HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-1216 Council Mtg PACKET
CITY OF
ASHLAND
AGENDA FOR THE REGU~AR MEETING
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL
December 16, 2008
Council Chambers
1175 E. Main Street
6:30 p.m. Reception for Outgoing Council Members and the retirement of Keith Woodley
7:00 p.m. Regular Meeting
I. CALL TO ORDER
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
III. ROLL CALL
IV. FAREWELL ADDRESS BY MAYOR MORRISON
V. PRESENTATION OF PLAQUES TO DEPARTING COUNCIL AND KEITH WOODLEY
VI. MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENT OF BOARD AND COMMISSION VACANCIES
VII. SHOULD THE COUNCIL APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THESE MEETINGS?
[5 minutes}
1, Executive Session of November 25, 2008
2. Executive Session of December 1, 2008
3. Study Sessio~ of December 1, 2008
4. Executive Session of December 2, 2008
5. Regular,Council of December 2,2008
VIII. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS
1, Mayor's Proclamation of January 10, 2009 as Christmas Tree Recycle Day in Ashland
2. Proclamation of the election held in the City of Ashland, Oregon on the 4th of November,
2008
IX. CONSENT AGENDA [5 minutes]
1, Does the Council accept the Minutes of Boards, Commissions, and Committees?
2, Shall Council approve the Resolution declaring the Canvass of the Vote of the election
held and for the City of Ashland, Oregon on November 4, 2008 and Mayoral
Proclamation?
3, Does the Council wish to confirm the Mayor's appointment of Robert Townsend for a term
to expire April 30, 2011 to the Tree Commission?
4. Will Council approve the engineering services contract Amendment#3 with Brown and
Caldwell for $46,998 for engineering services to improve the water plant's treatment
process?
5. Will Council, acting as the Local Contract Review Board, approve a Sole Source
COUNCILt\.fEE"rINGS ARE BROADCAST' LIVE ON CHANNEL 9
VISIT THE errv OF ,ASI1LAND'S \VEB SITE AT \V\V\V.ASll1,AND.OR.lJS
Procurement for the acquisition of City-wide mail services with Northwest Mail Services?
6. Does the Council authorize Mayor Morrison to send a letter of support to the City of
Montague's efforts to explore whether a "public utility" system could stabilize the operation
of the Siskiyou Subdivision Rail Line between Weed, California and Ashland, Oregon?
X. PUBLIC HEARINGS {Persons wishing to speak are to submit a "speaker request form" prior
to the commencement of the public hearing. All hearings must conclude by 9:00 p.m., be
continued to a subsequent meeting, or be extended to 9:30 p,m. by a two-thirds vote of
council {AMC ~2.04.050})
1. Should the Council approve the resolution titled, "A Resolution to Provide New
Methodology for Determining Building Permit Fees"?
XI. PUBLIC FORUM Business from the audience not included on the agenda. (Total time
allowed for Public Forum is 15 minutes, The Mayor will set time limits to enable all people
wishing to speak to complete their testimony,) [15 minutes maximum]
XII. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
1. Does Council approve, modify, or deny the Conditional Use Permit and Site Review to
construct a 592 square foot Accessory Residential Unit above a proposed two-vehicle
garage, for the property located at 960 Harmony Lane? [30 Minutes] Please note: there
will be no public testimony taken on this item as the public hearing has been closed,
2. Should Council conduct and approve First Reading of an Ordinance titled, "An Ordinance
Relating to the Review of Public Art Proposals, Establishing Criteria and Selection
Processes for the Acquisition, Acceptance, or Removal from the Ashland Public Art '
Collection," and move the ordinance on to Second Reading?
[10 Minutes]
3, Does Council wish to adopt the resolution supporting drafting of a sweatshop free
procurement policy for City uniforms and garments? [10 Minutes]
XIII. NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS
1, Shall the Mayor and Council approve appointments for the two positions open on. the
Citizen Budget Committee with terms ending December 31, 2011? [15 Minutes]
2. Will Council approve a request from the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) to
appoint an Aesthetic Advisory Committee (MC) for bridge improvements at Exit 14 and
Exit 19?
3, Does the Council have any questions about the presentation of report titled, "Preparing for
Climate Change in the Rogue Basin of Southwestern Oregon" (no Council
Communication included)
XIV. ORDINANCES. RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS
1. Should the Council conduct and approve First Reading of an ordinance titled "An
Ordinance Amending Chapter 13,20, Local Improvement and Special Assessment,
Amending Sections 13.20.010 thru 13.20,050 and Section 13.20.210, Relating to
Definitions, Initiation of Improvements, Resolution Notice and Content, Waivers of
Remonstrance and Remedies; and Amending AMC Section 13.20," and move the
ordinance to Second Reading? [15 Minutes]
XV. OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS/REPORTS FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS
None
XVI. ' ADJOURNMENT
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need speCial assistance to participate in this meeting,
please contact the City Administrator's office at (541) 488-6002 (TTY phone number 1-800-735-2900). Notification
72 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the
rnootinn I?R r.1=R ~~ 1n?_ ~~ 1nL1 .l3rl.l3 Tit/o /I
VISIT TFIE crrv OF ASHLAND'S \VEB SITE AT \V\-V\V.ASHLAND.OR.US
I~-
L11 J LUU1VL1L..)1 UUJ ..),C..)..)lU1V
December 1,2008
Page 1 of 1
MINUTES FOR CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
Monday, December 1, 2008
Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street
Mayor Morrison called the meeting to order at 6:02 p.m. Councilors Navickas, Hartzell, Jackson and Chapman
were present. Councilor Hardesty arrived at 6:04 p.m. Councilor Silbiger was absent.
1. Look Ahead Review
City Administrator Martha Bennett reviewed the items on the Council Look Ahead.
2. Review of regular meeting agenda for December 2, 2008
City Administrator Martha Bennett reviewed the upcoming Regular meeting agenda with Council.
3. Will Council consider amending Ashland Municipal Code (AMC) 13.20 Local Improvement
and Special Assessments and Amending Resolution 1999-09?
Public Works Director Mike Faught presented the staff report, the current subsidy, the proposed subsidy and
the rationale of the sub-categories, He noted the current cap artificially inflated the City's amount from $4,000
to $5,426.
60% Arterial
Collector
Safe Route To School
General
75% Regional Facilitv
Stream Restoration
18" Diameter or Equivalent
Stormwater Conveyance System
General
20% Arterial
Collector
Residential
50% These costs are included in the total
ro . ect cost estimates
Staff SUbsidy
Recom1nendation
50%
50%
50% .;.^:'.;,
0%
60%
60%
60%
Council
Recommendation
Current Subsidy Proposed Catee:ories
0%
20%
10%
0% -""
0%
The General sub-categories were set at 0% because the primary investment benefited the homeowner the most
and it was decided they should pay for the cost of the project. Council increased the subsidy for sub-category
General under Sidewalk to 1 00/0 and suggested readdressing sub-category subsidies in five years.
The subsidy for the Safe Route to School sub-category under Sidewalk increased from 500/0 to 600/0.
Concern was expressed that 00/0 subsidy for the General sub-category under Storm Drain was too low and did
not benefit the environment. The City had subsidized the category in the past because of the Department of
Environmental Quality (DEQ) discharge and reducing sediment. Council increased the subsidy amount to
400/0.
Council agreed to eliminate the cap with a suggestion to re-evaluate in five years. Concern was voiced that it
was unfair to make the owner pay for something that benefited the whole community.
Meeting was adjourned at 7: 19 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Dana Smith
Assistant to the City Recorder
I
ASHLAND CIT},' COUNCIL ll/fEET/NG
December 2, 2008
PAGE I of 10
MINUTES FOR THE REGULAR MEETING
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL
December 2, 2008
Council Chambers
1175 E. Main Street
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Morrison called the meeting to order at 7 :00 p,m, in the Civic Center Council Chambers,
ROLL CALL
Councilor Hardesty, Navickas, Hartzell, Jackson, Silbiger and Chapman were present.
MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENT OF BOARD AND COMMISSION VACANCIES
Mayor Morrison noted vacancies on the Tree Commission, Audit Committee, Housing Commission, Planning
Commission, and the newly formed Transportation Commission.
SHOULD THE COUNCIL APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THESE MEETINGS?
The minutes of the Executive Session of November 18,2008 and Regular Council of November 18,2008 were
approved with amendments to Regular meeting by adding "as read" to the amended main motion on page 6 of
7 regarding the approval of Ordinance #2975 (Transportation Commission),
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS & AWARDS
Assistant Planner Amy Anderson introduced Tree Commissioners Laurie Sager and John Rinaldi, A slide
presentation was made and the Tree of the Year for 2008 was announced as the Spanish Fir, located at 128
Wimer Street. In addition to this announcement, recent activities of the Tree Commission were noted as the
following: Collaboration with Ashland Daily Tidings on tree related articles; identifying trees for a "distinctive
tree of Ashland" list; revising the Recommended Street Tree guide and updating the Commission Powers and
Duties, which were approved by the Council earlier this year.
CONSENT AGENDA
1. Does the Council accept the Minutes of Boards, Commissions, and Committees?
2. Does the Council wish to confirm the Mayor's appointment of Libby Edson for a term to expire
April 30, 2010 to the Public Arts Commission?
3. Does the Council wish to confirm the appointment of Larry Langston as Interim Fire Chief?
4. Should the Council approve a resolution to adjust budget appropriations for changes in operational
expenses to remain in compliance with Oregon Budget Law?
5. Should the Council approve an Intergovernmental Agreement with Jackson County concerning the
placement of community service workers with City of Ashland Parks and Recreation?
6. Will the Council, acting as the Local Contract Review Board, consent to enter into a public contract
for a Risk Management Advisor with Beecher Carlson Insurance Agency?
7. Does the Council wish to exercise an option to extend a Landfill Capacity Guarantee Agreement
with Dry Creek Landfill for 10 additional years?
Councilor Chapman/Jackson mls to approve Consent Agenda. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Should the Council approve a resolution adjusting the FY 2008-2009 Budget to create
appropriations and authorize expenditures for unanticipated expenses during this year?
Administrative Services Director Lee Tuneberg presented the staff report and recommended approval of the
resolution, He explained that the supplemental budget was for the following:
· $3,251 Oregon alliance for the Community Traffic Safety grant received
· Interfund Loan of $670,000 to the Capitol Improvement Fund for cash payment toward the Clay
I-n
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL AlEETlNG
December 2,2008
PAGE 2 of 10
Street Proj ect
· $2,895 for the City/County Insurance Services W orksite Wellness grant received
· $450,000 to reimburse the costs and expenses relating to the Mt. Ashland Association lawsuit
· The other part of the $670,000 Interfund Loan coming from the Equipment Fund to the Capital
Improvement Fund
· $37,000 to recognize revenues and expenses for the Parks Department programs
Mr. Tuneberg noted that of the $670,000 for the Interfund Loan, staff would most likely require and request
$620,000,
Public Hearing open: 7 :24 p.m.
Public Hearing closed: 7:24 p.m.
Councilor Hartzell/Jackson mls to approve Resolution #2008-42. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Hardesty,
Chapman, Hartzell, Silbiger, Jackson and Navickas, YES. Motion passed.
2. After hearing the appeal and reviewing the record, does Council approve, modify, or deny the
Conditional Use Permit and Site Review to construct a 592 square foot Accessory Residential Unit
above a proposed two-vehicle garage, for the property located at 960 Harmony Lane?
Mayor Morrison called the public hearing for Land Use Hearing to order at 7:26 p.m, and read aloud the
required procedures,
ABSTENTIONS~ CONFLICTS~ EX PARTE CONTACTS
Councilor Chapman noted a site visit and shared his observations of the property; Councilor Hartzell noted that
her partner lived in the area; Councilor Jackson, Silbiger, Navickas, Hardesty, and Mayor Morrison stated they
had none to declare,
CHALLENGES
No challenges were received,
STAFF REPORT
Community Development Director Bill Molnar briefly presented the question before the Council. Assistant
Planner Amy Anderson provided the staff report that included the request for a Conditional Use Permit and
Site Review to construct a 592 square foot Accessory Residential Unit above a proposed two-vehicle garage.
Mr, Molnar clarified that solar calculations had been submitted and were a Class B lot, which allowed for a
higher solar fence,
Mr, Molnar explained the ordinance was not specific in mandating a survey for all Land Use actions, In this
case, the proposed building is 12 feet from the side yard and the general requirement is six feet. The rear yard
setback has a 20-foot requirement where the applicant's structure would be at 22 feet.
Off-street parking requirements were based on a calculation of 2 spaces for a single-family home and 1,5
spaces (rounded up to two by staff) for a one-bedroom apartment. The applicant would provide the required
four spaces on the property,
A complete urban storm drain system exists in both Harmony Lane and Hillview with ample capacity to
accommodate a run off from the roof and drive way surfaces as part of the project. Down the alley on an
existing property are a ten-foot wide public utility easement and an 8-inch storm drain line in the'easement that
terminates in a catch basin in the alley. The applicant would install a new storm drain line in the alley to
connect to that system. Other neighbors have expressed interest in connecting to the new storm drain line, Six
inches is adequate for a shared line but the final determination would come from the proposed engineering
drawings,
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL A1EETlNG
December 2.2008
PAGE 3 of 10
The definition of paved access to and through does not exist in the code, The Planning Commission applies it
by determining if the legal lot of record requires street frontage and if the city street has a paved surface.
APPLICANTS PRESENTATION
Bill Emerson/90 5th / Presented for the applicants Jendrisak and Berry, He provided a brief description of the
property, noted the existing garage and location of trees on the land. He stated that although the property had
not been surveyed, a Topo plan was completed showing existing buildings, grades and trees that allowed him
to determine contours and show on paper how they accommodated any of the setbacks. He clarified that the
elevation proposed in the Planning Action had changed and provided a new elevation with slight
modifications, He described the parking spaces then explained how the drain line would work.
The unit above the proposed structure could be used as a living space or home office, The Site Plan showed
that the shadow casting points for the Solar were all within the boundary of the property.
OPPONENTS AND THEIR REPRESENTATIVES
Ron Doyle/945 Hill View/Commented on the Exparte response regarding the three vehicles in the alley, The
camper and pick-up had been stationary for years, The other vehicle was a utility trailer covered by
blackberries that extended 10 feet into the alley behind the applicant's house, The alley right-of-way was 20
feet wide with the trailer reducing it to 10 feet of access.
He noted his June 27, 2008 request for a public hearing, August 12, 2008 written testimony to the Planning
Commissions Hearings Board, the August 18, 2008 additional evidence and objections to the decision and the
October 29,2008 notice of appeal with attached evidence, He explained the Conclusions and Findings were
not supported by substantial evidence in the record under Oregon Land Use Law, There was no evidence in the
record showing the alley was capable of handling the traffic that will be generated, He described how the
Talent Irrigation District (Till) broke twice due to traffic in the alley because the line that runs down the
alleyway is 12-18 inches deep, There was also no evidence that the storm drain was capable of handling the
run off,
The project did not meet Setback Requirements, The property lines should be shown in the record. There was
no evidence of paved access to and through the development. There was no access to the project off Harmony
Lane, The only way to get to the project would be down Ross Lane and the alleyway and both are unpaved,
The record did not show how the development would minimize glare, dust, noise and light which are all part of
staff s approval criteria, There was no sewer line from the alley and it would need to be pumped up to
Harmony Lane, This was a Conditional Use application and had to comply with the Conditional Use criteria,
No one knew where the public right-of-way line was located in the alley, Mr. Doyle encouraged Council to
deny the request.
It was uncertain who owned the utility trailer or the property where it was parked. Comments were made on
the applicant's use of the existing garage for storing contractor tools and materials possibly being moved to the
new structure,
THOSE WISIDNG TO PROVIDE TESTIMONY
Cyndi DionlExplained the alleyway was filled in the 1960' s over a small year-round creek. The storm drain
was a culverted creek that turns right at the end of the alley with a ten-foot easement that runs along the north
side ofMs, Dion's property, When the line started leaking a few years ago, it was not on the City's maps and
was finally determined to be a city culvert, The Public Works department repaired the leak and slipped a new
line inside the old one because of several trees on Ms, Dion' s property growing over the line.
She did not believe there were any structures in the alley that required storm draina'ge. The alley itself
contained percolating soil even though it is fill and gravel. If paving is required in the alleyway, Ms, Dion
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL A1EETlNG
December 2.2008
PAGE 4 of 10
requested the applicant use pervious paving. When the Till spigot was damaged by the applicant's dump
truck, a 35-foot geyser ran onto her and a neighbor's property. She took photos and will provide them for the
record within the next seven-day period,
She did not believe the culvert creek was part of the Master Storm Water plan in the past but it is now, She
further explained the alley is 3-5 feet above grade and during any kind of storm event, water jumps across the
alley into her and her neighbor's properties, She did not think the storm drain line the City proposed would be
effective based on her experience with how the water runs in that area, An effective storm drain would have to
be installed diagonally across her and her neighbor's property to follow a fall line in order to get to Hillview,
Her concern was that the project would make the drainage issue worse.
REBUTTAL BY APPLICANT
Mr, Emerson addressed the storm drain line, City staff cleaned out the line but nothing had been done to
reduce the size of the line itself. The applicant is a concrete contractor and will eventually have his business in
town. The truck that broke the Till line was delivering fill for the owners to landscape their property. The
owners do not intend to store any kind of equipment vehicles on their property. They intend to keep the
existing garage to store smaller items related to the business. When the owner brings his business to town, he
will have a separate location for his work vehicles.
The trailer was not located by the surveyor because it is a mobile vehicle and could be moved if there is a
problem with backing out of the proposed site, The Till line broke because it was not installed to handle
vehicles, The owner repaired the line when the Till should have repaired it and been instructed to re-install the
line below the grade, The size of the line for drainage will not be known until it is engineered, The sewer will
be pumped to Harmony Lane, was noted on the site plan and already known and proposed prior to the Public
Hearing,
The owners will install sprinklers for fire protection,
Mr. Emerson noted the last paragraph of the Findings mentioned the structure could be used as a residence at
2,725 square feet based on the lot size and the proposed unit is 1,234 square feet.
A request was made to keep the record open, City Attorney Richard Appicello noted there was 120-day
deadline for the project that would end December 16, 2008, If the record was left open for 7 days, any
participant including the applicant and staff could submit evidence, testimony or argument in writing during
that seven-day period, The applicant would receive an additional seven days after the record closed to submit
final written argument.
City Administrator Martha Bennett explained that if the record were extended and deliberation went into the
New Year, the new Council members would review the record, watch the video or listen to the oral tape of this
meeting to qualify for deliberation.
Council could declare the record be held open until 9:00 pm on December 9, 2008. Participant's could submit
their evidence, testimony or argument, in writing to the Community Development until 5:00pm December 9,
2008 or at Council Chambers 5 :00-9:0Opm during the Planning Commission meeting, Deliberations would be
continued until 8 :OOpm December 16, 2008 or Council could continue the meeting later between 12/16/08 and
12/31/08,
It was noted that some testimony heard was distinct from and not the subject of the application or part of the
approval criterion,
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED: 8:58 p,m.
~-T--
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL .A.1EETlNG
December 2.2008
PAGE 5 of 10
Councilor Hartzell/Jackson mls to hold deliberations on December 16,2008 on this matter. Roll Call
Vote: Councilor Hardesty, Navickas, Hartzell, Jackson, Silbiger and Chapman, YES. Motion passed.
PUBLIC FORUM (None)
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
1. Does the City Council wish to appeal the decision of Judge Schiveley on MAA v. City of Ashland to
the Oregon court of appeals and provide further direction to staff based on the decision?
City Administrator Martha Bennett presented the staff report and discussed the Council's options, One was to
appeal the Judgment which would require amending the Professional Services Agreement with Harrang, Long,
Gary Rudnick ,with a "not to exceed" amount of$275,000 and directing Legal staff to file all required actions.
The other option was to comply with the Judgment. She explained that Mount Ashland Association (MAA)
had made a settlement offer, If the City decided not to appeal, the Professional Services Agreement with
Harrang, Long, Gary Rudnick would be amended with a "not to exceed" amount of $225,000, Legal staff
would prepare settlement agreements and Council would authorize the City Administrator to sign and
implement the settlement.
The MAA settlement offer terms stated that the City would not appeal a~d MAA would accept $85,000 in
settlement of their legal claims. She explained that MAA had filed a petition with the court for reimbursement
of$109,300 and this would represent a $24,000 reduction in their legal fees claim. In addition, the City would
agree to comply with the decision and send a letter to the Forest Service reversing the October 3,2006 Change
of Practice letter and designate MAA as the buyer of the Ski Area Settlement Sale Contract.
Ron Roth/6950 Old 99 S/Questioned if this was a fiscal responsibility issue or an environmental protection
issue. The City had already spent close to $400,000, This was an action triggered by the City of Ashland two
and a half years ago and in response, MAA filed a lawsuit. If the City decided to appeal, the downside would
be if the City lost, it would cost more money and Mr, Roth did not know ifit would afford more protection to
the watershed, Voting not to appeal would cap the City's costs but it was unknown if it would have any real
impact on the proposed expansion, Mr. Roth urged the Council to accept the ruling by Judge Schiveley, stop
the fiscal bleeding and move on.
Suzanne Frey/1042 Oak Knoll Drive/Expressed concern with the City Council's Code of Ethics Policy and
the potential conflict of interest regarding the City and MAA. The intent of the Ethics Policy was to show that
Public Officials would be independent and impartial in their actions thereby giving the public confidence in the
integrity of their government. Her concern was that Councilor Navickas had a long history of fighting with
MAA. He had filed personal lawsuits against the US Forest Service and MAA and this raised the question
whether he could separate his personal agenda from the business of the City and be impartial in deliberating on
the matter. There was not a good reason for the City to persist, the Legal authority was not there for the City to
manage, and it was the authority of the US Forest Service, An appeal was not fiscally responsible at this time.
Mayor Morrison commented that Councilor Navickas has never attempted to conceal his position and the
voters had elected him as they elect other Councilors knowing they represent a perspective and have special
interests or projects, In a test of this sort, the individuals are asked if they can make an unbiased and objective
decision based on the facts at hand and Councilor Navickas has stated in several cases he can, The Council and
the Mayor all have positions they were elected to represent and Councilor Navickas has always been up front
about that.
Kim Clark/3840 Hilsinger Rd, Phoenix/Explained he was a representative and General Manager of Mount
Ashland Association, He encouraged the Council not to appeal the November 17, 2008 decision, Since the
decision was announced, MAA and City staff had worked extremely hard and diligently to come to the
settlement offered earlier. Many compromises were made on both sides to get to the settlement and Mount
----,....-
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL A1EETlNG
December 2.2008
PAGE 6 of 10
Ashland Association was interested in moving forward,
Angie Thusius/897 Beach Street/She thanked everyone for their efforts over the past years regarding the
issue. She commented that the Council and Mayor had an historic opportunity to follow through on being truly
wise and take MAA to a higher court, The proposed expansion through the community's drinking water
source area in the watershed was a complex issue, Contrary to the lower court, an appeals court would take
into consideration that ifMAA went bankrupt, which it had twice before, the entire community might have to
pay more than $1 million to restore and repair the watershed, She encouraged Council to allow a higher
appeals court to make the decision,
Alan DeBoer/Submitted an email to be read into the record asking Council not to appeal the judgment.
Enough money had been spent already, He noted when the City and MAA were partners working for each
other's success, The City had no investment or interest in running Mt. Ashland, Everyone was concerned for
the watershed and an agreement that places responsibility on the ski area similar to the Forest Service
agreement would be prudent and serve the community well. The City should not want the legal responsibilities
as permit holder if the current area should fail. He urged the Council to stop spending legal fees to fight the ski
area over an issue it does not want if the City wins, He suggested the City turn the permit over, get an
agreement on the water quality and move on. If the snow does not come this year, as the permit holder and
operator, the City will have lost a great economic benefit to the whole area. He concluded the expansion would
only happen if donations paid for it and it would probably not occur in his lifetime,
Councilor Chapman/Jackson mls agree to settle MAA v. City of Ashland with Mount Ashland
Association with following conditions: The City will not appeal the judgment by Judge Schiveley. The
MAA will accept $85,000 in reimbursement for their legal fees. The City Administrator is directed to
send a letter to the Forest Service by December 9, 2008 reversing the October 3, 2006 Change in
Practice directive and designating MAA as the purchaser of the Ski Run timber sale.
DISCUSSION: Councilor Navickas noted the City had made the motion requesting a Business Plan of the
project that MAA agreed to prior to his being elected to City Council. When it came down to following
through on the agreement, MAA was unwilling and filed a lawsuit that cost the City a large sum of money. He
felt that the City has a strong position for appeal and that there had been no obstruction by the City, He noted
the injunction from the 9th Circuit Court of Appeal regarding MAA.
He also commented on the partnership between the City and the Forest Service and the responsibility
associated with the holder of the Special Use Permit (SUP), which requires funds to be available to cover
liability and restoration of the overall project. He pointed out that the City continues to hold these liabilities
but there is no coverage to protect it.
Councilor Navickas stated that Judge Schiveley had ruled on both sides of justiciable controversy, The current
amount the City was spending on the issue was noted along with the cost associated for the City if the decision
was nofto appeal. He encouraged the Council to vote no on the motion,
Councilor Jackson supported the motion, The lawsuit was focused and the result would not change anything
regarding the expansion or the protection needed in the watershed, The protection of the watershed was most
important; pursuing the appeal was not the way to get there,
Councilor Hartzell would vote for the motion based on financial concerns about the City and did think the City
would fare well in the appeal and taking that risk at this time raised concerns,
Councilor Silbiger did not think the City had violated the lease but the issue was not about the presumption of
winning an appeal. If winning an appeal would achieve greater protection for the City or the ability to achieve
that protection he would consider it but it does not. If the City won and was able to get attorney fees back, the
issues still existed. The City would be in danger of violating the lease if the court lifted the injunction and the
-----, -~-
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL A1EETfNG
December 2. 2008
PAGE 7 of 10
City did not give them the timber sale. The City should end this now and work to make peace with MAA,
Councilor Chapman agreed that the City might have a strong case for appeal but at a great cost to the
community. Whoever won, both parties would lose and it was not worth it for the community,
Councilor Hardesty shared Councilor Navickas' frustration but agreed with most of what Council had said.
She sited Ron Roth's earlier comments that the appeal could mean spending more money and the City should
stop the fiscal bleeding, Winning would not make the environmental situation any better and she was not
convinced the City could win the appeal. It was hoped the City would work with MAA to come to a mutual
agreement on the expansion, better monitoring of the existing ski area and ensure the environment was
protected.
Mayor Morrison commented it was not prudent to risk spending more public money on something that looked
like a good idea originally but was not. The City needed to move from a strategy of confrontation to one of
collaboration. The appeal would not address the bigger issues; it would look for error in Judge Schiveley's
opinion and focus on that. It was a greater expenditure of money with very little opportunity to remediate the
problem, The City needs to work with MAA, as there is still a justifiable interest on the part of the City in
regard to the preservation and maintenance of the watershed. MAA was a valuable asset to the community,
The Mayor would support the agreement, it was not perfect but the City needed to move ahead, The City and
MAA needed to resolve this issue and grant that people on both sides of the divide have legitimate concerns
yet it is incumbent of everyone involved to do a better job than done in the past for resolution,
Councilor N avickas/Hartzell m/s to amend the motion to include a letter that Council directs the City
Administrator to send to the Forest Service that tells them the position of the City is to put recreational
development as a low priority and to place restoration, fire reduction and water quality as a high
priority. DISCUSSION: Councilor Hardesty suggested rephrasing the motion to ask the Forest Service to put
a higher priority on water quality, fire reduction and restoration without the lower priority on recreational
development language, Councilor Navickas responded that recreational development should be a lower priority
when it came to the management of the municipal watershed, Mayor Morrison explained that technically the
amendment was appropriate but did not agree it was the way to send a clear message, A clear message would
be communication between the Forest Service, MAA and the City to determine common interests and improve
how to work through them, The Forest Lands Commission had achieved great strides in terms of the Forest
Resiliency Plan. There was a legal matter requiring resolution and tagging the proposed amendment could be
misconstrued,
Roll Call Vote: Councilor Navickas and Hartzell, YES; Councilor Chapman, Silbiger, Jackson and
Hardesty, NO. Motion failed 4-2.
Councilor Hartzell/Hardesty m/s to amend the motion to include in the letter on the communication
with the Forest Service reversing the Change in Practice letter, a request that the Forest Service keep
the City in the communication loop as much as possible and kept informed on the progress of the
expansion. DISCUSSION: Councilor Hartzell explained the amendment was not an attempt to replace the
Change in Practice letter but a request to be kept in the communication loop, Councilor Chapman agreed with
maintaining a relationship with the Forest Service but it should not be a part of the motion as it specifically
addressed whether to settle, Concern was expressed that the more complex the motion became increased the
City's vulnerability for additional legal trouble. Council should vote on the amendment, the main motion and
decide whether to appeal.
Roll Call Vote: Councilor Navickas, Hartzell and Hardesty, YES; Councilor Chapman, Silbiger,
Jackson, Chapman, NO. Mayor Morrison, NO. Motion failed 4-3.
Roll Call Vote on original motion: Councilor Chapman, Silbiger, Jackson, Hartzell and Hardesty, YES;
Councilor Navickas, NO. Motion passed 5-1.
-,~-
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL A1EETlNG
December 2.2008
PAGE 8 of 10
Councilor Chapman/Hartzell m/s to direct the City's Legal Counsel to draft a settlement agreement
with MAA and to authorize the City Administrator to sign this agreement. Roll Call Vote: Councilor
Chapman, Silbiger, Jackson, Hartzell, Hardesty, YES; Councilor Navickas, NO. Motion passed 5-1.
Councilor Chapman/Jackson m/s to amend the contract with Harrang, Long, Gary Rudnick for legal
services in this case for an amount no more than $225,000. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Chapman,
Navickas, Silbiger, Jackson, Hartzell and Hardesty, YES. Motion passed.
2. Does the Council wish to enter into the proposed Intergovernmental Agreement with the Housing
Authority of Jackson County regarding the acquisition of 10 acres of property on Clay Street?
Community Development Director Bill Molnar explained the Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) with the
Housing Authority of Jackson County (HAJC) would establish how land division and coordinate certain land
use application and responsibilities for future public street improvements,
Senior Planner Brandon Goldman provided a presentation that included:
Key IGA Components
. Division of Land Area: 60% City of Ashland and 40% HAJC
. Division of Existing Development Rights: 60-67 units for HAJC and 40-47 units for the City
. Demolition of one outbuilding removed per HAJC Phase I with the remainder on City Land that
would be removed (if necessary) at Phase II
. Wetland Mitigation and Enhancement: $80,000 contribution from HAJC with the City responsible
for remainder, if any, and ongoing maintenance
. Road Improvements would provide for dedications of right- of-ways , Internal new streets completed
by HAJC, Off site improvements include property frontage to receive half-street improvement by
HAJC and other improvements to be equitably divided when Planning Action Conditions are
known
. Land area reserved for potential connectivity from Clay to Tolman Creek Road is secured through
the IGA and would be through the Planning application stage by HAJC
. Property Vicinity
. Site Division and Street Improvements
Next Steps
. Purchase Agreement ready to execute
. Property closing date December 18, 2008
. HAJC to submit planning action to divide the property and allow for their 60 unit development
. Separate Agreement with Parks may be developed
City Attorney Richard Appicello explained approval from the Planning Commission would occur by
demonstrating compliance with the applicable law, If the Planning Commission did not approve the partition,
the agreement stated the City would not only appeal but was obligated to follow through to completion,
including any appeals.
