed 10, then at least 10% of the residential units shall be affordable for moderate income persons in accord with the standards established by resolution of the Ashland City Council through procedures contained in the resolution. The number of units required to be affordable shall be rounded down to the nearest whole unit. SECTION 49, 18.40.040, E-1,Employment District, Conditional Uses, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.40.040 Conditional Uses The following uses and their accessory uses are permitted when authorized in accordance with the chapter on Conditional Use Permits: A. Electrical substations. B. Mini-warehouses and similar storage areas. Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 25 - C. Contractor equipment storage yards or storage and rental of equipment commonly used by a contractor. D. Automobile fuel sales. E. New and used car sales, boat, trailer and recreational vehicles sales and storage areas, provided that the use is not located within the Historic Interest Area as defined in the Comprehensive Plan. F. Hotels and motels. G. Any use which involves outside storage of merchandise, raw materials, or other material associated with the primary use on the site. H. Private college, trade school, technical school, or similar school. I. Cabinet, carpentry, machine, and heating shops, if such uses are located less than or equal to 200' from the nearest residential district. J. Cold storage plants, if such uses are located less than or equal to 200' from the nearest residential district. K. Automotive body repair and painting, including paint booths. 1. The use shall not be located within 200' of the nearest residentially zoned property. 2. All objectionable odors associated with the use shall be confined to the lot, to the greatest extent feasible. For the purposes of this provision, the standard for judging "objectionable odors" shall be that of an average, reasonable person with ordinary sensibilities after taking into consideration the character of the neighborhood in which the odor is made and the odor is detected. 3. The use shall comply with all requirements of the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. L. Churches and similar religious institutions M. Nightclubs and Bars. N. Theaters (excluding drive-in) and similar entertainment uses. O. Temporary uses. P. Wireless Communication Facilities not permitted outriaht and authorized pursuant to Section 18.72.180. SECTION 50, 18.52.030, M-1, Industrial District, Conditional Uses, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.52.030 Conditional Uses. The following uses and their accessory uses are permitted when authorized in accordance with the chapter on Conditional Use Permits: A. Junkyard and auto wrecking yards. B. Kennels and veterinary clinics. C. Banks, restaurants or other convenience establishments designed to serve persons working in the zone only. D. Concrete or asphalt batch or mixing plants. E. Temporary uses. F.. Wireless Communication Facilities not permitted outriaht and authorized pursuant to Section 18.72.180. SECTION 51, 18.54.030, HC, Health Care Services Zone, Conditional Uses, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.54.030 Conditional Uses Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 26 - The following uses and their accessory uses are permitted when authorized in accordance with the Chapter on Conditional Use Permits: A. Limited personal service providers in the home, such as beauticians and masseurs. B. Travelers' accommodations, subject to the requirements of the R-2 zone. C. Professional offices for an accountant, architect, attorney, designer, engineer, insurance agent or adjuster, investment or management counselor or surveyor. D. Any medically-related use, located on City-owned property, that is not specifically allowed by the Ashland Community Hospital Master Facility Plan. E. Wireless Communication Facilities authorized oursuant to Section 18.72.180. SECTION 52, 18.61.020.A., Tree Preservation and Protection, , Definitions, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.61.020 Definitions. A. Arborist means a person licensed bv the State of Oreaon State Landscaoe Contractors Board or Construction Contractors Board who has met the criteria far ~certified eatian as an arborist from the International Society of Arboriculture or American Society of Consulting Arborists, and maintains his ar her aeereditatian. SECTION 53, 18.61.020.E., Tree Preservation and Protection, Definitions, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.61.020 Definitions. D. Diameter at breast height or DBH means the diameter of the trunk ~, at its maximum cross section, measured 54 inches (4 1/2 feet) above mean ground level at the base of the trunk. On sloDed lands. the measurement shall be taken on the uohill side of tree. SECTION 54, 18.61.035, Tree Preservation and Protection, Exempt Tree Removal Activities, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.61.035 Exempt Tree Removal Activities. The following activities are exempt from the requirement for tree removal permits: A. Those activities associated with the establishment or alteration of any public park under the Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission. However, the Ashland Parks and Recreation Department shall provide an annual plan in January to the Tree Commission outlining proposed tree removal and topping activities, and reporting on tree removal and topping activities that were carried out in the previous year. B. Removal of trees in single family residential zones on lots occupied only by a single family detached dwelling and associated accessory structures, except as otherwise regulated by the Physical and Environmental Constraints ordinance (18.62. Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 27 - C. Removal of trees in multi-family residential zones on lots occupied only by a single family detached dwelling and associated accessory structures, except as otherwise regulated by the Physical and Environmental Constraints ordinance (18.62). D. Removal of trees less than 6" DBH in any zone, excluding those trees located within the public right of way or required as conditions of approval with landscape improvements for planning actions. E. Removal of trees less than 18" DBH on any public school lands, Southern Oregon University, and other public land,t-BtR-excluding Heritage trees a.ul street trees withiA the I'l:IbUc right 8f wa"i. F. Removal of trees within the Wildfire Lands area of the City, as defined on adopted maps, for the purposes of wildfire fuel management, and in accord with the requirements of the Physical and Environmental Constraints Chapter- 18.62. G. Removal of dead trees. H. Those activities associated with tree trimming for safety reasons, as mandated by the Oregon Public Utilities Commission, by the City's Electric and Telecommunication Utility. However, the Utility shall provide an annual plan to the Tree Commission outlining tree trimming activities and reporting on tree trimming activities that were carried out in the previous year. Tree trimming shall be done, at a minimum, by a Journeyman Tree Trimmer, as defined by the Utility, and will be done in conformance and to comply with OPUC regulations. I. Removal of street trees within the DubUc riQht-of-wav subiect to street tree removal Dermits in AMC 13.16. SECTION 55, 18.61.042.B., Tree Preservation and Protection, Approval and Permit Required, Verification Permit, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.61.042, Approval and Permit Required B. TREE REMOVAL - VERIFICATION PERMIT: 1. If a site has received development approval through a planning action consistent with the standards of this chapter, then a Verification Permit shall be required for those trees approved for removal through that process. To obtain a verification permit, an applicant must clearly identify on the property the trees to be removed by tying pink tagging tape around each tree and submitting a site plan indicating the location of the requested trees. Vegetation 4" to 6" DBH that is to be removed shall also be marked with pink tagging tape. The Staff Advisor may require the building footprint of the development to be staked to allow for accurate verification of the permit application. The Staff Advisor will then verify that the requested trees match the site plan approved with the planning action. The City shall require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each tree pursuant to AMC 18.61.084. Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approval of the original development permit. 2. Verification permits shall be required prior to the issuance of an excavation Dermit or building permit and Drior to any site disturbance and/or storaQe of materials on fetoo the subject property. Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 28 - SECTION 56, 18.61.042.0., Tree Preservation and Protection, Approval and Permit Required, Tree Removal, staff Permit, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: D. TREE REMOVAL - STAFF PERMIT: 1. Tree Removal-Staff Permits are required for the following activities: a. Removal of trees greater than 6" DBH on any private lands zoned C-I, E-I, M- I, or He. b. Removal of trees greater than 6" DBH on multi-family residentially zoned lots (R-2, R-3, and R-1-3.5) not occupied solely by a single family detached dwelling. c. Removal of significant trees on vacant property zoned for residential purposes including but not limited to R-I, RR, WR, and NM zones. d. Removal of significant trees on lands zoned SOU, on lands under the control of the Ashland School District, or on lands under the control of the City of Ashland. 2. Applications for Tree Removal - Staff Permits shall be reviewed and approved by the Staff Advisor pursuant to AMC 18.61.080 (Approval Criteria) and 18.108.0a~0 (~ I ProcedureNetiee Reqtlire...e,.ts). If the tree removal is part of another planning action involving development activities, the tree removal application, if timely filed, shall be processed concurrently with the other planning action. SECTION 57, 18.61.050.A., Tree Preservation and Protection, Plans Required, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.61.050 Platts Submittal Requirements.a A. An application for all Tree Removal and Tree Topping Permits shall be ...aEle tlpe,. fer...s preseribeEl bOt the City. The applieatie,. fer a Tree Re...e'./al Per...its include: a. Plans drawn to scale shaH contain!n9...-e.-,t=Fhe number, size, species and location of the trees proposed to be removed or topped on a site plan of the property. b. The anticipated date of removal or topping. c. A statement of the reason for removal or topping. d. Information concerning proposed landscaping or planting of new trees to replace the trees to be removed, and e. Evidence that the trees proposed for removal or toppinQe8 have been clearly identified on the property for visual inspection. f. A Tree Protection Plan that includes trees located on the subiect site that are not DroDosed for removal. and any off-site trees where driD lines extend into DroDosed landscaDed areas on the subiect site. Such Dlans shall conform to the Drotection requirements under Section 18.61.200. 9:-Any other information reasonably required by the City. SECTION 58, 18.61.080.8., Tree Preservation and Protection, Criteria for Issuance of Tree Removal Staff Permit, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.61.080 Criteria for Issuance of Tree Removal Staff Permit Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 29 - An applicant for a Tree Removal Staff Permit shall demonstrate that the following criteria are satisfied. The Staff Advisor may require an arborist's report to substantiate the criteria for a permit. B. Tree that is Not a Hazard: The City shall issue a tree removal permit for a tree that is not a hazard if the applicant demonstrates all of the following: 1. The tree is proposed for removal in order to permit the application to be consistent with other applicable Ashland Land Use Ordinance requirements and standards. includinQ but not limited to . (e.g. ether applicable Site Design and Use Standards and Phvsical and Environmental Constraintsi'. The Staff Advisor may require the building footprint of the development to be staked to allow for accurate verification of the permit application; and 2. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on erosion, soil stability, flow of surface waters, protection of adjacent trees, or existing windbreaks; and 3. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on the tree densities, sizes, canopies, and species diversity within 200 feet of the subject property. The City shall grant an exception to this criterion when alternatives to the tree removal have been considered and no reasonable alternative exists to allow the property to be used as permitted in the zone. Nothing in this section shall require that the residential density be reduced below the permitted density allowed by the zone. In making this determination, the City may consider alternative site plans or placement of structures or alternate landscaping designs that would lessen the impact on trees, so long as the alternatives continue to comply with other provisions of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance. 4. The City shall require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each tree granted approval pursuant to AMC 18.61.084. Such mitigation requirements shall be.a condition of approval of the permit. SECTION 59, 18.61.084, Tree Preservation and Protection, Mitigation Required, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.61.084, Mitigation Required An applicant ft'IitY shall be required to provide mitigation for any tree approved for removal. The mitigation requirement shall be satisfied by one or more of the following: A. Replanting on site. The applicant shall plant either a minimum 1 V2-inch caliper healthy and well-branched deciduous tree or a 5-6 foot tall evergreen tree for each tree removed. The replanted tree shall be of a species that will eventually equal or exceed the removed tree in size if appropriate for the new location. LarQer trees mav be reQuired where the mitiQation is intended. in Dart. to reDlace a visual screen between land uses. "Suitable" sDecies means the tree's Qrowth habits and environmental reQuirements are conducive to Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 30 - the site. aiven the existina toooaraohv. soils. other veaetation. exoosure to wind and sun. nearby structures. overhead wires. etc. The tree shall be planted and maintained according to the specifications in the City Tree Planting and Maintenance Guidelines as approved by the City Council. B. Replanting off site. If in the City's determination there is insufficient available space on the subject property, the replanting required in subsection A shall occur on other property in the applicant's ownership or control within the City, in an open space tract that is part of the same subdivision, or in a City owned or dedicated open space or park. Such mitigation planting is subject to the approval of the authorized property owners. If planting on City owned or dedicated property, the City may specify the species and size of the tree. Nothing in this section shall be construed as an obligation of the City to allow trees to be planted on City owned or dedicated property. C. Payment in lieu of planting. If in the City's determination no feasible alternative exists to plant the required mitigation, the applicant shall pay into the tree account an amount as established by resolution of the City Council. D. An aooroved mitiaation olan shall be fully imolemented within one year of a tree beina removed unless otherwise set forth in a tree removal aoolication and aooroved in the tree removal oermit. SECTION 60, 18.61.092, Tree Preservation and Protection, Expiration of Tree Removal Permits, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.61.092, Expiration of Tree Removal Permits Tree removal permits shall remain valid for a period of one year180 fla'{s from the date of issuance or date of final decision by a hearing body, if applicable. A 30 day extension shall be automatically granted by the Staff Advisor if requested in writing before the expiration of the permit. Permits that have lapsed are void. Trees removed after a tree removal permit has expired shall be considered a violation of this Chapter. SECTION 61, 18.62.040.H., Physical and Environmental Constraints, Approval and Permit Required, Plans Required of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.62.040 Approval and Permit Required. H. Plans Required. The following plans shall be required for any development requiring a Physical Constraints Review: 1. The plans shall contain the following: a. Project name. b. Vicinity map. c. Scale (the scale shall be at least one inch equals 50 feet or larger) utilizing the largest scale that fits on 22" x 34" paper. Multiple plans or layers shall be prepared at the same scale, excluding detail drawings. The Staff Advisor may authorize different scales and olan sheet sizes for oroiects. orovided the olans orovide sufficient information to clearly identify and evaluate the aoolication reauest. d. North arrow. Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 31 - e. Date. f. Street names and locations of all existing and proposed streets within or on the boundary of the proposed development. g. Lot layout with dimensions for all lot lines. h. Location and use of all proposed and existing buildings, fences and structures within the proposed development. Indicate which buildings are to remain and which are to be removed. i. Location and size of all public utilities affected by the proposed development. j. Location of drainage ways or public utility easements in and adjacent to the proposed development. Location of all other easements. k. topographic map of the site at a contour interval of not less than two feet nor greater than five feet. The topographic map shall also include a slope analysis, indicating buildable areas, as shown in the graphic. I. Location of all parking areas and spaces, ingress and egress on the site, and on-site circulation. m Accurate locations of all existing natural features including, but not limited to, all trees as required in 18.62.080.D.l, including those of a caliper equal to or greater than six inches d.b.h., native shrub masses with a diameter of ten feet or greater, natural drainage, swales, wetlands, ponds, springs, or creeks on the site, and outcroppings of rocks, boulders, etc. Natural features on adjacent properties potentially impacted by the proposed development shall also be included, such as trees with driplines extending across property lines. In forested areas, it is necessary to identify only those trees which will be affected or removed by the proposed development. Indicate any contemplated modifications to a natural feature. n. The proposed method of erosion control, water runoff control, and tree protection for the development as required by this chapter. o. Building envelopes for all existing and proposed new parcels that contain only buildable area, as defined by this Chapter. p. Location of all irrigation canals and major irrigation lines. q. Location of all areas of land disturbance, including cuts, fills, driveways, building sites, and other construction areas. Indicate total area of disturbance, total percentage of project site proposed for disturbance, and maximum depths and heights of cuts and fill. r. Location for storage or disposal of all excess materials resulting from cuts associated with the proposed development. s. Applicant name, firm preparing plans, person responsible for plan preparation, and plan preparation dates shall be indicated on all plans. t. Proposed timeline for development based on estimated date of approval, including completion dates for specific tasks. 2. Additional plans and studies as required in Sections 18.62.070, 18.62.080, 18.62.090 and 18.62.100 of this Chapter. SECTION 62, 18.62.0S0.A., Physical and Environmental Constraints, Land Classifications, Flood plain Corridor Lands, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.62.050 Land Classifications. The following factors shall be used to determine the classifications of various lands and their constraints to building and development on them: Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 32 - A. Flood plain Corridor Lands - Lands with potential stream flow and flood hazard. The following lands are classified as Flood plain Corridor lands: 1. All land contained within the 100 year Flood plain as defined by the Federal Flood Insurance ProQram E,"ergenE", "anage,"ent AgenEY, and in maps adopted by Chapter 15.10 of the Ashland Municipal Code. 2. All land within the area defined as Flood plain Corridor land in maps adopted by the Council as provided for in section 18.62.060. 3. All lands which have physical or historical evidence of flooding in the historical past. 4. All areas within 20 feet (horizontal distance) of any creek designated for Riparian Preservation in 18.62.050.B and depicted as such on maps adopted by the Council as provided for in section 18.62.060. 5. All areas within ten feet (horizontal distance) of any drainage channel depicted on maps adopted by the Council but not designated as Riparian Preservation. SECTION 63, 18.62.070. A. , Physical and Environmental Constraints, Development Standards for Flood Plain Corridor Lands, Standards for Fill, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.62.070 Development Standards for Flood plain Corridor Lands. For all land use actions which could result in development of the Flood plain Corridor, the following is required in addition to any requirements of Chapter 15.10: A. Standards for fill in Flood plain Corridor lands: 1. Fill shall be designed as required by the Uniter," International Building Code and International Residential Code, ChaptEr 79, where applicable. 2. The toe of the fill shall be kept at least ten feet outside of floodway channels, as defined in section 15.10, and the fill shall not exceed the angle of repose of the material used for fill. 3. The amount of fill in the Flood plain Corridor shall be kept to a minimum. Fill and other material imported from off the lot that could displace floodwater shall be limited to the following: a. Poured concrete and other materials necessary to build permitted structures on the lot. b. Aggregate base and paving materials, and fill associated with approved public and private street and driveway construction. c. Plants and other landscaping and agricultural material. d. A total of 50 cubic yards of other imported fill material. e. The above limits on fill shall be measured from April 1989, and shall not exceed the above amounts. These amounts are the maximum cumulative fill that can be imported onto the site, regardless of the number of permits issued. 