HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990-1106 Council Mtg PACKET
Important:
Any citizen attending Council meetings may speak on any item on the agenda,
unless it is the subject of a public hearing which has been closed. If you wish to
speak, please rise and after you have been recognized by the Chair, give your
name and address. The Chair will then allow you to speak and also inform you as
to the amount of time allotted to you. 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.
t:(AJ
AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL
NOVEMBER 6, 1990
I. EXECUTIVE SESSION: 7:00 P.M., Conference Room, to consider the
evaluation of the City Administrator pursuant to O.R.S.
192.660(1) (i) and the acquisition of real property pursuant to
O.R.S. 192.660(1) (e).
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: 7:30 P.M., Civic Center Council Chambers
III. ROLL CALL
/ /
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Executive Session and Special Meeting of
October 11, 1990; Regular Meeting of October 16~ 1990; and
Special Meeting of November 1, 1990~
V. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS:
1. Proclamation - "Scouting for Food Good Turn Week".
VI. CONSENT AGENDA:
1. Minutes of Boards, Commissions & Committees.
2. Letter from TCI Cablevision regarding new program
offerings.
3. Approval of sale of stock from Walter Ross to Oak Knoll
Enterprise, Inc. at Oak Knoll Golf Course.
4. Request by Recycle Task Force to authorize expenditure of
$4,000 for one-half of the cost of additional recycling
bins.
5. Quarterly Financial Report for period ending September 30,
1990.
VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS: (To be concluded by 9:30 P.M.)
1. Proposed vacation of a portion of Hillview Drive lying
south of Crestwood Drive.
VIII. UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
1. Determination of limitation of issues to be considered in
connection with remand of P.A. No. 89-170, a Conditional
Use Permit on property located South of Hersey street, East
of Williamson Way. (Mike Mahar/Pacific Trend, Applicant)
/2. Adoption of Findings, Conclusions & Orders - Secure
Storage.
/
3. Adoption of Findings, Conclusions & Orders - Logan Drive.
4. Request by Bicycle Commission to set date for joint work
session with Robert Foster re: Bike Plan.
IX. NEW & MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
1. Request by Church of the Nazarene for reduction of S.D.C.
Annexation Fee on E. Main st. property.
2. Request by David Lane, 1700 E. Main. Street for permission
to connect property outside of the city limits to city
sewer system.
3. Request by SOSC Students for the Environment that City
Council consider banning high-phosphate detergents.
4. Acceptance of deed from Harry Lawrence for 30 acres of land
for Open Space Purposes.
5. Recommendation from Bicycle commission that Council request
changes to Bike Route signage on siskiyou Blvd.
X. PUBLIC FORUM: Business from the audience not included on the
agenda. (Limited to 15 minutes)
XI. ORDINANCES. RESOLUTIONS & CONTRACTS:
d \.)1-
I) f;;~og
/2.
. /3.
/4.
/5.
)6.
/;'7.
Second reading by title only of an ordinance amending
Chapter 11.28 of the Ashland Municipal Code concerning
parking limits and parking zones in the Downtown Parking
District.
First reading of an ordinance amending the Ashland
Municipal Code with respect to unnecessary noises and
declaring an emergency.
First reading of an ordinance adopting an amendment to the
Comprehensive Plan Map. (Anderson/Diamond, Applicants)
First reading of an ordinance rezoning property from R-3
and R-1-7.5 to R-2 (Anderson/Diamond, Applicants) .
ordin~ndt amending the Municipal Code with respect to
grades on driveways and flag drives.
do \~' dO th 0 0 I 'd 0 h
Or 1nance amen 1ng e Mun1c1pa Co e W1t respect to
vision clearance standards.
ordinanc~~amendingthe Bicycle Ordinance concerning audible
signal devices and bike parking regulations.
XII. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS
XIII. ADJOURNMENT
MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL
OCTOBER 11, 1990
ROLL CALL
Mayor Golden led the Pledge of Allegiance and called the meeting 'to
order at 7:30 P.M. on the above date in the Council Chambers. Laws,
Williams, Acklin, Winthrop, and Arnold were present. Reid was absent.
PUBLIC HEARING
Foster Bike study - Planning Dir. Fregonese gave the staff report. He
gave stats on preferred modes of transportation and numbers of vehicle
trips per day in various parts of town. Downtown is reaching capacity
for V.T.D.'s. Rees Jones, Bike commissioner, said the big issue is
safety on Siskiyou Blvd., and that bikepath has a history of accidents
for which the City has been paying claims. Roger Noyes, Bike
Commissioner, said that commission did not accept ,Foster's proposal
for the section from N. Main to the City limits, and would like to see
the road hazards and storm drains fixed. John Seligman, Bike
Commissioner, said they recommend leaving the downtown section as it
is but reducing the parking lane from eight feet to seven feet, and
encouraging people to park closer to curbs. On E. Main they propose
enlarging the outside lanes and narrowing the inside lane. Ken
Gosling, Bike commissioner, said they propose signs to 1) encourage
bicyclists to ride on the road shoulder on Siskiyou from Highway 66 to
Tolman Creek Rd.; and 2) make motorists aware of the presence of
bicyclists on the road. They recommend that the median strip on
Siskiyou between Gresham and Highway 66 be reduced by five feet on
each side, but side streets not be closed off. Pam Barlow, P.W.
Admin. Asst., said the Bike Commission encourages the city Council to
recognize the importance of bicycling by adopting the Foster Plan,
w~th recommendations made by that commission.
Public Hearing - Edmund Dews, 407 Siskiyou Blvd., does not feel the
Siskiyou Blvd.bikepath is dangerous, he is concerned with destroying
the aesthetic value of the median, and feels the Historic Commission
should review the plan. He is also concerned with the cost. Terry
Skibby, Historic commissioner, said the Boulevard median has
historical value and should be left as is. Marjorie O'Harra, 1235
Tolman Creek Rd., said cyclists should obey traffic laws and motorists
educated on how to share roads with them, and she does not want the
median destroyed. She then read a letter from Virginia Cotton who is
against cutting the median. Leon Swartzberg, Jr., spoke about safety
'hazards for bicyclists on N. Main st. Evelyn Strellman thinks coming
out of cross streets onto the Boulevard would be more hazardouS if the
median is narrower. Charles Inman recommended putting bicyclists on
one side of the Boulevard and pedestrians on the other. Rick Landt
thanked City officials for having the study done and he is concerned
with taking away the grass and planting flowers on the median. Bob
Special Meeting - Ashland City Council - October 11, 1990- Page One
Foster Bike Plan (Continued)
O'Harra, 1235 Tolman, asked that the median be left as is, and said
using alternate routes i.e. E. Main street takes approximately the
same amount of time. stan Shadle spoke in favor of the plan. Bob
Cusumano said cutting the'median by three feet instead of five might
be a good compromise. A resident said cyclists need consistency to
learn to ride well and striping is a safety factor. Russ Rickert,
Pres. of Siskiyou Wheelmen, said that group supports the Bicycle
Commission and autos decrease livability. Esther Sohler, 505
Fairview, asked that consideration be given to people who can neither
walk nor ride a bike. Jim Ragland, 91 Gresham, gave a short history
of the Siskiyou bikepath, said alternates need to be found and the
median should not be cut. Renee Rickert, Siskiyou Wheelmen, echoed
that group's support of the Bicycle Commission. Robert Howell
supports the Boulevard proposal and said three feet may be okay.
Richard Ernst said parking should not be allowed downtown. A resident
suggested looking at a railroad right-of-way. There being no further
testimony from the audience, the public hearing was closed.
williams said the Commission has looked at railroad right-of-ways but
there are big obstacles to overcome; and State standards of six-foot
bikelanes have been adopted. He thanked the Council for holding the
hearing, and said the three foot ,compromise can be considered. On a
question from Winthrop, P.W. Dir. Hall said the Highway Dept. does
have a bicycle group who are open to reasonable suggestions. Williams
said this is a conceptual plan and exact costs are not known, but
approval is necessary in order to move ahead. Acklin said she hoped
everyone can work together to come up with a good solution to the
concerns expressed. Winthrop thanked the Bicycle commission for their
efforts.
ADJOURNMENT - The meeting adjourned at 9:40 P.M.
Catherine M. Golden
Mayor
Nan E. Franklin
City Recorder
Special Meeting - Ashland City Council - October 11, 1990 - Page Two
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL
OCTOBER 16, 1990
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Golden led the Pledge of Allegiance and called
the meeting to order at 7:30 P.M. on the above date in the Council
Chambers. Laws, Reid, Williams, Acklin, winthrop, and Arnold were
present.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The minutes of the Regular Meeting of October 2,
1990 were approved as presented.
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS 'AWARDS: Mayor Golden presented Finance
Director Turner with a plaque representing a certification of
Achievement in Financial Reporting from the Government Finance
Officers Association. Golden expressed appreciation for Turner's
expertise and ability to work well with the public.
CONSENT AGENDA: Williams moved to approve same as follows: 1)
Minutes of Boards, Commissions , Committees; 2) Water Quality Status
Report from RVCOG Water Coordinator Eric Dittmer; 3) Endorsement of
nominations of the Ashland Masonic Lodge and Ashland Depot Hotel to
the National Register of Historic Places; 4) Designation of Mayor as
voting delegate and Council Chair as alternate at the L.O.C.
Conference, Nov. 10-12, 1990. Winthrop seconded and the motion
carried on voice vote.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
P.A. No. 90-178 (Anderson/Diamond. Aoolicants) - Planning Dir.
Fregonese gave the Staff report and said the request to rezone the
property at 2300 Siskiyou Blvd. from R-3 and R-1-7.5 to R-2 reduces
the density, and the Planning Commission recommends approval. On a
question from Winthrop, Fregonese said the last line of page two of
the P.C. Findings should be amended to read as follows: "Therefore,
based on our overall conclusions, we recommend approval of Planning
Action #90-178." The public hearing was opened and Curt Weaver, agent
for the applicants, asked that the zone change be approved, said the
barn and some trees will be retained, and on a, question from Almquist,
said the billboard will come down. There being no further testimony
from the audience, the public hearing was closed. Winthrop moved to
adopt the Planning Commission's Findings as amended'above, Reid
seconded and the motion passed unanimously on roll call vote.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
Adoot Findinas - P.A. 90-057 (Diane Seitz. Annlicant) - On a question
from Golden, Fregonese said the Performance Standards Option does not
require a minimum lot size. Reid asked about the public notice and
City Attorney Salter said the error on the notice would not prejudice
the neighbors because it showed a greater density than actually
Regular Meeting - Ashland City Council - October 16, 1990 - P. 1
Findinas - P.A. 90-057 (Continued)
exists. Laws asked about an engineering geologic study and Fregonese
said it is only required when the slope of the land being built upon
is greater than 50%. Winthrop moved to adopt the Planning
Commission's Findings, adding the condition that the street name be
unique and not easily confused with another street name in town, and
approved by the Public Works Director. Williams seconded the motion
which passed on roll call vote with Arnold voting NO. Reid doesn't
agree with Salter's statement that the notice 'did not prejudice
neighbors.
Adoot Findinas - P.A. 90-120 (Secure storaae. Aoolicant) - city
Administrator Almquist noted that the Findings were amended on page
four, the second paragraph of Subsection A and read the revised
section into the record. Winthrop noted that a clause was added to
Condition #15 concerning exclusive annexation. On questions from
Golden, Fregonese said the findings will be revised concerning the
proposed residence and use of other E-1 lands for low employment
purposes. Staff will bring back revised'Findings.at the next regular
meeting.
NEW & MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
Brown & Caldwell Nutrient StudY contract Amendment - Public Wks. Dir.
Hall reviewed his memo requesting authorization for the Mayor to sign
the amendment for tasks 2, 3, and 4 of the Facilities'Plan. Reid
asked that the engineers be made aware of Parks land which could
possibly be used as treatment pond sites. Arnold moved to authorize
the request, Acklin seconded and the motion carried on voice vote.
Northwest Conservation Act Coalition - Mayor Golden requested that the
City join and said they are dedicated to pressuring energy compan1es
to invest in and encourage conservation. Reid feels its important to
join. Laws suggested an associate membership for one year and so
moved. Reid seconded and the motion carried on voice vote.
Sewer Connect Reauest - 1033 Clay st. - Hall recommended allowing the
connection to the sewer, but the water cannot be connected until the
property is annexed. Jackie Reid, Van Vleet Real Estate, said it
would cost more to bring the well up to drinking water standards than
to connect to city water. Laws moved to authorize the sewer
connection and Reid seconded. Arnold asked about possible
requirements for connections outside the city limits to comply with a
future ban on phosphates, and Salter said the Municipal Code can be
amended to make future regulations applicable to all users. Arnold
requested that the motion include agreement by the applicant to be
bound by all future rules and regulations of sewer users. Laws so
amended the motion and Reid amended the second. The motion carried on
voice vote.
Regular Meeting -Ashland City Council - October 16, 1990 - P. 2
Reauest for Public Hearina - Mahar Pro;ect on Hersev st. - A
discussion was'held on the scope of testimony to be allowed at the
hearing. Reid does not want to limit the testimony. Arnold said
issues raised by Mark Murphey in his recent letter to Council should
be included along with others requested by Council. Acklin said it is
appropriate to hear only the issues remanded by LUBA. Winthrop wants
to know what citizens would like testimony to include. Arnold moved
to set a public hearing using the notice form included in the agenda
packet and include as section 3 testimony concerning capacity of
schools, sewers, water, and traffic as same relate to new information
since the decision was rendered by the Council. Winthrop seconded.
Laws has not reviewed the record and will not take part in the
decision concerning the planning action. The motion failed as follows
on roll call vote: Reid and Arnold~ YES; Williams, Acklin, Winthrop,
and Laws, NO. Salter suggested sOliciting written comments on the
scope of the hearing to be accepted until 5:00 P.M. on November 1st.
Winthrop so moved, Reid seconded and the motion passed on roll call
vote with Acklin dissenting.
Urban Services StudY - city Admin. Almquist reviewed his memo
requesting that the City participate in an Urban Services Study
contract with Portland State University. Acklin said the L.C.D.C. is
involved in developing urban areas studies which may cover some of the
same issues and coordination between the two agencies should be
arranged so efforts are not duplicated. Acklin moved to approve the
request, Winthrop seconded and the motion carried on voice vote.
PUBLXC FORUM: Deborah Elliott, 692 Normal, is concerned about the
safety of school children who cross Highway 66 at Normal Street. She
spoke with Butch Parker, State Highway Div., regarding suspended
crossing signs and crosswalks; and spoke of the school crossing guard
program. Laws noted that senior citizens are also concerned with this
intersection. Acklin said the Traffic Safety Commission should be
involved. Winthrop requested the T.S.C. to consider the issue and
report at the next meeting. P.W. Dir. Hall will draft a letter to the
State Hwy. Div. for Council consideration. There being no further
comment from the audience, the public forum was closed.
ORDINANCES. RESOLUTXONS , CONTRACTS:
Downtown parkina Limits and Zones - Hall gave a short presentation on
the proposed changes. Reid said it is a mistake to park buses on
pioneer Street because of safety and health hazards. John Schweiger
spoke with Paul Nicholson, OSFA, who said its a problem getting senior
citizens back on the correct buses. He said Hargadine could possibly
be widened, for bus parking further up the hill. Schweiger then ,asked
for three no parking zones in front of the Varsity Theatre on E. Main,
instead of the existing two spaces. On a question from williams,
Schweiger said a loading zone would create more blockage and be less
safe for kids attending the movies. The ordinance was read. Laws
suggested including a process for appealing the City Administrator's
Regular Meeting - Ashland City Council - October 16, 1990 - P. 3
Downtown Parkinq Dist. (Continued)
decisions to the T.S.C. Reid feels that safety responsibilities lie
with the Council. Arnold moved to second reading, Acklin seconded the
motion. Arnoid does not think appeals should be heard by the original
decision-making body. Laws recommended adding a section 3. to read as
follows: "Traffic regulations made by the City Administrator
affecting parking may be appealed to the City Council." Arnold
amended his motion to include the suggested wording, Acklin seconded
and the motion passed on roll call vote with Reid voting NO. She
objects to the bus parking.
Mayor Golden left the meeting at 10:37 P.M. and Councilor "Acklin
presided.
General Obliqation ImDrovement Bonds - A resolution was read providing
for the issuance of General Obligation Improvement Bonds. Williams
moved to adopt same, Reid seconded and the motion passed unanimously
on roll call vote. (Reso. #90-47)
Illeqal Druq Lab Clean-uD - A resolution was read opposing the
proposed DEQ rules for the drug lab clean-up program. Williams moved
to adopt same, Winthrop seconded and the motion passed unanimously on
roll call vote. (Reso. #90-48)
Self-Insurance Pool - A resolution was read regarding membership in
the City/County insurance service trust property self-insurance pool.
Williams moved to second reading, Arnold seconded and the motion
passed un~nimously on roll call vote. (Reso. #90-49)
OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS: Councilors williams and Winthrop
requested an informal gathering to discuss the Council's effectiveness
and status of their goals. A short discussion was held during which
Acklin suggested hearing from Department Heads in advance of the goal-
setting session. Arnold said a session should be available to the
public. Almquist will prepare a schedule for the above, between the
first of November and the end of January.
ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 11:05 P.M.
Nan E. Franklin
City Recorder
Catherine M. Golden
Mayor
Regular Meeting - Ashland City Council - October 16, 1990 - P. 4
MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL
NOVEMBER 1, 1990
Roll Call - The meeting commenced at 11:45 A.M. in the civic
Center Council Chambers. Councilors Reid, Williams,' Acklin,
Winthrop, and Arnold were present. Mayor Golden and Councilor
Laws were absent.
General obliqation xmprovement Bonds - Finance Director Jill
Turner explained that the low bid on the general obligation
improvement bonds was submitted by Kidder Peabody with an
interest rate of 6.386792.
A Resolution was read awarding the sale of the $660,000 bonds to
Kidder Peabody. Arnold moved to adopt same, Winthrop seconded
and the motion passed unanimously on roll call vote. (Reso. #90-
50)
Liquor License - Arnold moved to endorse a liquor license
application for the B&S Saloon, 180 Lithia Way. Reid seconded
and the motion carried on voice vote.
N.W.C.A.C. - Reid noted she had attended a meeting of the
Northwest Conservation Act Coalition and asked Councilors to
contact her if they have any questions.
Adjournment - The meeting adjourned at 12:54 P.M.
Karen Huckins
Acting City Recorder
Pat Acklin
Council Chair
MINUTES
ASHLAND BICYCLE COMMISSION
Monday, September 25, 1990
CALL TO ORDER
Chairman williams called the meeting to order at 12:02 P.M. in the
Council Chambers. In attendance were Rees Jones, Vern Niehaus', Irv
Schueller, Keough, Ken Gosling. Also in attendance were John
Fregonese, Steve Hall, Pam Barlow and Secretary Barbran Jones.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The Minutes from the August 27, 1990 meeting were approved with the
following correction: Page 2, AMC vs. ORS, last line should read,
"against state law."
FOSTER STUDY
Pam noted that she had done some P.R. with a brochure that would go
into the bike shops and a utility newsletter. The video date was set
for next Monday. Keough said he 'would be out of town so Vern
volunteered to do the part on North Main.
Rees said he was concerned with giving Council the opportunity to say
no. He suggested that the Commission offer to do an engineering study
since one will have to be done anyway, include a drawing of what the
Boulevard will look like when narrowed, and stress water conservation.
As a Councilor, Greg said he would rather decide what we were doing
first before spending the money for a study which Council would be
forced to consider. The intent of the public hearing is to present
the "concept" which will be included in the Comp Plan showing
liability, water conservation, and the transportation issues.
Fregonese said it is important to indicate flexibility in your
recommendations and have Council approve the concept of getting an
extra lane from the median without changing it drastically. Rees
asked what happens after Council approval (if they do). He commented
that the Comp Plan written ten years ago is already obsolete and
little action was taken, on forecasts for Ashland's future. Ken said
he has received a lot of anger from the community regarding .the
reduction of the median. Fregonesealso stressed the importance of
getting the information to be public without being misinterpreted. Be
definite of what you want. Rees said time is short because the
transportation part of the Comp plan will be completed by next year.
We realize this is not the perfect solution ~nd we need to work on the
details so that the result will be beneficial to all concerned, not
just cyclists. Fregonese said everyone will have to give a little.
Freg~nese said never before' in history have we relied on the
automobile as much we do today with emphasis on the single occupancy
auto. LCDC is in the process of developing a strategy to reduce the
reliability on the automobile. Ashland blames tourists for problem
with congestion. The fOllowing-facts contradict that belief. 7,200
households in Ashland, approximately 70,000 trips per day, 9,700 trips
per day by hotel patrons at peak season which adds 13% max. to
existing traffic. 16% are home-based work trips, 61% are home-based
non-work related trips, and 23% are non-home based. 2% (1400) trips
are transient compared to 13% in large metro area.
-~r -~- -
Bicycle Commission - Minutes
september 24, 1990 Page 2
A 1968 figure shows 86% of the trips started in Ashland ended in
Ashland with the bulk less than one mile - 8% go to Medford. 1980
figures show 57% trips are to work alone, 18% carpool, 1.4% transient,
14.6% walkeq and 5% other, 3.1% work at home.
Hopeful goals: 10% bike use (as in Eugene), from 2% to 5% transient,
from 15% to 20% walkers, from 1.4 to 1;5 auto use" 2% more of all non-
work related trips, would cause a 13% reduction in traffic (tourism
represents 10% increase in Ashland).
People are concerned with too much growth but Census figures show 1200
people, only 8% growth, which is the least amount since WW-II.
Currently, there are 30,000 vehicles per day at 2nd street downtown (4
lanes) which is at capacity. We need to emphasize pedestrian/bike/
mass transit! We need to restrict any more "deals" for parking
spaces/lots. The Community Development Department has purchased a
City bike to use for inspections and short trips. It cost
approximately 10 tanks of gas. Fregonese agreed to present this to
Council on the night of the public hearing.
LOADING ZONE IN BIKE LANE ,
Business owners adjacent to the loading zone on E. Main street were'
notified that the Bike Commission requested removal of the zone. Some
were concerned about handicapped people needing the space but staff
observed that there is-plenty of space available in the adjacent
parking lot to locate handicap parking. The Commission agreed
unanimously to remove the loading zone. Will go to Traffic Safety
Commission on September 27th.
MISCELLANEOUS
Rees noted to staff that 4' curb cuts had been placed on Wightman
instead of 15' as recommended in the March minutes. Steve said he
would look into it.
Rees also said traffic counts are necessary in the near future. .Ken
noted that on September 11th he took a traffic count at Triangle Park
between 5 and 6 PM and counted 23 bikes on the sidewalk and 9 on the
street., It was suggested that college students were a good resource.
Seasonal counts were also suggested.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 1:15 P.M.
J.
I I . APPROVAL OF MINtn'ES
Commissioner Crawford made a motion to
approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting
of August 21, 1990 as written. Commissioner
Reynolds seconded. ~
The vote was: ,4 yes - 1 abstain (Pyle)
I
\,
i
1
j
i
!
I
i
I
i
;
i
~
j
r
!
I
I
I
i
i
I
I
I
1
!
!
I
I
1
j
I
~
!
i
I
CITY OF ASHLAND
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
September 26, 1990
Chair Pyle called the meeting to order at
7:30 p.m. at 340 S. Pioneer Street.
ATTENDANCE:
Present:
Absent:
Reynolds, Adams, Crawford, Pyle, Howard,
Mickelsen.
None
I. ADDITIONS OR DBLETIONS
None
III. BILLS AND FINANCES
A. Approval of previous month's disbursements
Commissioner Crawford made a motion to approve the disbursements from
the previous month as indicated by Payroll checks #3962 through #41Q4 in
the amount of $47,859.13 and Payables checks #4221 through #4365 in 'the
amount of $50,529.13. Commissioner Adams seconded.
The vote was: 5 yes - 0 no
B. Resolution on interfund loans
Having reviewed a memorandum from Director Mickelsen concerning the
probable necessity for the Parks and Recreation Fund to assist the
Recreation Serial Levy Fund for cash flow until the current fiscal year's
tax monies begin to arrive, Commissioner Reynolds made a motion to
authorize interfund loans among the funds administered by the Commission.
Commissioner Crawford seconded.
The vote was: 5 yes - 0 no
C. Certificate of Achievement - 1988-89
Director Mickelsen reported to the Commission that he had received
notification that the Commission had been awarded the Certificate of
Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting for its component unit
financial report for fiscal year 1988-89. He expressed his appreciation to
the Commission and department staff for the support and hard work which
enables the department to maintain its high standards. The Commission
expressed its appreciation for maintaining such standards.
Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission
ReRular MeetinR - September 26, 1990
Page 2
IV. AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION ON THE AGENDA
None
V. AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION NOT ON THE AGENDA
None
VI. OLD BUSINESS
A. Review of options for South Pioneer Street
The resurfacing of Granite Street conlpleted, the Commission having
reviewed the information previously gathered concerning the closure of So.
Pioneer Street to vehicle traffic, Commissioner Crawford made a motion to
follow through on the motion of July 18, 1989 to close the road to vehicle
traffic for a probationary two year period. Commissioner Howard seconded.
MOTION
In discussion of the motion, Commissioner Adams indicated that in her
opinion it would be more expedient for the Commission to work directly with
th~ Traffic Safety Commission, the Planning Commission, and the Ashland
Bicycle Commission to gain their points of view and recommendations prior
to taking the proposal to the Council. The Commissioners generally
concurred with approach.
The vote was: 5 yes - 0 no
B. DesiRn for Lithia Mill site
The Commission reviewed a draft of the final proposal for design of the
Lithia Mill park site. Director Mickelsen indicated that total cost for
development of the area would be approximately $85,000 not including
playground equipment and other recreational amenities. The department
currently has $50,000 allocated in this years budget for initial sidewalks
and irrigation. Director Mickelsen requested that, if the Commissioners
approved of the basic design as presented, that it be approved so that work
could begin on the initial phase.
MOTION
Commissioner Adams made a motion to approve the design as presented.
Commissioner Reynolds seconded.
In discussion of the motion, Commissioners confirmed that minor
modifications could be made as work progressed. One items which would need
to be decided soon is whether or not the volleyball courts would have a
sand or grass playing surface. It will affect the irrigation design.
The vote was: 5 yes - 0 no
C. Press release "Open Space Fund"
Director Mickelsen indicated that he had been receiving comments
indicating that the Commission should be more aggressive in letting the
public know that the "Open Space Fund" has been set up and that there is a
means to make donations to the program. Director Mickelsen said that the
persons who contacted him felt that there should be more media coverage of
the fund. Chair Pyle had recommended that the topic be put on the agenda
for discussion.
1--
Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission
Regular Meeting - September 26, 1990
Page 3
Press release "Open Space Fund" - con't.
Commissioner Howard recommended that the new media be contacted
suggesting that an article be written on the establishment of the fund.
There was brief discussion as to whether or not the media would consider an
artic1p- on the fund newsworthy. Commissioner Reynolds expressed the
opinion that the media might 'choose to write an article to let the public
know that the topic of funding open space was still alive and well even
though it was on hold for a little bit. The establishment of the fund
could be an aspect of such an article. Other ideas included an item in the
utility bill mailing as well as clubs and organizations. Chair Pyle
indicated that he would contact the media to see if they were interested in
writing such an article.
VII. NEW BUSINESS
A. Capital Improvement Plan
The Commission reviewed a memorandum concerning establishing a Capital
Improvement Plan (CIP) in conjunction with City efforts to establish the
new System Development Charge (SDC). Director Mickelsen reported that in
order for the Commission to meet the City's time line for establishment of
the SDC, the Commission needs to complete the ClP process by the end of
October.
After discussing both the process and various elements of both a
Capital Improvement Plan and System Development Charges, Chair Pyle
indicated that later in the meeting a date would be set for a study
session.
VIII. CORRESPONDENCE, COMMUNICATIONS, DIRECTOR'S REPORT
The Commission reviewed several letters from people expressing support
for Ashland's Marketplace. Director Mickelsen reported that the committee
on the marketplace had not yet been able to meet and that Judie Bunch would
be out of town until the middle of October. Commissioner Howard suggested
that the committee meet the week thank Ms. Bunch is back in town.
The Commission decided to further a letter from Tom Kennedy concerning
the condition of the golf course restrooms on to the City with support for
the idea that some improvements be considered.
Director Mickelsen reported that he and Commissioner Adams had
scheduled a meeting with the Tayler Foundation Board for October 4th
indicating that the board has expressed support for Phase I of the project.
He also reported that "the Ci ty would have their things cleared out of the
area by October 15th.
Director Mickelsen reportpd that he had attended a very informative
conference on open space in Palo Alto. As to the problem of funding, he
said that the conference offered no magic solutions; that various
cOlmnunities handle funding in various ways.
Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission
Re~ular Meeting - September 26, 1990
Page 4
IX. ITEMS FROM COMMISSIONERS
Commissioner Crawford said that she had received a request to have the
picnic table at Triangle Park replaced. She indicated that she would like
to have some thought given as to what kind of table set-up might be put in
the gazebo which might be more suitable for its shape and design.
Commissioner Reynolds said that she would like the Commission to
consider putting in a light at the tot end of the playground in Lithia
Park. She also said that she would like the concept of an inter-area city
volleyball program for teens considered indicating that so many young
people are interested and enthusiastic in the sport that a popular
recreational program could possible be arranged.
Commissioner Adams expressed her concern that as yet the joint
committee between the Council and Commission on open space funding had not
yet met. Her concern was that time was drifting by and that the
Commission, if it chose to go to initiative in March, would not have
adequate time to prepare if the committee did not meet soon. After brief
discussion, Chair Pyle indicated that he would contact the Mayor see
whether or not a meeting could be set up for the following week.
Commissioner Howard indicated that he would like to see some projected
planning for draining and refinishing the pool now that it has closed for
the season. He said that he felt the project should be seriously
considered if we have a good wet winter and that the longer we wait the
more potential problems could be run into.
X. NEXT MONTH'S AGENDA
The next Regular Meeting was scheduled for
Wednesday, October 17, 1990 at 7:00 p.m. A
Study Session on the Capi.tal Improvement
Plan was scheduled at 6:00 p.m. prior to the
Regular Meeting.
A Study Session on Open Space was scheduled
for October 4, 1990 at 6:00 p.m.
Commissioner Crawford requested that at the
next Regular Meeting the Commission review
general park usage policies.
XI. ADJOURNMENT
With no further business, Chair Pyle
adjourned the meeting.
Rer;;U~
Ann Benedict
Mana;gement Ass1's>tant
_~-L
CITY OF ASHLAND
PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
REGULAR. MEETING
September 26, 1990
Chair Pyle called the meeting to order at
7:30 p.m. at 340 S. Pioneer Street.
A'ITBNDANCE:
Present:
Absent:
Reynolds, Adams, Crawford, Pyle, Howard,
Mickelsen.
None
I. ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS
None
II. APPROVAL OF MINtrfES
Commissioner Crawford made a motion to
approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting
of August 21, 1990 as written. Commissioner
Reynolds seconded. ~
The vote was: ,4 yes - 1 abstain (Pyle)
III. BILLS AND FINANCES
A. Approval of previous month's disbursements
Commissioner Crawford made a motion to approve the disbursements from
the previous month as indicated by Payroll checks "3962 through "4lQ4 in
the amount of $47,859.13 and Payables checks "4221 through "4365 in 'the
amount of $50,529.13. Commissioner Adams seconded.
The vote was: 5 yes - 0 no
B. Resolution on interfund loans
Having reviewed a memorandum from Director Mickelsen concerning the
probable necessity for the Parks and Recreation Fund to assist the
Recreation Serial Levy Fund for cash flow until the current fiscal year's
tax monies begin to arrive, Commissioner Reynolds made a motion to
authorize interfund loans among the funds administered by the Commission.
Commissioner Crawford seconded.
The vote was: 5 yes - 0 no
C. Certificate of Achievement - 1988-89
Director Mickelsen reported to the Commission that he had received
notification that the Commission had been awarded the Certificate of
Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting for its component unit
financial report for fiscal year 1988-89. He expressed his appreciation to
the Commission and department staff for the support and hard work which
enables the department to maintain its high standards. The Commission
expressed its appreciation for maintaining such standards.
Ashland Parks and Recreation Conunission
Re~ular Meetin~ - September 26, 1990
Page 2
IV. AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION ON THE AGENDA
None
V. AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION NOT ON THE AGENDA
None
VI. OLD BUSINESS
A. Review of options for South Pioneer Street
The resurfacing of Granite Street completed, the Conunission having
reviewed the information previously gathered concerning the closure of So.
Pioneer Street to vehicle traffic, Conunissioner Crawford made a motion to
follow through on the motion of July 18, 1989 to close the road to vehicle
traffic for a probationary two year period. Conunissioner Howard seconded.
MOTION
In discussion of the motion, Co~nissioner Adams indicated that in her
opinion it would be more expedient for the Commission to work directly with
th~ Traffic Safety Conunission, the Planning Conunission, and the Ashland
Bicycle Conunission to gain their points of view and reconunendations prior
to taking the proposal to the Council. The Commissioners generally
concurred with approach.
The vote was: 5 yes - 0 no
B. Desi~n for Lithia Mill site
The Commission reviewed a draft of the final proposal for design of the
Lithia Mill park site. Director Mickelsen indicated that total cost for
development of the area would be approximately $85,000 not including
playground equipment and other recreational amenities. The department
currently has $50,000 allocated in this years budget for initial sidewalks
and irrigation. Director Mickelsen requested that, if the Conunissioners
approved of the basic design as presented, that it be approved so that work
could begin on the initial phase.
MOTION
Conunissioner Adams made a motion to approve the design as presented.
Conunissioner Reynolds seconded.
In discussion of the motion, COllun.issioners confirmed that minor
modifications could be made as work progressed. One items which would need
to be decided soon is whether or not the volleyball courts would have a
sand or grass playing surface. It will affect the irrigation design.
The vote was: 5 yes - 0 no
C. Press release "Open Space Fund"
Director Mickelsen indicated that he had been receiving conunents
indicating that the Commission should be more aggressive in letting the
public know that the "Open Space Fund" has been set up and that there is a
means to make donations to the program. Director Mickelsen said that the
persons who contacted him felt that there should be more media coverage of
the fund. Chair Pyle had reconunended that the topic be put on the agenda
for discussion.
Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission
Regular Meeting - September 26, 1990
Page 3
Press release "Open Space Fund" - con't.
Commissioner Howard recommended that the new media be contacted
suggesting that an article be written on the establishment of the fund.
There was brief discussion as to whether or not the media would consider an
article on the fund newsworthy. Commissioner Reynolds expressed the
opinion that the media might 'choose to write an article to let the public
know that the topic of funding open space was still alive and well even
though it was on hold for a little bit. The establishment of the fund
could be an aspect of such an article. Other ideas included an item in the
utility bill mailing as well as clubs and organizations. Chair Pyle
indicated that he would contact the media to see if they were interested in
writing such an article.
VII. NEW BUSINESS
A. Capital Improvement Plan
The Commission reviewed a memorandum concerning establishing a Capital
Improvement Plan (CIP) in conjunction with City efforts to establish the
new System Development Charge (SDC). Director Mickelsen reported that in
order for the Commission to meet the City's time line for establishment of
the SDC, the Commission needs to complete the CIP process by the end of
October.
After discussing both the process and various elements of both a
Capital Improvement Plan and System Development Charges, Chair Pyle
indicated that later in the meeting a date would be set for a study
session.
VIII. CORRESPONDENCE, CO~mICATIONS, DIRECTOR'S REPORT
The Commission reviewed several letters from people expressing support
for Ashland's Marketplace. Director Mickelsen reported that the committee
on the marketplace had not yet been able to meet and that Judie Bunch would
be out of town until the middle of October. Commissioner Howard suggested
that the committee meet the week thank Ms. Bunch is back in town.
The Commission decided to further a letter from Tom Kennedy concerning
the condition of the golf course restrooms on to the City with support for
the idea that some improvements be considered.
Director Mickelsen reported that he and Commissioner Adams had
scheduled a meeting with the Tayler Foundation Board for October 4th
indicating that the board has expressed support for Phase I of the project.
He also reported that 'the City would have their things cleared out of the
area by October 15th.
Director Mickelsen reportpd that he had attended a very informative
confer.ence on open space in Palo Alto. As to the problem of funding, he
said that the conference offered no magic solutions; that various
communities handle funding in various ways.
Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission
Re~ular Meetin~ - September 26, 1990
Page 4
IX. ITEMS FROM COMMISSIONERS
Commissioner Crawford said that she had received a request to have the
picnic table at Triangle Park replaced. She indicated that she would like
to have some thought given as to what kind of table set-up might be put in
the gazebo which might be more suitable for its shape and design.
Commissioner Reynolds said that she would like the Commission to
consider putting in a light at the tot end of the playground in Lithia
Park. She also said that she would like the concept of an inter-area city
volleyball program for teens considered indicating that so many young
people are interested and enthusiastic in the sport that a popular
recreational program could possible be arranged.
Commissioner Adams expressed her concern that as yet the joint
committee between the Council and Commission on open space funding had not
yet met. Her concern was that time was drifting by and that the
Conunission, if it chose to go to initiative in March, would not have
adequate time to prepare if the cOIDUlittee did not meet soon. After brief
discussion, Chair Pyle indicated that he would contact the Mayor see
whether or not a meeting could be set up for the following week.
Commissioner Howard indicated that he would like to see some projected
planning for draining and refinishing the pool now that it has closed for
the season. He said that he felt the project should be seriously
considered if we have a good wet winter and that the longer we wait the
more potential problems could be run into.
X. NEXT MONTH t S AGENDA
The next Regular Meeting was scheduled for
Wednesday, October 17, 1990 at 7:00 p.m. A
Study Session on the Capital Improvement
Plan was scheduled at 6:00 p.m. prior to the
Regular Meeting.
A Study Session on Open Space was scheduled
for October 4, 1990 at 6:00 p.m.
Commissioner Crawford requested that at the
next Regular Meeting the Commission review
general park usage policies.
XI. ADJOURNMENT
With no further business, Chair Pyle
adjourned the meeting.
Rer;U~
Ann Benedict
ManagementAssis~ant
926 South Grape
Medford, OR 97501
(503) 779-1814
FAJ((503)7~2278
October 25, 1990
TCICablevision of
Oregon, Inc.
Brian Almquist
City Administrator
20 East Main Street
Ashland, OR 97520
Dear Mr. Almquist:
We are delighted to announce the addition of selected Prime Sports Northwest
(PSN) programming to our channel lineup.
Beginning Friday, October 26, 1990 on cable channel 5, we will provide selected
coverage of the region's only all-sports ,network. Due to our limited channel
capacity, we will air PSN on Fridays from 6:0b pm to 12:00 midnight and
Saturdays from 9:00 am to 12:00 midnight. This selected coverage will bring
the best that PSN offers.
Friday programming will include coaches' shows from a number of universities,
including the University of Oregon and Oregon State University.
Saturday programming will cover a variety of sporting events, including foot-
ball, volleyball, basketball, hockey and soccer, as well as many other special
events.
We believe this addition of PSN programming will further enhance our service
to our customers.
Please contact me if you have any further questions.
Sincerely,
14~
Ken Reske
General Manager
KR:js
..-
I~
An Equal Opportunity
Employer
LAW OFFICES
AINSWORTH, DAVIS, GILSTRAP, HARRIS, BAWCCA & FITCH, P.C.
SIDNEY E, AINSWORTH
JACK DAVIS
DAVID V, GILSTRAP
DANIEL L. HARRIS
MICHAEL G, BALOCCA
KENNETH C, FITCH
SIS EAST MAIN STREET
ASHLAND, OREGON 97520
(503) 482-3111 FAX (503) 488-4455
October 29, 1990
BRIAN ALMQUIST
ASHLAND CITY HALL
ASHLAND OR 97520
Re: Oak Knoll Enterprise, Inc.
File No. 78-107
Dear Brian:
SAM B. DAVIS - Retired
DONALD M, PINNOCK - Retired
Walt Ross has agreed to sell his shareholding in the above
corporation to the corporation. Technically, according to the
lease, we should have your consent to that transaction. Please
sign the enclosed copy and return it to me representing the
City'S approval of that sale.
Yours truly,
AINS ORTH, DAVIS, GILSTRAP,
HARRI BALOCCA & FITCH, P.C.
"-.
~--...,.......------./
~emnrnndum
October 31, 1990
ijIn: Ashland City Council
~rn~: Michael Donovan, Chair, Recycling Task Force
~ubjed: Recommendations
At our meeting on October 16th, the Task Force members passed two
motions recommending that the Council take the following actions:
1. Authorize $4,000 to pay for one-half of an additional 1,500 blue
curbside recycling bins. Ashland Sanitary Service will pay the
other half, $4,000. They have given out 1450: of the 1500 we
helped purchase last February. The Task Force members believe
curbside recycling is an important part of our program and this
is an excellent use of the City's money. Ashland Sanitary has
3,631 customers and believes they will give out another 1,500
bins to Ashland residents.
2. Pass a motion urging Ashland voters to vote YES on Ballot Measure
6 - the recycling measure. We later realized that you would not
have a Council meeting until election day, which would obviously
be too late to pass a resolution that would have any impact. I
have enclosed a copy of the ballot measure so at least you can
read it thoroughly before you go to the polls and vote on it.
ral resources, it is the policy of the State of Oregon. to require
materials used in packaging to be reusable or recyclable as a means
of lessening the substantial and increasing burdens that these mate-
BALLOT TITLE rials place on the sttte's capacity to manage its growing solid waste
':.. . ,'..' '.. . , ' problems, , '
".'1' ,,' ...." ..', ,::. ,".:, " , ',':'...~;,::\;~:::';::~:r:':~:V";':::{\~:n,::,.,\Vf<j,;:::;<i?~:.:, ",:.,,:."';:/, (2) The purpose of this Act is to increase reuse and recycling
of
>, '. :,;:~';::':'~:!J!~"!1~~'~~_' ,~:: i~,~ ,::,/',;~~;t:i~::\i,L materials used in. packaging in or~er to: (a) co~serve natural
:;,:\",:', '. ',::.. ',:'i<!'J:.I "" ::"'::':~:+, '<I!:J;~::~C'~~$;g" ,::~..,' :'::':::: ';:<:":: resources; (b) reduce the amount of sobd waste that 18 landfilled and
'~,,::f~\..,;:'>:,y,~:,\,:~~C:"t~'i:_' ':,:\l!;tiS":S":.: incinerated; and (c) prevent pollution and other environmental
:: ,Ql1~mION-By;,.l9.9.3~: problems caused by the production and disposal of virgin materials,
f\~\~:I~\I~r . Act~~;:~<:e~'s~E~e~: :~o~td~;:~~~:k:~~ ~~f~:
,.:\t\% not environmentally lOund packaging af\er December 31, 1992,
><\{ Each packager shall maintain proof that his or her packaging com-
f! plies with one or more of the following standards for environmen-
tally sound packaging: (a) reusable: packaging that is used five or
more times for the same or a sub~tantially siIpilar use; (b) made of
recycled materials: packaging that is composed of recycled material,
so that 50 percent or more of the weight ofthe packaging is recycled
material; (c) recyclable:. packaging that is being recycled statewide
through an effective recycling program; or. (d) made of recyclable
material: packaging that is composed of a type of material that is
being effectively recycled statewide.' .
(2) For purposes of this Act, an effective recycling program is one
that is certified by the Department of Environmen~ Quality as
. meeting the following .criteria: (a) scope: the program is designed to
recycle a readily identifiable category of packaging which represents
a significant amount of solid waste in Oregon; and (b) recycling
rates: the packaging is being recycled statewide at a 15 percent rate
by January 1, 1993, at a 30 percent rate by January 1, 1996, at a 45
percent rate by J~nuary 1, 1999, and at a 60 percent rate by J.anuary
1, 2002.
(3) For purposes of this' Act,. a type of material is effectively
recycled if the department certifies that material of that type which
otherwise would be discarded is being recycled statewide at a 15
percent rate by January 1, 1993, at a 30 percent rate by January 1,
1996, at a 45 percent rate by January 1, 1999, and at a 60 percent rate
by January 1, 2002. For packaging composed of more than one
material, each material in the packaging that represents more than
an insubstantial part of the packaging must be of a type that meets
the specified recycling rates, .
(4) The Environmental Quality Commission may waive the 15
percent recycling requirement for a type of material under subsec-
tion (3) ofthis section if packagers using that type of material prove:
(a) there are substantial barriers to meeting the 15 percent require-
ment'by January 1, 1993; (b) there has been substantial investment
and measurable progress in improving recycling rates after January
, 1, 1990; and (c) there is a 8ubstantiallikelihood that such invest-
m~nt and progr~ss will continue aIld result in that type of material
achieving a 30 percent recycling rate by Jan~ry 1, 1996,
SECTION 5. (1) On September 1, 1992 and annually thereafter,
the Department of Environmental Quality shall publish recycling
rates for types' of ~terials used in packaging. For each type of
material, the recycling rate shall include material of that type from
all uses, not just packaging' uses. For each type of material, the
department shall calculate the recycling rate as a fraction in which
the. denominator represents, the weight in P9unds of the material .
from all uses that is landfilled, incinerated imd recycled, and the
numerator represents the weight in p<)unds of the material from all,
uses that is recycled. The department shall derive recycling rates
through 'represen~tive sampling of the state's solid waste stream
and recycling programs.
(2) The department shall calculate recycling rates under subsec-
tion (1) of this section for the following materials: (a) common types
of paper, such as corrugated and kraft paper; (b) common types of
glass. such as container glass; (c) common types of plastics, such as
polyethylene terephthalate; (d) common types of metals,' such as
aluminum; and (e) any other type of material used in packaging for
which there is a reasonable likelihood that'material of that. type is
Measure No. 6
STATE OF
OREGON
Proposed by initiative petition to be voted on at the general election,
, November6, 1990,
AN ACT
Be It Enacted by the People of the State of Orego~: .
SECTION 1. This Act shall be known aathe Oregon Recycling
Act,
SECTION 2. As used in sections 2 to 16 of this Act:
(1) "Commission" means 'the Environmental Quality Commis-
sion,' .
(2) "Department" means the Department of Environmental
Quality.
(3) "Environmentally sound pack~g" means packaging that is
reusable, made of recycled material, recyclable, or made of recyclable
material, -
, (4) "Material" means a substance from which packaging is made.
including paper, glass. plast~C8, metals, and any other existing or
new substance used to make packaging.
(5) "Packager" means: (a) for packaging in which products are
placed prior to their entry into Oregon, the first person to receive
posession of the product in Oregon for purposes of wholesale or retail
sale; (b) for packaging in which products are placed within Oregon
prior to retail sale, the person responsible for placing the 'product in
the packaging; and (c) for packaging in which prod,..cts are placed at
the point of retail sale, the retail seller. Packager does not include a
retail seller with fewer than ten employees.
(6) "Packaging" means any container or other pack8ge used to
protect, store, contain, transport, display, or sell products,
(7) "Person" means any individual, partnership, corporation,
association, firm. trust, estate, or other legal entity engaged in com-
merce, including the. State of Oregon and any authority, district, or
polit~calsubdivision of the ~tate of Oregon. . '
(8) "Product" means any commodity destined for wholesale or
retail sale.
(9) "Recycled material" means any material which has been.
recycled. . ,
(10) "Recycle" means to collect, process, and return to commerce
materials which otherwise would be discarded, Recycling does not
include burning or cotIlPosting materials.
(11) "Retail sale" means sale to a buyer for consumption or use
other than resale or further processing or manufacturing.
(12) "Wholesale sale" means sale to a buyer for the purpose of
resale or further processing or manufacturing,
SECTION 3. (1) In the interest of public health, safety, and
welfare and in order to protect the enyironment and conserve natu-
CONTINUED
44
Official 1990 General Voters' Pamphlet
. ;
~-, .
Measure No.6
STATE OF
OREGON
being recycled at the recycling rates established 'in subsection (3) of
section 4 of this Act. 'The department shall classify materials into
types based on how those materials commonly are recycled, so that
separate recycling rates shall be calculated for types of materials
that commonly are separated from other types of materials in the
recycling process. The department may revise these classifications
periodically to correspond to changes in recycling technologies and
practices. -.'
(3) In addition to the recycling rates required by'subsection (2) of
this section, the department shall calculate an aggregate recycling
rate for all paper used for any purpose, including but not limited to
corrugated and kraft paper, mixed waste paper, 'newspaper, and
office paper. '
(4) The department shall certify a type of material as being effec-
tively recycled if, under the provisions of either subsection (2) or
subsection (3) of this section, the department determines that
material of that type is being recycled at the recycling rates
established in subsection (3) of section 4 of this Act.. , '
SECTION 8. Section 4 of this Act does not apply to packaging
specifically required by federal law , packaging for- medication pre-
scribed by physicians, packaging necessary to provide tamper-
resistant seals for public health purposes, and packaging for prod-
ucts destined for export from Oregon - if the packaging is not
separated from the product before export.
SECTION. 7. '(1) The Department of Environmental Quality may
grant a conditional exemption from any requirement of this Act if
the department finds that the - requirement, when' applied to a
particular type of packaging- used with a - specified product, would
impose undue hardship on the general publiC'.
(2) A pack8ger applying for a _ conditional exemption under this
section shall bear the burden of proof in establishing undue hardship
on Oregon residents. Increased cost shall not CQnstitute a basis for
establishing undue hardship. Undue hardship shallbe established by
providing clear and convincing evidence that the :packaging meets
one or more of the following criteria: (a) there is no' environmentally
sound packaging available for that type of product; (b) the packag-
ing is necessary to comply with health or safety laws and there is no
environmentally sound packaging available that complies with
those health or safety laws; (c),the packaging provides net environ-
mental benefitS that _ are demonstrably superior to those of all
available alternativeS; (d) the packaging represents an innovative
approach to meeting - the environmentally sound packaging stan-
dards of this Act and there is a substantial likelihood that it will
meet those standards if given a one-year grace period in which to
establish compliance with those standards; or (e) the packaging is
necessary to satisfy another compelling public interest and there is
no environmentally - sound packaging available that adequately
serves the 8I*ified_interest.
(3) A packager applying for a conditional exemption shall submit a
written application to the department and . shall pay an annual
application fee sufficient to ,cover the costs to the department Df
processing and ruling on the application. "
(4) Before ~ting a conditional exemption, the - department must
make a written rmding of undue hardship. A cOnditional exemption
must be renewed annually and shall not be renewed if the basis for
the finding of undue hardship is no longer applicable.
SECTION 8. (1) Retail sellers shall provide consumers with readily
accessible information on environmentally sound packaging stan-
dards and the application of those standards to specific packaging
sold in their stores. Informatio~ shall be provided through shelf
signs -and other posted signs as required' by . the Environmental
Quality Commission.
(2) The Department of Environmental Quality shall design an
official environmentally sound packaging logo by January 1, 1992,
which packagers may affix to any packaging that coinplies with the
environmentally sound packaging standards established in section 4
of this Act.
SECTION 9. (1) The Department of Environmental Quality may
inspect packaging and determine whether, the packaging is enviroJ)-
CONTINUED I~
mentally sound packaging after December 31, 1992. The department
each year shall inspect a random sampling of different types of
packaging and insure that any inspected packaging complies with
the provisions of this Act. The department also shall inspect
. particular packaging when requested to do so by a petition signed by
at least 100 Oregon residents.
(2) If, on the basis of the department's inspection or any other
information, the department determines that any packager has
violated or is in violation of any provision of this Act or any rule
adopted or order issued under this Act, the aepartment shall issue an
order reqUiring compliance or assessing a civil penalty for any
violation, or both.
(3) For the. first violation, the department shall issue an order
requiring compliance, with notIce of intent to assess a civil penalty if
the violation continues or is repeated. For a second violation, or a
repeat or continuing violation, the department may assess a civil
penalty not to exceed $1000 for each day of violation.
(4)' Any order issued under this section shall take effect 21 days after
the date the order is issued unless the respondent requests a hearing
before the Environmental Quality Commission within the 21-~y
period. The request for hearing shall be in writing and shall include
the reasons for' requesting the hearing. All hearings before the
commission shall comply with the provisions of ORB 183.310 to
,183.550 applicab.1e to a Contested case proceeding.
(5) Unless the amount of the penalty is paid within 10 days after the
order becomes rmal, the order shall constitute a judgment and may
be ftledin accordance with the provisions of ORB 18.320 to 18.370.
(6) The department may request the Attorney General to seek
equitable or injunctive' relief to enforce any order issued by the
department pursuant to this Act.
SECTION IO~ The AttomeyGeneral, at the request of the
Department of Environmental Quality or independently, may con-
duct investigatioris and seek equitable or injunctive relief in any
court of competent jurisdiction against any packager who violates
any provisions of this Act or any rule adopted or order issued tmder
this Act. For a second violation,. or a repeat or continuing violation,
the Attorney General may s~k a fine not to exceed $1000 for each
day of violation.
SECTION II. The Attorney General or any district attorney may
bring an action in any court of competent jurisdiction against any
packager whokriowingly and willfully engages in repeated violations
of any provision ofthis Act or any rule adopted or order issued under
this Act. Upon conviction under this section, a packager shall be
subject to a penalty of not more than $10,000 for each day of
violation.
SECTION 12. (1) Any Oregon resident, or organization represent-
ing Oregon residents, may' bring a civil action for fines or injunctive
or equitable relief against any packager alleged to be in violation of
any provisjon of this Act or any rule adopted or order issued under
this Act. A civil action under this section may not be commenced:
(a) prior to 60 days after the plaintiffs have given tiotice of the
violation to'the alleged violator~ the Department of Environmental
Quality and the Attorney General; or (b) if the department or the
Attorney General bas commenced and is diligently prosecuting a
civil or administrative actio~ to require compliance with the rele-
- vant provisions of this Act. If the ~partment or the Attorney
General has brought an action, any Oregon resident or organization
representing Oregon residents may intervene in that action.
(2) 'In issuing any final order in an action brought, or intervened in,
under subsection (1) of this section, the court may award costs of
litigation, including reasonable attorney and expert witness fees, to
any individual or organization who advances the purposes of this
Act.
SECTION 13. On or before January 1, 1992, the Environmental
Quality Commission shall adopt rules to carry out the provisions of
this Act. The rules shall include but need not be limited to:
(1) Requirements for packagers to prove their compliance with the
environmentally sound packaging standards established in section 4
of this Act, and procedures for the department to insure effective
....
Official 1990 General Voters' Pamphlet
45
Measure No.6
STATE OF
OREGON
department oversight of packager compliance with those standards.
(2) Provisions related to department certification of effective
recycling programs under section 4 of this Act.
, (3) Provisions for determining when a material is eligible for a
waiver of the 15 percent recycling standard under section 4 of this
Act.
(4) Provisions related to department classification of types of
materials and calculation of recycling rates under section 5 of this
Act. \. '
(5) Guidelines for departmenf\'eview of exemptions under~c-
tions 6 and 7 of this Act.
(6) A schedule of annual application fees to be collected from
, packagers requesting exemptions under section 7 of this Act. The
fees shall be an amount necessary to recover the department'i costs
in administering the exemption program. " ,
(7) Requirements for consumer information under section 8 of
this Act. '
SECTION 14. The Department of Environmental Quality
shall establish an advisory committee to assist in establishing rules
related to the provisions of this Act and to make recommendations
on additional steps to be taken to- develop recycling markets, to
reduce barriers to recycling, and to reduce excessiv~ packaging. The
advisory committee shall include 'representativeS, o( the ,public,
en~nmental organizations, and affected industries. "
SECTION 15. This Act shall not preclude or in any way limit
the right of local jurisdictions to restrict, orothe~ regulate
packaging more stringently than this Act. , " , '
SEctION 16. The Legislative Assembly shall appropriate suf-
ficient funds or authorize the collection of sufficient funds and the
expenditure of such funds to enable the Department of Environmen-
tal Quality to carry out fully its.responsibilities under thiS Act. , '
CONTINUED
f'
:, ~
EXPLANA liON
This measure sets a state policy to' require ~~rials used in
packaging to be reusable or recyclable. The measure requires all non-
exempt packaging for products 89ld at wholesale or retail in Oregon
to mee,-one ,of the following "envirollJIlentally sound packagingtl
standards by January 1, 1993: 1) reusable - packaging used five or
more times for the same, or . similar use; 2) recycled content -
packaging composed of at least 50 percent recycled material by
weight; or 3) recyclable -' p~kagingbeing recycled statewide
through an effective recycling program or packaging made from
materials that are being effectively recycled statewide. To meet the
"recyclabletl standard, packaging or its component materials must
meet the following statewide recycling rates: 15 percent by 1993, 30
percent by 1996, 45 perceJ1t by 1999, and 60 percent by 2002. '.
Products in packaging which does not meet the standards caDnot
,be sold in such packaging un1ess,th~ packaging is exempt, or a
hardship waiver is obtained. Businesses which must comply, with
standards include, Oregon retailers ~th ten or more employees,
wholesalers, and manufacturers.
The Depar:tment of EnVironmental QUality must publish annual
statewide recycling ra~ for common types of paper, glass, pl8stic,
metal, and any other ~ype of paclcaging Diaterial which may qualify
as recyclable. In calc~ting these recycling rates, the Department
must include all uses of a material, not just packaging uses.' ,
The' Environmental 'Quality Commission may waive the 15
percent recycling requirement ,fC?r a type of material i( persons
affected show, there are, substantial recycling barriers~ they have
made substantial investments in, recycling since 1990, and are likely
~ meet the 30 percent recycling requn:ement by 1996~ ,',
, This law:e~emp~ packagiDgrequired by fed8rallaw. packaging
for medication prescribec\; by ,a physician, packagiDg needed to
provide ,tamper~resistant, seals, ~d p~ckaging for products ,destined
for export from 9regon~ " , .' ~' ..; " ,"" ',,' '
In.addition, persons affeCted ,may 'obWn hardship waivers for
other packaging by showing that complian~ with the ~w ,will cause
undue hardship to the g~~eral publi~. Hardship waivers ale allowed
if there is no qualifying packaging available for a type of product, the
packaging is necessary to comply with health and safety laws, or the
packaging serves another compelling .public interest.' Hardship
exemptions 'must be renewed annually, and cannot be based on
increased cost.
The law requires retailer.s to provide consumers with information
on environmentally sound packaging standards.
If a person violates this law, a'fme of up to $1,000 per day may be
imposed for each violation after the fU'St violation, or upto $10,000
Per day for knc;>wingly and willfully engaging in repeated violations.
Enforcement actions may be brought by the Attorney General and
district attorneys. Citizens also may bring enforcement actions
when'the Department' of Environmental Quality and the Attorney
General have not taken action after notice of an alleged vi9lation.
Courts ,may award litigation costs to citizens who win their, suits and
advance the purposes of the law. "
The law allowi loca1lovemments to adopt more stringent
packaging regulations than those established by this law.
The following committee members ~ to the above statement:
,""f:......, ........ .
) . . ,- I ~ -lo' '. ,','. .
,CommUteeMembers:"',,,.~. .
, ,Representative James M. Whitty
Patrick C. McCormick
,Joel'Ario
Representative Ron Cease
Arno H. Denecke '
j, . .' ~- 1'-
:,Appointed by:
, Secretary of State
Secretary of State
Chief Petitioners ,
Chief Petitioners
Members of the Committee
\~
(This Committee was appointed to provide an impartial ~xplanation
of the ballot measure pursuant to QRS 251,215,) ; .:'~"',
46
Offi~al J 99~, General Voters' ~a~phlet'
~emnrandum
November 2, 1990
~~
Mayor and City council
~ront:
Jill Turner, Director of Finance
f
~u~efr
Financial Report for September 30, 1990
Attached is the September 30, 1990, Financial Report for the
city of Ashland. It does not include the Hospital or Parks and
Recreation commission reports, which are being released to their
respective boards and commissions.
The first twelve pages are the statement of Resources and
Expenditures for the quarter year ended September 30, 1990. The
Expenditures are listed in the same classifications as the
adopted budget. Expenditures are reported on the modified
accrual basis of accounting, which means that those incurred
prior to October 1 are included regardless of when paid.
Resources are recorded on the cash basis of accounting.
Page 13 is a listing of cash and investments by type of
investments and by holder of the investment. Page 14 is a
listing of cash and investments by fund.
Again the report that follows does not include the Parks and
Recreation or Hospital revenues and expenditures, but does
include our investments on their behalf. A detailed Revenue
statement, Expenditure Statement and Balance Sheet are available
in the Finance Office for your review.
HIGHLIGHTS FROM THE STATEMENT OF RESOURCES AND EXPENDITURES
General Fund Although individual categories vary, the first
quarterly expenditures are at 24% of budget, with 25% serving as
the overall guideline. This compares to 27% at this time last
year and 25% the year earlier. Salaries for both the Police and
Fire Unions are still under negotiations and could have a
significant impact .on this budget later in the fiscal year.
Total Resources are 28% of budget compared to 33% at this time
last year and 31% the year earlier. The general fund carryover
was $16,573 less than budgeted. Building and Planning fees are
at 20% of budget or $16,000 less than anticipated for this
quarter. Transient Occupancy Tax receipts are close to budget.
Fire EMT Serial Levy Fund This fund was closed out on July 1,
1990.
Cemetery Fund
as expected.
This financially solid fund continues to perform
Expenditures are at 20% of budget.
street Fund This fund continues to perform well. The carryover
into the present fiscal year was at budget, but $18,137 less than
last year. Expenditures are at 31% of overall budget. This high
percentage is due to the summer paving season.
Water Ouality Fund Water revenues are similar to last year with
the biggest reduction in new service installations. Even with
the recent rate increase, commercial water revenues are lower
than last year.
Electric Fund Expenditures in the Conservation division have
slowed down with the decease in building activity. Expenditures
for the purchase of electricity are more than this time last year
as well as revenues.
Central Services Fund Expenditures in this fund are broken down
by department. Overall expenditures are at 28% of this budget.
Most of the payments for annual dues as well as insurance and the
civic index have been paid in this quarter.
Insurance service Fund This fund is moving from a growing, new
fund to a mature fund with little growth. The carryover
increased $72,598 from the previous year. Last year the City had
very few workers' compensation claims as well as a better than
average interest income. This contributed to the higher than
expected carryover.
Cash and Investments The City of Ashland cash and investments at
September 30, 1989, was $10,256,874, compared to $10,566,817 at
June 30, 1990, representing a decrease of $309,943. This
decrease is normal for this time of year. Electric utility
receipts, Property tax collections and Bond Sale proceeds should
bring the balance up the next quarter.
Ashland continues to be a leader in Oregon of cities our
size. We were well received in the bond market with an excellent
interest rate of 6.387%, and eight bidders on our Bancroft Bond
issue dated November 1. Additionally, the community supported
combining our Police and Fire Serial levies with a new tax base.
If proposition 5 passes, the playing field for financing our city
will be new, but because of our nondependence on property taxes,
we will be better off than most other cities.
L.l I -.,( DF' f:iE)!...IL.{iND
STA'J'Et~E!~'T' OF F~ES[JlJF~[;ES 8~ EXPE~NI)I-r'l.jRES
f=:o CJ l~'" t~ i"i E~: "TO ~.-! l'-- f:.~:: f?' !'~"i C) r-l to. j--i -::~. E~ r-~ C] i=?! d ~:.\ ~~~] t: f7! fn~] (=! r"- ::::~ () :; 1 .~") \) ()
r-:{ Lt. ci C.~} E: t:. .;':":\ ~ -. ")/ L-{ .r.~.. ~::.]. "::;:.
Fund
c:.~! [:: ,\j E:~ F~~ i:2! L.. F:"l_; I\.i [)
F~~ E t3 CJ LJ F=( C: i~ ~3
Cat... j'"' yOVE'l....
T' a}; t~S
Licenses and Permits
Intergovernmental
C hat'" q 1::'2~. + 0 t-. :?3 PI'" \/ :l c: e '::~,
Fi nes.
I nt.E.;t"'E'st
Miscellaneous Revenues
Operating Transfers In
TDT AL F<Et;GLlr:;:CES
EXF'Ei\j:O I TUF;:ES
j,..lum€.in F<eSOi..,ir- C e~_:; JJ i \.i i ~~ i c:)r'l
Economic Development
/VIi ~:.cE'll ant7.'OU~5
Police Department
t"1un :i, c i p a]. CDUi'- t
F i V"E' j)E:'P E:i.i'" t, mE-?n t.
E; E~ r"! :L C) i:n f) I.... (] (;J I.... a frf
ConlfDl111ity DevelolJfll2ilt
ur [J Of" {:i L_
E~ ~7~ ;:::: t:: 1\1 I) I
POLICE SERIAL LEVY FUND
!::;:E~:.iDUi:;:CES
Cat- r yov'er"
T a}; es
Int.erest
TOTAL RESOURCES
E XPEt'''D I TLJ~-:;~ES
Personnel Services
Operating Transfers Out
Conti ngE'nc''j'
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
E.;ucJ qf::-t
f:":1(~-t:!.Jal
Variance Percent
l+C/():: ()()()
L~73~427 ~ (16,573)
535,025 (2,3:3(3,275)
2 :; fJ ')" :~~: =t :~~ (i (i
~~:; ::::~ :';:':: , () (; i)
:':2 tJ :'~':: :: () 4 ()
...... ;'''~ i.hl t::.
(J c; II 7' "} __.i
( :~.~ t:- ~:.=.; !i () (:1 ~.:i )
( :?() 1 ~ :~:E3!.:5)
( ..~. if.:; :I. :::5 :.::5 )
(l~:i,l ~ 429)
.::~~ ~:::: Ii () () ()
l:. (:r; {~J ~:~ ~:;
::::~, E~: i~ ~~.i
~=~ :~: q ~.:i .;:: 1
20;~5, 000
i 8, (H)()
(S l u ~:3 ~:; ()
1 f3, l:18:'?
t. f:: 2
16p06l
1 :i, , (:. ~:i ;;:~
( .!"1- ~:i, '7. f:3 '-/ )
( J. ')' :~: , :3l+ ~::; )
--.. .. - -
]. ::::~ i.i. I: () () ()
f''', ...::
..,.. i
19
:';:~()
.,:...._1
~:3
..::: '.A.:)
10.4
."-: i
.:::.0
if!l -4 '7 if, 1 ;::;00
1 , ::;:: :~: (? ~ <) J. ~~::;
( ~~:~ 5 ~? :::.: l:!. :; ~2 '~.l .~? )
_.........__...._..._..__....__._ __.n_._.____...___.__._._.N... ..._________.____._...___ -~---...--..
~;~ ~=:
_... ._.. __. .__ ..._ .__ ..... .._ __. .__ N'" _. ..... ._ _.e. __.. .__ _ ..... .._ .._ ...- .-.. --. .-- .- -.- -" ..... ..-. ..- ..- .,-. -- .-- -- ..-. -... -- .'- -
________..__._.._.____. _.__________.__..__. __.__.n_.._________ -..------
..: _no" .: ....
{::) C.) &: ./ .l i._.i
j,-j'l :; :::~()~.
1:::' r" ,.... ...,. .../
._!l._J ~ h)' ..' .f
il. C? s: :=';(>5
1 \~:' l:'i!i :~:.:: (j 3
;:: 1 '7' 5 :.~~ t3 ()
:3::::Ci q :2 i ()
244, DOEJ
:t ; :~ :~:; C:;::, 1 i ()
1 () () " E{ ::::~ (i
:l ~.:), /1. () :';?
4..:=);::3 ~ i ()()
:':: E5 , :~: :~:~ ()
:~::: :';-: () , () ~3 ~:~ .
~~:':~ .~.? ~~ 1 i .~?~
-:? /.... .~ :.::~ :.:::
. -'" ... .- ...
. '-.' - .-.. --...
1. :: ./.if.'/ t: ::::). Ci
t :':? (?:~ 1 ~:~ ()
1 :; ~~: ..q. ~5 :; :~? () ()
:L :' U ~;:~ ;:~;, :L :l '7
. .. ..-. .... ..... -
], () .~::, ~:~~::::.r ()
~.;:.~ Iq. ~'::j ~ 1 f:~ ()
. ..... .... .-. .... ....
1 ...~: :./ :1 1./ :./ :I:~
l:!. () :.:.=.:;:: :L Ej ~:3
.f:::::';)
.t:"'_:
..t:::.<+
..-,~r
":-'_\
L':Ll
.c::. ':.)
. - ..... h . _.. ..
. ..... .....
. ..... .,.,.
.'.+ .. ....:. ... ....j... ; ../ =. .'
." " ... - . ..
1 :; () () .:;::-;: \ (:~.) {:)
. ~ .. '-'r'. ..: ~ ..
....1 ..' ..- .~
J....l:....l.:i
..... ..... h_' ..._ _... __.. _... ..... ..... ..... ..... ...- .-., -... ..... _... ..... ..... ..... -.- ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ...- ..... .._- ..... ...- ..... ...- -... .....
..-. ..... ...- -... ..... ..... .-..
....-:~
..... ..-. .-.. ..... ..... ...- ...... ..... .-- ..... ..... ...- -. .-.. ".- -... ..-. -... ...... ..-. ...~. -... ...... ..... .-- ..-. ..- -... .-.... -.- ..... ..... ...- ..-. .-..
..-. -.-. --. ....., ..... -...
------..-..-.-..-..-.---... -..---.......--..--.-.......-....----. -........---.--...-..-.--.-.--..-.. -.--.........---...-..
1 ~;, 500
242,000
~5, 500
21,620
2,868
282
6,120
( 2'::51=j, 1 :~;2 )
(~5, 218)
1
8
261,000
24, 7/'0
(2~56, 2::::;0:>
.__ .._. ..... ..... ..... _.' ...... ...._ ._ ..... _.. ..... ..._ ._ 'N'. ..... ..... ...._ ..... ..... ..... _... .._. __. ..... .._ - ..... ....... ...... _. .__ ...... .-- ..-.
....- N'''' ...... ....... ..... --'
":)}
--_.~---_._--- ------
------------ ------
=========== '============
8j~i = ()()()
:2 (j t: () :~.) L~
c.\ E~!i I~~ () {:'J
llJC/.. ()()()
. . ..- -....
1.::,1./ 'i (JC)()
u
:~~ ;i (; ()()
:~~: q Ci()()
..... .._. "'n .._. ...... ..... ..._ ..... ..... ..... ._.. ..... ._.. .__ ...... ..... ...n ..... ..... ..... _... ....... ..... ..... ...- ..... n,_ ........- --. ...-. ..... .......
-- ..-. --.. -... .-. -.- ...- --.
[J
-.. .. ....-.
:::: t~)]' ft () i) i)
:~? () r: () f:~} A.:j. -:f::
:2: oil (i = r:? () l.:':)
......--.-..-..--......-...-.-...... -....--..--.-----..-.-..--- .---.-.....-.--.---.-.--.. ----.-.--..-
_.__...n________.__ --------.-.----........-.-. -.--.--..-----.--- ------
.-'i -:;t.
,,;... ._.1
u
i..)
E; 'j" {~ 'T F ;"1 E j\i T U F ' r;: E: ~=) U U F;: c.: E:: ;::; ;:!:': E ~:{ F' E !\~ D I T U F E S
C:: I -r '../ CJ r:' (::.! ~~:~ ~"'l l._ {~ I'....! I)
r:" Cj I~" t', t-, E.? ,or fool j'n f::! E:: 1"-:1 C) ri 'l~. t"l ::::.- t~ r'~ c~ (-:.~: C1 E~ F::~) t~ E rn t) F:.; f' -.::: () , .~ (~) ::~} ()
F'unci
r' .L r':., [::.
~~~i:~:!:~:lAL_. t...E~~:VY f::'LJN1:)
j:::.: r~ ~3 (J LJ r::.: c::: E:~ ~:3
t: c\ Jr' r- ":-/ C) \/ E:z r'o
TDTAL HEE;DLJnCE~:;
EXPE!\![) I TUr~:ES
Operating Transfer~ Uut
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
CE(lETEi::;:'"/ FUI\iD
~-:;:E:30UF'~:CES
[:.;31'- r- yc)ve!'-
T ..3 >:: f2 S~,
(:tlai~"ges fc:)r" Ser"vi<:es
~.: I
.L ri 'C (.:;.' r' E.:: ~5 T~
t1isc=e:tlar'leol.l~;; Rever'll.teS
.... . . ..... .. -.
LJ r) E:' j.... i3. 't. ]. !") (:.~ , i'- ~':?~ r1 '::;. 'to. (::~ I'" ~::. .L r'~
'TO C} 'T' (~'i LoO F;~ E:: :::) fJ t_J r~; f=: E~ :=-~
EXPE!\ID I TUF~ES
Personnel Services
Materials and Services
Cd, pit a ], Du t ], a ':-1
Cont.i nqi:~nc"i
Operating Transfers Out
Unappropriated Fund Balance
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
l:~': tJ. (j () f::~ t:. .~3. i.... '\/
;...~ .:::; ':::~'i .;:::.