Ron Roth/6950 Old 99 Sffhought the project was a great idea and asked the Council to approve the IGA
unanimously,
Councilor Jackson/Hartzell m/s to approve IGA for the development of Clay Street with the Housing
Authority of Jackson County. DISCUSSION: Councilor Chapman commented that assigning the partition at
this time limited options for a decent design plan, He sited an article in the Mail Tribune newspaper that
described another six-acre affordable housing community that incorporated massive solar designs reducing
energy costs 50%, HAJC had several reasons they could not include solar energy into this project yet here was
another group doing just that.
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL A1EETlNG
December 2.2008
PAGE 9 of 10
Councilor Hardesty clarified that the project referred to in the paper was a $28 million project where the Clay
Street project was $10 million plus the land, The City could not have afforded the project without the HAlC
purchase, HAlC would use energy star appliances. The public needed to know that an effort was being made
towards energy efficiency, The project was not perfect but worthwhile,
Councilor Hartzell noted this was non-profit and the City should work with HAlC as much as possible to
improve the project but not treat it different from a private developer's project.
Councilor Silbiger commented that a year prior a private developer did his own development and for the
affordable housing portion the City required energy efficiency. He wanted to know how far along the project
was in the development process, He agreed with Councilor Chapman but supported the project.
Councilor Navickas also agreed with Councilor Chapman on some aspects but added the project was green
from an urban planning perspective,
Roll Call Vote: Councilor Jackson, Navickas, Hartzell, Hardesty and Silbiger, YES; Councilor
Chapman, NO. Motion passed 5-1.
Councilor Chapman left meeting at 10:16 p.m.
3. Should the Council approve the attached Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order on
Remand for LUBA 2007-113, [Planning Action 2006-02354] and send Notice of Decision pursuant
to the Ashland Land Use Ordinance to the Parties?
City Attorney Richard Appicello advised Council to disclose any Ex Parte communications, The Council and
Mayor had nothing to disclose.
Councilor Jackson/Hardesty mls to approve Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order on
Remand for LUBA 2007-113. Roll Call Vote: Councilor Silbiger, Hartzell, Jackson, Hardesty and
Navickas, YES. Motion passed.
NEW AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS
1. Should the Council initiate an amendment to Ashland's Land Use Ordinance that would require
incorporating public art as part of large-scale development projects?
Community Development Director Bill Molnar provided the staff report and explained it was a request to have
City Planning staff start working with the Planning Commission through the Public Arts Commission to
evaluate a change,
Concern was expressed that the ordinance required more discussion, The Planning department had other
priorities as well and this might not be the ideal time to initiate the ordinance,
ORDINANCES~ RESOLUTIONS AND CONTRACTS
1. Should the Council conduct and approve First Reading of an ordinance titled "An Ordinance
Relating to the Review of Public Art Proposals, Establishing Criteria and Selection Processes for the
Acquisition, Acceptance, or Removal from the Ashland Public Art Collection," and move the
ordinance to Second Reading?
Delayed due to time constraints
2. Does the Council wish to adopt a resolution supporting drafting of a sweatshop free procurement
policy for City uniforms and garments?
Delayed due to time constraints
1---
ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL A1EETlNG
December 2. 2008
PAGE 10 of 10
OTHER BUSINESS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERSIREPORTS FROM COUNCIL LIAISONS None
ADJOURNMENT
Meeting was adjourned at 10:30 p,m,
Barbara Christensen, City Recorder
John W. Morrison, Mayor
T~
1--'-
r-----
ASHLAND AIRPORT COMMISSION
November 4, 2008
MINUTES
MEMBERS PRESENT: LINCOLN ZEVE, TREGG SCOTT, DAVID WOLSKE, ALAN DEBOER, RUSS
SILBIGER, BRITTANY WISE ·
STAFF: SCOTT FLEURY
MEMBERS ABSENT: BOB SKINNER, GOA LOBAUGH
Visitors:
1. CALL TO ORDER: 9:30 AM
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: September 2008, Motion by Skillman for approval, second by
DeBoer, unanimous vote, minutes approved as written,
A, Additional Items: Ashland Rental Building Construction Approval
3. Public Forum: No public comments,
4. OLD BUSINESS:
A. Potomac SuperAwos: No new information regarding FAA Status of SuperAwos.
Commission would like update from Skinner via email when possible, Fleury to ask
Skinner to update Commission at earliest possible convience. Fleury to work on
scheduling internet training for Mike Cook to become FAA certified service
technician on system, Commission also would like Noise Sensitive Area Map placed
in a more obvious location within FBO so more people become aware of it. Also
Commission would like Skinner to place map within every hangar bill so all
occupants obtain one,
B. Rental Rate Approval: Rate Resolution to be written by Mike Faught and brought
before Council for approval in November or December depending on work load.
C. DC-3 hangar construction: No new updates on Hangar construction.
D. QT-Technologies Fueling Terminal Service Agreement: The Platinum Service has been
paid for and Airport Commission to review and discuss renewal options next year
when service expires.
E. A vigation Easement: Commission is interested in the planning process within the
Airport Overlay Zone and would like to know how certain issues with building heights
and the Avigation/hold harmless easements are dealt with. Fleury to research
planning information for next meeting, DeBoer mentions it would be a good idea to
change the zoning for taxlots within the overlay zone to include the designation -OA
to indicate taxlot was within the Airport Horizontal Surface and certain conditions
may apply to construction, Fleury to talk with planning regarding zoning change,
5. NEW BUSINESS:
A, Hangar Inspections: Fleury states that he has scheduled the Hangar inspections for
11-18-08 and Skinner has posted notice regarding inspections at FBO office. Fleury to
make sure that keys are available to all hangars and if there are locks with no keys
they will be removed to enter.
C:\DOCUME-1\shipletd\LOCALS-1\Temp\November 4 08.doc
1
B, Hangar Electrical Audit, Fleury shows hangar map and power provider breakdown
to Commission, Commission would like to see all power switched over to City of
Ashland Power. Fleury to research and get back to Commission on the change
over.
C. Crowman Mill Site: Silbiger states he has a conflict of interest with any discussion
relating to the Crowman Mill Site Development and leaves room during discussion.
Fleury stated that Jim Olson was going to contact the FAA to determine how
buildings are constructed on land that encroaches into the Airport overlay zone,
Fleury to share this information with planning so the proper procedures are followed
when it comes to construction within the overlay zone.
D. Oregon Aviation Plan: Commission had no comments regarding Aviation plan, The
main item of interest is the change from a category 4 airport to a category 3 airport,
which will allow for a broader range of funding for AlP projects in the future,
E. Ashland Rental: Commission reviews site plan for 26'6" building to be built at
Ashland Rental, 2915 Highway 66. Building maximum height meets guidelines set
forth in FAR 77 and DeBoer motions for approval of Height exception to current
planning standards, second by Hendrickson. Vote passes unanimously. Fleury to
write letter to Steve Shapiro stating approval from the Airport Commission and
height calculations with regards to FAR 77.
6. AIRPORT MANAGER REPORT/FBO REPORT/AIRPORT ASSOCIATION:
A. Status of Airoort, Financial Reoort, Review of Safety Reoorts: Skinner absent from
meeting. Fleury states only issue was brought up by FAA inspector regarding Vasi
Light calibration being done. Fleury states calibration is done on a bi-annual
basis and logged in a book kept at the Public Works building.
B. Maintenance Updates - Hangar inspection scheduled for 11/18/08 and Peters to
install hangar numbers as time allows. Commission interested to know how
numbering changes affect BB, Sky and Skinner hangars who use old number.
7. OTHER:
The meeting of the JC airport commission is the third Monday of the month at 12:00 PM.
8. NEXT MEETING DATE: December 2,2008, 9:30 AM
ADJOURN: Meeting adjourned at 10:49 AM
C:\DOCUME-1 \shipletd\LOCALS-1 \T emp\November 4 OB.doc
2
T---
CITY OF
ASHLAND
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
SPECIAL MEETING
MINUTES
NOVEMBER 6, 2008
CALL TO ORDER
Commission Chair John Stromberg called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers,
1175 East Main Street.
Commissioners Present:
John Stromberg, Chair
Michael Dawkins
Mike Morris
Pam Marsh
Melanie Mindlin
Dave Dotterrer
Michael Church
Staff Present:
Bill Molnar, Community Development Director
Maria Harris, Planning Manager
April Lucas, Administrative Assistant
Absent Mem~ers:
Tom Dimitre
Debbie Miller
Council Liaison:
Cate Hartzell
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Community Development Director Bill Molnar reminded the Commission of their December 18, 2008 Study Session.
He also announced the City Council Public Hearing on the Water Resource Protection Zones Ordinance has been
tentatively scheduled for January 20,2009.
PUBLIC FORUM
No one came forward to speak.
TYPE III PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Water Resource Protection Zones Ordinance
Staff noted the following items were submitted to the Commission at the beginning of the meeting:
. Memo from Parks & Recreation Director Don Robertson which listed questions and concerns about the use of
herbicides, equipment weight restrictions, vegetation replanting requirements, and annual reviews.
. Email from Eric Bonetti questioning where the centerline would be measured for creeks with more than one
channel.
. Email from Councilor Hartzell regarding the herbicide issue.
. Emails from Commissioner Miller.
Stromberg noted the discussion outline that was used at the last meeting and clarified they would pick up where they
left off.
Enforcement & Penalties
Planning Manager Maria Harris stated language was added that references the General Penalties section of the
Ashland Municipal Code, which outlines the procedure for citations and fines. This section also includes language
requiring an owner to re-establish the natural condition when a water resource protection zone is illegally altered and
language that allows the court to impose additional fees for enforcement costs incurred by the City.
Ashland Planning Commission
November 6, 2008
Page 1 of 5
Comment was made questioning how this would be enforced, and whether penalties for intentional violations would
differ from accidental incidents. Suggestion was made that staff should attempt to work with the property owner to
remedy the situation before issuing a citation.
Mr. Molnar clarified this ordinance would be enforced by the City's Code Compliance Officer. City Attorney Richard
Appicello commented on the General Enforcement section of the Ashland Municipal Code and clarified the maximum
fine that can be applied according to the City Charter is $500; however, the Commission could set a minimum fine for
intentional activities if they desire.
The Commission discussed the proposed language. Concern was expressed with the requirement that regardless of
the violation, the property owner is required to submit a mitigation plan prepared by a natural resource professional.
Staff acknowledged the Commission's concerns and suggestion was made to modify Section 18.63.140(B) to read,
"Within thirty days (30) of notification by the City of Ashland Planning Division of a violation of unauthorized alteration
of native vegetation or disturbance of land, mitigation shall be required, and the staff advisor may require a mitigation
plan prepared by a natural resource professional." The majority of the Commission indicated support for this section
as modified.
Removal of Invasive Veaetation
Ms. Harris noted Ecologist Jeannine Rossa's testimony that it is safe to use glyphosqte without surfactants in the
riparian area, and Mr. Robertson's concerns that this ordinance might prohibit the Parks Department's use of
herbicides. Staff indicated a compromis'e might be to allow use of this type of herbicide only if it is applied by a
trained professional. Ms. Harris noted the report on Managing Himalayan Blackberries that was sent out to the
Commission and clarified the findings indicate the most effective treatment for blackberries is mowing or cutting down
the canes and then treating them with herbicide. She stated this report makes the case that it is better to remove
blackberries in riparian areas and replant with native vegetation since blackberries do not provide significant shade,
have shallow roots, and don't allow any new trees or shrubs to be established in the area where they have taken
over.
Dawkins voiced his opposition to the use of herbicides and commented that DDT is a good example of a product that
was suppose to be really good, but turned out to be harmful. He also disagreed with the proposed removal approach
and stated in his experience, the most effective way to eradicate blackberries is to cut them down and dig out the
roots. He also shared his concerns regarding bank instability once the blackberries are removed.
Stromberg noted the email submitted by Councilor Hartzell and asked if the Commission would allow Hartzell to
share her input. Staff recommended the public hearing be re-opened if the Commission wants to allow her to speak.
Stromberg re-opened the public hearing at 7:44 p,m.
Councilor Hartzell noted the testimony from Rick Landt who told the Commission about successfully removing
blackberries manually. She also noted a study that found that blackberries can come back after herbicide application.
She clarified her email spoke about toxicity and how it affects waterways and noted the proposed ordinance is
suppose to protect the water and habitat; blackberries should not be the main objective.
Stromberg asked if anyone else wished to provide testimony and then closed the public hearing at 7:47 p.m.
The Commission continued their discussion on whether to permit herbicide use. Mindlin noted the ordinance requires
a Type I application approval before herbicides can be used. She commented on trying to find a compromise to the
issues raised and suggested the ordinance be modified to include the following: 1) only allow glyphosate without
surfactants herbicides, 2) application of the herbicide could only be done by a certified professional, 3) include a
limitation on the number of re-applications (herbicides may be applied for initial eradication, but should not be used
as an ongoing maintenance plan), and 4) include language that encourages repeat mowing as a method for removal.
Ash/and Planning Commission
November 6, 2008
Page 2 of 5
r--
Dawkins indicated he is against the use of herbicides, but is willing to compromise and is comfortable with Mindlin's
suggested amendments. Staff clarified the Parks & Recreation Department would be required to file an application;
however, it may cover a longer period of time, It was also clarified the cost for a Type I application is approximately
$900. Dotterrer expressed concern with this cost. Marsh commented that this would discourage homeowners to use
herbicides to remove a minimal amount of blackberries, but would allow herbicide use in the more extreme situations.
Comment was made questioning how the Parks Department applies herbicides and some concern was expressed
with spraying rather than dabbing on the product. Mr. Molnar commented on the expenses associated with a Type I
approval process, including the noticing requirements and the staff time spent responding to citizens. He also noted
there is a provision in the ordinance that allows the fee to be reduced for restoration enhancement activities. Ms.
Harris re-stated the four proposed amendments outlined by Commissioner Mindlin and the majority of the group
indicated support for this section as amended.
HardshiD Variance
Ms. Harris indicated the ordinance is required to include a hardship variance. It was clarified this would be a Type II
action and would come before the Planning Commission for approval.
Creeks with More than One Channel
Staff was asked to respond to Mr. Bonetti's email questioning where the centerline would be measured for braided
creeks. Staff indicated the ordinance is currently silent on this issue, but they could include language if the
Commission desires, Mr. Molnar commented on how other communities address this issue and stated in these
instances measurement is typically taken from the center of the braid. Support was voiced for clarifying this in the
ordinance. Mr. Molnar noted there are situations were there is a dominant channel, and there may be a need for
judgment in some cases. Suggestion was made to include language that indicates where there is an unusual creek
bed, staff will visit and evaluate the site. The Commission voiced support for including language to this effect in the
ordinance.
Setback Issues
Stromberg reviewed the setback issues listed in the discussion outline. Staff clarified the reduction provision
associated with 18.63.080 states up to 50% and only the minimum amount needed would be granted, Comment was
made questioning whether staff would be allowed to take the size of a house into consideration when determining the
appropriate reduction. Mr. Molnar clarified staff generally does not take into account the size of the house, but
evaluates the size of the buildable area outside the protection zone. He added the ordinance states any adjustment
to the protection zone would only be the minimum amount necessary to accommodate the use. Ms. Harris
commented on the Top of Bank issue and clarified the ordinance was amended to include physical characteristics to
help identify top of bank.
Activities Issues
Stromberg reviewed the activities issues listed in the discussion outline. Ms. Harris clarified the replanting standards
were changed to indicated a minimum plant size of 4 inches for ground cover, the % in. caliper for tree size was
removed, and the requirement to identify the plant sources and suppliers was removed. She added staff did not make
any changes addressing the canopy tree planting configuration. Recommendation was made to include language
that provides staff the ability to approve a different configuration so long as the canopy issue is addressed. Ms. Harris
noted the previous language that was inserted into the ordinance and suggested they reinsert the following
statement, "Canopy trees shall be planted at 20 ft. intervals or such other interval as required to install materials
required for tree mitigation..." Support was voiced for replacing this language as suggested by staff.
Council Liaison Hartzell left the meeting at 8:50 p,m.
Comment was made questioning the ability for backyard food production in the riparian zone. Staff clarified this would
be permitted in the 50/50 zone. It was also questioned if a property owner would be permitted to protect this area with
fencing. Mr. Molnar commented on the floodplain regulations and stated solid fences are restricted within 20 ft. of the
Ashland Planning Commission
November 6, 2008
Page 3 of 5
'---, -
floodplain. It was questioned if other types of fencing might be acceptable in riparian areas. Ms. Harris stated the idea
is for fencing to be generally prohibited, but they could make an exception for deer fencing in specific cases. The
Commission discussed what type of fencing might be acceptable and where it could be located. Comment was made
that this issue also pertains to people who might want to install fencing for other reasons besides garden protection in
the riparian zone. There was agreement among the Commission to prohibit solid wood fencing and Staff was directed
to develop ordinance language that would permit open fencing in the 50/50 use area.
The Commission continued their discussion of the activities issues and whether the ordinance should restrict a
property owner from rebuilding a structure in the same location if it has been damaged by a flood for the second time.
Comment was made that such a provision is not necessary and if someone's house is washed away twice, they are
not going to want to put it back in the same place if they can avoid it. Dawkins noted that he can't remembera single
case since 1955 where this has been a problem.
Applv Proposed Ordinance to Specific Sites
Staff commented on two sites the Commission visited during their site visits. In regards to Mr. Brambacher's property
on Tolman Creek Rd, he will be able to continue to manage his property as is. However if he wishes to make
changes to the channel, that would trigger the requirements of the proposed ordinance, And in regards to the
Duncan's property, this ordinance is not going to affect the landscaping work they have already completed. They will
be able to leave their landscaping in place and maintain it.
General Issues with the Ordinance as a Whole
Stromberg read the issues listed on the discussion outline aloud. Staff provided clarification that the concerns raised
by the Public Works and Parks Departments have already been addressed in the ordinance. Mr. Molnar added the
Planning staff will continue t<;> keep these departments abreast as this ordinance moves forward. The Commission
briefly reviewed the remaining issues and no changes to the ordinance were proposed.
Commissioners Morris/Dotterrer m/s to extend meeting to 9:45 p.m. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed.
Recommended Additional Proarams or Actions
Mindlin provided an explanation of the stormwater infiltration and rainwater catchment issues and read aloud her
proposed recommendation which was submitted to the Commission at their last meeting. Comment was made that
this language may be too specific and recommending the Commission make a more general recommendation to the
Council instead. Marsh suggested they include a note to the Council explaining this issue came up and the
Commission agreed that while this issue is much broader than the scope of the ordinance, it should be placed on the
City's agenda. Mindlin felt this language was too vague and voiced her preference to use the language she drafted
instead. Suggestion was made to take Mindlin's language and add Marsh's proposed statement to the end. The
Commission voiced their support for this combination.
Mindlin commented on her second recommendation which addressed the need for ongoing assessment of the native
plant requirement. She recommended the City conduct an on-site review of the projects permitted under this
ordinance every three years to determine how well the native plants are performing. Church commented that they
may want to recommend that the entire ordinance be reviewed, not just the plantings. Dotterrer noted the Stream &
Enhancement Guide (which includes the native plant list) will likely be evaluated and updated periodically, and
questioned if they could use this instead of a mandatory site visit by staff. Dawkins questioned if there was a way to
bring the Parks Department into this since they have the immediate expertise and may be able to help evaluate.
Mindlin clarified she is not attached to the methodology of how this is completed, but does believe this needs to be
reviewed. Stromberg summarized the intent of this recommendation is to review not only the native plants list, but
also the usability of it in actual situations, and somehow involve the Parks Department with this process. Church
suggested an additional recommendation that states, "Three years from the effective date of the ordinance, staff will
field check all projects that have been subject to the ordinance and report to the Commission on the effectiveness of
the provisions." Suggestion was made to incorporate both of these concepts into one recommendation. Church
Ashland Planning Commission
November 6, 2008
Page 4 of 5
--------r --
suggested the language, "Three years from the effective date of the ordinance, staff will field check projects that have
been subject to the ordinance and report to the Commission on the effectiveness of the ordinance, including review
and usability of the native plants list."
Commissioners Dotterrer/Marsh m/s to extend meeting to 10:00 p.m. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed.
Commissioners Marsh/Morris m/s to recommend approval to the City Council of adoption of the ordinance
adding Chapter 18.63 Water Resource Protection Zones to and modifying Chapter 18.62 Physical and
Environmental Constraints of the Ashland Land Use Ordinance with the amendments and changes as
delineated in the meeting minutes and noted by staff. DISCUSSION: Dotterrer provided an explanation of why he
will be voting no on this ordinance. He expressed his concems with the way this ordinance was developed and felt
citizens will find the ordinance confusing and difficult to implement. He voiced his support for staffs efforts, but does
not think this is a model for how they should be doing business. He felt the Commission failed to define what the
problem was and wished they would have established water quality baselines so that it would have been possible to
determine whether or not this ordinance improves the City's water quality, Roll Call Vote: Commissioners Marsh,
Mindlin, Morris, Church, and Stromberg, YES. Commissioners Dotterrer and Dawkins, NO. Motion passed
5-2.
ADJOURNMENT
Meeting adjourned at 9:55 p.m.
Respectfully submitted by,
April Lucas, Administrative Assistant
Ashland Planning Commission
November 6, 2008
Page 5 of 5
CITY OF
ASHLAND
ASHLAND PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
NOVEMBER 12, 2008
CALL TO ORDER
Commission Chair John Stromberg called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 East
Main Street.
Commissioners Present:
John Stromberg, Chair
Michael Dawkins
Mike Morris
Debbie Miller
Pam Marsh
Melanie Mindlin
Dave Dotterrer
Michael Church
Tom Dimitre (Arrived at 7:25 p.rn.; joined the meeting after the first public hearing at 9:45 p,m.)
Staff Present:
Bill Molnar, Community Development Director
Derek Severson, Associate Planner
Angela Barry, Assistant Planner
Richard Appicello, City Attorney
April Lucas, Administrative Assistant
Absent Members:
None
Council Liaison:
Cate Hartzell, absent
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Community Development Director Bill Molnar reminded the Commission there is a Study Session scheduled for December 18,
2008. He also introduced Mike Faught, the City's new Public Works Director.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Commissioners Dotterrer/Church m/s to approve Agenda. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed.
CONSENT AGENDA
A. Approval of Minutes
1. October 14, 2008 Planning Commission Meeting
2. October 28, 2008 Planning Commission Meeting
B. Approval of Findings for 281 Fourth Street, PA #2008-01526
Church noted an error on the October 14, 2008 meeting minutes [under Planning Action 2008-01526, Ex Parte Contact]. He
stated Dotterrer is not listed and he is listed twice.
Commissioners' Miller/Dotterrer mls to approve Consent Agenda. Roll Call Vote: Commissioners Dawkins, Dotterrer,
Church, Marsh, Miller, Mindlin, Morris, and Stromberg, YES. Motion passed.
PUBLIC FORUM
No one came forward to speak.
Ashland Planning Commission
November 12, 2008
Page 1 of 8
1---
TYPE II PUBLIC HEARINGS
Stromberg read aloud the public hearing procedures for land use hearings.
A. PLANNING ACTION: 2008-01318
SUBJECT PROPERTY: 2200 Ashland Street
APPLICANT: Coming Attractions Theatres
DESCRIPTION: Request for Site Review approval to redevelop the existing 5,418 square foot, single-story
office building located at 2200 Ashland Street into an 18,791 square foot, three-story office and retail building.
The property is located within the Detail Site Review Zone and the development is subject to the Additional
Standards for Large Scale Projects and Ashland Boulevard Corridor Design Standards. Also included are
requests for: Administrative Variance to the Site Design and Use Standards and Exception to Street Standards
relating to the reconfiguration of off-street parking between the building and Ashland Street and to Ashland
Street improvements, and Tree Removal Permit to remove six trees greater than six-inches in diameter-at-
breast-height.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Commercial; ZONING: C-1; ASSESSOR'S MAP#: 391E 14 BB; TAX
LOT #: 300.
Declaration of Ex Parte Contact
No ex parte contact was reported. Dawkins and Stromberg both stated they performed site visits since the last hearing.
Staff ReDort
Associate Planner Derek Severson noted this item is a continuation from the October 14,2008 meeting. At that meeting, a
request was made by Evan Archerd to extend the public hearing so that he could familiarize himself with the project and
provide input. Mr. Severson explained the median was the main issue that came up during that hearing and clarified the
proposed median would restrict left hand turns from the proposed driveway onto Ashland Street and would also restrict left
hand turns from Clay Street onto Ashland Street. Mr. Severson stated the notice area for this planning action was extended
and the residents on Clay Street were provided notice of tonight's hearing. He also commented on the revised findings which
were distributed to the Commission at the beginning of the meeting, and noted the modifications that were made to Condition
3(L) and Condition 6.
Public Works Director Mike Faught came forward and introduced Marc Butorac with Kittleson & Associates Transportation
Engineering. Mr. Faught clarified Kittleson & Assoc. was hired by the City to review the application, findings, and traffic studies
for this planning action.
Mr. Butorac addressed the Commission and noted the Transportation Impact Analysis and Access Management Review
Memo that was submitted to the Commission at the beginning of the meeting. He explained the intersection of Clay and
Ashland has site distance issues and operational safety issues, and stated they concur with the need to restrict left hand
turning movements. He commented on where the existing south bound left turning movements from Clay Street would be
diverted to if the median were installed, and noted their concern of vehicles making u-turns on Ashland Street without
sufficient site distance. He also indicated traffic coming from 1-5 would also need to turn around in order to access the
proposed development. For this reason, they are recommending a raised median be installed between Clay and Faith Streets
which would enable vehicles to make their u-turn at the Faith. He stated this is consistent with the City's Transportation
System Plan and recommended a reimbursement agreement between the City and the Applicant.
Tom Dimitre arrived at 7:25 p.m, and indicated he would wait in the lobby until the next hearing.
Mr. Butorac commented on the need for an east-west connection between Tolman Creek Road and Clay Street, and stated
this connection would minimize the number of u-turns on Ashland Street. He recommended the City review this possibility
separate from this application. Mr. Butorac noted the commercial uses in the area and clarified larger vehicles, including
buses, moving vans and semi-trucks would not be able to turn around at Faith Avenue due to the width of the street.
It was clarified vehicles would still be able to make left hand turns from Faith Avenue onto Ashland Street. It was also clarified
it is not possible to restrict left hand turns from Clay Street, but allow left hand turns into the project site because Ashland
Ash/and Planning Commission
November 12, 2008
Page 2 of 8
1----
Street is not wide enough to accommodate the vehicle storage space that would be needed. Comment was made questioning
if there is an alternative to the u-turn at Faith. Mr. Butorac stated the ideal alternative is the east-west connection, which would
significantly reduce the need for making a u-turn at Faith. He clarified the volumes on Ashland Street are not an issue; it is the
reduced site distance caused by the overpass that are creating these issues. Church commented that the site distance at the
Faith and Ashland intersection is also an issue, and if you add in u-turns that could significantly affect this intersection. Mr.
Butorac noted the vehicles making u-turns at Faith have plenty of site distance since they are looking at opposing east bound
vehicles, but acknowledged Church's concerns and stated the site distance issue affects both ends of the overpass.
Mr. Butorac commented that the City does not have the most desirable street system in this area; however installing a median
would diminish the existing safety issue. He stated the system would be aggravated slightly at the Faith intersection, but on a
whole, the Applicant is maintaining or slightly improving the current system. However, for future development to occur in this
area, he recommended the City create an additional connection between Tolman Creek Road and Clay Street.
David Pyles and Dan Dorrell with the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) addressed the Commission and
summarized their letter that was handed out at the beginning of the meeting. Mr. Pyles stated ODOT concurs with the
Applicant's Facts, Findings and Conclusions in their Traffic Impact Study, which identifies the need for a median at this
location. He stated the scale of the identified improvement is in proportion to the proposed development. Mr. Pyles noted there
has been development in this area over the past several years that has bumped up the need for mitigation in this area. He
also noted the potential future development on the north side of Clay Street and clarified with or without this project, there is
development pressure that is creating this issue. Mr. Pyles concluded his testimony by clarifying the two key conditions of
approval that they have requested are: 1) the condition for the raised median, and 2) the condition for the legal access permit.
Dan Dorrell commented on why it is not possible to allow a left hand turn into the proposed development. He agreed with Mr.
Butorac's assessment and stated there is not enough vehicle storage space. He clarified the concern is that the vehicles
waiting to make this left turn could back out into the west bound traffic lane. Mr. Dorrell also provided a brief explanation of
what the channelized median would look like and clarified it would be signed appropriately to help prevent driver confusion.
Marsh questioned if this section of Ashland Street would be included in the study being completed for the Exit 14 Interchange
Area Management Plan (lAMP) and asked if the proposed mitigation is consistent with that project. Mr. Pyles stated the lAMP
for Exit 14 does not look at an access management strategy west of Tolman Creek Road. However, there may be an
opportunity to include this type of system level planning in the final recommendation for the TSP system analysis. Or, it could
be done as a follow up, or some type of refinement plan that updates the City's Transportation System Plan. He clarified this
type of system level planning is different from the study being completed for the lAMP.
ADDlicant's Presentation
Mr. Knox agreed to allow a few members of the audience who had time constraints to give their testimony first.
Public Testimonv
Greg Jones/641 Faith Avenue/Stated he is not opposed to the proposed development and believes this is a good thing for
the area. However, the proposed median and u-turns that would occur at Faith would make one of the City's worst
intersections even worse. Mr. Jones stated he has spoken to staff, the City Council, and the Traffic Safety Commission about
the problems at Faith and he has yet to see any type of study or mitigation for this area. He stated there has got to be another
solution and warned them about creating a worse situation at Faith.
Robin Jokinen /311 E. Hersey Street/Stated she is a small business owner and does deliveries throughout Ashland. Ms.
Jokinen explained she has been using Clay Street for 25 years and has never had a problem making a left turn onto Ashland
Street. She noted the alternate routes available and explained she does not use Oak Street because of the speed bumps,
does not use North Mountain because of the high school and college students, and avoids Walker because of the elementary
and middle school. Ms. Jokinen reminded the Commission of the fatal accident that occurred at the intersection of Faith and
Ashland and questioned if the proposed development could be accessed from behind the Oil Stop to prevent the median from
being installed.
Ash/and Planning Commission
November 12, 2008
Page 3 of 8
ADDlicant's Presentation
Mark Knox! 485 W Nevada Street/ Applicant's Representative/Stated the Applicant agrees with the conditions proposed by
staff and ODOT and clarified when they are able to obtain an easement through the Bi-Mart shopping center, the Applicant is
willing to pave the driveway to make that connection. Mr. Knox noted the amount of time the Applicant, staff and ODOT has
spent working on the median issue and stated no one is taking this situation lightly. He stated the Applicant is willing to pay for
their fair share of the median and stated the turning movements out of this site are dangerous with or without this application
going through. He clarified it is not this application that is creating the problem and noted ODOT could decide to go in and
install the median on their own. He clarified this is a safety issue and stated they do not want to put anyone is a position that is
unsafe.