4. If additional fill is necessary beyond the permitted amounts in (3) above, then fill materials must be obtained on the lot from cutting or excavation only to the extent necessary to create an elevated site for permitted development. All additional fill material shall be obtained from the portion of the lot in the Flood plain Corridor. 5. Adequate drainage shall be provided for the stability of the fill. 6. Fill to raise elevations for a building site shall be located as close to the outside edge of the Flood plain Corridor as feasible. Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 33 - SECTION 64, 18.62.070.G., Physical and Environmental Constraints, Development Standards for Flood Plain Corridor Lands, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.62.070 Development Standards for Flood plain Corridor Lands. For all land use actions which could result in development of the Flood plain Corridor, the following is required in addition to any requirements of Chapter 15.10: G. New non-residential uses may be located on that portion of Flood plain Corridor lands that equal to or above the flood elevations on the official maps adopted in section 18.62.060. Second story construction may be cantilevered or suooorted bv oillars that will have minimal imoact on the flow of floodwaters over the Flood plain corridor for a distance of 20 feet if it does not imoact rioarian veaetation, and the clearance from finished grade is at least ten feet in height, and is supparted bV pillars that will have minimal impact on the flow of floodwaters. The finished floor elevation may not be more than two feet below the flood corridor elevations. SECTION 65, 18.62.080.8.1., Physical and Environmental Constraints, Development Standards for Hillside Lands, Hillside Grading and Erosion Control, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.62.080 Development Standards for Hillside Lands. B. Hillside Grading and Erosion Control. All development on lands classified as hillside shall provide plans conforming with the following items: 1. All grading, retaining wall design, drainage, and erosion control plans for development on Hillside Lands shall be designed by a geotechnical expert. All cuts, grading or fills shall conform to Chapter 79 af the U"ifar"" International Building Code and be consistent with the orovisions of this Title. Erosion control measures on the development site shall be required to minimize the solids in runoff from disturbed areas. SECTION 66, 18.62.080.D.4., Physical and Environmental Constraints, Development Standards for Hillside Lands, Tree Conservation, Protection and Removal, Tree Protection, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.62.080 Development Standards for Hillside Lands. D. Tree Conservation, Protection and Removal. All development on Hillside Lands shall conform to the following requirements: 4. Tree Protection. On all properties where trees are required to be preserved during the course of development, the developer shall follow the following tree protection standards: a. All trees designated for conservation shall be clearly marked on the project site. Prior to the start of any clearing, stripping, stockpiling, trenching, grading, compaction, paving or change in ground elevation, the applicant shall install fencing at the drip line of all trees to be preserved adjacent to or Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 34 - in the area to be altered. Temporary fencing shall be established at the perimeter of the dripline. Prior to grading or issuance of any permits, the fences may be inspected and their location approved by the Staff Advisor. (see gral'hiE18.61.200) c Tree Conserva t ion .\, Guideline , , '. b. Construction site activities, including but not limited to parking, material storage, soil compaction and concrete washout, shall be arranged so as to prevent disturbances within tree protection areas. / - ----,Dripline Tree O:lI1()~Y~ 8' / '\( r I \ I \ , , , '...._-~--/ To provide minimum prol eel ion I 0 I he root area, I ake I he greal esl radius from I runk I 0 dripline and creal e a regular circle, using I he longesl radius, ral her I han I 0 follow an irregular, above ground, exisl ing I ree dripline. c. No grading, stripping, compaction, or significant change in ground elevation shall be permitted within the drip line of trees designated for conservation unless indicated on the grading plans, as approved by the City, and landscape professional. If grading or construction is approved within the dripline, a landscape professional may be required to be present during grading operations, and shall have authority to require protective measures to protect the roots. d. Changes in soil hydrology and site drainage within tree protection areas shall be minimized. Excessive site run-off shall be directed to appropriate storm drain facilities and away from trees designated for conservation. e. Should encroachment into a tree protection area occur which causes irreparable damage, as determined by a landscape professional, to trees, the project plan shall be revised to compensate for the loss. Under no Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 35 - circumstances shall the developer be relieved of responsibility for compliance with the provisions of this chapter. SECTION 67, 18.64, SO, Southern Oregon State College District, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: CHAPTER 18.64, SO, SOUTHERN OREGON UNIVERSITY STATE COLLECE DISTRICT SECTION 68, 18.64.010, SO, Southern Oregon State College District, Purpose, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.64.010 Purpose. This district is designed to provide for the unique needs of sesE SOU as a State educational institution functioning within the planning framework of the City. It can be applied to all areas now or hereinafter owned by the State of Oregon acting by and through the State Board of Higher Education and Southern Oregon stMe Cellege University and located within the sesE SOU boundary, as shown on the sesE SOU Comprehensive Plan, adopted by sesE SOU and approved by the City. SECTION 69, 18.64.020, Southern Oregon State College District, Permitted Uses, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.64.020 Permitted Uses. A. Uses permitted outright are all those which are directly related to the educational functions of sesESOU, provided that such uses are indicated and located in conformance with the adopted and City approved SOSC SOU Comprehensive Plan, and are greater than fifty (50) feet from privately owned property. B. Wireless Communication Facilities authorized Dursuant to Section 18.72.180. SECTION 70, 18.64.030, Southern Oregon State College District, Conditional Uses, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.64.030 Conditional Uses. A. Any use, site design, or construction or alteration of same not agreed upon in advance by the City and SOSC SOU in the sesE SOU Plan. B. Any use, site design, or construction within fifty (50) feet of privately-owned property. C. Any construction over forty (40) feet in height. D. Wireless Communication Facilities not Dermitted outriaht and authorized Dursuant to Section 18.72.180. SECTION 71, 18.64.040, Southern Oregon State College District, General Regulations, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.64.040 General Regulations. Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 36 - This Chapter, together with the Site Review, Sign and Off-Street Parking Chapters of this Title, are the only portions of the Title to be effective within the seSE SOU zone, except for areas within fifty (50) feet of privately-owned land, which are subject to the Chapter on Conditional Use Permits.In addition, the creation or vacation of public streets or public ways shall be subject to mutual agreement between the 'City and seSE SOU and all other applicable laws. SECTION 72, 18.68.040, General Regulations, Yard Measurements, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.68.040, Yard ~4easl:lrements Reauirements. All yard measurements to and between buildings or structures or for the purpose of computing coverage or similar requirements shall be made to the building or nearest projection.thereaf and shall be I:Inabstrl:leted tram the gral:lndl:ll'ward, exeel't thitt-Aarchitectural projections may intrude eighteen (18) inches into Nte reauired yard~ reql:lirement. SECTION 73, 18.68.090, General Regulations, Nonconforming Uses and Structures, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.68.090, Nonconforming Uses and Structures A. A non-conforming use or structure may not be enlarged, extended, reconstructed, substituted, or structurally altered, except as follows: 1. When authorized in accordance with the same procedure as provided in Conditional Use Chapter 18.104 and the criteria of Section 18.104.050(8 and Cl, a nonconforming use may be changed to one of the same or a more restricted nature. exceot that a Conditional Use Permit need not be obtained when the use is chanaed to a oermitted use within the zonina district. 2. When authorized in accordance with the same procedure as provided in Conditional Use Chapter 18.104 and the criteria of Section 18.104.050(8 and Cl, aft existing nonconformina structure may be enlarged, extended, reconstructed or the footorint modified, ar strl:letl:lrally altered, except that a Conditional Use Permit need not be obtained ta enlarge ar extend a single famil"{ hame in the residential distrid, I'ra,,'ided that when the addition or extension meets all requirements of this Title. 3. A non-conforming structure may be enlarged, reeanstrl:lded restored or rehabilitated ar strl:ldl:lrall'f altered if its faatl'rint is not changed in size or shape, orovided that the use of the structure is not chanaed exceot if in conformance with the orocedures of Section 18.68.090.A.1 above. 4. Nothina in this section shall be deemed to orevent the normal maintenance and reoair of a non-conformina structure or its restoration to a safe condition when declared to be unsafe bv any official charaed with orotectina oubUc safety. 5. A leaal nonconformina structure or nonconformina use that is damaaed to an extent of 500/0 or more of its reolacement cost may be restored onlv if the damaae was not intentionallv caused bv the orooertv owner and the nonconformity is not increased. Anv residential structure(sl, includina multiole-familv, in a residential zone damaaed beyond 500/0 of its reolacement cost bv a catastroohe. such as fire that is not intentionallv caused bv the owner. may be reconstructed at the oriainal Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 37 - density orovided the reconstruction is commenced within 2 years after the catastroohe. B. Discontinuance. If the nonconforming use of a building structure, or premises ceases for a period of six (6) months or more, said use shall be considered abandoned; and said building, structure, or premises shall thereafter be used only for uses permitted in the district in which it is located. Discontinuance shall not include a period of active reconstruction following a fire or other result of natural hazard; and the Planning Commission may extend the discontinuance period in the event of special unique unforeseen circumstances. C. Reactivation. A non-conforming use, which has been abandoned for a period of more than six (6) months may be reactivated to an equivalent or more restricted use through the Conditional Use and Site Review process. In evaluating whether or not to permit the reactivation of a non-conforming use, the Planning Commission, in addition to using the criteria required for a Conditional Use Permit and Site Review, shall also use the following additional criteria: 1. That any improvements for the reactivation of the non-conforming use te al'l existil'lg l'Iel'l eel'lfermil'lg strl:ldl:lre on the site shall be less than fifty (50%) percent of the value of the structure. The value of the structure shall be determined by either the assessed vall:le aeeerdil'lg te the Jael(sel'l Cel:ll'lt}. Assesser er an independent real estate appraiser licensed in the State of Oregon. The value of the imorovement shall be determined based uoon cooies of the contractor's bid for said imorovements. which shall be reauired with the Conditional Use oermit aoolication. Personal property necessary for the operation of the business or site improvements not included in the structure shall not be counted as improvements under this criterionthis eriteria. 2. An assessment that the traffic generated by the proposed use would not be greater than permitted uses on the site. In assessing the traffic generated by the proposed use, the Planning Commission shall consider the number of vehicle trips per day, the hours of operation, and the types of traffic generated; i.e., truck or passenger vehicle. The Planning Commission shall modify the Conditional Use Permit so that the operation of the non-conforming use is limited to the same traffic impact as permitted uses in the same zone. 3. That the noise generated by the proposal will be mitigated so that it complies with the Ashland Noise Ordinance, Chapter 9.08.170, and also that it does not exceed the average ambient noise level already existing in the area, as measured by this standard. 4. That there will be no lighting of the property which would have direct illumination on adjacent uses and that there would be no reflected light from the property greater than the amount of reflected light from any permitted use in that same zone. 5. In a residential zone the findings must further address that such reactivation will further implement Goal VI, Policy 2, Housing Chapter of the Ashland Comprehensive Plan. 6. Nothing herein shall apply to non-conforming signs, which are governed by the provisions of Section 18.96.150 of this Code. D. Building or structure: Nothing contained in this Title shall require any change in the plans, construction, alteration, or designated use of a structure for which a building permit has been issued and construction has commenced prior to the adoption of the ordinance codified herein and subsequent amendments thereto, except that if the designated use will be nonconforming, it shall, for the purpose of Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 38 - subsection (B) of this Section, be a discontinued use if not in operation within two (2) years of the date of issuance of the building permit. SECTION 74, 18.68.110, General Regulations, Front Yard - General Exception, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.68.110. Front Yard-General Exceotion A. If there are dwellings or accessory buildings on both abutting lots (even if separated by an alley or private way) with front or side yards abuttina a oublic street with ef less than the required Elel'th setback for the district, the front yard for the lot need not exceed the average yard of the abutting structures. B. If there is a dwelling or accessory building on one (1) abutting lot with a front yard of less than the required depth for the district, the front yard need not exceed a depth one-half (V2) way between the depth of the abutting lot and the required front yard depth. C. The front yard may be reduced to ten (10) feet on hillside lots where the terrain has an average steepness equal to, or exceeding a one (1) foot rise or fall in Me four <.~~) feet of horizontal distance within the entire required yard, said vertical rise or fall to be measured from the natural ground level at the property line. SECTION 75, 18.68.140, General Regulations, Accessory Buildings and Structures, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.68.140 Accessory Buildings, attd Structures and Mechanical Eauioment. Accessory buildings and structures shall comply with all requirements for the principal use except where specifically modified by this Title and shall comply with the following limitations: A. A greenhouse or hothouse may be maintained accessory to a dwelling in an R district. B. A guest house may be maintained accessory to a single-family dwelling provided there are no kitchen cooking facilities in the guest house. C. Mechanical equipment shall be sl:Ibjed ta the I'ravisia"s af this Sedia". Sl:Ieh eEll:lil',"e"t shall not be located between the main structure on the site and any street adjacent to a front or side yard, and every attempt shall be made to place such equipment so that it is not visible from adjacent public streets. Mechanical eauioment and associated enclosures, no taller than allowed fence heiahts, may be located within reauired side or rear yards, orovided such installation and ooeration is consistent with other orovisions of this Title or the Ashland Municioal Code, includina but not limited to noise attenuation. Any installation of mechanical equipment shall require a building permit. D. Regardless of the side and rear yard requirements of the district, in a residential district, a side or rear yard may be reduced to three (3) feet for an accessory structure erected more than fifty (50) feet from any street, other than alleys, provided the structure is detached and separated from other buildings and structures by ten (10) feet or more, and is no more than fifteen (15) feet in height. Anv conversion of such accessory structure to an accessory residential unit shall conform to other reauirements of this Title for Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 39 - accessory residential units. includina any reauired olannina action and/or site review. SECTION 76, 18.68.160, General Regulations, Driveway Grades, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.68.160 Driveway Grades. Grades for new driveways in all zones shall not exceed a grade of 20% for any portion of the driveway. All driveways shall be designed in accord with the eriteria ef the City of Ashland standardsl"l;Iblie Werl(s Del'artA'u:At and al'l're".'ed installed prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for new construction. If required by the City, the developer or owner shall provide certification of driveway grade by a licensed land surveyor. All vision clearance standards associated with driveway entrances onto public streets shall not be subject to the Variance section of this title. SECTION 77, 18.72, Site Design and Use Standards, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: Chapter 18.72 SITE DESIGNREVIEW AND USE STANDARDS SECTION 78, 18.72.030, Site Design and Use Standards, Application, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.72.030 ApplicabilitYBefl Site design aAdl;lse standards shall apply to all zones of the city as outlined below. aAd shall al'l'l"{ te all de""'elel'",,eAt iAdieated iA this Chapter, exeel't fer these deil'elel'""eAts whieh are regl;llated by the Sl;Ibdi'J'isieAs (18.89), the l"artitieAiAg (18.76), MaAl;lfaetl;lred Hel;lsiAg (18.84) aAdl"erfer""aAee StaAdards (18.88). A. Aoolicability. The followina deyelooment is subiect to Site Desian Review: 1. Commercial. Industrial, Non-Residential and Mixed uses: a. All new structures, additions or expansions in C-l, E-l, HC and M zones. b. All new non-residential structures or additions (e.a. oublic buildinas. schools. churches. etc.l. c. Exoansion of imoervious surface area in excess of 100/0 of the area of the site or 1.000 sauare feet. whichever is less. d. Exoansion of oarkina lots. relocation of oarkina soaces on a site. or other chanaes which affect circulation. e. Any chanae of occuoancy from a less intensive to a more intensive occuoancy. as defined in the City buildina code. or any chanae in use which reauires a areater number of Darkina SDaces. f. Any chanae in use of a lot from one aeneral use cateaory to another aeneral use cateaory. e.a.. from residential to commercial. as defined by the zonina reaulations of this Code. Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 40 - g. Anv exterior chanae to a structure which reauires a buildina oermit and is listed on the National Reaister of Historic Places or to a contributina orooertv within an Historic District on the National Reaister of Historic Places. h. Mechanical eauioment not otherwise exemot from site desian review oer Section 18.72.030CB). 2. Residential uses: a. Two or more residential units on a sinale lot. b. Construction of attached sinale-familv housina C e.a. town homes. condominiums, row houses, etc.) in all zonina districts. c. Residential develooment when off-street oarkina or landscaoina, in coniunction with an aooroved Performance Standards Subdivision reauired bv ordinance and not located within the boundaries of the individual unit Darcel Ce.a. shared oarkina). d Anv exterior chanae to a structure which reauires a buildina oermit and is individuallv listed on the National Reaister of Historic Places. e. Mechanical eauioment not otherwise exemot from site desian review oer Section 18.72.030CB). B. Exemotions. The followina develooment is exemot from Site Desian Review aoolication and orocedure reauirements orovided that the develooment comolies with aoolicable standards as set forth bv this Chaoter. 1. Detached sinale familv dwellinas and associated accessory structures and uses. 2. Land divisions reaulated bv the followina chaoters: Partitionina C18.76), Subdivisions C18.80), Manufactured Housina C18.84) and Performance Standards C18.88). 3. The followina mechanical eauioment: a. Private, non-commercial radio and television antennas not exceedina a heiaht of seventy (70) feet above arade or thirty (30) feet above an existina structure, whichever heiaht is areater and orovided no Dart of such antenna shall be within the yards reauired bv this Title. A buildina oermit shall be reauired for any antenna mast, or tower over fifty CSO) feet above arade or thirty (30) feet above an existina structure when the same is constructed on the roof of the structure. b. Not more than three (3) oarabolic disc antennas, each under one Cl) meter in diameter, on any one lot or dwellina unit. c. Roof-mounted solar collection devices in all zonina districts, with the exceotion of Emolovment and Commercial zoned orooerties located within desianated historic districts. The devices shall comolv with solar setback standards described in 18.70 and heiaht reauirements of the resoective zonina district. d. Installation of mechanical eauioment not exemoted bv Ca, b, c) above or Ce) below, and which is not visible from a oublic riaht-of- way or adiacent residentiallv zoned orooertv and consistent with other orovisions of this Title, includina solar access, noise, and setback reauirements of Section 18.68.140Cc). e. Routine maintenance and reolacement of existina mechanical eauioment in all zones. Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 41 - SECTION 79, 18.72.040, Approval Process, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.72.040, Approval Process. DeveloDment subiect to site desian review shall be reviewed in accordance with the Drocedures set forth in ChaDter 18.108. A. Staff Per",it. The felle'wi..g t'il'es ef Ele'.'e1el'",e..ts shall be stlbjed te a I'l're..a I tI..Eler the Staff Per",it Pref:eEltlre. A.., Staff Per",it ",ay be I'reeesseEl as a T'~'l'e I I'er",it at the Eliseretie.. ef the Staff AEI',,"iser. 1. A""f f:ha..ge ef eef:tll'a..f:Y fre", a less i..te..sive te a ",ere i..te..si~e eeetll'a..e';, as Elefi..eEl i.. the Cit"t' btlilEli..g f:eEle, er a..', f:ha..ge i.. tlse '.vhieh reEltlires a greater "tI",ber ef I'arld..g sl'af:es. 2. A..}. aElElitie.. less tha.. 2,599 sEltlare feet er te.. I'erf:e..t ef the builEli..g's sEltlare feetage, whif:heyer is less, te a btlilEli..g. 3. A..}" tlse v;hieh restllts i.. three er If:sS Elwelli..g tI..its I'er let, ether tha.. si..gle fa",i1}' he",es e.. i..EliviEltlal lets. 4. All i..stallatie..s ef ",ef:ha..ieal eEltlil'",e..t i.. a..', ze..e. I..stallatie.. ef Elise a..te....as shall be stlbjeet te the reEltlire",e..ts ef Sedie.. 18.72.169. A..,; Elise a..te....a fer f:e",,,,erdal tlse i.. a resiEle..tial ze..e shall alse be stlbjeet te a Ce..Elitie..al Use Per",it (18.194). (OrEl. 2289 S5, 1984; OrEl. 2457 S4, 1988). 5. All i..stallatie.. ef wireless ee"''''tI..ieatie.. s'fste",s shall be stlbjed te the reEltlire",e..ts ef Sedie.. 18.72.189, i.. aElElitie.. te all al'l'lieable Site Desig.. a..EI Use Sta..ElarEls a..EI are stlbjeet te the fellewi..g apprsyal precEss: Ze..i..g Desig..atie..s AttaeheEl te Alter..ative Freesta..Eli..g Existi..g Strtlettlres Stll'l'ert Strtlettlres Strtlettlres ResiEle..tial Ze..esffl EYP PrehibiteEl PrehibiteEl G-l- EYP EYP PrehibiteEl C 1 D (Dew..tev;..)~ EYP PrehibiteEl PrehibiteEl C 1 FrecvJa,. 8\:erla..- Site Re,,'iew Site RC1riew EYP E-t- Site Re'.iew Site Re,.iew EYP M-l- Site Re'.iew Site Re,,'iew EYP 59 Site Review EYP EYP N~4 (Nerth ~4etl..tai..) PrehibiteEl PrehibiteEl PrehibiteEl Histerif: Distrid~ EYP PrehibiteEl PrehibiteEl A 1 (Airl'ert O....erla"t.) EYP EYP EYP HC (Health Care) EYP PrehibiteEl PrehibiteEl Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 42 - ~ 01'11', alleweEl el'l existil'lg strtlettlres greater thal'l 45 feet il'l height. Fer the ptlrpese:s ef this sectiel'l in resiElential zening Elistriets, existing strtlettlres shall il'leltlEle the replaee""el'lt ef existil'lg pele, ""ast, er tewer strtlettlres (stleh as staElitl"" light tewers) fer the eembil'leEl ptlrpeses ef their pre'lietls tlse al'lEl wireless eemmtll'lieatiel'l faeilities. ~ permitteEl el'l pre existil'lg strtlettlres with a height greater thal'l 59 feet il'l the DeWl'lte.lfl'l Cemmereial Elistriet. PrehibiteEl il'l all ether Elistriets withil'l the Histerie Distriet, as Elefil'leEl il'l the Cemprehel'lshl'e Plal'l. 6. AA., exterier ehaAgfl te aA"f strtlettlre IisteEl eA the NatieAal Register ef Histerie "'Iaees." (ORD 2892, 52 1997) (OrEl 2852 53, 2999; OrEl 2858 56, 2(99) B. T'I"e I "'reeeEltlre. The fellewiAg ty"es ef Ele".'e1e"...eAts shall he stlhjed te a""re....al tlAEler the T"t'"e I "reeeEltlre: 1. AA.,. ehaAge iA tlSfl ef a let fre... eAe geAeral tlse eategery te aAether geAeral tlse eategery, fl.g., fre... resiEleAtial te ee......ereial as ElefiAeEl ht' the EeAiAg rflgtllatieAs ef this CeEle. 2. AAt' resiEleAtial tlse v;hieh restllts iA fetlr EI..'ieIliAg tlAits er ...ere eA a ?M.- 3. All AflW strtldtlres er aElElitieAs greatflr thaA 2,599 sEltlare feet, exee"t fer Ele,..e1e"...eAts iAeltlEleEl iA 5fletieA 18.72.940(A). SECTION 80, 18.72.050, Site Design and Use Standards, Detail Site Review Zone, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.72.050 Detail Site Review Zone. A. The Detail Site Review Zone is that area defined in the Site Design Standards adopted pursuant to Section 18.72.080. B. Any development in the Detail Site Review Zone as defined in the Site Review Standards adopted pursuant to this chapter, which exceeds 10,000 square feet or is longer than 100 feet in length or width, shall be reviewed according to the Type 2 procedure. C. Outside the Downtown Design Standards Zone, new buildings or expansions of existing buildings in the Detail Site Review Zone shall conform with to the following standards: 1. it. Buildings sharing a common wall or having walls touching at or above grade shall be considered as one building. b~.Buildings shall not exceed a building footprint area of 45,000 square feet as measured outside the exterior walls and including all interior courtyards. For the purpose of this section an interior courtyard means a space bounded on three or more sides by walls but not a roof. ~e. Buildings shall not exceed a gross floor area of 45,000 square feet, including all interior floor space, roof top parking, and outdoor retail and storage areas, with the followi ng exception: Automobile parking areas located within the building footprint and in the basement shall not count toward the total gross floor area. Fer the "tlr"ese ef this seetieA, hase...eAt ...eaAS aA" fleer le....el hfllew the first ster'~' iA a htlilEliAg. First sterol shall haye the sa...e ...eaAiAg as "re'..iEleEl iA the htlilEliAg eeEle. Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 43 - ~e.Buildings shall not exceed a combined contiguous building length of 300 feet. ~. Inside the Downtown Design Standards Zone, new buildings or expansions of existing buildings shall not exceed a building footprint area of 45,000 sq. ft. or a gross floor area of 45,000 sq. ft., including roof top parking, with the following exception: Automobile parking areas located within the building footprint and in the basement shall not count toward the total gross floor area. Fer the purpese ef this seEtieR, base...eRt ...eaRS aR'f fleer I e....e I belew the first stert" iR a btlildiRg. First stery shall haV'e the sa...e ...eaRiRg as pre...ided iR the btlildiRg Eede. SECTION 81, 18.72.060, Site Design and Use Standards, Plans Required, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.72.060. Plans Required The following submittals shall be required in order to determine the project's compliance with this Chapter: A site plan containing the following: A. Project name. B. Vicinity map. C. Scale (the scale shall be at least one (1) inch equals fifty (50) feet or larger.) The Staff Advisor may authorize different scales and Dlan sheet sizes for Droiects. Drovided the Dlans Drovide sufficient information to c1earlv identify and evaluate the aDDlication reauest. D. North arrow. E. Date. F. Street names and locations of all existing and proposed streets within or on the boundary of the proposed development. G. Lot layout with dimensions for all lot lines. H. Zoning designations of the proposed development. 1. Zoning designations adjacent to the proposed development. J. Location and use of all proposed and existing buildings, fences and structures within the proposed development. Indicate which buildings are to remain and which are to be removed. K. Location and size of all public utilities in and adjacent to the proposed development with the locations shown of: 1. Water lines and meter sizes. 2. Sewers, manholes and c1eanouts. 3. Storm drainage and catch basins. 4. Opportunity-to-recycle site and solid waste receptacle, including proposed screening. L. The proposed location of: 1. Connection to the City water system. 2. Connection to the City sewer system. 3. Connection to the City electric utility system. 4. The proposed method of drainage of the site. M. Location of drainage ways or public utility easements in and adjacent to the proposed development. N. Location, size and use of all contemplated and existing public areas within the proposed development. Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 44 - O. All fire hydrants proposed to be located near the site and all fire hydrants proposed to be located within the site. P. A topographic map of the site at a contour interval of at least five (5) feet. Q. Location of all parking areas and all parking spaces, ingress and egress on the site, and on-site circulation. R. Use designations for all areas not covered by building. S. Locations of all existing natural features including, but not limited to, any existing trees of a caliber greater than six inches diameter at breast height, except in forested areas, and any natural drainage ways or creeks existing on the site, and any outcroppings of rocks, boulders, etc. Indicate any contemplated modifications to a natural feature. T. A landscape plan showing the location, type and variety, size and any other pertinent features of the proposed landscaping and plantings. At time of installation, such plans shall include a layout of irrigation facilities and ensure the plantings will continue to grow. U. The elevations and locations of all proposed signs for the development. V. For non-residential developments proposed on properties located in a Historic District. an exterior wall section. window section and drawings of architectural details (e.q. column width. cornice and base detail. relief and projection. etc.) drawn to a scale of three-fourths (3/4) of an inch equals one (1) foot or larger. VW. Exterior elevations of all buildings to be proposed on the site. Such plans shall indicate the material, color, texture, shape and other design features of the building, including all mechanical devices. Elevations shall be submitted drawn to scale of one inch equals ten feet or greater. WX A written summary showing the following: 1. For commercial and industrial developments: a. The square footage contained in the area proposed to be developed. b. The percentage of the lot covered by structures. c. The percentage of the lot covered by other impervious surfaces. d. The total number of parking spaces. e. The total square footage of all landscaped areas. 2. For residential developments: a. The total square footage in the development. b. The number of dwelling units in the development (include the units by the number of bedrooms in each unit, e.g., ten one-bedroom, 25 two- bedroom, etc). c. Percentage of lot coverage by: i. Structures. ii. Streets and roads. iii. Recreation areas. iv. Landscaping. v. Parking areas. 3. For all developments, the following shall also be required: The method and type of energy proposed to be used for heating, cooling and lighting of the building, and the approximate annual amount of energy used per each source and the methods used to make the approximation. SECTION 82, 18.72.080, Site Design and Use Standards, Site Design Standards, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.72.080 Site Design Standards. Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 45 - A. The Council may adopt standards by ordinance for site design and use. These standards may contain: 1. Additional approval criteria for developments affected by this Chapter. 2. Information and recommendations regarding project and unit design and layout, landscaping, energy use and conservation, and other considerations regarding the site design. 3. Interpretations of the intent and purpose of this Chapter applied to specific examples. 4. Other information or educational materials the Council deems advisable. B. Before the Council may adopt or amend the guidelines, a public hearing must be held by the Planning Commission and a recommendation and summary of the hearing forwarded to the Council for its consideration. C. The Site Desian and Use Standards adooted by Ordinance No's. 2690, 2800, 2825 and 2900, shall be aoolied as follows: 1. The Multi-familY Residential Develooment Standards in Section II.B. shall be aoolied to the construction of attached sinale-familY housina (e.a. town homes, condominiums, row houses, etc.). 2. The Commercial, Emoloyment, and Industrial Develooment standards in Section II.C. shall be aoolied to non-residential develooment (e.a. oublic buildinas, schools, etc. ). SECTION 83, 18.72.105, Site Design and Use Standards, Expiration of Site Design Review Approval, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is added and reads as follows: 18.72.105 Expiration of Site Design Review Approval~ Site desian review aooroval aranted under this Chaoter shall exoire if no buildina oermit or oublic imorovement olan for the oroiect has been aooroved by the City within twelve (12) months of site desian review aooroval. SECTION 84, 18.72.120, Site Design and Use Standards, Controlled Access, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.72.120 Controlled access. A. Prier te aAny partitioning or subdivision of property located in an R-2, R-3, C-1, E-1 or M-1 zone shall meet the controlled access standards set forth in section (B) below. shall be al'l'lieEl anEl, if neeessar"i, If aoolicable, cross access easements shall be required so that access to all properties created by the I'artitiening land division can be made from one or more points. B. Street and driveway Agccess points in an R-2, R-3, C-1, E-1 or M-1 zone shall be limited to the following: 1. Distance between driveways. On arterial streets - 100 feet; on collector streets - 75 feet; on residential streets - 50 feet. 2. Distance from intersections. On arterial streets - 100 feet; on collector streets - 50 feet; on residential streets - 35 feet. Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 46 - C. "'isia.. eleara..ce sta..ElarEls. 1. Ha abstrl:ldia..s greater tha.. tr....a a..EI a..e half feet high, ..ar a..', la..Elseal'i..g whieh "Jill graw greater tha.. b'..a a..EI a..e half feet high, with the excel'tia.. af trees whase ca..al", heights are at all til'l'les greater tha.. eight feet, 1'1'I at' be I'laceEl i.. a yisia.. e1eara..ee area Eleterl'l'li..eEl as fallaws: The ',;isia.. eleara..ee area at the i..terseetia.. af twa streets is the tria..gle farl'l'leEl by a Ii..e ea....edi..g I'ai..ts 2S feet fral'l'l the i..tersedia.. af I'ral'erty li..es. I.. the ease af a.. i..tersedia.. i.....al...i..g a.. aile', a..EI a street, the tria..gle is farl'l'leEl bV a Ii..e ca....edi..g I'ai..ts te.. feet ala..g the alley a..EI 2S feet ala..g the street. "."he.. the a..gle af i..terseetia.. betwee.. the street a..EI the aile'; is less tha.. 39 Elegrees, the Elista..ce shall be 2S feet. Ha strl:letl:lre ar I'artia.. thereaf shall be eredeEl withi.. te.. feet af the Elri',;ewa;-s. 2. State af Orega.. "'isia.. Cleara..ce 5ta..ElarEls. The fallawi..g stal'l'i..g site Elista..ees shall al'l'ly ta all State Highways "Jithi.. the Cit). w'ith the I'reseribeEl sl'eeEl Ii 1'1'I its. "Jertieal stal'l'i..g sight Elista..ce ta be baseEl a.. Elista..ee fral'l'l three a..EI a..e half feet aba',Je I'airel'l'le..t ta a I'ai..t six feet aba....e the I'a.....el'l'le..t. (OrEl.2S44 51, 1989) 30 mph200 feet 35 I'I'II'h225 feet 49 I'I'II'h275 feet 4S I'I'II'h325 feet 55 I'I'II'h459 feet 3. The visia.. e1eara..ce sta..ElarEls establisheEl by this seetia.. are ..at sl:lbjed ta the ....aria..ce seetia.. af this title. (OrEl. 2695 52, 1999) D~. 1. Access Requirements for Multi-family Developments. All multi-family developments which will have automobile trip generation in excess of 250 vehicle trips per day shall provide at least two driveway access points to the development. Trip generation shall be determined by the methods established by the Institute of Transportation Engineers. 2. Creating an obstructed street, as defined in 18.88.020.G, is prohibited. SECTION 85, 18.72.170. Site Design and Use Standards, Development Standards for Disc Antennas, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.72.170 Development Standards for Disc Antennas A. Building Permit Required. All disc antennas shall be subject to review and approval of the building official where required by the Building Code. B. Development Standards. All disc antennas shall be located, designed, constructed, treated and maintained in accordance with the following standards: 1. Antennas shall be installed and maintained in compliance with the requirements of the Building Code. 2. Disc antennas exceeding one (1) meter 36 i..ches in diameter shall not be permitted on the roof, except where there is no other location on the lot which provides access to receiving or transmitting signals. In no case shall any part of any antenna be located more than ten feet above the apex of the roof surface. Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 47 - Antennas mounted on the roof shall be located in the least visible location as viewed from adjacent right-of-ways, and residential structures in residential zones. 3. No more than one disc antenna shall be permitted on each tract of land. 4. Ground mounted disc antennas shall be erected or maintained to the rear of the main building, except in those instances when the subject property is cul-de-sac or corner lot where the side yard is larger than the rear yard, in which case the antenna may be located in the side yard. Antennas shall not be located in any required setback area. No portion of an antenna array shall extend beyond the property lines or into any front yard area. Guy wires shall not be anchored within any front yard area but may be attached to the building. 5. Antennas may be ground-mounted, free standing, or supported by guy wires, buildings, or other structures in compliance with the manufacturer's structural specifications. Ground-mounted antennas shall be any antenna with its base mounted directly in the ground, even if such antenna is supported or attached to the wall of a building. 6. The antenna, including guy wires, supporting structures and accessory equipment, shall be located and designed so as to minimize the visual impact on surrounding properties and from public streets. Antennas shall be screened through the addition of architectural features and/or landscaping that harmonize with the elements and characteristics of the property. The materials used in constructing the antenna shall not be unnecessarily bright, shiny, garish, or reflective. Whenever possible, disc antennas shall be constructed out of mesh material and painted a color that will blend with the background. 7. Antennas shall meet all manufacturer's specifications. The mast or tower shall be non-combustible. Corrosive hardware, such as brackets, turnbuckles, clips and similar type equipment if used, shall be protected by plating or otherwise to guard against corrosion. 8. Every antenna must be adequately grounded, for protection against a direct strike of lightning, with an adequate ground wire. Ground wires shall be of the type approved by the latest edition of the Electrical Code for grounding masts and lightning arrestors and shall be installed in a mechanical manner, with as few bends as possible, maintaining a clearance of at least two inches from combustible materials. Lightning arrestors shall be used that are approved as safe by the Underwriters' Laboratories, Inc., and both sides of the line must be adequately protected with proper arrestors to remove static charges accumulated on the line. When lead-in conductors of polyethylene ribbon-type are used, lightning arrestors must be installed in each conductor. When coaxial cable or shielded twin lead is used for lead-in, suitable protection may be provided without lightning arrestors by grounding the exterior metal sheath. 9. Antennas may contain no sign or graphic design as defined in the Ashland Sign Code, even if the sign is permitted on the property. SECTION 86, 18.72.180, Site Design and Use Standards, Development Standards for Wireless Communication Facilities, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.72.180 Development Standards for Wireless Communication Facilities. A. Purpose and Intent - The purpose of this section is to establish standards that regulate the placement, appearance and impact of wireless communication facilities, while providing residents with the ability to access and adequately utilize the services that these facilities support. Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 48 - Because of the physical characteristics of wireless communication facilities, the impact imposed by these facilities affect not only the neighboring residents, but the community as a whole. The standards are intended to ensure that the visual and aesthetic impacts of wireless communication facilities are mitigated to the greatest extent possible, especially in or near residential areas. B. Submittals - In addition to the submittals required in section 18.72.060, the following items shall be provided as part of the application for a wireless communication facility. 1. A photo of each of the major components of a similar installation, including a photo montage of the overall facility as proposed. 2. Exterior elevations of the proposed wireless communication facility (min 1"=10'). 3. A set of manufacturers specifications of the support structure, antennas, and accessory buildings with a listing of materials being proposed including colors of the exterior materials. 4. A site plan indicating all structures, land uses and zoning designation within 150 feet of the site boundaries, or 300 feet if the height of the structure is greater than 80 feet. 5. A map showing existing wireless communication facility sites operated by the applicant within a 5 mile radius of the proposed site. 6. A collocation feasibility study that adequately indicates collocation efforts were made and states the reasons collocation can or cannot occur. 7. A copy of the lease agreement for the proposed site showing that the agreement does not preclude collocation. 8. Documentation detailing the general capacity of the tower in terms of the number and type of antennas it is designed to accommodate. 9. Any other documentation the applicant feels is relevant to comply with the applicable design standards. 10. Documentation that the applicant has held a local community meeting to inform members of the surrounding area of the proposed wireless communication facility. Documentation to include: a. a copy of the mailing list to properties within 300' of the proposed facility. b. a copy of the notice of community meeting, mailed one week prior to the meeting. c. a copy of the newspaper ad placed in a local paper one week prior to the meeti ng. d. a summary of issues raised during the meeting. C. Design Standards - All wireless communication facilities shall be located, designed, constructed, treated and maintained in accordance with the following standards: 1. General Provisions a. All facilities shall be installed and maintained in compliance with the requirements of the Building Code. At the time of building permit application, written statements from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the Aeronautics Section of the Oregon Department of Transportation, and the Federal Communication Commission that the proposed wireless communication facility complies with regulations administered by that agency, or that the faCility is exempt from regulation. b. All associated transmittal equipment must be housed in a building, above or below ground level, which must be designed and landscaped to achieve minimal visual impact with the surrounding environment. Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 49 - c. Wireless communication facilities shall be exempted from height limitations imposed in each zoning district. d. WCF shall be installed at the minimum height and mass necessary for its intended use. A submittal verifying the proposed height and mass shall be prepared by a licensed engineer. e. Signage for wireless communication facilities shall consist of a maximum of two non-illuminated signs, with a maximum of two square feet each stating the name of the facility operator and a contact phone number. f. Applicant is required to remove all equipment and structures from the site and return the site to its original condition, or condition as approved by the Staff Advisor, if the facility is abandoned for a period greater than six months. Removal and restoration must occur within 90 days of the end of the six month period. 2. Preferred Designs a. Where possible, the use of existing WCF sites for new installations shall be encouraged. Collocation of new facilities on existing facilities shall be the preferred option. b. If (a) above is not feasible, WCF shall be attached to pre-existing structures, when feasible. c. If (a) or (b) above are not feasible, alternative structures shall be used with design features that conceal, camouflage or mitigate the visual impacts created by the proposed WCF. d. If (a), (b), or (c) listed above are not feasible, a monopole design shall be used with the attached antennas positioned in a vertical manner to lessens the visual impact compared to the antennas in a platform design. Platform designs shall be used only if it is shown that the use of an alternate attached antenna design is not feasible. e. Lattice towers are prohibited as freestanding wireless communication support structu res. 3. Landscaping. The following standards apply to all WCF with any primary or accessory equipment located on the ground and visible from a residential use or the publiC right-of-way a. Vegetation and materials shall be selected and sited to produce a drought resistant landscaped area. b. The perimeter of the WCF shall be enclosed with a security fence or wall. Such barriers shall be landscaped in a manner that provides a natural sight obscuring screen around the barrier to a minimum height of six feet. c. The outer perimeter of the WCF shall have a 10 foot landscaped buffer zone. d. The landscaped area shall be irrigated and maintained to provide for proper growth and health of the vegetation. e. One tree shall be required per 20 feet of the landscape buffer zone to provide a continuous canopy around the perimeter of the WCF. Each tree shall have a caliper of 2 inches, measured at breast height, at the time of planting. 4. Visual Impacts a. Antennas, if attached to a pre-existing or alternative structure shall be integrated into the existing building architecturally and, to the greatest extent possible, shall not exceed the height of the pre-existing or alternative structure. b. Wireless communication facilities shall be located in the area of minimal visual impact within the site which will allow the facility to function consistent with its purpose. Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 50 - c. Antennas, if attached to a pre-existing or alternative structure shall have a non-reflective finish and color that blends with the color and design of the structure to which it is attached. d. WCF, in any zone, must be set back from any residential zone a distance equal to twice its overall height. The setback requirement may be reduced if, as determined by the Hearing Authority, it can be demonstrated through findings of fact that increased mitigation of visual impact can be achieved within of the setback area. Underground accessory equipment is not subject to the setback requirement. e. Exterior lighting for a WCF is permitted only when required by a federal or state authority. f. All wireless communication support structures must have a non-reflective finish and color that will mitigate visual impact, unless otherwise required by other government agencies. g. Should it be deemed necessary by the Hearing Authority for the mitigation of visual impact of the WCF, additional design measures may be required. These may include, but are not limited to: additional camouflage materials and designs, facades, specific colors and materials, masking, shielding techniques. 5. Collocation standards a. Each addition of an antenna to an existing WCF requires a building permit, unless the additional antenna increases the height of the facility more than ten feet. b. Addition of antennas to an existing WCF that increases the overall height of the facility more than ten feet is subject to a site review."(ORD 2802, 53 1997) D. All installation of wireless communication svstems shall be subiect to the reauirements of this section in addition to all aDDlicable Site Desian and Use Standards and are subiect to the followina aDDroval Drocess: Zonina Desianations Attached to Alternative Freestandina Existina Structures SUDDort Structures Structu res Residential Zones(l) CUP Prohibited Prohibited C-l CUP CUP Prohibited C-l-D (Downtown)(2) CUP Prohibited Prohibited C-l - Freewav overlav Site Review Site Review CUP E-l Site Review Site Review CUP M-l Site Review Site Review CUP SOU Site Review CUP CUP NM (North Mountain) Prohibited Prohibited Prohibited Historic District(2) CUP Prohibited Prohibited A-l (AirDort Overlav) CUP CUP CUP Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 51 - HC (Health Care) CUP Prohibited Prohibited SECTION 87, 18.76.040, Partitions, Administrative Preliminary Approval, of the Ashland Municipal Code is deleted as follows: 18.76.949, AElministrati"..e Preliminarv ABBreval Preliminar"j appreval fer all miner lanEl partitiens which reEJtlire ne T";'pe II ".'arianE.:es shall be preeesseEl tlnEler the T"~"pe IpreE.:eEltlre. SECTION 88, 18.76.050, Partitions, Preliminary Approval by the Planning Commission, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.76.050. Preliminary Approval bv the PlanninEl Cemmissien If the prepeseEl partitien Elees net appear te eempl"j with the reEJtlirements fer retltine aElministrath"e appreval, the prepesal shall be stlbmitteEl te the Planning Cemmissien anEl An aDDlication for a Dreliminarv Dartition shall be approved when the following conditions exist: A. The future use for urban purposes of the remainder of the tract will not be impeded. B. The development of 'the remainder of any adjoining land or access thereto will not be impeded. C. The tract of land has not been partitioned for 12 months. D. The partitioning is not in conflict with any law, ordinance or resolution applicable to the land. E. The partitioning is in accordance with the design and street standards contained in the Chapter 18.88, Performance Standards Options. COrd 2836 58, 1999) F. When there exists adequate public facilities, or proof that such facilities can be provided, as determined by the Public Works Director and specified by City documents, for water, sanitary sewers, storm sewer, and electricity. G. When there exists a 20-foot wide access along the entire street frontage of the parcel to the nearest fully improved collector or arterial street, as designated in the Comprehensive Plan. Such access shall be improved with an asphaltic concrete pavement designed for the use of the proposed street. The minimum width of the street shall be 20-feet with all work done under permit of the Public Works Department. 1. The Public Works Director may allow an unpaved street for access for a minor land partition when all of the following conditions exist: a. The unpaved street is at least 20-feet wide to the nearest fully improved collector or arterial street. b. The centerline grade on any portion of the unpaved street does not exceed ten percent. 2. Should the partition be on an unpaved street and paving is not required, the applicant shall agree to participate in the costs and to waive the rights of the owner of the subject property to remonstrate both with respect to the owners agreeing to participate in the cost of full street improvements and to not remonstrate to the formation of a local improvement district to cover such improvements and costs thereof. Full street improvements shall include paving, curb, gutter, sidewalks and the undergrounding of utilities. This Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 52 - requirement shall be precedent to the signing of the final survey plat, and if the owner declines to so agree, then the application shall be denied. H. Where an alley exists adjacent to the partition, access may be required to be provided from the alley and prohibited from the street. SECTION 89, 18.76.060, Partitions, Preliminary Approval of Flag Partitions, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.76.060. Preliminarv Approval of Flaq Partitions. Partitions involving the creation of flag lots shall be approved by the Planning Commission if the following conditions are satisfied: A. Conditions of the previous section have been met. B. Except as provided in subsection 18.76.060.K, the flag drive for one flag lot shall have a minimum width of 15 feet, and a 12 foot paved driving surface. For drives serving two lots, the flag drive shall be 20 feet wide, with 15 feet of driving surface to the back of the first lot, and 12 feet, respectively, for the rear lot. Drives shared by adjacent properties shall have a width of 20 feet, with a 15 foot paved driving surface. Flag drives shall be constructed so as to prevent surface drainage from flowing over sidewalks or other public ways. Flag drives shall be in the same ownership as the flag lots served. Where two or more lots are served by the same flag drive, the flag drive shall be owned by one of the lots and an easement for access shall be granted to the other lot or lots. There shall be no parking 10 feet on either side of the flag drive entrance. Flag drive grades shall not exceed a maximum grade of 15%. Variances may be granted for flag drives for grades in excess of 15% but no greater than 18% for no more than 200'. Such variances shall be required to meet all of the criteria for approval as found in 18.100. Flag drives serving structures greater than 24 feet in height, as defined in 18.08.290, shall provide a Fire Work Area of 20 feet by 40 feet within 50 feet of the structure. The Fire Work Area requirement shall be waived if the structure served by the drive has an approved automatic sprinkler system installed. Flag drives and fire work areas shall be deemed Fire Apparatus Access Roads under the OreQon Unife,.... Fire Code and subject to all requirements thereof. When reQuired bv the OreQon Fire Code, Fflag drives greater than 150 ~ feet in length shall provide a turnaround as defined in the Performance Standards Guidelines in 18.88.090. The Staff Advisor, in coordination with the Fire Code Official, mav extend the distance of the turnaround reQuirement UP to a maximum of 250 feet in lenQth as allowed bv OreQon Fire Code access exemptions. C. Each flag lot has at least three parking spaces situated in such a manner as to eliminate the necessity for backing out. D. Curb cuts have been minimized, where possible, through the use of common driveways. Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 53 - E. Both sides of the flag drive have been screened with a site-obscuring fence, wall or evergreen hedge to a height of from four to six feet, except in the front yard setback area where, starting five feet from the property line, the height shall be from 30 to 42 inches in the remaining setback area. Such fence or landscaping shall be placed at the extreme outside of the flag drive in order to ensure adequate fire access. F. The applicant has executed and filed with the Planning Deoartmentircctor an agreement between applicant and the city for paving and screening of the flag drive. Such an agreement shall specify the period within which the applicant, or agent for applicant, or contractor shall complete the paving to standards as specified by the Director of Public Works and screening as required by this section, and providing that if applicant should fail to complete such work within such period, the City may complete the same and recover the full cost and expense thereof from the applicant. An agreement shall also provide for the maintenance of the paving and screening to standards as indicated in this section and the assurance that such maintenance shall be continued. G. A site plan has been approved by the Planning Commission. The site plan shall be approved provided the regulations of the zoning and subdivision titles are satisfied. Such a site plan shall contain the map requirements listed in Section 18.76.050 and the following information: 1. The location of driveways, turnarounds parking spaces and useable yard areas. 2. The location and type of screening. 3. For site plans of a flag lot, the building envelope shall be identified. H. No more than two lots are served by the flag drive. I. For the purpose of meeting the minimum lot area requirement, the lot area, exclusive of the flag drive area, must meet the minimum square footage requirements of the zoning district. J. Flag lots shall be required to provide a useable yard area that has a minimal dimension of 20 feet wide by 20 feet deep. As used in this chapter, the term "useable yard area" means a private yard area which is unobstructed by a structure or automobile from the ground upward. K. Flag lots adjacent to an alley shall meet all of the requirements of this section, except that: 1. Vehicle access shall be from the alley only where required as a condition of approval; 2. No screening and paving requirements shall be required for the flagpole; 3. A four foot pedestrian path shall be installed within the flag pole, improved and maintained with either a concrete, asphalt, brick, or paver block surface from the street to the buildable area of the flag lot; 4. The flag pole width shall be no less than eight feet wide and the entrance of the pole at the street shall be identified by the address of the flaglot clearly visible from the street on a 4" X 4" post 3112 feet high. The post shall be painted white with black numbers 3 inches high running vertically down the front of the post. For flagpoles serving two or more dwellings, the addresses of such dwellings shall be on a two feet by three feet white sign clearly visible from the street with three inch black numbers. SECTION 90, 18.76.075, Partitions, Expiration of Preliminary Partition Plan, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is added and reads as follows: Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 54 - 18.76.075. Exoiration.of Preliminary Partition Plan. Preliminary oartition olans aooroyed under this Chaoter shall exoire if a final oartition olat has not been aooroved by the City within eiQhteen (18) months of oreliminary olan aooroval. SECTION 91, 18.88.050.E., Performance Standards Options, Street Standards, Street Grade, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.88.050 Street Standards. E. Street Grade. Street grades measured at the street centerline for dedicated streets and flag drives shall be as follows: 1. Street and private drive grades in Performance Standards Developments shall not exceed a maximum grade of 15%. No variance may be granted to this section for public streets. Variances may be granted for private drives for grades in excess of 15% but not greater than 18% for no more than 200'. Such variances shall be required to meet all of the criteria for approval as found in 18.100. Private drives serving structures greater than 24' in height, as defined in 18.08.290, shall provide a Fire Work Area of 20' by 40' within 50' of the structure. The Fire Work Area requirement shall be waived if the structure served by the drive has an approved automatic sprinkler system installed. Private drives and work areas shall be deemed Fire Lanes and subject to all requirements thereof. When required by the OreQon Fire Code. DPrivate drives greater than ~ 150 feet in length shall provide a turnaround as defined in the Performance Standards Guidelines as provided in 18.88.090. The Staff Advisor. in coordination with the Fire Code Official. may extend the distance of the turnaround requirement uo to a maximum of 250 feet in lenQth as allowed bYOreQon Fire Code access exemotions. SECTION 92, 18.92.070, Off-Street Parking, Automobile Parking Design Requirements, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.92.070 Automobile Parking Design Requirements A. Size and Access. All required parking areas shall be designed in accordance with the parking layout chart at the end of this Chapter. Parking spaces shall be a minimum of 9 x 18 feet, except that 50% of the spaces may be compact spaces in accord with 18.92.050. ParkinQ soaces attd shall have a 22 feet back-up maneuverinQ space no less than twenty-two (22) feet. except where parking is angled. and which does not necessitate movinQ of other vehicles. B. Driveways and Turn-Arounds. Driveways and turn-arounds providing access to parking areas shall conform to the following provisions: 1. A driveway for a single dwelling shall have a minimum width of nine feet, and a shared driveway serving two units shall have a width of 12 feet. 2. Parking areas of more than seven parking spaces per lot shall be provided with adequate aisles or turn-around areas so that all vehicles may enter the street in a forward manner. Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 55 - 3. Parking areas of more than seven parking spaces shall be served by a driveway 20 feet in width and constructed to facilitate the flow of traffic on or off the site, with due regard to pedestrian and vehicle safety, and shall be clearly and permanently marked and defined. Parking areas of seven spaces or less shall be served by a driveway 12 feet in width. 4. Shared Use of Driveways and Curb Cuts. a. Developments subject to a planning action or divisions of property, either by minor land partition or subdivision, shall minimize the number of driveway intersections with streets by the use of shared driveways with adjoining lots where feasible. In no case shall driveways be closer than 24 feet as measured from the bottom of the existing or proposed apron wings of the driveway approach. b. Plans for property being partitioned or subdivided or for multi-family developments shall indicate how driveway intersections with streets have been minimized through the use of shared driveways and shall indicate all necessary access easements. c. Developments subject to a planning action shall remove all curb cuts and driveway approaches not shown to be necessary for existing improvements or the proposed development. Cuts and approaches shall be replaced with standard curb, gutter or sidewalk as appropriate. All replacement shall be done under permit of the Engineering Division. C. Vertical Clearances. Driveways, aisles, turn-around areas and ramps shall have a minimum vertical clearance of 13'6" for their entire length and width. D. Vision Clearance. No obstructions mav be Dlaced in the vision clearance area exceDt as set forth in Section 18.68.020. He sig..s, structures er '..egetatie.. ift excess ef t".Ye a..d e..e half feet i.. height shall be plaeed i.. the visie.. c1eara..ee area. The visie.. cleara..ee area is the tria..gle fer...ed b", a Ii..e ce....eeti..g pei..ts 25 feet fre... the i..terseetie.. ef prepert"f Ii..es. I.. the case ef a.. i..tersectie.. i"",'el..-i..g a.. aile)" a..d a street, the tria..gle is fer...ed by a Ii..e ce....eeti..g pei..ts te.. (19) feet ale..g the alley a..d 25 feet ale..g the street. Whe.. the a..gle ef i..tersectie.. bet....,gee.. the street a..d the aile', is less tha.. 39 degrees, the dista..ee shall be 25 feet. He sig..s, structures er ',.,egetatie.. er pertie.. thereef shall be erected ,.',ithi.. te.. (19) feet ef drh..eways u..less the sa...e is less tha.. twe a..d e..e half feet i.. height. The visie.. eleara..ee sta..dards established b't this sectie.. are ..et subject te the 'Jaria..ee seetie.. ef this title. E. Development and Maintenance. The development and maintenance as provided below, shall apply in all cases, except single-family dwellings. 1. Paving. All required parking areas, aisles, turn-arounds and driveways shall be paved with concrete, asphaltic or comparable surfacing, constructed to standards on file in the office of the City Engineer. 2. Drainage. All required parking areas, aisles and turn-arounds shall have provisions made for the on-site collection of drainage waters to eliminate sheet flow of such waters onto sidewalks, publiC rights-of-way, and abutting private property. 3. Driveway approaches. Approaches shall be paved with concrete surfacing constructed to standards on file in the office of the City Engineer. 4. Marking, Parking lots of more than seven spaces shall have all spaces permanently and clearly marked. 5. Wheel stops. Wheel stops shall be a minimum of four inches in height and width and six feet in length. They shall be firmly attached to the ground and so constructed as to withstand normal wear. Wheel stops shall be provided where Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 56 - appropriate for all spaces abutting property lines, buildings, landscaping, and no vehicle shall overhang a public right-of-way. 6. Walls and Hedges. a. Where parking abuts upon a street, a decorative masonry wall or evergreen hedge screen of 30-42 inches in height and a minimum of 12" in width shall be established parallel to and not nearer than two feet from the right-of-way line. Screen planting shall be of such size and number to provide the required screening within 12 months after installation. The area between the wall or hedge and street line shall be landscaped. All vegetation shall be adequately maintained by a permanent irrigation system, and said wall or hedge shall be maintained in good condition. The required wall or screening shall be designed to allow for free access to the site and sidewalk by pedestrians. b. In all zones, except single-family zones, where parking facilities or driveways are located adjacent to residential or agricultural zones, school yards, or like institutions, a sight-obscuring fence, wall, or evergreen hedge not less than five feet, nor more than six feet high shall be provided on the property line as measured from the high grade side. Said wall, fence or hedge shall be reduced to 30 inches within required setback area, or within 10 feet of street property lines, and shall be maintained in good condition. Screen plantings shall be of such size and number to provide the required screening within 12 months after installation. Adequate provisions shall be made to protect walls, fences or plant materials from being damaged by vehicles using said parking areas. 