.... .... .... ... ..-
[':uci q et
Actual Variance
$
1 () u ()()()
:i.:I. ~ (~);:52' "~;
1 , '::::'~i~:::
1 i:~) Ii () () (i
.i': .. .1-.' I
J. J. , () __J .:::.
-:. .. I.... :
.1. , {) ___, .::':.
.______._._._.._..__..._ __.'__.._"_"M.___.._._"__._
----.--------.-.--- .-.....-.....--.---.------.--
_... ".- ..... _. ..-. ..... -... .-.. ..- ..... -... .....
.-.. ..... -. --. - .-... -- - - - --_.
... ......
1 (_:i:; {) () ()
11 , l)~~i:?
1( 1. ~ tJ~~:;:2)
..... _.. u_ _.. ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..._ ..._ ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... _... ..... ..._ ._ ..._ ..... -... .-- ..... ..~... ..-. -.- - ...- ...- .on'
10,,000
1 1 :! ':~-:.' ~:.::.t ~~
( 1. , 1:.":1 :.:) :~':'~ )
-----..---.--...-...--..-.- -..--.---.--.--..---.-.- -..-.---..---.-.....---.---
-------------..--. --------..--------- --------------
f:{ ~.5, () () (::
:~:) ~:; , Af 5 ~::'~
1 :' ~:~ ~::~ ~::5
:t t) !l L+ ~:5 ~;:'::
( (~'::: 1:.:,: ~l .ill ~:..~ )
( ,if :.:.! ~I {~-'I (:.:: ii. )
( .L~, f3~:~:2)
( t Ii (::()())
..... ....-
{::) tj q () () ()
..... .. -....
~")() !t ()()~)
..:+ It .::- ..::1 t!
:::}:' (i i:) ()
. . -- -..
1,1/i:j
]. , {)(}()
i....1
........ ......
l....t ~": ,,'": i 'Ii '1
. .. ... ......
..- ...... .. " ..
} () ~ ~:()t:3
( ..q.l:i,!, .~.:: (? :':? )
_._ ,,_. ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... .__.. .._. ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... .... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ._.. ..... .....
..... ..... ._.. ..... ..... ..... 00'" ..... .....
:-J' '..>
... . ..... ......
. ... ......
.I:~ b :=.. 't i....i :....i J.)
-- ..... ....- ....
.. .' " ....
. . . . ..... .
: 1.' .' :.....
.to .:. -'...., .. '.._' ..
( 1 :.~:~ :~':~ , ~:': i~~. :L )
__. ._.. "_' _'"_ ..._. ._.. ...... ..... ..... ..... ...... ._.. __ ..... ...... ..... _." ..... _... "_' ..... ..... ..... _d. ..... ..... _... ..._ _._ ........_ ..... ..... .....
..... ...- ..... ...- ..... .-.. .....
---~._..__..__.........__._- .----......---....----....-..-..-.-- --------...--.-..-.--.....-.--. -........-..-.............
\.,~' 1 ~ 000
ei7, 92<:)
20,,500
10,080
500
4~i ;I 000
L~:3 It t..\ :2:; 'j'
2.~, 64Ci
1 ~ :':;:(::)6
I ...-.. ...,... .'or
b/, ,'::.b,~;.
71,280
19,214
10,0:30
500
45,000
F' f::~ 1''' c: f::.' ('i t.
1 ], ,./
"j 'i ./
_... ..- ..- --. ..... .-..
...- .-- .--. -- .-.. -.
i 1-:;;'
11':';:'
._.. .__ .._ ..... "'_' _00
-- ..-. ..... ..- .-- -
1.12
..I.:'.
:::~l
':'::{"J
1 (?
:~':6
ri -'"T
.c../
i
C)
u
(>
100
100
----.----.----. ------------ ---~--------~- -------
2()
$
:265,000 $
~~;:2, {)6::::~ "$
:21 :2 , \i::::~";'
-------.------.----. .-------.----- ---.---.-------..-"- --.----..-..-.
-------------- ------------- ------------ -------
C:: I 'T' \{ CJ F:' (.~l ~3 t...! t._. (i i\~ I)
S'1-ATEMEN1" (:)F~ f:~E:S(Jl.jR(:=I:~:S t~ EXPEj~Dll'Uf~ES
F' C:) Jr' i: ri e. -r i"'? roo f::~ i::.:.:' j....~ C) r-i 1:.~ t..! ':::. E:: ('j c~ (-:.:: c~ ~::3 f:~: r~) t:. i::::: in t) F:: Ir' ::::~ () , 1 '-;I 1..:/ ()
..- . .
. . . .
J::.; t,E. Ci (J (':"~ T~ .:'~~ ~. .. \/
~""i :"=i c:. 1 .,;:::.
.._ ._. .... _4 ....
Fund
f~{ Lt c:~ f;;J E,:,:; t...
AC:.tljd.L Var-iar'}(::e
I:'~'; (:i i....~ 1) r:' LJ ~\~ J)
!"\ L:.. ~j tJ LJ l"< L.: C:' ~j
C ":3. r". r.. \/ D \,.' Ei r.
~;
:::':': (I ~ () () (:: .F
:~::~ :.::S fi () () (;
~:~: () :; ~.:.:.i .:~:z :~::: ~;
.: .... ;-.... "'1'
J. !") =' ;:: t:z .~:;
( ~~:..q. , :':'~ :~: (~ )
.< ~::.:.! r:.} () )
j E:i.}~ e:=-
,.' Li':;.
410
Int. E:t- E'~:" t
1 l\ i:_}()()
..... ..... ..... ..... .'~.' ._. ..... ..._ ..... ._.. _." .._. ..... ..... ..... ..._ ..... ..,.. .._ ._.. .__ __. 4.... _... ..... ._. ..._ ...- ..... --- .-- ...- -- ..... ...-
TDT AL nE:SDur:::CE~3
._... .... u
:..:.: {::.: :1 t) t) ()
-," 1. --, -"," .."~
.'::r ._ :t ..l ..::' ....'
( :::'::: l:i. ~i ~::'~ {:) ::~: )
_... _... ..... ..... .__ .._. ..... ..... _... ..._ ..._ __. ..._ .....4.... ..._ ..... ..... ......._ ._ ..... ...- ...- -.. --. ..... ..-. -... "'- ..... ..... ..- --. .-.. ...- .....
.- ...... -.. ._.
-....-.----.--.-.-.--.--- --.------------ .--------..----.-.--.-. -...---.-.-.
E\F\:~~ND I TUF~E~J
PE:rsonnel Services
Materials and Services
..... ..... - ..
'.~; Ii ..::,t)C)
..-: '1 r::';:.:
.:::' ~ J.- ...J.....1
1.7,,101
1. , J Lj. :::.~
14 ~ 0':-:i9
1 , ~~";OO
~~~O, 000
..0.. ........
"~' 1 :t ~:~ () ()
1 :: ~5()()
Cont:.} nqE~nc:y
Unappropriated Fund Balance
~~':': () :: i) () ()
~..: f.::: r- c:: E.:: ('j t...
1 ::::! ..~,
(:) ~'.)
1:::'C"":'
.....I.._.!
u
()
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
:~:i 1..1 ~: () {) (}
11~;' , :'2 ~::; (~
:~:~; l:;, '~7 L). il
-........-.-----.-.--..---.....-.. -..-.---.---......---..--...-.-.. -.--..----.---.....--..........-... .....----..-.-.-...-
..).!+
-.---.-.---......-.-.--.-.-...-. --.---.-.--..--.--.....-.-.---- -.--...---.--------..-- --..--.-..-......--..
------.---..----..- -------...-.--.-------. ---.-.---------.- ---'--"--
EMERGENCY 9-1-1 FUND
F~~ E:~ ::3 CJ LJ F;~ f~: I::: ~3
i:::' .: ..~. /l
...J, J. ._>":"i'
C i:.:":. rOo (. \/ C} \/ 1;::" i'"
.... .........
'..,:' :"': i .~ i '.
.. :1 ~._' .... ....
.\ .<:i.." /.:.::;..-+
.., "J .-.... .
... .. . -
.L r"i -t... E~J (' (; C) \/ (~:.~ t. f"i rn f:.:! r'~ .r. .::i. i
to.. .-. .... .... ....
...... ......
t ....I. :, 1 : ~ :
. . . " ......
__ . h .. .. "
." ._... ....
.... ......
.L ..=+ :; .L:: i.) t~:i
f':.l.-i .... :...}' .,: 'i
.. ..... .' Ii .. .' .1... .'
.... .
.i. r': .t. t:;:: r- t:! ~:.-t:
.. .....
.i "uz!;i:
.:. :t ~.-' '-.' ....
'4':Z ~...: c:z
{1, 1.~..{~)
( ':.7 Ii :.::i(i(j)
()pei~atj.l..lg l"1:-ar'}s.fer-s In
..l .'. .". .... ....
J. t.):; i.) l.) i.)
:'~':: , ~:.; () ()
.!. ::") '-:'1
..' i-":.
TO"TriL Ft:ESDUF:;~CE:S
':.7 :.:.; *\ () () ()
:~:; 1 q b9B
( .4:~~:f :~:~()2 )
--. .-. -... ._- ..... .-.. '-" ..... .-. ..-. ..... ..-. ..- -... -." ..-. ..... _.-- .-. ..-. ..... ..... -- -... ..... ..... ..... .... ...... ".- -- ..... .-.. ..... ..... .._. ..-.
..... ..... ...- .....
;1 ....:'
_ -.. -.- -.- -". -.. -. -- _.. -..... ..... -.... --. -.. _.- ..-. -... ..- -.- --. -- -.- -.- --. .-.. --. -- -.- ..-.- -. -- ._. ..-. -_. -.- ...- -.... -- ..... _...
---------.----- -----..------- ------------.- -..------
EXPENDITUHES
L~ '~7 , ~:: 8 .~=}
"/~! 6:1. "~.
5,099
o
2:::::,501
10,000
1,600
PersonnE:l Services
:~::~:; u ()()(;
Materials and Services
Capital Outlay
Continqency
:':8, 4(:i(j
10,000
1 , 600
.-':.:")
.c:.....::..
18
o
o
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
"/~~; 11 ()()(). ~s
12,7'1::::: '=*>
62,287
--.--...-.------.-.-.. ------.-.-.--.--.-.- ---_.~---------_. ---'-'-"'-
j ""7
~~
________.__._________ _.____._._.....__.___ ____._______._.____ ___'_"_"_'4_
_____..________ .._____________ ----_.____0_--- _______...._
C I T -._{ U r. ?"i Ei 1m! L.. poi i-'~ I)
S'l"A~i"E~~IE~I~-r (~:}F:' I;ES(]lJf~CE~S & EXj=~ENDll'URE~S
r:' (J roO t... 1"'1 f.::: 'T' ~"'i r.' (.::~ (.::! r....! Cj fOOl t.. ~...! .:-::. t: roo! (jc:.:1 (j ~::::; E'~ f.::r .t. t::: in [) f::.: i"" . '1:. .1 ..
'f :....:i..i......
f .(3 tJ. ci i:;:.~ F:.: .t. -:'::1. i"- \....
; 1 ... ._... ._.
.Ci .:::t :::- J. ':-.::.
Fur.ie!
E.:u.dqet.
t:.i c t_ u. .:::t }
\i ci 1.... i ,:~ rUI C: f:::
..... ..... ..... ._.. ...,. .__ ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... .... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... .._. ..... ..... _.... ..... ..... ...... .....
u_. ...... .._ ..._ ..... .__ ..... ..... ..... ..... ._.. ..... ..... ...... ..... _n' ..... ..... ._.. ..... .__ ..... ...... .u_ .4... ._ ..... __. .._. ..,_ ..... ..00. ..- .-..
...... .-.. ..... .....
r::t (.~.::I ir' C: i:?:! r1 t...
:::::; .,~.. F:~ E:: F~ 'T' r::' LJ r\i }:>
F;~ [~~ ~~; CJ tJ r:~~ t: [:~ ~3
1":"
:p
( 4 q ':7 ~:;(=} )
( :~~~ I~) Al , t3 ':7 '/' )
( ~5 :::; o::l , () E:: '~7 )
( :'~'~ ::::: ~:4; !:. () '7' ~5 )
(4,~:546)
Ca !.- r. ./ D V e r"
"r d. ::{ (:? S
~~.
::':: :~~ l:."-:; =' (:; () {)
..q. :~;:;~.q (j () ()
.... ...n. _.. .~... ..
:,;::.'::11!, :::::~)J:_)
.' "-,' .1 .-". "'1'
\":J / ~ ]. .::~ ,,)
IntergoVE:rnmE:ntal
70:i.,OOO
:~:': ~7 t.; , (; () ()
1 l:) :~:;, C/ 1 ~:~~
40, (]i2;~j
..... ..
Ltlarges .t'(Jjr' ~e~r'V].c:es
I r.! t E'r- f:::S.t:.
.-. -....
./ .. ()UO
....-1 ..'1 ::::''::
0:::. :: .'l.1' ...J.:..t
(?f:::
16
.,:;.. ..._1
1. ::J
:~::~:;
TD.T At.. FE::~::)DL_jF;:CE~=i
i, 6=i2, 000
_._ 00 ..h. .. _...
~.i C) ~=.i , <::i {:} ~'''~.'
( J , 1 LlI:J, :~;:~::5)
-...-...--..---.--------...- .........-.--.....---.-.-.---- ..-......-.......-.....--..-.--.---..- -----..,..-..--
'"_). .f.
---.---..--------...- -...--.--------..---- -...---.-..--.-.....-.---.-. ---.---
___.______~._____. _._______________ _____________ _.____4_
E:XPE!\~D I TUF;:ES
.i ..-:....., .....;r..:..::.
.I. .. . m. -
.::....::_ , .::.. l....:
~:;t)O, 607
:=i O::.i, ~_:.:.i 0 :s
2 4 ::~; !l ti 1 !:;
~~2 ':7 It () () I:)
f3a:;i, ()()()
PersonnE:l Services
4 f3 ~:2!t .:? () (:)
~l ~~.; :~:, ~:! () (1
::~: () () ~ (7J (> <:i
Z7..000
E.:9,000
1:7:: l.. c::a c; i::::
....J :..._'!t l I....; .....:
_.. .., .... .... ._.0
:::::LJ.f:.):t \"::".:} ../
11aterials ar1c:! ~3eF-vices
Cal::) i t c:\ 1 (Jut 1 E\"y'
Operatiflg "~-rar15'felr's Ol_\t
Cont: i nq€0r-Jc .y'
:? ~~5
4"::..':;
12.:/
o
()
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
1 , b~~_;2, 000
L~2t) ~~ :2-;':5
.f ...., t...; C::' --''' "'-, t::'
.1. =' .:::.:::.\....', l.z::.......J
--.-.-.---....----- ----..---.-.----.--- -.---..-------.-.--- ---------
':":1 ':"1
-------.------...---.---.. -..-.-.--..-.-.-...--.----.-.- ......-..-----..-..---..-..- ---'--'-'---'"
.----------.-.-.---- ----..--.-.-..-.......---.- .......-----..-...-.--.....-- --'---"-'---
WA1"Ef~ QUAL_!l"Y i='lJND
F;.: E~ ~::; CJ tJ F;~ L~: E:: :3
., .. ..... ..... .... ....
.q. (.1 ~..:.), ..f {j ~:::~
L ,3 (. 1'- '..-/ D \/ f::: !'-
.{l. :::'~ () z: () () ()
. .. .. .
....... ."'''. .. ....1......
:....; .::'. .....r:t ... :....: 1_.':
:~~~ ~~~~ ~~~ , (:':1 () I~)
...~ ...... .'; ...:. "'1' ...... ..: '\
i.. .J. Q .,:::..:+ ..::; I: ..::' '.t.Lf. }
1 , ~5 ':;.:: (:- !! () () ()
.-" ..
L;t')ar-qes {'or ~e;:-Vlc:es
I~ ~:~':': 1 ~ :.:5 it :~~: )
(:.;;::,070)
.. "1 ;-.. -..:
\:J r. ..:+ ~.:.I /'
.... ..4_ .... u
~::r3, ()C)()
4,000
:i :a (? ::~ ::)
I ntf:::'(. E:S.t
Miscellar120us ReVerll!eS
.L
~.? 1
.:::. '_:;
.i.j-;3
To.r ~iL f~:EEDUF:CES
2,028,000
1,166,781
(861,219)
-~--_._._--------- ~_._.-._._-_._-_.__. -_..._-_..__._.__.._--~-_. .._._~_._....._..,
::~8
----------- ------------ --.----------- ---~..-----
----------- ------------ ------------ ----.--
EXPEND I TUF~ES
Personnel Services
Materials and ServicE:s
Capit.~\l CJut.Jay
Operating Transfers Out
Cont:. i nqE'r.,C\!
Unapproriated Fund BalanCE:
170, ~;96
~;82 , '1'04
425,127
8~;, 44t3
17,500
100qOOO
226..000
75:3, ~iOO
~:i78, 400
120,:1.00
250,000
1 O() , 000
226..000
153,2.73
~~::.i~. It 6~i2
:;-~:~~:2, 5(j(j
........:z.
.,::.....:.
26
C;} ~4~:
u
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
~~ :;~ G O::~:8.. 000
4-+'
:p
5 Cj1 :i , () :;~ :L
:L :t .l~ ::~; 6 &i f:; ':7 \'7:
- ._. ..._ _'.' ..... ._ __. _... _. _._ ._ ._... _.. ..... __ ..... ..... ..... ..... _._ _... _00' ..._ ,._. ...... ...... ..... -"" ...- ...-. --' ..... ..... ...... .,.- ..... .....
-.. ..... ..... .....
u
----------.-..-. --.-------.--..------ ---..----...--.----.--..-. ---...-.---...-...
_.__________ ___.______.______ _____________~____...__ ___0.---'-'--
C 1 T\( OF. {:ibHL.P.lf....!D
~3 "r (~i "r E:~ r"~i L: t\~ 'T' CJ ~:. F~ E~ E1 CJ tJ F~~ (~: E~ E.~ ;~:;!: E:~ ::~ F> E: !\l i) I . r LJ ;:~.: E~ ~~
F:" roo! ro' .t. fOOj i::":.' 'T' i"j t... E~.: f!:.; J.....t C] l"j t:. ~mi ~. E:~ f"i dE':':! ci E; E.:: r:: 'L E~ cn [) f."::, roo ..~1 () r. 1 t..:/ \::} tJ
I~~ L!. C1 (::~ (.:.:.:1 t~ i'~. ~..u \....
.. .
1.:.1 .-. .......; .....
; ;....:..... 1-.
..... .... ._. ... ..-
Fund Budoet
Ac:.tLlal. Vaj~iaflCe
.... ...... .......,.. ........ .....
~:~: L: ~/..J L:. ~."1.~ j'h LJ j\.i J.)
F:~ E:: ~:3 C) LJ V:.: C=: E:~ ~:3
C.::ir.. f' 'y'Dver"
$
.i~t)~:; z: ()(:!() '::."r
(46~'::.i ~ 0(0)
(620,1\)4.)
(2i '! >::/./:5)
$
-' .. -." '
Charges .t'Oi~" tjer'vlces
'7' C:);:~ =i () () ()
:L 4. Lj. !i ;::3::) ~:~)
I n t. E~ !... e ~:;. -1.-:.
:~:~ () z: i) () ()
.... .. .... .....
d, ()~:.:: .f
.r 0 .r {.":j L. F;~ E ~~3 C) tJ F< c:: E: ~3
. _... 00 ..._ u
1 ~ :':::6(), i)i:_)C)
1. :.:::.~ ::'~ , t:~ :~:~ ~~:
(i'l 10")' '116./)
--.--.-.------.--- .-......-........---.---...-..--..- -..-.-...----..--...---.--..- .--...--......---.
-------.---...- ----.....---.-.--.---.- _._-~---------~--~ -.------
1 ~::'~
EXPF~~ND I TUr;:ES
PE:rsonnE:l Services
.. ...... .._. n _.
4..S 1 ti ::}()Ci
...... ...........
II () , ..::l t:) ()
:i ~.~ i.:~ , f~. .i4.l~
11,44.7
:'2 :; ~5()()
::::' ~:.:;: ~.:.:~;, 1:2 ()
~.::: :.,2~ ~~{!f (~\ (j if
\ 1 1 (j, ~:; ~:; ::::~
:l :~:;:2, ~jOO
:I. :I. :~;, 4~:;O
~laterials 3ild ~3ejr'vi(::es
4~i8 ~ 0~50
CEtP i t: ,::!.1 [)u .1:: 1 i-3.y'
() P F:.? rOo 2 t: i n q .r j". c~ n ~:::. + E~ 1". S D u t
Cor.lt: i nqE'nc./
. ._. h.. _.._.
:t ::::: ~::: ~ () () f)
1. :::;~;, () ()()
1 :I. :~;, 4~..:;O
:...1 E: fn C: E.:: f'i t:.
u
'i C)
....., :'-":
i._J
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
1 , 2<::)() , {)()()
~;;~ t (?:; .::;'"7 :~:;
1 , (!4()!! :2:'?~/
-_._--_.._..__.._.._~-_. .-_..._..._.._..-_.-...__..._-_._~--- ._,---~----,-"._-"--'- -.---------
'1...:':;
"._._._-~--_..__.__._- ---~._._.__._---- -.----..-
.--.----------- _._~--~------ -------
...- -_. - - -.. - ..- - ..-. .-.. ......
- --. -"-.-.- - -" -- .-.--
{:'i I F~.~ f> CJ F;~ 'T' r:' tJ 1\.; I)
r;.: E: ~:~; fJ tJ F~~ c:: E~ ~3
i : .:::j, roo f" \/ r"f ........ :,:.:~ F:-
....4.... . . ~... . ......
lli." {~)()U
J :t = {) () {:.~.::
( :~:; , ~:.:.; c.;: 1. )
..... .. .00. .
t_: ti {;:\ (' ~J f:::: -:::. .~.. C) r" ~:: !?:~ r' \/ 1 C: E.:' ~::.
I: ...; .'. .-. ....
..~+.~> &: i._J'..)i.)
. ,.... _.. ...... ...
( ..::; :&:::!i ./ 1 1.j. }
.: :'. . t: ~ :
.L '._.t :; .=::" (~:: C.i
.t.; :
.L r'! 'C. F~ j.... E:l :::. T".
.q. U ()
( 2 ./: :~~: )
~--_..._--_._~..._..._. ..-..-..-.-..-.................-..-..-..-- -----....---...-------..-.- --......--.-..-..
'..) ....
TDTP1L nEFiutJr~:CEf)
~':;~J'i ()()(]
~:~.~ ,1 , it ~:? ~:':':
( ::~~ {) :t ~; ./. ~::: )
___~__._._._.._._.____... __........_......._.._...____.____. ____.___4____.__.___. --.---.---
.---------.--- .---...--.-.-----.- --.-----.------- ------..---
EXPENDITUHES
Mater-ial~; arld SerUvi{:es
Capi tal Outl a.y
Operating Tr~nsfers Out
tB,OOO
20,000
20qOOO
il':t '~7 t:J ~l
5qOOO
1 ::::;, ~2 i ~::;
1 ~i, 000
20,000
..... ~...!
.:::. /
:':~~.:;
()
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
$
~:;t3, 000 ~;
C) '! ':78':7
L18q 2i::::;
-----_._-----~- -~-----~--_._-- -----------.---.-. --..--.--
J. l
--.----.------- -.-.-------.----.--. ---~_._._----_._._._- ---'-'-"---
----------- -~---------- --.----------. ._-----_.~
C I .r ....t. C) r::. {.i ~:; I.u! L. {::j \\.1 :0
S'T'A'T'E!Y~E~\~"I" OF R[~~:~~30lJ~:~CE~~3 ~( EXf::ENDI";-URES
For- .tl'lE I!"~r"ee iyt{:)i'l.ttl~; E~f'lde(:i Sep.temt)er ...~~Ju 199(:)
.Fund
E:: L.. E:~ c=: 'T' F;~ Ie:: r:' LJ }\j })
_.. ..... ..00 ..... . .... .... _'.' ....
. i";~ L:, ~::; LJ LJ i"'~ L.: t::. ::::;
[:aI'U r. yovE!r-
Intergovernmental
Charges for ServicE:s
I n t F::' I'.. e.:::.:. t
Miscellaneous Revenues
Operating Transfers In
To.rAL F-:ESDUF~:CES
EXPENDITUF\ES
Community Development
Electric DE:partment
UnappropriatE:d Fund Balance
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
(:AFzIl"AL IMPI~OVEMEN'T'S F~UND
r;: E: ~3CJ i..JPC E S
C i:;;. r. 1'.. \/0\/ F:: fr.
. ..... ..... .....
I ...I '.' :...Z'l....
. ....... .
. -.... .-. ...-
Interoovernmental
.-. . - .... .
Lt131r'ges '~or ~:;erVlces
I rl t F?:i'- f.:::~:::. t
Miscellaneous Revenues
Operating Transfers In
TOTAL RESOURCES
EXPENDITURES
Personnel Services
Materials and Services
Capiti.il Outla.y
Operating Transfers Uut
Cont:. i ngE:j"""tcy
. , . ,
L:': L~ C~ (:l f.:! T:. {.:;'!. i.n, ":./ t:.; .:':t ':::. 1 ~=.
E.; u. c:i CJ F::' t.
ActLlaJ. varJ.ar}ce t..1eJ1"c: ej..).t
..... ~.... .-.' ..... ..... -... ..... -- ...- --.. .-. ..-. ..... .-. ..... ..... .-.. ..-. ..... ..... ...- ..... ..... ...- ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... .....
~2 .:;..... ~:2~ I: () (j ()
1 , l ~5 () ~ () () () .~; 1 q 1 ~5 1 Ii 1~; l4.
16, ~.:::.;9 :i.
l:,) =\ ~~ () () 'i i:) f) ()
..00.. ......
./ 1 u ()C)()
1 {':. &: ()()()
.~. i-::3 q () () (j
r:-} 8 ~:5 q () '~l :~::
1 it , ~:: (:;) ~~:~
( :~:; ~~:; () )
.i 'i !.:::. /i
l. :t J. ,-_.I "'i'
( :;;': :.:~.i E3, ..q. () C? )
. ...n ~...... .... _'. n... .
\ ~i ~ ~:! Iii- :t I"l ~::~ .,/ ;;
. ._.. ..._ 4' ..... .
<. ~.:: ':::)!i ./ () ..i )
( :}. {) , :~~: :.::~; () )
.' .J ...... .... .... ......
J~ .,:+ (::i Ii 1.) 1._1 I.) ,.;
.{ ()c}
t::J
1 ~':':!
'..1f 'J
( ~? )
()
-....-...-..---......----.--.-...-..... -...---..--..-..--.--...-"'-'-"'- -.-.......--.....--...-.....-..-..-....-. --.-.--.-.-...-.......
:c::: /
f3 Ii (){::)(i q ()()(J
:.~.~, 1 tJ f.) ~ .~? 6 1
( 5, ~::3 (:;i :~:, :'~': ~:~ z:"1) )
-------...---.-----. .--..-----.-----.-.-.-.. ------......----.---.----...-- ,-,,--'---'--"'"
---.-----...---...--.- --.-..--------.--- -.---.--.---.------- -----.....--..-
:, "I" .-.'. .... ....
.1:+ ..;+ <:J ~ .:::: 1.) i...1
.:.:.:: ~ 1 1 :~:: Ii [-3 () (j
~j(H) ~ 000
f)i i=) q lJ J. ~.:::
111 ::::;6C/ Ii <)41
~~: ~:i :.:.::;, ~:.:.) ~3 .:/
::;:f ./. .il:::1-!l ./. ~:~.; (;)
~5.00 'I O()O
:~~()
19
()
~_._...._..._..._.._-_...._.........._.._. -_.._--~.._-_._..._..__.------ .._.._....-..-_._.~....._......_.._..._...... ..-.-..----...---
i8
8'1060'1000
i !l 45'7, 6~.i4
1:::.;, 6(~)() :t :::~LI..l:~
--..- _.- - .- -.... -... -... ..-. -- -- .- .-. - - ..-..- - - -- .-- --.- ..... -. _... ...- -. .-.. ..... --. -.. .- -' -- ..- -.- ...- -.. .......-
-_..._----_._.._--_...~- --.-.--------- -..-----..------.--- ---.-----
. ..... ......
.. ..... ......
1. !' ..:+ ..:+ (::) ;: !....~ i.j i....!
~::~: () 1 ~ ~j () ()
.'.. .........
..q. () :: ~:_~'.i () ()
. ,. .... h
]. 1 ]. !i ()C)()
1 (j() zt ()()()
:~, ii. (:f f3 ~ :~~ ~~ (j
1 :::::4,000
. .. -. .,
1 ~ ~:'t :..:/~::: :i .':+ :::: .::+
.-.. .... ......:
..::: ;,,) , <:~i {:} ii.
.....; -.:: J--' l! ...::
.:::..... , ..."/....!.....
:3~Ll :t c:; 11
40,000
:l /,j. (:-: :; ..:'~i. :~? .l~
()
. ........ ,...,. - .
(. -.::' () :L ~ t::~ () () )
( ::'1 () ~ ::.:.:.~ () () )
( tJ () :; :~::: :~:: {:>.)
:t J. ()
I.j
~j
.--'j r"1
..::.C::Z
J.
.'::I()
4, 6~'::; 1 , 5~.50
_. _... .__ ._. ._.' '_" __. '_.__ ._.. ..... ._ __ .._ ._.. __. __ ..... .__ ._ __ _. ._. __ ..... "_. .__ __ ._ ._ .._. .._. 4..... .._. ...... 4_ ._ ..... ..-. ...- -.
..::' /
1,725,946
. ..... .... .. _00......
~. ./ ~::: , ()~) '.~' )
( ~~.~ , ..4 ;~S :~:: ~ :~~: :~~ c; )
( ri'4, 0(0)
(2, 90::,i, 6(4)
--_._----_.---~ ------------ ------~.-._._._._~-- -------.
~-----_._---- --------.---- ---~.----_._---- ------
1.!l 000
1 (!(?, 7~~O
2, tlif::::: , ~; 1 ~5
11 ':;,:., 1: ()()()
UnapprDpriated Fund Balance 1,655,285
. .... _....
). C)() :; (){)()
__.__.._______.__. .___.___.________.._..__ _......._._.H__.__._.._.._.._.__ -...-..........-.--.
..:..
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
~. 4, (~:~~~ 1 , ~S~;C)
5,91.4
1 :.=;, i 09
6~~; 'I 071
.-. - .-. .
;:J, ]. z..:/ <::1
;~~ ~2 , ~:? (.1 ()
(f+,Cili~.)
Cii~a: 6i~.:t
~~: , ::;i85 , L~4A~.
1 (i t1 " t3 (=) i~.
:1.00,000
1 :: (~I 5 :.:~:; =' :'~:: ~:3 ~~;
..q. , ~5 :~~ {;; ~ L~ '::) f::)
t::;.",-, 'i
.........;: 1
14
~?
/
i._i
u
---...--.----------... ------.-----..--.---. --.-....--....,..-.-.----...--- ----..--.--.-.
-------.------- ----.----.--------- -.-.---------.---- -...---.---.--
L: I TV DF. i~~3\-..iL{il\j:C)
S'l-A-~"E~IVIEN'l" lJI=' l~i~SOL.jR(:I~~S ~~ EXF~ENDI1..tJRES
r:' () f' t ~...! (.::: ~ i"'J j.... F::I (.:.:.:z IV) c::; ri t.: In) ':::. E:: r"~ cl f..:.; ci ~::~ ~:.~~ f.:j t:. cl f'n]::) (.:::: r" :~::: () u 1. :.:-/ I...:..: ()
r.:{ t.t c~ c.::J E.:: t~ E:\ r' \.... .1:3 .::~. '::::. 1 '::::.
Fund
I::'; t.t. C; <;;J t:-? t~
(ic't, L!. c:\].
\.! d ,'- :1. ;3. n c: E'
(::'; ::3 ~3 E:. ~::) t:) !.....i E:~ ~\~'T
c:: Co! ~...~ ~::3 -'r F;~ LJ C~:'T ~ i-'!! -..j
r~~ t:: ~:3 CJ. LJ F~; [~ L:: ~:::;
C a 1'- r-. .y'D V e j.-.
Intergovernmental
Special Assessment
I n t i7? 1'- F:: s;. t
I"h ~:.cel1 c;\rH.?DU-=.:;
Operating Transfers !n
':;5
:?\), (;()()
:~: J. ~; If (j()()
.. .' ..-......1.
{::; u () / ..::S
( l:~~!i :~::~ ~=~ ':7 )
( :~: 1 :=.; It ()()())
!''t~ E; \./ \~~I ,...! Li (.:?
(J
l04qOOO
t::. ...:.. i':::' ":1. ~'-'J
._.1 / , ....J '..) -.t'
(46, ,q-(d )
.... .
j--.' c:\ \/ Hi F: n t_ ~::.
( ~5:3~:; )
1 I: ()()()
..-1 -i !:::.
';. .l ,..!
.? :~~: (~1 r: () () ()
()
(./:~:6, 0(0)
(20~OOO)
...... ......
Lt)!t ()()()
..-...-------.-.--..-.--.--.- -----.-.--.....-...-..-..---.--- -.--.--.-.--...-.....-.-..--.--...-.....
TO."!"" (.; L_ F;:t::3DUF~CE~3
i =i 1 C){') Ii ()()()
{::' II ~ 1:.":1 ~~ ';l
( 1 q 1 :~) 1 q :3/1 :2:; )
--....-..--..---.-----. ..----.-..-...--......-..-..-..-. -...--...----..-.-----.---.--... ---..-..-...-.....
----.--.---.-..---- -.-------.--.-.--.----- .-.---------.----- --..-..------.
C'
....J
EXPEND I TUF;~ES
1"1 i:":\ t. f::! r-. :i Et 1. ~~. 2 r., cJ
C.=~I=)i.t21 Dutla-y"
Debt. t.\er-vi Cf?
~:::~ i.-::: ~.-. \l.l .--!== c;.
_. -.. . . -. - -- --
~~:; ~ '): ~~ ()
...,. .-.. ..... -
..::' ~{ ..... ::) t_i
..... ..-.. -- ..... ..
...." ~!Cl q :.:::~~.)()
( 1 :~::: ~ 1 () '~7 )
'~.}' {;I :::;:a , ::~~ ~-S '7'
4::~;6, ()O()
:, -"1'" .... .... ....
,,+ ,,) (::' I! i....; t_..: t.)
.--.......-.-.-...--.-...--...... --.----.-...-..--..---.---...- ---.-.-...--.-.--.....------... .--..---.----
I, .L .i
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
i , l z::~; 6, () () ()
( 1 :~~; Ii 1 <=:f 7' )
1 , :? (:1 c.~}, 1. () ~l
-....-...-.---------..-.-- -------.--.--.-.-.-- -..-------.--.--------..- --..---..--
.--.--..-------- --....-----------.-.. ...-------.------ -.--------
~1(Jf;f:)I..~..Ai__ COi~Sl..I~LJ{=..I..IO!~ I::'UI~D
F~~ E~ t3 [J tJ i:;~ C:: E:: E;
Lal.- r. -/c)v-pr-
I ntP/.-f::t-::3t
OpE:rating Transfers In
::::: ::::~ :.:.:~; ~ () () ()
:~: :I. :~:~!! () Ej ~3
( ~:;::"1 :t '~.i:l. :'r~~ )
( :I. 4 , :3~; ~.::.:.i )
( ~;~ ():;;: , (:z :~~: () )
..-.. ~...-
~::: ti =t () i) t..)
~; ~ () ..q. !:.3
:;:': ":':1, '~7 , /:."::: ::::: ()
.. _... _.. n
i+ ~:) 1: ()()()
F:z t.:! 1'''' <:: E~ r'~ t...
...:' '..:'
u
~:~ ~:~
i.j. ~I~~
u
u
{)
( '-::. ..;
':. .....- .'
u
~':':':~=;
TOTAL RESOUF;~CES
. .. .... . -.- -
C-;'\_I:L:; CZ.'::1(_)
._.. J _-:. .n... -';' .....
... ...
'_:' c:.... ...:. at f .":1 '_)
(2:::;:8,897)
..... ._.' _... ..... ._. _._ ..... ..... ._.. _... ....... ....... _4" _... ..... .'_' _'" .._. ..... ..... ._.. ."_ ._.. .._ _.., ._.. ._" .'_' ...... ._" .._. _.. ..... _'. .-.. ..-
..... ..... 'n_ ..... --
bU
_.___.__4______._ _______._____.._4 .----.-.-------.-. ..-...---.---
----------- ------------ ------------ ------
EXPEND I TUf.:ES
Capital Out.lay
602, 6:~::O
(>
602 'I 6~50
<)
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
t':. () ~'2, t:."J:3 () ~;
t) ~:}
6 :Ci :::.~ , /;:., ::::~ ()
_..___.______._ __._____._____..._ __.____4_~.________ ~-------
()
:p
--.----------- -----------.--- ------..-..-.------- -.-.--.---.