Mr. Knox clarified where the property line ends and where the fencing would be located. Dawkins expressed concern with
individuals not being able to connect to the bike path. He stated people will not be inclined to create a new informal path on
the slope and stated it would be great if the Applicant could obtain a partial easement for this.
Miller questioned the likelihood of the Applicant getting permission from the Bi-Mart shopping center to access the
development site. Mr. Knox noted the informal access that exists today, but clarified they have not yet obtained a legal access
from the Oil Stop property. He stated the shopping center is a conglomeration of 17 different owners and it is difficult for this
group to come to a decision.
Public Testimony (Cont.)
Mike McGuire/321 Clay Street #51/Stated he would like to continue to be able to make left hand turns from Clay Street onto
Ashland Street. He stated he would like to see this development move forward, and stated if the Applicant could get an
easement behind the Oil Stop, this would solve the problem.
Helen Leider/321 Clay Street #34/Voiced her concerns with losing access to Ashland Street from Clay Street. She also
expressed objection to the noticing that was performed by staff. Ms. Leider stated the proposed median would cause more
driving and would affect her quality of life. She noted the upcoming development on Clay Street and stated the City needs
more arteries to deal with the traffic.
Elise Thiell321 Clay Street #19/Stated she is not against to the proposed building, but would oppose this application if it
means left hand turns onto Ashland Street would no longer be allowed. She commented on how this proposal would affect the
Faith intersection and noted there are a lot of pedestrians who cross at that location. Ms. Thiel voiced her support of retaining
the left hand turns from Clay onto Ashland and suggested the City deny any new buildings for this area until an overall traffic
study has been completed. She added she hopes the Applicant will be able to gain access to their property from the Oil Stop.
Evan Archerd/2200 Ashland Street/Commented on the importance of supporting local businesses, but stated approving this
application with the median installation would cause harm to those who live and work in that area. He stated the issues that
have been raised by the traffic engineers are accurate, but stated he does not agree with Kittleson & Assoc.'s conclusions. Mr.
Archerd commented on safety and stated there have only been 5 accidents at the intersection of Clay and Ashland in the last
5 years, and 2 of them were on his property and had nothing to do with the intersection. However, there have been 2 fatal
accidents at the Faith and Ashland intersection and voiced his objections to diverting traffic to that intersection instead. Mr.
Archerd commented on the traffic counts, and stated the traffic study was based on approximately 120 new units on Clay
Street; however that development has been reduced to 60 units. Therefore the actual vehicle trips on Clay Street will go down,
not up from what was listed in the study. He also noted the proposed development has a much lower number of vehicle trips
than the hardware store that previously occupied the site. Mr. Archerd stated the proposed median is not necessary and
recommended the Commission approve the application without this condition.
Ron Roth/6950 Old Hwy 99 S/Commented on the driving route he uses daily and stated denying left turn access from Clay
onto Ashland Street does not make any sense. Mr. Roth stated he uses Clay Street everyday, but if the median goes in, he
will have to use Walker instead, and noted the two schools on this road. He stated it would be in the Bi-Mart shopping centers
best interest to provide the easement and stated the existing steep driveway would be impassible in the winter. Mr. Roth
encouraged the Commission to decouple this application from the median issue.
Ashland Planning Commission
November 12, 2008
Page 4 of 8
~---
Russ Dale/230 Wilson Road/Noted the many properties he has been involved with in this area and strongly encouraged the
Commission to approve the proposed development. However, he stated the median is a disaster and stated the Clay/Ashland
intersection works fine without any new impediments. He recommended they approve the project, but remove the median
condition.
Alan DeBoer/2260 Morada Lane/Noted he is the former owner of the property and voiced his support of Coming Attractions
building their headquarters at this location, Mr. DeBoer agreed with the previous speakers that diverting vehicles to make u-
turns at Faith is not a good solution, and stated the proposed median would increase vehicle miles traveled. He recommended
the Commission approve this application without the median requirement, have the Applicant sign in favor of participating in
future improvements, and then direct staff to work on an overall plan for this area.
Dawkins read aloud the written testimony submitted by Donald Abel/566 Faith AvenuelThe email stated the traffic
consequences caused by the proposed median have not been adequately considered, and the fact that he was not notified as
an affected party to this change indicates that the larger ramifications were not considered. It stated u-turns are slow and
dangerous and take up both lanes. It also indicated these u-turns will interfere with the traffic on Ashland Street, but will also
interfere with cars turning either right or left off Faith. Mr. Abel urged the Commission to look at this issue more closely and if
necessary do an actual traffic study that addresses the reality of the situation,
Church read aloud the written testimony submitted by Colin SwaleslThe email questioned whether 4 lanes on Ashland Street
are needed at the Clay intersection, and whether 3 lanes with a central turn lane would be better. It questioned whether
pedestrian crossing and bicycle turning movements were considered in the traffic study, and asked how the median would
affect the intersection of Faith and Ashland. It asked what the traffic impacts would be when all of the Clay Street properties
are developed to their maximum potential and whether ODOT has considered installing a roundabout at this junction to make
turning movements more efficient. It also questioned whether Ashland Street complies with the recently approved changes to
the Street Standards in regards to sidewalk width and protection for pedestrians.
ADDlicant's Rebuttal
Mark Knox/Stated if the Planning Commission decides to not require the median, the Applicant would be supportive of that.
However, he cited the 5 traffic engineers who have indicated the median will need to go in, regardless of whether it's this
application or the next development. He noted the median issue was talked about with Barclay Square and stated safety
matters more than adding one more minute to a driver's commute. Mr. Knox stated the Clay and Ashland intersection is
operating at a level of service "F", but the median would bring it to level "B". He stated he hopes the Commission will come to
the conclusion that this application stands on its own and should be approved, and the median is more of a community issue
that needs to be resolved. He noted ODOT feels strongly that this median needs to go in, and regardless of this project,
ODOT is likely to do this on their own in the near future.
Stromberg closed the Public Hearing and the record at 8:50 pm. He also announced the Vista Planning Action would not be
heard tonight and would be continued to the December 9, 2008 Planning Commission meeting.
Advice from Leaal Counsel and Staff
Comment was made questioning how the City can better control the traffic at the Faith intersection. Mr. Butorac explained the
concems regarding the u-turns at Faith will go away once the new east-west connection is made. He stated the issue at Clay
and Ashland is simple and explained there is 330 ft. of intersection site distance and AASHTO requires 412 ft, He stated this is
a very black and white line. He added while the Faith intersection does have issues, it meets the AASHTO site distance
standards and it also meets City standards.
Church questioned the possibility of severing the requirement for the median from this planning action. Mr. Faught clarified this
is an ODOT facility and it is their jurisdiction, and they are requiring this median. He added staff has looked into this and
concur with the need for the median. Mr. Butorac stated they have a study before them that indicates this intersection is
deficient of site distance; if they defer and any issue (such as a crash) occurs, it puts ODOT, the Applicant, and the City in a
very tenuous situation.
Ashland Planning Commission
November 12, 2008
Page 5 of 8
T----
Miller noted this site has already been in use, and if the proposed development is built as planned, it will have less traffic than
the previous uses. She questioned why these traffic mitigation efforts need to be installed now. Mr. Butorac clarified when this
intersection was originally designed, the standards were different. He added this Applicant is required to comply with the
current standards.
Deliberations and Decision
Commissioners Dawkins/Marsh mls to approve Planning Action #2008-01318 as written. DISCUSSION: Several
members indicated they would like to discuss dropping the median requirement. Ootterrer suggested they consider removing
Conditions 3(L) and 6. Comment was made voicing support for decoupling these issues and taking a more holistic approach to
the issues on Ashland Street. Comment was made noting the liability issues, and the 5 traffic engineers who have stated this
is an unsafe intersection. Concern was voiced regarding the situation at Faith. Support was voiced for the City to work on a
connection between Tolman Creek Rd and Clay Street. Church commented that in his own experience, the proposed median
would not solve the problem, and would only push the problems down to the Faith intersection. Miller suggested they work
towards putting in arterials before installing the median. She also recommended they hold off on any further urbanization on
Clay Street until some comprehensive traffic arrangements have been made. She added the more growth they allow on Clay,
the worse the situation will get. Ootterrer commented that they are trying to solve a major transportation problem through land
use planning, and this is backwards, Stromberg stated the proposed median would create a new situation at Faith, and they
do not have the equivalent ability to evaluate the danger at that intersection. He added to make the Clay/Ashland intersection
safe, it would make the Faith/Ashland intersection more dangerous. He noted there would be no ability for larger vehicles to
make the u-turn at Faith. He also noted the testimony which indicated the proposed median would divert traffic to Walker
Avenue, which has two schools along it.
Commissioners Dotterrer/Miller mls to amend motion to remove Condition 3(L) and Condition 6. Roll Call Vote:
Commissioners Church, Dawkins, Mindlin, Miller, Dotterrer and Stromberg, YES. Commissioners Morris and Marsh,
NO. Motion passed 6-2.
DISCUSSION on Main Motion as Amended: Marsh suggested they ask the Applicant to pursue the extension of the
bikepath through their property. Comment was made questioning whether they could legally require this since it would have to
cross the railroad tracks. Mindlin voiced her support for asking the Applicant to have a future access in the event legal access
is granted.
Commissioners Dawkins/Dotterrer mls to extend meeting to 10:00 p.m. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed.
Commissioners Mindlin/Marsh mls to amend motion to require the Applicant to provide a future connectivity route to
what is now the informal pathway, connecting to the bikepath and through the property to sites on southeast side, at
such time a legal connection is made. DISCUSSION: Marsh stated they have an opportunity here, and if they do not act on
it, once the lot is developed the opportunity for the path is lost. Mr. Molnar clarified this condition would be activated if and
when there is a legal crossing of the railroad tracks. Miller noted that if this property were to change hands, this condition
would ensure that this future connection happens. Roll Call Vote: Commissioners Marsh, Church, Miller, Dawkins,
Dotterrer, Mindlin, Morris and Stromberg, YES. Motion passed 8-0.
DISCUSSION on Main Motion as Amended: Mr. Appicello clarified it is the Commission's job to make a defensible decision
and noted the criteria requiring adequate transportation facilities. He recommended the Commission provide clear justification
for their decision so that staff can prepare findings. He also recommended the Commission address what would happen if
OOOT denies the Applicant's approach permit unless the median is installed, Stromberg clarified the Commission is interested
in the safety of the entire transportation system for this area, not just one intersection. He noted the lack of a sufficient turn
around for larger vehicles at the Faith/Ashland intersection and noted additional traffic would be diverted onto other streets
that have their own hazards. He stated the proposed median focuses on one intersection and does not take into consideration
the effects it will have at the Faith intersection. He also noted the lack of a model to evaluate Faith Street as stringently as the
Clay intersection was evaluated. Mr. Stromberg added it is the Commission's feeling that what is being proposed is not a
responsible, safe solution. Mr. Appicello recommended the Commission consider including a provision that states nothing in
this approval stops OOOT from granting approach permits with whatever conditions they deem necessary.
Ashland Planning Commission
November 12, 2008
Page 6 of 8
~r-- -
Commissioners Dotterrer/Dawkins m/s to amend motion to include that this approval does not preclude ODOT from
imposing conditions on the approach permit to the Applicant. Roll Call Vote: Commissioners Church, Dawkins,
Dotterrer, Marsh, Miller, Mindlin, Morris and Stromberg, YES. Motion passed 8-0.
Roll Call Vote on Main Motion as Amended: Commissioners Church, Dawkins, Dotterrer, Marsh, Miller, Mindlin,
Morris and Stromberg, YES. Motion passed 8-0.
B. PLANNING ACTION: 2008-00911
SUBJECT PROPERTY: 2300 Siskiyou Blvd.
APPLICANT: Steve Asher
DESCRIPTION: A request for Site Review approval to construct thirteen condominium units for the property
located at 2300 Siskiyou Boulevard. Also included are requests for a Physical & Environmental Constraints
Review Permit to allow tree removal and parking space installation on Flood Plain Corridor/Riparian
Preservation Lands adjacent to a culverted section of Clay Creek; Tree Removal Permits to remove 36 of the
site's 78 trees; and an Exception to Street Standards to not install sidewalks and curbs along Siskiyou
Boulevard frontage. (The approval of this application wo~ld replace the previous Performance Standards
Options subdivision approval from PA #96-131).
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Low Density Multi Family Residential; ZONING: R-2; ASSESSOR'S
MAP #: 391E 14 CA; TAX LOTS: 7700,7800, 7801, 7802, 7803, 7804, 7805, 7806, 7807 and 7808.
Declaration of Ex Parte Contact
No ex parte contact was reported. Commissioners Stromberg, Dawkins, Church, Dotterrer, Miller, Marsh and Mindlin all had
site visits.
Commissioners Mindlin/Church m/s to extend meeting to 10:30 p.m. Voice Vote: all AYES. Motion passed.
Staff ReDort
Associate Planner Derek Severson presented the staff report and provided a brief overview of the project. He noted the
location of the site is on the comer of Bellview and Siskiyou, adjacent to the Ashlander Apartments. Mr. Severson commented
on the 1996 subdivision approval and clarified the current proposal would replace the previous one in its entirety. He stated
this application includes a request to construct 13 condominium units, as well as tree removal permits to remove 38 of the
site's 78 trees, an exception to the Street Standards to not install sidewalks and curbs along the Siskiyou Boulevard frontage,
and a request to allow parking space installation on Floodplain Corridor/Riparian Preservation Lands.
Mr. Severson noted this application could have been approved administratively; however, staff felt there were issues that
warranted this application coming before the Planning Commission, including: 1) the open space requirement, 2) the location
of the surface parking, and 3) the request for an exception to the Street Standards to not install curbs or sidewalks along the
Siskiyou frontage. He clarified the Applicant is proposing to install street trees and patch the path that currently exists along
the Siskiyou frontage rather than installing a new sidewalk. He stated staff is recommending approval, without the exception to
the Street Standards.
Comment was made noting a newer development down the street does not have a sidewalk in front of it, and applying the
City's public improvement standards project by project may be causing more problems than it is solving. Additional comment
was made questioning the placement of the open space. Mr. Severson clarified numerically, the Applicant meets the standard;
however, the Commission must determine whether it functionally meets the standard.
ADDlicant's Presentation
Mark Knox/485 W Nevada Street/Representing the Applicant/Stated this is one of the most complex projects he has
worked on due to a number of factors including the trees, the shape of the property, and the density. Mr. Knox commented on
the open space requirements and noted they did have to spread this space out, but they do meet the requirements. He added
the minimum requirement is 8% and they are proposing 17.5% of open space. He commented briefly on some of the smaller,
narrower spaces and clarified they were not required to include these areas, but felt the residents would need some extra
space to store some of their things. He added these smaller spaces were never intended to be "recreational spaces." He
Ashland Planning Commission
November 12, 2008
Page 7 of 8
l" --
added if you eliminate these areas, this application still meets the open space requirement. Mr. Knox noted the central green
area and stated they do believe this will be used as a recreational space. He also commented on the improvements to
Siskiyou Boulevard and displayed a photo of a section of the current path. He stated they feel very strongly that this type of
pathway is superior to what is being recommended by staff. He noted it is setback further from the street and provides better
protection to pedestrians, However if the Planning Commission disagrees, he indicated they will comply with the Street
Standards. Mr. Knox clarified they are proposing to install trees and patch the pathway to make it look consistent with the
section shown in the photo.
Carol Sunahara/919 Bellview Avenue #3/Stated the application does not meet the approval criteria for Physical and
Environmental Constraints and does not think it should be approved. She stated potential impacts to the property and nearby
areas have not been considered and adverse impacts have not been minimized. Ms. Sunahara stated the Applicant has not
considered the potential hazards the development may create and stated this area of Siskiyou and Bellview is densely
populated and there should really be a sidewalk and crosswalk there. She also expressed her concerns with the proposed tree
removals and stated these trees are needed to prevent the erosion of Clay Creek.
C. PLANNING ACTION: 2008-01517
SUBJECT PROPERTY: 232 Vista Street
APPLICANT: Kerry KenCairn
DESCRIPTION: A request for a Minor Land Partition, a Type II to Variance to the requirement that the new lot
have a paved 20-foot wide access or an unpaved 20-foot wide access with less than 10 percent slope, and a
Physical and Environmental Constraints Permit for development and tree removal on Hillside Lands.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Single Family Residential; ZONING: R-1-7.5; ASSESSOR'S MAP #: 39
1E 09BC; TAX LOT: 7500
This item will be continued to the December 9, 2008 Planning Commission meeting.
OTHER BUSINESS
A. Update - APA Legal Issues Forum
This item was not addressed due to time constraints.
ADJOURNMENT
Meeting adjourned at 10:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
April Lucas, Administrative Assistant
Ashland Pfanning Commission
November 12, 2008
Page 8 of 8
Bicycle & Pedestrian Commission
October 16th, 2008 Regular Minutes
Roll Call:
Chair David Young, Vice Chair Julia Sommer, Steve Ryan,
and Tom Burnham. Secretary Jim Olney (absent)
Council Liaison:
Kate Jackson (absent)
Staff:
Steve McLennan, Police Officer
Derek Severson, Associate Planner
RVTD liaisons:
Nathan Broom, RVTD TDM Planner
SOU liaison:
Eve Woods
Traffic Safety Commission liaison: Matt Warshawsky
High school liaison: Vacant
Call to Order
Chair Young called. the meeting to order at 5:18 p.m.
Approval of Minutes - September 18th, 2008
Ryan noted that in last month's Public Forum, Ms. Thiel had discussed the fact that she did not
like sending her children to school over Ashland Street to access the Central Ashland Bikepath
(CAB). The minutes were approved by unanimous consent as amended.
Public Forum
Traffic Safety Commission Matt Warshawsky questioned the status of the "Taking the Lane"
recommendation going to Council, commented on the issue of the new Transportation
Commission plaYing a role in land use decisions, and discussed the potential for using
"sharrows" and/or different colored pavement for bike lanes in Ashland. He noted that bike
lanes in Portland have recently been painted green.
Subcommittee & liaison Reports
Burnham noted that he had now met with Jenna Stanke from Jackson County twice to discuss
creating a county-wide bicycling map. He stated that at this point, funding the maps is a
concern. He explained that the. hope was to produce one map that would work for all
jurisdictions, to be distributed in print and on-line. Members questioned the costs involved,
asking whether it would be to offset printing costs or if it would also include staff time to prepare
the map. Young questioned if the maps might be created on-line only. Members also asked
whether the map would be sold or offered for free. Burnham noted that they have asked
Siskiyou Velo for $1,000 to assist with the cost of preparing the maps. He questioned who to
coordinate with at the city to request funds. Severson suggested that it would require more detail
before making a request, including specific costs and details of the map. There was discussion of
2008-1016 Bike & Ped minutes
Page 1014
using Google Earth/Google Maps to prepare and present the map, and also of ensuring that it was
GPS ready. Woods noted that ECOS students from the University might be of assistance, noting
that a lot of seniors have the appropriate skill set and are looking for capstone projects. It was
also suggested that Burnham could approach the local Chambers of Commerce for funding as
well.
Broom presented the monthly R VTD ridership report. He also noted that he has been in
discussion with a new bike rack supplier and they have a new model of three-bike rack which
may fit the buses in RVTD's fleet. He added that they are looking at the possibility of additional
racks inside the buses and at modifYing their tracking to include cyclists who are unable to ride
due to full bike racks. He pointed out that R VTD will be bringing forth a ballot measure in
support of transit in the spring, and clarified for commissioners that the fare box revenue from
the buses is a small and limited source of revenue so even a significant increase in ridership does
not fund increased service levels. Broom noted that he had posted information on new bicycle
commuter tax credits on the Rogue Utility Bike group on Google, and could provide additional
information to those who were interested.
Ryan noted that he had attended last month's Traffic Safety Commission (TSC) meeting which
included a discussion of skateboarding in the bike lane on Siskiyou which became legal with the
reduced speeds. He added that he had passed along Elise Thiel's concerns about CAB access for
residents of the Wingspread mobile home park, and he discussed the Engineering Department's
proposal for addressing bollards with striping and candlesticks.
Woods noted that she had tabled at eight events over the past month, and that she was acting as a
student leadership liaison as well. She had the opportunity to speak on Siskiyou safety for 35
minutes at an SOU event, and that she now had 58 students who were interested in a safety club.
Car Free Dav, Commute Challenae, Try Transit & Walk/Bike to School Oebriefinas
Ryan noted that the Commute Challenge resulted in a reduction of more than 3754 vehicle miles
traveled in Ashland, and indicated that he was in the process of preparing a packet for next year's
organizers. He stated that he would issue a follow-up press release and would also provide
Severson final numbers for the City Source and/or city employee newsletter.
Broom stated that on the fare free day of Try Transit week there was an increase in ridership of
700 riders, but added that the interactive bus tour participation was disappointingly low at some
of the stops. He added that 68 helmets and 58 pedometers were given away as part of the event.
Broom indicated that valley-wide, approximately 1,200 students participated in International
Walk and Bike to School Day activities in ten elementary schools in Central Point, Ashland,
Talent and Medford.
Winaspread Mobile Home Park/Central Ashland Bikepath Access Follow-Up
Severson provided some brief background on this item, noting that a Wingspread resident spoke
last month requesting that the Commission look at ways to provide residents with access to the
Central Ashland Bikepath (CAB). He explained that in reviewing county records, there did not
appear to be any unused easements that could be used to provide access. He noted that recent
2008-1016 Bike & Ped minutes
Page 2014
T~n
discussions of the proposed development at the old Handyman site at 2200 Ashland Street had
included a recognition of the need to look at CAB access points in the Transportation System
Plan so that when developments occur, applicants could be required to provide easements as part
of the required transportation system improvements. He concluded that with no development
proposed and the added complications of the adjacent property being located under Jackson
County's jurisdiction and ODOT Rail's ~ontrol of the railroad right-of-way, he saw no way of
providing new formal access easements.
Ryan/Burnham mls to recommend that the need for access to the Central Ashland
Bikepath (CAB) for Wingspread residents be considered in future Transportation System
Plan (TSP) updates or other long range transportation planning. Discussion: Young noted
that he was supportive of finding a resolution to this matter, but it did not appear that
there was an avenue to provide the requested connectivity at this time. Ryan expressed
frustration with not being able to deal with the problem, and indicated that he thought it
was at least important to make Jackson County authorities aware of the problem as well.
V oice vote: All AYES. Motion passed~
Bollard Discussion Follow-Up
Severson briefly explained that the Engineering Department had proposed at last month's Traffic
Safety Commission meeting to address the bollard safety issuelbollard removal recommendation
by painting diamond stripes around the bollards and installing "candlesticks" at the points of the
diamond in order to provide advanced warning to cyclists. He expressed some concern with the
use of the candlesticks as an additional hazard that might catch in pedals or spokes and cause
problems for cyclists. Commissioners concurred, indicating that it wasn't the bollard impact that
was the problem it was the placement of items in the bikeway which lead to an impact with the
pavement. Severson added that he had contacted the Oregon Pedestrian and Bicycle Program
Manager to inquire about her experiences with the diamond striping and whether thermoplastic
painted stripes were slippery when wet and thus hazardous to cyclists. He stated that she was
generally in favor ofbollard removal as bollards were a safety concern and were being removed
in many communities around the state with no observed negative impacts; however he noted that
she stated that bollards may be needed in those instances where there was a history of vehicular
use of the bikepath. He suggested that bollards may have been installed in response to the initial
complaints in areas beyond those where a problem was being experienced and that this could be
looked at more closely.
Warshawsky indicated that the Engineering Department and new Public Works Director were
concerned with safety and liability and he did not believe they would be inclined to support
removalofbollards.
Young noted that he continued to believe that it would be safer to install a fence or gate across
the path which would require cyclists to stop and walk around. Severson noted that in many
instances, the installation of a gate within the limited right-of-way for a bicycle path would result
in restricting handicapped accessibility.
Sommer noted that she was never aware ofbollards prior to the discussion, but now she not only
sees them but sees them as a safety concern.
2008-1016 Bike & Ped minutes
Page 3014
~---
Severson summarized that staff could look further at the potential for removing bollards where
possible, i.e. where they were not necessary to prevent vehicular access to the path, and to stripe
the area around the bollards that need to remain according to AASHTO standards. He clarified
that this striping should not include candlesticks. There was general consensus in support of this
summation.
Developina an Ashland Bicycle Master Plan
Severson explained that Council Liaison Jackson had wanted this item included on the agenda,
based on the "Bicycle Friendly Community" recommendations of the League of American
Bicyclists. He briefly explained the variety of information which can be included in such a plan,
and noted the advantages of presenting all bicycling related information for a community -
including parking requirements, a prioritized list of improvement recommendations, etc. - in one
place. He noted that he had a sample of a plan from the City of Eugene, and stated that if there
was sufficient interest he could provide links to a number of other plans to help a subcommittee
work on this item. Sommer asked to borrow the City of Eugene plan, and stated that she was
interested in working on this item. Burnham noted that a lot of the bike route research he had
done relating to mapping would translate into this item and stated that he was interested as well.
Severson state that he would forward links to the various sample plans.
New Business
It was noted that the stop signs on the Central Ashland Bikepath (CAB) at Mountain Avenue
were faded and in need of replacement or re-painting. It was also noted that while the new
railroad crossing at East Main is much improved, the lane markings now direct cyclists into the
curb rather than to the curb cut. Severson indicated that he would pass these items along to the
Engineering and Street Departments.
Severson noted that the Council study session on the creation of a Transportation Commission
was occurring next Monday, October 20th at 6:00 p.m. He stated that he would forward the final
draft version of the proposed ordinance to the Commissioners for review, and asked that they
either attend the meeting or forward comments or concerns to him. Warshawsky suggested that
Commissioners review the changes closely to verify that previously raised concerns have been
addressed to their satisfaction.
Severson noted that the regularly occurring meetings for the next two months fall exactly one
week before Thanksgiving and Christmas. The regularly scheduled November meeting is the
20th and Thanksgiving is the 2ih; the regularly scheduled December meeting is the 18th, and
Christmas is the 25th. Young noted that he would be unable to attend the November meeting.
Warshawsky noted that Traffic Safety typically combines their November and December
meetings into one consolidated meeting. Young suggested consolidating the two meetings into
one early December meeting. Severson indicated that he would contact members via e-mail in
order to arrive at a date and time that worked for everyone's schedule.
Adiournment
The meeting was adjourned at 7:00 p.m.
2008-1016 Bike & Ped minutes
Page 4 014
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Council Communication
A Resolution Declaring the Canvass of the Vote of the Election Held in and for the
City of Ashland, Oregon on November 4, 2008, and Mayoral Proclamation
Meeting Date: December 16, 2008 Primary Staff Contact: Barbara Christensen
Department: City Recorder E-Mail: christeb@ashland.or.us
Secondary Dept.: Legal Department Secondary Contact: Richard Appicello
Approval: Martha Bennett Estimated Time: ConsentlProclamation
Question:
Shall the City Council approve the Resolution declaring the Canvass of the Vote of the election held in
and for the City of Ashland, Oregon on November 4,2008 and Mayoral Proclamation?
Staff Recommendation:
Adoption of Resolution and Mayoral proclamation is recommended.
Background:
Article VII, Section 6, of the City Charter requires that the canvass of the votes for all city elections be
made, and the results of the election "shall be entered in the record of the proceedings of the council."
The Resolution sets forth the vote for each position and each measure, and the proclamation sets forth
the name of each person elected to office and the passage or failure of each of the ballot measures, all
as required by this chapter section.
Related City Policies:
Per charter requirements as outlined above.
Council Options:
Adoption of the resolution with the Mayor making the proclamation.
Potential Motions:
Move to adopt the attached resolution.
Attachments:
Resolution
Proclamation
Canvass of the Vote
Page 1 of 1
121608 Canvass ofVote.CC.doc - Canvass of the Vote
r~'
NUMBERED KEY CANVASS GENERAL ELECTION
NOVEMBER 4. 2008
RUN DATE:11/20/08 01:18 PM JACKSON COUNTY. OREGON REPORT. El52 PAGE 0002
VOTES PERCENT VOTES PERCENT
Mayor ASHLAND CITY
Vote for 1
01 = Steve Hauck 927 8.21 05 - Art Bullock 1.451 12.85
02 - John Stromberg 4.410 39.05 06 = Tom Frantz 614 5.44
03 - Peter Gross 244 2.16 07 - Jenifer l Carr 519 4.60
04 - George Kramer 3.076 27.24 08 - WRITE. IN 53 .47
.................-.... ..-.......-..............- -. ........ -..---.
01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08
--.. -. -..................... ......... --....... --.... -.....................
0002 2 Ashland 199 1263 48 918 316 120 102 10
0004 4 Ashland 191 1106 49 805 387 127 112 9
0007 7 Ashland 218 1023 74 650 345 158 118 17
0010 10 SOU 15 54 14 15 33 20 27 4
0013 13 Ashland 304 964 59 688 370 189 160 13
I certify the votes recorded on
the election indicated.
stract correctly summarize the tally of votes cast at
/leJl/fl1
date
NUMBERED KEY CANVASS
GENERAL ELECTI ON
NOVEMBER 4. 2008
JACKSON COUNTY. OREGON
RUN DATE:11/20/08 01:18 PM
Councilmember. Pos. 1 ASHLAND CITY
Vote for 1
01 - John Gaffey
02 · Carol Voisin
VOTES PERCENT
2.107 21.42
7.680 78.06
03 - WRITE. IN
01 02 03
..............-....
0002 2 Ashland 512 2103 10
0004 4 Ashland 561 1855 12
0007 7 Ashland 448 1796 11
0010 10 SOU 28 139 4
0013 13 Ashland 558 1787 14
REPORT-EL52
PAGE 0003
VOTES PERCENT
51
.52
.
I certify the votes recorded on
the election indicated.
stract correctly summarize the tally of votes cast at
;jCllllr
date
NUMBERED KEY CANVASS
GENERAL ELECTION
NOVEMBER 4. 2008
JACKSON COUNTY. OREOON
RUN DATE:11/20/08 01:18 PH
VOTES PERCENT
Councilmember. Pas. 3 ASHLAND CITY
Vote for 1
01 - Cate Hartzell
02 · Greg Lemhouse
4.419 40.72
6.386 58.85
03 · WRITE- IN
01 02 03
................--
0002 2 Ashland 1084 1779 13
0004 4 Ashland 1195 1476 7
0007 7 Ashland 1093 1384 13
0010 10 SOU 101 62 3
0013 13 Ashland 946 1685 10
REPORT.EL52
PAGE 0004
VOTES PERCENT
46
.42
I certify the votes recorded on t
the election indicated.
ct correctly summarize the tally of votes cast at
/1 ;!/{If
date
JAC~ CWHV
Fax:5411146140
Dee 5 2008 02:00pm PO01/001
L>/7)/ t!)r /7-.:5#2A.A./12 (?~q..r/~/--L #1~'118~'> - ~~S ....~
OfIIce6r _Unt
City of Ashland
Councilmember. Pos. 5
County
Jackson
Election
Recount
Dec.4,200e
L..,
Q)
.5j!) f! ~
Iil ~ ~
(J) > ';{;
CD E
co c: :=
~ CG c! ~
a::: n..