7. Landscaping. In all zones, all parking facilities shall include landscaping to cover not less than 7% of the area devoted to outdoor parking facilities, including the landscaping required in subdivision 6(a) above. Said landscaping shall be uniformly distributed throughout the parking area, be provided with irrigation facilities and protective curbs or raised wood headers. It may consist of trees, plus shrubs, ground cover or related material. A minimum of one tree per seven parking spaces is required. 8. Lighting of parking areas within 100 feet of property in residential zones shall be directed into or on the site and away from property lines such that the light element shall not be directly visible from abutting residential property. SECTION 93, 18.96.070, Sign Regulations, Residential sign Regulations, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.96.070 Residential_and North Mountain Sign Regulations. Signs in the residential (R) and North Mountain (NM) districts tat shall conform to the following regulations: A. Special Provisions: 1. No sign or portion thereof shall extend beyond any property line of the premises on which such sign is located. 2. Internally illuminated signs shall not be permitted. 3. Nothing contained herein shall be construed as permitting any type of sign in conjunction with a commercial use allowed as a home occupation, as no signs are allowed in conjunction with a home occupation. Signs in residential areas are only permitted in conjunction with a Conditional Use. B. Type of Signs Permitted. 1. Neighborhood identification signs. One sign shall be permitted at each entry point to residential developments not exceeding an area of six square Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 57 - feet per sign with lettering not over nine inches in height, located not over three feet above grade. 2. Conditional Uses. Uses authorized in accordance with the Chapter on Conditional Use Permits may be permitted one ground sign not exceeding an overall height of five feet and an area of fifteen square feet, set back at least ten feet from property lines; or one wall sign in lieu of a ground sign. Such signs shall be approved in conjunction with the issuance of such conditional use permit. Said signs shall not use plastic as part of the exterior visual effect and shall not be internally illuminated. 3. Retail commercial uses allowed as a conditional use in the Railroad District and traveler's accommodations in residential zones shall be allowed one wall sign or one ground sign which meets the following criteria: a. The total size of the sign is limited to six square feet. b. The maximum height of any ground sign is to be three feet above grade. c. The sign must be constructed of wood and cannot be internally illuminated. 4. North Mountain Sians. Sians for aDDroved non-residential uses within the NM-R15. NM-C and NM Civic zones shall be Dermitted one around sian not exceedina an overall heiaht of five feet and an area of fifteen sauare feet. set back at least ten feet from DroDertv lines: or one wall or awnina sian in lieu of a around sian. Said sians shall not use Dlastic as Dart of the exterior visual effect and shall not be internallv illuminated. SECTION 94, 18.96.150, Sign Regulations, Governmental Signs, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.96.150 Governmental Signs. Governmental agencies may apply for a Conditional Use to place a sign that does not conform to this Code when the Co",,,,issio" it is determine!!s that, in addition to the criteria for a conditional use, the sign is necessary to further that agency's public purpose. SECTION 95, 18.108.015, Procedures, Pre-Application Conference, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.108.015. Pre-Application Conference, An applicant shall request a pre-application conference prior to submitting an application for a Type I, II or III planning action....Q.!: an EXDedited Land Division. The purpose of the conference shall be to acquaint the applicant with the substantive and procedural requirements of the Land Use Ordinance, provide for an exchange of information regarding applicable elements of the comprehensive plan and development requirements and to identify policies and regulations that create opportunities or pose significant constraints for the proposed development. The Staff advisor is authorized to waive Dre-aDDlication conference reauirements and to create Drocedures which allow for electronic or other alternative forms of conferences. SECTION 96, 18.108.017, Procedures, Applications, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.108.017 Applications. Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 58 - A. In order to initiate a planning action, three eal3ies af a complete application shall be submitted to the Planning Department as set forth below. 1. Complete applications shall include: a. All of the required information for the specific action requested, b. Written findings of fact, c. Complete and signed application form. The application must be signed by one or more property owners of the property for which the planning action is requested, or their authorized agents. The application shall not be considered complete unless it is accompanied by the appropriate application fee. 2. Incomplete applications are subject to delay in accordance with ORS 227.178. The City will inform the applicant of deficiencies within 30 days of application. The applicant then has 31 days in which to provide a complete application. The City will begin the appropriate application procedure when the application is deemed complete, or at the end of the 31 day period. 3. The Staff Advisor is authorized to set standards and orocedures for aoolication submittal reauirements. includina the number and tvoe of aoolications reauired (e.a. hard and/or electronic cooies). size and format of aoolications (e.a. oaoer size and electronic format). and dates when aoolications can be received. The Staff Advisor shall make the reauirements for aoolication submittals readilv available to the oublic to review. B. All applicants for Types I, II and III planning actions shall have completed a pre- application conference for the project within a 6-month time period preceding the filing of the application. This requirement may be waived by the Staff Advisor if in the Staff Advisor's opinion the information to be gathered in a pre-application conference already exists in the final application. SECTION 97, 18.108.020, Procedures, Types of Procedures, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.108.020 Types of Procedures-,- There are three aeneral tvoes of orocedures: 1) ministerial actions: 2) olannina actions. and 3) leaislative amendments. When a oroiect orooosal involves more than one aoolication and more than one tyoe of orocedure. the aoolications shall be reyiewed toaether by the same decision body and follow the hiahest level orocedure aoolyina to anyone of the aoolications. A. Ministerial Actions. The Staff Advisor shall have the authority to review and approve or deny the following matters which shall be ministerial actions: 1. Final subdivision plat approval. (18.80.050) 2. Final partition map approval. (18.76.120) 4. Minor amendments to subdivisions and partitions. 5. Boundary line adjustments. (18.76.140) 6. Zoning permits. (18.112.010) 7. Sign permits. (18.96.050) 8. Home occupation permits. (18.94.130) 9. Extension of time limits for aooroved olannina actions (18.112.030). 10.Mechanical eauioment exemot from Site Review. II.Conversion of existina multi-family dwellina units into for-ourchase housina. Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 59 - B. Planning Actions. All planning actions shall be subject to processing by one of the four following procedures: h Staff Permit Preeedure 1~. Type I Procedure 2-3. Type II Procedure }4. Type III Procedure 4. EXDedited Land Divisions C. Legislative Amendments. Legislative amendments shall be subject to the procedures established in section 18.108.170. SECTION 98, 18.108.025, Procedures, Consolidated Review Procedures, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is added and reads as follows: 18.108.025 Consolidated Review Procedures~ An aDDlicant mav aDDlv at one time for all Dermits or zone changes needed for a develoDment Droiect. The consolidated Drocedure shall be subiect to the time limitations set out in ORS 227.178. The consolidated Drocedure shall follow the most restrictive Drocedure in the develoDment Droiect. SECTION 99, 18.108.030, Procedures, Expedited Land Divisions - Staff Permits, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.108.030, EXDedited Land Divisions Staff Permit Preeedure. A. ADDlicabilitv. 1. An eXDedited land division is an action that: a. Includes land that is zoned for residential uses. b. Is solelv for the DurDoses of residential use. including recreational or ODen SDace uses accessory to residential use. c. Does not Drovide for dwellings or accessorv buildings to be located on land that is sDecificallv maDDed and designated for full or Dartial Drotection of natural features that Drotect ODen SDaces. Dhvsical and environmental constraints Der ChaDter 18.62. riDarian corridors. wetlands. designated historic districts or structures. d. Meets minimum standards in the Street Standards Handbook and Section 18.88.050. e. Creates enough lots or Darcels to allow building residential units at 80 Dercent (800/0) or more of the maximum net density Dermitted bv the zoning designation of the site. 2. A land division that creates three or fewer Darcels under ORS 92.010 and ALUO 18.76. 3. An eXDedited land division as described in this section is not a land use decision or a limited land use decision under ORS 197.015 or a Dermit under ORS 227.160. 4. All reguirements outlined in ChaDter 18.76 aDDlv to eXDedited land divisions exceDt for those Drovisions modified within this section. B. Procedure and Notice Reauirements. 1. ADDlication ComDleteness. a. If the aDDlication for eXDedited land division is incomDlete. the Staff Advisor shall notify the aDDlicant of exactlv what information is missing within 21 days of receiDt of the aDDlication and allow Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 60 - the aoolicant to submit the missina information. For ourooses of comoutation of time under this section. the aoolication shall be deemed comolete on the date the aoolicant submits the reauested information or refuses in writina to submit it. b. If the aoolication was comolete when first submitted or the aoolicant submits the reauested additional information within 180 days of the date the aoolication was first submitted. aooroval or denial of the aoolication shall be based uoon the standards and criteria that were aoolicable at the time the aoolication was first submitted. 2. The city shall orovide written notice of the receiot of the comoleted aoolication for an exoedited land division to anv state aaency. local aovernment or soecial district resoonsible for orovidina oublic facilities or services to the develooment and to owners of orooerty within 100 feet of the entire contiauous site for which the aoolication is made. The notification list shall be com oiled from the most recent orooertv tax assessment roll. For ourooses of aooeal to the referee under ORS 197.375. this reauirement shall be deemed met when the local aovernment can orovide an affidavit or other certification that such notice was aiven. Notice shall also be orovided to any neiahborhood or community olannina oraanization recoanized by the aovernina body and whose boundaries include the site. 3. The notice reauired under subsection (21 of this section shall: a. State: i. The deadline for submittina written comments: ii. That issues that may orovide the basis for an aooeal to the referee must be raised in writina orior to the exoiration of the comment oeriod: and iii. That issues must be raised with sufficient soecificity to enable the local aovernment to resoond to the issue. b. Set forth. by commonly used citation. the aoolicable criteria for the decision. c. Set forth the street address or other easily understood aeoaraohical reference to the subiect orooertv. d. State the olace. date and time that comments are due. e. State a time and olace where cooies of all evidence submitted by the aoolicant will be available for review. f. Include the name and teleohone number of a local aovernment contact oerson. a. Briefly summarize the local decision-makina orocess for the exoedited land division decision beina made. 4. After notice under subsections (21 and (31 of this section. the city shall: a. Provide a 14-day oeriod for submission of written comments orior to the decision. b. Make a decision to aoorove or deny the aoolication within 63 days of receivina a comoleted aoolication. based on whether it satisfies the substantive reauirements of the local aovernment's land use reaulations. An aooroyal may include conditions to ensure that the aoolication meets the aoolicable land use reaulations. For aoolications subiect to this section. the city: i. Shall not hold a hearina on the aoolication: and ii. Shall issue a written determination of comoliance or Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 61 - noncomoliance with aoolicable land use reaulations that includes a summary statement exolainina the determination. The summary statement may be in any form reasonably intended to communicate the local aovernment's basis for the determination. c. Provide notice of the decision to the aoolicant and to those who received notice under subsection (2) of this section within 63 days of the date of a comoleted aoolication. The notice of decision shall include: i. The summary statement described in oaraaraoh (bHii) of this subsection: and ii. An exolanation of aooeal riahts under ORS 197.375 C. Aooeals 1. An aooeal of a decision made under ORS 197.360 and 197.365 shall be made as follows: a. An aooeal must be filed with the local aovernment within 14 days of mailina of the notice of the decision under ORS 197.365 (4), and shall be accomoanied by a $300 deoosit for costs. b. A decision may be aooealed by: i. The aoolicant: or ii. Any oerson or oraanization who files written comments in the time oeriod established under ORS 197.365. c. An aooeal shall be based solely on alleaations: i. Of violation of the substantive orovisions of the aoolicable land use reaulations: ii. Of unconstitutionalitv of the decision: iii. That the aoolication is not eliaible for review under ORS 197.360 to 197.380 and should be reviewed as a land use decision or limited land use decision: or iv. That the oarties' substantive riahts have been substantially oreiudiced by an error in orocedure by the local aovernment. 2. The city shall aoooint a referee to decide the aooeal of a decision made under ORS 197.360 and 197.365. The referee shall not be an emoloyee or official of the local aovernment. The City Administrator is authorized to hire, under contract on an as needed basis, a referee to decide such aooeals. If the city has desianated a hearinas officer under ORS 227.165, the City Administrator may desianate the hearinas officer as the referee for aooeals of a decision made under ORS 197.360 and 197.365. 3. Within seven days of beina aooointed to decide the aooeal, the referee shall notify the aoolicant, the local aovernment, the aooellant if other than the aoolicant, any oerson or oraanization entitled to notice under ORS 197.365 (2) that orovided written comments to the local aovernment and all oroviders of oublic facilities and services entitled to notice under ORS 197.365 (2) and advise them of the manner in which they may oarticioate in the aooeal. A oerson or oraanization that oroyided written comments to the local aovernment but did not file an aooeal under subsection (1) of this section may oarticioate only with respect to the issues raised in the written comments submitted by that person or oraanization. The referee may use any procedure for decision-makina consistent with the interests of the oarties to ensure a fair oooortunity to oresent information and araument. The referee shall orovide the local aovernment an Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 200B-p. 62 - oooortunitv to exolain its decision, but is not limited to reviewina the local aovernment decision and may consider information not oresented to the local aovernment. 4. Referee Decision. a. The referee shall aoolv the substantive reauirements of the local aovernment's land use reaulations and ORS 197.360. If the referee determines that the aoolication does not aualifv as an exoedited land division as described in ORS 197.360, the referee shall remand the aoolication for consideration as a land use decision or limited land use decision. In all other cases, the referee shall seek to identify means bv which the aoolication can satisfy the aoolicable reauirements. b. The referee may not reduce the density of the land division aoolication. The referee shall make a written decision aoorovina or denvina the aoolication or aoorovina it with conditions desianed to ensure that the aoolication satisfies the land use reaulations, within 42 days of the filina of an aooeal. The referee may not remand the aoolication to the local aovernment for any reason other than as set forth in this subsection. 5 Unless the aovernina bod v of the local aovernment finds exiaent circumstances, a referee who fails to issue a written decision within 42 days of the filina of an aooeal shall receive no comoensation for service as referee in the aooeal. 6. Notwithstandina any other orovision of law, the referee shall order the city to refund the deoosit for costs to an aooellant who materiallv imoroves his or her oosition from the decision of the local aovernment. The referee shall assess the cost of the aooeal in excess of the deoosit for costs. uo to a maximum of $500, includina the deoosit oaid under subsection (1) of this section, aaainst an aooellant who does not materiallv imorove his or her oosition from the decision of the local aovernment. The local aovernment shall Day the oortion of the costs of the aooeal not assessed aaainst the aDDellant. The costs of the aooeal include the comoensation oaid the referee and costs incurred bv the local aovernment, but not the costs of other oarties. D. Effective Date of Decision. Unless aooealed within 14 days of mailina a notice of decision, the Staff Advisor decision becomes final on the 15th day. Aooeals shall be considered as set forth in ALUO 18.108.030(C) and ORS 197.375. A. Aetians Ineltlded. The fallawing planning adians shall be stlbjeet ta the Staff Per",it Praeedtlre: 1. Site Re...iew far twa ar three residential tlnits an a single lat. 2. Ph'fsieal and En'.i'iran",ental Canstraints Re.,-iew Per",its as allawed in Chapter 18.62. 3. 'Jarianees deseribed in Seelian 18.79.960. 4. Site Re",;ieVis in C 1, E 1, HC and ~, zanes far expansians af an existing tlse that da nat reqtlire new btlilding area in excess af 2,599 sEttlare fed, ar ",adifieatian at ",are than 19'\'0 at the area af the site. 5. Extensian af ti",e Ii ",its far appraved planning aelians. Twa extensians af tip ta 12 ",anths each ",av be appraved tinder the rallawing canditians: Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 63 - a. A chaAge af eaAElitiaAs, far ".....hich the applicaAt was Aat respaAsible, pre".-eAteEl the applieaAt fralft ealftpldiAg the Ele."elaplfteAt ..",ithiA the arigiAal tilfte IilftitatiaA, aAEI b. LaAEI Use OrEliAaAce reql:lirelfteAts applicable ta the ElevelaplfteAt have Aat chaAgeEl siAce the arigiAal appra....al. AA exteAsiaA Ifta"t be graAteEl, haweo.Jer, if reql:lirelfteAts have chaAgeEl aAEI the applicaAt agrees ta calftply v.ith aA"; sl:leh chaAges. 6. The fallawiAg Ele"-ielaplfteAts sl:Ibjeet ta the Site DesigA aAEI Use StaAElarEls iA sediaA 18.72.949.A: a. AAY chaAge af aCCl:lpaAej" fralft a less iAteASii."e ta a Iftare iAteASi"-ie aeCl:lpaAc'f", as ElefiAeEl iA the Cit"t" bl:lilEliAg eaEle, ar aAY ehaAge iA I:Ise whieh reql:lires a greater Al:llftber af parldAg spaees. b. AAY aElElitiaA less thaA 2,599 sql:lare fed ar teA pereeAt af the bl:lilEliAg'S sql:lare faatage, whiehe."er is less, ta a bl:lilEliAg. c. All iAstallatiaAs af IfteehaAical eql:liplfteAt iA aA"; zaAe. EI. IAstallatiaA af Elise aAteAAas sl:lbjed ta the reql:lirelfteAts af SeetiaA 18.72.169. AA}" Elise aAteAAa far ealft Iftercia I I:Ise iA a resiEleAtial zaAe shall alsa be sl:lbjed ta a CaAElitiaAal Use Perlftit (18.194). e. AA)" exteriar chaAge ta a strl:ldl:lre IisteEl aA the NatiaAal Register af Histarie: Plaees. 7. AAY ather plaAAiAg adiaA ElesigAateEl as sl:Ibjeet ta the Staff Perlftit PraeeEll:lre. 8. Other plaAAiAg aetiaAs Aat atherwise IisteEl ar ElesigAateEl as a Tj"pe I, II ar III praceEll:lre. B. Tilfte Lilftits, Hatiee aAEI HeariAg Reql:lirelfteAts. ApplieatiaAs sl:lbjed ta the Staff Perlftit PraeeEll:lre shall be praeesseEl as fallaws: 1. '.aJithiA 14 Ela)"s after receipt af a ealftplete applieatiaA the Staff AEI..-isar shall appra'\o"e, apprave ".",ith eaAElitiaAs ar EleA"" the applieatiaA I:IAless sl:lch tilfte IilftitatiaA is exteAEleEl with the eaAseAt af the applicaAt. The Staff AEI"J'isar shall eAter fiAEliAgs aAEI eaAell:lsiaAS ta jl:lstift" the EleeisiaA. 2. Natiee af the EleeisiaA shall be IftaileEl withiA SeyeA Ela)"s af the ElecisiaA. The Aatiee shall caAtaiA the fallav,i'iAg iAfarlftatiaA: a. The EleeisiaA af the Staff AEI".Jisar aAEI the Elate af the EleeisiaA. b. That Aa pl:lblie heariAg will be helEl I:IAless speeifically reql:lesteEl. c. That a reql:lest far a pl:lblic heariAg Iftl:lst be IftaEle by the Elate iAElicateEl aA the Aatiee iA arEler far a pl:lblie heariAg ta be scheEll:lleEl. EI. That a reql:lest far a pl:lblie heariAg shall iAe:lI:IEle the Aalfte aAEI aElElress af the persaA reql:lestiAg the pl:lblie heariAg, the file Al:llftber af the plaAAiAg adiaA aAEI the specific gral:lAEls far which the EleeisiaA shal:llEl be reverseEl ar IftaElifieEl, baseEl aA the applieable eriteria ar praeeEll:lral irregl:llarit"f. 3. Natice shall be IftaileEl ta the fallawiAg persaAs: a. The applieaAt, ar al:lthariEeEl ageAt. b. The sl:lbjeet praperty aWAer. e. All aWAers af reearEl af praperty aA the Iftast receAt prapert"j tax asSeSSlfteAt rail withiA the Aatiee area ElefiAeEl as that area v.-ithiA 199 fed af the sl:lbjed prapert",-. 4. PcrsaAs ta v,i'halft the Aatiee is IftaileEl shall ha."e 19 Elays fralft the Elate af IftailiAg iA whieh ta reql:lest a pl:lblie heariAg. Reql:lests far a pl:lblic heariAg shall Ifted the fallawiAg reql:lirelfteAts: Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 64 - a. The reEltlest shall be filed b'( the date specified i" the "atiee af dedsia". b. The reEltlest shall be i" writi"g a"d i"eltlde the appella"t's "a"'e, address, the file "t1",ber af the pla""i"g actia" a"d the spedfic gratl"ds far which the dedsia" shatlld be re..