--.----------- ---.------------ ------.------- ------.-.
t: I "r \{ C) r~' f:'::'i ::::; ~ ..~ t.. (':.~ !\j f)
STATEMENT OF RESOURCES & EXPENDITURES_
f:' C) 1'- t f"j i~.:.:: "r }'-j r' {.~.:r t:::: j'....i I::' ""1 .t:. j"'~ -::::. F:: f"j C:! (.:.:.:~ c~ ~::::; {::.:.=~) t4 E~ rn i~) f!..: r-
1. ::) c.? ()
..... I
.t.; tJ c; (_::.! !?:.:"C '::'). ~.... -\.... J::~ .~~.!. -:.~. ]. ~:.
Fund Gudget
Actual VariancE
f...1 c.:.:' r" c: F~ j'"'f t~
:E{ (.~i !.....i c:: F;~ C) r:" --j" f:{ C) i.....i f) F~:.: E:~ I) E:: r':~ F:: 'T' I C) ~"".f
F~ E:~ ::3 CJ LJ F~: c:: L:: ~::;
I n t: €::. r.. E? :;:- t
:2;: I( t~ .:.:.:.. ::.~
4, ~=i =t ~:.:~ .~? ()
( ~2 (~::: (:::; , (:;# (> :~:; )
( 1 1:.:) ~ :~:: ~~~ ~S )
:L 1. c/
C C:i r- r- y 0 \/ E: !....
.:p
.")'.:::i:::; (', (i ("!
.;....._.. "'_. u ..... .... .....
~;~: t3 ():t ~:~.; .~? () ::.::
Special Assessment
.... .
j_.l ct ":l in e r"i 1: ~.
'-j' ...... .... .... .... .-.
. ',,?.;:. .! _ '. P. Ji. J
- .- - "" .. .. ...
. . .-.. - .... .-..
1 1 -.::. q U '._/ ./
. .:, t )
~:.~ () A () (j i:)
1 ;::~~
TOTP1L. F;:E:E;UU!:~~CE~=;
{') :::; :~:~ :; () (, ()
::~; C?7 , ::~; 4- 2
( :~~ ~:~ .~? ~ {::: ~.:.:.; f:~ )
1 ,-~::E:~
.- ...-. ...- .- ..... -... ...... .-. .-.. ...- _.-
_._ .__ _. _.. 004" _. .__ _". 4._. "_4 __
----..--.----.----- ------.-....-----.-..- .-.---..--.-
.-.---------------- -------.----..-.- -----.-.--.-...
t~ )< F::z t:: j\1 I) I 'T' L.i f-~ E ~3
Df:?b t ~:;j=r- \I ice
DpF~!-- E:\ t. i nq Tr.- an ~::.+ E.:' 1''' ~~. Uut
Url aj:J p rOo DP r-:i ~i t E?d Fun c! E:;E:\]. E:i.nc: E
L~ t:.;;::) :: () () ()
i l+ (:i , :2 ~:: Ej
~:~; i~l. :::;, '~7 t~ :.~:
:~Z()
..... ....-
~) ~ ()()Ci
::5'1000
1._i
140,,000
l "::\-0, 000
()
__ ..... _." ..... ..... ...... ..... ..... ..... _... ..... ..._. ..._ __. ..... ..... ._. .._. ..... ..._ ...... '''.' .._. ..... _... _... ..... ._.. ..._.4 .._ ..... ...... _._ _...
..... ...- ..... ..- .-. ..... .--
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
<::) :~:: :.::.~ u () () ()
i .4(.':1 ~ :'2 :~: f:.i
4 t3 ~=:,. .). {~~.~~
L...:a
.- ..-. ..-. .-. ..-. --. .......- -... ..- -.- .-.. ...- -... ...- ..- .- -- _. .-.. --. - -.... .-.. .-. .-.. -_. -- ..-..- -.. ._. -.. -.- -.- -- -. ~..... -- ...- -..
-.----..-.-..-..----..- -...-------------- _.._---~---_._~_.- -.-----
GENERAL DBLIGATION BOND FUND
F:.: E~ r3 C.i tJ F~~ f~; E::.~"3
I r-, t_ Ei r-' c, ~::. t
. .._.. 00.__.
1 ..::1:1 () () (_)
C,/ ~:;~ ~i ~;:: l::.~ :?
l~., 1 ~:? i:.)
:~~: () ~:5 7\ () () ()
( .y. !! i:~) :~;: ~3 )
( Ej ~ ~3()..~i. )
(.~.:: {:}
r:: <:~ r' r' \,.... (j \/ e i....
_.. .._. u....
:..;1 ./ _ ( )1: );: )
. . - .. .. ..
(J ~::) t.:~1 f' E:'\ .t: :i. f"1 (.~;} "r i.... c':;' r"! ~:..f E.:: ~.". ~=:. I r"~
..' .. _.00 .... 00
..::' () ~:..);~ ::) (J ()
i.)
'j f ':f'J
...-.................-..................-........... ..........--........-.....-...-.-....----.. .-..--...-.....--.-.........--.--.-....... ........-..-...........--
TDTf."~L !::;~E:::;iJUr;:CES
l:t t ~:5 u ()()()
i~ t) ~:2!t 1 ~5 E:i
( i ~:: ~ t34~~'~)
._. .... __ .__ __ _... _n. ._.. ._.. .._ __. _... ..... -- -'" - -.. ..- --. .-.. -- ...- ..... .-. _... ..... -... ..... ....- -.- ..... - -. ...- ..... ...- ..... .-. .- .-.. ....
--.--------.-..--- -.----.------.-- --.-.-------.-.-- -........--.----
EX PEI\ID I TURES
Debt. SeF.vi ce
Unappropriat.ed Fund Balance
305,000
1J.0,000
158,113
o
146,887
110,000
~i:2:
u
--_._._._.._..-.-~--_....- ----_..._-_._-~_._--- -...--..-----.-----.-.--- --.....--.............-
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
No
:p
4 1 ~i , 000 :j:i
1 58!l 11:3 .$
256, 8S.l
":!'C.i
,-,\_,
------------ ------------ ------------- ------.
----------- ------------ ------------ ------
[~: I "r \.... C) F:' Pi E; l..i L.. (.~ t..~~ f)
STATEMENT OF RESOURCES & EXPENDITURES
FDr..
t: l"'i E.;
~ j'''! F. ....;..
. . .. .... .-.
j";'~ t) ~'.i t~ i."i ::~. E:: f"l ci f::.: c:~ ~=) :;:.?! ~) .t f:":.i rn f.::r f?:.f r.
._::,i._.J'i
J. -../ --;! U
... . .
J:3 Lt c~ C:i E.:: t: .:'::\ t.... \i
.. .
~.-.~ r'.:'i '::::.'j \::.
.-.. ...........-
Fund
13!..3_d .:;:) E.t
f.:iC t Ltii].
I....} i:':i. ~_.. i ,d 1'-1 <:: t-:!
F' F!! 1--- C EO:; (., t.
..... ..._ ..... _... ..._ ...... ...... _.... ..... ._.. ....... ..... ._.. .._. ..... - ..._ "'''' ....... _... ..... ._.. ......... ..... ..... ..... 00... ..... ..._ _n ..... .....
_. ..... ..... ..... ..... '.'" ..... -... ...- ..- ..... -.- ..... ..... .._. ..... ...... -... ..... ..... ..... -... ..... ..... ..... ._.. ...- _... ..... ..... -... ..-. .-- .....
..... .....
1:) E~ I:'~ 'T' ~:::~ E::~ r::.: \/ I L~: E:: F:' LJ f....1 I)
F( E:: ~:; (J L.j r;.~ C~: (~ ~3
Car.- r. YO\!E::>!'"-
I nter.12st
~~5, ~~ () <) .:t:-
:",h' .... "'1'
::) , ,:::- b '.) :~:.
.1. ",_1._,
J. tj ..:;,
1 (j4.
J ()Lj.
OpE~f- at-. i ng
..... ..
j j'- ~.... 1'"1 S .t. e ir' S. J. r'l
'7' :2 ~ (~) () ()
.: ...,. .. ...... ..
1 '.~' 11 1 '-.:-'"(:::s
. ..... .... .00. n ...
( ~'.:) to) , t:.{ i:_J .q. )
113
-r(jT?:~L PE:~}DURCES
::.:: '~7 , ~:5 () ()
l f3 ~ c/ i..~r :::::
. ..... .... -.. ..... ..... .
.. ~... I I :_... .' ....
.~ ._J C:: , \...1 ",)"" .J
..:::,,,:+
.---.-..----.--....--. .--.---.---..--.---.-..... ..---.-....-.--.---......--.--.-..-- .--..--.---
-..--.....-..------- ----.--------- --_..-.__.._-_._---_.~ ------
EX PE-:!\ID I TUFi:E::S
Df?bt. ~3elr.'.../i ce
Unappropriated Fund Balance
.i~j.8 It ~~()()
~~:: c,: ~ () () ()
.j ''':.' "7 ..::. :"'~
J4 / !i ....) ...:Z ::::)
::::,:l. !' :!. 6::.::
()
.- .... .. - ..
~::: ;.-:/ 'i () (-j (j
()
-_._~-_._.._._---_._._-- ----_..__.~------....._..._.- --.-....---..-.---.-.-.-...-.-- ---.-..-..-.-...
~i"Ol'AL EXF:Ej~DI'rLJF~ES
.? ./. I: ~::.; () (;
. ._.. ..00. .._. .-.
]. ./ , -.::...:.:,{:j
... ..-.
(~:,~ (), :L {::'i :::~
_' _ ._.' _... _. __ _... ...., _ __.. .._4 .._ 4'_' _'. .__ ..... __ ._. _..... ._.... ...... ..... n... _' ..... ..... .._. _._ ..... ..._ __. ..... ...._ ..._ _... _.. ___ _. .'-'
._. ...00
---_.._-~-_._..--- .-----------.------...- ---...----------..-. ------....
ADVANCED I;EF:'UNDlf~G B{JND F'UND
F~~ t::: ~:3 (J L1 r~ C: [:: E')
C .:~ t-. r -.:-/ C) \! 2 r-.
- ..... ......
]. , L~<:)() ~ ()()()
J. ~ i:~ t~ '~?' =t :';:.:.: :'::'~ .y.
..__ ..... .... 'n' ..
. :.. . 1'1.';
,,'.' .... .....:.
.:,..... u .Z...~_.. ,
I i"'j t.. €::z r" t.'::' ~:..t~
1 ::::~ () G () (:: (J
1 ~:3 :l
( :t :~~:': :::~:: ~ ~::~; 1 i.:;) )
()
i tJ i j'"1 L.... F;~ t:~ ~3 (] LJ F;~ c=: E~ ::::~
1 ;J ~~:_:.~ :::? () ;: () () ()
1. , ..~~ {j .:.:.:: ; ::"~. () :.~:.;
( J. (::: ~~':: =' ::.:.~; 1::~j ::~:.~ )
C)ll
----..---....---......-...-..-.. ..-.-------....-.-...-..--.-.--.. .....-...--.--.----...---..- --..---...---.....
---_....._.__._.._.~-- ...__._-----..._-_._-~-_. --.....-...--...----.----- --.---...--.......
EX F'Ei\iD I TUI:;:ES
Debt Service 204~OOO
Unappropriated Fund Balance 1~386~OOO
121, 70~S
o
8:;~, 2{i~.7
(::, t j
1 ~ ::::;86~ 000
(>
~---_..._----- -.-------.------ -.------------.-- --.----
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
.~.; 1, ::,i90, O(H)
..y.
:p
1 ::~ 1 , ~/" (::r ::; '$
. ... .... .... ..- .....
1 ~ f..i.6(J, :':::;'l. /
cj
------------ ------_.._---~- -..---------.----- --.--.-.-
------------ ------------ ------------ ------
[~ I "r \1': [) r:' {.":'f ~:; :..i t.. f:''':'i ~\~ I)
Sl"Al-EMEN'r' OF RE:SOl.JRC:ES 8~ EXf~ENDI-rlJRES
f:'C)f" ttlE Mf'~'1!~'ee ~tof.)tl-1S E:i")c~ed Seoteflll:)et:- ~I(_)q i~~C~(')
Fu.r-!c!
HCJF;F'T .r ("it.
... ..... . .n' ......... ....
J:3 tJ ~'...t .1.) ~... LJ (..; 1)
;::;~ E:~ s tJ LJ F:~ C; E:: ::3
Car- t- VD\/E.;r-
I ntE:I'-'es:-t
Operating TransfE:rs In
TUT AL. F;~E:~:;U!..JF:;~CE~3
E>:;F'END I TUPE:S
Dt7!b t b0?!.-- \1 i c: f.~
Un ap P j'- C1p r- i ~_i t:. ed
..~.. . .... -'
j-- unlj .i.-3al anC:E'
-'r CJ 'T' A L.. E:~ >< F::l E~ i\j I) I I" LJ r;~ t:: S
CENTRAL SERVICES FUND
I::;: E: f3U L.l F:;~ C E S
[: a roo r. -y' D \/ t.:.; j---
f~:i-! c.i.!'-"Cf (~Z:-:::. -f 01:-'
.... .
~:) E? r' \/ 1 c:: E? ::;:.
I ntE:,!.ooe~:.t
j'-..,~:!. .~::. c: E~ 1 ]. ~::\ r--i F:~r c:! !.J. ::::. F;.: (::' ......... ~~ r"t L ~ F::.t '::.:.
'T. CJ 'T' f::.":j L_ F~~ E:~ S CJ LJ t~.: (~ t:: ~;
EXPENDITURES
AdministrativE: Department
Finance Department
t-'i:i sc[;:11 E:i.nE~Ou.~,
Public Works Department
Community Development Dept
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
~[~{ Lt c~ c:~ f=:~ t~ .:'~\ ~.... '../
. . -
1 : ... .... _ .._
.r.:' .::;!. ::::..1. ~:~-
Bue! q E::,t
-$
::~~ q ~) (i (j :~:;
-~. _... ..... -. ..
L~), ~.)t)(_!
::': fj ; ~.~ () ()
{.:jC t UE!.l
..... .. -...
..::' It (:::1 1 ..... .:t,.
1. ::;:; Ii.
:~: '1 -~.7 ~?' 1
\) a rOo ii~ n c: E'
l"j! l
1 ~:j .{~
( 2::; 'I ~_;OO )
(24, "/2c/)
..- .
1"': F:: r' C: E:: r'i t.".
i :~~.~ J
___._..____.__..__._.. .._....._..__.~._____.._~__._ __.._0-----..------.---.. -___.___..
-----.------.-- -.--.--------- --.---------.--- ---..-----.
J. .~:I
....ir..;:. ...... '.
..::" __I, '..:_ / r..)
:~~, 1 .:~~~ (j
o
()
:~ ~:; l( ::::: ./. ()
..-t. .I ...;. .-.
..::' II l.'::t{)
()
()
------~-_._._--_._... --.-.-......---.-------..---- --_.__..__._...~.__._----- ..-.---..-....-.....
u
:'~':: [~ ~ ~:; () ()
\_.i
- ::? E: 'I ::.; (J (j
_. - _. _., _... _~.. _. ___ __....... _'_ _._ .00" _.. ..... _... __ _... ..._ _..' _. ...... ..._. _., _ .'- -.- -- -.... ..-. -.- ...... --. ..-. -... ....- -.. ..- .-.. ...... .....
-.--------..---.-- -------.--......----- ---------.--..--.----- --.--...-.....-..
.... ... ......
~:: 1 () ~ ()()(}
1 ~ .~.:- E:~ (:i f{ :.~~; () ()
:':~~ J:) ~ ::) () ()
.-... ......
". !:i i: i
. ... ......
-.. .. ., .. -
:? :':5 () :t ~:; ~~~ ::::~
it ":.1- 1 ~ .~7 () (;)
. .. 00.. ._
. ......
{::' r:' ;...-' .:::: ::+
." !::;. -::. .:i ...
t. . i. 't:'+ :
11-0 r. 52:::;
( 1 , ::::~ :~:::: Ej;, .~/ (7~ 1 )
... .; ":1' ;....(..-.........
\ .l"_:~' ':"lie)}
( :.:!: .. ~:::; :.::~ ii. )
. -. ., .-. -. ..
-:;' ';
( lf3)
___..__._...._....._.................__ __.._...._.._._....M..._..._.._................ _.._._-....__.._.-__.._......._..-.__ ,-,,--,,'~'-'-'--'"
..~1-':'-)
:~: q () :L ~:~: ~ . ~~:.~ () ()
. .... ..... -....-....
.. ; :: ... s ~ J
C) '::' .... u l .I:: .:::
( 1 , ~:~ 1 ~):4 .~.:.~.. ':.7 E1 )
----..---...--.......--.-.. -.--.-.---.--.-.--.-...-.--.--. ..--..-----.-...----..---. ---...--.-........
-------------.---.. ---_.._.-.__._._.--~-- ---.--.------.-.--- ----..---...-.
::::;76~ 050
81:::::, :::;'00
2 ~:: :~~ q ~:';~ ~:::.! ()
397,600
1 93, :::;'00
97,872
209,801
l :~:~ ::'~:; ~5 :~: (:>
89, 0:3::::;
40,582
Z78~ 178
60:3, 499
100 'I 7~.::.O
308,567
152,718
....'s ..-
"::'0
26
1:::."7
2L'~
21
~; 2, (> i ::::; , ~=:.;(>O ~t~
-------..---- ---..------------- ------------ --.-----
.::.. z"._;
5tJa~i I( 8(:)ti
-t'
1, 44~':::, 692
- _' __ __._ - - ._ '__ u_. _ .._, .._ __ -- _. --.- -- -- -. - '"'' -. ._- - --.- -. -. -- -' '- -.- --. ...- _.. -- -- .- -...
----------- -.---.-------- ------------- ------.-
C I T\/ DF (..:i:::3HL..r:i!....~D
STATEMENT OF RESOURCES & EXPENDITURES
F:~C)I:" tt1e '-!'-j"lr"ee Mor.)tj")~~~ E~r'~(jeci Septefnber ~;(.)~ l~\i(_)
.[{ Li. (j (J f:~' t~ .:':;t. !.... -':./' .t:5 ,:'~!. .~::.]. s.
F.ur-lei
I i",~ E:; Lj r:~ ('":'i r...~ C~: E:: ~:3 E~:~ F~.~ \:} T L~: E:~ ~:::) r:' LJ I\~ I)
.... ...._ .._ ..... . .... ._. ..... n"
h~ I::. ~j LJ U I.': L.: I:::. ;j
Cal.... t... \/D\/er"
Chai:~ges +01:- ~er'Vlces
I ntpt-.e~~.t.
}\"1 i ~:. c E~ 1 J.. ct 1'-1 t? C] Lt ==:. F;~ f2 \/ e ;-.J 1...1. t:7:::.
.TOTt:.:L F;:E~30Uf~:CE:3
BL\dqet
{ictual
J.../ c:\ r" i a fOOl c: f-?:
40'1 '-:://+0
( ::'~ 8, (:. ~ ~:; 1 :.:~ )
. .-.. ..... ..-. ..... . .
<. /U~. /:':.6)
. ...., .. ..... - .
;; :::10, OUU)
. ._.. . .... . .._ u.. .
(. ..~l (:) ;:=~ , cJ:Z::: t3 .>
F> f:~: !... c:: :::.':: r'i t~
J f..)..:+
:'~"~'~;)
d::: J.
()
~.. -_. -.....-.... --..- -- ....- -- -- -- ........- ..-.. ..... - .-....- .-. -- -- -- -.- --. -. ...... -- ...- .-.. ......- -- -.. ..... -.- ..... -.. -... .-- ..... --
_._-------~--_.- -------------- -.--.---.---------...-- '---'-'---'--
""...1
... \-'
EXPE-::!\JD I TUi::;:ES
Personnel Services
~lateF'ials 811d Ser-vi(:es
Con t :i. r.! (;1 pr"! c::...,...
Unappropriated Fund Balance
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
EUU I Fl"'.jENT. F.Ui\jD
i:~.~ E:~ F3 (J LJ F< (~:: E'~ E;
c:: .::~ ~.-. (' ..../ () \./ I::';: r"
.... ..
L..: (i .::'~. j"- ~~i E.:( '::.~ .).. C) ~.".
~::::~ r:=l f" ....i -j r" !-::.l .::::.
._ __. ,.h"" _u ....
Int. E? r.. e .::::..t.
11is<:ellalle<:J'lS F:~eveflL~es
Operating Transfers In
TO.TAL RESOURCE;::;
EXPENDITURES
Personnel Services
MatE:rials and Services
Capital Outla.'i
Contingency
UnapprDpriated Fund Balance
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
1 :; 1 ~.i(}, ()()()
~~~: '~;) ::.; If 1:=) () ()
1. ~l :I. <-:;'0, C}40 :p
1 1. 4. =' 1 f3;::~
:21 , ::~4:44
iOO,OOO
~:.; () II () I:) (j
1 q z~) c/ =:.i" (; () ()
1i, ::;26, :::::72
:i. :~:; ~ 000
::, "l2l:l.
:=:;::::~, /:::.' .~/ ~3
Ci
Ii. ':7 () If () () (1
::iO() ~ 000
.:.:..... 1 ~z~~ :; (::. (j ()
..- -... -.., .
], t) , ~J./ t}
Lj. :!. t"J, ::~: :~': ::~
.-.. ."... ......
::.IUU q UUU
.7J.2,000
:l C)
1. .l
()
U
i Ii CJ(?~; q ()i:)()
~S6, 102
__.__0.._.._._._______._ ______._______.___._._ .______....M._____._____.._ --..---.-.......-
....:'
1 II 6:~j:::{.. E:S::;:'8
---.------------.. .-....---.-----"...-..-...-- -..---------.----.-.-.- -...--.--...---.
---------.----- ----------------- --------------.. -------.-
~:~ l::t () ~ () () (.';
.....Ii:::......! t-'";"'::r::'
..,.. J ... .. ..f f . I
. .... -...., . . ....
...7....1 ..'J ih'l i:::. ......
.' .' ....:. .-". 'I I
.. .Z._ : .:; '\_...._.. ....
1. [:5 ::} ~ :~; 4 ::~:
1 9~! 14b
..00.. ......
c5() , (){)()
,., _....
'j i'i f i i j.. '1
". .0. 'I .... ... .-.
177 q (lO()
i~.5
:1.07,520
n.' ..00 ... ..... .....
t ,.: ::: :...
.-.. ..... .
.. ...
.. .1...:; .. .. 'hO.'
. .....-........ ....... ......
.. .. .....
~.. ~.") "~; ::) ~ :~:.1 t.) ./ ..:
. ... .._ ..... h_ .
( ~~) ()!! ;:::) ::....: ~I::: }
( C) z: 1::;' ~:5~; )
( It.\ {:;I , 4 E:~ () )
.;. 1. .l.
()
C) J.
-.--..--.----.-.-.-.-- -.-----..------.-.-.. ..---------..------- .---.-..-.-.--
I :....:
(J .:::
1, 8~i:t, B~iO
i , 269, ():31
----.-------- ------------ ------------ -------
----------- ------------ ------------ -------
SiB, 000
:3: ::2 4. II a:7 ~i ()
::~ .;, , ():2~ Sz
\~ 1 11 ~l~;C?
~;i 7 ...000
~; 1. , .? ~.:~.i 0
1 t-:,8, ~525
t~i (~:\ (), ::::: ~.:.i ()
( ~if:3~?, E: i f7; )
7 I::) II C? 7 1
~~ ::~: :~: u () 1 1
:::;;4B'1 4 ~?5
;5:l , 7;:::.iO
8t-,,(j, ~~~5!:)
.1::.'::)
'..).-:'
()
tj
--....-..-...--.-.---........--..... -...-...-...-.....----.-.------ .--..-----..-.-..-..-.-.---....-.. ..-..--....-..-.-.--.
.t (:)
287~293 $ 1~564~55'7
:1. !l e~:51 , d;::.iO
C I T\( OF {~SI"'IL.l:~i\iD
STATEMENT OF RESOURCES & EXPENDITURES
F:'OJr' t~le -t'-t')i~ee ~1(~rlt~..)S ErldedSe~J.ten)t:)eF- :~;(:)G 19()(:)
E~{ tJ ci i;.:J E~ t~ ,:'~i, f.... .~./ 1-3 E:i. :::. ]. ~.
Fund Budget Actual VariancE: Percent
[~[:ME~~:'-rE~~F~Y "f'F~L.j~;-J" F::'lj~.\jI:)
REsuur;-:CL:~S
Car. r- -y'C)Vel---
4:x}
~:;\:.t:.5 q 000
11,000
5~.5 'I ()<)()
~:j i=) ()
~,~
~.:.! G? ~::': , :~:; ~~~ :~:~
:p
( ::;': , (~...z :::') .~? )
'i () ( )
Char-qi:3!S 0 + C)lo-
.-. .
~:) t-:-? ,:- \/ 1 (~~ E,i ~::.
l , ~l~;ll
1 i), :'~: J::) E::
!.500
. .... - -. . .
( z_:/., ::::: Li. {::' )
16
In t f..0r- e:.~ t.
(ij04u ]c/2)
11.).1
Operating Transfers In
(1
100
TDTf:lL RESUi...Ji::':Cr~s
661,500
604 q -/(:i5
( ~:i ti!f :? (j~; )
('-1 '1
7.l
-----.-----.--- ----,..--..-----...--------. -...-...---.--.-.--------.-.. .---.-.--.-
------------ --.--------..-.---.-- --------.----.---- ..---.-----.-..,
EXF'Ei-\!DI TURES
Operating Transfers Out
Ur)appj~opriated Fl.~ncj Balarlce
5~:;, 000
1 () ~ :? () i::::
i:} 1."", '~7 I~;) :~2
'::'i()f:::.." ~5C)()
1 z:.~::
, ." '~".""
6(){") q ::-)(}()
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
(Jl~ 1 , ~.:5()()
1 () ~ :~:: (j ~::i ~~
(:)!j 1 , 292
...)
.,:..
__._______.______. ____.___..,________._.__._ __..____.._.______..___ _____M._..._..
----------.--. ----.------..-.---- --_._.._-----~.._._-~- -.--.---.-
c:: I -r Y 0 F. r; ~:::; j..-j L p! i""-i I)
t=: f:'::j ~:; t...} ?'i I\j [) J }\! \/ E:~ ~:.~ 'To !....j E~ j\! "r ~3
~::::~ E::~ r::: .1- E:~ 1....1 I::; E:: r:;~ ~:: () ~ ]. C.r: :::.;.:: ()
j::; j~.i U U h~ T
PEFCENT
__..._.M.._U.._..__.__._.._............___.........'............-....-,..........-.....-."-...-.-......-.-'...-......---..-..-.-...-..-. -.,.-.....---.....--...--.-..-.....--.----...
........-.-........-.--.....-..----.
C (.; ~::) 1".1 C) j\i j...j (:.~ r) D b -)' H " () () i.) u i...!
CHECKING ACCOUN.rS
First Interstate Bank-Combined
u.s. National Bank-Combined
.-:;' -:"1::' -{ t=:;' r~';
....:z~; ,_:Z ......' J. II __! CJ
( :~~~ 1 ::~~ :t f3 ~~: l:..\ s: :"2 f:3 )
() ;t ~)
C:~;. 1)
s:.ubto-l.:-.C1.1
(:S10, 4B-4. .70)
C:::; . 0 )
LOCAL GOVERNMENT INVESTMENT POOL
l:; , 2 ~:~ ~~:; () .iI.I.:) u ~7 (~i
61" 0
U~3 {'-jCt!:::NC I ES
hE!,,} COF:P
~~ , ~~:: 1 ~7 , i~) 1 Ie ~:5 ()
:f~:~L n 6
TIME CERTIFICATES OF DEPOSIT
Klamath First FE:deral
:t C;() Ii ()()() n ()(i
1. . <)
BANKERS ACCEPTANCE
First In.ter-state ~afl~(
() ;; C)()
() II i)
lJl,ite(j Stat~s Barl~~
J. ~ 1 .:.:.:.. ~.:.;, i::: :';;:~ f:/
11~~;~t
::::. t..!. t:} t:. C:) t.. ~:.:\ ],
1 ~ 1 .:~:.:.. ~~.~; ~ (:':;:2 (:;) :z () ::~~
J. 1 u :.:!
I l\!.f j-:;: {~ C I -r \/ I (-.-j \/ E t; -r !vj E 1"'~ ..~.. ~:::)
bE' n f?I'.. ~:\ ].
--. ..' .'
'_.1 t:) J. 1 <;t ~.::'f. t: ]. Cj rOo;
i..z.j ;:~ !.-' r-' ...:..~ fhi 1'. <:::.
. . -.., . _.... -. ....
.. ... ...... ....
l+ J. () , ()(){J II ()()
:~~; 1 1. , 6 ~7 l~~ II () (i
4uO
::~~ n (::.
General ()bl~igatiorl BOf1ds
subtotcl_l
721,67'4.00
7.0
TOTAL CASH AND INVESTMENTS
$ 10~ 256,874. ::.i9
100.00
---.---------.---- ---------.-
--------------- ----------
. C I r..{ UF A~:;i.R..{.~r..n)
CASH AND INVESTMENTS BY FUND
~3[~:f~-~"E~MB~~~:I~ 3()q 199C)
GenE.:'r" al . Fur-.,d
_.. ,.. ,_n _ .
j.... C) J. ]. c: ~'2 ~j t::'~ r" 1 - c\ .L
j..n. . ,... _.!
roO C.!.I j Li
j i:................,:..
f:~iF.e E~I-r Sel:-ial L.~VY ~::ul-ld
Cemeter..y F.u.nd
Bar-.ld Fund
Emergency 911 Fund
St.t".E.~et F!...l.nd
Water Quality Fund
Sewer" Fund
Ai t-POI'-t Fund
El ectr- i c Fund
Capital Improvements Fund
AssessmE:nt Construction Fund
Hospital Construction Fund
Bancroft Bonding Redemption Fund
GeneralObliqation Bond Fund
GE:neral Debt Service Fund
Advanced Refunding Bond Fu.nd
Hospital Bond Fund
Central SE:rvices Fund
Insurance Services ~und
E:qui pmer.,t Fund
Lemetery irust Fund
SLtt. t eft:..:::~ 1
Hospital
Parks and Recreation
TOTAL CASH AND INVESTMENTS
{..1j....1DLJ!\j.r
~~: l .~-;., ~{ :.=.:; ';.=: (; It ../. \)
'... ..
. -'... ..
./ :j .::.+ .L (~:~ t: {:J .....
() r: ()(i
..: .. ..... .'Z .l.1
{:JO, c:>.':;..i+ 1t'J. .l
1 :2~ , 4Ej() It t~~~::
2(i If t:551 J: 72
1 i 2 , ::'~t)l:- tI :::t~f
i+(:.,3 ~ ::i~)2" (=)~j
484, {}82~ 12
11 , 85::::;" 27
85~?.. 3:l8n'6(:r'
1 , 646, :=529. :::;; 1
47, ./~':;;4. 47
-.::. ... .-::. -';'-:Z'., .-;.....
._)C)...'::, / ,_:S.'::'" .I (":)
188,1.04..48
2444 Ii C)i+~5 n ~71"
1 II t1:: ::.; u 3 (:1
(110,758.61)
:::::, 'i1 ':7 i:) II ~?::::;
2 J::)~? II 4. ~:~: 8 II ~; 6
. ..- .-... . _... ..... .-. ..-
1 , ~:: '-l CJ; (J,.~:I f.j" t.{ ".:./
1 , i ::~;~~ ~ f3S) 1 z: '/':~~
~:.:.; C? ..q. ~ :.:.:.~! E~ '~.:7 u () J
~? , (:;} '7' ~;T , ~':': \~J .:.:.:: c 1 fJ
2,0.48, 6i;).4,. 16
2~~:(=j, .94::5. 25
$ 10,256,874.59
PEr;.:CEhl.r
'4..1:; ..!.
t.) u .i.
() n ()
(ill 6
0.. 1
0..2
:I. .. 1
if" 6
i~.. j"
(;.. 1
B.4
16. 1
0" ~i
-:S' C::'
.-=c u '_'
1.8
2..4
0,,0
(1.1)
0,,0
2.0
1 :~':': :: tJ
11 . 1
:::.) u t::t
./ ,/ ,. (:;5
~:::O" u
rj '7'
Lit ...:'
_._____4_______..__.____ -...---~~---
----~-------------_.- -----.-----
100,,0
~emorandum
November 1, 1990
<(H 0:
Mayor & City Council
Jff rom:
Planning commission
Jiubjttt: Vacation of a Portion of Hillview Drive
The Planning commission at its meeting on October 9, 1990
considered the application for the vacation of a portion of
Hillview Drive, South of Crestview Drive.
It was the unanimous opinion of the Planning Commission-that the
vacation be approved, subject to reserving a 20-foot easement for
future public utilities and pedestrian access purposes.
~emnrandum
october 11, 1990
~o: Brian Almquist, City Administrator
JIf rom: Steven -Hall, Public Works Director
~ubjed:
Public Hearing
vacation of-Hillview Drive
ACTION REQUESTED
City Council conduct public hearing on-vacation of. Hillview Drive
located South of Crestview Drive adjacent to Lot 5, Block 3 of
the Norwood Subdivision.
City Council adopt ordinance including easements for utilities
and pathways.
Staff is including two ordinances for Council consideration. One
includes a 20 foot wide public easement and the second does not
include any public easements.
BACKGROUND
The City has received a petition and request from Mr. Jimmie L.
Hald to vacate the portion of dedicated right-of-way for Hillview
Drive 'adjacent to his property.
City Council set a public hearing date for November 6, 1990 and
the notices for the hearing have been made in accordance with the
Oregon Revised Statutes Section 271.
Upon review of the proposal, two requests were made by City
staff. I requested that an easement be maintained for City
utilities and John Fregonese requested a 20 foot wide easement be
retained for future pathways. Copies of each request are
included for ,your reference.
Mr. Hald and Ms. Freeman sent a letter with objections to the
staff proposal for a pedestrian easement. A copy is attached.
Vacation of Hillview Drive
October 12,_ 1990
Page Two
The land was dedicated to the City as a public right-of-way at no
cost as a part of the subdivision.
Councilor Arnold has requested approximate values of the land for
City Council's reference. The assessed value of land based on
County Assessor values for the Hald lot is about $2.75 per square
foot. The area of the requested vacation is approximately 3000
square feet which would equate to a value of $8,250.
cc: Mr. Jimmie L. Hald, Applicant
Jim Olson, Assistant City Engineer
John Fregonese, Planning Director
encl: Ordinance with easement
Ordinance without easement
Olson memo
Map
Petition Summary
Petitions (2)
Hald/Freeman letter
Fregonese memo
Hall comments
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE VACATINGHILLVIEW STREET FROM CRESTVIEW DRIVE
ADJACENT TO 1800 CRESTVIEW DRIVE AND RESERVING AN EASEMENT
IN FAVOR OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND.
WHEREAS, Notice of the Public Hearing on the proposed vacation of
Hillview Street has been given in accord with the provisions of
Chapter 271 of the Oregon Revised Statutes.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PE~PLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. It is determined that the public interest will be
best served by the vacation of the portion of Hillview street
located in the City of Ashland, Jackson County, Oregon, more
particularly described as follows:
A 23.5 foot wide portion of Hillview Drive adjacent and
contiguous to the westerly boundary of lot 5; block 3 _of the
Norwood SUbdivision, city of Ashland, Jackson County,
Oregon, lying south of Crestview Drive and terminating at
the southerly boundary of. said Norwood Subdivision.
The City of_Ashland reserves- an easement 20 feet wide
adjacent to and contiguous to the easterly boundary of the
vacated portion of Hillview Street for future installation
of utilities and/or a pedestrian facility. Said easement is
to be perpetual in nature.
SECTION 2. For the foregoing reasons the street located on the
land described above is hereby vacated.
The foregoing ordinance was first read on the 16th day of
October, 1990 and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this 6th day of
November, 1990.
SIGNED and APPROVED this
day of November, 1990.
Catherine M. Golden, Mayor
Nan E. Franklin, City Recorder
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE VACATING HILLVIEW STREET FROM CRESTVIEW DRIVE
ADJACENT TO 1800 CRESTVIEW DRIVE.