~1 011 pagee
~ BalJot Number
~orNo.ofP~
2
4
7
10
13
/..31"' //~~ /~ 9
/ /IJ/ /-Z.~ /?'..:J..
/t//(/ //5/ /95
#1 S'8 $.2-
/ ,;LV /(1 j,p ~-2.
~
.."t
//
-<.
9
-......
./ or 1.-.
GRA-N.E> ,,,,rflL U~I 1~7'..-?7 77-' ~~~ -<,. f I
I c:erftty the votes reoorded 0" th18 ."I'lilct. correctly aumm~ _:iZ. W-- c7 / 1/ / / /
ta1IyofvablSCMtMtha.a.c.tlonlndlcated. - l -?::JJy'/f~11/ /'" //A.../"
ABSTRACT OF VOTES AT GENERAL AND ABf::T~ OF VO;/s ~T ~MARY ELECTIONS
SPECIAL ELeCTIONS . ~ .'
sepef'ale Sheets for tJemooretlc, Republican, Nonparti-.n and ather c:andida~
I~ ,.: for governor must be on se~r" ~. or ~ (ORS Sepw-.ta..... for candida_ far city, caunty (induding pr8dnd) and state omce:s.
en
~
8
:..
I~
int
~~
00
""'iI
~G)
-40
mZ
en
.....
~- It
Iii
:a..~~
liZ
fll
'all
o~~
!!:.I) i!E
s:~ I' '
o
:s
I .~:=
If(/)
: lS f
rf~
.. I
i
1
~ii
f II
10
I-
I
CAT!! OF ABS'TftACT
, . 'Z~O 5.f)~
--- - -------r
NUMBERED KEY CANVASS
GENERAL ELECTION
NOVEMBER 4. 2008
JACKSON C<X.JNTY. OREGON
REPORT-EL52
PAGE 0005
RUN DATE:11/20/08 01:18 PH
VOTES PERCENT
Cauncilmember. Pas. 5 ASHLAND CITY
Vote for 1
01 - Russ Silbiger 4.751 46.22 03 · Ben Chew
02 - Pam Vavra 4.726 45.98 04 = WRITE- IN
--------.... -.-..-.....-.. ...
O! 02 03 04
---..---.......---..... -..
0002 2 Ashland 1386 1186 169 6
0004 4 Ashland 1100 1240 172 4
0007 7 Ashland 1005 1152 194 11
0010 10 S<X.J 41 88 32 2
0013 13 Ashland 1219 1060 202 9
VOTES PERCENT
769 7.48
32 .31
I certify the votes recorded on
the election indicated.
ract correctly summarize the tally of votes cast at
/1-Jl!-fJr
date
NUMBERED KEY CANVASS
GENERAL ELECTION
NOVEMBER 4. 2008
JACKSON COUNTY. OREGON
RUN DATE:11/20/08 01:18 PM
VOTES PERCENT
Parks and Recreation Commissioner. Pos. 1 ASHLAND CITY
Vote for 1
01 = Stefani Seffinger 2.183 24.80
02 - JoAnne Eggers 6.580 74.75 03 = WRITE. IN
01 02 03
.........---..-...
0002 2 Ashland 544 1776 6
0004 4 Ashland 510 1635 8
0007 7 Ashland 490 1508 11
0010 10 SOU 60 86 3
0013 13 Ashland 579 1575 12
REPORT.EL52
PAGE 0006
VOTES PERCENT
40 .45
I certify the votes recorded on
the election indicated.
1trac~ correctly summarize the tally of votes cast at
/1-;;2l(()r
date
NUMBERED KEY CANVASS
GENERAL ELECTION
NOVEMBER 4. 2008
JACKSON COUNTY. OREGON
RUN DATE:11/20/08 01:18 PM
VOTES PERCENT
Parks and Recreation Commissioner. Pos. 2 ASHLAND CITY
Vote for 1
01 - James Lewis 5.922 97.64
02 - WRITE.IN 143 2.36
01 02
............
0002 2 Ashland 1523 43
0004 4 Ashland 1466 27
0007 7 Ashland 1336 29
0010 10 SOU 136 6
0013 13 Ashland 1461 38
REPORT.EL52
PAGE 0007
I certify the votes recorded on
the election indicated.
ct orrectly summarize the tally of votes cast at
/ldl(-tJr
date
NUMBERED KEY CANVASS
GENERAL ELECTION
NOVEMBER 4. 2008
JACKSON COUNTY. OREGON
RUN DATE:11/20/08 01:18 PM
VOTES PERCENT
15.87 Levy for enhanced services for Ash public library
ASHLAND CITY
Vote for 1
01 - Yes 7.357 62.69
02 - No 4.379 37.31
01 02
--.-..-..-.-
0002 2 Ashland 1973 1120
0004 4 Ashland 1793 1079
0007 7 Ashland 1778 915
0010 10 SOU 133 81
0013 13 Ashland 1680 1184
REPORT.EL52
PAGE 0008
I certify the votes recorded on t
the election indicated.
ract correctly summarize the tally of votes cast at
1It1f!(}r
date
NUMBERED KEY CANVASS
RUN DATE:11/20/08 01:18 PM
GENERAL ELECTION
NOVEMBER 4. 2008
JACKSON COUNTY. OREGON
VOTES PERCENT
15-88 Requires food establishments to post grades
ASHLAND CITY
Vote for 1
01 - Yes 2.920 24.63
02 - No 8.934 75.37
01 02
.-.--------.
0002 2 Ashland 689 2434
0004 4 Ashland 665 2221
0007 7 Ashland 654 2076
0010 10 SOU 135 86
0013 13 Ashland 777 2117
REPORT.EL52
PAGE 0009
I certify the votes recorded on
the election indicated.
ract correctly summarize the tally of votes cast at
/
/(cJl/-()6
date
PROCLAMATION
I, John W. Morrison, Mayor of the City of Ashland, Oregon, do proclaim that at the election
held in the City of Ashland, Oregon, on the 4th day of November, 2008, there was submitted to
the voters the question of the elections of persons to various elective offices in the City and two
Measures.
It is hereby declared that the following persons were elected to the positions set forth next to
their names:
Mayor, John Stromberg
Council Member, Position #1 Carol Voisin
Council Member, Position #3 Greg Lemhouse
Council Member, Position #5 Russ Silbiger
Park Commissioner, Position #1 JoAnne Eggers
Park Commissioner, Position #2 Jim Lewis
Approved: Measure #15-87 "Shall Ashland levy up to $.21 per $1,000 assessed value for four
years beginning July 1, 2009 for library operations?
Failed: Measure #15-88 "Shall Ashland, by ordinance, require Food Establishments Post a Letter
grade assigned by City based upon Environmental Health Services Inspection?
Dated at Ashland, Oregon, this _____ day of December , 2008.
John W. Morrison, Mayor
RESOLUTION NO. 2008-
A RESOLUTION DECLARING THE CANVASS OF THE VOTE OF THE
ELECTION HELD IN AND FOR THE CITY OF ASHLAND, OREGON, ON
NOVEMBER 4, 2008.
RECITALS:
A. The City Council of the City of Ashland met on the 16th day of December, 2008~ at the
City of Ashland's Civic Center and proceeded to canvass the vote cast at the election held in and
for the City of Ashland on the 4th day of November, 2008.
B. The Council has canvassed the vote and has determined the number of votes for the
positions and measures as follows:
CITY OF ASHLAND CITY MAYOR
-..- -.. ~._.. .--
--
4A10
927
John Stromberg
Steve Hauck
.-"teteI .lJf\J~-~-
,------::------_.---:----~----~. --
George Kramer
Art Bullock
Tom Frantz
Jenifer Carr
Write-Ins
3.076
1A51
614
519
53
COUNCIL MEMBER - POSITION NO.1
Carol Voisin
John Gaffey
Write-Ins
7.680
2.107
2l
COUNCIL MEMBER - POSITION NO.3
Greg Lemhouse
Cate Hartzell
Write-Ins
6.3 86
4A19
46
COUNCIL MEMBER - POSITION NO.5
Russ Silbiger
Pam Vavra
Ben Chew
W rite- Ins
4.759
4.727
770
11
PARKS COMMISSIONER - POSITION NO.1
JoAnne Eggers
Stefani Seffinger
W rite- Ins
6.580
2.183
40
PARKS COMMISSIONER - POSITION NO.2
Jim Lewis
Write-Ins
5.922
143
RESO Canvass of the Vote November 4,2008 Election
Page 1 of2
15-87
Levy for enhanced services for Ashland Public Library Yes
No
7.357
4.379
15-88
Requires Food Establishments to post grades
Yes
No
2.920
8.934
THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. John Stromberg is declared to be the du!y elected Mayor of the City of Ashland.
SECTION 2. Carol Voisin is declared to be the duly elected council member for Position No.1.
SECTION 3. Greg Lemhouse is declared to be the duly elected council member for Position No.3.
SECTION 4. Russ Silbiger is declared to be the duly elected council member for Position No.5.
8EC'fIOlJ S J..n'UIlI... EeeL...:.. J......I~I...J L\.J b... LL...J~I.J ...1......L...J y~..l.... ...\.J.um:....:\.Ju.... f\.J' P\.JJ:L:\.Ju lJ\.J
SECTION 6. Jim Lewis is dec:lared to be the duly elected parks commissioner for Position No.2.
SECTION 7. Measure 15-87, which posed the following question is declared to have passed: "Shall
Ashland levy up to $.21 per $1,000 assessed value for four years beginning July 1, 2009 for library
operations?"
SECTION 8. Measure 15-88, which posed the following question is declared to have failed: "Shall
Ashland, by ordinance, require Food Establishments Post a letter grade assigned by City based upon
Environmental Health Services Inspection?"
SECTION 9. This resolution takes effect upon signing by the Mayor.
This resolution was duly PASSED and ADOPTED this _ day of December, 2008.
Barbara Christensen, City Recorder
SIGNED and APPROVED this _ day of
, 2006.
John W. Morrison, Mayor
Reviewed as to form:
Richard Appicello, City Attorney
RESO Canvass of the Vote November 4, 2008 Election
Page 2 of2
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Council Communication
Meeting Date:
Department:
Secondary Dept.:
Approval:
Appointment to Tree Commission
December 16, 2008 Primary Staff Contact:
City Recorder E-Mail:
Mayor Secondary Contact:
Martha Benne Estimated Time:
Barbara Christensen
christeb@ashland.or.us
Mayor Morrison
Consent
Question:
Does the Council wish to confirm the Mayor's appointment of Robert Townsend for a term to expire
April 30, 2011 to the Tree Commission?
Staff Recommendation:
None.
Background:
This is a confirmation by the City Council on the Mayor's appointment for the Tree Commission on
application received. There are currently three vacancies on the Tree Commission.
Related City Policies:
Ashland Municipal Code (AMC) Chapter 2.17.020
Council Options:
Approve or disapprove Mayor's appointment of Robert Townsend.
Potential Motions:
Motion to approve appointment of Robert Townsend for a term to expire April 30, 2011 to the Tree
Commission.
i\ttachments:
Application received..
Page 1 of 1
121608 Tree Comm Appt.CC.doc
r~'
CITY OF
APPLICATION FOR APPOINTM~~~ LA1~~
CITY COMMISSION/COMMITTEE . ,f{;l;'. ~
PI.ease type or print. answers to the ~ollowing questions and submit to the City R~'trd~~! -'.f lUUI
City Hall, 20 E MaIO Street, or emall christeb(cv.ashland.or.us. If you have any questions, ~~~~.
please feel free to contact the City Recorder at 488-5307. Attach additional sheets if ..tt,,,,,,,..
necessary. "'",
Name f?k~ T 0~~.c:!
Requesting to serve on: A h L J ~ ~ (~mmittee)
Address $(,(,S"' tJtUJ",q- Cr~~k- tr{f;I---~1rYo
Occupatio.;Jr~ ~ l.....,. is,-_fCL ~L ~one: Home S3~ -{, I '1 <.....
ev..Ll-...( )I!-..,,~t. .AJAA. Work u'f{,~J ,
~ _ ~~ 5~Y.t."'-Lr-;P:7 Email ~"'l h @~-q~~ { .. ~
~ (...L Fax ~~-~ {'7,-
1. Education Baclmround ~.
What schools have you attended? ~ ~,7 I (/ ,{ J{."".".s.; L
M -5 ~/"t;~ ~ h-
What degrees do you hold?
2. Related Exoerience
What prior work experience have you had that would help you if you were appointed to
this r:2tion? I I'" /l _ /
@f'....~ ~ ,r:f- $tJ lUre WI l&~s> ItN'jl':Ju.A.... ''>:. APy..rn.../ f-,>r'"",,-r:
k,~/J.:,.... v-~ ,-J r<l~ A' fJ/-..( tJr.,~ (~~.J..:...... -<--Ie .) )
~"<-( ~ M $t.{~..- I 1.$./...- i, 4. a--ci ~ t f.... 'f'j , PI.
VI-f"" I\. 41 1\1 "',.e.c; l:ru-~ ~~~J W4J~{ 1.
Do you feel it would be advantageous for you t ave fu~her training in his fidQ, such
as attending conferences or seminars? Why? Ik k - ~~ ~
~ lei ~ ~~ ~j rr."~ ~f>~~ rt,.~ 1V0s-I
,.{: ~ ~ ~ --..cf I've ?:......j.:..-- {J' ..( Jr.u...'f v"'- {...-c.. .
,;.,
--~-- T
---~-~--------_._-._-- --_._ ____0._
3. Interests ~
Why are you applying for this position? W-; f~~' ,,'" en. ~ 7
~ t!-n.ttk-~:4 f--.f;-<-~A~~ ~J tv~~'
~~ jyJ~-$ .Z-~~r;c,17 ~~J ~~re7(~~t.,
, S'k--4 K..~' /7 /'
4. Availabilitv
Are you available to attend special meetings, in addition to the re~'1larly sch9duleg
meetings? Do you prefer day or evening meetings? n~ {, k 5t:- L_ cL.... 6e
5. Additional Information
How long have you Jived in this community?
119-1 - z.~/
11~5 .2Pqb ~ lres-<---I
Please use the space below to summarize any additional qualifications you have for this
position
1/ j~;/ y
Date/ '
:=~~~ V
, . Signature
r... ,
-.-----. -.-T--
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Council Communication
Meeting Date:
Department:
Secondary Dept.:
Approval:
Approval of Amendment No 3 to Engineering Services Contract for Water
Treatment Plant Improvements
December 16, 2008 Primary Staff Contact:
Public Works E-Mail:
Finance Secondary Contact:
Martha Benn Estimated Time:
Mike Faught (488-5347)
faughtm@ashland.or.us
Pieter Smeenk (488-5347)
Consent Agenda
Question:
Will Council approve the engineering services contract Amendment #3 with Brown and Caldwell for
$46,998 for engineering services to improve the water plant's treatment processes?
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends that Council approve the attached contract Amendment #3 with Brown and
Caldwell to provide final engineering design and construction phase services to add mechanical
mixing flocculators and improve hypochlorite delivery facilities for the purpose of increasing the
plant's capacity to treat greater quantities of water under more widely varying water quality
conditions.
Background:
In April 2006, staff solicited consultant proposals on the Process Evaluation for the Ashland Water
Treatment Plant. Four engineering firms proposed on the project and the professional services contract
was awarded to Brown and Caldwell. This project was specifically split into three phases as outlined
in the Request for Proposals (see attachment 1):
Phase 1 - Process Evaluation (completed)
Phase 2 - Plans, Specifications and Bid Documents (Amendment No.1)
Phase 3 - Construction Services
The RFP requested that the consultant specifically propose on Phase 1 and provide a conceptual
understanding for services under Phases 2 and 3. Both Phase 2 and 3 were dependent on the final
product of Phase 1. The original Professional Services contract was for Phase 1 only and was awarded
to Brown and Caldwell for $25,000 (see attachment 1).
Brown and Caldwell have completed Phase 1 - Process Evaluation and outlined the requirements for
Phase 2 and 3. With that, staff has met with Brown and Caldwell and negotiated the majority of
remaining Phase 2 and 3 work requirements. Phase 2 encompasses the development of design plans,
specifications and final bid documents for the specific process improvements. Phase 3 includes
engineering services during construction. Because moneys for phases 2 and 3 improvements were
spread over two fiscal years, the largest portion of the project was completed in the last fiscal year, and
the remaining portion to be completed is included in this amendment.
Construction and engineering costs for the following improvements were incurred in FY07:
Sodium Hypochlorite Conversion $350,000
Sludge Lagoon and Waste Line Improvements $100,000
Page 1 of2
r~'
-,
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Water Treatment Plant Process Improvements $520,000
Reeder Reservoir Sedimentation Study $100.000
Total costs $1,070,000
The current year Capital Improvement Plan was titled "Water Treatment Plant Process Improvements".
Anticipated Construction costs for the projects being designed in FY08 are:
Flocculators - 6 units for a total cost of $220,000
Chlorine Loading Station - total cost of $ 40.000
Total construction cost est. - $260,000
The design and construction phase engineering services cost is $ 47,000, or 18% of estimated
construction cost, which complies with the estimate provided by Brown and Caldwell as part of their
original proposal to do this design work.
This project was originally budgeted at $250,000 for FY09. In order to stay within that budget in this
fiscal year, two of the six flocculators will not be installed immediately. We anticipate that this down-
scaled construction project will nevertheless substantially improve the plant's ability to treat during
high turbidity and low temperature conditions. The flocculators will also improve the efficiently of the
existing treatment process and provide increased capacity to meet future water demands. The down-
scaling is estimated to reduce current costs by $30,000 per flocculator, or $60,000 total. This leaves a
project budget of $247,000, which equals $200,000 for construction and $47,000 for engineering.
Since the original project budget was reduced to $200,000 during the most recent budget cycle, we
plan to delay construction of the hypochlorite loading station until next fiscal year, but will be prepared
to construct it as funds become available because design will be completed during this fiscal year.
Related City Policies:
Capital Improvement Plan Project previously adopted by City Council: Water Treatment Plant
Process Improvements.
Under current City of Ashland Rules of Procedure for Public Contracting; AMC 2.52.050, contracts
amendments in excess of 350/0 above the base contract amount require Local Contract Review Board
approval prior to award.
Council Options:
The Council, acting as the Local Contract Review Board, may approve this engineering services
contract, direct staff to make changes to the contract, or rej ect the contract amendment.
Potential Motions:
Council may move to approve or reject the attached Engineering Services Contract Amendment #3
with Brown and Caldwell.
-Or-
Council may direct staff to modify the contract amendment.
Attachments:
Brown and Caldwell's proposed Contract Amendment No.3 and Exhibits A and B.
Page 2 of2
r~'
-~------.---
ENGINEERING SERVICES CONTRACT
Consultant services contract made on the date specified below in Recital A between the City and Consultant as
follows:
Recitals:
A. The following information applies to this contract:
CITY: CITY OF ASHLAND Consultant: BROWN AND CALDWELL
City Hall Address: 6500 SW Macadam Avenue, Suite 200
20 E. Main S1. PORTLAND OR 97239
Ashland, Oregon 97520
(541) 488-6002 Telephone: 503/977 -6632
FAX: (541) 488-5311 FAX: 503/244-9095
Date of this agreement: August 15, 2006 B: RFP date: April 7, 2006
Proposal date: May 18, 2006
2.2. Contracting officer: Mike Faught, Public Works Director
2.4. Project: WTP Process Improvements
6. Consultant's representative: Robert F. Willis, PE
8.3. Maximum contract amount: NTE $25,000
B. ASHLAND WATER TREATMENT PLANT IMPROVEMENTS PHASE II - AMENDMENT NO.3
1. Modification to Section 5. Consultina Services.
In accordance with the existing scope of services in this contract, the following additional consultant services
are added as further defined in Exhibits A & B, attached.
Item No. Description Amount
A Project ManaQement $5,955
B Design $25,153
C Construction Period Services $15,880
Total Amendment NO.3 Total $46,988
H:\ShipletD\Council\Council Communication\2008\December 1Sand 16\121608 Amendment 3 to \\TP Contract. atch 1. doc
---~
2. Modification of Section 8. Payment
8.3 Total payment under this contract shall not exceed the adjusted total contract amount of $382,325.
A.
B.
C.
D.
Original Contract
Amendment No. 1
Amendment NO.2
Amendment No. 3
$25,000
237,337
73,000
46.988
Adjusted total contract amount
$382,325
CONSULTANT
By:
CITY OF ASHLAND
By:
Signature
Lee Tuneberg
Administrative Servicesl Finance Director
Bryan Paulson
Printed Name
Its: Vice President
Fed ID# 94-1446346
REVIEWED AS TO FORM:
By:
REVIEWED AS TO CONTENT:
By:
Department Head
Coding:
Date:
Legal Department Date:
(For City use only)
H\Ship)etD\Council\Council Communication\2008\December 15 and 16\121608 Amendment 3 to \VTP Contract. atch 1. doc
----..~--.l
AMENDMENT 3
CITY OF ASHLAND
WATER TREATMENT PLANT IMPROVEMENTS-PHASE II
EXHIBIT A
SCOPE OF SERVICES
The Scope of Services to be provided under this amendment to the current contract include the design and
construction management of the Phase II Improvements at the Ashland Water Treatment Plant (\VfP). The
level of effort is detailed in the Fee Estimate and Staffing Plan in Exhibit B.
Planned engineering services to be performed in accordance with the current contract and are limited to
those specifically set forth herein, including project management, design, and construction period services
associated with the project. This Scope of Services assumes that all construction activities will occur on the
existing Ashland WfP site. It also assumes that the City will enhance as necessary the main electrical service
panel that the flocculators must connect with to provide the spaces necessary for that equipment.
Furthermore, it assumes that all work will be completed in FY 2009-no escalation has been included for any
work completed after July, 2009.
The level of services is based upon the construction work being performed under a change order to the
existing construction contract of Triad Construction of Portland, OR. Construction bid documents and
specifications for formal bids are not included in the scope.
The specific elements of the Scope of Services are subdivided into the following tasks:
Task 100
Project Management
101 Project Management and Coordination
102 Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC)
Task 200
Design
201 Flocculators
202 Chlorine Loading Station
203 Basis of Design Technical Memorandum
Task 300
Construction Period Services
401 Construction Management Assistance
402 Office Engineering During Construction
403 Onsite Field Services Startup Services
404 Startup Services
405 As-builts and Manuals
OVERVIEW OF EV ALUA liON AND DESIGN WORK
The design work will be conducted with participation by the City of Ashland (City). It is assumed that City
staff will participate in regularly scheduled meetings during the course of evaluation and design to provide
input to the process. Decisions, discussions, and information to be transferred will be documented.
Page 1 of 10
H:\ShipletD\Council\Council Communication\2008\December 15 and 16\ 121608 Amendment 3 to WfP Contract.atch2.doc
-~.~-
City of Ashland WTP
Amendment 3: Phase II-Scope of Services
This Scope of Services is based on Phase II Improvements to the Ashland WfP. It is also based on the
assumption that accurate base mapping (i.e., current as-built drawings) needed to design the facilities
described herein exist in proper electronic format, and that all necessary geotechnical documents necessary
for this design are readily available. Phase II improvement elements are listed below and discussed in detail
on the following pages.
. Flocr:ulators-The two existing flocculator basins do not have any devices to mechanically flocculate
the raw water after it has been dosed with chemicals. The intent of this amendment is to design
electrically driven vertical turbine paddle flocculators with adjustable speed drives to enable plant
staff to more closely regulate flocculation energy input. The exact equipment will be determined.
. Chlorine Loading Station-Currently the City has experienced an unwillingness of local drivers to
deliver sodium hypochlorite to the newly installed sodium hypochlorite bulk storage tank at the
WfP. The Consultant will evaluate and design a pipeline to convey delivered sodium hypochlorite
from a truck-accessible site located near the washwater pond to the sodium hypochlorite bulk
storage tank. This line will drain by gravity to the delivery trucks to ensure it is empty when the
trucks disconnect. It is assumed that the trucks will be equipped with their own pumps and/or
compressors to provide the motive force to transfer the chemical. Spill containment and a utility
water washdown station will need to be included at the point of truck unloading.
OVERVIEW OF CONSTRUCTION PERIOD SERVICES
It is assumed that the City will provide a Construction Manager. The Consultant will provide limited
involvement during construction by assisting the Construction Manager. Unless otherwise stated herein, the
Consultant will rely on the Construction Manager to handle the majority of construction management
responsibilities. It is also assumed that the City will be responsible for all permitting, plan advertising and
distribution, plan holder list maintenance, site map development, materials testing, and Operations and
Maintenance Manual preparation.
The budget development for Task 300 series efforts below assumes a limited Consultant involvement
through 3 months of working-day construction period. Additional engineering services required beyond this
period or in addition to the allocated labor hours stated herein will be conducted in accordance with the
agreemen t.
TASK 100. PROJECT MANAGEMENT
SUBTASK 101. PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND COORDINATION
Objective. To provide management, direction, coordination, and control of all work associated with project
schedule, budget, subconsultants, technical quality, and monthly progress reports and invoices.
Activities/Approach. This subtask includes the following activities:
. Prepare input to invoices, including backup materials, progress reports, cash flow projections, and
updated project schedules. Invoices are to be submitted monthly for work done within the prior
month.
. Manage subconsultants. Although there are not any subconsultants required for this project at this
time, this section is included should one be required later.
. Use Consultant CAD standards and software standards for all reports and submitted documents. All
submitted documents will be prepared on hard copy and in electronic format.
. Attend meetings with the City to review project status for the duration of the project.
Page 2 of 10
City of Ashland WTP
Amendment 3: Phase II-Scope of Services
Products
· Sustained project management activities.
· Communication and coordination with City project management staff, including meetings,
presentations, and minutes.
· Attendance at monthly project status review meetings.
City's Responsibilities
· Collect and document comments from City staff on materials submitted to the City for review and
comment.
· Provide the Consultant with copies of all written comments logged by City staff.
· Assign reviewers to the project.
· Resolve conflicting review comments prior to submitting to the Consultant.
SUBTASK 102. QA/QC
Objective. To implement a Consultant QA/QC Program that ensures work products are reviewed and
cross-checked before being sent to the City. In addition, the QA/QC Program will ensure that the design
effort and work products meet client expectations for quality, timeliness, and cost. City and regulatory
agency review comments shall also be incorporated to prepare and complete the final design contract
documents.
Approach. This task includes several discrete elements to ensure product quality. These elements include the
following: develop a Project Management Plan (PMP); establish client standards; provide independent review
of calculations, review agreements; and provide in-house design review, constructability review, and
90 percent review.
No external value engineering reviews are included in this scope.
Products. The products for this task are as follows:
. PMP.
· One meeting (conducted at the 50 percent design) between the City and the Consultant to establish
design standards and monitor the progress of the design.
· For the 50 percent design completion level review, Consultant shall assemble and present:
.
Design criteria with supporting calculations regarding facility design and equipment selection
and sizing.
Draft design drawings showing plans, sections, and equipment layouts.
.
.
Draft design drawings showing pumping and piping diagrams.
Draft hydraulic prof1le, if applicable.
.
.
Draft specification outline.
.
Construction cost estimate for the work shown and specified in the contract documents, as
prepared in this scope.
-
Page 3 of 10
City of Ashland WTP
Amendment 3: Phase II-Scope of Services
.
A memorandum summarizing the design review meeting minutes and the project managers
response to design review suggestions.
· For the 90 percent design completion level review, Consultant shall assemble and provide for
comment:
.
Half-size, virtually complete contract documents (drawings and specifications).
.
Construction cost estimate and construction schedule for the work shown and specified in the
contract documents, as prepared in this scope.
.
A memorandum summarizing the design review meeting minutes and the project managers
response to design review suggestions.
. A constructability review.
.
For the 90 percent cross-check, the City receives the benefit of a product that has been
checked for consistency, accuracy, and coordination between disciplines.
TASK 200.
DESIGN
Objective. The purpose of this task is to prepare the final design documents up to and including final
drawings and specifications suitable for inclusion in a contract change order.
Approach. This task consists of all work necessary for completion of civil and site design included in this
project. Civil drawings will be based on as-built drawings of the existing facilities and buried utilities,
engineering calculations, and existing geotechnical information. This task also includes design of the chlorine
pipeline and site/civil work required for the chlorine transfer station. Structural drawings for inclusion in the
project manual will be based on as-built drawings of the existing facilities, structural calculations, and existing
geotechnical information collected for each of the new improvements. Mechanical drawings will include plan
views, sections, and details of the flocculators. Similarly, electrical drawings will also be prepared for the
flocculators. Electrical design drawings will include diagrams, schematics, plans, sections, and details of areas
where new equipment instruments, wiring, control centers, panels, and appurtenances are to be installed.
Electrical design drawings will include electrical plans and a one-line diagram. Electrical plan drawings will
show cable raceway locations and will indicate equipment connections as home-run type symbols with
reference to which motor control center a cable is to be connected. Specific activities are as follows:
· Review the general and mechanical design requirements.
· Define hazardous areas in the project buildings and sites.
· Prepare a one-line diagram for the plant distribution systems.
· Provide motor control schematics for all loads.
· Develop electrical specifications.
· Develop electrical drawings, including a site plan
· Develop raceway, conduit, and wiring schedules.
Instrumentation and controls (I&C) construction documents will be prepared for installation of the
flocculators. This task will not include development of programmable logic controller programming. Design
drawings will include instrumentation system diagrams, control diagrams, loop diagrams, and input/ output
cabinets. Specific activities are as follows:
. Develop I&C interlock notes.
· Write narrative descriptions of control strategies and sequences.
· Specify sensors and instruments to be used.
· Investigate requirements and design for security alarm systems.
· Complete drafting of I&C system drawings, including symbol and detail sheets.
-
Page 4 of 10
----------T -----
City of Ashland WTP
Amendment 3: Phase II-Scope of Services
. Provide instrumentation loop wiring diagrams.
. Specify control system hardware requirements.
Programming is not included in this Scope of Services. This activity will be deferred to the construction
phase of the project, and it is assumed that the City will hire a specific contractor to perform this function.
Activities/Products
. Civil drawings will be prepared for the chlorine site/civil work required for the chlorine transfer
station. Pipeline drawings will not be prepared, but located in the field and placed in the as-built
drawings as constructed.
. Structural drawings and specifications will be prepared for walls, footings, beams slabs, structural
steel, concrete reinforcement, anchor bolts, bracing, miscellaneous metals and other structural
aspects for the flocculator supports and the chlorine transfer station containment structure.
. Products for this task include analysis and calculations associated with design of piping systems,
structures, mechanical systems, and electrical systems.
. Drawings will be submitted with the 50 and 90 percent design review submittals and will be included
in the project manual.
City's Responsibilities
. Review 50 and 90 percent design review submittals.
. Provide as-built drawings for the facilities associated with the project and their associated piping
systems.
. Provide base survey of site for design.
. Confirm site utility features through field locates or other methods where there is reasonable
expectation the base map drawings may be incorrect.