-.ersed ar ",adified, based a" the applicable eriteria ar pracedtlral irregtllarit.,. 5. If a reEltlest far a ptlblie heari"g is ti",el)' reeeh.-ed, a public heari"g shall be schedtlled far the "ext regtllar Ca",,,,issia" ar Heari"gs Baard ",eeti"g allavJi"g adeEltlate ti",e ta ",ed the "atiee reEltlire",e"ts af sectia" 18.198.989. The ptlblic heari"g shall be i" aeeard VJith the reEltlire",e"ts af sectia" 18.198.199. SECTION 100, 18.108.040, Procedures, Type I Procedure, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.108.040 Type I Procedure. A. Actions Included. The following planning actions shall be subject to the Type I Proced u re: 1. Site Desian Review. The followina develooments that are subiect to the Site Desian Review Standards outlined in 18.72 shall follow the Tvoe I oermit orocedures. a. Downtown Desian Standards Zone. Anv develooment which is less than 2.500 sauare feet or ten oercent of the buildina's sauare footaae. whichever is less. b. Detail Site Review. Anv develooment in the Detail Site Review Zone. as defined in the Site Review Standards adooted oursuant Chaoter 18.72. which is less than 10.000 sauare feet in aross floor area. c. Commercial. Industrial and Non-residential Uses i. All new structures. additions or exoansions in C-l. E-l, HC and M zones, not within the Downtown Desian Standards zone, that do not reauire new buildina area in excess of 200/0 of an existina buildina's sauare footaae or 10,000 sauare feet of aross floor area, whichever is less. ii. Exoansion of imoervious surface area in excess of 100/0 of the area of the site or 1,000 sauare feet, whichever is less iii.Exoansion of oarkina lots, relocation of oarkina soaces on a site, or other chanaes which alters circulation affectina adiacent orooertv or oublic riaht-of-wav. iv.Anv chanae of occuoancv from a less intensive to a more intensive occuoancv, as defined in the City buildina code, or any chanae in use which reauires a areater number of oarkina soaces. v. Anv chanae in use of a lot from one aeneral use cateaorv to another aeneral use cateaorv, e.a" from residential to commercial, as defined bv the zonina reaulations of this Code. vi. Anv exterior chanae to a structure which reauires a buildina oermit and is listed on the National Reaister of Historic Places or to a contributina orooertv within an Historic District on the National Reaister of Historic Places. d. Residential i. Two or more residential units on a sinale lot. ii. All new structures or additions less than 10,000 sauare feet of aross floor area. other than sinale-familv homes or accessorv uses Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 65 - on individual lots iii.Construction of attached sinQle-familv housinQ (e.Q. town homes, condominiums, row houses, etc.) in all zoninQ districts. iv.Off-street oarkinQ or landscaoinQ, in coniunction with an aooroved Performance Standards Subdivision reQuired bv ordinance and not located within the boundaries of the individual unit Darcel (e.Q. shared oarkinQ). v. Anv exterior chanQe to a structure which reQuires a buildinQ oermit and is listed on the National ReQister of Historic Places. 2. Miscellaneous Actions. 1. Fil'lal I"lal'l AJ'J're".'al fer P'erfermal'lee Stal'lElarEls Sl:IbEli".'isiel'ls. 2. Site Re.....iews ether thal'l these sl:Ibjed te a Staff Permit I"reeeEll:lre er T"y"J'e 11 I"reeeEll:lre. 3. I"artitiel'ls whieh reql:lire I'Ie ..,..arial'lees er el'll't" ""arial'lees sl:Ibjeet te TYJ'e I J'reeeEll:lres. !l4.Amendments or modification to conditions of approval for Type I planning actions. 5. Creatiel'l ef a J'rivate way, as alleweEl il'l sediel'l 18.89.939.8. b. Amendment or modification to conditions of aooroval for Tvoe II actions where the modification involves on Iv chanQes to tree removal and/or buildinQ envelooes.olanninQ actions. c. Phvsical and Environmental Constraints Review oermits as allowed in Chaoter 18.62. d. Tree removal oermits as reQuired bv Section 18.61.042(0). ~6.Conditional Use Permits. The following conditional use permits are subject to Type I review procedures: a. Conditional use permits involving existing structures or additions to existing structures, and not involving more than three (3} residential dwelling units-et" L -t:Iemporary uses. c. EnlarQement, exoansion, etc. of nonconforminQ structures in accordance with 18.68.090(2). d. Government siQns oer Section 18.96.150. e. The followinQ uses in Residential zones: i. Accessorv residential units ii. Oavcare centers. iii. Public and oublic utilitv buildinQs, structures and uses less than 2,500 SQuare feet in buildinQ footorint and disturbs less than 7,500 SQuare feet of land. iv. Structures in excess of 35 feet in R-3 zone. v. All new structures, additions or exoansions that exceed MPFA in historic district uo to 250/0, but the addition is no larQer than 300 s.f. or 100/0 of the existinQ floor area, whichever is less. vi. Hostels. vii. Public ParkinQ Lots in the NM-C zone. viii. Communitv Services in the NM-R15 zone. f. The followinQ uses in Commercial or Industrial zones: i. Electrical substations ii. Outdoor storaQe of commodities. Q. The followinQ uses in the Health Care Services Zone: i. Limited oersonal service oroviders in the home, such as beauticians and masseurs. Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 66 - ii. Professional offices for an accountant. architect. attorney. desianer. enaineer. insurance aaent or adjuster. investment or manaaement counselor or surveyor. iii. Anv medicallv-related use. located on City-owned DrODertv that is not sDecificallv allowed bv the Ashland Community HosDital Master Facilitv Plan. h. Conditional uses in the Southern Oreaon University District. 1~. Variances for: a. Sign placement. b. Non-conforming signs, when bringing them into conformance as described in section 18.96.130.D. c. Up to 50% reduction of standard yard requirements. d. Parking in setback areas. e. Up to 10% reduction in the number of required parking spaces. f. Up to 10% reduction in the required minimum lot area. g. Up to 10% increase in the maximum lot coverage percentage. h. Up to 20% reduction in lot width or lot depth requirements. i. Up to 50% reduction for parking requirements in Ashland's Historic District as described in section 18.92.055. j. Up to 10% variance on height, width, depth, length or other dimension not otherwise listed in this section. k. Site Design and Use Standards as provided in section 18.72.090. 5. Partitions and Land Divisions. a. Partitions which reauire no variances or onlv variances subject to TVDe I Drocedures. b. Creation of a Drivate way. as allowed in section 18.80.030.B. c. Final Plan ADDroval for Performance Standards Subdivisions. 8. The fellevJiftg EleV'elep",eftts stlbjeet te the Site Desigft aftEl lJse StaftElarEls ift sE:etieft 18.72.040.B: a. Aft)" ehaftge ift tlS~ ef a let fre", eft~ g~fteral tlse eategery te aftether g~ft~ral tlse catE:ger-y, e.g., fre", resiElefttial te ce"''''~reial, as EldifteEl b'/ the zeftiftg regtllatiefts ef this CeEle. b. Aft)" resiElefttial tlse whieh restllts ift fetlr Elwelliftg tlftits er ",ere eft a ~ e. All fteVi strtldtlres er aElElitiefts greater thaft 2,599 sEltlare f~et, except fer EleV'~lep"'~ftts ifteltlEl~EI ift seetieft 18.198.030.A.6. ~9.Any other planning action designated as subject to the Type I Procedure. 7. Prior to the Staff Advisor Drovidina notice of aDDlication and makina a decision. aDDlicants or the Staff Advisor may reauest Dlannina actions subject to a TVDe I Drocedure be heard bv the Commission or Hearinas Board. In such case. the Staff Advisor shall not make a decision and shall schedule a hearina before the Commission or Hearinas Board to be heard as Drovided in section 18.108.050. B. Notice of Application. Ti",e Li",its, Netice aftEl Heariftg ReEltlire"'~ftts. Applieatiefts stlbjed te the T.t'pe I PreeE:Eltlre shall be precesseEl as fellews: 1. Within 10 days of the citv's determination that an aDDlication is comDlete. but no less than 20 days before the Staff Advisor makes a decision. written notice of the aDDlication shall be mailed to all of the followina: a. ADDlicant. b. Owners of the subject DroDertv. c. Owners of DroDerties located within 200 feet of the Derimeter of the subject DroDertv. Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 67 - d. Neiahborhood arouo or community oraanization officiallv recoanized bv the city council that includes the area of the subject orooertv. e. For final oartitions. final subdivisions, and final Outline Plans, to interested oarties of record from the tentative decision. f. For modification aoolications, to oersons who reauested notice of the oriainal aoolication that is beina modified. 2. The written notice shall include all of the followina: a. The street address or other easilv understood aeoaraohical reference to the subject orooertv. b. The aoolicable criteria for the decision, listed bv commonlv used citation. c. The olace. date, and time that comments are due. d. A statement that cooies of all evidence relied uoon bv the aoolicant are available for review, and can be obtained at cost. e. A statement that issues that may orovide the basis for an aooeal to the Land Use Board of Aooeals must be raised in writina and with sufficient soecificitv to enable the decision maker to resoond to the issue. f. The name and ohone number of a city contact oerson. a. A brief summary of the local decision makina orocess for the decision beina made. 3. Posted Notice. A notice shall be oosted on the subject orooertv in such a manner as to be c1earlv visible from a oublic riaht-of-wav. Postina shall occur no later than the date of mailina notice of aoolication. 4. Notices shall allow a 14-dav oeriod for the submission of written comments, startina from the date of mailina. All comments must be received bv the city within that 14-dav oeriod. C. Decision. Within 45 days of the city's determination that an aoolication is comolete, unless the aoolicant aarees to a lonaer time oeriod, the Staff Advisor shall aoorove, conditionallv aoorove, or deny a Tvoe I aoolication. D. Notice of Decision. 1 Within 5 days after the Staff Advisor renders a decision, the city shall mail notice of the decision to the followina: a. Aoolicant. b. Owner and occuoants of the subject orooertv. c. Neiahborhood arouo or community oraanization officiallv recoanized bv the city that includes the area of the subject orooertv. d. Anv arouo or individual who submitted written comments durina the comment oeriod. e. Those arouos or individuals who reauested notice of the decision. f. Prooertv owners and occuoants of orooertv located within 200 feet of the oerimeter of the subject orooertv. 2. The notice shall include all of the followina: a. A descriotion of the nature of the decision of the Staff Advisor. b. An exolanation of the nature of the aoolication and the orooosed use or uses which could be authorized. c. The street address or other easilv understood aeoaraohical reference to the subject orooertv. d. The name of a city reoresentative to contact and the teleohone number where additional information may be obtained. e. A statement that a coov of the aoolication, all documents and evidence submitted bv or on behalf of the aoolicant and aoolicable Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 68 - criteria are available for insoection at no cost and will be orovided at reasonable cost. f. A statement that anv oerson who was mailed a written notice of the Staff Advisor's decision mav reauest reconsideration or aooeal as orovided in ALUO 18.108.070(B)(2). a. A statement that the Staff Advisor's decision will not become final until the oeriod for filina a local aooeal has exoired. h. An exolanation that a oerson who is mailed written notice of the Staff Advisor's decision cannot aooeal directlv to LUBA. 3. Unless the decision is reconsidered or aooealed accordina to the orocedures in ALUO 18.108.070(B)(2), the Staff Advisor's decision is effective on the 13th day after notice of the decision is mailed. 1. Caft'll'lete al'l'lieatia..s shall be re"l'ieweEl at the first regtllarl"f seheEltlleEl Caft'lft'lissia.. ft'Iedi..g which is helEl at least 30 Ela"IS after the stlbft'lissia.. at the eaft'll'lde al'l'lieatia... 2. V/ithi.. 14 Ela',s after receipt af a caft'll'lde al'l'lieatia.., the Staff AEI'.isar shall al'l'ra"l"e, al'l'raye with ea..Elitia..s ar Ele..y the al'l'licatia.. tI..less stich tift'le lift'litatia.. is exte..EleEl VJith the ea..se..t af the al'l'liea..t. The Staff AEI'."isar shall e..ter fi..Eli..gs a..EI ea..eltlsia..s ta justify the Eleeisia... 3. Natiee af the Eleeisia.. shall be ft'IaileEl withi.. se'..e.. Ela,s af the Eleeisia.. ta the I'ersa..s EleseribeEl i.. seetia.. 18.198.930.B.3. The ..atiee shall ea..tai.. the i..farft'latia.. reEltlireEl i.. seetia.. 18.198.939.B.2 I'ltlS a stateft'le..t that tI..less a I'tlblic heari..g is reEltlesteEl, the adia.. VliII be re'.ieweEl by the Caft'lft'lissia... Persa..s ta whaft'l the ..atiee is ft'IaileEl shall ha....e 19 Elays fraft'l the Elate af ft'Iaili..g i.. '."/hieh ta reEltlest a I'tlblie heari..g bdare the Caft'lft'lissia... ReEltlests far a I'tlblie heari..g shall ea..farft'l ta the reEltlireft'le..ts af sedia.. 18.198.939.B.4. 4. If a reEltlest far a I'tlblie heari..g is tift'lely reeei'.leEl, a I'tlblie heari..g shall be seheEltlleEl far the ..ext regtllar Caft'lft'lissia.. ar Heari..gs BaarEl ft'Ieeti..g alla..",i..g aEleEltlate tift'le ta eaft'll'l, with the ..atiee reEltlireft'le..ts af seetia.. 18.198.989. The I'tlblie heari..g shall be i.. aecarEl with the reEltlireft'le..ts at seetia.. 18.198.190. 5. If..a reEltlest far a I'tlblie heari..g is tift'lely reeeh'eEl, the Eleeisia.. shall be re".ie"l"'eEl b", the Caft'lft'lissia.. ar Heari..gs BaarEl at its first regtllarl", seheEltlleEl ft'Iedi..g 39 Elays after stlbft'lissia.. at the al'l'lieatia... The Caft'lft'lissia.. ar BaarEl ft'Ia"t': a. Aft'le..EI the Eleeisia"i i.. Stich case, the aetia.. shall be re ..atieeEl as a Type I Eleeisia.., ,."tith a 7 Ela"; l'eriaEl withi.. which ta reEltlest a pl;lblie heari..g, exeel't that the Caft'lft'lissia.. shall ..at review the Eleeisia.. agai.. shal;llEl there be ..a stleh reEll;lest fileEl. b. I..itiate a I'l;Iblie heari..g af the Eleeisia.., thral;lgh a ft'Iajarit"j wate af thase i.. atte..Ela..ee, ta be hearEl at the fallawi..g ft'Ia..th's regtllarl... seheEll;lleEl Caft'lft'lissia.. ar BaarEl ft'Iedi..g. e. Tal(e..a adia.. at the ft'Iedi..g "."/he.. the Eleeisia.. is seheEltlleEl a.. the age..Ela. I.. sl;leh ease the Eleeisia.. is fi..al the ..ext Ela"t". 6. Priar ta the Staff AElr;isar ft'Iald..g a Eleeisia.., al'l'liea..ts ar the Staff AEI"..isar ft'Iay reEltlest I'la....i..g aetia..s sl;lbjeet ta a Type I I'raeeEll;lre be hearEl by the Caft'lft'lissia.. ar BaarEl. I.. sl;lch case, the Staff AEI".iisar shall ..at ft'Ial(e a Eleeisia.. a..EI shall seheEll;lle a heari..g befare the Caft'lft'lissia.. ar BaarEl ta be hearEl as I'raviEleEl i.. sedia.. 18.198.949.B.4. SECTION 101, 18.108.050, Procedures, Type II Procedure, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 69 - 18.108.050 Type II Procedure. A. Actions Included. The following planning actions shall be subject to the Type II Procedure: 1. All Conditional Use Permits not subject to a Type I procedure. 2. All variances not subject to the Type I procedure. 3. Outline Plan for subdivisions under the Performance Standard Options (AMC Chapter 18.88). 4. Preliminary Plat for subdivisions under the standard subdivision code (AMC Chapter 18.80). 5. Final Plan approval for all subdivision requests under the Performance Standard Options not requiring Outline Plan approval. 6. Any aooeal I'tlblie hearing of a Staff Advisor decision. includina a Tvoe I Plannina Action or Interoretation of the Ashland Land Use Code. restllting treM the Staff PerMit PreE:eEltlre. 7. Any other planning action not designated as subject to the Tvoe I or Tvoe III TYl'e II Procedure. B. Time Limits, Notice and Hearing Requirements. Applications subject to the Type II Procedure shall be processed as follows: 1. The Staff Advisor. actina under the authority of ORS 227.165. may hold an initial evidentiary hearina on Tvoe II aoolications once they are deemed comolete. The Staff Advisor shall transmit cooies of the record develooed at the hearina to the Commission for additional oublic hearina. deliberation and decision. The Staff Advisor is not authorized to make decisions on Tvoe II aoolications. 2-!-.Complete applications shall be heard at iLthe first regularly scheduled Commission meeting which is held at least 30 days after the submission of the complete application. 3~.Notice of the hearing mailed as provided in section 18.108.080. 43.Public hearingW shall be held before the Commission and/or Staff Advisor in accord with the requirements of section 18.108.100. SECTION 102, 18.108.060, Procedures, Type III Procedures, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.108.060. Type III Procedures A. The following planning actions shall be subject to the Type III Procedure: 1. Zone Changes or Amendments to the Zoning Map or other official maps, except for legislative amendments. 2. Comprehensive Plan Map Changes or changes to other official maps, except for legislative amendments. 3. Annexations. 4. Urban Growth Boundary Amendments B. Standards for Type III Planning Actions. 1. Zone changes, zoning map amendments and comprehensive plan map changes subject to the Type III procedure as described in subsection A of this section may be approved if in compliance with the comprehensive plan and the application demonstrates that: a. The change implements a public need, other than the provision of affordable housing, supported by the Comprehensive Plan; or Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 70 - b. A substantial change in circumstances has occurred since the existing zoning or Plan designation was proposed, necessitating the need to adjust to the changed circumstances; or c. Circumstances relating to the general public welfare exist that require such an action; or d. Proposed increases in residential zoning density resulting from a change from one zoning district to another zoning district, will provide one of the following: 1. 35% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below 120% of median income; or 2. 25% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below 100% of median income; or 3. 20% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below 80% of median income; or 4. 15% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below 60% of median income; or 5. Title to a sufficient amount of buildable land for development is transferred to a non-profit (IRC 501(3)(c)) affordable housing developer or comparable Development Corporation for the purpose of complying with subsection 2 above. The land shall be located within the project and all needed public facilities shall be extended to the aroa or areas proposed for transfer. Ownership of the land shall be transferred to the affordable housing developer or Development Corporation prior to commencement of the project; or e. Increases in residential zoning density of four units or greater on commercial, employment or industrial zoned lands (i.e. Residential Overlay), will not negatively impact the City of Ashland's commercial and industrial land supply as required in the Comprehensive Plan, and will provide one of the following: 1. 35% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below 120% of median income; or 2. 25% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below 100% of median income; or 3. 20% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below 80% of median income; or 4. 15% of the base density to qualifying buyers or renters with incomes at or below 60% of median income; or 5. Title to a sufficient amount of buildable land for development is transferred to a non-profit (IRC 501(3)(c)) affordable housing developer or comparable Development Corporation for the purpose of complying with subsection 2 above. The land shall be located within the project and all needed public facilities shall be extended to the area or areas proposed for dedication. Ownership of the land and/or air space shall be transferred to the affordable housing developer or Development Corporation prior to commencement of the project. The total number of affordable units described in sections D or E shall be determined by rounding down fractional answers to the nearest whole unit. A deed restriction, or similar legal instrument, shall be used to guarantee compliance with affordable criteria for a period of not less than 60 years. Sections D and E do not apply to council initiated actions. C. Type III Procedure. Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 71 - 1. Applications subject to the Type III Procedure shall be processed as follows: a. Complete applications shall be heard at the first regularly scheduled Commission meeting which is held at least 45 days after the submission of the application. b. Notice of the hearing shall be mailed as provided in section 18.108.080. c. A public hearing shall be held before the Commission as provided in 18.108.100. 2. Far I'laRRiRg adiaRs EleseribeEl iR seetiaR 18.108.969.A. 1 aREI 2, the CaMMissiaR shall ha't/e the al:ltharit"f ta tal(e stleh adiaR as is Reeessary ta Malee the aMeRElMeRts ta Mal's aREI EaRes as a resl:llt af the EleeisiaR withal:lt fl:lrther adiaR fraM the Cal:lReil tlRless the EleeisiaR is al'l'ealeEl. The EleeisiaR af the CaMMissiaR Ma"," be al'l'ealeEl ta the Cal:lReil as I'rao.,.iEleEl iR sediaR 18.198.119. 3. Far I'laRRiRg aetiaRs EleseribeEl iR seetiaR 18.198.969.A. 3 aREI 2, t 2. The Commission shall make a report of its findings and recommendations on the proposed action. Such report shall be forwarded to the City Council within 45 days of the public hearing. a. Upon receipt of the report, or within 60 days of the Commission hearing, the Council shall hold a public hearing as provided in 18.108.100. Public notice of such hearing shall be sent as provided in section 18.108.080. b. The Council may approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application. SECTION 103, 18.108.070, Procedures, Effective Date of Decision and Appeals, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.108.070, Effective Date of Decision and Appeals. A. Ministerial actions are effective on the date of the decision of the Staff Advisor and are not subject to appeal. B. Actions subject to appeal: 1. Staff PerMit DeeisiaRs. Exoedited Land Divisions. Unless aooealed within 14 davs of mailina a notice of decision. the Staff Advisor decision becomes final on the 15th dav. Aooeals shall be considered as set forth in ALUO 18.108.030CC) and ORS 197.375. URless a reEll:lest far a I'l:Iblie heariRg is MaEle, the fiRal EleeisiaR af the City far I'laRRiRg aetiaRs resl:lltiRg fraM the Staff PerMit I'raeeEltlre shall be the Staff AEI't/isar EleeisiaR, whieh shall be effeetiii'e teR Elars after the Elate af EleeisiaR. If hearEl bOt the CaMMissiaR ar BaarEl, the CaMMissiaR ar BaarEl EleeisiaR shall be the fiRal EleeisiaR af the CitOtO aR sl:leh Matters, dfeetive 15 Elays after the fiREliRgs aElal'teEl 131 the CaMMissiaR are sigReEl by the Chair af the CaMMissiaR aREI MaileEl ta the I'arties. 