WHEREAS, Notice of the Public Hearing on the proposed-vacation of
Hillview street has been given in accord with the provisions of
Chapter 271 of the Oregon Revised statutes,
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. It. is determined that the public interest will- be
best served by the vacation of the portion of Hillview Street
located in the City of Ashland, Jackson County, Oregon, more
particularly described as follows:
A 23.5 foot wide portion of Hillview Drive adjacent and
contiguous -to the westerly boundary of lot 5, block 3 of the
Norwood SUbdivision, City of Ashland, Jackson County,
Oregon, lying south of Crestview Drive and terminating at
the southerly boundary of said Norwood Subdivision.
SECTION 2. For the foregoing reasons the street located on the
land described apove is hereby vacated.
The foregoing ordinance was first read on the 16th day of
October, 1990 and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this 6th day of
November, 1990.
SIGNED and APPROVED this
day of November, 1990.
Catherine M. Golden, Mayor
Nan E. Franklin, City Recorder
~emnrandum
October 1, 1990
~n: Steve Hall, John Fregonese, John McLaughlin
~ro~: Jim Olson, Asst. City Engineer
~ubjed:
Vacation of Hillview Drive
It has been suggested that a 15.00 wide easement for public
utilities and for pedestrian access be reserved along the
westerly 15.00 of the section o~ Hillview Drive to be vacated.
The description used for the vacation ordinance should be as
follows:
A 23.5 foot wide portion of Hillview Drive adjacent and
contiguous to the westerly boundary of lot 5, block 3
of the Norwood Subdivision, City of Ashland, Jackson
County, Oregon, lying south of Crestview Drive and
terminating at the southerly boundary of said Norwood
Subdivision.
Reserving therefrom an easement for pedestrian access and for the
installation and maintenance of public utilities over the
westerly 15.00 feet of the hereinabove described tract.
Mr. Jimmie Hald, the originator of the vacation petition, is very
opposed to the creation of this easement, and will surely voice
his opposition at the November 6th public hearing.
No other comments have been received concerning the proposed
vacation.
cc: John Fregonese
John McLaughlin
)I"
\JQ
o
t
~
I
~
Q
--- --- ~ , ,.. .... - - -
"
/
~'l '~_~
...::::::-
.)
LZ:
----
~
---
----
AREA OF PROPOSED VACATION
SCALE 1" = 100.
PETITION FOR VACATION OF A PORTION OF HILLVIEW DRIVE
Portion Within
Map No. Tax Lot # Petition Signature Affected Area
5D 1400 no 0.29 AC
" 1417 yes 1.43 AC
" 1414 yes 0.24 AC
" 1413 yes 0.27 AC
1411 yes 0.24 AC
" 1412 yes 0.27 AC
1407 yes 0.21 AC
1408 no 0.18 AC
" 1405 no 0.18 AC
" 1406 _ no 0.21 AC
" 1402 no 0.15 AC
" 1401 no 0.19 AC
15 DD 600 no 0.13 AC
502 yes 1.33 AC
15 DA 4500 no 0.028 AC
15 DA 4700 no 0033 AC '
" 4600 yes 0.46 AC
it 3901 yes 0.27 AC
if 3902 yes . 0.19 AC
" 3904 yes 0.21 AC
" 4000 yes 0.17 AC
" 4800 yes 0.22 AC
" 6300 no 0.14 AC
" 4900 no 0.22 AC
" 6200 yes 0.14 AC
" 5000 no 0.070 AC
6100 no 0.045 AC
TOTAL 5.65 AC. 7.813 AC
. ..
Date filed:
PETITION
We the undersigned property owners-residing on or near
J ~ 0 0 (. t-c..sf-v u. uJ Of-;
AUG 2 8 199Q
do hereby petition the City
Council to initiate proceedings to v~cate the above mentioned public
right-of-way, being further described as follows:
A 23.5 foot wide portion of Hillview Drive adjacent and
contiguous to the westerly boundary of lot 5, block 3 of the
Norwood Subdivision, City of Ashland, Jackson County, Oregon,
lying south of crestview Drive and terminating at the southerly
boundary of said Norwood Subdivision.
We do furthe_r warrant that the signatures below repres.ent 100% I
{Of the properties abutting the proposed vacation, and at least 66 2/3% of
( the affected area which lies within 200 feet on either side and 400 feet from
the ends of the public right-of-way proposed for vacation.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
.0.
State of Oregon
I, .\'')..,m7~
Huld
,being one of the principal pro-
TAX LOT NO.
/4 / 7
6D?-
:3Qo I
'3~dl
J/6(~
..J-~ J~IJ'7
~-/40'1
3~~1-
~f'o/
~'"'()
\
ponents of the proposed vacation do hereby subscribe and swear that the above
owning property abutting or
signatures were taken in my presence and a~e the signatures of the persons
vacation.
; '- -'- ',-.' q (,' C:C.'t.1 I
,. 4:,.) ,.. -" I.v .,. .
~~~;:".,:~j;~:~~'i:~~~:J
0-Z7 - ~(}
\
~ - ,,'"
Date filed:
AUG 28 ~')O
PETITION
We the undersigned property owners residing on or near
1800 Crestview Drive
do hereby petition the City
Council to initiate proceedings to vacate the above mentioned public
right-of-way, being further described as follows:
A 23.5 foot wide portion of Hillview Drive adjacent and
contiguous to the westerly boundary of lot 5, block 3 of the
Norwood Subdivision, City of Ashland, Jackson County, Oregon,
lying south of Crestview Drive and terminating at the southerly
boundary of said Norwood Subdivision.
We do further warrant that the signatures below-represent 100%
of the properties abutting the proposed vacation, and at least 66 2/3% of
the affected area which lies within 200 feet on either side and 400 feet from
the ends of the public right-of-way proposed for vacation.
NAf-1E
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
.0.
ADDRESS
II fe, 1.( J/ lL~ /i!fv ,
L!.;:::s- "f'.a~///.//"-! / / bA
j;~~ !:;;;:;1:/~/C
1777 ~~h) &A--'
~~i6~Z;f:;()o
TAX LOT NO.
L( 8 6-rJ
71I'J a ,/)
~ (f..fTr)
/~/G ~/<//I
/' n
14/?\
/" t/ /~
County of Jackson)
)
State of Oregon )
I, -.J ,-n-, W1'It' ;../ u / J
,being ~ne of the principal pro-
ponents of the proposed vacation do hereby subscribe and swear that the above
signatures were taken in my presence and are the signatures of the persons
owning proper~y abutting or within the
.~/kJ~
Notary P
Hy Conuni
expires q--zz- ~
1800 Crestview Drive
Ashland, Oregon 97520
October 9, 1990
City Administrator
20 East Main
Ashland, Oregon 97520
fCt. '. p~/ J..J-1Lr-. ~
fJ(}(j. ~,(770
Dear Mr. Almquist,_
We are asking for the vacation of 26.60 feet of property
between 1780 and 1800 Crestview Drive. After going through the
proper channels and paperwork, we find that the city is considering
giving us only 11 feet and keeping the rest for a possible public
path connecting Crestview Drive with the TID or Ditch path behind
and above us.
We are vehemently opposed to the idea. To make a public path
between two properties in a residential area seriously diminishes
the value ~nd beauty of the property.
There are several reasons why a public path in this location
isn't a practical idea. In the first place, there is a vertical
bank approxiamately 6 feet high directly off the street, which would
require stairs or grading. - The property itself is very steep. Making
the path safe and attractive would be expensive for the city.
Neighborhood access is provided by Park Street, two blocks over,
which is maintained by the city during the winter. Our hill gets
little or rtowinter sun, so the path would be virtually useless, even
dangerous, in the winter.
We are backed already by a path widely used by the public.
To have another public path running along the side of our property
(right outside our front door) seems asking too much of any homeowner.
We landscaped our property as well as the requested footage, having
understood at the time we purchased our property that the latter
would never be used by the city because it is so steep. The
landscaping is interwoven; putting in the path would mean moving
trees and our irrigation system and require us to re-Iandscape for
the sake of our privacy. The landscaping is beautiful and will
be much more so as the trees grow~ so that a path would definit~ly
mar the scenic beauty. Motorists currently using Hillview on the
way up to Crestview have a lovely view ahead of them.
The City Council considers the issue on November 6. Before
any decision to keep the property for a possible public path, we
think an onsite visit should be made. We think our objections will
be obvious.
Again, we feel very strongly about the imposition of two
public pathways on the borders of our property.
I
We havent really
minded the path above us, although it is heavily used and voices
carry. We are absolutely opposed, however, to having to deal with
people walking right outside our front door as well.
Thank you very much for your attention to this matter.
Sin~e;;:; ';j. ~~
~?,;r;1;1Ub~
~?l1.1y L. Freeman
Uimmie L. Hald
(503-482-1779)
cc: John Fregonese, Planning Dept.
Jim Olson, Engineering Dept.
<(fio:
J1f rom:
~uhjtd:
~emnrandum
september 21, 1990
James Olson
.----......
. John Fregonese Ql!)
Proposed vacation of Hillview
I believe that there is still some public interest
in the Hillview right of way. The right of way may
be useful in the future as pedestrian access to a
trail on or parallel to-the T.l.D. ditch.
Currently, this is heavily used by neighbors as a
recreational trail, and this section of the T.I.D.
is included in the City's Open Space Plan as a
trail. It would provide access to the open space
areas to the south as well, such as the Superior
Lumber property and the Todd Ordsen woods. While it
is fairly steep, a stairway access may be
desireable. I would recommend that we retain a
pedestrian easement of at least 20 feet in width so
as to facilitate construction of a stairway~ if
deemed desireable in the future. I am enclosing the
adppted plan map showing the proposed trail on or
near the T.I.D. ditch.
2BR t m n r a n,d u m
September 11990 .
--~
:2J
'-7 J \ \"v'\. U .
~o: Brian Almquist, Steve Hall, Dennis Barnts, Jerry Glossop, John
Fregonese, John McLaughlin, Al Williams, Lee Roy King, Vic Lively
Jlfrom: James H. Olson, Asst. City'\-tfz)
& h+ f Proposed Vacation of an ~nopened Section of Hillview Drive
~u Jet:
A petition has recently been presented by Mr. Jimmie Hald, 1800
crestview Drive for the vacation of an unopened section of Hillview
Drive lying south of Crestview Drive. The street was dedicated as a
half width street on the plat of the Norwood Subdivision in 1961.
Kensington Subdivision, dedicated in 1965 and located adjacent and
westerly of the Norwood Subdivision did not provide any additional
right of way for that section of Hillview Drive and, in fact, set that
area apart as a private drive which was later acquired by Leslie and
Peggy George. The street right of way is extremely steep (25%+) and
would require a very deep cut at Crestview Drive for use as a street.
The right of way is less than 200 feet long and terminates at the
T.I.D. irrigation canal.
Can you foresee any reason why the City might oppose this proposed
vacation? Will it be necessary to retain any easements for utilities,
etc., if the right of way were to be vacated?
PETITION SUMMARY
A petition was received on August 28, 1990, containing 21 signatures
and representing 14 lots, requesting vacation of a portion of Hillview
Drive.
As required by ORS Section 271.080, 100% of those abutting the right
of way to vacate have signed the petition. The "affected area",
defined as that area being 200 feet from each side line and 400 feet
beyond each end of the proposed vacation, contains 7.813 acres. The
area represented on the petition totals 5.65 acres or 72.3% of the
total which is well over the 2/3 majority required by state statutes.
All petition requirements have been met including the filing of a
$250.00 filing fee.
o L~.h) A&;~~ 01\C--4 ~\::;E::'<"'<\.s ~ be- -O\J~l~ u-{~..'3AN
G ~\..\J't1'+- lSC\jN-~~ ~ "'t ,
(') $~,-~ Q~\-N ~"I8).:L '-.l\'.....'\'~ :-P(,<:~\'3\..G
A- ~<':'-J\'<\V'\'G N 0 F TJ::"::::> ~ ,\C-ti 8',\ C q''t, \ N ~. AJf'-;'~
~ ' --. .~ \ ~- (:r-;--;/,_"" '\
. c~ \:~ <~.:> . Lt. N\2S IN ~.'t '-' . , ~'kJ,)
~ ~.
.---/ lk'.....\..i~
~J ' N\ -- u.jWv~ '~)~i \~~'\.,;") N'.~ \.\)\..;-~ F\ ~ Qt: ,\.r(Y\~~"'\J..)~t'-'Ut'\.J .
/J
J-~.J
October 31, 1990
MEMORANDUM
'TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Ronald L. Salter, City Attorney
SUBJECT: Thoughts on LUBA Remands
& the Scope of the Mahar Hearing
Ladies and Gentlemen:
The number of remands from LUBA indicates that it may be
appropriate to discuss the theoretical aspect of planning and the
LUBA process. \
,-
The process starts wi th the Law. A part_icular land ili:;)e
\ -
action will require compliance wi th certain provisions of the
zoning ordinance and perhaps provisions of the -Comprehensive Plan
and other documents as well. These laws indicate the type of
evidence that must be established in a hearing before the
Planning Commission, and on appeal before the Council. The
hearing's body then is to apply the facts to. the law and then
"find" certain conclusions which will in turn indicate the
decisions to be rendered. The applicant and his planners and/or
attorneys are responsible for determining the laws to be
satisfied and thus, the evidence to be brought forth. The staff
is not in an advocate's position and should merely be advisory to
the hearing's body with respect to facts known to it and relevant
provisions of law. The staff should not take sides to ei ther
support or oppose the land use action.
At the end of the process, if the application is approved,
generally, the findings prepared by the applicant are presented
to the hearing's body and they mayor may not be modified.
If the problem was merely with the findings, then when the
cases were remanded from LUBA, the findings could be re-written
based upon the evidence at the original hearing. However, I do
not recall any case where that has been done with-a LUBA remand.
Mayor and City Council
October 31, 1990
Page 2
All of the cases have gone to further public hearings to obtain
the necessary evidence so that the appropriate findings can be
written. All of this indicates that the applicants have not
determined the appropriate law and thus, had not put in the
necessary evidence to support the necessary findings.
Why haven't the applicants done this? It is submitted that
LUBA's requirements are not at all readily available. The rules
that LUBA goes by_and have been created by it's opinions cannot
easily be found. LUBA's opinions have not been published for the
last few years and so if you want a particular opinion, you need
to call LUBA and ask for them to send you a copy.- However, that
does not solve the problem of how to know what opinion to seek.
Legal research starts with a legal encyclopedia, a legal digest,
a legal treatise or some other general reference work which is
based upon the published opinions of the Courts or LUBA and that
work then leads the reader to the appropriate LUBA opinion.
There is only one work for LUBA' s opinion which is the work
published by John DuBay. It is- a fine work, however, there are
two problems. The audience for such a work is
so small that this small book was priced at $225.00 a volume.
That price made the buying public even smaller in scope and that
resulted in it being uneconomical for it to be kept up to date.
It is not kept up to date and thus, about the only ones who
really know the breadth of LUBA opinions at this point, are the
LUBA referees.
Thus, when a case goes to LUBA, LUBA frequently decides a
case on rules not argued by ei ther side. It knows it's rules,
applies them arid then remands the case to the city. Then, the
requirements are known, a new public hearing held and that
results in the required findings being made and the decision of
the Council upheld.
Mayor and City Council
October 31, 1990
Page 3
An illustration of this is the recent land use action with
respect to Shakespeare wherein the findings were some fifty pages
in length. They were prepared by and under the supervision of
two attorneys and one private land use planner, to say nothing of
the comments of the Ci ty I Planning Staff as well. The findings
were extremely comprehensive and were an obvious attempt to
anticipate LUBA. We shall see whether they were' successful.
That is, I believe, an illustration of the fact that this problem
cannot be solved merely by someone trying a little harder.
The practical conclusion appears to be that Planning with
controversial matters is a two step process. The ,process must be
gone through the first time in order to find out exactly what
LUBA will require.
However, for this two step process to work, it would be
necessary for the Council to limi t the scope of hearings on
remand to the issues which are the subject of the remand. If
hearings on remand are opened to other issues, then this process
may be virtually never ending. Accordingly, it is recommended
that the scope of remand be limited by ordinance.
Respectfully submitted,
~~ ~~,-,.
f~; " --...
,;/~
l~ ' .
RONALD L. SALTER
City Attorney
RLs/as
cc: Brian Almquist
John Fregonese
XII 0:
Jtf rom:
~.ubjett:
~tmnrandum
October 25, 1990
Mayor and Council
~
Planning Director ~
Schools and the Public Facilities Question
As you have asked to receive written comments
regarding the scope of the Mahar hearing, I felt
that I could write to yo~ as well, and address a
critical issue that I feel is certain to arise.
I have had several conversations with John' Dagget,
superintendent of Ashland Schools. He has informed
me that he expects the Ashland School Board to
inform the council that the school system is over
capacity, that is, they cannot accommodate
adequately the existing student population. This
will obviously be raised in the Hersey street
project, and I expect that you will be told by the
School District that they cannot accommodate the
additional children that are expected to live in the
apartments.
This raises some interesting questions. First, you
should read the section of schools in Chapter XI of
the Comprehensive plan. Interestingly, this was
predicted in the plan many years ago. I am
attaching some graphs and tables that chart the
city's population and the School district's
enrollment. The city's policies on this are
contained in this section, and may be used to guide
your decision.
You will probably be asked to deny this project due
to inadequate capacity in the school system. This
denial would be due to an inadequate capacity of a
city wide facility. Furthermore, the correction of
the problem is out of the Council's hands.
At this year's Planning Institute in Eugene, the
issue of school capacity was discussed by the
professionals in the field, including LUBA referees.
While there was no unanimous consensus on the issue,
it seems that many, including at least one LUBA
referee, feel that denial of a planning action for
housing with a finding of inadequate capacity of a
Tn
increased by about 1,000 units in 10 years, and by
about 1,200 to 1,500 persons in that time (the jury
is still out on our official Census count). The
rate of growth in the 1980's has been the slowest
since the Great Depression.
This amounts to 100 units per year on average, 65
single family homes and 35 apartment units" and
about 150 people. This is well below our Comp Plan
projections and somewhat below our new projections.
While 1988 and 1989 were hectic times, 1990 is
turning out to be much slower. We are currently
operating at about the level of 1987 or 1986 for
housing starts. Growth is like this in small Oregon
towns, it goes in spurts.
We really are in pretty good shape to handle this
rate of grow~h. While I don't want to discount the
challenges that lie ahead, our capital planning is
advanced, and while we have some problems to solve,
there appears to be time to deal with them~ and we
are well on the way of addressing them, especially
at the rate of growth of 1% to 2% increase per year.
We would be hard pressed to make a case that Ashland
is in a critical state of rampant growth.
While a moratorium may have some initial appeal, I
have had some experiences with them, as I was
Planne~ for Woodburn while it was under a moratorium
from 1977 to 1979. This experience left me with a
great distaste for this type of regulation. While
the popular perception was that it was keeping the
big bad developers out of town, a lot of personal
dreams of ordinary people were shattered. I found
it very distressing to be caught between the public
popularity of the moratorium, and the very human
toll in unrealized dreams and financial disaster
this caused to many people. While some of them were
developers or builders, many were ordinary people.
In a word, it was hell once the initial newness wore
off.
While I believe that moratoriums have a place, they
are emergency tools that should be of a limited
duration, and for a very specific purpose. I view
them as part of a therapy for problems, but the side
effects of the medicine are severe. When that is
true, one must carefully weigh the benefits with the
very substantial risks and costs. This is clearly
the intent of oregon's law, and one that is the most
humane approach in the long run. The longer they
remain in place, the greater the potential for
damage to the city and its citizens.
Percentage of 1970 population
.... .... .... .... ....
Q) CD 0 .... N c.u ~
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
N N N N N N N
....z
0
\
....z I
N
"-
....z '\
~
\
....z /
m
I t-"(j
en
....z / .,
CD Ooon
/ en 0 .....
~ p- e+-
CD / e+-o'<
0 ~ot-"(j
en ....... 0
\ tj~
o .....~
CD , ~~.......
l\1 e+-q~
.-< \ p- t-'. t-'.
enOo
(II e+-~
~ CD
~ , ~ElQ
\ -..10~
o~ 0
CD \ t-"(jp-~
m
o p-
, ~P'g
~Ul
CD \ .......
CD ~P'p.
" .... .
0
CD , ~
0
CD
l\1
CD
~
CD
m
I I
tG ~
0
po ~
0
eo "'d
0
r '0
~
0 E:
Ii 0
GI t;j
~ "'d
GI
"'d >1
0
GI GI
>1 ~
0
CD
~
Population
.- .- .- .- .- .- .- .- .- .- .-
N N ~ ~ ~ ~ 01 01 a:l a:l -..2
0 01 0 01 0 01 0 01 0 01 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
-..2
0
-..2
~
-..2
N
-..2
a:l n
......
c+
'<
~
0
~
-..2 ~
CXJ t-'
PJ
c+
......
0
~
.-< c;'l
CD CXJ ~
~ 0 0
~
t:T
.....
CO
~
CXJ 0
N
c+
0
.....
CO
CO
0
CXJ
~
CXJ
CXJ
CXJ
a:l
CD
o
,-
-,
~
N
~
.p..
~
(J)
~
Q:)
Q:)
o
Q:)
N
.-<
CD
~ Q:)
.p..
Q:)
CJ)
Q:)
Q:)
co
o
co
N
C,:)C,:)
~ CO
o 0
o 0
co
.p..
co
(J)
student.s
N N N N N N N U1 U1 U1 U1
0) --l -J OJ OJ co co 0 0 .- .-
.-en 0 en 0 en 0 en 0 en 0 en
NO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0
0
0
.- ;4(.
N
en
0
0
.-
eA
0
0
0
.-
eA
en U1
0
0 0
p-
O
.- 0
.p.. '" -
0
0 0(Xj
0 ....p
.- * '" nci
'lj .p.. ..... -
'" '" ("1-_
0 en '<13
t'd 0 '"
~ 0 * t-tj<D
- oP
pt *
c..- .- t'(J("I-
- en t::s>>
0 0 ;4(.
p 0 j;en
0 ;4(. ::r.s>>
;4(. 0
.- * pt:z::t
en s::
en
0 ;4(. P
0 0
("I-
.....
.- * * 0
(J) P
0 ;4(.
0
0
.- *
(J)
en
0
0
;4(.
.-
--l
0
0
0 '"
"1 "1
N
.- n
--l U
en
0 0
0 0
0 .....
c,u co
I '" CJl
UI MO
if ~;::
'" o~
.. i:r
~ .'0
~ Pt:.
~p
0- s::
., 0
e;, P
p ~
;:- UI
0
p-
o
~
B. KENT BLACKHURST
ERVIN B. HOGAN
GREGORY T. HORNECKER
JOHN R. HASSEN
DANIEL C. THORNDIKE
BLACKHURST, HORNECKER, HASSEN & THORNDIKE
&
ERVIN B. HOGAN
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
p, 0, BOX 670 SUITE 1 - 129 N, OAKDALE
MEDFORD, OREGON 97501
AREA CODE 503
TELEPHONE 779-8550
FAX (503) 773-2635
October 29, 1990
Mr. Brian Almquist
Ashland City Administrator
Ashland City Hall
20 East Main
Ashland, OR 97520
RE: Mahar Application - Remand Hearing
Dear Brian:
It is my understanding that we have been requested to
submit our position concerning the scope of the Remand Hearing
by November 1, 1990. Enclosed please find a Memorandum on
behalf of Mike Mahar. .
It is my further understanding that this matter will corne
before the Counsel on November 6, 1990. I would appreciate
receiving a copy of the agenda report for this item. Mike
Mahar and I intend to attend the City Counsel Meeting.
Very truly yours,
"-~~
J~R. HASSEN
JRH:hlh
enclosure
cc: Mr. Ron Salter
Mr. John Fregonese
Mr. John MacLaughlin
Mr. Mark Murphy
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
Mayor Cathy Golden and Council Members
John R. Hassen, Attorney for Mike Mahar
October 25, 1990
RE:
HAHAR C. U. P. P-.PPLICATION - Scope of Hearings on Remand
I.
REMAND.
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS ON THE SCOPE OF THE HEARING ON
It is impor~ant to recognize this is not a new or even
modified, application corning before the Council. Rather, it is
exactly the same application originally filed by Mr. Mahar on
April 7, 1989. This application has since traveled to the Land
Use Board of Appeals ("LUBA") and to the Court of Appeals,
which upheld LUBA's decision.
LUBA' sdecisibn was to remand the Council's decision,
based upon certain specific issues raised by the petitioner,
Mr. Mark Murphey. LUBA did not reverse the Council's decision,
nor did it remand it on unlimited grounds.
The Council, Planning Commission, Mr. Mahar, Mr. Murphey,
City Staff and others, have all spent a' considerable amount of
time dealing with this application. Neither LUBA's decision,
nor Oregon's land use laws, require the Council to "reinvent
the wheel" and re-address issues which either were not raised
on appeal to, or which were affirmed by, LUBA. See, e.g.,
Jefferson Landfill Corom. v. Marion County. 14 Or LUBA 156,
157-158 (1985) (where LUBA rejected the argument that the
entire hearing should be reopened because over 3 1/2 years had
elapsed, Board personnel had changed, and the County's
"attitude toward garbage burning, had changed").
In fact, it would be an error for the Council to re-open
the hearing to consider issues other than which were remanded
by LUBA. As LUBA stated in another case, when a case is
remanded on limited grounds, the City does not rehear the
entire matter "such that even those matters upon which are
ruled in the City's favor would be open to another appeal."
See Faye Wright Neighborhood Planning Council v. The City of
Salem, "Order on Motion to Clarify", I Or LUBA 3l8, 359 (1980).
Likewise, once the City makes its decision, any party
appealing the decision to LUBA must, at the least, state "!tlhe
issues the petitioner seeks to have reviewed." ORS
197.830(ll) (c). If not raised on appeal, these unchallenged
issues remain as part of the City's decision. Readdressing
these issues would be neither necessary, nor appropriate.
II. ISSUES RELATING TO TRP.FFIC, WATER, SEWER AND SCHOOLS
SHOULD NOT BE ADDRESSED ON REMAND.
It has been suggested that the Council should reopen the
hearing to consider not only the issues remanded by LUBA, but
also those relating to traffic, water, sewer and schools. This
would violate the general rules outlined above.
Regarding water, sevler and schools, the Council made
specific findings of sufficient capacity, which findings were
supported by uncontradicted facts. These were not issues
raised by Mr. Murphey in his appeal to LUBA. They have been
decided, and there is no basis for reconsidering these issues
now.
Issues relating to traffic were raised by Mr. Murphey in
his appeal. However, LUBA expressly found "! tlhe city
responded to petitioner's evidence of impact relating to
traffic" and affirmed these issues in favor of the city.
Consequently, this issue has likewise be~n decided and should
not be reconsidered on remand.
III. ISSUES ON REMAND.
Obviously, Mr. Mahar believes the City's initial decision
was correct. Nevertheless, LUBA's decision, which was upheld
without opinion by the Court of Appeals, sustained two of Mr.
Murphey's challenges. In doing so, .LUBA remanded the case back
to the City for consideration of specific matters, as set forth
below.
A. Mr. Murphey's 3rd and 7th Assignments of Error -
Subassignment of Error B: "Evidentiary Support for
Findings of Compliance with Plan Policy XII-I.
In o~der to rely upon its study of available E-l lands (to
support its finding that 50 acres of such lands would remain),
the City was directed, upon remand, to "explain why the study
is reliable in light of the photographs and other evidence
cited by petitioner which strongly suggest that the study
relied upon is inaccurate." See Murphey v. City of Ashland,
Or LUBA (LUBA No. 89-123, May 16, 1990), Slip Ope at 26.
Alternatively, or in addition to the foregoing, LUBA
indicated the City could "choose to adopt a different
interpretation reflected in the city's findings." Id. at n.
18. Under either interpretation, LUBA further noted the need
for substantial evidence in support of the findings adopted.
B. Mr. Murphey's 3rd and 7th Assignments of Error -
Subassignment of Error C: "Compliance with Lua
18.104.040."
To determine compliance with ALUO l8.l04.040(B) on remand,
LUBA held: "The city must identify the qualities constituting
the livability and appropriate development of the abutting
properties and the surrounding neighborhood, and must determine
whether the proposed use will have more than a minimal impact
on those identified qualities." Id. at p. 28.
In addition, the city must respond to the following issues
raised regarding "livability and appropriate development of
abutting properties and the surrounding neighborhood": " * * *
impact on views, privacy, inhibition of appropriate development
of E-I uses on the balance of the subject E-l parcel, and
adverse impact to neighboring cottage industries." Id. at p.
29 n. 21.
IV. CONCLUSION.
Legally and logically, an applicant should not be required
to, reprove his or her case on issues which have been decided
and affirmed. Nor should the City Council have to endure such
a never-ending process. It is good law, and even better
policy, to strictly adhere to the terms of LUBA'sremand.
DCT:lh
City of Ashland
Ashland City Council
City Administrator's Office
20 East Main Street
Ashland~ OR 97520
Ref: Written Public Comments~ Planning Action 89-170
Dear Council Members:
This letter is in response to your letter dated Oct. 19 of
1990 to Taxlot 391E04DD~ Sarah F Slagle~ at 482 Lynn Street. Our
pos; t i on has not changed since the first pub 1 i c hear; ng by the
City Planning Commission in January of 1990. At that time we
registered our objection to the CUP for construction of a 90+ unit
apartment complex on E-l land south of Hersey street and East of
Williamson way by Mike Mahar~ et ale We have found no reason to
change our position since then.
On point one~ regarding the E-l vacant land inventory~ I
believe it is the responsibility of the planning commission to
provi de convi nci ng evi dence to LUBA that there is an ade-quate
supp 1 Y. We were never consul ted on zoni ng of ,the area south of
Hersey in the first place. As the area was developed~ we found no
reason to object to it's use until now. The new neighbors we have
on this land have not caused us any problems or inconvenience. It
is our belief that the Jobs and income produced bY these neighbors
are of far greater benefit to the city of Ashland than another 100
renters. It also seems to be the overwhelmingly more expensive
choice for the City than indus-trial use. City services to this
many new people cannot avoid costing more than an equivalent area
of industrial development.
Your poi nttwo seems to be your b 1 i nd spot. This is our
area of most concern and I have the feeling that yOU regard it as
tri v i a 1 . The test i mony of more than 100 res i dents of Ash 1 and in
rebuttal to the claims of Mahar's architect and attorney was
seem; ngl y ignored at the pub 1 i c heari ngs. I be 1 i eve that th is
testimony~ studied a little more 'carefullY~ would provide more
than enough evidence that this development will have more thana
minimal impact on the neighborhood. If a77 the attendee's at the
publ ic hearings had been allowed to make thei r comments part of
the public record I'm sure YOU wouldn't have any trouble figuring
out where public opinion lies. You may not take our objection
very seriouslY, but I sure have trouble understanding how YOU can
ignore the input of lOa's of your own citizens. I find this
process un-democratic in the extreme. I am also aware of letters
wri tten to the Mayor and vari ous couci 1 members whi ch addressed
specific issues concerning this action, (were these entered into
the public record 7).
FinallY~ I have trouble with the credibility of claims made
bY Mr. Mahar and planning commission officers. We were told at
one meeting with Mr Mahar bY himself that we would have to bear no
cost at all for street improvements (an incredible claim in
itse1f)~ This claim was later withdrawn at a subsequent open city
council meeting. We have been told that access to these
apartments woul d be from Lynn street south of Hersey ~ then thi s
was changed to another 1 ocat i on ~ and now ~ who' knows where! We
have been told that traffic studies show that there would be
almost no additional traffice on our section of HerseYI but
already the new paving has increased the traffic without any new
housing facing us. How can I believe a city engineering staff
which allowed a developer to open UP a large piece of ground and
fail to provide protection from landslides for residents below the
deve 1 opment? (It happened just a few years ago. above the park!)
WhY can I t YOU gUYS just tell us the truth ???? We don I t want
muchl just a good reason for us to change our minds. You haven't
even come close yet! Maybe 'YOU ought to look at the possibility
that your plan is wrong.
~idents a~8h Lynn street;
~ I:~()-- /~~~ ~
arah F. Slagc~~
~a~
October 30, 1990
Mark Murphey
492 Lynn Street
Ashland, Oregon 97520
To the Ashland City Council:
In regards to Planning Action 89-071 (The Mahar Project),
~ would like to make a request of the Council to broaden the
scope of review.
There has been a great deal of new information, publicity,
and statistics which was not available to the Council at the
time of the previous decision on Planning Action 89-071.
Because of this, I believe the Council should certainly accept
testimony on public schools, traffic, recreational facilities,
electrical power, and wetlands. I would, therefore, like to
request that the Council open the scope of revi~w to the above
items, especially in light of the fact that those items mentioned
all effect livability of the surrounding neighborhood.
There is a second request I would like to make of the
Council. Due to the controversial nature and complexity of
the Mahar Project (P.A. 89-071) I would like to request that
the public hearing be held at a time when all of the Council
members and the Mayor can be present. . My concern comes from
the fact that historically many Council members have a difficult
time attending meetings in December. I would like to ask that
if the public hearing is in December that it be at a time when
all Council members can be in attendance. When the project
was originally brought before the Council the public hearing
was put off until a time when all members could attend due
to the request of one of the Council. In light of this fact,
I don't think that this is an unreasonable request.
Thank you for your consideration of my concerns.
Sincerely yours,
/lId I!~
Mark Murphey
11-1- 7{)
5IAfI/e~flf k k -Ikr I krl1e~
i'iIl eQ:. y It '{" ..
Pflllr (dtJ.1 C,' I
J
r rece ('U<.cf tt Ie ffer ~rVl J~ IlIA. f!tts5eil
~h.;c.1t 1 I:e/;eue yoU /1PJe ~IS() ~a.vd.
):,11. d-Yd1J~ ,6 h;s lelfer.L ~d.dd /..14 M
/1la k'e 51?.,fF7:l ( GY11;?1eI/!f$',
tif,.. a.S5e~ t-otJi<J&.P kflvl tJU k/..~Itt l4f1.f
Some kw ;J. cuouL/ k ;)-I{~l'r;t lie c"1y
f.:> b/Ollt&'1 -rk S6oj't" cI-' reu.-e& ;1 Cu,e!:/
/PtPtf,"Hf ~.f4 twD CdJeS ~'c.h ~. itrsN,
,Plli,J-? t,<~ kM-v- /'e.oU4- ~-,/ #I etlLLH{;-/
/s Irc f//f> C /ud&/ ~m ko(ttl,~,? Mt S"C~
GI reu/.~f..U il,'{ so c..kse<;..
-r/zl pew In /J." n((;L f,..t,K td-t~'cA ;'gl ome
{or1AJ4vJ &VI ~ ckotJ/ ~ etn&P ~~c /UtJt"tV hltv(
0- S' '/ n<:l!cavtf ;J;#f~d "1'1 et //o"h~. fi,j
/f6ju+ ..I ; f we,e 10 k hrrJ'jn7 frtad
.;0 J~. GoJ ptUlliU~ fl.)qu./tI ht4I4 ~ J4Jqt1dt
~S6Yl ~ Jfa eifUYl-H He!> HIJt.cJ.it w~'h~..
A,wx; T am fiSk;", }It!>{ 10 b~ ~ ~~~
rWL<(WI S?dA~ tJ-A~
October 29, 1990
T'o : Me m b e r s 0 f the Ash I and C i t Y Co u n c i I (7, ' /1, . 1/(//
,/' I I It, t/" I....-{ \
From: Barbara Ryberg 1?()-..2. -157;' f~i\Aklfv\.i:J i 6 J
Re: Re-opening of Mahar Project for discussion
In light of the LUBA finding regarding the Mahar apartment
project I urge the Council to expand the discussion to include
the impact that such a project might have on the Ashland School
system. I do so because of the recent over-crowding in two
schools. Walker has had to add two classrooms and Lincoln School
is holding one fourth grade class in the College's educational
lab.
It is clear that the Ashland Schools cannot easily
accommodate this year's growth. To expect them to accommodate
more in the immediate future imperils their ability to deliver
the best education possible for our children.