. Provide all necessary shop drawings, submittals, records, and operation and maintenance
information necessary to establish the condition of the facilities upon which the mechanical design is
based.
. Supply current as-built drawings for all buried and exposed power supply cables, duct banks,
raceways, instrument cables, communication cabling, yard piping, process piping, and structures at
the WTP.
. Update and enlarge as necessary the primary electrical service panel to provide the capacity and space
necessary to connect and control the 6 flocculators in that panel.
SUBTASK 201. FLOCCULATORS
Objective. To select and design mechanical flocculators suitable for mounting in the existing flocculation
tanks, gain approval of the design and complete their final design.
Approach. The Consultant shall develop a preliminary design/layout for the new flocculators that are to be
installed in the settling basins at the Ashland WTP. This evaluation will be limited to vertical turbine paddle
flocculators. After approval of the preliminary design, final design will be performed.
Products.
Page 5 of 10
~I
City of Ashland WTP
Amendment 3: Phase II-Scope of Services
. A brief technical memorandum will be developed summarizing the findings of the preliminary
design.
. Final design documents.
City's Responsibilities. Review the findings of the technical memorandum and provide comments to the
Consultant.
SUBTASK 202. CHLORINE LOADING STATION
Objective. To select the appropriate routing and piping scheme to deliver sodium hypochlorite to the bulk
sodium hypochlorite storage tank and provide a final design for the approved system.
Approach. The Consultant will develop routing and preliminary design for the chlorine feed line to be
installed from the entry to Wfp site (at the waste pond) to the new chlorine storage tank. Upon approval of
that pre-design as part of Subtask 203, final design of this system will be conducted.
Products.
. A brief technical memorandum will be developed summarizing the findings of the pre-design.
. Final design documents.
City's Responsibilities. Review the findings of the technical memorandum and provide comments to the
Consultant.
SUBT ASK 203. BASIS OF DESIGN TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
Objective. To prepare a preliminary design technical memorandum that will:
. Form the basis for detailed design and preparation of contract documents.
. Present information from Subtasks 201 and 202.
. Document compliance with regulatory requirements that pertain to design of water treatment
facilities.
. Serve as a vehicle for City input to the predesign effort.
Approach. The Basis of Design Technical Memorandum will include the following elements:
. Process Design Criteria: Design data such as type of equipment, number of process units, pumping
rates, horsepower requirements, and volume requirements will be identified.
. Design Standards: Key design standards for the various engineering disciplines will be discussed.
. Detailed Process Stream Descriptions: Process stream descriptions for each of the new or retrofitted
systems will be presented.
. Site Plan: A site plan showing all existing structures and new or modified structures will be
developed.
. Preliminary Prqject Schedule
. Equipment Numbering System
. Preliminary Process and Instrumentation Diagrams
. Preliminary Equipment List
-
Page 6 of 10
-TU
City of Ashland WTP
Amendment 3: Phase II-Sco'pe of Services
. Preliminary Specificlltion List
Products
. Three draft copies of the Basis of Design Technical Memorandum to be delivered to the City.
. Three final copies of the Basis of Design Technical Memorandum to be delivered to the City.
City's Responsibilities
. Provide the most recent set of as-built drawings that reflect changes the City has made. Unless
otherwise identified, the City will verify that the existing as-built drawings are correct to the best of
its knowledge. The Consultant assumes no responsibility for inaccuracies in the as-built drawings or
in the deviations specified by the City. The City will provide electronic drawings. This scope does
not include effort for developing as-built drawings or converting drawing to electronic CAD format.
. Review and provide comments to draft Basis of Design Technical Memorandum.
. Attend Basis of Design Workshop.
TASK 300. CONSTRUCTION PERIOD SERVICES
SUBTASK 301. CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT ASSISTANCE
Objective. To aid the City with overall construction management support.
Approach. The Consultant will provide assistance to the City in handling any contract change order issues,
such as contract negotiations or interpretation, etc. The Consultant will attend two project construction
meetings as directed by the City. The majority of the normal construction management activities associated
with projects of this type will be done by the City. The scope of work includes up to 12 hours for this
subtask.
Products. Attendance at construction meetings and prompt assistance with resolution of construction issues.
City's Responsibilities. The City will take the lead in activities associated with this task and request
Consultant assistance as needed. The City will also appoint a staff member or other person to serve as the
project's Construction Manager.
SUBT ASK 302. OFFICE ENGINEERING DURING CONSTRUCTION
Objective. To ensure that the facilities proposed by the Contractor will fulfill the requirements of the
con tract.
Approach. With respect to submittal processing, one reproducible original plus four copies of a complete
submittal package will be received by the Consultant from the Contractor. The Consultant will receive and
review complete submittals for contract compliance and return comments to the Contractor within
14 calendar days. In order to stay within the budget allocated for this task, it is imperative that complete
submittals be provided; the Consultant reserves the right to return incomplete submittal packages to the
Contractor without review of content. A complete submittal package will include all of the information listed
in the contract documents with single unit responsibility (e.g., a particular piece of equipment or system)
which may include materials, shop drawings, wiring diagrams, design and performance criteria, calculations,
mitigation plans, outage plans, and product data.
A normal part of submittal review herein includes some minor effort in reviewing submittals that deviate
from the contract documents. Excessive review of Contractor proposals for alternate equipment and
materials, equipment proposals not in compliance with the specifications, and cost savings proposals by the
-
Page 7 of 10
City of Ashland WTP
Amendment 3: Phase II-Scope of Services
Contractor is to be at the Contractor's expense. Otherwise, this additional work will be in accordance with
the agreement.
With respect to assistance with change order preparation, the Consultant will work with the Construction
Manager to identify the reasons for change orders and schedule impacts. It is assumed that the Construction
Manager will prepare monthly pay estimates and prepare and negotiate change orders. The Consultant will
provide drawings and specifications for changes associated with design errors or omissions. The budget
allocated for this task assumes a limited labor effort, as shown in Exhibit B, and is based on preparing change
orders only for design issues related to the Scope of Services items. The Consultant will provide
documentation of Consultant hours spent resolving out-of-scope issues or non-design related change orders.
Additional change order preparation assistance will be conducted in accordance with the agreement as
additional out-of-scope work, for non-design related change orders and for change orders for additional
facilities not included in this Scope of Services.
Additionally, miscellaneous office engineering services during construction may include review of materials
and shop drawings, interpretation of contract documents, responding to requests for information (RFls),
ensuring that regulatory agency requirements are met, coordination with City staff, coordination with the
Construction Manager, and review of as-built drawings. Unless otherwise directed by the City, all RFls will
be submitted in writing and will be sent directly to the Consultant by the Contractor. The Consultant will
immediately send one copy of all RFls to the City. The Consultant will prepare a written response to all
RFls. The Consultant will send one copy of the written response to the Contractor, one copy to the City,
and will retain one copy for their f1les. Written responses will be prepared and distributed within 15 days
after receipt from the Contractor. The budget allocated for this task assumes a limited labor effort, as shown
in Exhibit B.
The scope includes up to 20 hours for this subtask.
Products. The Consultant will return comments for each submittal to the Construction Manager. The
Consultant will maintain a submittal log reflecting only the submittals that the Construction Manager has
chosen to give to the Consultant for review. The Construction Manager is expected to maintain the official
project submittal log for all submittals. The Consultant will submit one list of contract submittals that
require review and comment and one list of contract submittals that are considered product data.
Drawings, specifications, engineering labor, and other charges associated with change orders will be
provided.
Written and verbal correspondence will be provided as needed for miscellaneous office engineering activities.
City's Responsibilities. The City will review all submittals that require approval upon receipt from the
Consultant. The City will inform the Consultant in writing of any specific comments that the City wants
incorporated into the submittal mark-up within 7 calendar days upon receipt from the Consultant.
Additionally, the City will review all RFls immediately upon receipt from the Consultant. The City will
inform the Consultant in writing of any specific comments that the City wants incorporated into the RFI
response within 3 calendar days upon receipt from the Consultant.
Page 8 of 10
I --
City of Ashland WTP Amendment 3: Phase II-Scope of Services
SUBT ASK 303. ONSITE FIELD SERVICES
Objective. To support the Contractor and the City by attending on site meetings and conducting
miscellaneous field inspection services during construction.
Approach. The Consultant will attend field meetings and perform miscellaneous inspection services as
requested by the City. The Consultant will attend a preconstruction conference also attended by staff from
the City, the Contractor, and the subcontractors. The purpose of the preconstruction conference is to clarify
authority and relationships, partnering schedule submittals, procedures for pay requests, equipment and
materials submittals, change order procedures, and project close-out procedures. The Consultant will also
attend select progress meetings and perform special field inspections at the request of the City and
Construction Manager.
Products. There are no specific products identified for this task. The budget allocated for this task assumes
that one engineer will attend the preconstruction conference and one progress meeting that includes a site
visit for special field inspections of 4 hours' duration. Eight hours are included in the scope for this subtask.
SUBT ASK 304. STARTUP SERVICES
Objective. The Consultant will provide hands-on, onsite assistance and start-up services to facilitate the start-
. up of equipment and processes. Services in excess of those identified below will be conducted in accordance
with the agreement.
Approach. On site start-up assistance will be provided for all elements of the system, including the
arrangement and initiation of machinery/equipment warranties and beneficial use dates. This subtask is
based on the assumption that the Contractor will develop a complete testing and start-up procedures
submittal in accordance with the specifications for review by the Consultant.
When requested by the City, the Consultant's staff will serve as the Engineer's Witness for verifying testing
results, but not for inspection or certification of installations. Inspections or certification of installations,
whether for mechanical performance, for proper mechanical installation, or for structural integrity, will be
considered out-of-scope work under the terms of this contract and, if requested by the City, will be
negotiated for equitable compensation as extra work under its provisions.
After all submitted plans for an equipment item or system are accepted, the Consultant will aid the City in
verifying that equipment and system performance test requirements are met. The Consultant will aid the City
in ensuring that all systems are properly configured and valves are in proper positions to test each system and
piece of equipment adequately. If a piece of equipment serves as back-up to another piece of equipment, the
Consultant will aid the City in identifying the proper system configuration and valve position for testing the
equipment during back-up operations.
The level of effort for the work in this subtask is included in the budget shown in Exhibit B. If additional
testing is required during start-up activities, and the City requests the Consultant's assistance, then the
Consultant will negotiate reasonable additional fees under the provisions for extra work included in this
agreemen t.
It is expected that the City will hire an outside firm to provide programming services to the Contractor. This
work activity will be deferred to the construction phase of the work and will not be part of this agreement.
This scope includes up to 10 hours for this subtask.
Products. The marked-up original submittals, plans, and/ or schedules.
City's Responsibilities. The City will review all plans and submittals for testing and commissioning of equipment, systems, and structures immediately upon receipt from the Consultant.
The City will inform the
Page 9 of 10
City of Ashland WTP
Amendment 3: Phase II-Scope of Services
Consultant in writing of any specific comments that the City wants incorporated into the submittal mark-up
within 7 calendar days upon receipt from the Consultant.
SUBTASK 305. As-BuILT PLANS AND EQUIPMENT MANUAL SERVICES
Objective. Provide the City with a set of as-built plans for the improvements to the WfP, including a set of
manuals for the equipment provided. Obtain Oregon Drinking Water Division approval of the completed
improvements. Services in excess of those identified below will be conducted in accordance with the
agreement.
Approach. Consultant will coordinate the provision of as-built plans and equipment manuals from the
construction contractor. Consultant will develop the as-built plans into a useable form for the City and
submit the plans to the Oregon Drinking Water Program f?r approval.
Products. Complete set of as-built plans and binder(s) of equipment manuals. Submittal documents for the
Oregon Drinking Water Division.
City's Responsibilities. The City will provide the consultant with copies of all manuals and as-constructed
plans submitted by the contractor.
-
Page 10 of 10
II)C'?N
11)"11III'''1''''
000
-nMN
~~~
~COII)
"I""
C'?II)COO
II)OCDO
~~~~
N"I""
~~:~
~~CD
"I"" "I""
OC'? CD CO CO CD
COO CDC'? "I"" II)
COOC'?"IIIII'NCO
-nNMNN-n
"I""
~~~~~~
CD "I""C!.COII)
N "I""
co
CO
o
ui
"11III'
CD
"I""
o
ui
~O 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 00 0 0 0 0
or:~ 0 'CD CO CO 0 "11III' 0 :
II) .-. C'? C'? C!. .-. N
"I"" "I"" "I"" M
000 0000 0 0000 0 0
0 0 0
N N N
000
o 0
~ ~
000
~~~
880
~~
0000
N<.O<.O
"I""
0000
~NN
N"I"""I""
0000
000
~NN
000000
o 00
Lt) ~"I""
000000
~ ~~
800880
co ~~
o
N
C!.
"I""
o
N
C!.
"I""
o
o
<<!.
"I""
N co ~ N 0 ~ co ~ <.0 <.0 ~ 0 <.0 CD
C") <.0 <.0 0 ~ 0 ~ 0) I""- <.0 co ('t) .-.
N "I"" or: co ('t) .-. "I"" ('t) "I""
"I"" N
t/) C") Lt) co "I"" Lt) ~ N CO I""- 0 ~ co 0 N
X CO ('t) ~ 0 I""- co ~ CO 0 0) I""- 0) N .-.
M II) "I"" ~. N 0 0) "I"" "I"" ~ "I"" ~ ('t). ('t) 0
.s:::. . ri M cD Il'i M ri Il'i 0
(.)
15 N "I"" "I"" "11III'
U
~
E
0
() 0 "I"" CO 0 II) CO CD d'; N N CO 0 N N
ll. N N "11III' 0 C'? "I"" N "I"" "11III' .-.
I- "I"" "I"" N
3:
.s
N
E
Q)
E <.0 N ~ 0 0 0 0 co 0 0 co 0 0 ~
"0 "I""
C
Q)
E
<(
co
0 ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 co ~ N 0 0 N N
<.0
N "I""
"I""
('t) ('t) 0 Lt) ~ "I"" 0 <.0 0 0 0 0 <.0 "11III'
"I"" -
C'?
-
c
CD
E
'0
C
CD
~
l!
c
CD
E
~
e
Q.
.5
-
c
ca
c:
-
'0 C
C CD
ca E
:C'ai
~ e
't-~
o ..
b';
o~
00
000
000
000
~~o
NCO~
"I""
"E
8
-()
c ~
~E
.5 E
_ C)
U~()
CD . 0
"'!!'lIo ......~
.. e
A.ll.
O"l""N
000
"I"" "I"" "I""
ONCOO
~('t)
~~OO
NN
<.0<.000
"I"" "I""
~N~O
0000
OCO<.O<.O
('t) "I""
o
c E
o Q)
~;2
(j).c
C) ~
.5 I-
"0 c
~ .2>
~ C ~
0::::>0
C ~ ~ '5
.f}) 8 .g .~
: .Q :2 m
CLL()1Il
go~8
NNNN
000000
('t) ('t)
000000
000000
NCOOOO~
~ N "I""
000000
000000
~
>
tn ...
"8 ~
'5; ~ 8 ~
A. <( :5 CJ)
SEO"O
is E c:i> ~
= C) c LL
.::;;2WQ)
.ui~~
88~8
t/)
"'ffi
::J
C
m
;2
~ ~
CJ) t/)
0.:=
::J ::J
t:: III
m I
(j)~
go~8~~
C")('t)('t)('t)('t)('t)
o
.-.
"11III'
N
CD
"I""
CD
.-.
"11III'
N
"11III'
..J
~
o
~
C
~
C>
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Council Communication
Meeting Date:
Department:
Secondary Dept.:
Approval:
Approval of a Sole Source Procurement greater than $75,000
Northwest Mail Services
December 16, 2008 Primary Staff Contact:
Finance E-Mail:
Purchasing Secondary Contact:
Martha Benne Estimated Time:
Lee Tuneberg
tuneber1@ashland.or.us
Kari Olson
Consent Agenda
Question:
Will the Council, acting as the Local Contract Review Board, approve a Sole Source Procurement for
the acquisition of City-wide mail services with Northwest Mail Services?
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the public contract be awarded to Northwest Mail Services.
Background:
A Request for Proposal was processed in OctoberlNovember of2005 and a contract was awarded to
Northwest Mail Services in Medford, Oregon, for a period of 3 years, which expired on December 1,
2008. Northwest Mail Services was the only proposer who submitted a proposal in response to that
RFP.
In addition to Northwest Mail Services, there are three (3) companies listed under Mailing Services in
the yellow pages. The Purchasing Representative contacted each of those three (3) companies by
telephone on December 4, 2008. One of the companies does not have the capability to stuff and sort
the mail to obtain the best postage rates. Another company mentioned not having the capability to do
the metering, but said that Northwest Mail and Valley Web are the only companies that can do
metering in the Rogue Valley. The third company - Valley Web - attempted to provide the full gamut
of mailing services similar to Northwest Mail Services but there was just not enough business in the
Rogue Valley to sustain their efforts. And, that person also confirmed that Northwest Mail Services is
the only company in the Rogue Valley at this time that can provide the full gamut of mail services.
After conducting the RFP in OctoberlNovember 2005 and after reasonable investigation at this time,
the City has not learned of any other potential service providers in the Rogue Valley that have the
capabilities to provide these services for the City of Ashland. Therefore, it has been determined that
this acquisition for mail services with Northwest Mail Services is a Sole Source Procurement.
Please note: COST DATA is included in the attached Sole Source Determination and Written
Findings.
Related City Policies:
Section 2.50.020 Public Contracting Officer's Authority
A. Authority to Execute Contracts Without Prior Council Approval. The Public Contracting Officer
may execute without prior Council approval contracts that satisfy all of the following:
Page 1 of2
r.l'
- -~.- 1
CITY OF
ASHLAND
1. The contract has a total value of seventy-five thousand dollars ($75,000) or less;
11. The contract does not exceed a twenty-four month contract period;
111. The contract provides that the contract may be terminated by the City for convenience
thirty (30) or fewer days following delivery of written notice to the contractor;
IV. Funds are budgeted for the purpose of the contract;
v. The contract has been approved as to form by Legal Counsel unless it meets one of the
exemptions set forth below; in Section 2.50.025, and,
VI. All other requirements for public contract code procurement have been satisfied.
Section 2.50.075 Sole Source
The appropriate department head shall determine when there is only one seller or price of a product of
the quality required available within a reasonable purchase area. To the extent reasonably practical,
the appropriate department head shall negotiate with the sole source to obtain contract terms
advantageous to the contracting agency. The determination of a sole source must be based on written
findings that may include:
(1) That the efficient utilization of existing goods requires the acquisition of compatible
goods or services;
(2) That the goods or services required for the exchange of software or data with other
public or private agencies are available from only one source;
(3) That the goods or services are for use in a pilot or an experimental project; or
(4) Other findings that support the conclusion that the goods or services are available from
only one source.
Council Options:
The Council, acting as the Local Contract Review Board, can approve the contract recommendation or
decline to approve the contract recommendation.
Potential Motions:
The Council, acting as the Local Contract Review Board, moves to award the public contract to
Northwest Mail Services.
Attachments:
Sole Source Determination and Written Findings
Letter (Includes the following two price lists):
Utility Bill Charges effective December 1, 2008
Daily First Class Presort Services Fees (Item Price List) effective July 29, 2008
Cost Data (January - November 2008)
Page 2 of2
r~'
-----------------------------~---------,---------~ '1
CITY OF
ASHLAND
I FORM #6
SOLE-SOURCE DETERMINATION AND WRITTEN FINDINGS
GOODS and SERVICES
GREATER THAN $75,,000
To: City Council, Local Contract Review Board
From: Lee Tuneberg, Finance Director
Date: December 10, 2008
Re: Sole Source Determination and Written Findin2s for Goods and Services
In accordance with AMC 2.50.075, the appropriate department head shall determine when
there is only one seller or price of a product of the quality required available within a
reasonable purchase area. To the extent reasonably practical the appropriate department
head shall negotiate with the sole source to obtain contract terms advantageous to the
contracting agency. The determination of a sole source must be based on written findings
The sole source determination being made here will be based on the following written
findings.
Background:
This sole source justification applies to the acquisition of mail servicesfor the City of
Ashland. City-lllidemail services l1dll include daily mail pick-up (J1;londay through Frida)),
folding, inserting, barcoding, lnetering, sorting and daily delivel)' of mail to "Nledford Post
Qffice. Envelope storage for approximately 200,000 envelopes is also provided (#10
WindoH>/100A4 and #9Return/./00A1) for a minimal cost of $25. 00 per month.
The reason for this Sole Source Procurernent is because IVorthlvest A1ail Services is
current(y the on~v known company in the Rogue -Valley area Vi'ith the capabilities (~')tqff,
equipment, and storage facilities) to provide all the required mail services that are routine(y
required 0!1 a dai~v basis b.Y' the City of Ashland.
The terms of the intended contract will be for three years, beginning Janual)' ./, 2009 and
expiring on Decenlber 31, 20././.
The attached Fee schedules are as {olloyvs:
lltility Bill Charges effective Dece111ber 1, 2008. Thesefees will increase 3:?{j annually.
Daily.First Class Presort Services Fees (Item Price List) effective July 29, 2008. Any
increase in these fees lvill be agreed to by both parties.
Form #6 - Sole Source - Goods & Services - Greater than $75,000, Page 1 of 4, 12/10/2008
-r
The costs associated with these services are as follolvs:
Cuo"ent charges for this
Breakdown of costs: calendar year Estimate for Dee 2008 3- Y ear Estimate
(.lan-Nov 2008)
Fees for processing City-wide mail $4,292,7C $390.2~ $ 15,OOO.OC
Postage for mailing City-wiele mail 17,475.62 1,588.6<; 60,OOO.OC
Fees for processing Utility Bills 11,O19.3~ 1,OO1.7E 40,OOO.OC
Postage for mailing lJtility Bills 45,428.4C 4,129.85 150,OOO.OC
TOTAL $78,216.0~ $7,1 10.55 $265,OOO.OC
Findings:
ORS 279B.075 provides examples of findings that should be addressed. The department
head should select at least one of the findings and prepare the determination as it specifically
relates to the good and/or services being procured. More than one finding can be addressed.
The findings are as follows:
Pursuant to ORS 279B.075 (2)(a): Provide findings supporting your determination
that the efficient utilization of existing goods requires the acquisition of compatible
goods or services from only one source.
Not applicable
Pursuant to ORS 279B.075 (2)(b): Provide findings supporting your determination
that the goods or services required for the exchange of soCtware or data with other
public or private agencies are available from only one source.
Not applicable
Pursuant to ORS 279B.075 (2)(c): Provide findings supporting your determination
that the goods or services are for use in a pilot or an experimental project.
Not applicable
Pursuant to ORS 279B.075 (2)(d): Any other findings that support the conclusion that
the goods or services are available from only one source.
A Request for Proposal )lvas processed in October/November of 2005 and a contract was
([lyvarded to lvorthwest ltfai! Services in Medford. Oregon, for a period of 3 years, lvhich expired
on Decenlber 1, 2008. IVorthwest Alail Services was the only proposer who submitted a proposal
in response to that RFP.
In addition to Northwest Alai! Ser\"ices, there are three (3) companies listed under lv/ailing
SenJices in the yellolv pages. 77ze Purchasing Representath1e contacted each of those three (3)
companies by telephone on Decenlber 4, 2008. One of the companies does not have the
capability to sll~ff and sort the mai!to obtain the best postage rates. Another company lnentioned
not having the capability to do the metering, but said thatN()rth~,vest Alai! and Valley If'eb are the
only cornpanies that can do metering in the Rogzle Valle.v. The third company...... Valley ~fleb ,......
attempted to provide thefull ganlut of mailing services silnilar to Northwest lv/ail Services but
there l-vas just not enough business in the Rogzle Valley to sustain their efJbns. And. that person
Form #6 - Sole Source - Goods & Services - Greater than $75,000, Page 2 of 4,12/10/2008
T
also confinned that Northvv'est Afail Services is the only company in the Rogue Valley at this time
that can provide the full gamut of mail services.
Afier conducting the RFP in October!J.Vovember 2005 and qfier reasonable investigation at this
time, the City has not learned qf an}' other potential sen1ice providers in the Rogue Valle..v that
have the capabilities to provide these services for the City of Ashland. Therefore, it has been
determined that this acquisition for lnail services l'vith North'l-vest Alai! Services is a Sole Source
Procurement.
PUBLIC NOTICE:
Pursuant to OAR 137-047-0275 (2), a Contracting Agency shall give public notice of the
Contract Review Authority's determination that the Goods and Services or class of Goods
and Services are available from only one source in a manner similar to the public notice of
competitive sealed bids under ORS 279B.055(4) and OAR 137-047-0300. The public notice
shall describe the Goods or Services to be acquired by a sole source procurement. The
Contracting Agency shall give such public notice at least seven days before Award of the
Contract.
Date Public Notice first a eared on www.ashland.or.us -
PUBLIC NOTICE
Aooroval of a Sole Source Procurement
First date of publication: December 17, 2008
A contract recommendation for a Sole Source procurement was presented to and
approved by the City Council, acting as the Local Contract Review Board, on
Decenlber 16, 2008.
After conducting an RFP in October/November 2005, and after reasonable
investigation at this tillle, it has been determined based on 1vritten findings that
Northwest Alai! Services is curren#'I/ the on~v known compan.'I/ in the Rogue
Valle..'I/ area lvith the capabilities (stall equipment, and storage facilities) to
provide all the required mail services that are routine~v required on a daily basis
by the City of Ashland.
CitY-l-videmail services include envelope storage, daily mail pick-up (A10nda.v
through FridaJ~, folding, inserting, barcoding, metering, sorting and dai~v delivery of
mail to Ale(!ford Post Office.
The contract terms, conditions and specifications may be reviewed upon request by
contacting Kari Olson, Purchasing Representative at 541-488-5354.
An affected person may protest the determination that the goods and services are
available from only one source in accordance with OAR 137-047-0710. A written
protest shall be delivered to the following address: City of Ashland, Kari Olson,
Purchasing Representative, 90 N.Molmtain Avenue, Ashland, OR 97520. The seven
(7) day protest period will expire at 5:00pm on Decelnber 24,2008.
This public notice is being published on the City's Internet W orId Wide Web site at
least seven days prior to the award of a public contract resulting from this request for
approval of a Sole Source procurement.
e urce - s rvlceS - rea er an
---~~~--l
Authority to enter into a Sole-Source Contract:
ORS 279B.075 Sole-source procurements. (1) A contracting agency may award a contract for goods or services without
competition when the Director of the Oregon Department of Administrative Services, the local contract review board or a
state contracting agency, ifit has procurement authority under ORS 279A.050, or a person designated in writing by the
director, board or state contracting agency with procurement authority under ORS 279A.050, determines in writing, in
accordance with rules adopted under ORS 279A.065, that the goods or services, or class of goods or services, are
available from only one source.
(2) The determination of a sole source must be based on written findings that may include:
(a) That the efficient utilization of existing goods requires the acquisition of compatible goods or services;
(b) That the goods or services required for the exchange of software or data with other public or private agencies are
available from only one source;
(c) That the goods or services are for use in a pilot or an experimental project; or
(d)'Other findings that support the conclusion that the goods or services are availablefrom only one source.
(3) To the extent reasonably practical, the contracting agency shall negotiate with the sole source to obtain contract
terms advantageous to the contracting agency. [2003 c. 794955; 2005 c.103 98c]
AMC 2.50.070 Proceduresfor Competitive Bids
All Public Contracts shall be based upon Competitive Bidding pursuant to ORS 279A - 279C and the
Attorney General Model Rules, OAR Chapter 137 Divisions 46 - 49, except for the following:
E. Sole source procurements as set forth in ORS 279B.075 and herein.
AMC 2.50.075 Sole Source
The appropriate department head shall determine when there is only one seller or price of a product of the
quality required available within a reasonable purchase area. To the extent reasonably practical the
appropriate department head shall negotiate with the sole source to obtain contract terms advantageous to the
contracting agency. The determination of a sole source must be based on written findings that may include:
(3)
(4)
That the efficient utilization of existing goods requires the acquisition of compatible goods or services;
That the goods or services required for the exchange of software or data with other public or private
agencies are available from only one source;
That the goods or services are for use in a pilot or an experimental project; or
Other findings that support the conclusion that the goods or services are available from only
source.
(1)
(2)
one
OAR 137-047-0275 Sole-source Procurements
(1) Generally. A Contracting Agency may Award a Contract without competition as a sole-Source Procurement pursuant
to the requirements ofORS 279B.075.
(2) Public Notice. If, but for the Contracting Agency's determination that it may enter into a Contract as a sole-source, a
Contracting Agency would be required to select a Contractor using source selection methods set forth in either ORS
279B.055 or 279B.060, a Contracting Agency shall give public notice of the Contract Review Authority's determination
that the Goods or Services or class of Goods or Services are available from only one source. The Contracting Agency
shall publish such notice in a manner similar to public notice of competitive sealed Bids under ORS 279B.055(4) and
OAR 137-047-0300. The public notice shall describe the Goods or Services to be acquired by a sole-source Procurement,
identify the prospective Contractor and include the date, time and place that protests are due. The Contracting Agency
shall give such public notice at least seven (7) Days before A ward of the Contract.
(3) Protest. An Affected Person may protest the Contract Review Authority's determination that the Goods or Services or
class of Goods or Services are available from only one source in accordance with OAR 137-047-0710.
I certify that the information provided above meets the City of Ashland public contracting
requirements and if applicable, the documentation can be provided upon request.
Department Head Signature:
Date:
Form #6 - Sole Source - Goods & Services - Greater than $75,000, Page 4 of 4, 12/10/2008
----~- T
12/05/2008 10:14 Northwest Mailers, Inc
(FAX) 5417795896
P .0021004
NORTHWEST MAIL SERVICES
A Northwest Mailers, Inc. Company
550 AIRPORT ROAD
MEDFORD, OR 97504
(541)779-1347
November 3D, 2008
Ms Karl Olson
Purchasing Representative
City of Ashland
90 N Mountain Avenue
Ashland OR 97520
Dear Ms Olson:
On December 1, 2005, Northwest Mailers, Inc. and the City of Ashland executed a contract for
Northwest Mailers, Inc. to provide mailing services for the City of Ashland. This contract was
scheduled for three years.
Northwest Mailers, Inc. continues to be the only Southern Oregon business that can provide the
services now being provided to the City of Ashland. Therefore, Northwest Mailers, Inc. is
prepared to offer an extension of the contract for an additional term that is acceptable to the City
of Ashland. All provisions of the original contract are still acceptable, except at the execution of
the contract extension (November 30, 2008) the prices for the utility bill processing will be
adjusted by the 30/0 specified in the original contract. Prices for processing the daily flIst class
mail will remain at the current level through November 30, 2009. The prices for the new contract
are shown in Attachments 1 and 2. The US Postal Service now makes annual postage
adjustments based on a variation of the CPl. These adjustments are generally made in May of
each year. We will adjust the cost of postage to reflect the new rates when the rates are made
effective.
If this proposal is acceptable please have your legal staff prepare the necessary documents. We
value the long business relationship we have enjoyed with the City of Ashland and look forward
to continuing to provide yOll excellent service.