2. Type I Planning Actions. a. Effective Date of Decision. URless a reEll:lest far a I'l:Iblie heariRg is MaEle, t,Ihe final decision of the City for planning actions resulting from the Type I Planning Procedure shall be the Staff Advisor decision, effective on the 13th day after notice of the decision is mailed seheEll:lleEl ta be re"."ieweEl b)" the CaMMissiaR ar BaarEl. If a I'l:Iblie heariRg is helEl 13,. the CaMMissiaR ar BaarEl, the EleeisiaR af the CaMMissiaR ar BaarEl shall be the fiRal EleeisiaR af the Cit)", unless reconsideration of the action is aooroved bv the Staff Advisor or appealed to the Cal:lReil Commission as provided in section 18.108.070CBH2Hc).119.A. b. Reconsideration. The Staff Advisor mav reconsider Tvoe I olannina actions as set forth below. Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 72 - i. Anv Darty entitled to notice of the olannina action. or any City Aaencv may reauest reconsideration of the action after the decision has been made bv orovidina evidence to the Staff Advisor that a factual error occurred throuah no fault of the Darty askina for reconsideration. which in the ooinion of the staff advisor. miaht affect the decision. Reconsideration reauests are limited to factual errors and not the failure of an issue to be raised bv letter or evidence durina the oooortunitv to orovide oublic inout on the aoolication sufficient to afford the Staff Advisor an oooortunitv to resoond to the issue orior to makina a decision. ii. Reconsideration reauests shall be received within five (5) days of mailina. The Staff Advisor shall decide within three (3) days whether to reconsider the matter. iii. If the Plannina Staff Advisor is satisfied that an error occurred crucial to the decision. the Staff Advisor shall withdraw the decision for ourooses of reconsideration. The Staff Advisor shall decide within ten (10) days to affirm. modify. or reverse the oriainal decision. The Staff Advisor shall send notice of the reconsideration decision to affirm. modify. or reverse to any oartv entitled to notice of the olannina action. iv. If the Staff Advisor is not satisfied that an error occurred crucial to the decision. the Staff Advisor shall deny the reconsideration reauest. Notice of denial shall be sent to those oarties that reauested reconsideration. c. Aooeal. i. If a I'l:Iblie hearing is helEl, Within twelve (12) days of the date of the mailina of the Staff Advisor's final decision. includina any aooroved reconsideration reauest. the decision may be aooealed to the Plannina Commission bv any Darty entitled to receive notice of the olannina action. The aooeal shall be submitted to the Plannina Commission Secretary on a form aooroved bv the City Administrator. be accomoanied bv a fee established oursuant to City Council action. and be received bv the city no later than 4:30 o.m. on the 12th day after the notice of decision is mailed. ii. If an aooellant orevails at the hearina or uoon subseauent aooeal. the fee for the initial hearina shall be refunded. The fee reauired in this section shall not aoolv to aooeals made bv neiahborhood or community oraanizations recoanized bv the city and whose boundaries include the site. III. The aooeal shall be considered at the next reaular Plannina Commission or Hearinas Board meetina. The aooeal shall be a de novo hearina and shall be considered the initial evidentiary hearina reauired under ALUO 18.108.050 and ORS 197.763 as the basis for an aooeal to the Land Use Board of Aooeals. The Plannina Commission or Hearinas Board the final decision on aooeal shall be effective 135 days after the findings adopted by the Commission or Board are signed by the Chair of the Commission or Board and mailed to the parties. iv. The aooeal reauirements of this section must be fullv met or the aooeal will be considered bv the city as a jurisdictional defect and will not be heard or considered. Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April!, 2008-p. 73 - d. Final Decision of City. The decision of the Cel:lAeil Commission shall be the final decision of the City on appeals heard by the Cel:lAEiI Commission on Tyoe I Plannina actions, effective the day the findings adopted by the Cel:lAeil Commission are signed by the ~'ayer Chair and mailed to the parties. 3. Type II Planning Actions. a. Effective Date of Decision. The decision of the Commission is the final decision of the City resulting from the Type II Planning Procedure, effective 1~5 days after the findings adopted by the Commission are signed by the Chair of the Commission and mailed to the parties, unless reconsideration of the action is authorized as orovided in Section (b) below or appealed to the Council as provided in section 18.108.110.A. b. Reconsideration. i. The Staff Advisor on his/her own motion. or any oarty entitled to notice of the olannina action may reauest reconsideration of the action after the Plannina Commission final decision has been made by orovidina evidence to the Staff Advisor addressina one or more of the followina: (1) new evidence material to the decision exists which was unavailable. throuah no fault of the reauestina oarty. when the record of the oroceedina was ooen: (2) a factual error occurred throuah no fault of the reauestina oarty which is relevant to an aooroval criterion and material to the decision: (3) a orocedural error occurred. throuah no fault of the reauestina oarty. that oreiudiced the reauestina oarty's substantial riahts and remandina the matter will correct the error. Reconsideration reauests are limited to errors identified above and not the failure of an issue to be raised by letter or evidence durina the oooortunity to orovide oubUc inout on the aoolication sufficient to afford the Staff Advisor an oooortunity to resoond to the issue orior to makina a decision. ii. Reconsideration reauests shall be received within seven (7) davs of mailina. The Staff Advisor shall oromotly decide whether to reconsider the matter. iii. If the Staff Advisor is satisfied that an error occurred as identified above and is crucial to the decision. the Staff Advisor shall schedule reconsideration with notice to oarticioants of the matter before the Plannina Commission. Reconsideration shall be scheduled before the Plannina Commission at the next reaularly scheduled meetina. Reconsideration shall be limited to the oortion of the decision affected by the alleaed errors identified in oaraaraoh 3.b.i above. iv. The Plannina Commission shall decide to affirm. modify. or reverse the oriainal decision. The Plannina Commission Secretary shall send notice of the reconsideration decision to any oarty entitled to notice of the olannina action. ~. Final Decision of City. Unless the decision is remanded to the Plannina Commission, the decision of the City Council shall be the final decision of the City on appeals heard by the Council, on TYDe II Plannina actions. effective the day the findings adopted by the Council are signed by the Mayor and mailed to the parties. 4. Type III Planning Actions. Fer plaAAiAg adieAs desEribed iA sedieA 18.198.969.A.1 aAd 2, the dedsieA ef the Ce"",.issieA shall be the fiAal Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 74 - Elecisia... af the Cit', resl:llti...g fra... the Type III Pla......i...g PraeeEl1:1 re, 1:I...less appealeEl ta the Cal:l...eil as pra,..iEleEl i... seetia... 18.108.110.A. The fi...al Eleeisia... shall be effective 1~5 Ela'fs after the fi...Eli...gs aElapteEl by the Ca......issia... are sig...eEl b..- the Chair af the Ca......issia... a...EI ...aileEl ta the parties. The Elecisia... af the Cal:l...eil shall be the fi...al Eleeisia... af the Cit)' a... appeals hearEl b'f the Cal:l...eil, effedi'.'e the Ela)' the fi...Eli...gs aElapteEl b" the Cal:l...eil are sig...eEl b, the ~4a,.ar a...EI ...aileEl ta the parties. For planning actions described in section 18.108.0GO.A.l thru 3 a...EI 4, the decision of the Council shall be the final decision of the City, effective the day the findings adopted by the Council are signed by the Mayor and mailed to the parties. 5. The City Council may call up any planning action for a pl:lblie heari...g a...EI decision upon motion and majority vote, provided such vote takes place in the required aooeal time period, as al:ltli...eEl belaw. Unless the olannina action is aooealed and a oublic hearina is reauired. the City Council review of the Plannina Action is limited to the record and oublic testimony is not allowed. The City Council may affirm. modify or reverse the decision of the Plannina Commission. or may remand the decision to the Plannina Commission for additional consideration if sufficient time is oermitted for makina a final decision of the city. The City Council shall make findinas and conclusions and cause cooies of a final order to be sent to all oarties of the olannina action. C. No building or zoning permit shall be issued for any action under this Title until the decision is final, as defined in this section. SECTION 104, 18.108.080, Procedures, Public Notice, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.108.080, Public Hearina Notice. Public notice for hearings before the Staff Advisor. Hearings Board or Commission for planning actions shall be given as follows: A. Notices shall be mailed at least 10 days prior to the hearing to: 1. The applicant or authorized agent, 2. The subject property owner, and 3. All owners of record of property on the most recent property tax assessment roll within 200 feet of the subject property.I:I...less the heari...g has bee... reEll:lesteEl I:I...Eler the Staff per...it praeeEll:lre. I... sl:leh ease the ...atiee shall be ...aileEl a...I',. ta aw...ers '.vithi... 100 feet af the sl:lbjeet prapert",. B. Mailed notices shall contain the following information, provided, however, that notices for hearings before the Council shall not contain the statements specified in paragraphs 8 and 9: 1. Explanation of the nature of the application and the proposed use or uses which could be authorized. 2. List of the applicable criteria from the ordinance and the plan that apply to the application at issue. 3. The street address or other easily understood geographical reference to the subject property. 4. The name of a local government representative to contact and the telephone number where additional information may be obtained. Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 75 - 5. A statement that a copy of the application, all documents and evidence relied upon by the applicant and applicable criteria are available for inspection at no cost and will be provided at reasonable cost. 6. The date, time and location of the hearing or of the meeting, if no hearing is involved. 7. A statement that failure of an issue to be raised in a hearing, in person or by letter, or failure to provide sufficient specificity to afford the decision maker an opportunity to respond to the issue precludes an appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) based on that issue. 8. A statement that if additional documents or evidence is provided in support of the application, any party shall be entitled to a continuance of the hearing. 9. A statement that unless there is a continuance, if a participant so requests before the conclusion of the hearing, the record shall remain open for at least seven days after the hearing. C. Posted Notice. Exeept fer Staff Perfftit PreeeEll:lre plaAAiA!I aetieAS, A notice, as described in this subsection, shall be posted on the subject property by the applieaAt city in such a manner as to be clearly visible from a public right-of- way at least 10 days prior to the date of the CefftfftissieA ffteetiA!I. Failure by the applieaAt city to post a notice, or post in clear view from a public right-of- way shall be considered an incomplete application. The applicaAt city shall certify, for the record of the hearing, that the posting was accomplished. The failure of the posted notice to remain on the property shall not invalidate the proceedings. The posted notice shall only contain the following information: planning action number, brief description of the proposal, phone number and address for contact at Ashland Planning Department. D. Additional Requirements for Type II and III Public Notice. In addition to the notice specified in section 18.108.080.A, Band C, notice for Type II and III procedures shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the City at least 10 days prior to the date of the hearing before the Commission. E. The failure of a property owner to receive notice as provided in this section shall not invalidate such proceedings if the City can demonstrate by affidavit that such notice was mailed. The failure to receive notice shall not invalidate the decision after the action is final if a good faith attempt was made to notify all persons entitled to receive notice. F.. Whenever it is demonstrated to the Staff Advisor that: 1. The city did not mail the notice required in ~ 18.108.939.8; 2. Such error adversely affected and prejudiced a person's substantial rights; and 3. Such person notified the Staff Advisor within 21 days of when the person knew of should have known of the decision, the Staff Advisor shall schedule a hearing for the next regular Commission or Hearings Board meeting allowing adequate time to comply with the notice requirements of section 18.108.080. The public hearing shall be conducted as provided in ~ 18.108.100. If a hearing is conducted under this section, the decision of the Commission or Hearings Board shall supersede the previous decision. G. Whenever it is demonstrated to the Staff Advisor that: 1. The city did not comply with the notice requirements in ~ 18.108.080.A through E; 2. Such error adversely affected and prejudiced a person's substantial rights; and Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 76 - 3. Such person notified the Staff Advisor within 21 days of when the person knew or should have known of the decision, the Staff Advisor shall schedule a hearing before the Board, Commission or Council that heard or would have heard the matter involving the defective notice. a. The Staff Advisor shall notify by mail all persons who previously appeared in the matter and all persons who were entitled to mailed notice but were not mailed such notice. b. The hearing shall be conducted as provided in 9 18.108.100 if it is a hearing before the Board or Commission, except that the record of the previous hearing shall be reviewed and considered by the Board or Commission. If it is an appeal before the Council, the Council may hear such matters as are permitted in 9 18.108.110. A decision made after the hearing shall supersede the previous decision. H. Notwithstanding the period specified in subsections F.3 and G.3 of this section, the period for a hearing or appeal shall not exceed three years after the date of the initial decision. SECTION 105, 18.108.110, Procedures, Appeal to Council, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.108.110,Appeal to Council. A. Appeals of =FvI'e 1 deeisia"s far which a heari"g has bee" held, af Type II decisions or of Type III decisions described in ~ection 18.108.060.A.1 ;]nd 2 -shall be initiated by a notice of appeal filed with the City Administrator. The standard Appeal Fee shall be required as part of the notice. Failure ta I'a'; the Al'l'eal Fee at the time All the appeal reauirements of Section 18.108.110. includina the aooeal fee. must be fullv met or the aooeal will be considered bv the city as is filed is a jurisdictionalb( defective and will not be heard or considered. 1. The appeal shall be filed prior to the effective date of the decision of the Commission. 2. The notice shall include the appellant's name, address, a reference to the decision sought to be reviewed, a statement as to how the appellant qualifies as a party, the date of the decision being appealed, and a clear and distinct identification of the specific grounds for which the decision should be reversed or modified, based on tfte identified applicable criteria or procedural irregularity. 3. The notice of appeal, together with notice of the date, time and place af the heari"g a"to consider the appeal by the Council shall be mailed to the parties at least 20 days prior to the heari"gmeetina. 4. The al'l'eal shall be a de "ewe e".'ide"tiar'; heari"g 4. A. Exceot uoon the election to re-ooen the record as set forth in suboaraaraoh 4.8. below. the review of a decision of the Plannina Commission bv the City Council shall be confined to the record of the oroceedina before the Plannina Commission. The record shall consist of the aoolication and all materials submitted with it: documentary evidence. exhibits and materials submitted durina the hearina or at other times when the record before the Plannina Commission was ooen: recorded testimony: Cincludina DVDs when available). the executed decision of the Plannina Commission. includina the findinas and conclusions. In addition. for ourooses of Citv Council review. the notice of aooeal and the written arauments submitted bv the oarties to the Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 77 - aooeal. and the oral arauments. if any. shall become Dart of the record of the aooeal oroceedina B. The Council may reooen the record and consider new evidence on a limited basis. if such a reauest to reooen the record is made to the City Administrator toaether with the filina of the notice of aooeal and the City Administrator determines orior to the City Council aooeal hearina that the reauestina oartv has demonstrated: (a.) That the Plannina Commission committed a orocedural error. throuah no fault of the reauestina oartv. that oreiudiced the reauestina oartv's substantial riahts and that reooenina the record before the Council is the onlv means of correctina the error: or (b.)That a factual error occurred before the Plannina Commission throuah no fault of the reauestina oartv which is relevant to an aooroval criterion and material to the decision: or (c.) That new evidence material to the decision on aooeal exists which was unavailable, throuah no fault of the reauestina oartv, when the record of the oroceedina was ooen, and durina the oeriod when the reauestina Darty could have reauested reconsideration. A reauestina oartv may onlv aualifv for this exceotion if he or she demonstrates that the new evidence is relevant to an aooroval criterion and material to the decision. This exceotion shall be strictlv construed bv the Council in order to ensure that onlv relevant evidence and testimony is submitted to the hearina body. Re-ooenina the record for ourooses of this section means the submission of additional written testimony and evidence, not oral testimony or oresentation of evidence before the City Council. C. Oral araument on the aooeal shall be oermitted before the Council. Oral araument shall be limited to ten fifteen (10) minutes for the aoolicant, ten (10) for the aooellant, if different, and three (3) minutes for any other Party who oarticioated below. A Darty shall not be oermitted oral araument if written arauments have not been timelv submitted. Written arauments shall be submitted no less than ten (10) f8l:1rteen (14) days orior to the Council consideration of the aooeal. Written and oral arauments on the aooeal shall be limited to those issues c1earlv and distinctlv set forth in the Notice of Aooeal: similarlv, oral araument shall be confined to the substance of the written araument. D. Uoon review, and exceot when limited reooenina of the record is allowed, the City Council shall not re-examine issues of fact and shall limit its review to determinina whether there is substantial evidence to suooort the findinas of the Plannina Commission, or to determinina if errors in law were committed bv the Commission. Review shall in any event be limited to those issues c1earlv and distinctlv set forth in the notice of aooeal. No issue may be raised on aooeal to the Council that Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 78 - was not raised before the Plannina Commission with sufficient sDecificity to enable the Commission and the Darties to resDond. 5. The Council may affirm, reverse, et' modify or remand the decision and may approve or deny the request, or grant approval with conditions. The Council shall make findings and conclusions, and make a decision based on the record before it as justification for its action. The Council shall cause copies of a final order to be sent to all parties participating in the appeal. UDon recommendation of the Administrator. the Council may elect to summarily remand the matter to the Plannina Commission. If the City Council elects to remand a decision to the Plannina Commission. either summarily or otherwise. the Plannina Commission decision shall be the final decision of the City. unless the Council calls the matter ud Dursuant to Section 18.108.070.8.5 . B. Appeals may only be filed by parties to the planning action. "Parties" shall be defined as the following: 1. The applicant. 2. Persons who participated in the public hearing, either orally or in writing. Failure to participate in the public hearing, either orally or in writing, precludes the right of appeal to the Council. 3. The Cel:nu:i1, by fI'Iajerit"j ".ete. ~4. Persons who were entitled to receive notice of the action but did not receive notice due to error. SECTION 106, 18.112.030, Enforcement, Revocation - Permit Expiration, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.112.030, Revocation - permit expiration. Any zoning permit, or Dlannina action granted in accordance with the terms of this Title shall be deemed revoked if not used within one year from date of approval. unless another time oeriod is specified in another section of this Title. Said permit shall not be deemed used until the permittee has actually obtained a building permit, and commenced construction thereunder, or has actually commenced the permitted use of the premises. The Staff Aadvisor te the I"lal'uti"!I Cefl'lfl'lissie.. may grant an extension te this tifl'le perieEl sl:Ibjed te the T"ipe 1 preeeEll:lre set ferth i.. Chapter 18.198 ef this Title.of the aDDroval under the followina conditions: 1. One time extension no lonaer than eiahteen (181 months is allowed. 2. The Staff Advisor shall find that a chanae of conditions for which the aDDlicant was not resDonsible Drevented the aDDlicant from comDleted the develoDment within the oriainal time limitation. 