;)Jo A)ed/e.; S'r
:tk/z(~1 OIC
IO(~()/10
10 tk IJ~ ar, a-uAl D-P -
(1s a p()JJMLt i t1 ~ QrnCfl~ ~ do ~~
4-~ fML rt<wJ ~ ~ Uf~' ~ ~
Of a ~~ h fY~ tt ~ .JL~~ ~
~' eA1~ ~,~ 4 ch- ~ ~ c;udt-
.,t~ OJ ~ ann/?1-LVl~1y ,
Cod du- CJ/l?~ ~ hJ ~ Ck.-
~ jJ~cI 6It- ~ Lt./ r.L duvt. ;f ~
he ~h ~tk ~-tld~d~
~ en.- ~ ~. s~ .J~'
~.~~
~Il. ~
10/31/90
Ashland City Administrators Office
In regards to issues LUBA remand~d back to the Ashland City Council
on the Mahar Apartment complex on Hersey st.
I would like to open the scope of
public services;ie, SCHOOL CAPACITIES:
or over enrollment capacities riow. We
development that will (can) jeopardize
in our schools~
TRAFFIC, POWER, WATER......
I would also like to include testimony on the drainage from
wetland on the So. Pacific Railroad property. Question? Do these
wetlands drain through Mahar's property? Could there be any toxic
drainage because of dumping by So. Pacific????
the testimony to include
Should our schools be at
shouldn't approve a large
the quality of equcation
Compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood is also a
very important issue, and I relize that this is one of the main
issues LUBA wants more information on. The neighbors should be
allowed to testify addressing their concerns on this.
I also feel, even though this issue is probably dead...So
it is merely my opinion.....That this development would have
been denied by the planning commission if the commissioner who
sold Mahar the property had abstained from casting her tie-breaking
vote to approve this project, the project would have been denied on
a tie vote.
I would further like to suggest that the hearings be set in
January 1991 to avoid the holidays when many of the council members
and public take time off. This issue is a very important decision
to be acted on and should include the whole council.
Thank you for allowing me to address my concerns to you.
~~-.
Marie Morehead
310 N. Mountain Ave.
Ashland, Or. 97520
I-~
iASHLAND CITY COUN ClL
CITY HALL
ASHLAND. OR.
Dear Council ~embers:
I am writing this letter concerning the scope of the public hearing
on fA 89-170, which is a request for a C.ll.F. for const~ction of 96
apartments on E-l land off of Hersey st.
As you know, this has been remanded back to the city from LUBA for
further review. The question before you is whether to restrict testimony
to just the two items subject to remand or to allow additional testimony
on other matters relevant to the project.
The important thing to_note is the decision rendered by the city
attorney on Oct. 5,1990. In this decision, Mr..Salt~r says ..... iithe
Council wishes, I believe it is arguably permissible for it to broaden
the scope of review to include other issues or the entire C.U.F.
application. If it broadens the scope of review and makes a different
finding based upon new and/or different evidence, I believe that would
be permissible."
So, according to our city attorney, and contrary to what John
Hassen says, it is legally permiss'ible to open the scope of the hearing
to include other testimony. It is also legally permissible to consider
new evidence pertinent to this application and, if called for, make a
new judgment after examining the facts.
This brings me to my point: that there is new evidence that should be
considered. This application was considered in Aug..1989, almost a year
and a half ago. Since that time, significant developments have taken
place regarding the adequacy of public facilities in Ashland. Capacity
problems have arisen regarding our pUblic schools and the ability of
our downtown area to handle traffic and congestion. Also, attention
has been called to the fact that our existing power substations are
fast approaching capacity and our need to build a new power substation
in the middle of the city. The urgency with which the city packaged
the Open Space proposal also alerted us to the fact that our park and
recreational facilities are inadequate to handle the growth of the 'ci ty.
Significant new evidence has been gathered concerning all these
areas and should be considered for 2 important reasons:
l) This is a very large apartment complex being proposed
(the third largest in the city) and has a huge impact
on our city as a whole.
2) This is not a permitted use on this piece of land and
therefore should be subjected to close scrutiny by
the Council.
The argument that this evidence has already been considered just
doesn't hold up when one looks at the facts- that there is significant
new evidence (e.g. resolution by School Board 6/11/90)
Let's not narrow our vision on a project of this magnitude and
importance. If the Council is to make an error, let's err on the side
of being "too thorough", rather than taking a short-sighted approach.
It seems as if many land use decisions of the recent, past have returned
to the city due to a lack of a thorough treatment. You have the oppor-
tunity to take a thorough look at one of the most important issues
to pass before you in recent history. It seems foolish to me that you
would narrow your vision at a time when the people of Ashland are
looking to the Council for direction through some crucial times.
eincerel~,~' /,#,;,7~/'/
'--U;5)"~frU/('l/,., '
/ /.. i{',
\i~6,~~~-
David and Lisa Sebrell
271 N. Mountain Ave.
Ashland, OR
November 1, 1990
Ashland City Council:
I am an adjacent property owner owning several properties in
the Grizzly Park Subdivision. I am quite concerned about the
proposed Mahar Project of 96 apartments.
While I think we are gaining some ground with the
development of E-l lots, I am quite opposed to continuing
Williamson Way through the apartment development~ I am concerned
for the security of my business with all the added vehicular and
foot traffic. I understand that we cannot have a cul-de-sac
longer than 500 ft. and Williamson Way needs to be longer to
accommodate the proposed new E-l lots.
Personally, I think the size and scope of the apartment
complex is inappropriate for this piece of land in Ashland. But
we as a community need the help of developers to develop E-l
land. Try as we might to bring new, clean industries to Ashland
it is quite expensive to secure and develop E-l lands. These new
E-l lots should not be smack in the middle of 96 apartments.
There were several plans regarding where to extend Williamson
Way. There were plans of break-away barriers to separate
dwellings from business; there should definitley be a substantial
fence separating the complex from existing and new business.
I would like for these issues to be reconsidered and if this
is not possible I would like you to reject this apartment
proposal. It is a no-win situation for so many of the neighbors.
It is only a win-win situation for the developer. If the people
of Ashland were to vote on it today it would not pass. Please, as
our elected representatives~ represent our needs.
Thank you.
q(~ct!~
Kathleen Kahle
800-523-0258 · 503-488-2322 · (Fax) 503-488-1549
Harold A. Cloer
1036 Prospect Street
Ashland, OR 97520
(503) 482-8364
November 1, 1990
To: ;Y1\f j Ashland Ci ty Council
From: \'{j~' Hal Cloer, Chmn., CPAC Economy Commi ttee
Re: LUBA Remand on Mahar Project
Unless there is a real likelihood that new information
concerning the water and traffic impacts can be obtained
for the Mahar project, I would support limiting debate to
the two items on which LUBA wants more information and
evidence. Given Ashland's growth rate, I'm sure that the
school system will accommodate expected growth of the city.
CPAC's committee on the Economy element of the Comp
Plan will undoubtedly wish to submit testimony on the issue
of the availability of E-l land over the update period of
the Plan. The committee will contend that what is most
relevant is the inventory of developed E-l land such as
that available until 1988 in the Ashland Business Park, and
thos~ proposed ,in the 7-parcel industrial subdivision that's
part of the Mahar project. (This is a personal observation;
the committee has not discussed the Mahar E-l subdivision in
any detail).
It seems to me that the Council should not have to
deal with matters of fact such as those mentioned above,
but should be abie to rely on staff and the Planning Comm-
ission for such determination. On the other hand, an issue
such as "livability" for a segment of the population vs.
"the general good" of the community would seem to require
the wisdom and perspective of the Council. This latter
determination appears difficult enough as to probably
result in considerable debate and Council time. And, I
would think, require the development of principles and
guidelines as the city attempts to implement its plans for
affordable housing--in this era of widespread concern for
quality of life and the ubiquitous NIMBY.
copies: CPAC Committee on the Economy
))tJ//, ~ /796-'-
/11' 4~ )t1 / k;4/-1 S
2> q Y5.HG-/Z-se-y S r
_, " ,-:Ar Irb8Jf:!.j) ()/'~ ? 75~)
/
d4..~~
A:;, 1 O~~~, .' CO~/7()
/~" u/ ' tJ tf/
,- ---------,----~~-~~---~--~:~~-~-~ ----,
--~----------~-~-~~_.__._-- .
_.,__._ .._.__.__.___" __.._._ ._'___. .__.___._.w._...y_. --- ----_.~--'---.-.-.-.- -.,..----.------ ..--. -... "'-., - --- .-.--.--- ,- ---------- -_._..---- _........._.__.-_._--_.._._.._.....--..
-~._----_... ----,-. .----.-. ----.-. ---
tk-: tVJJ.-~'I.~#~.~
_~..~k~.~~
. ..~~.~~. ~/..,d
._~==-~.-_---~~Lk.~-~~- .
=~~~-~~~-~~~~~~ ~=~-:
-:.----:.-i-~~f~~~~.~~.:~-4-~~~~:r... ..
.. . . ~~ ~~ ~~~~~_.__.__..
~-_. ..~,~~,-, - ~" --~-~~----~-,-~- -
. . __ ~ ~ -A~~d._.__._..
_==_-==-.-..-7t1~-71L~~~-;:!t:;~.ZO~ .
=--.~..---.:=_. -~F7T5JJ7.c.;~z;I1;r<;!=H~.~=====:-:=_::_..-.
_~~..;~~~_~=_=r.__~=r-_=~r.....:;Zi~_;_-~*-up;~~.. ... .~-.. ...:.:--=- .-=.--_..
~ts
.._' .. ,.,..,--,..-----;-
AVAilABLE 11/1. Nice'
, _ ;,quaIU~v;iaulU..( 2~1.,Qld,
2 BDRM. ap.t., In' triplex, home near vall KnoK' got
near lithla Parlc.. Garage. COUfSI, 3 bedlOOln, 2 bath,
Pvt, patio, lots of. ameni. double g~rage, heal pump,
-. plus slOraQl. No dog&. auto. 5~nnklers. S,7.5 per
$495hno ~82"(169 mo.. S1 000 rtnrnlbl.
. dep, Rets,r.quired. No
323 Ape, H~ts, 2 BDRM, 'apt. Very_ quiet 'smokers ~lease. No. pets,
vuvv.. bull din a a b v. "8 I v d. 488-3601 or &64-40475 '
S375/mo, l33 HoUy, ARt, 'teEAUTFUl. new. 3 bdml.,
N the trees.abon the last & see:. 488-2630, 2 bath home on quiet lag
college. Swimming p'ool. 2 BDRM. townhouse apt. lot. S700/mo. S700/dep,
hot fub.... sauna, "2 fire- Quiet comp'lex, Clean, No ~ CCiI ~
places. ," b{r!'l;.[,_syacious. pets, 131 California S...... a.AIJOIA lIVElY
!3p8lI. pnvaey, ~ No, ~, $4101mo, Ftrst, last fal ESTATE 482-1118
of fl8 wllev, 3 bdrm, p\us depoIit.482-48~ BEAUTifUl country home.
New. 1.700 aq.ft. D.cks. 2 BORM. townhouse, Quiet 10 miles so, of Mhland.
low mainlllnanC8~'~' CloH' to~. 3-~' bedrooms ~ baths,
AIhIInd ml 2080 S Is k I you B Iv Cl, U5LPlus $3~0 dtposlt.
482. 71 S37~/mo. Flnt. last & AVirinimecl, "2,,(740.
seamty, 482-2280. ~ BE THE FIRST ONE ~
LARGE 2 bedroom apart. 2 BORM. upstairs lll'l. In 'Available 11/20: Brand
ment in dean & quiet small d -,.
compltx. Close to shop. ~~ntown. across from new. 3 bedroom, 2 bath
ph!;. Available ,11/1/VO. Uthia Park. Most utils. pel, home on Sheridan St. Qual-
~ ~ deoosl No P.tts, , Taking appllca. I" built. with heat (lump.
. LaildMart p~ Mgml DlL CIn Plc:t ~ at: double garase. S775..HL
,482-:J451 607 SiskiYou Blvd. mo.,' $1 20 ri1iiii1i'tiTi"
2 BDRM, vltw lupin, dep. Rets, ft.quirtd, No
lARGE. 2 plus bedroom Dtck, carport. No lets. s m 0 k e u . No "e tI ,
home, 36S Pearl Sl off $4OOImO. 482-251 48HEi01 or 664~75
GreshJ:i~~~ req, ~ BED ROO M 1 b al h ClE~, 1 ~droom,' ~rt.
"'....Jaw ......rm 2 homt. Nic. rtmodel. No mtnt ltl qut,el buildlllG. No
...,.._ .. uu:1 ,PIts. No smokers, t:!..."'t. pets, Deposit &, rtfertftClts
balh, Gar:ps/.:tar nigh No smokin~~25i;:0. reg,. $315/mo. includes all
School. o. Flrsl. 630 UIitiIs.482-4577-
last= ClAOOIA
482~ Mgnd. REAl ESTATE 482~118 tied 1~ ~~ r=
12 BEDROOM historic home in 'A.R. disl Central
LARGE houH br Emigrant house, Plc:ktt fence, laIgt htat, ~mplt"ly w..th....
lake. $375, 482..(722, garden space. Good stor. ized. DiIhWashet. No pets,
",...&tw 2 bdrm. 2 ...... ~"^....... No smoking. $650fmo,
bath home' golf _. ....' -..... '586 C Steet .c8RlIJ3
Double car garaa.. Ear 2 BDRM. fireplace, Drive a.EAN & neat, '1 bcImt apt.
care yard, AVail. llov. 1s by. 115 Nob hill, Avail. ~ blocks, from downtown,
No s moktrs. $750/mo. 'shol1-~J!~~~,.u~_ $2i5hno. 482-2484
First, luU .. __wu 482~1 "Yilt COME Ifl!ld fit win. in
UndUart482V Mgmt. 2 BEDROOM at a. B&B, Room & kllcht"
$325hnon11 == . $2OOhno. 482-1726-
d~'.ur:~i~,.~i~ 'BEDROOM. 11'0 bath 1 ~:.~Rru~~j;a: t::::.
DeckI, 1s\llaslldep, townhouse. above Safeway. w/wash.r & d~er, yard.
Taka a 488-7715 Weath.rlzed. .ncloud garagt Ilorcli sauna
LONDONAIRE Apartments, rard~wld :hook:~425, vi.w, ~6!,nll"; 1 blk:
2 bdrm.. $376ftao. Wal.r 211 Harrison 7 ,above PlaD. ~~102.
& garbagt pd. ~82-1422.. 12 R~VENWOOD condos, . 2 bdnIl. .1Va bath
Takila ailPbionl avallabl.. '::O~"'u:' 2 ... olea. Ale. M -.nc.
MOUNTAIN house locattd bdrm,. deck.. I dry. ~II ap"pllances, Parking
17 mHes from Ashland on carport. sWimmIng pool, incld, No ~ts. 1500. 1st.
Hwv, &6" 2 bdrm.. 1 baIh. VI8WJ::sto town. last & ,482'-'.
$~50/mo~ deposit. = Mgmt. ONVENIENT to college,
oj- BOA" Furnished kitchen unIts,
EW 2 & 3 belrm' apts '3 Mo. 1. ba house III Monlhly ra.te.sthrough
Garaat. pvt, ftnced yd: ,~~~d'd 'i' ~rden area. March. 1'~. 18. 91.: $450 ,to
Wid hoolWps heal pump, I '~<K J1'0 plus ~lIh Jdal.!y maId
659 Parf&'~' OIJir_, servlC8. parkirL;,ncIUded),
J~" L ~1 ,Commercial Property 11~U rMl.
EW, 3 bdrm.. 2 bath Manaaement' ~82.2561
home, Country kitchen ~I 3 BDRM, 1 ~ balh town. . '
pantry. Heal pump/au. house near hospital Gas OZY. 3 bdrm, furnlSh4!d
dec:k. Avail.' Nov. 5th, No h..t. S5~ Call for home abv, college, Avaif,
~' First, last , detaIs. ~ ShortS or long '::oF to
. $ 482-O:M6. BDRM" 3 balh house ElUXE 2 bel
NEW l V rem 0 d .Ie d 3 will harclwood Ioors , hot' rm.. ~ ba~h.
.droom. 1 Va bath ,Ius tub In convenitnt location, ~ floor plan .11 ~
family room near Helman First tasl and triplex. ,Range. refng" wid
School wilh larae yard. amage deposiL No hookups, Hut p'ump.
New app\ianCII. Jenn-aift. pets,482-4818.' ~1, lasl & 1llQI~,
oven. r.frlgerator. -r:iiidMirt~MQml
41lhwasher. ft.w carpet 3 BDRM. dupl.x. 15A 482~1 "
an4 f1oorll!J, No p.ts. Exe, co...dltlonlloci'ti'0Ji7 fURNISHED apJl 1 , 2
S1.1il.m.JL first. last , Stove., 4l1hwllher. patIO. 'bdrm. CoIar. caIlIt' T,V. Hot
~-2611, '" ~711 110OI. IIUIII' & ItIem -.
HOUSE.,~ , , BDR"', next to~, Wt.'kIy rates 'rom $176.
S " n d ~ Y. 258 Hi g h S I,' large utiity 1VOm. wiIh wid ~82-2000
Vletorlln duplex abov'~~O:up" hDen'dtlfeplace. REAT location Walk to
Blvd. 2 bdT~' I:, WIS .r. "~. SafeR}. Charmlna. oId.r
pnI. S585' ,re .. ranoe~l1:: IUI.& IIrat 2 slOfy. 3 'Wrm.., ~
PHOENIX. . 2 bedroom on 482-1287. ball house wldenklti:'
=1f50ac::Cu:rPi;~~'d~:t 3 BEDROOM. 2 balh ~ir~'t~~:srld'd' , .
~_.... house, 'Si5DlmD, Se. a' 488-0034
,..--- . 540~07'
PHOENIX '*>TEL LARGE 2 bdrm" town.
Low weeldv .... on RlOlIlI 3 BED RO 0 M h a use. house, i420hno. Fnt, lasl
w"'l......"~ft.. L Nt"'" TY F.tn~~,~_1.,t~.^"U,W&a.,. plu! l~.9..~:~I~,.~~gu1~p.
~~~D~YT~:: -~-~~~~:'=r 27. ~ ~'~:v~m~1
323
323
Publisher's Notice
All real estate.-MrtiHd
heI'ein is subject to Ihe
FedefalFarHouaing~
which rMkeI illl\eg8l to
advenise -any prefer-
ence, Iimitation.or ds-
crimination bec:auI8 of
race. color. religion, sex.
handalp. .ami... status.
or national origin. or In-
tention to make ant sucb
preference. Imitation. or
cisc;rimination
The Stale of 0r8g0n
ptohibiIs dsc:riminationin
the _. ..... or rentlll
of real property on III
buil 0' race. CIOlor. sex.
marital statui. famiIi&l
status. Nigion. NIIionaI
origin or hanckap, The
City of AahIMd prohIMIa
cIisaimination in the ...
lease t"f' I8ntIII of ....
RENTALS
323 ~..:ts
1 BORM. quiet apt. IClOSS
from, ShakeSpeare & ~
Compl.tely lurn. Includes
utilities, Avail. 11/1-2125
$350/month. Firs.. lilt i T H S T R E E T cu t It.
MClIi\,,488-2630. Vln 'agt homt. Wrap
1 BORMdl~1t1 apL Non. 1rCMnl~2 bdnn. pIuiI
smoker, poo, Fnl, last & ofIllI, ,
$100 dip. 4888-7836. 482 71 Mgmt.
1 BEDROOM sman" fu ABOVE colleg.. Largt. 3
, ishtd. Ulilltres paId. A'~ bFdrm, homt, Short.term.
pet., $235. Firs.. last' urnJrlim as.3863.
let. 482-4447. 1MOVE tht '<<!VI Fantastic
1 BEDROOM cottage. view" Wonclerfulandhoule ~
Greensprlngs, $275 wlo II8fQI8 lOOIII hot ...,
appliances. $325 with. 2~ =-A{r'~
~ leave IllIG. 772-2177 535-11l94
.leXCEPTlONAl 2 bdrm, . . ,
plus dtn/offlct. N.wly lET u. ftnd a quehhed
remodeled hislorlc char. tenant lor ~yUl' ~I~E
. mer. Many custom AM CIPES
feature.. Close to down. . & ASSOCIATES INC,
lown, Abso!utely no ~ts, Real &tate.9~ Maml
lease/of,ill)n pOUlblt, 488-3333 W:s4m
Refs. '*l. ~
ASHLAND, 2 bdrm, mobile,
PALOMAR on acreaat, $385 plus'
PROPERTIES deposil488~7~,
, 482.362Q or 488-3710 SHLANDS FIRST lOFT
2 BORU.. 1 bill Ipl $405 STYLE APT, Spacious. 2
plus dtp,No ~tI. Avail. bdrm.. 0fItl:I Iooi' - 30'
, 1/1 , Wimer Helghtl t'-.!~ ceIlings. Amenh
....1841 · _: StoH. refrlgttalOr.
1-2 BDR, M..1 kth houft, ~~:Cy~'r.':' ,::.
Gardtn space. R.R. dill Quilt. $6251mo. f'1IIt, Iut
Avail. 11115. 15.25. first, ,~
last & dtp, 488-~' MNInd P10DerW Mgmt. ,
'h 8DfIl. 1 ball. 8elM & 482-2713
rtfriQ. Gteat neighborhood. AsK.eY GAII)EN APTS.
NO~IS. No smo~lng, 0Hnlna 100ft In Ash\Iftd.
, ~ 1-'2-3 6clr& ancl ~
a.AUDlAwr:av ~t...~ts availabl..
REAL ESTATE 412-111. ...' rtfr~tor. wall"":
BDRM.. 1 utL S1cMt' & dry f:N:' &<<;f:;'a.round.
rtfrig.ralor. washer & Contact: Ashl.y Senior'
dryer, New carp. I , a.nd~:k~~uApB,~:e":ihl~~~1
oaml No 1NIts, No smokina, ^D ~.,c.,t.I . 100 .,.:."C.
.'R". tV,ACY~' ",Ln."-t" 2
roo",., ;,JlI,lh~, lI'f,(
. aU t, nU;
carp.'~" vi,e". eck; , No
petl/smoklng, $680 mm,o
jlIuIl8CUritt, 482-4'ClS2:-- .
QUIET, 'cl.an, L~!I~_ m,ain.
tlined 2 & 3 lIIICIlUOllI Is.
renli~a for $~ 10 , $4'5,
A&Nandtr AI*. 482-t121
SEE TO NlPREClATE
2 bedroom townhouse 'apl
Very clean, Spacious
rooms. Washer/dryer
hookups, Weatherlud
Quiet complex, No ptt.'
167 Lincoln St. $~25Imo'
First, last plus d.posit'
~12:.u76' .
SMALL. c1tan. studio apt
$205/mo, Fnt, last & dep'
No 488-2600. '
P ACIOUS 2 BR.. 1 BA.
rembdtltd vintagt home
abov. Blvd. Stove rlftr
dlshwashtr. wid ~ookup'
garagel workshop. wrap:
arouna porch and nice
yard, Sony no pets. S600
plus d.p. Drive by~
~ Sl 482-2805
Ilk for Patricia or Mary.
Or call 482-1231 twI,
PACIOUS. ",*,118. 2 p\us
bdrm,. 2' bath, ~pliarictd
kltchtn. Btautiful malnte.
~' Wall ~
plaza. 1-616-8374
or ,. ,
SWEET. 2 bdrm~. 1 bath
...~~
260, '
<VWtA Y
REAl ESTATE 482-1118
ALENT, Clean. conve
nitnl 3 bedroom. 0rMt ~
511 W... QMk. $625,
, ~
3 BEDROOM. 1 Va balh
Firtplace. Immaculate
Beautiful yard. Special
~ ProIlerW Mgml
482-2713
houst wocil be area
b- a ... or b- sWInIs
ao. to sase. L.MIt hin!
room. lormal dinfng. AI
~=-~RTIES
m-2177 535-1VlM
VIEW boule. , 2 bedrvotn. .
balh, all tlectric kitchen
decks. AvaDable Nov. 111
~.JU,st. lasl I
VINTAGE I cute 2 bdrll'
.pt. 1 b ock above Safe
way, $485 ~Ius security
773.5069_ S35-~125
11/1/90
To Members of the City Council:
It is my opinion as a citizen of Ashland and an ex-school
board member, that school capacity should be taken into
consideration when making the final decision on the Mahar
apartment project on Hersey Street.
I realize the capacity of our schools may have been given
some attention when the project was originally approved and
there may have been ample time for people to speak.
However, much has changed over the last year in regards to
school capacity, and, because of the LUBA remand, we have
the luxury to address this issue again.
In June, the school board unanimously passed' an advisory to
the city that stated our schools would be "at or over
capacity by September." The superintendent of schools
admits the middle school is at capacity now. My personal
experience on the board tells me other schools are very
close.
I don't know the exact letter of the law, but I believe
approval for building projects has been reversed because
schools were at capacity. Irregardless of legality, it
makes common sense to address school capacity again in
reference to the Mahar project. Our' schools are at or near
capacity because of another multi-family housing unit that
was just built and the exact impact on schools was not
,determined before the project was completed.
While there are many factors that affect a land use decision,
school capacity has rapidly moved to the forefront in
Ashland. If our schools are so crowded education suffers or
if voters are going to be asked to fund minor or major
school construction in the near future, school capacity
should be considered with every residential land use
decision. We are close to one of those two outcomes. Don't
miss this chance to make informed decisions.
dj;~
Tom Olbrich
904 Garden Way
Ashland, OR 97520
,
BEFORE THE ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL
September 18, 1990
IN THE MATTER OF PLANNING ACTION #90-120, REQUEST FOR )
ANNEXATION, WITHDRAWAL FROM JACKSON CO. FIRE DISTRICT )
NO.5, SITE REVIEW, AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO )
CONSTRUCT MINI-STORAGE UNITS WITH ASSOCIATED MANAGER'S )
APARTMENT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT EAST MAIN STREET )
IN THE VICINITY OF OAK KNOLL DRIVE AND HIGHWAY 66. )
APPLICANT: SECURE STORAGE )
FINDINGS,
CONCLUSIONS
AND ORDERS
\
RECITALS:
1) Tax lot 320, of 391E 12 is located at East Main Street in the
vicinity of Oak Knoll Drive and Highway 66 and is zoned RR-5i Rural
Residential - Jackson County.
2) The applicant is requesting Annexation, site Review and a
Conditional Use Permit to construct mini-storage units with associated
manager's unit. site improvements are outlined on the site plan on file
at the Department of .Community Development.
3) The criteria for approval of an Annexation are found in 18.108.190
and areas follows:
A. That the land is within the City's Urban Growth Boundary.
B. That the proposed zoning and project are in conformance with the
City's Comprehensive Plan.
C. That the land is currently contiguous with the present City
limits.
D. That public services are available or can be made available to the
site.
E. That a public need for additional land, as defined in the City's
Comprehensive Plan, can be demonstrated.
criteria for approval of a site Review are found in Chapter 18.72 and
are as fol,lows:
A. All applicable City ordinances have been met and will be met by the
proposed developmen~.
B. All requirements of the site Review chapter have been met.
C. The site design complies with the gl;}.idelines adopted by the City
Council for implementation of this chapter.
Further, the criteria for approval of a Conditional Use Permit are found
in Chapter 18.104 and are as follows:
A. The proposal is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan.
B. The location, size, design and operating characteristics of the
proposed development are such that the development will be reasonably
compatibl,e with and have minimal impact on the livability and
appropriate development of abutting properties and the surrounding
neighborhood.
C. In determining the above, consideration shall be given to the
following:
1) Harmony in scale, bulk, coverage and density.
2) The availability and capacity of public facilities and utilities.
3) The generation of traffic and the capacity of surrounding streets.
4) Public safety and protection.
5) Architectural and aesthetic compatibility with the surrounding area.
4) The Planning Commission, following proper public notice, held a
Public Hearing on June 12, 1990, at which time testimony was received
and exhibits 'were presented. The Planning Commission recommended
approval of the application subject to conditions pertaining to the
appropriate deve~opment of the site.
The City Council, following proper public notice, held a Public Hearing
on August 21, 1990, at which time testimony was received and exhibits
were presented. The Council's motion resulted in a tie vote, ,and a
tabling of the action until September 4, 1990, at which time the Mayor
would be present to consider the action and vote. At the September 4,
meeting, the action was delayed to the September 18, 1990. At this
meeting the city Council granted approval of the annexation and
conditional use requests, and continued the request regarding the site
Review.
Now, therefore, The Ashland City Council finds, concludes and orders as
follows:
SECTION 1. EXHIBITS
For the purposes of reference to these Findings, the attached index
of exhibits, data, and testimony will be used.
Staff Exhibits lettered with an "S"
Proponent's Exhibits, lettered with a "P"
Opponent's Exhibits, lettered with an "0"
Hearing Minutes, Notices, Miscellaneous Exhibits lettered with an
"M"
SECTION 2. CONCLUSORY FINDINGS
2.1 The City Council finds that it has received all
information necessary to' make a decision based on the Staff
Report, public hearing testimony and the exhibits received~
2.2 The City Council finds that the request to construct mlnl-
storage units with associated manager's unit meets all criteria
outlined in the Annexations Chapter 18.108.190 and Conditional Use
Chapter 18.104. The Council, however, finds that site 'Review
approval should be deferred to a later date until all issues
regarding the wetland have been addressed by the appropriate state
Agency, and the issues regarding on-site circulation have been
addressed.
The Ashland City Council makes the following findings concerning
the request for Annexation:
A. That the la~d is within the city's Urban Growth Boundary.
The property is within the UGB.
B. That the proposed zoning and project are in conformance with
the city's Comprehensive Plan.
The proposed zoning is E-1 in conformance with the Comp Plan, and
the use is listed as a Conditional Use for the E~l zone.
c. That the land is currently contiguous with the present City
limits.
The City limits border this property on three sides.
D. That public services are available or can be made available
to the site.
Sewer and water are available from mains in Highway 66, and all
other City services are readily available to the site.
E. That a public need for additional land, as defined in the
city's Comprehensive Plan" can be demonstrated.
Although the current inventory of vacant lands has yet to be field
checked, the Council believes annexation of additional E-1 zoned
land is appropriate. The Comprehensive Plan states that the City
shall strive to maintain at least (emphasis added) a five year
supply of land for any particular need in the City limits
(Comprehensive Plan Policy XII-1). Data supplied by staff
indicates that there is approximately a five year supply at this
time, ,therefore the Council does not find this annexation to
conflict with the stated policy.
In addition, based on the preliminary results of the vacant lands
study, the council does not believe there exists within the city
Limits a parcel of land of similar quality to the subject parcel
which would accommodate the proposed use. This finding is in
compliance with Policy XII-2 of the Comprehensive Plan, which
states "This city shall incorporate vacant land onlY after a
showinq that land of similar aualities does not alreadY exist in
the city limits. or if annexation is necessary to alleviate a
probable public health hazard." '
From the preliminary vacant lands study, there are 6 vacant parcels
within the city zoned E-1 or M-1 of s~milar or larger size as to
that parcel proposed for annexation. These parcels are as follows:
1)
391E4DC 3502
Hersey street
7.78 acres
This land is more commonly known as the Mahar parcel.
It is presently under review for an apartment complex and
E-1 subdivision. ,The sloping portions are not conducive
for mini-storage development, while the flatter portions
are prime employment lands and are scheduled to be used
for higher employment generating businesses, when fully
accessed and served by public facilities.
2&3) 391E12 309 and 310 Dead Indian Road
7 . 6 and 12 acres
This land is currently owned by the city of Ashland and
is scheduled for airport related uses in the future, as
part of the Airport Master Plan. At present, there is
no sewer or water presently extended to these parcels.
This land would not be available for mini-storage use at
this time.
4&5) 391E14D 101 and 201 Crowson Road
7 . 0 and 6'. 73 acres
This land is within the city limits, but has been limited
for further development until full sewer service is
extended to the site and paved access throughout the site
is provided. At present, there is one small development
on this property which is currently on a well and septic.
A condition of approval for this development has
restricted any future development to when full services
ar made available to the site. When this land is fully
serviced, due to it relatively flat topography and
location, is proposed for higher intensity employment
uses and is not an appropriate location for lower
intensity employment associated with mini-storage units.
6)
391E9BA
Railroad Tracks near A street 16.85 acres
This land is currently owned by Southern Pacific Railroad
and has very limited access. The only access point is
from Oak street via a short unimproved street dedication
for New street. Again, this land is relatively flat and
T----
due to its location near the center of Ashlanq, it has
a strong potential for future higher intensity employment
uses and would not be an appropriate location for low
employment mini-storage units.
Therefore, the council finds that there are not other locations
available within the city which would accommodate the low-
employment mini-storage use and finds that it is appropriate to
annex this land for this,use as there is a public need for this
land as defined in the comprehensive Plan.
The city council makes the following findings in support of the
Conditional Use Permit for Mini-storage units in the E-1 zone, and
allowing for a manger's apartment on the site.
A. The proposal is in conformance with the comprehensive Plan.
The comprehensive Plan, implemented through the Land Use Ordinance,
states that mini-storage units are allowed in E-1 zone as 'a
Conditional Use. Quoting from 18.104.010 of the Land Use
Ordinance: "The purpose of conditional use approval is to allow
the proper integration into the community of uses which may be
suitable only on certain conditions and at appropriate locations."
The comprehensive Plan states that the employee per acre ratio
should be approximately 10/acre for E-1 lands. However, this area
is within the primary Safety Zone of the Ashland Airport as
indicated in the "Ashland Municipal Airport Master Plan." As
stated in the Transportation element of the comprehensive Plan,
"This (Airport Master) plan was completed and adopted by the
Ashland city council on October 5, 1976. This plan is the ruling
document concerning airport development and is hereby adopted by
reference. The plan is currently being updated by Waddell to
'reflect changes that have occurred since 1975."
The Master Plan states that developments within the safety zone
should be of a low intensity. While the city's Comprehensive Plan
has indicated this land as E-1 when annexed, the Airport Master
Plan suggests little development be allowed.
In reviewing this application, the city council finds that mini-
storage is an allowable use in the E-1 zone, and that the safety
concerns of the airport are a significant factor in determining
that a low-employment use is the most appropriate for this
location. Further, we find that the location within the Primary
Safety Zone is abutting an area outside of safety zone constraints,
and therefore constitutes the safest area within that zone.
B. The location, size, design, and operating characteristics of
the proposed development are such that the development will be
reasonably compatible with and have minimal impact on the
livability and appropriate development of abutting properties and
the surrounding neiqhborpood.
T---
The council further finds that the submitted site plan and
elevations, along with the applicant's project description are such
that the use will be leS?s intensive than other permitted uses
within the zone, such as commercial retail uses, and thereby
compatible with the abutting properties.
c. In determining the above, consideration shall be given to the
following:
1) Harmony in scale, bulk, coverage and density.
2) The availability and capacity of public facilities and
utilities. .
3) The generation of traffic and the capacity of surrounding
streets.
4) Public Safety and.protection.
5) Architectural and aesthetic compatibility with the surrounding
area.
The council finds that the single-story design of the structures,
except for the low two-story apartment, maintain an appropriate
scale for this area, while protecting views of the neighborhood to
the southwest. The lot coverage and density are in conformance
with the requirements of all uses within the E-l zone~
All public facilities are available, or can be made available to
the site, as indicated by the city of Ashland.
The access to the site is from Highway 66, a state highway.
Adequate capacity remains on this highway to accommodate the
expected traffic flows for this use, which the applicant expressed
to be less than 100 trips/day. other uses which are normally
allowed outright within this zone include retail, office, and light
'manufacturing uses, which if the parcel were fully developed for
these uses, wduld generate approximately 5000, 1000, and 500 trips
per day. Again, these estimates are for a fully developed parcel
to these intensive uses and are intended to provide a guide to the
relative impact of the propos~d mini-storage use.
Further, the subsequent site review of this proposed use will
further address the proposed access of the site onto Highway 66 and
the internal circulation of the site.
This use will not increase any public safety or protection
problems. An on-site manager will ensure the security and the site
and appropriate fencing will inhibit trespassing. Additionally,
lighting requirements will provide adequate security for the site
while still being in conformance with the city's requirements
regarding the Shieldl.ng of lighting from view from residential
areas, and an attached condition prohibits exterior lighting from
interfering with aircraft operations.