Best Regards
/-....;..~.) \\ ~\ L- C) {\
. . ~/(f\"~V'-{)' __.-')c;-'~
Donald L. Sauls
President
Northwest Mailers, Inc.
cc: Sheri BrearclitIe
--------------~------'----' 1
12/05/2008
Attachment 1
12/01/08
Item
PS.A
PS.AS
PS.C
PS.CS
PS,lB
PS.LBS
PS.N
PS.NL
PS.NLS
PS.NS
PS,O
PS.PU
10:14 Northwest Mailers,lnc
Northwest Maners Ine
Item Price List
December 1. 2008
Daily Mail Services
Description Preferred Vendor
Actual Postage Machinable letters
Processing Fee Machinable letters
AQual Postage Certified, Registered or Foreign
Processing Fee Certifled, Registered or ForeIgn
Actual Postage Box Over 101bs.
Processing Fee Box Over 101bs.
Addillonal Poslage Non Machinable Letters
Actual Postage Non Machinable Items
Processing Fee Non Machinable Hems
Processing Fee Non Machinable letters
Other
Daily Pick Up
(FAX)5417795896
Price
-
0.00
0.105
0.00
0.32
0.00
1.05
0.00
0.00
0.125
0.05
0.00
2.50
P .003/004
Page 1 of 1
--~-l
12/05/2006 10:14 Northwest Mailers, Inc
Attachment 2
December 1. 2008
Item
F aiding
Inserting
. , ---Metering
Barcoding
Envelope Storage
Northwest Mailers lne
Utillity Bill Charges
for
City of Ashland
December 1.2008
Price/M
$11.40
$24.70
$8:76
$48.10
$25.00 Per month
(FAX) 541779 5896
P .004/004
Page 1 of 1
1
12/0812008 14:26 Northwest Mailers, Inc
(FAX)5417795896
Northwest Mail Services
A Northwest Mailers, Inc. Company
550 Airport Road, Medford OR 97504
541-779-1347 I fax 541-779-5896
don@northwestmail.com
P .001/004
Date: December 7, 2008
To: Kari Olson
From: Don Sauls
President
Fax No.488-5320
Re: Cost Sheets
Kari
Attached are three reports that give you the cost data from January 1 to
November 2008.
Sheet 1 identifies the fees we charge for processing the daily mail and
Sheet 2 is the postage cost for this mail.
Sheet 3 identifies the postage and processing costs for mailing the utility
bills.
Hope this is what you need.
Don
3 Sheets to follow
v)
~
17001Z00'd
96BS6LL L trS(X\1:1)
~UI's..anew ~saMln.JoH 9Z:t1l BOOZ/SO/Z l
----r ,---
~
C\1oo
Eo
u EO
eN
- :J ~
l!!UJ.c
C1J '- 5
== Q) >
nJ E 0
:!: 0 ~
.....+'OJ
Kl U) ::J
~ ::2 2
:e05
o ~~
z..Q~
en c
1!!~
C\1
en
N
~
I I
"J
~ ~
;i an u;
~ t-. ....
~ ~~ ~
r- ....
co eo
~ ~ ~
> .... .-'
o .- ....
z ....
o 0
! ~ :!
~ ~ ~
o .....
ca CQ
0) CO CO
o ~ ~
~ Pl ~
0) m
eo CO) C"')
o ai ai
g>> ~ :8.
ct ...
I' ....
~ ~ ~
'3 S S
-, N N
CI:I ~ :;:
o m ~
S III ill
-, ....
It> U)
CO 0 0
c d d
~ ~ ~
~ .:
eo ~ ::z
~ ~ ~
~::~
to co
~ ~ ~
:e ~ C;;
E ..... or:
to CD
~ ci d
~ ~ ~
LL ... ....:
eo ~ ~
o at eft
~ 1:::- I::
~ ~
CD
aI
III
0..
~
;gn;
U) Ci1 ~
CO) 0 u
~ ~ ~
tJOO/tJOO'd
I/)
"a
~
';;
Ji
lllS
:c:
~.
~gg
~
96BS6ll L tJ5(XV:I)
:>UI 's.J9I1eH ~SaMlnJON lZ:v L
800Z/80/Z l
-I
~
ns
E!
g E ~
- ::J a.
l!!tn..a
CI) ... e
:= cD ~
ftJEO
:is Z
1ij's~
Q) en ~
~::se
.cO '5
1:: >, i:'
O.Cl'"
:z CI) E
J!!.!!J
m
t/)
M
3
\f\
.~
II)
co
:e m
~ S ~
~ ~ H
"'"' <r"" ~
UlO
.-J (") V
~ oicO
6 S~
.... i ~
i\
co ~~ m
o ~~ ~
~ 0 Ul I.tI
Z ....:. ..,;
N.... (0)
~ ~~ ~
t$ ~~ ~
o ..:. lti'
00 :;;:(;) ~
o ~~ :S
go ON M
rn ....:~ an
CD ~~ ~
o :gm ai
~ 0.... ~
< ..:. an
C"l It) co
10 mlt) ~
o ~8 3
:; IOtn M
..., Pi ~
CD ~~ t;
o ~tO ti
g S~ ~
..., ..,.: ~ ui
CD ~~n~ ~
i ~~ ~
== ..j ~
co m~ ,
o c)N N
... U)U) M
n. m..... ~
00( M ~
CD ~{; ~
~ ~~ ti
IV co (") ~
:ii! c.; ~
00 0
co CON 0
o Nt-: d
.D 0 0 ....
CIJ ~~ U)
u. ....: t.O cD
co ~~ Gtl
i ii~ ~
~ M ~
CD
m
I~
tLQ.
~-~
E ~
SS
S.11
f/)UJ
~,;
cC
~~
~~
co
bb .-J
OU ~
~
CD
QI
ro
C1..
vOO/EOO'd
96856lL L VS(XV.:I)
:)UIISJ3I!a~llsa"\ln.lOH 9Z: V L
BOOZJ80/Z L
~--T-
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Council Communication
Authorize the Mayor to send a letter of support for rail line
Meeting Date: December 16, 2008 Primary Staff Contact: Martha J. Bennett
Department: Administration E-Mail: bennettm@ashland.or.us
Secondary Dept.: None Secondary Contact: None
Approval: Martha J. Benne Estimated Time: Consent
Question:
Does the City Council authorize Mayor orrison to send a letter of support the City of Montague's
efforts to explore whether a "public utility" system could stabilize the operation of the Siskiyou
Subdivision Rail Line between Weed, California, and Ashland, Oregon.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the Council authorize the Mayor to send a letter of support.
Background:
In summer 2008, representatives from the City of Montague, California, contacted the City of Ashland
and Senator Alan Bates to discuss options for restoring service on the rail line beween Ashland and
Weed. Since those initial discussions, Montague has received a grant to develop a business plan for
operating this line as a public utility. Last week, Councilor David Chapman represented the City at a
meeting with a variety of jurisdictions working on this issue, and after that meeting, Councilor
Chapman requested that the City send a letter supporting those efforts.
Restoration of service on this line meets several of the City's transportation and economic
development objectives. Additionally, rail transportation is considerably more efficient than truck
transportation, so restoration of service also is consistent 'Yith the City's conservation goals. The City
of Ashland does not have a financial commitment to any work as a result of this letter.
Council Options:
· Authorize the Mayor to send a support letter
· Do not send a letter of support.
Potential Motions:
. I move to authorize the Mayor to send a letter supporting efforts to stabilize rail service
between Ashland and Weed by acquiring the Siskiyou Subdvisions Line and operating it as a
public utility,
Attachments:
· Letter from City of Montague to Union Pacific Railroad
· Grant award by State of California to City of Montague.
Page 1 of 1
r~'
T --
(2)
'*
City of Montague, Office of the'*Mayor
230 South 13th Street, Montague, CA 96064
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 428, Montague, CA 96064
Phone: 530-459-3030
Fax: 530-459-3523
Email: cityofmontague@sbcglobal.net
~
ft
MONTAGUE
~:D~~kA L1~ h- s~rrl~ "2/0~OYltt~
Vice President / Mexico and Interline //1 1J _\ t'jJ.
Union Pacific Railroad I;' 1\ vI L{. c~"" (;v-,\ r-'h IIv, \ ~
Union Pacific Center J J
1400 Douglas Center 0'~ 1/\ '-" i - '-'~-
Omaha, NE 681 79 -t. i';{. L .;, <J C:!/L....
~ 0L.~ l iI" I
Dear Sir, J 1(11 ~ " ~f J l I
J J i YV'-- (V/.... o/l/Y' -0 ;\ (J
The City of Montague is pleased to present this letter of inquiry/interest regarding
the rail corridor between Black Butte CA and Bellevue OR, known locally as the
Siskiyou Subdivision Rail Line [SSRL].
Montague, founded as a railroad community in 1887 by the Central Pacific
Railroad and incorporated as the City of Montague in 1909, is geographically in the
center of the SSRL. Montague has always been a railroad town, historically functioning
as a major shipping point for cattle and timber and being the hub connecting the Siskiyou
County Seat ofYreka by way of the short line Yreka Western Railroad [YWRR] to other
communities in Siskiyou Co. along the main SSRL and to points both North and South.
The SSRL has from the beginning been an essential part of the economic infrastructure
and development in Siskiyou Co.
Today, two of our most stable businesses and major employers have been
utilizing the SSRL and YWRR to ship products both North and South for both further
processing and delivering finished products to various markets. The service has been
provided by the Central Oregon Pacific Railroad [CORP], which leases the SSRL from
the Union Pacific.
In the Fall of 2007 the CORP began curtailing service to the shippers in Siskiyou
Co., citing increasing expenses, and demanding higher rates. In the Spring of 2008,
unable to negotiate rates with the shippers, the CORP for all practical purposes
terminated service from Ashland to Weed.
The issue of marginal profitability over the SSRL has long plagued private'
enterprises. The recent reduction of service is an example of the "boomlbust" cycle which
has prevailed over the past years.
In mid summer 2008 representatives from the Siskiyou Co. Board of Supervisors,
the Cities of Montague, Weed and Yreka, plus representatives from the City of Ashland
OR and Oregon Senator Bates' office began meeting to discuss and find solutions for
maintaining economic stability and vitality on the SSRL. It has become our general
consensus that public ownership of the SSRL as a "public utility" will likely be the best
means to achieve that goal.
---T
-
~
"
MONTAGUE
~
City of Montague, Office of the 'Mayor
230 South 13th Street, Montague, CA 96064
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 428, Montague, CA 96064
Phone: 530-459-3030
Fax: 530-459-3523
Email: cityofmontague@sbcglobal.net
Page 2
A Public Agency would have a distinct advantage in that it would be eligible to
provide Federal and State funding to maintain and improve the SSRL infrastructure,
thereby securing long term stability and easing the maintenance cost burden to the rail
Service Provider which should increase operational profitability for that third party. We
also anticipate a Public Agency will be the best suited to encourage new business growth
in the communities, broaden the user base of freight shippers on the SSRL and develop
additional uses on the SSRL corridor. We expect the Union Pacific Railroad would
t.
receive increased revenues from additional traffic and de"elopment on the line.
We have begun discussing the formation of a Joint Powers Authority that could
be the Public Agency to acquire and own the SSRL. The City of Montague applied for
and has been awarded grant funds from the State of California to hire a consultant and
conduct a feasibility study to evaluate public ownership of the SSRL. Communication
and negotiation between our representatives and the Union Pacific will be an integral part
of determining the feasibility of public ownership.
If the Union Pacific Railroad is interested in discussing acquisition of the SSRL,
we welcome the opportunity to come to your offices in Omaha in order to discuss
acquisition and begin negotiations. We look forward to hearing from you at your earliest
convemence.
Respectfully,
Mayor
'12t~~ lJ) ~,~ rYIC~
Rebecca Bums Mayor Pro-Tern
/jfi l=d,..e-t;:.:j,'----'
Phil Robustellini Councilman
dM'\~
Trina Blanchard
.&1 (Wi {/ll'i,~ 0 0
Councilwoman
\ '-', id,f.:~
J~ Councilwoman
i./
---r---
S I A I t- l)to CAL 11-( JI-<NIA -HlJSINt-SS I I-(ANS!-'l)1-( I A liON AND HO\JSINli Alit-NCY
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DIVISION OF FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE
1800 Third Street. Suite 390
p, 0, Box 952054
Sacramento. CA 94252-2054
www.hcd.ca.QOV
(916) 322-1560
FAX (916) 327-6660
@
NOV 2 6 2008
RECEIVED
DEe 2 - 2008
Ms. Janie Sprague
City Clerk
City of Montague
P.O. Box 428
Montague, CA 96064
CllY Or MONTAGUE
Dear Ms. Sprague:
The Department of Housing and Community Development (Department) is pleased to
announce that the City of Montague (City) has been awarded $70,000 for an Economic
Development Planning and Technical Assistance grant from the Department's
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program.
These Planning and Technical Assistance grants help communities lay the groundwork
for affordable housing and economic development activities that will benefit lower
income households.
The Department will be forwarding a standard agreement which should be signed and
returned to the Department. Planning and Technical Assistance grant expenditures
may be incurred prior to the execution of the standard agreement at the grantee's risk,
but only upon submitting a written request and receiving written approval from the
Department. Call your CDBG representative for specific information if you wish to incur
costs early. Please note that the City will not be able to draw down funds for grant
activities until a fully executed standard agreement is in place.
In closing, we look forward to assisting the City in implementing its CDBG grant. If you
have any questions or need further assistance, please contact your CDBG Economic
Development Representative at (916) 552-9398.
Sincerely,
~a
Chris Westlake
Deputy Director
~
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Council Communication
Meeting Date:
Department:
Secondary Dept.:
Approval:
Consistent Forms and Fees Methodology
December 16, 2008 Primary Staff Contact: Bill Molnar
Community Development E-Mail: molnarb@ashland.or.us
Legal Secondary Contact: Mike Broomfield
Martha Benn Estimated Time: 10 Minutes
Question:
Should the council approve the resolution titled, "A Resolution to Provide New Methodology for
Determining Building Permit Fees"?
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends Council approval of attached Resolution.
Background:
The Oregon Building Codes Division has developed a uniform methodology for determining permit
fees throughout the state. Municipalities have until January 1, 2009 to bring their fees into compliance
with the new rules detailed in OAR 918-050. The methodology provides predictability for customers
and will assist contractors in calculating bids. A consistent fee methodology does not mean consistent
fees. The new rules establish a consistent method and adopt a standard valuation, but jurisdictions
continue to have the freedom to set their fee schedules to ensure sufficient operating funds.
All fees have been restructured where necessary to comply with the state requirement and are revenue
neutral which preempts the need for a public hearing through Building Codes Division. The majority
of existing fee methodologies relating to building permits were already consistent with the
methodologies detailed in OAR 918-050.
Two changes of note include a change from fixture based fees to room based fees for residential
plumbing, i.e. a cost per bathroom rather than a cost per fixture and a change from equipment type
based fees to valuation based fees for commercial mechanical permits.
In summary, adoption of this resolution does not result in a fee increase, but rather creates a consistent
structure and methodology consistent with the State Building Codes Division requirements.
Related City Policies:
City Charter, Resolution Adoption Procedures
Council Options:
(1) Move to approve the resolution.
(2) Postpone consideration.
Potential Motions:
Motion to approve the resolution.
Page 1 of 2
r~'
1-
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Attachments:
Proposed resolution
Proposed Fee Methodologies and corresponding fee schedule
Building Codes Division Explanatory Communication
Consistent Form and Fee Methodology Rules - OAR 918.050
Page 2 of 2
rA'
T-
RESOLUTION NO. 2008-
A RESOLUTION TO ADOPT NEW METHODOLOGY FOR DETERMINING BUILDING
PERMIT FEES FOR THE CITY OF ASHLAND BUILDING DIVISION ELECTRICAL,
MECHANICAL, STRUCTURAL AND PLUMBING PROGRAMS AND REPLACE
RESOLUTION 2003-15
Recitals:
A. The City wishes to clarify that Resolution 2003-15 no longer applies to the
administration of building division fees.
B. The City wants to emphasize that the fees and methodologies provided are
consistent with uniform methodology required under OAR 918-050.
THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOllOWS:
SECTION 6 This resolution was duly PASSED and ADOPTED this
, 2008, and takes effect upon signing by the Mayor.
day of
SECTION 1. This resolution replaces Resolution 2003-15 as approved by the City
Council on May 21,2003.
SECTION 2 The Structural Program (including valuation), marked as Exhibit "A"
SECTION 3 The Plumbing Program Fees marked as Exhibit "B" and Exhibit "C" are
adopted.
SECTION 4 The Mechanical Program Fees, marked as Exhibit "D" and "E", are
adopted.
SECTION 5 The Electrical Program (including restricted energy), marked as Exhibit
"F" .
Barbara Christensen, City Recorder
SIGNED and APPROVED this _ day of
, 2008.
John W. Morrison, Mayor
Reviewed as to form:
Richard Appicello, City Attorney
Page 1 of 1
--T--
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Permit Fee Schedule
Building Safety Division
Total Value of Work Performed
$1 to $500
$501 to $2000
$10,00
$10.00 for the first $500 plus $1.50 for each additional $100 or
fraction thereof, to and includin $2000
$32.50 for the first $2000 plus $6.00 for each additional $1000
or fraction thereof, to and includin $25,000
$170.50 for the first $25,000 plus $4.50 for each additional
$1000 or fraction thereof, to and includin $50,000
$283.00 for the first $50,000 plus $3.00 for each additional
$1000 or fraction thereof, to and includin $100,000
$433.00 for the first $100,000 plus $2.50 for each additional
$1000 or fraction thereof
$2,001 to $25,000
$25.001 to $50,000
$50,001 to $100,000
$100,001 and up
Plan Review Fee
A plan review fee equal to 65% of the building permit fee shall
be due at ap lication
$65.00 per hour
65% of building permit fee of deferred submittal valuation with
a $50 minimum fee
Additional Plan Review Fee
Commercial Fire Sprinkler/Fire Suppression/Fire Alarm Total value of work performed (see Building Permit Fees)
Commercial Fire Sprinkler/Fire Suppression/Fire Alarm Plan
65% of building permit fee
Review
Residential Fire Sprinkler (based on square footage; incl.udes plan review fee)
o - 2,000 sq. ft. $200.00
2,001 - 3,600 sq. ft. $263.00
3,601 - 7,200 sq. ft. $317.00
7,201 sq. ft. and up $373.00
Inspections for which no building permit applies (minimum 1
hour)
Reinspection Fee
Inspections outside normal business hours (minimum 1 hr)
$65.00 per hour; per inspector
$50.00
$130,00 per hour; per inspector
G:\comm-dev\building\Fonns\Building Penni! Fee Schedule - DRAFT,xls
T--
CITY Of
ASHLAND
Building Safety Division
Permit Fee Schedule
3 bathrooms/l kitchen
Each additional bathroom (over 3)
Each additional kitchen (over 1)
Remodel! Alterations
Remodel/Alterations (minimum fee)
Each fixture, appurtenance, and first 100 ft of
i in
Miscellaneous Residential
Minimum Fee
Piping or private storm drainage systems
exceedin the first 100 feet
Backflow Assembly
Residential Fire Sprinklers (include plan review)
o to 2,000 square feet
2,001 to 3,600 square feet
3,601 to 7,200 square feet
7,201 s uare feet and reater
Manufactured Dwelling or Pre-Fab (Circle one)
Connections to building sewer and water supply
RV and Manufactured Dwelling Parks
Base fee (including the first 10 or fewer spaces)
Each additional 10 s aces
$345
$405
$45
$45
$40
$15
$40
$22
$15
$2.44/sq ft
$2.44/sq ft
$2.44/sq ft
$2.44/s ft
$50
$150
$100
G'\comm-deV\building\Fonns\Building Permit Fee Schedule - DRAFT.xls
r-
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Permit Fee Schedule
Building Safety Division
Commercial, Industrial, and dwellings other than one- or two-family
Minimum fee
Each fixture
Pi in based on number of feet
Miscellaneous
Minimum Fee
Specialty fixtures
Reinspection (no. ofhrs. x fee per hour)
Special requested inspections (no. ofhrs. x fee
er hour
Medical gas piping
Minimum fee
Enter valuation of installation of equipment $
Valuation $500 to $2,000
Valuation $2,001 to $25,000
Valuation $25,000 to $50,000
Valuation $50,001 to $100,000
Valuation greater than $100,000
$40
$15
$.75/ft
$40
$15
$65
$65
$50
$50 + $5 per $100 of valuation
$125 + $18 per $100 of valuation
$540 + $14 per $100 of valuation
$890 + $9 per $100 of valuation
$1,340 + 8 per $100 of valuation
G:\comm-dev\building\Fonns\Building Pennit Fee Schedule - DRAFT,xls
r--n
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Permit Fee Schedule
Building Safety Division
Mechanical Permit Minimum Fee
Furnace/Burner including ducts & vents
Up to lOOk BTU/hr.
Over lOOk BTU/hr.
Heaters/StovesN ents
Unit heater
Wood/pellet/gas stove/flue
Repair/alter/add to heating appliance or
refrigeration unit or cooling system/absorbtion
s stem
Evaporated cooler
Vent fan with one duct/appliance vent
Hood with exhaust and duct
Floor furnace inc1udin vent
Gas Piping
One to four outlets
Additional outlets each
Air-handling Units, including Ducts
Up to 10,000 CFM
Over 10,000 CFM
Compressor/Absorption System/Heat Pump
Up to 3 hp/100K BTU
Up to 15 hp/500K BTU
Up to 30 hp/1,OOO BTU
Up to 50 hp/1,750 BTU
Over 50 h /1,750 BTU
Incinerators
Domestic incinerator
$12
$15
$15
$15
$12
$15
$7.50
$10
$15
$10
$15
$15
$25
$50
$60
$75
$25
G:\comm-dev\building\Forms\Building Permit Fee Schedule - DRAFT,xls
r-
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Building Safety Division
Permit Fee Schedule
Minimum Fee
Enter total valuation of mechanical system and
installation costs
Enter fee based on valuation of mechanical
s stem, etc.
Miscellaneous Fees
Reinspection ~-
Specially requested inspection (per hour)
Regulated equipment (unclassed)
$
5% of valuation
$50
$65
$50
G:\comm-dev\building\Fonns\Building Pennit Fee Schedule - DRAFT,xls
T-
CITY Of
ASHLAND
Permit Fee Schedule
Building Safety ,?ivision
1,000 sq. ft. or less
Each additional 500 sq. ft or portion thereof
Limited energy
Each manufactured home or modular dwelling
service or feeder
~.- ~------
Multi-famil residential $45
Residential and Commercial - Services or Feeders: installation, alteration, relocation
200 amps or less $63
201 to 400 amps $75
401 to 600 amps $125
601 to 1,000 amps $163
Over 1,000 amps or volts $375
Reconnect Onl $50
Temporary Services or Feeders
200 amps or less $50
201 to 400 amps $69
401 to 600 amps $100
Over 600 amps or 1,000 volts, see services or feeders section above
Branch Circuits: new, alteration, extension per panel
Branch circuits with purchase of a service or
feeder
B!~~~_h circuits without purchase._()fa service ~r feeder: _~___ _
First branch circuit
Each additional branch circuit
Miscellaneous Fees: service or feeder not included
Each pump or irrigation circle
Each sign or outline lighting
Signal circuit or a limited energy panel, alteration,
or extension
Specially requested inspection (per hour)
Each additional inspection over the allowable
$106
$19
$25
$50
$3
$43
$3
$50
$50
$50
$65
$50
Fee for all systems $25
Check type of work involved:
o Audio and stereo systems
o Data telecommunications
o Doorbell
o Garage-door opener
o Heating, ventilation, & air-conditioning systems
o Landscape lighting & sprinkler controls
o Landscape irrigation controls
o Outdoor landscape lighting
o Vacuum Systems
o Other:
o Audio and stereo systems
Each additional inspection $25
G:\comm-dev\building\Fonns\Building Pennit Fee Schedule - DRAFT.xls
T
EXHIBIT G
Building Valuation Data
The International Code Council is pleased to provide the follow-
ing Building Valuation Data (BVD) for its members. The BVO will
be updated and printed at six-month intervals, with the next
update in August. Ice strongly recommends that all jurisdictions
and other interested parties actively evaluate and assess the
impact of this BVO table before utilizing it in their current code
enforcement related activities.
The BVD table provides the "average" construction costs per
sq. ft., which can be used in determining permit fees for a juris-
diction. Permit fee schedules are addressed in Section 108.2 of
the 2006 International. Bui/ding Codif (IBCG) whereas Section
108.3 addresses building permit valuations. The permit fees can
be established by using the BVD table and a Permit Fee Multi-
plier, which is based on the total construction value within the ju-
risdiction for the past year. The Square Foot Construction Cost
table presents factors that reflect relative value of one construc-
tion classification/occupancy group to another so that more ex-
pensive construction is assessed greater permit fees than less
expensive construction.
ICC has developed this data to aid jurisdictions in determin-
ing permit fees. It is important to note that while this BVD table
does determine an estimated value of a building (Le., Gross
Area x Square Foot Construction Cost), this data is only in-
tended to assist jurisdictions in determining their permit fees.
This data table is not intended to be used as an estimating guide
because the data only reflects average costs and is not repre-
sentative of specific construction.
This degree of precision is sufficient for the intended
purpose, which is to help establish permit fees so as to fund
code compliance activities. This BVD table provides jurisdictions
with a simplified way to determine the estimated value of a build-
ing that does not rely on the permit applicant to determine the
cost of construction. Therefore, the bidding process for a partic-
ular job and other associated factors do not affect the value of a
building for determining the permit fee. Whether a specific
project is bid at a cost above or below the computed value of
construction does not affect the permit fee because the cost of
related code enforcement activities is not directly affected by the
bid process and results.
Building Valuation
The following building valuation data represents average valua-
tions for most buildings. In conjunction with IBC Section 108.3,
this data is offered as an aid for the building official to determine
if the permit valuation is underestimated. Again it should be
noted that, when using this data, these are "average" costs
based on typical construction methods for each occupancy
group and type of construction. The average costs include struc-
tural, electrical, plumbing, mechanical, interior finish and normal
site preparation. The data is a national average and does not
take into account any regional cost differences. To this end, the
table containing the regional cost modifiers was last printed in
the October 2003 issue and has been discontinued.
PERMIT FEE MULTIPLIER
Determine the Permit Fee Multiplier:
1. Based on historical records, determine the total annual con-
struction value which has occurred within the jurisdiction for
the past year.
2. Determine the percentage (%) of the building department
budget expected to be provided by building permit revenue.
Permit Fee Multiplier = Bldg. Dept.Budget x (%)
Total Annual Construction Value
Example
The building department operates on a $300,000 budget, and it
expects to cover 75 percent of that from building permit fees.
The total annual construction value which occurred within the
jurisdiction in the previous year is $30,000,000.
Permit Fee Multiplier = $300,QO.O.x 75.% = 0.0075
$30,000,000
PERMIT FEE
The permit fee is determined using the building gross area, the
Square Foot Construction Cost and the Permit. Fee Multiplier.
Permit Fee = Gross Area x Square Foot Construction Cost
x Permit Fee Multiplier .
Example
Type of Construction: liB
Height 2 stories
Permit Fee Multiplier = 0.0075
Use Group: B
1. Gross area:
Business = 2 stories x 8,000 sq. ft. = 16,000 sq. ft.
2. Square Foot Construction Cost:
BillS = $137.27!sq. ft.
3. Permit Fee:
Business = 16,000 sq. ft. x $137.27/sq. ft x 0.0075 = $16.472
Important Points
· In most cases the avo does not apply to additions, alter-
ations or repairs to existing buildings. Because the scope of
alterations or repairs to an existing building varies so greatly,
the Square Foot Construction Costs table does not reflect
Area: 1st story = 8,000 sq. ft.
2nd story = 8,000 sq. ft.
Janual)'-February 2008 building safety journal 51
~..
Building Valuation Data (Gontinued)
accurate values for that purpose. However, the Square Foot
Construction Costs table can be used to determine the cost
of an addition that is basically a stand-alone building which
happens to be attached to an existing building. In the case of.
such additions, the only alterations to the existing building
would involve the attachment of the addition to the existing
building and the openings between the addition and the ex-
isting building.
· For purposes of establishing the Permit Fee Multiplier, the es-
timated total annual construction value for a given time period
(1 year) is the sum of each building's value (Gross Area x
Square Foot Construction Cost) for that time period (e.g.. 1
year).
· The Square Foot Construction Cost does not include the
price of the land on which the building is built. The Square
Foot Construction Cost takes Into account everything from
site and foundation work to the roof structure and coverings
but does not include the price of the land. The cost of the land
does not affect the cost of related code enforcement activities
and is not included in the Square Foot Construction Cost.
Group (2006 Inlema
A-1 Assembly, theal
Assembly, lheat
~_~?_......~~~~.~~'!y-,_~~9.~.!._
~.:?_.........~s_~~~.!>.I.y"~r.~.~Y~..
f::.:~.._._.__._~_~~~!':l.~.I.Y-L~~,:!~g
A-3 Assembly, gene
libraries. museu
._.._._--_.._....-._--~- --..-.-..-...---.
~,~~_...,,_~~~,~!.'.l.~_!y.!_~!.~~.?
~____~~nes.~.___
E Educational
-------........----.........
F-1 F aclory and indl
F-2 F aclory and ind
~~__!:!igl'_~.?ard, ex
H234 High Hazard
H-5 HPM -
1-1 .. _.~~~l.~t~!.!~'!.~ 1:__~.l.!P.
!:?.__._.-'~_s..~~.!:'..~~~~l~._~g.~
1-2 Institutional. nur
...,....-...........---.-.....--...... ..-...................,
! :~._ ....__I~~.~i!~.~~~I1~!~Ee~~
.I..:~._..... ..ln~.!!~_l!~i9.~~.I.._~~y
M Mercantile
...~ n..__ __._._.. _..._....__...__.._..__...._.... .._
.~~ L_.....~~:>l~~.~.~~.<.t.I....~?!..
.B.:.~_ R~!~denl~1..P~!
R-3 Residential, one
.~.i._..__~~sjd!!."~1_car
S-1 Storage, moder
$-2 Storage, low ha
U UtiHly, miscellan
Square Foot Construction Costsa, b, c. d
tional Building C~.~) ___....._..__ Type of Construction
IA 18 IIA 118 ilIA IIIB IV VA VB
--
ers. with stage 196.11 189.78 185.37 177.60 167.20 162.27 171.92 152.56 146.94
ers, without sta~____.___F7.62 171.29 166.88 159.10 148.75 143.82 153.43 134.10 128.49
clubs ... .... ..__.. . ....... . ........~.~~~.~~ .......__1..1.?~!.~__..._1~?_~<?~.._.._. ...!.~~ ..~~_...._.1?~.:.?~__.....1.?i:~_~.._. .._....l~.~.:!..!.___...!~?:.~Q___..,,!_~.?.:.~~_
u_~~D.~~:._~.a..~.~:....~~t~.q~~!_~:a..I~~__. ..!__~_~_..~~__..____~_44 . 7.~..........!_!Q:..~~........_.!..~?~~~___...!.~.~.:? ~... .._....J?3..:~.!.._ .._....~}Q~!_1______..!~~.:.~.Q_____.~.1.!.:_
.~...
i"_~~____....._..__. ...... . ...___..... w....... ..__!.~.~:.!.?.._._._!.~~~~_~__...~~~:~~.. .._... .!.??:?j..__.._.!.?_!..:~.?___.....~.~.?:il_~. ....._.....!.?_~:?4....__...!..~!.:~,~......__.!_~.