3. Land Use Ordinance reauirements aDDlicable to the develoDment have not chanaed since the oriainal aDDroval. An extension may be aranted. however. if reauirements have chanaed and the aDDlicant aarees to com Diy with any such chanaes. SECTION 101, 18.112.040, Enforcement, Revocation - conditions violated, of the Ashland Municipal Code, is amended to read as follows: 18.112.040, Revocation - conditions violated. Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 79 - Any zoning permit, or DlanninQ action granted in accordance with the terms of this Title may be revoked if any of the conditions or terms of such permit or variance are violated or if any law or ordinance is violated in connection therewith. SECTION 10~ Digital Maps. The following Official Maps in electronic format, attached hereto and made a part hereof by this reference, are officially adopted by the City of Ashland: 1. AirDort Overlav Zone 2. Site desiQn Zones 3. Detailed Site Review Zone 4. Downtown DesiQn Standards - Overlav 5. Hillside Lands 6. Historic Districts 7. North Mountain Zone 8. Physical and Environmental Constraints MaDS 9. FloodDlain Corridor Lands 10. RiDarian Preservation Lands 11. Hillside Lands 12. Wildfire Lands 13. Severe Constraints Lands 14. Performance Standards Overlay 15. Residential Overlay 16. ZoninQ MaD SECTION 109, Severability. If any section, provision, clause, sentence, or paragraph of this Ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstances shall be held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other sections, provisions, clauses or paragraphs of this Ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this Ordinance are declared to be severable. SECTION 110 Savings Clause. Notwithstanding this amendment, the City ordinances in existence at the time any land use action was legally deemed commenced, shall remain valid and in full force and effect for purposes of all applications, cases and actions filed or commenced during the times said ordinance(s) or portions thereof were operative. SECTION 111, Codification. Provisions of this Ordinance shall be incorporated in the Ashland Municipal Code and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "code", "article", "section", or another word, and the sections of this Ordinance may be renumbered, or re-Iettered, and typographical errors and cross-reference corrections, corrected by the City Recorder, provided however that Sections 110, thru 112, unincorporated Whereas clauses and boilerplate provisions need not be codified. Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 80 - The foregoing ordinance was first read by title only in accordance with Article X, Section 2(C) of the City Charter on the day of , 2008, and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of , 2008 Barbara Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this day of , 2008. John W. Morrison, Mayor Reviewed as to form: Richard Appicello, City Attorney Ashland Land Use Ordinance Amendments Second Reading: April 1, 2008-p. 81 - CITY OF ASHLAND Council Communication Three Emergency Ordinances amending or repealing AMC 9.08.180, AMC 6.24 and AMC 10.68.050, 10.68 070 and 10.68.160 Martha Bennett Primary Staff Contact: E-Mail: Secondary Contact: Estimated Time: Richard Appicello Appicelr@ashland.or.us Meeting Date: Department: Secondary Dept.: Approval: April l, 2008 City Attorney's Office 15 minutes / Ordinance Question: Should the City Council declare an emergency and unanimously adopt the following three ordinances, effective immediately? AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO NUISANCES, AMENDING CODE SECTION 9.08.180, CONCERNING DISTRIBUTION OF WRITTEN MATERIALS DECLARING AN EMERGENCY AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO SOLICITATION, REQUIRING NO TRESPASS SIGNS, LIMITING SOLICIT A TION HOURS, AND REPEALING CODE CHAPTER 6.24 CONCERNING PEDDLERS, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO PUBLIC PARKS, REPEALING CODE SECTIONS 10.68.050, 10.68.070 AND 10.68.160 AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends declaration of an emergency, and unanimous adoption of the three advertised Ordinances after the ordinances are read in full and then by title only. Background: After the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Watchtower Bible & Tract Society v. Village of Stratton, 536 U.S. 150 (2002), most local governments examined their local ordinances for overbreadth.-(i.e. the regulation sweeps within its ambit constitutionally protected activities.). The City Attorney's office has identified the provisions proposed for amendment or repeal as potentially subject to legal challenge. AMC 10.68.050 and AMC 9.08.180 have also been identified for repeal in correspondence from the American Civil Liberties Union to the City Council. This office will continue to examine the code and advise Council of other provisions in need of amendment or repeal. The ordinances are proposed for emergency enactment. Staffmust read the ordinances in full and then by title only. The Council must declare that an emergency exists. Finally, the Council's vote enacting the ordinance must be unanimous. Related City Policies: City Charter Article 10, Section 3.Emergency Ordinance Page] 040] 08 Three Ordinances.CC.doc r~' CITY OF ASHLAND Council Options: (1) Enact one or more of the proposed ordinances by emergency. (2) Postpone consideration. Potential Motions: Staff: [Conduct Reading of Ordinance infull and then by Title only] Council: Motion to declare an emergency exists. Council: Motion to approve First and Second Reading and adopt the three advertised emergency Ordinances. Attachments: Three (3) proposed ordinances AMC Section 2.24 Page 2 040108 Three Ordinances.CC.doc ~~, ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO NUISANCES, AMENDING CODE SECTION 9.08.180, CONCERNING DISTRIBUTION OF WRITTEN MATERIALS DECLARING AN EMERGENCY Annotated to show deletions and additions to the code sections being modified. Deletions are bold . and additions are in bold underline. WHEREAS, the City of Ashland wishes to update its nuisance provisions to conform with case law regarding the distribution of written materials; and WHEREAS, the nuisance provision regarding the distribution of notices and advertisements needs to be clarified to allow individuals to distribute notices as long as the distribution does not create a litter problem. THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Section 9.08.180 [Notices - Advertisements] is hereby amended to read as follows: A. No person shall affix or cause to be affixed a placard, bill, advertisement, or poster upon real or personal property, public or private, without first securing permission from the owner or person in control of the property. This section shall not be construed as an amendment to or a repeal of any regulation now or hereafter adopted by the City regulating the use and location of signs and advertising. 8- No person shall scatter, litter, distribute, or cause to be scattered, or littered or distributed on public or private property any placards, advertisements, or other similar materials on public or private property. C. This section does not prohibit the distribution of advertising materials during a parade or appro\'ed public gathering. SECTION 2. Severability.. The sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses of this ordinance are severable. The invalidity of one section, subsection, paragraph, or clause shall not affect the validity of the remaining sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses. SECTION 3. Emergency. The City Council of the City of Ashland finds that the health, safety and welfare of the City of Ashland and the protections afforded free speech and expression in the Oregon and United States Constitutions, requires this ordinance to have immediate effect. Therefore, the City Council hereby declares the existence of an emergency and this ordinance shall be in full force and effect from the time of its passage by the Council and approval by the Mayor. Ordinance No. Page 1 of2 The foregoing ordinance was read in full and then by title only at a single meeting of the Ashland City Council in accordance with Article X, Section 2(B) and 2(C) of the City Charter on the day of , 2008, and duly PASSED by unanimous vote and ADOPTED this day of , 2008. Barbara M. Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this _ day of Ordinance No. ,2008. John W. Morrison, Mayor Page 2 of2 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO PUBLIC PARKS, REPEALING CODE SECTIONS 10.68.050, 10.68.070 AND 10.68.160 AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY Annotated to show delotions and additions to the code sections being modified. Deletions are bold :;;-;~~ and additions are in bold underline. WHEREAS, the City of Ashland wishes to repeal outdated and questionable parks provisions first instituted in 1916 and 1978; THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Repeal. repealed. SECTION 2. Repeal. SECTION 3. Repeal. repealed. Section 10.68.050 [Soliciting - Begging - Prohibited], is hereby Section 10.68.070 [Vocations-Prohibited], is hereby repealed. Section 10.68.160 [Annoying others -Prohibited] is hereby SECTION 4. Severability.. The sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses of this ordinance are severable. The invalidity of one section, subsection, paragraph, or clause shall not affect the validity of the remaining sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses. SECTION 5. Emergency. The City Council of the City of Ashland finds that the health, safety and welfare of the City of Ashland and the protections afforded free speech and expression in the Oregon and United States Constitutions, requires this ordinance to have immediate effect. Therefore, the City Council hereby declares the existence of an emergency and this ordinance shall be in full force and effect from the time of its passage by the Council and approval by the Mayor. The foregoing ordinance was read in full and then by title only at a single meeting of the Ashland City Council in accordance with Article X, Section 2(B) and 2(C) of the City Charter on the day of , 2008, and duly PASSED by unanimous vote and ADOPTED this day of , 2008. Barbara M. Christensen, City Recorder Ordinance No. Page 1 of2 SIGNED and APPROVED this _ day of Ordinance No. ,2008. John W. Morrison, Mayor Page 2 of2 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO SOLICITATION, REQUIRING NO TRESPASS SIGNS, LIMITING SOLICITATION HOURS, AND REPEALING CODE CHAPTER 6.24 CONCERNING PEDDLERS, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY Annotated to show deletions and additions to the code sections being modified. Deletions are bold . and additions are bold underlined. WHEREAS, the City of Ashland wishes to repeal its peddler provisions and replace it with an ordinance that conforms with case law regarding solicitation. THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Sections 6.24.010 [Solicitation hours] through 6.24.050 [Penalties] are hereby added to read as follows: 6.24.010 Solicitation hours. No person shall offer Qoods or services for sale, or solicit money or anvthinQ havinQ monetary value from another person on premises occupied as a residence except between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. or bv the prior, express permission of the person occupvinQ or in control of those premises. 6.24.020 Business license reauired. Except for not-for-profit orQanization fundraisinQ, a business, shop, trade, profession, or occupation transactinQ or carrvinQ on business bv solicitinQ door-to-door within the city limits is reauired to obtain a business license pursuant to the business license ordinance. 6.24.030 Criminal trespass. A person that enters private property with a clearlv visible "No solicitation," "No peddlinQ," " No trespassinQ," or similar siQn posted is subiect to prosecution for criminal trespass, reQardless of whether the purpose for entry was to enQaQe in business or otherwise. SiQns posted under this section shall not exceed 12 inches bv 12 inches in dimension, and such siQns shall conform with AMC Chapter 18.96. 6.24.040 Criminal trespass exception. The prohibition of AMC 6.24.030 does not applv to Qovernment officials enterinQ the property in the performance of their lawful duties, includinQ, but not limited to: peace officers, emerQencv service personnel, or city emplovees. 6.24.050 Penalties. Ordinance No. Page 1 of2 A violation of any of the provisions of this chapter shall constitute a Class C misdemeanor, except that the maximum fine per offense is limited to five hundred dollars ($500.00) and the costs of prosecution while Article 9, Section 1 of the Ashland City Charter is effective. Notwithstandina this provision, the offense of criminal trespass may also be charaed and prosecuted as a violation of state law. SECTION 2. Repeal. Ashland Municipal Code Chapter 6.24 [Peddlers] is hereby repealed in its entirety. SECTION 3. Severability. The sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses of this ordinance are severable. The invalidity of one section, subsection, paragraph, or clause shall not affect the validity of the remaining sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses. SECTION 4. Emergency. The City Council of the City of Ashland finds that the health, safety and welfare of the City of Ashland and the protections afforded free speech and expression in the Oregon and United States Constitutions, requires this ordinance to have immediate effect. Therefore, the City Council hereby declares the existence of an emergency and this ordinance shall be in full force and effect from the time of its passage by the Council and approval by the Mayor. The foregoing ordinance was read in full and then by title only at a single meeting of the Ashland City Council in accordance with Article X, Section 2(B) and 2(C) of the City Charter on the day of , 2008, and duly PASSED by unanimous vote and ADOPTED this day of , 2008. Barbara M. Christensen, City Recorder SIGNED and APPROVED this _ day of ,2008. John W. Morrison, Mayor Ordinance No. Page 2 of2 6.24 Peddlers 6.24.010 Definition For the purposes of this chapter the term "peddler" means a person who enters onto real property used for residential purposes for the purpose of communicating with an occupant of the property, whether the communication is verbal, visual, or in writing. "Department" means the finance department of the city. (Ord. 110292,1949; Ord. 2774 S12, 1996). 6.24.020 Prohibited Acts It is unlawful for any peddler to: A. Solicit before 9 a.m. or after 9 p.m. when the local time is daylight savings time or after 8 p.m. when the local time is standard time, without the consent of the occupant to do so. B. Solicit without first having obtained a city business license. C. Solicit after a business license has been revoked or has expired. D. Allow, suffer, or permit any person soliciting on the peddler's behalf or under the peddler's direction to commit any act prohibited by this chapter. E. Provide false or fraudulent information on an application. F. Leave written materials upon real property where a sign conforming to the requirements of section 6.24.045 is posted. G. Solicit upon real property where a sign conforming to the requirements of section 6.24.045 is posted. (Ord. 1102 Sl, 1949; Ord. 2774 S12, 1996) 6.24.025 Consent to Enter Onto Real Property, Exemptions A. It shall be an affirmative defense to an alleged violation of section 6.24.020.A, F, or G that the person charged with the violation had received actual or constructive consent of the occupant prior to entering the real property. Constructive consent to enter real property may be implied from the circumstances of each instance, the relationship of the parties and actual or implied contractual relationships. B. The occupant of real property shall be considered to have given constructive consent to enter real property for the purpose of solicitation between the hours of 9 a.m. and 9 p.m., when the local time is daylight savings time or between 9 a.m. and 8 p.m., when the local time is standard time, if the occupant has not posted a "No Solicitation" sign, pursuant to section 6.24.045. C. Nothing in this section shall be construed to authorize the entry into a structure located on real property. The right to enter any structure must be otherwise provided for by law. D. Officers, employees, or agents of a governmental entity while performing activities within the scope of their office, employment, or agency are exempt from the requirements of this chapter. E. No person may be charged with a violation of any subsection of section 6.24.020 in connection with an act committed between 4 p.m. and 9 p.m. on each October 31st. COrd 2774, S12 1996) 6.24.030 Application - Fee A. Any person who desires to solicit at five or more dwelling units during any eight hour period shall register with the department by filing for a business license for the purpose of peddling and a sworn application on a form furnished by the department, which gives the following information: COrd. 2231, Sl, 1982; Ord. 2774 S12, 1996). 1. The time period within which the solicitation is to be made, giving the date of the beginning of solicitation and its projected conclusion; 2. A description of the methods and means by which the solicitation is to be accomplished and the approximate locations and dates on which those locations will be visited; 3. A copy of the applicant's motor vehicle operator's license or other form of official identification containing a photograph of the applicant. If the applicant has no such license or identification, then the applicant shall be required to furnish evidence of the applicant's true identity; 4. A statement as to whether or not the applicant or any officer, director, trustee, partner, corporation, or any current agent or employee engaging in the solicitation has signed a consent decree or order in the last five years or has been convicted of a felony or a misdemeanor involving moral turpitude within the past five years, and the nature of the offense, or consent decree or order, the state where the conviction, or consent decree or order occurred, and the year of such conviction, or consent decree or order. COrd. 1693 Sl, 1971; Ord. 1102 S3, 1949; Ord. 2231 S2, 1982; Ord. 2622, S3, 1991; Ord. 2774 S12, 1996). 6.24.040 Issuance A. Upon receipt of such application, the department shall determine its compliance with section 6.24.030, and, within ten working days of the receipt of the application, either issue a business license pursuant to chapter 6.04 or notify applicant that the application does not comply with the requirements of section 6.24.030 or chapter 6.04. The department shall keep a record of all permits issued. COrd. 2231 S3, 1982; Ord. 2774 S12, 1996). 6.24.045 No Solicitation Sign A. If an occupant of real property chooses to not invite peddlers onto property, the occupant may post a "No Solicitation" sign pursuant to this section. The effect of the posting of such a sign is to express the refusal of the occupant to grant consent to any person to enter the occupant's real property to solicit, except to those persons exempt from these provisions by section 6.24.025.D and E. B. Signs posted pursuant to this section shall be posted on or near the boundaries of the property at the normal points of entry must be no smaller than 6" in height by 8" in width and the words "no solicitation" in letters no less than 1/2" in height. C. For real property possessing no apparent barriers to entry at the boundaries of the property which limit access to the primary entrance of a structure located on the property, placement of the sign at the primary entrance to the structure constitutes compliance with this section. 6.24.050 License - Fee COrd. 1102 S5, 1949; Ord. 2231 S4, 1982; repealed Ord. 2774 S12, 1996) 6.24.060 License - Exhibition Peddlers are required to exhibit their business licenses at the request of any citizen. The permit shall not be used as or represented to be an endorsement by the city or any of its officers or employees. COrd. 1102 S6, 1949; Ord. 2774 S12, 1996). 6.24.070 Enforcement COrd. 1102 S7, 1949; repealed Ord. 2774 S12, 1996). 6.24.080 Records COrd. 1102 S8, 1949; Ord. 2231 S5, 1982; repealed Ord. 2774 S12, 1996). 6.24.090 License - Revocation A. A business license for a peddler may be revoked by the City Judge after notice and hearing, for any of the following causes: 1. Fraud, misrepresentation, or false statement contained in the application for license; 2. Fraud, misrepresentation, or false statement made in the course of carrying on business as a peddler; 3. Any violation of this chapter; 4. Conviction of any crime or misdemeanor involving moral turpitude; or 5. Conducting the business of peddling in an unlawful manner or in such a manner as to constitute a menace to the health, safety, or general welfare of the public. B. Notice of the hearing for revocation of a license shall be given in writing, setting forth specifically the grounds of complaint and the time and place of hearing. Such notice shall bemailed.postageprepaid.tothelicensee.at licensee's last known address, at least ten days prior to the date set for hearing. COrd. 1102 S9, 1949; Ord. 2774 S12, 1996). 6.24.100 License - Expiration COrd. 1102 SlO, 1949; repealed Ord. 2774 S12, 1996). 6.24.110 Peddling - Prohibited in streets It is unlawful for any person to offer for sale or sell merchandise, food or drinks on any public sidewalk, street or in any other public place in any commercial zone of the City. However, the City Council may, at its discretion, grant permission to persons to hold sales on the sidewalks in the commercial zones of the City upon such terms and conditions as it deems appropriate. COrd. 1693 S3, 1971; Ord. 1102 S15, 1949; Ord. 2774 S12, 1996). 6.24.120 Penalty Any person violating any of the provisions of this chapter is guilty of an infraction and shall be subject to the penalties set forth in Section 1.08.020. COrd. 1810, 1974; Ord. 1693 S2, 1971; Ord. 1102 S14, 1949; Ord. 2382 S6, 1986; Ord. 2774 S12, 1996) 10.68.050 Soliciting-Begging-Prohibited No one shall solicit fares or beg or publicly solicit subscriptions in any part of the Parks. Card 626 S5, 1916; Ord 1948 S2, 1978) 10.68.070 Certain vocations prohibited Solicitors, commercial photographers without permission from the Park Commission, agents, fakirs, peddlers, mendicants, strolling musicians, organ grinders, exhorters, and showpersons shall not ply their several vocations within the park limits. Card 626 S7, 1916) 10.68.160 Annoying others prohibited No person shall solicit the acquaintance of another in any park, or annoy or follow children, or distribute obscene literature, or in any way annoy another. Card 626 S16, 1916)