The structures are proposed to be constructed of a split face block
with blue metal roofs. The construction will also include the use
of pitched roofs and single story construction to further mimic
some of the residential characteristics of the neighborhood across
Highway 66. Further ,. the council finds that these materials are
similar in nature to those generally used for commercial
construction on other E-l lands, while still being less
"institutional" than standard concrete block or metal siding and
flat roof design and are appropriate for the development of this
property. Also, the area along Highway 66 is p~oposed to have the
highest intensity of landscaping on the parcel, mitigating impacts
to surrounding properties. This are will include street trees and
fencing which will provide an aesthetically pleasing streetscape
along Highway 66. '
The city council makes the following findings for the Conditional
Use permit for a residential use in the Airport Overlay Zone:
A. The proposal is in conformance with the. comprehensive Plan.
Refer to the finding for this criterion above. In addition to the
previous findings, the purpose of a conditional use permit for a
residential use in the airport overlay zone is to ensure that there
are few conflicts between the uses, and to place the resident on
notice that the airport is the overriding permitted use in the area
and that the residential use is the conditional use. In this
instance, the council finds that the primary use of the property
is for mini-storage, a commercial use, and that the residential use
for a one-unit apartment is the minimum necessary to complement the
mini-storage use and does not result in a conflict with airport
operations and is in conformance with the Airport Master Plan, a
,supporting document of the comprehensive Plan.
'B. The location, size, design, and operating characteristics of
the proposed development are such that the development will be
reasonably compatible with and have minimal impact on the
livability and appropriate development of abutting properties and
the surrounding neighborhood.
The location of the proposed apartment unit is at the outer fringe
area of the safety zone of the airport, nearest Highway 66,
representing the location with the least impacts within the safety
zone. Further the height limitation of no greater than 20' within
the zone controls the height such that this use is not out of scale
with the remainder of the development, or surrounding uses. since
the residential component of the application is limited to one
unit, it is the minimal size necessary, and will have the least
impact on residents in relation to airport operations. The
approval of only 1 residential unit ensures. that the primary
commercial use of the property zoned E-l will be maintained and
will not hinder airport operations or obstruct views from the
residential area across Highway 66.
I ~
c. :In determining the above, consideration shall be given to the
following:
1) Harmony in scale, bulk, coverage and density.
2) The availability and capacity of public facilities and
utilities.
3) The generation of traffic and the capacity of surrounding
streets.
4) Public Safety and protection.
S) Architectural and aesthetic compatibility with the
surrounding area.
In addition to the findings maqe above for the overall commercial
development, the following findings are made specifically for the
residential use:
1) The size of the apartment unit will be in scale with the
remainder of the project, and will follow the. design and
materials outlined for the mini-storage units. The two story
height will not obstruct views and will conform with the
height limitations of the Airport Overlay Zone. All
requirements for lot coverage and landscaping will be as
outlined for the mini-storage use.
2) The public facility needs for an apartment unit are
minimal and shall not cause any faciiities to operate beyond
their established capacities.
3) As stated above, Highway 66 is a fully improved 2-lane
Oregon state highway providing access from the site into the
, city of Ashland. The traffic generated by an apartment unit,
approximately 7 trips per day, shall not significantly impact
the traffic handling capabilities of Highway 66.
4) The location of the apartment on site shall increase the
safety aspects of the proposal by providing on-site security
and surveillance, as well as monitoring the access to the site
by users.
5) . Th~ findings made for the mini -storage approval above are
equally applicable to this portion of the application.
Further, the council makes the following findings regarding the
site Review:
. A. All applicable city ordinances have been met and will be met
by the proposed development.
B. All requirements of the site Review Chapter have been met.
C. The site desiqn complies with thequidelines adopted by the
city council for implementati~n of this Chapter.
The council finds, that the information regarding on-site
circulation presented on the site plan is not in conformance with
the city's ordinance. Further we find that until all issues
regarding the wetland are reconciled, that the site plan is subject
to change from that presented, and therefore we find that the
criteria for site Review have not been met,.
SECTION 3. DECISION
3.1 Based on the record of the Public Hearing on this matter, the city
council concludes that the request to Annex approximately 6.2 acres of
land to construct mini-storage units with associated manager's unit is
supported by evidence contained within the record.
Therefore, based on our overall conclusions, and upon the proposal being
subject to each of the following conditions, we recommend that Planning
Action #90-120 be approved. Further, if anyone or more of the
conditions below are found to. be invalid, for any whatsoever, then
Planning Action #90-120 is denied. We recommend that the following
conditions be attached to the approval:
1) That no development be allowed on the areas indicated as wetlands,
until this area is reviewed and inventoried by the Division of state
Lands.
2) That if the area is determined to be a wetland, the applicant would
follow the process and procedures outlined by.the Division of state
Lands for obtaining a permit for altering the wetland,' which includes
the mitigation measures outlined in Senate Bill 3.
3) That the proposal be subject.to a continuance of the site Review,
allowing the applicant to redesign the project to not include the
wetland areas. Further conditions regarding design, on-site vehicular
circulation, landscaping, etc... will be addressed at that time.
4) That city services be made available to the site, including sewer,
water, and electric, and that the required water lines and appurtenant
devices be installed for fire hydrant installation as required by the
Public Works Department.'
5) That all system development annexation fees be, paid prior to the
issuance of a building permit.
6) That a survey and legal description of the property be prepared by
a registered land surveyor prior to first reading of the annexation
ordinance by the city council. Also that the survey indicate the
primary safety zone of the airport and horizontal and transitional
safety surface regarding building height in the airport overlay zone.
7) That all fire hydrants be installed as required by the Ashland Fire
Department prior to the commencement of combustible construction on the
site.
8) That the applicant grant an easement to the city of Ashland to
allow for the trees penetrating the horizontal and transitional surface
of the Airport Overlay Zone.
9) That all necessary easements for sewer, water, and electric be
provided as required by the city of Ashland.
10) That the applicant obtain ingress/egress approval from the state
Highway Division for access to the property.
11) That the applicant sign an agreement with the City, agreeing that
airport noise is likely to increase in the future and that they waive
all rights to complain about airport noise.
12) That the building height for the two-story office/residence not
exceed 20' as required by the Airport Overlay zone, or protrude through
the transitional or horizontal surface of the Airport Overlay Zone.
13) That all cuts and fill be indicated on the building permits to
be reviewed and approved by the Staff Advisor.
14) That no lights from the project be directed to interfere with
airport operations.
15) That the city shall not adopt ordinances annexing the land until
the following is completed:
That the property owner enter into an agreement with the city of
Ashland, after site- Review approval, agreeing to construct and
develop the property in complete accord with the approved mini-
storage use and plan indicated by this Conditional Use Permit
approval (PA90-120) and subsequent site Review approval; and that
the property will never be used for any other purpose without the
'approval of the city of Ashland. subsequent to the property owner
signing the agreement, the city council shall adopt the appropriate
ordinances annexing the land.
Dated this
day of October, 1990.
Catherine M. Golden
Mayor
Nan E. Franklin
city Recorder
BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF ASHLAND
JACKSON COUNTY, OREGON,
IN THE MATTER OF PLANNING ACTION # 90-168, REQUEST FOR
FINAL PLAN MODIFICATION TO MODIFY THE STREET LOCATION
AND LOT LAYOUT FOR A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED 18-LOT SUB-
DIVISION. MODIFICATION INVOLVES THE RELOCATION OF
THE INTERSECTION OF THE PROPOSED LOGAN DRIVE AND SCENIC
A )
)
}
)
)
DRIVE APPROXIMATELY 60' TOWARDS THE SCENIC/GRANDVIEW )
INTERSECTION AND THE ASSOCIATED MODIFICATION OF LOT LINES.)
NO MODIFICATION IN THE NUMBER OF LOTS IS PROPOSED. }
APPLICANT: ED HOUGHTON- )
}
FINDINGS,
CONCLUSIONS,
AND ORDERS
\
\
RECITALS:
1) Tax lot 6900 of 39lE 8AA is located near the intersection of
Scenic and Grandview and is zoned R-l-lO-Pi Single Family Residential.
2) The applicant is requesting a Final Plan modification to modify
the street location and layout for a previously approved IS-lot
sub-division. Modification involves the relocation of the
intersection of the proposed Logan Drive and Scenic Drive
approximately 60' towards the Scenic/Grandview intersection and .the
associated modification of lot lines. No modification in the number
of lots is proposed. The new street location is outlined on the site
plan on file at the Department of Community Development.
3) The criteria for Final Plan approval are outlined in Chapter 18.88
and are as follows:
Final Plan approval shall be granted upon finding the substantial
conformance with the outline plan. Nothing in this provision shall
limit reduction in the number of dwelling units or increased open
space provided that, if this is done for one phase, the number of
dwelling units shall not be transferred to another phase, nor the open
space reduced below that permitted in the outline plan. This
substantial conformance provision is intended solely to facilitate the
minor modifications from one planning step to another. Substantial
conformance shall exist when comparison of the outlined plan with.the
final plan shows that:
a) The number of dwelling units vary no more than 10% of those shown
on the approved outline plan, but in no case shall the number of units
exceed those permitted ~n the outline plan.
b) The yard depths and distances between main buildings vary no more
than 10% of those shown on the approved outline plan, but in no case
shall these distances be reduced below the minimum established within
this Title.
c) The open spaces vary no more than 10% of that provided on the
outline plan.
(1)
d) The building size does not exceed the building size shown on the
outline plan by more than 10%. .
.e} The building elevations and exterior material are in conformance
with the purpose and intent of this Title and the approved outline
plan.
f} That the addi tional standards which resul ted in the awarding of
bonus points in the outline plan approval have been included in the
final plan with substantial detail to ensure that the performance
level committed to in the outline plan will be achieved.
g} Any amendment to an approved Final Plan shall follow a Type I
procedure.
4) The Plan'ning Commission, following proper public notice, held a
Public Hearing 'on August 14, 1990, at which time testimony was
received and exhibits were presented. The Planning Commission denied
application, noting that the applicant had failed to meet the burden
of proof.
5} The Ci ty Council, following proper public notice, held a Public
Hearing on August 2, 1990, at which time testimony was received and
exhibits were presented. The City Council denied the appeal, noting
that the applicant had failed to meet the burden of proof.
Now, therefore, the City Council of the City of Ashland finds,
concludes and recommends as follows:
SECTION 1. EXHIBITS
For the purposes of reference to these Findings, the attached
index of exhibits, data and testimony will be used.
staff Exhibits lettered with an "5".
proponent's Exhibits, lettered with a "P".
Opponent's ,Exhibits, lettered with an "0".
Hearing Minutes, Notices, Miscellaneous Exhibits lettered with
and "M".
SECTION 2. CONCLUSORY FINDINGS
2.1 The City Council finds that it has received the
information necessary to make a decision based on a Staff
Report, public hearing testimony and the exhibits received.
2.2 The City Council finds that the proposal to modify the
street location and layout for a previously approved 18-l~t
sub-division does not meet the criteria for approval for Final
Plan as outlined in Chapter 18.88.030 B.
(2 )
,-
The criteria for approval is that the proposed location of
of Logan Drive be in substantial conformance with the
outline plan. The council finds that the location of
Logan Drive, where it was to enter scenic, was ambiguous
in that two locations were equally possible, each
substantially different from the other. Accordingly, it
appears necessary for the final plan to be amended so
as to establish a precise approved location for Logan
Drive to enter Scenic. The council further finds that
there is not now an approved location for that intersection.
As for the presently proposed location, the council finds
that from a standpoint of traffic safety, other locations
should be explored and this planning action is denied.
SECTION 3. DECISION
3.1 Based on the record of the public Hearing on this matter, the
City Council concludes that the request for Final Plan Modificati6n to
modify the street location and lot layout for- a - previously approved
lS-lot sub-division is not supported by the evidence contained within
the whole record.
Therefore, based on our overall conclusions, and upon the proposal
being subject to each of the following conditions, we deny Planning
Action 490-168.
Date
MAYOR
ATTEST - CITY RECORDER
(3)
~emnrandum
October 25, 1990
ijI 0:
Mayor and City Council
JIi rom:
~'ubjed;
c-..___--~,-
steve Hall, Public Works Director~~
Foster study -- Work Session with Bike Commission
Now that public input has been collected, the Bicycle commission
is requesting that Council set a date to have a study session
together to move forward on the Foster study decision. This date
should be set at the earliest opportunity while the issue is
still fresh.
The only available location is.tbe Hunter Park Senior Room.'
suggested dates:
Monday, November 5th
Wednesday, 7th
Thursday, 8th
Wednesday, 14th
Monday, 19th
--r--- -
~tmntctndum
October 31, 1990
~o: Honorable Mayor & city council
JII rom: Brian L. Almquist, city Administra~"""'"
~'ubjed:
Request from Church of the Nazarene
The council recently approved a sewer connect outside the city limits
for the Nazarene c~urch, subject to the Municipal Code requirement
that they agree to pay the SDC annexation fee of $.0383'per sq. ft. upon
connection to the city sewer system.
The Church has requested that they only be required to pay the
required fee for a 10,000 square foot lot, citing Section 18.108.070
of the Municipal Code as authorization for this request. section
18.108.070 is the land-use procedures section of the zoning Ordinance,
and does not relate in any way to the requirements contained in the
Systems Development Annexation Chapter of the Code (Chapter 4.16).
Although section 4.16.020 does not make provision for staging of the
fee, it has been city policy to allow payment only for the portion of
the land being developed, as it is developed.
RECOMMENDATION: Based on the site plan, it is my recommendation that
the fee be divided into three segments:
~.<-~. --
II-tf' ~ 9~; )'Jt1 "1.
:5 eg ,(TO
The first portion of the property which has the recently
completed parsonage would be due now. This portion is
approximately 18.7 acres (47,350 sq. ft.) and the fee would
be $1,813.
11
./
2. When the Church is complete, and is ready for connection to
the sewer system, an additional fee of $6,339 based on
approximately 3.80 acres (165,500 sq. ft.) would be due and
payable.
/ 335"
(,p/
......, ,
/;;//'.:;;'_, 3. The remaining $7,113 would be due and payable when and if any
<"/'...______ t/J portion of the remaining' 4.26 acres is developed.
13lf'3~~ /
Please see the attached plot plan which illustrates the above
recommendation for staging of the fee.
Attachments/
, /~
13cf3-:> . -
~. 1/-fi-'76 ,r>'/i<f3%
1.3, 375. & ;j~ C0t-1~" a...~':i
10 J~C;-' 3' Y
"
CYi;1 )
< /3/ ~3S ./,
----..'-.....'.'.... , .
/Y3c 3? (:~:(f
HJ-'k-dl::l-1990 11:28 FROM CASCADE COHSULTING SSOC. TO
, .
14880677 P.02
\;' I. \i
'1 ( '. . .~....I \ ,; "-
I '",
-----r-, --. --TI:: ,. ~ ~
I I I l .
,. . 'I I ~ ~
I L II \-:
r I 1 \1 i '
. '.
I
I
~--
to , (
,
(! h Cl )" c.l\-...
, ...
.001 04'" ~ 011 ~ d
"380V aNV1H~J/ J. t' JAJ1
, '
~
-..~
--
~-.
~
.&3'$~~ ~
NIJ1r .... ~
-.:
------- _.
II
l. .~
~ '.
~ ~
~ .,;'\
. \!'\
t,. .,.
~\ ~
:~
I
I It
~.'~
II t ~
I I\." ~
I I Vll ~
"
I~-
Qollie Miller. Pastor
ClIURCII OF TIlE NAZAllENE
P.o. Box 846
1650 Clarke
Ashland. Oregon 975'20
(503) 48'2-1784
Phone (503) 48'2-3936
10/29/90
Mr. Brian Almquist
20 East Main
Ashland. Oregon 97520
Dear Mr. Almquist.
i am writing on behalf of the Ashland Church of the Nazarene. to
petition for relief from annexation fees on our property at 1760 East
Main Street.
According to Ashland's city ordinances. connection fees for sewer
services. for a connection outside the city limits. are as follows:
1. A basic connection fee of $1055.00. (Section 14.08.025).
2. A Wastewater Treatment Plant Systems Charge of $35.00. (Section
14.08.030. paragraph F).
3. A Systems Development Annexation Charge of $.0383 per square
foot. for land zoned as Single Family Residential. (Section
4.16.010). For our property. (9.15 acres). that would be a
total charge of $15i265.38.
However. in section 18.108.070. and the following paragraphs.
provisions are made for a Type 3 Amendment to the Systems Development
Annexation Charge. Under this procedure the property owners would be
asked to pay System~ Development Annexation Charges for a standard lot
of 10.000 square feet. and the fees for the balance of the property
would be due and payable upon subdivision or sale of the property in
que~tion. Payment of that adjusted charge would allow the property
owners access to city services. and still insure that the city would be
compensated in full for future connections to city serviG,es from that
property.
We have consolidated the ,property into a single tax lot. We have
s'i,gned an agreement notto~ subdivide. Our, conditJon'al use permit shows
clearly~hat we have no ~ntention of subdividing the lot. Since the
intent of the Systems Development Annexation Charge is to insure that
property is not subdivided and connected to city services without
proper compensation to the city for the services used. we believe that
there is adequate protection uhder a Type 3 amendment. and that these
factors qualify us for consideration for a Type 3 amendment to the
standard Systems Development Annexation Charge.. under Section
18.108.070. and the following ,para~raphs.
After a week like yours, you need a church like ours!
If the amendment is granted, it would mean that our Systems Development
Annexation Charge would be reduced from $15,265.38, (standard fees for
9.15 acres). to $383.00. (the fee for a standard 10.000 square foot
lot). The balance of the charges for our property would be due and
payable upon subdivision or sale of the property.
As specified by Section 1B.1~8.090, paragraph C, I am enclosing a legal
description of the land, and a map showing the property affected.
Thank you for your help with this issue. Obviously. it is of great
importance to our organization, and we much appreciate your
representation in this matter. Please do not hesitate to call me if I
can be of help to you in your preparations to take this to the Planning
Commission.
Sincerely,
~ 1'VW-
Rollie Miller
enc: Property descriptions
Map
cc: IMP consultants
Jim Olson'
--~-r--
~
90-16783
EXHIBIT lIAll
TR AC T A:
Beginning at a point on the east line of Donation Land Claim No. 45 in
Township 39 South, Ran~e 1 East of the Willa~ette Meridian in Jackson
County Oregon which point bears South 0 04 East 417.42 feet from the
southe~st corn~r of Lot 47 of ASHLAND ACRES, according to the official plat
thereof, now of record; thence West 417.42 feet; thence North 00041 West,
pa'rallel with the east line of said Claim, 208.71 feet to the south line of
that tract described in Document No. 70-11377 of the Official Records of
Jackson County, Oregon; thence West, along the south line of said tract,
124.865 feet to the southeast corner thereof; thence South 00071 East
415.71 feet; thence East 541.92 feet to a point of intersection with the
east line of said Claim; thence North 0004' West, along the Claim line,
207.00 feet to the point of beginning. .
(C~de 5-12, Account 11-11431-1, Map '391E10D, Tax Lot '912)
TRACT B: .
Commencing at a poi~t on the east line of Donation Land Claim No. 45 in
Township 39 South, Range 1 East of theWillarnette Meridian in Jackson
County, Oregon, which point bears South 00041 East 417.42 feet from the
southeast corner of Lot 47 of ASHLAND ACRES, according to the official plat
thereof, now of record, thence West 208.71 feet to the southwest corner of
tract described in Document No. 75-05379 of the Official Records of Jackson
County, Oregon, the true point of beginning; thence continue West 208.71
feet; thence North 00041 West 210.06 feet to the south line of that tract
described in Document No. 70-11377, said Official Records; thence East,
along the south line of said tract, 208.71 feet; thence South 00041 East
1.35 feet to the northwest corner of that tract described in Document No.
75-05379, said Official Records; thence South 0004' East, 'along the west
line of said tract, 208.71 feet to the true point of beginning.
(Code 5-12, Account 11-11421-4, Map '391E100, Tax Lot 1902)
TRACT C:
Beginni.ng at a point on the east line of Donation Land Claim No. 45 in
Township 39 South, Range 1 East of the Willamette Meridian in Jackson
County, Oregon, which point bears South 0004' East 208.71 feet from the
southeast corner of Lot 47 of ASHLAND ACRES, according to the official plat
thereof, now of record (said point is also the southeast corner of tract
described in Volume 516 pa~e 19 of the Deed Records of Jackson County, .
Oregon); thence South 0004 East, along said Claim line, a distance of
208.71 feet; thence West 208.71 feet; thence North 0.04' West 208.71 feet
to the south line of said .tract; thence East, along said line, a distance
of 208.71 feet to the point of beginning.
(Code 5-12, Account 11-11427-1, Map 1391EI00, Tax Lot 1908) ,
-
--
90-16783
PARCEL NO. 11
Beginni~ at a p)int on the South line of Lot 47, ASHlAND ACRES, in
Donation Land Claim" No. 45, Township 39 South, Range 1 East, Willamette
Meridi~n, Jackson County, Oregon, according to the Official Plat
thereof, now of record, which point bears 208.11 feet West, of a stone
monument at the southeast corner of said tract, thence West, along the
South line of said tract, 88.29 feet, to the Southwest corner therof;
thence North O. O~, west, along the West line thereof, 384.77 feet, to
the southerly line of East Main Street, thence along said street, North
75. 34' West, 97.15 feet, thence North 89. 33' West, 121.40 fee t;
thence South O. 07' East, 557.29 feet, thence East, 303.63 feet; thence
North O. 04' west, 147.36 feet, to the point of beginning.
EXHIBIT "A" (CON'T)
PARCEL NO.2:
Commencing at a polnt on the East line of Donation Land Claim No. 45,
Township 39 South,. Range 1 East, Willamette Meridian, J~ck8on County,
Oregon, wh lch po int bears South O. '.04' East, 208.71 feet, from the
Southeast corner of Lot 47, ASHLAND ACRES, Jackson County, Oregon,
according to the Official Plat thereof, now of record (said point also
beino the Southeaat corner of tract described in Volume 516, Page 19,
Jackson County, Oregon, Deed Recorda), thence West, 208.71 feet, along
the North boundary of said tract, to the Northwest corner thereof, for
the true point of beginning, thence North O. 04' West, parallel with
the East l1ne of said Claim, 61.35 feet, thence West, 303.63 feetJ'
thence North O. 07' west, 557.29 feet, to a point of inte~section with
the South line of East Main Street, thence North 89- JJ'west, along
said street line, 30.00 feet, thence South O. 07' East, 618.875 feet,
thence .East, 333.515 feet, to the point of beginning.
Jackson County, Oregon
Recorded
OFFICIAL RECORDS
d. : 57 JUL 5 1990 P M.
KATHLEEN S. BECKETT
Ifi1t~~~j;;1!Lputy
I!'
."
3/
f ,.-- '. .
"' '^~,A Ii i';',.. ,,_.
.~::~5~~~'(_"~\
C/j" "{:
affix. corpora,. .......,
-I
.....-........
STATE OF OREGON,
1...
~ API
1-5 FREEWAY
......
L&J
UJ
a:::
......
CI')
a:::
L&J
~
...J
<
::a
. \..I. . ""'
"IDIl..E
SCHO,(l
NIOR
tOl;
WALKER.
SCH()(L
. ... .Vo,J v..
" ',-:' .:
c., '
.~ ."
t. ~ '.,f I
.,
.,
,,;,.
39 . IE' II
~
;, 1!'
. .;:
. ft;
t~
..
: .
..
"'
~ .
.. .
~ '
f ,
.~
~ .
t- .;
f
1(;
t '
:,a..
'!e,
"
2..'
I
203 "
, . ..,.~ .
, ;~
;.
..
1
~.
l(p-sso. ,
a (,0
!
902
,t,
..
tj
..
t"
w
912
T ~
t....
290
tJ t. .. .
S ',' .t .
. ..3Q ;'E I~<, ,~. ....
This'prin(is'ma e soley f~urPose of assistin~t
in locatitta ~aid remis~s and the company asSu~~.' ,
. no 1i3bilit%Jor riations. if any~ ht 'dLnellsioils anti. ',;
'I :.caticns a~se.rl i,led 'by actual surve" . (" ,
f ..' . JA SON cOOVtltlTlEOT 5..:.
. .,oIVlSION 0 CONTiliiNIAL LANO TITLE CO, '.:
, :. ' ~~ W. MAIR' Ph. 179.2811 MEDFORD. 'OREtON~. . l
, : '. . : ".' ~'7N\~: " '
I,... .~<.. "
.~;,;;::.. ..~~_ . . (P-4928) I " :.-~
,.- \ ",...
..._. .......
. , .. ....,..,.
.. 204
I
...... "
..._ ~ ~~ ~1l ~.:": .'
909
..
,.
.'
..
(P-4678) .
.
..
..
.
...
7.a..
910
T
5~12
.z~
.
f
.:.
Tel"
'. .
..~
2tn
'.
91'3 ·
T " 11,
RR6.
., '~
(P-2484)
"
J3..
,.....,
.,.....
~.
o~....
If'. ..
7.._':
I.t,. ..
",.
44"'"
,J!;:
904
I~
9.r' . 1
.~
400
i
4~
J.
t
Ii
a l
.. "
.. ..
" ..
,10
.~.
915
, .,.
1....+
c.'
,
;1
~emnrandum
November 1, 1990
~o: Honorable Mayor & city council
~ro~: Brian L. Almquist, city Administrator
~ubjed:
1700 E. Main - Sewer Connect Request
The attached request from David.Lane involves property which is
adjacent to the City limits. Several weeks ago, the Council approved
a request by the Nazarene Church for a sewer connection sUbject to
their consent to annex. (The Lane property made the Nazarene Church
property non-contiguous)
Attached is a map showing the location of both properties and their
relationship to the present City 'limits. Annexation of the Church
property is particularly important in that it would allow our city
electric utility to provide electric service.'
RECOMMENDATION: In light of the current request by David Lane, it is
recommended that an application for annexation be processed, rather
than'a request for sewer service outside the city.
It is further recommended that the proposed annexation include both
the Lane and Nazarene Church properties.
~emnrandum
October 18, 1990
~o: Brian L. Almquist, City Administrator
~ro~: Steve Hall, Public Works Director~.~1,~
~ubjed:
1700 East Main Street - Sewer and Connect Request
ACTION REQUESTED
City Council authorize 1700 East Main Street to be connected to
City sanitary sewer in accordance with Section 14.08.030 of the
Ashland Municipal Code with one additional condition:
+ Property owner must sign in favor of participating in
future sanitary sewer improvements to serve the area.
BACKGROUND AND SUMMARY
Attached is a letter from David Lane, owner of 1700 East Main
Street, requesting connection to city sewer facilities.
The property is outside the city limits but within the Urban
Growth Boundary and will require application for annexation to
the City of Ashland prior to allowing service to city sewers.
When the City Council allowed connection of the Nazarene Church
to city sewers August 21, 1990 a stipulation that "the easement
will be exclusive". A copy of the minutes is attached for your
reference.
I have also attached a copy of my letter to David Lane outlining
options for him to pursue in reference to connection to city
sewers.
The condition I am recommending for signing in favor of future
sewer improvements is requested for the future need to resolve
the overall sewer needs of this area. As with the Nazarene
Church, this is a piecemeal effort to provide sanitary sewers to
two landowners in the area.
1700 East Main Street
October 18, 1990
Page Two
City Council may allow connection to city sewers as per AMC
14.08.030 if:
- There is adequate capacity within the sewer system and the
treatment plant to serve the residence.
- Requirements will be met by the property owner as listed
in the attached section of the Ashland Municipal Code.
- Applicant can meet all the requirements of the Municipal
Code.
- Staff 'recommends approval of application for sewer
connection of 1700 East Main Street subject to meeting city
requirements.
cc: Mr. David Lane, applicant
John Fregonese, Planning Director
Jim Olson, Assistant City Engineer
Dennis Barnts, Water Quality Superintendent
Pam Barlow, Administrative Assistant
encls:
Minutes 8/21/90
Lane J~tter/easements
Hall letter
ijI 0:
JIf rom:
~ubjed:
&b\.R.~ .....~ . .
_~~ L~~
A'~~..\ 'lO t"i\~~
(u C~".,;<~ (~tL_
J\~~il
. \~:1-~lO'O
~emnrandum
October 25, 1990
Steve Hall, Public Works Director
1700 East Main Street - Sewer and Connect Request
The Planning Department has reviewed the action requested, and 'we
have the following concerns: .
1) This appears to be predicated on the development of the
Church of the Nazarene property adjacent to the Lane property.
As stated in the City Council minutes of August 21, 1990, the
plans submitted for the wetland area were to receive approval
from the Division of State Lands prior to sewer connection. It is
our understanding that the sewer hookup has been completed,
or that a permit has been requested for this. However, we are
not aware of any approvals from the State, other than the verbal
statements by the Church's engineer. We believe that this
documentation must be provided in order to be in compliance
with the Council's order. And we believe that similar
requirements should be attached to Mr. Lane's request.
2) Much of the wetland area dis'cussed during the Church of
the Nazarene sewer request is located on Mr. Lane's land.
Since this sewer request involves land within our Urban Growth
Boundary, we would request the addition of a condition to the
approval requiring that any drainage, fill, or other modifications
of the wetland area be approved by the City of Ashland and
Division of State Lands prior to the commencement of any work
within this area.
3) Very recent issues have been raised over the validity of
Consent to Annexation agreements. It appears that these may
not be legally binding documents due to changes in annexation
law. We believe that the City Attorney should research and
respond to this prior to granting the sewer connection approval.
Bikeway study (Continued)
making radical changes to the Boulevard, and Laws suggested an
adjourned meeting. Grant Application - Siskiyou Blvd. Engineering
Plans - The discussion turned to the next item from the Bikeway
Commission recommending submission of a grant application for
engineering plans for the Boulevard Bikeway Project. Acklin said the
study is an excellent document but until it is adopted we should not
apply for the grant. Hall said the application needs to be in by
September 1st. Laws moved to table the grant application, Winthrop
seconded, all AYES on voice vote.
Schrodt Designs, Inc. - state Lottery Funds' - A letter was received
from Schrodt Designs requesting Council endorsement of their
application for State Lottery Funds for business expansion.
Admin. Almquist noted that they are outside of the City, but
could write a letter of support. Acklin said development of
wood products is a goal of the state. Laws moved to write a
support, Winthrop seconded, all AYES on voice vote.
City
Council
secondary
letter 'of
Memo re: 1990-91 Council Goals - City Admin. Almquist prepared a
memorandum concerning progress on the goals adopted by the Council.
For informatiqn only, no action taken.
opacity standards for Woodstove Use - Dick Wanderscheid, Energy
Conservation Coord., said the Air Quality Committee and Staff both
feel the standards will be easier to enforce if they are mandated by
,the voters. Mr. Farrar, 987 Walker, +eels Ashland does not have an
air quality problem and this action is not necessary. Williams moved
to extend the meeting for 1/2 hour, winthrop seconded, all AYES on
voice vote. Williams moved to approve the request, Winthrop seconded
and the ,motion carried on voice vote.
Sewer Connect Request - 1760/1780 E. Main - A request was received
from the Church of the Nazarene for a sewer connect outside of the
City limits. Almquist said there is a wetland issue on the property
to be resolved, and a sewer easement on the other side of E. Main
should be exclusive to the Church. John Seaders, Engineer, said an ,-
engineering study on the wetland area was sent to the state and they
have accepted it, but he did not.have that letter in hand. Acklin
said she visited the site as a sanitarian for Jackson County. Laws
moved to qrant the request sub;ect to confirmation that the sewer
easement will be exclusive and Williams seconded. Winthrop suggested
adding the condition that the building plans be approved by the Div.
of State Lands and the motion and second were amended. All YES on
roll call vote.
PUBLIC FORUM
Bob Fredinburg, 2275 Siskiyou Blvd., is upset that his letter to the
Council offering property for sale for open space purposes, was
responded to by the city Administrator.
Regular Meeting - Ashland City Council - August 21, 1990 - P. 4
f'~ r~(\~.,
.('\ -.j." ' ""'J'/,:.~,~,
~;:- )) < m.~l'<)
r~ r~: [. c ~ iV' c'D
[;p~TE ocr 1 8 199.r:
City of Ashland
Steve Hall, Dir. of Public Works
20 E. Main St.
Ashland, OR 97520
Oct.18, 1990
Dear Mr. Hall,
As per your request, enclosed, are copies of the proposed easements
which would be necessary for us to run our sewer pipe across the
Nazarene Church's property and the Piersons' property. Neither of
these have been accepted and both are being revieweQ by the Grantors
respective attorneys, however I suspect that there will not be major
changes in either one. I have discussed the options you mentioned in
your 9-26-90 letter with the Piersons and they maintain that they will
not change their require~ents for granting a public easement:
inclusion of a portion of their property into the urban growth boundary
and waiver of the connect and systems development fees for the
residences on their property. Because of the Piersons' stance, our
next best option is to ask for connection to the City sewer system.
If you require any other information, please let me know. Thanks.
Yours truly,
p~.L
David Lane
1700 E. ,Ma inS t .
Ashland, OR 97520
482-8866 home
773-6611 work
GRANT Of EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT fOR SANITARY SEWER
i n c: () n sid e i~ a t~ -; () n 0 -f the s u en 0 f $ '1 . 0 U.. r h e~ IIJ.. ~: h'i .,3 n d C rl u r c h () f the
Nazarene. Grantor. convey to David and Patricia Lane. Grantees. a
pel~petual and exclusive easement to I",!se a s.tr'''iP of land 20 fe<::,t ~In
~/,I i (3 t !N;. t i', .;;' "=~ en t e to, -; ~; II e 0 "f \1.,1 h ~ C i-: i:;:; "!.: ate (2 a :::~ f 0 I -j C> VJ S c,:: :-. 0 s s the
P("(>PE;'" .;
f the (:; r" ant 8',' 2~ :
A line. beginning at the northerly edge of the Church's proper~y
\I\'rlsre t:-le Church' ssewer 'I -i ne n.Jns undei~ E. tvla"j n St..
paralleling the church's sewer line until it meets a line
t~ u n Ii ~ n.;:1 sub s tan t i a 'j -I:"i E a s t to v'J est. 'lac ,-;:;t e d 5 0 fee t. sou tho r .:5: n (J
essentially paralleling the center line of East Main Street.
sa i d -j i ne extend -, ng wes t. t.e:' meet an otJ'ler" '1";, r'E' at appr'c.>: i ma te -j \/
135 degree angle extending from the Grantee's residence. thence
extending UP this angled line to the Grantees' property located
at 1700 E. Main Street. Ashland. Oregon. also know as Tax lot
9 0 9. 3 9. 1 E. 'j 0 D. ( See a t t a c h e d d i a 9 t~ a i:; . ')
fhe Terms of this easement are as fol16ws:
-'I ~ (~:i i- a tl t~ e e ~:: and t. h e i r a q en t s c. ":j (I d e pen den t. C 0 rl t (' !!:~ c:: to t- s a rf c:; i n y' i tee s
shall use ~he easement strip for sanitary sewer purposes only. and the
grantees may construct and maintai~ therein a sanitary sewer pipe.
2. The use of the said easement by Grantees shall be exclusive and the
sewer pips shall serve only the property of the Grantees. located at
1700 E. Main Street. Ashland. Oregon and no other. This easement shall
/"'<.:::ma i n in cff ec t and sha i -i becomE- p a I'" ~: of th c: deed V',inen th '';:: G~~ .:',f"l t e:es
:3 ell ()r ()t ,''': er~ irJ is e ell S p os e of thE: ;.:;. j- 012' erot.:,/ ,
,_, C'; 1'" a nt,;:es a (J, :" e8 a n d~_ c,'v'en ant to::> "; n d erni"j f \; '::" n d (:, ;;;' + en C (:;t'. a Ii t c.~." f t oni
.51 ('I V 1 c' s s . claim (';0 r- 'I i a b i i i t, .yt Co C; j- a n 't C) r a ,-' :~c~': n q Ci n a n './ : n ann E3 (' f r- 0 m
Grantees use of he easement strle. Grantees Bssume all risk 5;-ls1ng
out of their use of the easement strip and Grantor shall have no
-I i a b i -I -1 t y toG t"" ant e e s 0 r' 0 t h 8F s f c;. :~' any con d '1 t i 0 (I ex i s t 'i n 9 the r e -i n CH'"
thereon.
4. This easement shall be perpetual; however. in the vent that it is
not used by the Grantees for a period of five years, or if otherwise
abandoned by Grantees. the easement shall automatically expire and
Grantees shall~ upon request. execute a recordable document evidencing
such expiration.
5. This easement is granted subject to all prior easements and
encumbrances of record. situate in the real property owned by Grantors
in Jackson County, Oregon as described in Exhibit A attached hereto.
Page 1 - Grant of Exclusive Easement
in W tnes$ Whereof. th~'0arties have caused this instrumen~ to be
execu~ed effective the date of ~~? Slqn~n9 below.
The Ashland Church of the Nazarene b~:
..... ... ............ ....................-...
GI~ a n +~or
..... .................... . .. . ...-......................-- .......
David Lane. Grantee
.......... .... ........... ....,_...._.... . .' _, ........_..._......... .n
Patricia Lane. Grantee
Page 2 - Grant of [xc~usive Easement
Date
...........................