!.~?L.
ral. community halls. 152.81 146.48 141.07 134.30 122.33 118.97 128.63 108.26 103.65
ms
.....~.._~......~_......A.._..~._.~__._~~.A~. .....__.._.__________..__~_________._.__.,_......_____..~.__'._....'.._~._~___._._.___._..___...___.___._________..__..__._____._.___._.___.____.____..._
_.~_
S _n..'__...__.... ..___.._._ .. __..~?~:_~.?._____~!..Q.:.~~_.._..__1..~.~:_~.~._.._._...1_~~:.!.Q......._..!.~.~:.?..?..._.._..!.~.2..:.~_?_._....__~.?.?.;~_~.......... ..!~.?..:.!.Q........~_?l:..
~
154.16 148.70 144.00 137.27 125.07 120.41 131.97 109.81 105.37
----.......----------...........-.--
,________...___~.:52 160.91 156.34 149.52 140.14 132.98 144.59 12_~~8.69
Istrial, moderate hazard 92.68 88.42 83.70 80.93 72.45 69.29 77.68 59.67 56.50
uslrial, low hazard __.__..___j)"!:~. 87.42 83.70 _~.:.~L__L2.4S 68.29 76.68 __ 59.67_~
plosives 86.84 82.58 78.86 75.09 67.79 63.63 71.84 _-.?..?..:..~_N.P:.-
____ 86.84 82.58 7~.:.!!~-!_5.09 67.79 63.63 71.84 55.02 50.85
154.16 148.70 144.00 137.27 125.07 120.41 131.97 109.81 105.37
~r.,,!~~.~__~!1.,,!~?!.!.!!.!~.~L..... ..__.__1..?~3.g.._.__..~.~?~Q.~ _..._._!~.3.~.~.~_._.__l:!.!..:~!... .._~.~~:?~___.._..~.?_4.:.!.~__....._....1}~ :.?.!__ .._.~~?:.~__._... .1.~.~_:~.~._
p'.i!~!~..._._..._ ..._._.._.. ......._....... ...wN.??~.:?~_.........~.?.9..:~.Q___.m...?~~:1!..__......?.~~;~~..__._..?.?_~.~?..?.. ..._..._._!'!;~;_......._ ?~~. :Q.~_. ..._...?_1.1.:~.~......____
~.:~:__.
~~~9...~?_f!.1..~~__......____._____.._.__,..__.!.~~..~~._m....._! .!?!..:.!..?_...._._.1!>_~Q.~__.._._~~.?}Q..._......g;Q:~~.......___._.._~:?:.___..._.._._1. ~!._:9.Q .......!~_~_._~!....
N . P.
ra ined __......._......._._.._.._._..1..?~:~~.___...1~_~:??__...~.?.~.:~.~.._........~.?~:_!Q... __._~.~EJ _~,__:t '!1.:?,~..._ _ ...1?.~:~9__...... ...!.3._!.:~~__.__!?_~.:~_~.
..~~r:.e._~~~I~~~~...__...__ . . . .__..__~.??:~.Q_..._J.~!..:.Q.~.___.._.!~~.:.!.~.______1.~.7..:_3.~.. ... ~~~~?~......_._ 1 ?~Z~...__....._.1.~~:.~.!....___116 "O~.... __...~..1..1:.5.:!_
111.44 107.24 102.53 97.99 89.62 87.00 93.21 77.59 74.67
---.........-....... ..."..... ~.~ ...... .....",.........."..-..--......".-.- ~~.. ..-..--....---...-.........- --..-.... _.P.._......_.."......_...._..... ...._._.......'__.__.. ._P._._
.____________no________m.~ ._ ......_ ..... _.._.__. _.._... __.... ..___...n _ _n_.
e.I~.._._.__._.._. ..____. .._. ........... 1.~i:?~.._ .___.1~~~9,?..____J~~. 08 139. 2 8__.____..!?~._~.~ ...... ._g~: ~~.......___..!.:!Q.}?...........1E.:~9_......~.!,,~.?..~_
~~~~!'J1i1L--___~J..:~~___J1~..11 120.17 114.37 __.:!..~ 16-...!.Q~_~__...!~E~_~~i>1...__ 88.46
- and two-f~.~!y_..__..___..__. 122.1~8.76______!!?~_..112.68 108.62 105.77 110.77 101.74 95.91
e/assisted living faci(ili~..!.....___~2.30_.____147.08 143.14 !_~r:..~~_-1.?!~~~.!.?~ 138:?...!___1J2.:.9_~_.J~1.54
ale hazard 85.84 81.58 76.86 74.09 65.79 62.63 70.84 53.02 49.85
_.------- --
zard 84.84 80.58 76.86 73.09 65.79 61.63 69.84 53.02 48.85
___.___._r_~.n_._._.._._
~_~~~___ 65.15 61.60 57.92 55.03 49.70 46.33 51.94 39.23 37.3~_
a. Private Garages use Utility. miscellaneous
b. Unfinished basements (all use group) = $15.00 per sq. ft
c. For shell only buildings deduct 20 percent.
d. N.P. = not permitted
Electronic files of the latest Building Valuation Data can be downloaded from the Code Council website
at www-iccsafe.orglcs/techservices
52 building safety journal January-February 2008
1--
Building Codes Division
Working with Oregonians
10 ensure safe building
cmwruc:l;on while
.'iupporti1l8 a posit;\'e
bll.villess dimllle.
Communication
July 2008
Consistent Forms and Fee Methodology
OAR 918-050
The division, with the assistance of a Consistent Forms and Fees Committee, has developed a uniform
methodology for detennining permit fees throughout the state. Municipalities have until January 1, 2009
to bring their fees into cOlnpliance with the new rules, which are modeled after the Tri-County
methodology. The methodology provides predictability for customers and will assist contractors
calculating bids. A consistent fee methodology does not mean consistent fees. The new rules establish a
consistent method and adopt a standard valuation, but jurisdictions continue to have the freedom to set
their fee schedules to ensure sufficient operating funds.
~ Where fees change only as a result of a municipality coming into compliance with the new rules
and the current ICC table, the division will not consider it a fee change subject to the notice
requirements of 918-020-0220. (See below for more information).
~ For items not expressly covered by the new methodology, a municipality may either, fit the item
within the appropriate program area or develop a reasonable permit fee.
~ Municipalities can use the model forms provided by the division or develop their own forms
meeting the division's minimum content. The division will post model forms and minimum
content on its web site.
Important features of the new rules
Ice VALUATION TABLE
Because regional modifiers won't be used, the average national construction costs provided by the ICC
Valuation Table will provide for uniformity of valuation across the state. The appropriate valuation is
plugged into the municipality's fee schedule to determining the permit cost.
· The ICC Valuation Table is published twice a year, but municipalities will only be required to use
the table that is current as of April! st of each year. Municipalities will not have to update tables
when a new one is published after Aprill.
.:. The yearly update of the table won't subject jurisdictions to the 918-020-0220 notice
requirements because the version of the table is in rule. But local requirements may apply.
.:. Because the table's valuation is "plugged into" ajurisdiction's fee schedule, changes in the
table will not necessarily affect fees charged.
.:. The notice requirements of918-020-0220 will apply to changes to fee schedules (but see
Additional Information below).
· Residential Structural Pennit fees will be based off the Iec table.
.:. "Residential structures" means R3 occupancies covered under the ORSC - it does not
include apartments.
· Commercial Structural Permit fees will be calculated using either the ICe table or the stated value of
a project to determine valuation.
· For remodels and alterations, valuation is determined by fair market value.
OTHER PERMIT FEES
· Electrical permit categories and procedures will be those set out in OAR 918-309-0020 thru 918-
309-0070.
Building Codes Division. Department of Consumer and Business Services. State of Oregon ~~~
1535 Edgewater St. N\V, Salem, Oregon. P.O. Box 14470, Salem, OR 97309-0404 ~~ ~
(503) 378-4133 . Fax (503) 378-2322. bcd.oregon.gov ~ ",/
.y
1--
Residential plumbing permit fees will be calculated on a graduated scale based on the number of
bathrooms - from one to three.
.:. Base cost includes: one kitchen, the first 100 feet of water and sewer lines; hose bibs,
icemakers; underf100r low-point drains, and rain drain packages that include piping, gutters,
downspouts, and perimeter system.
.:. For more than 1 kitchen or 3 bathrooms a set fee will be charged for each additional kitchen
or bathroom.
Commercial plumbing fees will be based on the number of fixtures and the footage of piping.
Residential mechanical fees will be figured per appliance and related equipment with a set minimum
fee. .
Commercial mechanical fees will be calculated by the value of the mechanical equipment and
installation costs. The valuation will be applied to the fee schedule, with a set minimum fee.
Fire suppression system permit fees will be a graduated set fee based on square footage.
Manufactured Home Siting will be a single fee for installation and set-up.
.:. The fee includes: concrete slab, runners or foundations when they comply with the
prescriptive requirements of the code. Also includes electrical feeder, plumbing connections
and all cross-over connections.
.:. Accessory structures outside prescriptive requirements, and utility connections beyond 30
lineal feet, new or additional electrical services or plumbing, may require additional permits.
FEE SCHEDULES
.
.
.
.
.
.
· ORS 455.210(3) allows municipalities to adopt "reasonable fees" to "provide for the administration
and enforcement" of the building code program.
· Municipalities must incorporate all of their building inspection program administrative fees into their
fee schedules. A municipality is not precluded from communicating to customers exactly how fees
are arrived at.
· If a municipality assesses a charge on all its permits (for instance a parks surcharge), whether or not
they relate to the building code program, then it will not need to be incorporated into its fee
schedule. If a municipality assesses a charge only for actions related to the building inspection
program then it must be figured into its building pennit fee schedule.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
· These changes will require some municipalities to recalculate fees to accommodate the new
methodology. Where fee changes are revenue neutral or due only to the adoption of the new
valuation table, the division will not require notice under 918-020-0220.
.:. To detennine if a fee change is revenue neutral, a municipality can calculate the cost of a
pennit under its old method and the same permit under the new method, using the new fee
schedule for both - if the fee is the same, then the change is revenue neutral and won't
trigger notice to BCD; OR
.:. Where a change in fees is purely the result of switching to the new methodology, and no
changes are made to the fee schedule, BCS won't require notice.
.:. Municipalities may still have to comply with 294.160 (requiring opportunity for public
comment) and any other local notice requirements.
.:. Future fee changes, but not simple updates of the Ice table, must comply with the 918-020-
0220 notice to BCD.
Contact: If you have any questions please contact Aeron Teverbaugh at 503-373-1354 or
aeron. teverbaugh(ii.:state. or. us.
STATE OF OREGON
INTEROFFICE MEMO
BUILDING CODES DIVISION
JULY 1,2008
To: Consistent Forms and Fees Committee
From: Aeron Teverbaugh, Policy Analyst
Subject: Model Forms and Minimum Requirements for Forms
The division is providing model forms that a municipality may use in lieu of developing their
own forms. If a municipality chooses to develop their own forms the minimUIn content required
is as follows.
For municipalities that calculate permit fees electronically,
All forms must include:
· Pennitee Information (name, address, contact number, and license information where
applicable);
· Construction Type - residential or commercial
· Certification of Residential or Farm Property owned by the permitee or a member of their
family - if the municipality uses a separate form to certify this information it does not
need to be included on a permit application;
· Information to locate the job site;
· The 12% State Surcharge calculated from the total of permit fees - if the municipality
calculates the State Surcharge electronically it is not required to include a section on its
application; .
· Where required, a section for plan review fees - if the municipality calculates plan
review fees electronically it is not required to include a section on its application.
Additional Required Information
NOTE: The requirements listed below, except for structural permits, are separated based on commercial or
residential for convenience only. Separate permits are not required.
Electrical:
· Sections for each category, procedure and requirement established by 918-309-0020
through 918-309-0070.
· NOTE: The model forms developed by the division separated the Residential Restricted Energy Electrical
Applications from the general Electrical Permit. This separation is for convenience only. It is not required.
Manufactured Home Siting and Recreational-Park trailer:
· A section for the single fee for installation and set-up of a manufactured home;
· The state administrative fee of$30 for placement of a manufactured dwelling;
· A section addressing decks or other accessory structures and foundations that don't meet
the prescriptive requirements of the Oregon Manufactured Dwelling Code;
· NOTE: a municipality may use a structural permit for manufactured home siting so long as the calculation
follow the methodology required by the rules.
r--
Consistent Forms and Fees
July 1, 2008
Page 2
Mechanical Residential:
· A section with space for totaling a per appliance and related equipment fee; and
· A section for the set minimum fee.
Mechanical Commercial:
· A section with space for totaling the value of the mechanical equipment and installation
costs;
· A section for applying the municipality's fee schedule to the valuation; and
· A section for the set minimum fee.
Plumbing Residential:
· A section for the base fee for new construction - this includes one kitchen, and the first
100 feet of water and sewer lines; hose bibs, icemakers; underfloor low-point drains, and
rain drain packages that include piping, gutters, downspouts, and perimeter system;
· The section for the base fee must have space to calculate the number of bathrooms from
one to three, on a graduated scale;
· A section addressing an additional set fee for each kitchen over one and each bathroom
over three;
· Sections for additional water, sewer and service piping or private storm drainage systems
exceeding the first 100 feet;
· Sections addressing any items not covered in the base cost of the plumbing permit (i.e.
irrigation systems, stonnwater retention facilities);
· A section for a fire suppression systems graduated set fee based on square footage;
· For alterations, a section for number of fixtures appurtenances and piping and a section
for a set minimum fee.
Plumbin~ Commercial:
· A section with space for totaling the number of fixtures;
· A section for totaling the footage of piping;
· A section for a set minimum fee;
· A section for valuing the medical gas installation and applying to the municipality's fee
schedule.
Structural Residential and Commercial:
· A section for valuation calculation.
· Where a municipality uses a general "Building Permit" and calculates fees electronically,
the only requirement is that the calculation method conforms to the rules. Manufactured
Home siting may be included on a structural or general building permit so long as the
permit fee is calculated appropriately.
Contact: If you have any questions please contact Aeron Teverbaugh at 503-373-1354 or
aeron. teverb3:ygll@ilitate.or.us.
~l
Consistent Form & Fee Methodology Rules
Effective: January 1, 2009
DIVISION 50
MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION
918-050-0000
Purpose and Scope
Division 50 provides administrative procedures for use in all regions of the state and, where
applicable, to specified regions of the state. These rules address a unifonn methodology for
arriving at building permit and inspection fees to provide consistency in fee calculation. Where a
permitted item is not covered by the methodology in these rules, a municipality may either, fit
the item within the appropriate program area or develop a reasonable permit fee. These rules do
not supersede or repeal the existing provisions of the state building code and related rules. These
rules become effective on January 1, 2009.
Stat. Auth.: ORS 455.020 & 455.048
Stats. Implemented: ORS 455.020 & 455.046
918-050-0010
Definitions
Terms not specifically defined will have the meanings ascribed in the state building code.
(1) "Administrative fees" refers to fees assessed by a municipality to cover costs of
administering and enforcing the building code apart from inspection and plan review services.
Surcharges, assessed as part of the cost of doing business within a municipality and that are
assessed without regard to whether the municipal action relates to the administration of the
building code, are not administrative fees for the purposes of these rules.
(2) "Tri-county region" or "Tri-county regional" refers to the geographical area that includes
Clackamas, Multnomah and Washington counties.
Stat. Auth.: ORS 455.020
Stats. Implemented: ORS 455.020
1
--T . ---
Consistent Form & Fee Methodology Rules
Effective: January 1, 2009
918...050-0020
Standard Statewide Application Forms
(I) A municipality must use standard permit applications containing at least the minimum
content required by the division.
(2) All municipalities within the Tn-County region shall use intake checklist forms
approved by the division
(3) The division shall consider for adoption proposed amendments to the standard
application and intake checklist forms.
(a) Proposals for amendment to the application forms shall include: The existing unamended
formes);
(A) The formes) containing the appropriate amendments; and
(B) A brief explanation of the need for the amendments.
(b) Proposals to amend the approved forms must be filed with the division no later than
February I or August 1.
(c) The division shall notify all municipalities and interested parties of the division's
determination regarding proposed amendments and provide copies of the amended formes).
(d) Any form changes shall be effective in all regional jurisdictions on July 1 or January I
following adoption.
Stat. Auth.: ORS 455.020 & 455.048
Stats. Implemented: ORS 455.020 & 455.046
918-050-0030
Standard Tri-County Regional Processes
All jurisdictions within the Tri-County region shall use uniform processes for pennit
application, plan review, permit issuance and recording inspections as approved by the division,
including, but not limited to:
(I) Minor labels;
(2) Issuing permits when no plan review is required;
(3) Recording inspections;
(4) Partial permits;
(5) Deferred submittals;
2
1-
Consistent Form & Fee Methodology Rules
Effective: January 1, 2009
(6) Over-the-counter pennits that require plan review; and
(7) Plan review issue resolution.
Stat. Auth.: ORS 455.048
Stats. Implemented: ORS 455.046
Uniform Fee Methodology
918-050-0100
Statewide Fee Methodologies for Residential and Commercial Permits
(I) Residential construction permit fees shall be calculated using the following
methodologies:
(a) A plumbing permit fee for new construction includes one kitchen and is based on the
number of bathrooms, from one to three, on a graduated scale. An additional set fee shall be
assessed for each additional bath or kitchen.
(A) No additional fee shall be charged for the first 100 feet of water and sewer lines, hose
bibbs, icemakers, underfloor low-point drains and rain drain packages that include the piping,
gutters, downspouts and perimeter system.
(B) The plumbing permit fee described in this section does not include:
(i) Any storm water retention/detention facility;
(ii) Irrigation and fire suppression systems; or
(iii) Additional water, sewer and service piping or private storm drainage systems exceeding
the first 100 feet.
(C) Permit fees for an addition, alteration, or repair shall be calculated based on the number
of fixtures, appurtenances and piping, with a set minimum fee,
(b) A me,chanicaI permit fee shall be calculated per appliance and related equipment, with a
set minimum fee.
(c) Effective January 1,2009, a structural permit fee for new construction and additions shall
be calculated using the ICC Building Valuation Data Table current as of April I of each year,
multiplied by the square footage of the dwelling to determine the valuation. The valuation shall
then be applied to the municipality's fee schedule to determine the permit fee. The plan review
fee shall be based on a predetennined percentage of the permit fee set by the municipality.
3
~-
Consistent Form & Fee Methodology Rules
Effective: January 1, 2009
(A) The square footage of a dw~lling, addition, or garage shall be determined from outside
exterior wall to outside exterior wall for each level.
(B) The square footage of a carport, covered porch, patio, or deck shall be calculated
separately at fifty percent of the value of a private garage from the most current ICC Building
Valuation Data Table.
(C) Permit fees for an addition, alteration, or repair shall be calculated based on the fair
market value as determined by the building official, and then applying the valuation to the
jurisdiction's fee table.
(2) Commercial construction permit fees shall be calculated using the following
methodologies:
(a) A plumbing permit fee shall be calculated based on the number of fixtures and footage of
piping, with a set minimum fee.
(b) A mechanical permit fee shall be calculated based on the value of the mechanical
equipment and installation costs and applied to the municipality's fee schedule with a set
minimum fee.
(c) A structural permit fee shall be calculated by applying the valuation to the municipality's
fee schedule with a minimum set fee. Valuation shall be the greater of either:
(A) The valuation based on the ICe Building Valuation Data Table current as of April! of
each year, using the occupancy and construction type as determined by the building official,
multiplied by the square footage of the structure; or
(B) The value as stated by the applicant.
(C) When the construction or occupancy type does not fit the Ice Building Valuation Data
Table, the valuation shall be determined by the building official with input from the applicant.
Stat. Auth.: ORS 455.020 & 455.048
Stats. Implemented: ORS 455.020 & 455..46
918-050-0110
Fees and Fee Schedules
(1) A municipality may develop its fee schedule in any reasonable manner to provide for
the administration and enforcement of the Building Code program.
4
Consistent Form & Fee Methodology Rules
Effective: January 1, 2009
(2) Administrative fees assessed by a municipality to cover administration and
enforcement shall be incorporated into a municipality's fee schedule. Changes to a municipalities
fee schedule must be adopted in accordance with OAR 918-020-0220.
(3) The plan review fees shall be based on a predetermined percentage of the pemrit fee
set by the municipality.
Stat. Auth.: ORS 455.020, 455.048 & 455.210
Stats. Implemented: ORS 455.020, 455.046 & 455.210
918-050-0120
Statewide Fee Methodology for Electrical Permits
An electrical permit fee shall be calculated based on the categories, procedures and
requirements established in OAR 918-309-0020 to 918-309-0070.
Stat. Auth.: ORS 455.020, 455.048 & 479.870
Stats. Implemented: ORS 455.020,455.046 & 479.870
918-050-0130
Statewide Fee Methodology for Manufactured Home Siting Permits
(1) A municipality shall charge a single fee for the installation and set-up of manufactured
homes. This fee shall include the concrete slab, runners or foundations when they comply with
the prescriptive requirements of the Oregon Manufactured Dwelling and Park Specialty Code,
electrical feeder and plumbing connections and all cross-over connections.
(2) Decks, other accessory structures and foundations that do not comply with the
prescriptive requirements of the Oregon Manufactured Dwelling and Park Specialty Code, utility
connections beyond 30 lineal feet, new electrical services or additional branch circuits, new
plumbing and other such items that fall under the building code may require separate permits.
(3) When a municipality has reason to believe that the existing electrical service to a
manufactured dwelling may be unsafe or inadequate, the municipality may require a separate
permit to inspect the electrical service.
[Publications: Publications referenced are available from the agency.]
5
r----
Consistent Form & Fee Methodology Rules
Effective: January 1, 2009
Stat. Auth.: ORS 455.020 & 455.048
Stats. Implemented: ORS 455.020 & 455.046
918-050-0140
Statewide Fee Methodology for Residential Fire Suppression Systems
Stand-alone and multi-purpose fire suppression system permit fees shall each be calculated
as separate flat fees based on the square footage of the structure with graduated rates for
dwellings with 0 to 2000 square feet, 2001 to 3600 square feet, 3601 to 7200 square feet and
7201 square feet and greater. The permit fee shall be sufficient to cover the costs of inspection
and plan review.
Stat. Auth.: ORS 455.020 & 455.048
Stats. Implemented: ORS 455.020 & 455.046
918-050-0150
Statewide Fee Methodology for Medical Gas Installations
(1) A plumbing permit fee for the installation of a medical gas system shall be determined
based on the value of installation costs and the system equipment, including but not limited to,
inlets, outlets, fixtures and appliances and applied to the municipality's fee schedule, with a set
minimum fee.
(2)The plan review fee shall be based on a predetennined percentage of the permit fee as set
by the municipality.
Stat. Auth.: ORS 455.020 & 455.048
Stats. Implemented: ORS 455.020 & 455.046
918-050-0160
Statewide Fee Methodology for Phased Projects
A municipal plan review fee for a phased project is based on a minimum phasing fee,
detennined by the municipality, plus 10 percent of the total project building permit fee not to
exceed $1 ,500 for each phase.
6
1-
Consistent Form & Fee Methodology Rules
Effective: January 1, 2009
Stat. Auth.: ORS 455.020 & 455.048
Stats. Implemented: ORS 455.020 & 455.046
918-050-0170
Statewide Fee Methodology for Deferred Submittals
A fee charged for processing and reviewing deferred plan submittals shall be an amount
equal to a percentage, determined by the municipality, of the building permit fee calculated
according to OAR 918-050-0110(2) and (3) using the value of the particular deferred portion or
portions of the project, with a set minimum fee. This fee is in addition to the project plan review
fee based on the total project value.
Stat. Auth.: ORS 455.020 & 455.048
Stats. Implemented: ORS 455.020 & 455.046
7
-----T---
Council Communication
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Meeting Date:
Department:
Secondary Dept.:
Approval:
Council Appeal PA2008-00801, 960 Harmony Lane - Conditional Use Permit and
Site Review to construct a 592 square foot Accessory Residential Unit above a
proposed two-vehicle garage
December 16, 2008 Primary Staff Contact:
Planning E-Mail :
N/ A Secondary Contact:
Martha Benn Estimated Time:
Amy Anderson
andersona@ashland.or. us
Bill Molnar
60 minutes
Question:
After hearing the appeal and reviewing the record, does Council approve, modify, or deny the
application for a Conditional Use Permit and Site Review to construct a 592 square foot Accessory
Residential Unit above a proposed two-vehicle garage, for the property located at 960 Harmony Lane?
Staff Recommendation:
The Planning Commission Hearings Board unanimously approved the request for a Conditional Use
Permit and Site Review to construct a 592 square foot Accessory Residential Unit above a proposed
two-vehicle garage. Staff supports the decision of the Planning Commission Hearings Board,
accompanied with the eighteen attached conditions as stated in the findings.
Background:
On May 19,2008, Bill Emerson, the agent for the property owners Michael Berry and Steve Jendrisack
filed the application for Conditional Use Permit and Site Review approval to construct a new 592
square foot Accessory Residential Unit above a proposed two-vehicle garage. The application was
administratively approved on June 18,2008 and a request for a public hearing was subsequently filed
by a neighbor. A public hearing to consider the application was conducted before the Planning
Commission Hearings Board on August 12,2008. At the conclusion of the hearing, one of the parties,
neighbor Ronald Doyle, requested that the record be held open for seven days. The applicants
requested an additional seven days to respond with written arguments and, as a consequence, the
Planning Commission Hearings Board deliberations were continued to the September 9, 2008 meeting.
At the September 9,2008 meeting, the Hearings Board approved the application with eighteen
conditions. The findings were reviewed and approved by the Hearings Board at the October 14, 2008
meeting and signed by the Commission Chair on October 14, 2008.
A timely appeal was filed by Ronald Doyle on October 29,2008. The appeal document states the
applications fails to comply with the relevant approval standards found in the Conditional Use Permit,
Accessory Residential Unit (ARU) and Site Design and Use Standards sections of Ashland's Land Use
Ordinance. The appeal specifically identifies the following 12 reasons as grounds by which the
Council should reverse the decision of the Hearings Board:
Page 1 of5
121608960 Harmony Lane.CC.doc
~.l'
--1
First, the proposal does not meet the code required setbacks as specified in 18.104.050.A.
and 18.20. 03 O. H. 1.
The Hearings Board found that the application met all required code setbacks for the zone. The
Hearings Board found no evidence that would suggest all required setbacks, lot coverage
limitations and height restrictions would not be met. Additionally and as noted in condition 1
of the Hearings Board findings, "that all proposals of the applicant shall be conditions of
approval" all proposals, including setbacks from property lines, solar setbacks, lot coverage,
etc. as proposed in this application are required to be met at the time of building permit.
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Second, the proposal does not meet the code required paved access per 18.104.050.B.
This criterion requires a finding that adequate facilities can and will be provided to the "subject
property" that is, the property subject to the development application. The issue was addressed
on page 3 of the Staff Report addendum for the September 9,2008 Planning Commission
Hearings Board meeting. The paving standard for access has been defined and applied by the
City Council and the Planning Commission as the paved access to the subject site for providers
of services such as the postal service, deliveries, visitors, etc., and Harmony Lane is the
serviceable, addressable, legal frontage of the property. Additionally, the Planning Commission
Hearings Board found that the paving of the alley and of the unpaved portion of Ross Lane,
approximately 275-feet of improvements, would be disproportionate to the impacts (7 vehicle
trips) of a modest accessory residential unit. Lastly, condition 4e) of the Hearings Board
findings of fact requires the applicant/property owner to agree to participate in a local
improvement district for the future improvement of the back alley.
Third, the proposal does not establish that there are adequate facilities for urban storm
drainage (18.104. 050. B.)
The Hearings Board found that adequate public facilities are available in the adjacent rights-of-
way to serve both the existing and proposed unit. Such facilities are identified on a site plan
and discussed in the applicant's narrative. The preliminary storm water drainage plan was
reviewed by the city's Engineering staff: which confirmed that facilities as well as the
necessary right-of-way and easements are available to serve the project. Specifically, the
applicant is required to install a storm drain line from the rear of the property down the alley to
the existing storm drain line which crosses through an easement from the alley to Hillview
Drive. The storm water improvement is required as a condition of approval, and as a proposal
of the applicant.
Fourth, the proposal is not similar in scale or bulk to permitted uses (18.104.050C.1.)
Private garages, guest quarters and other detached buildings without kitchen facilities are
defined as accessory structures and permitted outright. [AMC 18.08.020]. The fact that the
proposed accessory structure contains an Accessory Residential Unit (ARU) requires
compliance with specific conditional use criteria in AMC 18.20.030. H.. The Hearings Board
found that the modest size of the proposed unit and its placement at the rear of the parcel are
appropriate and architecturally compatible with the bulk, scale, coverage and development
patterns found in the vicinity.
Page 2 of5
121608960 Harmony Lane.CC.doc
r~'
-----------.---------
~l
Fifth, the project will generate twice as much traffic as a permitted use, adversely affecting
neighbors
This issue is addressed on page 3 of the Staff Report addendum for the September 9,2008
Planning Commission Hearings Board meeting. The alley is public right-of-way and is
proposed to provide vehicular access to the accessory residential unit and the garage. This alley
is unimproved, approximately twelve to sixteen feet in width, and appears to be used
occasionally by neighbors as a secondary access to reach rear yards.
CITY OF
ASHLAND
According to the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) trip generation manual accessory
residential units of 500-square feet generate approximately 6.7 vehicle trips per day. This
proposed unit at just over 500 square feet will generate slightly more. Given the proximity of
the site to a park, shopping, and Siskiyou Boulevard, non-motorized trips are a viable option.
Specifically, under this factor, the ALUa notes that "Increases in pedestrian, bicycle, and
mass transit use are considered beneficial regardless of capacity of facilities." The parcel
is within walking distance of Siskiyou Boulevard and the bus route, which makes walking,
bicycling and transit viable options for residents of the accessory residential unit. Consequently
the Hearings Board found that the proposed accessory residential unit would have no greater
adverse affect on the livability of the neighborhood than would full development of the site to
it's the target, single-family use.
Sixth, the proposed structure is not architecturally compatible with impact area.
The proposal is for a modest sized accessory residential unit with garage below. The
application notes that the proposed accessory unit is traditional in style, with a small cottage
design. Though this would be one of the first two-story structures located in this section of
Harmony Lane, as long as the required 20-foot rear yard setback and Solar Setbacks can be
complied with, a two-story structure is permitted. For the purposes of Conditional Use
Permits, in the past, the architectural compatibility has been reviewed pertaining to style,
design and material usage similarities and compatibility - not solely height or number of
stories.
Seventh, the project will generate more traffic than any permitted use worsening an already
adverse dust impact on neighbors.
This issue is addressed on page 12 of the Hearings Board findings, as well as above under the
fifth ground for the appeal. The Hearing findings under adequt;lte public facilities demonstrate
that there is no greater adverse impact based on the proposed use than from the target use, thus
paving is not required to mitigate such alleged impact
Eighth, the project will generate noise, light and glare that will adversely affect the
neighbors.