Date
. . ..................... .-
Date
-~t
----_#....~~..-.-
-:-;:l
~ !'
If1
m VI'
~"'\1'>
~"'~
nt~.
',,--.
L.Dr q 1/
fl)
X
);' ~
'><.
~ ~
~1 -r
'" 0
"
(\
\:
~
~
'"i
:t
~
~
'-.
@J
'h
()
'-1
~
'-.]
~
C/)
~
~
~
~
(J
~
C/)
GRANT OF COMMON EASEMENT FOR SANITARY SEWER
In consideration of the sum of $1.00. William R. Pierson and Gwen
Jones Pierson~ Husband and Wife! Grantors! convey to David and
Patricia Lane~ Grantee, a perpetual and common easement to use a
strip of land 20 feet in width, the centerline of which is located as
follows across the property of the Grantors:
Beginning at a point which is located on the northerly right of
way line of the East ,Extension of Main Street ,in the City of
Ashland, Oregon! which point bears west 306.45 feet and south
337.30 feet from the N.E. corner of the Donation Land Claim
No. 45 , which DLC corner is located on the north line of
Ashland Acres~ an official plat now of record, marked by a 3/8"
iron pipe; thence running N. 07' W. ~ 293 feet more or less to
the centerline of a 12" diameter sanitary sewer, belonging to
the City of Ashland, Oiegon.
The Terms of this easement are as follows:
1. Grantee, and their agents, independent contractors and invitees
shall use the easement strip for sanitary sewer purposes only~ and the
grantee may construct and maintain therein a sanitary sewer pipe of no
more than 4" diameter. The sewer pipe shall, serve only the single
residence of the Grantee, located at 1700 E. Main Street, Ashland~
Oregon, and no other. This easement shall remain in effect and shall
become part of the deed when the Grantee sells or otherwise disposes
of the residence. The use of the said easement by Grantee shall be in
common with the easement granted by the Grantor to the Ashland Church
of the Nazarene.
2. It is expressly agreed by Grantee and reserved by Grantor that any
use of the easement! except by the Grantee! and any sewer installed
thereiri by the general public and/or by the City of Ashland and any
trespass consented to by Grantee upon the easement by the City of
Ashland, its agents. or employees shall extinguish this easement
forever and render it nullity. It is furthermore expressly agreed by
Grantee that any voluntary agreement or permission granted by them to
the City of Ashland to connect any sanitary sewer pipe installed
within this easement to any public or municipal sewer, other than at
the northerly terminus of the easement as described hereinabove, shall
extinguish the easement and all rights and appurtenances thereof
forever.
3. Grantee agrees and covenants to indemnify and defend Grantor from
any loss, claim or liability to Grantor arising in any manner from
Grantee's use of the easement strip. Grantee assu~es all risk arising
out of their use of the easement strip and Grantor shall have no
liability to Grantee or others for any condition existing therein or
thereon.
Page 1 - Grant of Common Easement
4. This easement shall be perpetual; however, in the vent that it is
not used by the Grantee for a period of five years, or if otherwise
abandoned by Grantee, the easement shall automatically expire and
Grantee shall, upon request, execute a recordable document evidencing
such expiration.
S. This easement is granted subject to all prior easements and
encumbrances of record, situate in the real property owned by Grantors
in Jackson County, Oregon as described in Exhibit A attached hereto.
In Witness Whereof, the parties have caused this instrument to be
executed effective the date of its signing below.
William R. Pierson, Grantor
Date
Gwen Jones Pierson, Grantor
Date
David Lane, Grantee
Date
Patricia Lane, Grantee
Date
Page 2 - Grant of Common Easement
September 26, 1990
I
co~.
~ 1'^\' .
).
David Lane
1700 East Main street
Ashland, Oregon 97520
Re: Sewer Connect Request
,1700 East Main Street
Dear 'David:
The City Council approved the Nazarene Church connection to the
sewer on August 21, 1990. The approval was based on the use of
the line to be exclusively for the Nazarene Church.
During the negotiations with the Nazarene Church, every effort
was made to, construct public sewers as per our master plan, but a
reasonable agreement could not be reached with the Pierson's.
Under these conditions, staff recommended approval of the
Nazarene Church with a provision that they agree to participate
in the future costs of a public sewer in accordance with the City
of Ashland sewer master plan.
The City council was very firm in their limiting the connection
to only the Nazarene Church.
I recommend that you check with your neighbors and see if there
is any potential of forming a local improvement district to
construct sewers to serve the entire area. I cannot recommend to
the city council that we continue to allow "piece meal"
connections to the City's sewer system.
A second option would be the easing of the requirements by the
pierson's for an easement for a City sewer which could serve the
entire area surrounding your property. The City is willing to
pay a reasonable price for an easement, but cannot grant
connections as requested outside the Urban Growth Boundary. You
might wish to pursue that option with the Pierson's.
David Lane
September 26, 1990
Page Two
I am enclosing the sections of the Ashland Municipal Code that
outline the requirements for connection to City sanitary sewers
for your reference.
I am forwarding a copy of my letter and your request to the
Council as information.
Sincerely yours,
steven M. Hall, P.E.
Public Works Director
cc: Brian Almquist, City Administrator
Mayor and City Council
Jim Olson, Assistant City Engineer
Pam Barlow, Administrative Assistant
encl: Lane letter
Council Minutes (8/21/90)
AMC 14.08.030
THE HONORABLE CATHY GOLDEN &
THE ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL
ASHLAND CITY HALL
ASHLAND OR 9?S20
OCTOBER 22, 1990
SOSC STUDENTS ACTIVE FOR THE ENVIRONMENT encourage you to
hold hearinas and pass an ordinance bannina high phosphate
detergents. We believe the need ~or such a ban is imperative to
help clean up Bear Creek and to maintain Ashland's image as a
leader in environmental responsibility.
We realize that phosphates are not the only pollutants that
Ashland emits into Bear Creek and that banning phosphates will
not impact these contaminants, but we believe that a,phosphate
ban isa necessary, cost-effective, and easily implemented ~irst
step for the City.
Ue are attachina a draft ordinance written by THE SOSC
RECYCLING PROJECT for your consideration. We would also sUl2est
that requirina clear, understandable shelf-Iabellina might be a
productive first step_
Respectfully,
SOSC STUDENTS FOR THE ENVIRONMENT
SU ACTIVITIES OFFICE
ASHLAND OR 91520
(~f )~'
\
~;~
~N~IJ
1l6Uu1b- .~
M\YVv(svu?~
(-~ -:>
~J~
0/UML S0
~
CIIt-~ /J /) Jl
U~ f/l
~ . /(~
tLL4LN~
1z~\!j(~
;gt::;;J.'
..?~~
-n4~
~~~a
~~
~1-
f
;tJoc
SOSC RECYCLING PROJECT DRAFT PROPOSAL
ORDINANCE NO.
AN. OROINANCE OF THE CITY OF ASHALND ADDING A NEU CHAPTER
TO THE MUNICIPAL CODE RELATIVE TO A BAN ON CERTAIN
DETERGENTS CONTAINING PHOSPHATES.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND FINOS~
1. The City of Ashland values the protection and preservation
of our natural environment.
2. Ashland's sewage treatment facility exceeds state and
federal guidelines for phosphate emissions Into Bear Creek.
3. Excessive phosphate in Bear Creek can lead to algae growth)
eutrophication and bacterial contamination.
4. The City of Talent gets its water supply downstream from the
Ashland sewage treatment facility.
s. laundry and dishwashing detergents typically account for 40-
65~ of the phosphate entering a municipal sewage treatment
facility.
6. Ten states and various municipalities have banned the sale
of detergents containing phosphates with positive
environmental results.
1.
Several low-phosphate
market in Ashland.
detergents are currently on the
8.
Most high-phosphate detergent brand$
available in areas with phosphate
formulations.
marketed locally are
bans in low-phosphate
9. Infra-structure modifications to reduce phosphate (i.e.)
tertiary sewage treatment) will cost .illions of dollars and
take years to implement.
10. The Council finds that this ordinance will serve the public
interest by reducing the amount of phosphate entering Bear
Creek.
11. This o!dinance will bring Ashland closer to compliance with
state and federal requirements for phosphate emissions.
12. The Council finds that this ordinance will reduce the
economic burden on Ashland residents of expanding the sewage
treatment facility or finding other outlets for Ashland's
sewage effluent.
NOW THEREFORE, THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND 00 ORDAIN AS
FOllOWS:
SECTION 1. A new Chapter is hereby added to the Ashland
Municipal Code and shall read as follows:
"Chapter
Sections:
.020
.030
_.040
.050
.010 Phosphate detergents declared
Definitions
Phosphate detergents banned
Enforcement
Exemptions
a nuisance
.010 Phosphate Detergents Declared Nuisance. The
introduction of phosphate detergents in public sewage treatment
facilities is hereby declared a nuisance. The presence of
phosphate in streams, lakes and other waterways has been
identified as a major contributor to algae growth, eutrophication
and bacterial contamination of the earth's water resources and
thus is a menace to the public health.
.020 Definitions.
1. "Detergent" means a cleansing agent used for laundry,
dishwashing, or automatic d1shwashing purposes, and
includes detergents in liquid or concentrated form, pre-
soaks, stain removers, and bleach.
2. .
"Person" means
partnership, or
organized.
any natural person,
other organization
firm, corporation,
or group' however
3.
"Phosphorus content"
phosphates.
means phosphorus in the form of
.030 Phosphate Detergents Banned.
,. Effective March " 1991, no person shall sell laundry
detergents with a phosphorus content in excess of 10.0S.
2.
Effective June " 1~91J no
dishwashing detergents with a
of 6.S~.
person shall sell laundry or
phosphorus content in excess
3.
Effective
detergents
shall any
phosphorus
January " 1992, no person shall sell laundry
with a phosphorus content in excess of O.SS, nor
person sell dishwashing detergents with a
content in excess of S.OS.
.040 Enforcement. The City Attorney, upon determination
that a violation of this ordinance has occurred, shall issue a
written notice of the violation by certified lDail to the person
which will specify the violation and appropriate penalty.
Violntions of this ordinance shall be deemed 8n infraction, Gnd
shall be punishable as set forth in Section 1.08.020 of the
Municipal Code. The person shall, upon receipt of a notice of
violation, pay to the City the stated penalty, or appeal the
finding of a violation to the Ashland Municipal Court by
requesting a hearing within 15 days of receipt of the notice.
.050 Exemptions. The City Council, or its appointee, may
exempt a person from the requirements of this ordinance for a six
.onth period, upon a showing by the applicant that the condition~
of this ordinance would cause undue hardship. The phrase .undue
hardship. shall be construed to include but not be limited to:
1 .
Situations where the seller
acquired stock.
is liquidating previously
2.
Situations where the
detergent for use in an
Ashland sewage system.
seller supplys a
area which would
purchaser with
not impact the
SECTION 2. Severability. If
ordinance or the application
circumstance is held invalid,
including the application of such
persons or circumstances, shall not
continue in full force and affect.
this ordinance are severable.
any part or provision of this
thereof to any person or
the remainder of the ordinance~
part or provision to other
be affected thereby and shall
To this end, provisions of
LOU PHOSPHATE BUYER'IS GUIDE
Phosphate Free liquid laundry Detergents
Yes, Cheer Free, Dash, Purex, Ivory Snow, Uisk, Surf, Bold,
Era, All, Arm & Hammer, Tide
low Phosphate Concentrated laundry Detergents
OS Ivo~y Snow, Uhite King, Sun, Par, Purex, Woolite
.2SS Arm & Hammer
.SS All, Cold Power, Ajax
High Phosphate Concentrated laundry Detergents
3.?S Dash
SS Clorox, C-20
S.8S Oxydol
6~ Cheer
6.1S Thri-fty
6.3S Fab
6.SS Tide with Bleach
6.6S to 9.8S Tide
?S Uhi te Ka2ic ,
? . , ~ Bo I d
?SS Sur-f
* 13.9S Fab 1 Shot (packaged in plastic trays) * NEVER USE
* 1?SS Fresh Start (packaged in plastic bottles) * NEVER USE
Phosphate Free Bleach
Snowy Fabric Dry Bleach, Vivid Fabric Safe Bleach, Purex,
Clorox, Purex Dry Bleach, Boratee., Arm & Ha..er Dry Bleach,
Clorox 2 Dry Bleach
High' Phosphate Bleach
* 1?2S Biz Bleach (only bleach with phosphates) * NEVER USE
Automatic Dishwasher Detergents
4S Sunlight liquid
S.9S Cascade liquid
6.'S All, Sunlight
6.3~ Palmolive liquid
7.1S Electrasol
8. 1~ Cascade
8.3S lemon Cascade
8.?S tJhite Magic
,
, Survey conducted by the sose Recycling Project 3/90.
ASHLAND PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
CITY HALL · ASHLAND, OREGON 97520 · 488-5340
PARK COMMISSIONERS:
KENNETH J. MICKELSEN
Director
PATRICIA ADAMS
JEAN M. CRAWFORD
. LEE HOWARD
TOM PYLE
J'ULlE REYNOLDS
October. 31, 1990
Honorable Mayor and city Councilors
City of Ashland
Ashland, Oregon 97520
RE: Lawrence gift
Dear Mayor and City Council Members:
The Ashland Parks and Recreation staff along with assistance
from city staff has now formalized the donation of thirty (30)
acres of land for open space park purposes. The donation is
being made by the Lawrence family and the land is located on the
east slope above Granite street overlooking Lithia Park.
The Lawrence property has been identified on the open space
park map that was adopted by the city. According to City Charter
Article XIX pertaining to the Open Space Park Program, Section 2
states that both the Ashland Park Commission and the City Council
must agree upon land or easement to be acquired for open space
park purposes. At a meeting of both Council and Commission this
parcel of land was discussed and at that time both groups agreed
to acquire the land. The Ashland Parks and Recreation Commission
recommends that the City Council accept the Lawrence donation per
deed restrictions for open space park purposes and dedicate it
for park purposes.
Sincerely,
p~
%'hlMJb.J, 'D~
Thomas W. Pyle, Chair
ASHLAND PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
cc: Brian Almquist, City Administrator
John Fregonese, Planning Director
Home of Famous Lithia Park
_ ___ -L
RONALD L. SALTER
ATTORNEY AT LAW
94 THIRD STREET
ASHLAND, OREGON 97520
(503) 482-4215
October 29, 1990
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Ronald L. Salter, City Attorney
SUBJECT: Lawrence Gift Deed
Ladies and Gentlemen:
Delivered herewith is the original of a Deed from the
Lawrences to the City of Ashland and covering some 30 acres. This
has been negotiated by the Parks Department and is to be open space
for the City. The conveyance is a gift to the City at no expense
to the Ci ty except for the $1,000.00 attorney's fees incurred by
the Lawrences.
It is requested that a motion be made and passed accepting
this Deed.
I believe Ken Mickelsen will either give you more explanatory
matter or will be available for the November 6, 1990, meeting to
answer any questions concerning all of this that you may have.
It is also my understanding that this land should be
dedicated to the Parks Department.
7J1r;:: ~Ubmittedl
~~~ SALTER
City Attorney
RLS/kr
Enclosure
cc: Mr. Ken Mickelsen
BARGAIN AND SALE DEED
NHL HOLDINGS, a California Limited Partnership, hereinafter
called "Grantor", conveys to the CITY OF ASHLAND, OREGON, a Municipal
Corporation, of the State of Oregon, hereinafter called "Grantee",
all that real property situated in Jackson County', State of Oregon
described as:
Code 5-1 Account 1-6085-9 Map 39 IE 8DC Tax Lot 100
Code 5-1 Account 1-6086-7 Map 39 IE 8DC Tax Lot 200
Code 5-1 Account 1-6092-3 Map 39 IE 8DD Tax Lot 300
All as more particularly described on Exhibit "A" which is
attached hereto and incorporated herein and at the bottom of which
bears the notation I' P ag e 2 of 3 CPI-788l5", and which bears the
signature of either NANCY BLACK LAWRENCE or HENRY LAWRENCE.
Subject to the following conditions subsequent:
1. That the subject land shall be used only as open space as
that term is presently defined in ORS 308 . 740 ( 1 ) ( A) , (B), (C) and
(E), it being the intent that the subject parcel shall be preserved
as much as possible in its natural umimproved state for passive
enjoyment.
2. That the Grantor, its heirs, successors, and assigns, as
to parcel 39lE8DD TL400 shall be p~rmitted to siphon water from the
irrigation channel which traverses said parcel, and which 'is on the
same terms and conditions as other presently existing users are
presently allowed to take water in the future.
3. That the City of Ashland shall not require Grantor, its
heirs, successors, or assigns, as to parcel 39lE8DD TL400, to permit
placement of any public hiking trail, or similar facility on said
parcel, or place such facility on said parcel under power of eminent
domain.
4. That the City of Ashland shall pay to Grantor their
attorney I s fees incurred in this donation of property, it being
unerstood that said attorney I s fees shall not exceed ONE THOUSAND
DOLLARS ($1,000.00) and to be chargeable at the rate of ONE HUNDRED
FIFTY DOLLARS ($150.00) per hour.
-1- Bargain and Sale Deed
RONALD L. SALTER
ATTORNEY AT LAW
84 THIRO aTRlii:lii:T
ASHLAND. OREGON 97520
5. Grantee, by acceptance of this Deed acknowledges that the
subject property may be landlocked, and specifically waives any claim
to any easement of nec.essi ty or other access rights to the subject
property over any other lands owneq by Grantor, it being acknowledged
that Grantee has available to it the power of eminent domain to
obtain an access.
Should Grantee, its successors and assigns fail to adhere to
the foregoing conditions, Grantor, its successors and assigns as to
parcel 39lE8DD TL400 shall have the power to terminate all right,
title and interest of Grantee granted by this Deed, and shall
thereupon have and enjoy all this property forever as if this deed
had not been made.
This conveyance is a gift by the Grantor to the Grantee. The
true and actual consideration for this transfer is the kind feelings
and affection that the Grantor has toward the City of Ashland, the
Grantee. The Grantee acknowledges that the property hereby conveyed
to it has at the present time a fair market value of SEVENTY-FIVE
THOUSAND DOLLARS ($75,000.00).
Until a change is requested, all tax statements should be
sent to the following address: City of Ashland, 20 East Main Street,
Ashland, Oregon, 97520.
THIS INSTRUMENT WILL NOT ALLOW USE OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED
IN THIS INSTRUMENT IN VIOLATION OF APPLICABLE LAND USE LAWS AND
REGULATIONS. BEFORE SIGNING AND ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT, THE
PERSON ACQUIRING FEE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY SHOULD CHECK WITH THE
APPROPRIATE CITY OR COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO VERIFY APPROVED
USES.
D ted this ~jc1day of O(1~
, 1990
)$7~?p~~
, 1990, per sonall y appeared NANCY BLACK
LAWRENCE and HARRY LAWRENCE, consti tute all of general partners of
NHL HOLDINGS, a California Limited Partnership and acknowledge the
foregoing instrument to be the voluntary act and deed of said Limited
Partnership. . ;1 /~///
~fi., ::/ ~~ " i-/'
Notary &\iblic for Q-.rl.!._"'- ~
My Commission expires:
F L
HUGH J. SCAllON
NOTARY' PUBLIC - CALlFORN1A
ORANGE '00UfiTY
My comm, expires IMt\R 4. 1994
d
RONALD L. SALTER
ATTORNEY AT L.A.W
@\\t THIRe @TR~!IT
Aet-4LANO. OREGON 97!20
PRELIMINARY TITLE REPORT'
I~al Description of Real Property belQg searched:
A tract or parcel of land situated in the Southeast quarter of Section 8, Township 39 South,
Range 1 East, Willamette Meridian, Jackson County, Oregon, and being more fully described as
follows:
Commencing at a found pipe and bronze disk situated at the intersection of the centerline of
Granite Street with the section line common to Sections 8 and 9, said Township and Range, said
monument bears South 000 06' 52" East, W27.32 feet from a found 8 inch by 9 inch sandstone
with an X chiseled in the top, situated at the quarter comer common to Sections 8 and 9, said
Township and Range; thence North 000 06' 52" West along the section line common to Sections
8 and 9, a distance of 709.38 feet to the Northeast comer of the South half of the Southeast
quarter of Section 8, said Township and Range; thence leaving said section line, South 8g- 56'
02" West along the Northerly boundary line of the. South half of the Southeast quarter of said
Section 8, a distance of 485.54 feet to a found 5/8 inch'iron rod situated 'at the Northwest comer
of that tract or parcel of land as surveyed and set forth on Recorded Survey Nos. 10050 and
10050A and filed in the office of the Jackson County Surveyor; thence continue South 8g- 56'
02" West along said Northerly line 500 feet to the Northeast comer of that tract described in
Document No. 87-11775, said Official Records; thence South along the East line of said tract
87.125 feet to the Southeast comer thereof; thence West along the South line of said tract 250
feet to the Southwest comer thereof; thence North along the. West line of said tract 87.125 feet
to the Northerly line of said South half of the Southeast quarter; thence South..8g- 56' 02" West
along said Northerly line 70 feet, more or less, to the Southeast 1/16 comer of said Section 8 and
the true point of beginning; thence continue South 8g>> 56' 02" West along said Northerly line
1320 feet, more or less, to the Northwest comer of the Southwest quarter of the Southeast quarter
of said Section 8; thence South along the West line of said quarter-quarter, a distance of 1019.7
feet to. intersect that Boundary Line Agreement recorded as Document No. 80-01390, said
Official Records; thence East along Said Boundary Line Agreement, 1320 feet, more or less, to
the Southwest comer of that tract described in Document No. 86-16304, said Official Records;
thence North O~ 15' 21" East, along the Westerly line of said tract 693.03 feet to the Northwest
comer thereof; thence continue North 020 15' 21" East 330 fcet, more or less, to the true point
of beginning.
NHL HOlDINGS
A CAliFORNIA UMITED PARTNERSHIP
an estate in fee simple
:f(f::'.
+r~
Vesting shown by public records:
Page 2 of 3 CIl - 78815
JHemnrnndum
October 31, 1990
~o:
city council
~rom:
~'ubjett:
Pam Barlow, Pub. Wrks. Admin. Asst.
Remova'l of "Bikes on sidewalk" signs
The Bicycle commission recommends that council
request the State Department of Transportation
remove the "Bike Route on sidewalk" signs as well as
the "stop" and "Yield" signs on the siskiyou
sidewalk bikepath. The Bicycle commission strongly
feels that these signs should be removed and
replaced with "Bike Route" and "Bicycles on Roadway"
signs to alert motorists that the sidewalk is not
the only legal route for bicyles on. Highway 99.
The intent is to allow bicyclists who feel confident
and comfortable in mixing with traffic to do so as
is allowed by state st~tute. The second intent is
to minimize the conflict between pedestrians,
bicylists and joggers who jointly use the sidewalks.
Allen Drescher, Ashland Municipal Judge, has advised
the Bicycle commission that the yield and stop signs
for bicycles on the sidewalks are not enforceable
unless the bicyclist. is traveling at or below
pedestrian speed of 5 miles per hour.
It has been observed that most bicyclists ignore the
stop and yield signs while motorists expect the
bicyclists to obey those signs. In addition,
motorists often expect those bicyclists riding in
the traffic lane to obey the bicycle stop and yield
signs. Several 'accidents have occured due to those
factors.
The Bicycle commission respectfully requests the
council to have staff sign and forward the
letters on their behalf.
cc: Allen Drescher
RONALD L. SALTER
ATTORNEY AT LAW
94 THIRD STREET
ASHLAND. OREGON 97520
(503) 482-4215
October 18, 1990
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Ronald L. Salter, City Attorney
SUBJECT: Noise Regulation Ordinance
Ladies & Gentlemen:
For your ready reference, enclosed is a copy of the
memorandum I wrote to you on October 5, 1990 ~ It raises the
question as to whether addi tional words should be added to the
noise ordinance that is presently before you.
I hav.e now heard from the League of Oregon Cities with
respect to noise regulations and they have not found any cities
where the type of neighborhood is considered.
Accordingly, it appears appropriate for you to consider
whether you wish to pass the noise ordinance as it has been written
or whether you wish to have added to it words providing that the
Judge or jury would take into consideration the character of the
neighborhood in which the noise is made and in which the noise is
heard in making its decision.
~~_rsl
R{sALD L. SALTER
City Attorney
RLS/kr
Enclosure
RONALD L. SALTER
ATTORNEY AT LAW
84 THIRD STREET
ASHLAND. OREGON 97520
(503) 482-4215
October 5, 1990
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Ronald L. Salter, City Attorney
SUBJECT: Noise Regulation Ordinance
.Ladies and Gentlemen:
At the last meeting I asked that the Amendment to Noise
Ordinance be put off as I wished to do further research. I
suspect that you will be receiving inquiries as t~ my reasons for
doing this.
Last week Sharon Thormahlen called indicating that she was
being assaulted by noise from Shakespeare and wished to cite it
for unreasonable noise. I pointed out to her that our
unreasonable noise ordinance was not in effect at this time due
to a previous decision by the Municipal Court Judge.
As I consider all of this, it seems to me that there is a
question as to whether, in determining what is an unreasonable
noise I. should the character of the neighborhood be taken into
consideration.
The amendment to the noise ordinance adding such language
would be as follows:
-The standard for judging loud, disturbing or unnecessary
noises shall be that of an average, reasonable person with
ordinary sensibilities after taking into consideration the
character of the neighborhood in which the noise is made and the
noise is heard.-
The words underlined above would be the words added if the
neighborhood is to be considered.
At this point, I am asking the League of Oregon Cities to
give me' sample ordinances from other cities where they have
considered, if they have, the neighborhood.
Mayor and Members of the City Council
October 5, 1990
Page 2
As all of this is considered by me, it .seems that what is
unreasonable noise in one neighborhood may not be unreasonable
noise in another.
We will, of course, continue to keep you fully informed.
Respectfully submitted,
RONALD L. SALTER
City Attorn~y
RLS/kr .
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ASHLAND MUNICIPAL CODE WITH RESPECT
TO UNNECESSARY NOISES AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY.
THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1.
read as follows:
uB. The standard for judging loud, disturbing, or
unnecessary noises shall be that of an average, reasonable
person of ordinary sensibilities. Such noises which are in
violation of this section include but are not limited to the
Section 9.08.170 B, is hereby amended to
following:"
SECTION 2. Due to the fact that at present there is
not an ordinance governing.and prohibiting unnecessary noises,
an emergency is hereby declared to exist and this ordinance
shall be in full force and effect from and after the date of
it's passage by the Council and approval by the Mayor.
The foregoing Ordinance was read and duly approved at
a regular meeting'. of the City Council of the City of Ashland
on this_day of , 1990.
APPROVED:
MAYOR
ATTEST:
CITY RECORDER
J.
RONALD L. SALTER
ATTORNEY AT LAW
94 THIRD STREET
ASHLAND, OREGON 97520
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE ASHLAND
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP FROM HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
AND SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO MULTI-FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL (ANDERSON\DIAMOND, APPLICANTS)
THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The Ashland Comprehensive Plan Map as adopted by
Ordinance No. 2227 is hereby amended by changing the designation
of Tax Lot 39-1E-14C-1900 from High Density Residential and
Single Family Residential to Multi-Family Residential.
The foregoing ordinance was first read on the
day of
, 1990, and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day
of
. 1990.
Nan E. Franklin
City Recorder
SIGNED and APPROVED this
day of
, 1990.
Catherine Golden
Mayor
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND RE-ZONING CERTAIN
PROPERTY FROM R-3 AND R-1-7.5 TO R-2 (ANDERSON\DIAMOND,
APPLICANTS)
THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The property described as Tax Lot 39-1E-14C-1900 and
shown as that property located at 2300 Siskiyou Boulevard is hereby
rezoned from R-3 (High Density Residential) and R-1-7.5 (Single
Family Residential) to R-2 (MUlti-family Residential).
The foregoing Ordinance was first read on.the ____ day of
1990, and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this ____ day of
1990.
Nan E. Franklin
City Recorder
SIGNED and APPROVED this
day of
, 1990.
Catherine M. Golden
Mayor
,
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ASHLAND MUNICIPAL CODE --
LAND USE ORDINANCE -- WITH RESPECT TO RESTRICTING
ALLOWABLE GRADES ON DRIVEWAYS AND FLAG DRIVES.
THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. A new section shall be added to Section 18.08 of the Ashland
Municipal Code and shall read as follows:
"18.08.195 Driveway. An accessway serving a single dwelling unit or
parcel of land, and no greater than 150' in length. A flag drive serving a flag lot
. shall not be a driveway. Single dwelling or parcel accesses greater than 150' in
length shall be considered as a flag drive, and subject to all of the development
requirements thereof." .
SECTION 2. A new section shall be added to Section 18.68 of the Ashland
Municipal Code' and shall read as follows:
"18.68.150
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
criteria -of the Ashland Public Works Department and approved prior to issuance
of a c~rtificate of occupancy for new construction. All vision clearance standards
associated with driveway entrances onto, public streets shall not be, subject to the
Variance section of this title."
SECTION 3. Section 18.76.060 C. of the Ashland Municipal Code shall be
amended to read as follows:
"C. The flag drive for one flag lot shall have a minimum width of 15 feet, and
a 12 foot paved surface. For drives serving two lots, the flag drive shall be 20
feet, with 15 feet of pavement 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 surface. Flag drives shall be constructed so
as to prevent sunace drainage from flowing over sidewalks, other public ways or
adjoining properties. Flag drives shall be in the same ownership as the flag lots
served. There shall be no parking for 10 feet on either side of the flag drive
entrance. Flag drive grades shall not exceed a maximum grade of 15%, unless
the topography requires a greater grade t~an 15% in which case, a grade of no
greater than 18% may be permitted for no more than 200 feet."
SECTION 4. . Section 18.88.050 B. of the Ashland Municipal Code shall be
amended to read as follows:
"B. Street Grade
Street grades for dedicated streets and flag drives shall be as follows:
1. Street and flag drive grades shall not exceeq a maximum grade of
15%, unless the topography requires a greater grade than 15%, in which
case a grade of no greater than 18% may be permitted for no more than
200 feet.
2. No street or flag drive grade shall exceed 18%. Streets requiring
grades exceeding 18% shall be considered unacceptable. No variances
may be granted which permit a street or flag drive grade greater than
18%."
The foregoing ordinance was first read on the 6th day of November. 1990 and duly
PASSED and ADOPTED this day of , 1990.
Nan E. Franklin
City Recorder
day of
, 1990.
SIGNED and APPROVED this
CatherineM. Golden
Mayor
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ASHLAND MUNICIPAL CODE --
LAND USE ORDINANCE -- WITH RESPECf VISION CLEARANCE
STANDARDS AND NOT ALLOWING VARIANCES TO THOSE
STANDARDS.
THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. A new subsection D shall be added to Section 18.68.020 of the
Ashland Municipal Code and shall read as follows:
"D. The vision clearance standards established by this section are not subject
to the Variance section of this title."
SECTION 2. A new subsection c. shall be added to Section 18.72.100 D. 3. of the
Ashland Municipal Code and shall read as follows:
"c. The vi~ion clearance standards established by this section are not subject
to the variance section of the title."
SECTION 3. Section 18.92.070 D. of the Ashland Municipal Code shall have the
following amendment. added to the end of the existing section:
"The vision clearance standards established by this section are not subject to the
Variance section of this title."
The foregoing ordinance was first read on the 6th day of November. 1990 and duly
PASSED and ADOPTED this day of , 1990. .
Nan E. Franklin
City Recorder
SIGNED and APPROVED this
day of
, 1990.
Catherine M. Golden
Mayor
~emnrandum
October 30, 1990
ijI 0:
City Council
Jff rom:
Bicycle Commission
~ubjed:
Changes to the Municipal Code
The Bicycle Commission respectfully requests that
the Council make changes to sections 11.52.020.C and
11.52.030.K of the Municipal Code relating to
bicycles. The change to section 11.52.020 changes
the word "device" to the phrase "audible signal".
This would make the use of vocal signals legal.
The second change, to section 11.52.030, would allow
bicycles to park against specially designated light
poles. The Bicycle Commission envisions marking
certain light-posts as bicycle parking.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMMENDING ASHLAND MUNICIPAL CODE TO MODIFY AND REENACT
IN ITS ENTIRETY CHAPTER 11.52 WHICH RELATES TO BICYCLES.
THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. section 11.52.020. C of the Ashland Municipal Code
shall be amended to read as follows:
C. "Audible Siqnalinq Device". A bicyle rider .using any
sidewalk must make an audible signal to warn pedestrians they are
approaching from the rear, and at a distance to allow the
pedestrian to move to the right in order to allow passage of the
bicyclist on the left of the pedestrian.
SECTION 2. Section 11.52.030.K of the Ashland Municipal Code
shall be amended to read as follows:
K. "Parkinq". No person shall park a bicycle upon a street,
other than in the roadway and against the curb, or against a
lamppost designated for bicycle 'parking, or in a rack provided for
the purpose of supporting bicycles, or on the on t;.he curb in a
manner so as to afford the least obstruction to pedestrian traffic.
When a parking rack is provided, no person shall park a bicycle
except in such a rack and within a distance of three hundred (300)
feet of such a rack.
The foregoing Ordinance was first read at a regular meeting
of the Common Council held on the day of
1988,
and passed to its second reading and duly passed on the day
of , 1988, the vote being as follows:
Ayes:
Nays:
APPROVED:
MAYOR
ATTEST:
CITY RECORDER
Ordinance No.
-_._-_......._._--..~-_.- ..---........-. .----"--....--.....
October 10, 1990
~\\~
~emnrandum
ijl' n:
Brian Almquist, City Administrator
JIf rom:
Robert D. Nelson, Risk Management Analyst
~ubjtd:
Opportunity to Reduce Insurance Premium Expense
For purposes of funding liability claims, the
City has for several years participated in the City-
County Insurance Services risk pool. (The C.C.I.S.
is co-sponsored by the League of Oregon cities and
the Association of Oregon Counties). This program
has enabled the City to achieve not only "premium"
stability, but substantial out-of-pocket savings as
well.
The C.C.I.S. now offers an improved program for
funding property damage losses from fire, windstorm
and the like. Basically, the program consists of
risk pooling, plus commercial reinsurance for excess
losses. The City would retain $10,000 annual
aggregate as in the past. The new approach differs
from the existing plan primarily because of the
pooling feature. In earlier years, C.C.I.S.
property loss coverage was essentially a mechanism
whereby commercial insurance could be purchased
wholesale.
I have examined the new program and concluded that
it, together with other cost-saving efforts on our
part, will achieve an up-front saving of about
$2,800 per year, plus stability or even reduction of
future years' "premium" costs. The risk is
practically zero.
Because of the switch from wholesale insurance
purchasing to a pooling arrangement, the C.C.I.S.
requires adoption of a resolution (see attached) .
Respectfully submitted,
RObe~elson
Risk Management Analyst
cc: Nan Franklin, City Recorder
Jill Turner, Director of Finance
~
RESOLUTION NUMBER 90-
A RESOLUTION REGARDING MEMBERSHIP IN THE CITY/COUNTY INSURANCE
SERVICE TRUST PROPERTY SELF-INSURANCE POOL
WHEREAS, the City/County Insurance Services Trust (CIS) offers
pooled self-insurance offering cost stability and the
potential for long-term savings; and
WHEREAS, CIS is sponsored by the League of Oregon cities and the
Association of Oregon Counties as a service to Oregon
cities and counties; and
WHEREAS, the City of Ashland finds that membership in CIS is of
benefit in managing the risks involved in providing
services to its citizens; and
WHEREAS, the City of Ashland has been provided with an
opportunity to review the Trust agreement, Bylaws and
Rules of CIS; and
WHEREAS, the City of Ashland has reviewed the Trust Agreement,
Bylaws and Rules of CIS for compliance with the Charter
and Ordinances of the City of Ashland;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Mayor and City Council of
the City of Ashland, that the City of Ashland does hereby enter
into a contract with CIS and becomes a member of the CIS Trust
for Property for a three-year period commencing December 15,
1990, and agrees to abide by the terms of the Trust Agreement,
Bylaws and Rules of CIS which, along with this Resolution,
constitutes a contract between the City of Ashland and CIS. The
City Administrator is hereby authorized to execute such documents
as are necessary pursuant to this Resolution.
The foregoing Resolution was READ and DULY ADOPTED at a regular
meeting of the city Council of the city of Ashland on the
day of , 1990.
Nan E. Franklin
City Recorder
Signed and approved this ____ day of
, 1990.
Catherine M. Golden
Mayor