It is not anticipated that the proposed accessory residential unit would create more dust, noise,
light or glare than the wide range of occupants that can reside in a larger single family
residence. Because the size of the accessory residential unit is only large enough for one or two
residents, the Hearings Board found that the generation of light and noise would likely be
minimal. Additionally, city Site Design and Use Standards restrict individual properties from
directly illuminating adjacent parcels, and all lighting details will be required to demonstrate
this requirement is being met with the building permit submittals.
Page 3 of 5
121608960 Harmony Lane.CC.doc
r~'
-------- --T
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Ninth, the project does not comply with applicable city ordinances.
The appeal states that the application fails to comply with approval criteria for a Conditional
Use Permit as well as other (not specified) directly applicable city ordinances. The Hearings
Board findings specifically describe how the application complies with all relevant approval
standards. These determinations have been based upon the referenced information and evidence
included in the record of this proceeding.
Tenth, the proposal/ails to comply with Site Design Standards (setbacks) per 18. 72. 070. C.
The appeal does not specify applicable Site Design Standards that the application does not
comply with, yet reiterates that the proposal does not adequately address how the project will
conform to residential setback requirements. The issue of setbacks has been addressed under
the first ground for the appeal. As described above, the Hearings Board found that there was no
evidence to indicate that all required setbacks, coverage limitations and height restrictions
cannot be met.
Eleventh, the proposal does not meet the code required paved access per 18.72. 070.D.
This item is addressed above under the second ground for the appeal.
Twelve, the proposal does not meet the code required setbacks as specified in 18.20.030.H.1
This item is addressed above under the first and tenth grounds for the appeal.
The public hearing is scheduled for the December 2,2008 Council meeting. The item is time sensitive
because the 120-day limit expires on December 16,2008. Ideally, the hearing would be completed and
a decision made at the December 2, 2008 meeting. This would allow preparation of the findings for
adoption at the December 16, 2008 meeting.
Related City Policies:
N/A.
Council Options:
The Council may approve, approve with modifications and conditions, or deny the application.
Potential Motions:
Move to approve: Planning Application 2008-00801 - A Conditional Use Permit and Site Review
approval for a 592 square foot Accessory Residential Unit above a proposed two-vehicle garage for the
property located at 960 Harmony Lane with the conditions of approval attached by the Planning
Commission Hearings Board as stated in the Findings and Orders dated October 14,2008.
Move to approve: Planning Application 2008-00801 - A Conditional Use Permit and Site Review
approval for a 592 square foot Accessory Residential Unit above a proposed two-vehicle garage for the
property located at 960 Harmony Lane with the conditions of approval attached by the Planning
Page 4 of 5
121608960 Harmony Lane.CC.doc
r~'
_._--_._------------------------------~_.~-~-----
~nl
Commission Hearings Board stated in the Findings and Orders dated October 14, 2008 along with the
following added or amended conditions of approval.
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Move to deny the application as submitted.
Attachments:
Record of Planning Action PA 2008-00801,960 Harmony Lane
Page 5 of5
121608960 Harmony Lane.CC.doc
r~'
~T-
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Memo
DATE: December 9,2008
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Bill Molnar, Community Development Director
RE: 960 Harmony Lane: Planning Action #2008-00801
Conditional Use Permit and Site Review Approval for a proposed Accessory Residential Unit
Attached you will find new information submitted by Staff for inclusion in the record for Planning
Action 2008-00801.
Staff Exhibit 1: Memorandum from Pieter Smeenk, P.E., S.E. to Michael Faught, Public Works Director
regarding Public Works Department review of Planning Action 2008-00801
Staff Exhibit 2: Documents pertaining to 10-foot Storm Sewer easement crossing 39 IE 15AC 900 also
known as 897 Hillview Drive (Dion Property)
Staff Exhibit 3: E-mail from Richard Hackstock, Plumbing Inspector for the City of Ashland to Amy
Anderson, Assistant Planner regarding the proposed residential sewer pump proposal.
Staff Exhibit 4: Illustrations of paved access to versus through the development
Staff Exhibit 5: E-mail from Marguritte Hickman, Fire Marshall to Amy Anderson, Assistant Planner
regarding fire apparatus access and residential sprinkler requirements
DEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
20 E. Main Street
Ashland, Oregon 97520
www.ashland.or.us
Tel: 541-488-5305
Fax: 541-552-2050
TTY: 800-735-2900
r.,
T ~--
STAFF EXHIBITS
--~-~T
~ft tx~bita 1
Memo
CITY OF
ASHLAND
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
RE:
December 8, 2008
Mike Faught, Public Works Director
Pieter Smeenk, P.E., S.E.
Public Works review of planning action 2008-00801 located at 960 Harmony Ln.
The following findings are based on review of planning application 2008-00801 dated October
14, 2008, the applicant's associated drawing prepared by Emerson Design, and discussion with
City employees regarding operations and maintenance of city utilities. The property is located
on tax lot 1500 of plat 391E15AC.
Findings
Ci Pre-application Conference - A pre-application conference was held with the applicant
on October 17, 2007 when the project was presented and worked through with staff.
!J Proposal - The request is to construct a 592 SF Accessory Residential Unit (ARU)
together with 400 SF of new paving. The property contains 2 existing buildings and one
driveway entrance at Harmony Lane. The applicant's agent presented the proposed
residential use for approval under a conditional use permit (CUP).
o Existing Street Improvements - Harmony Lane is currently improved along the
frontage of subject parcel. The alley in the rear of the parcel is open and in use, but
minimally improved. Existing improvements include a drive entrance curb cut at Ross
Lane and a minimum width gravel drive in the upper section of the alley. It is not
anticipated that the street or alley will be reconstructed or that existing curbs and
sidewalk will be relocated.
!] Right of Way - Both Harmony Lane and Hillview Dr. are designated as neighborhood
streets by the adopted transportation plan. Ashland's adopted standard right-of-way
(ROW) minimum width for neighborhood streets is 50 to 57 feet when parking is allowed
on both sides (per table 1 of the Ashland Street Standards). The minimum width for alley
ROW is 16 feet, and the existing alley has a 20' ROW width.. All of the above ROW
widths exceed minimum standards.
o Sewer - The property is served by a 6 inch sewer on Halmony Lane and a 8 inch sewer
on Siskiyou Blvd. The adopted wastewater master plan does not recommend changes to
these pipe sizes. .
o Water - The properties are served by an 8 inch water main on Hannony Lane and a 12
inch water main on Siskiyou Blvd. The water master plan does not recommend changes
to these pipe sizes.
Public Works Engineering Tel: 541/488-5347
20 E. Main Street Fax: 541-/488-6006
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 8001735H2900
www.ashland.or.us
C:\DOCUME-1 \ANDERS-1\LOCALS-1\Temp\xP9rpwise\08-64PWEPlanningApproval FindingsC _1.doc
------1
~.... ,...,,. :1
[J Fire Protection - There is a fire hydrant across the street from the applicants lot (see
attached utility map, but it will not likely meet the fire protection needs because of the
hydrant's distance from the proposed Structure. An additional hydrant would likely be
required unless the ARU is fire sprinkled. See Fire Dept requirements.
[! Driveway Access to New Lots - The existing driveway will continue to serve the
primary residence. Joint access will not be required to this driveway, since access to the
ARU is available via the alley.
o Storm Drainage - Storm drainage capacity will not be adversely impacted by this
planning action. However, additional development on neighboring parcels or in the alley
itself will trigger the need to review drainage at that time based on the proposed
development design. The attached preliminary stonnwater conveyance capacity
calculation (attachment A) indicates that adequate capacity exists to accommodate the
new ARU in the current piping, but it is the applicant's responsibility to verify existing
system capacity, given the improvements proposed.
Public Works Conditions of Approval
1. Street Improvement and Right of Way - No street improvement or Right of Way
dedication is required at this time.
2. Water - No additional improvements to the existing water supply system are required.
3. Fire Protection -. See Fire Department requirements.
4. Sewer -. A new ejector pump is required to serve the ARU, since no sewer main exists in the
alley. The pump can be plumbed into the existing 4" lateral of the main structure on
Hannony Lane, and a macerating (grinder) pump is allowed.
5. Driveway Access to Lot - No additional improvements to the existing driveway is required.
6. Storm Drainage - A detailed design of the storm drainage improvements prepared by a
licensed engineer is required at time of building permit submittal. In this calculation, the
engineer shall take into account the information provided below under the heading
Investigation of Claim of Historical Natural Channel across Ross Lane (attachment B). The
engineer shall also design the drainage layout to direct leakage from any TID valve in or
adjacent to new paving towards a catchment that flows into the storm drain, given recent
events related to TID repair work.
Public Works will require that the applicant leave the existing diamond plate lid in place and
not replace the lid with a open grate as proposed. Public Works will also require that a new
line extended down the alley not include stub-outs unless the submitted calculations can
demonstrate that capacity exists to serve the stubs. StOIm water detention and water quality
shall be addressed in accordance with the Public Works Specifications in effect at the time.
The applicant may elect to pipe directly to storm drain, use rainwater harvesting or pervious
paving to decrease a portion of the pervious area, or detain a portion of the flows in order to
improve stormwater quality.
6. Permits - Any construction within the public right of way will require a Public Works
construction permit.
Public Works Engineering Tel: 541/488-5347
20 E. Main Street Fax: 541-/488-6006
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800/735-2900
www.ashland.or.us
C:\DOCUME-1\ANDERS-1\LOCALS-1 \T emp\xPgrpwise\08-64PWEPlanningApprovaIFindingsC _1.doc
-1-
~t..~f rxtai"i t" 1
Attachment A: Preliminary Storm water Convevance CapacifY-
Calculation
This calculation assumes that a grate is installed to capture upstream drainage.
Since the location that the grate is proposed lies on the uphill side of the alley
and a gentle ditch drains toward it the alley itself would not drain into the grate
unless the alley ;s regraded. Given that, and including the additional 992 SF of
impervious area proposed by the applicant, storm capacity calculation is as
follows:
Distance to furthest point per 1998 Aerial Topography map: L= 377'
Average site slope: ss =(elevation 2150-elev 21 15)/L = 0.093
Site coefficient for overland flow in res. areas n= 0.08
Time of concentration: Tofc=0.93*L^0.6*n^0.6/i^0.4*ss^0.3= 10 min.
Assume Tc=5 min. Then per ODOT i=2. 9 IN/HR and Tc=9.56
Assume Tc= 13 min. Then per ODOT i=2.0 IN/HR and Tc= 11.096
Assume Tc=10 min. then per ODOT ;=2.3 IN/HR and Tc=10.49
Assume Tc=J 1 min. Then per ODOT 1=2.2/N/HR and Tc=10.68
By trial & Error, Tof converges at T=JO.55 min
Tpf= 200/4 FPS= 50 seconds= .833 miinutes, Tc=10.55 +.833=J 1.38 min
Per ODOT zone 5 IOF curve 1=2.05 inches per hour
Conveyance coefficients for 25 yr C=0.5 Cf=J.lfor 25 yr event
Tributary drainage area per Aerial Topography: A= 28500 SF = .677 AC
25 YR storm flow Q=Cf*C*I*A = 0.50*1.1*2.05*0.677= .76 CFS
Pipe diameter: d=0.5'
Pipe slope: s= (elev 2J 15-elev 2111)/200) = 0.02
Manning's pipe roughness coefficient:,n= 0.013
Pipe hydraulic radius: R= A/P=d/4= 0.1251
Pipe flow velocity: v=(J.49/n)*(Rh)^.666*(sJ^0.5= 4.05 FPS
Pipe Capacity (CFS) q=v*p;*(d/2)^O.5= 0.79 CFS >Q=0.76 CFS OK
Because the pipe capacity of the pipe would be consumed almost entirely by
the flow into the grate, I recommend that the grate not be substituted for, the
diamond plate lid on the existing storm drain vault at the bottom of the alley. The
grate will cause clogging unless maintained frequently and carefully.
Public Works Engineering Tel: 541/488~5347
20 E. Main Street Fax: 541-/488-6006
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800/735-2900
www.ashland.or.us
C:\DOCUME-1\ANDERS-1\LOCALS-1\T emp\xPgrpwise\08-64PWEPlanningApprOVaIFindingsC _1.doc
---~T--
~ff ~ bi1 J.
Attachment B: Investi2ation of Claim of Historical Natural Channel across Ross Lane
During the Council Hearing, it was stated that there appears to have been a natural stream
channel cutting across Ross Lane and through neighboring yards. It is useful to review the
historical aerial photos of the area to investigate this claim.
The attached 1939 aerial photo has been overlaid with GIS map information of the neighborhood
The. Dion lot is shaded in orange. A channel is apparently cutting from SW to NE across Ross
Lane towards Hillview Drive, to the south of the Dion lot. This channel seems to end at Hillview,
or may cross Hillview Drive and wind through the mixed oak/savannah area to the east side of
Hillview.
The composite photo and GIS overlay shows current streets in tan, tax lots in black, storm drain
pipes in green, and irrigation pipes in pink. The old stream channel is captured into a ditch inlet
along Peachey Rd. From there, the flow is now purely irrigation delivery from the Ashland
Lateral Canal (in pink on the map) in the summer only. It is piped from SW to NE to a catch
basin in the Catholic Church parking lot. At this catch basin, it is mixed with stonnwater
(displayed as green), and continues across the church lot to a catch basin on Ross Lane, then east
down Ross Lane into the stonn drain that runs down Hillview. The red arrows in this picture
trace the apparent course of this historical flow.
The next image shows the same extent without the 1939 aerial photo, and includes 1998 2 foot
contour layer (purple), indicating how the surface generally drains from SW to NE.
Public Works Engineering Tel: 541/488-5347
20 E. Main Street Fax: 541-/488~6006
Ashland. Oregon 97520 TTY: 800/735-2900
www.ashland.or.us
C:\DOCUME-1\ANDERS-1\LOCALS-1 \Temp\xPgrpwise\08-64PWEPlanningApprOvaIFindingsC .doc
r~~
~t.~ bhtllii ~
1939 Aerial photo with GIS shapes overlaid
Public Works Engineering Tel: 541/488-5347
20 E. Main Street Fax: 541-/488-6006
Ashland, Oregon 97520 TTY: 800/735-2900
www.ashland.or.us
C:\DOCUME-1 \ANDERS-1\LOCALS-1\ Temp\xPgrpwise\08-64PWEPlanningApprovaIFindingsC .doc
---~-
~taft b'",ait ~
+W~m ;- '-.->,2.,' Y-I~~1l 'J.l\1"'\; .f\ '. '"\ "-\J\ '\, ~V-->/---Uj 'R't..: .~"': .":!.'
~IJ~ ~~-\'~"'1: "'-" . , \l \. ~.. . "II!
II} ~~, ~i - Il~: m~ <1 ,\j" ~ ,,1', . [ " ~)-\rK.. ,-....
','I -, l_.___u. """" . .~ . j i ",1 V\' I )1 -
\.~~'rzZr=-~ ..~~~." ~--..~..-....tJ;~. f\~~~i~"'-""..'..'~'-..-.'~'u"u~~. ;~~. ' .- ~:.:,~:;
"" /. ~"~' ......';' ...~..~~, '~'", ,.~.~. ~
',>y.. r; .;:*~! i ......-.., \- ~.._.u.~! ; ;, i : Ii
\. \ (" t I ..~. !: i, ' >--...,J
, ~f. I I Lit,. \\ \ :~ r. ~:l ~~ ..rx
~~ ! 1~'.T'Zi'''''~'-C:~''t-.'-~r--. . .u_._. -.u.iU' ."\('M---" \)1u...~.,::..>:_>'=.........".............ft' ......;.,~..,.....( ~\... . \'..:./'.!.. ...-----..::: ~," ": .:.....0.,
\,..\... '1--1 ~ '7"-.~ i \ .' \ ~~~~ ,': .....:.~: \1~
""~~~ ~~ 'M .... .. \~' , \.~. "." ..~ 1../\ -{~,:
\ :\ IJ{ '-....1 '" 1 '\ i .."...~-~~,l : ~.u.. u__ .~. <.. ~ '---! ~...., ;-- \.. 'L "'""__
Ii' C..., > ,u,\, ,..., 'h\"~,,,,,,_._..,, ---........ ".'" ' :., ~ : ..:
t- ""'- " \t. ) \" _____10 '. \"
~f~,.1 ~~(\\.~' \\"~.I'.;;;....._....m..".h'....'."_.._'h.h..'~.l''''~~.~\ ..\~....'i
\l~~ ~ ~r ~ -'~ J i~_.h 1.'...0\., ~-- \ \. ~ '~"'\ -.v-. :,... .h . h" ....~~.' \k.r
~'\ ~~,- ~! t '-.," I ~., '\ \ '-...---~ ~ ..i .,o..~_; .; ...----..
\ ~J~! " _""'-____~' . ."" '- I 2.'{'
\ \' ...... '~r. i ~'"""'''--''''__'.;O~_''~ "hUh \1- : \... \ ;......~......,..... ...:...'....... . .... ...............,. .... ,; ':'4-.' ....._~ ~ '-' ~.. ..
\\ L ~lJ:ft 1"\ '.......: ~.......~. . .... u", ,---'-~ h-". _'__ : .!~..... _ .;!"\ \ i \!i :~
\ I --~ ;', I' \. i :'\: ,. . ...."..-'..,.,..:u,-...U..S:& .!ttlI--. '.r--.....~ ) 10. 'iw-
\~~~\~P~~"''''--~ ~ \..u ~-+ ~~.,'- ';~)~.. -.... ~~~_..i ~'...'....,....,..'..:""'.'...........'......~..' ~-Y' '''~\~!\~"' 'tv.\~.),l~
\ "'~"'J -~. ; ""'\.hl~ : ~J ),. l~ '\ \ ~' ..~.'>.......... '~~. \::.i
\~ r---"' -....... '\. '--, \ ' \ \ '.. ... ....... ....... ...........1 .-~..--- ... -' ____ ~1
'0:: ~..h..__._.....__...... ~"'\ l.>.. --;' !I,: :.... ...... ,_.. -0 I'; .:-~~:.:<!........d "-\: .....T... \ 'i'
~~"\ fJ1~!1 "~.' ~\..-h-u.+h~~,M~ ~~.... ~ . ~,~ \~~ )~, .l'.
\:-~.~.....t1.''''nh; ;;~~_..~ l;~~\\ ~.; ;1>. \..2 ~J 1 \ : :.~
"\. .1 ; . I J\ . ~" \. l fl \ ; ~ ! ::
. (\: ~. \.....; '\ ~ ~\;.."",._~ '-,;' . \ ' . ....._..., : 1""'"\ . !
~.. ~~i",.,,,uf""h__"_'_lo/\0 '\... ..~.: .. l.~l1i~~\ \ .~._~.\8t.~~...~~".~;~. srl:=yJ ~J' -"'u"~! \ti..'l< '=
\)v.' ~ ..d .~~'-..... 1~ ........ . \ ~ \ \ ~~.tl -......::--\~::" ,,~. J l ~. :C,.::;
I, I / /...... ,""" . -'u"",---' " :1;" ......".........'r........... ....-:') i............ '; \ . ~ '},._
~ r \ '~'-""~ r-... \ ,~.,-,..\.. 1", ~ \1 " ,
... - V\r:'v-....h'" i\"~" -. ~\t... (\ \~""\ ~i :'i::-'-::-:.'\.-..~ .:.;.~:.,..............\.....u~:\.__i...... :.1\ '\.
.... r--..;,I I ,"--, L-. . ~ \_\." " ~'~......"'-_.._.....~~. ~..... m, \ 1\ ........ I ,1~
~'~( _\.J-' /\ j' .: ~ ,;'" .... ..m~.~ .' , -..........."'\ -1., . .. '\' ~ '-. f\
~\-\\ ..." ......'----"" -{ \.,'.. 1 ..L ,,\ '" 1 "-.,i . ~ \'\.. .
. ...~, .......................-: ~ ~_. ~.--'-.\~ ..-:,.....J L...."'" \i ,.'::::n l ;?"" i h_"~''''''\ : ~;': "....
t.1I:.c_~~_I"-. ~~ L ~,~ ~.."--~\.- \.:--I~ N~~~l.' ....~~... .
'-..~~; " -<../ ~......_~~~j~.~-.:-:D... ~.. '~... ~~, ~:~ ... :S~t,[~~~:~:~:;r... l' .'y:, '-,
~1'} ),~ ,./:.... -r::. ~~ "\f\ \ \ .~.r~...\U~~<.- '.. ~1' .~~\ ~ \ ~ :. '~
-. il t, ~JI" ~'- ~./.''\.' '.\ \ \ '\1', l__~ ',,",.,1 --------.:l. . .t~'. ~,~lf~,!~"'~\~.. ::..:~::::
..J.~~'.~ I / ../"{\ \.\ \ \~ \. '-\ 1\ '" ~ '\.. -.. .tr----\~~\.../ i:; \. ..",.~\ T\ "'- 'l~,,\.. : '-"--"
"\ 1.1 ..1......?."...,.~.L _... J,-..., \....:\ Ii"" ,',1 . ~ ~ ,:'....... T\ k ...........,i .. ,......
> rtl~.')"''''0 ...,,,.!~~i\\ V"\\-~~~ 0l'e ~~ ~~.::~~...-.........::......~.....\~R=~J.: ., '-...'"
~\~{~l.( / /f~i'\"\ l \\1\ \ '"" "',0.'" ~.. ./ ~~~4', ~-~:~L ,,~~~
\\\.~\. '7; / ;;/~ ; '" I \. ,,' \. ,,,",. ~ "'- / , ./-, \~\ ~~~~ .._. _.. ~\ ~~ "'-J.S\, (
\~:\~V/q ~\~.\.'~ '-~_.~'--.:~ --.........../ /-..,~....K::.-----... ,,~ /"" \ f"i~..:~~..::-..".....~~"'......,..'... ~~~
~\.~\\\\'t/-C~.~ \'~--\\~\..,"----\~! "-~~1\~~~~ /',~" ,,'~:~ --l ,-..:~~~
:. -" \.......~1':. -.0-.--. ,.... ~~ w."\ ' .. -.,; '1~ ':.f '- \,\ " ........ '""';;\.
. ~,_. ....,~~_.~.~.......~...."'!.--........ .__i..___......__~~~~~. !~~;\..:. ~ ."'----...... \,"~.. .
. ;-,/, \ ,,",\ ^' ~ ....:.:::..".~ -"", 'C ~.. )-.. .... .... ~u. ., __ "- ,~..-. "
: .... ,-..--..,.. ( \.~~ . ttit: ~. \. ..... ..., ".... ..(..........\. : "-
~}J,I ~t' --.i\\\~l~ i.~,..~.-. ~..~,\,~m~~~.~.'~
~)\~~ ~~~\\~\~~~V~~~~~~~
'~'~~~~~A~'%J~~~--.:~:;~\.}\\~~1;; l~'<;;:=:1 iH<~'\ ~'-\~~~\~--:-~~'~':. ~,,~... ",.0~'k.;'=f' ::h.)..'-'~-\
. ,) 1/' ~ ,,~ ~~" \-. :~...~ \~. '''''. I ~~::=::~h."~~
. A~J ~ . \ \ "L J:\' \ l ---../ /'! "'. -----..;"fl'--,-".~~ , . :::::::--::"l.
j\ I ..r-fh,,~~:r:--~":'""'\ \,,\:~~ ,:\ I ) ~ \ f ./ ,I "um._; "l'-..... ~~ {_ ; ~\ ',1. ...~ y~
Thpography near the QrQject site
Public Works Engineering Tel: 541/488-5347
20 E. Main Street Fax: 541~/488-6006
Ashland, Oregon 97520 Try: 800/735-2900
www.ashland.or.us
C:\DOCUME-1\ANDERS-1\LOCALS-1\T emp\xPgrpwise\08-64PWEPlanningApprovaIFindingsC .doc
----~- '-T
~t4..-lxh".it ~
.
I
I
,
I
,
.
.
I ;
I .
,
I i
I
.
I{!
.
I
I .
.
; :
i ,
1----__ ~~J
; ---~~-llir . iJl
I .
.1 .
I . I
.
i
,
.
I
I
, .
:('-',: l : -r
:;rr.-r----- -----_ , ""P,' n
~,It ....-,.. .l,. II
, f IH
, :
I
r
.
.. I
.
.
I
.
.
~~
I
,
I
,
h_,.,l~
illi__1
I
.
;' I
I
; i
I
.
I
I
I
I
I
I~' ..i
~ .'
ii, ' .1
J IH!
" ....-"..- .. ----., .. .....,....-. ...-.,..-... "-'--... '. ........... ,- '-... - . --,-.I
Y.~~t---~~-~-----_..
'r~j /.-
" ,/"
,/'
v/'
/''''
/'
/'
/'
-,'-' /'
J,1
L
Utility MaQ
,
,
Public Works Engineering Tel: 541/488-5347
20 E. Main Street Fax: 541-/488-6006
Ashland. Oregon 97520 TTY: 8001735-2900
www.ashland.or.us
C:\DOCUME-1\ANDERS-1\LOCALS-1 \T emp\xPgrpwise\08-64PWEPlanningApprovaIFindingsC .doc
---~---l
~&.Jf bh;~:" Z
June 25, 1976
Mr. & Mrs. Clarence Comstock
897 Hillview Drive
Ashland, Or., 97520
Dear Mr. & Mrs. Comstock:
Enclosed is a copy of the recorded storm sewer ease-
ment which you recently signed. Also enclosed is a
check for $1.00 as provided for in the instrument.
Thank you again for your Cooperation. With conditions
permitting, work should begin near the latter part of
July.
Sincereiy,
James H. Olson, P.L.S.
Engineering Tech. III
ih
Ene.
-~-~T-
'untQ the CITY OF ASHLAND, a 1-1uni~i~al corporation of the State of
Oregon; for and in considcratio~'of
one uollar ($1.00)
,.
.' .
which Easement is for
. ., .
. for the installation and maintenance of a
.. storm sewer
..
- ..
'.
,.
Oregon, described as follows, to-wit:
. Commencing at a point 2.98 chains West. and 0.14 chains South from
." th~ Southeast corner of Donation Land Claim No. 45 in Township 39
... . South, ~ange 1 East of the Willarnett'e Heridian, Jackson County,
Oregon; thence South a distance of 872.92 feet; thence West 20.0 .
,'feet to a point on the West line of Hillview Drive in the City'of .'
Ashland, sai~ point being the Southeast corner of a tract described
~. '. in ins.trument No. 67-00888 of JacksoI]. County De.ed Records, for the
.' 'true point of beginning; thence South along the s.aid West line of...:
Hi 1,1 vie,., Drive 10.0 o feet , thence West 190.0 0 feet; thence North
"'10.00 feet to. the Southwest corner .of said tract; thence East along"
'the South line of said'tract 190.00.feet to -the true point of
beginning. .. . . .., - .-' - . ,. .....
_..-......;....: '. .'.:'-- .......:..... ........... ".. ':{ ": ...... .....,...... .'.:.:';''.:"'~ . . ......... .-..:.... "".
. ':'w ...... ',' -- _ . '. . .... . '. .. -~ . _ ......~... ....... ....:.:........~.::...... .-.-'.;" e', ;".... ......
.. "... .. '.. . '",.., ,..; . . a . . a.....' ":. . :.
,....<)....; . ... .. "ut.:: UJ.cHll.vJ.::' \vC1J.l-allL. LUdt they arc' .the OW11.~ib vI si::icl'
. " ~:~ ~"," ~:- <. :.: . '........ ,
.' r.eal property free and clear of all liens and encumbrances \vhatso~ver J
. . .
. .
~xcept .tho~e of rec6rd on-the below d~te.'
'. . ...... ;.
The Grantee shall have the right to'go on the above
described premises for the purpose of ' installing and maintaining
.,:' ..:... a"....
a stann sewer'
, . -
. .
.;.
r ~-
. . ,.' ~.~ '. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, th e
," 9.. ... '. .
hands.~and ~eals this' I.)'day of
. ............", -,"~ " .
,-' "" - ~ - - -
. .....- c:.' H 0 '" " "I... :
...' ~ oJ . i..s "', \ '\ .' .
~..." . ,~................ (/ ...~.~ .' .
~ ~'r'.. "'-. ~ ":. '\ " ..
f .... O-rAR'L..'" . \ \ " . -: .:.,
. ' I ~ r · .: H ,. .'
l'. \ i"). si~ Ie," ~l~ ~YfEGON ).'.-
~ .,,\ ""'u b '-~ ..'~:. '. ss
' u~. . ~ . ..
"=:.......",...t>..C..nuR~(;~ ~.'~t Jackson)
. 1# t (. F f) ,..... - .' . ......'.
. :~,.......;...........,. On' this /..1:ftL cay of ......-JI//Jr'..' , 19:76, before m~~, the
undersir;ncd, () Notnry Public in and for s~iid Coun'ty nnd State,
person:.JJ.ly ~ppe~r0d the \-li thin nn!Hcd Clarence D. Comstock and
.Alic~J.i-!_~omstock' ,husband and \^life ".;ho arc l~nO\\Tl Lo
nl(' 1'c' hI' il-..'\ ;d;"q'1-;("'~11 -inrl;";"~I1.\lC" ,I,,'"....__.;~...^'~ ~..... ........J ..,_... ~"_~'4~''''''....l ..:.....
set their
19:16.
(SEAL)
(SEAL)
. .. '
. .: a
.\
~--
...._-:.~..
~Ffb~lait Z.
June 3, 1976
Mr. and Mrs. Clarence Comstock
897 Hillvieov, Drive
Ashland, OR 97520
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Comstock:
As you may recall, several months ago I asked for your opinion
on the possibility of installing a storm drain along the north
line of your property. Since the irrigation season has started
we have again been besieged with a flood of letter and requests
for some action that will help drain the water which collects
along the alley at the rear of your property.
It is most important that I hear from you on this matter whether
you are for or against the proposal. Please use the enclosed
stamped envelope or call me at 482-3211, Ext. 51 from 8:00 a.m.
to 4:30 p.m. or at 482-4671 after 4:30 p.m.
Your prompt reply will be very greatly apprecmated.
Sincerely,
James H. Olson, P.L.S.
Engineering Tech. III
JUG/em
~oif tIC"". Z.
December 8, 1975
Mr. and Mrs. Clarence Comstock
897 Hillview Drive
Ashland, OR 97520
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Comstock:
Regarding my letter of November 5, the City Engineering Department
is still examining ways in' which to dispose of the surface water
in the alley at the rear of your lot. The most direct route to
the storm drain on Hillview Drive would he along the north line
of your property. Would you please advise us of the possibility
of installing the pipe line in this location on your property.
Please feel free to call at 482-3211 ext. 51. Your prompt reply
will be greatly appreciated.
Sincerely,
James H. Olson, P.L.S.
Engineering Tech. III
JHO/e.m
~
:~
------1
'\)1Gtt lXN lit" ~
November 5, 1975
Mr. and Mrs. Clarence Comstock
897 Hillview Drive
Ashland, OR 97520
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Comstock:
The City of Ashland has been asked to look into the possibility
of opening the 20' alley that abuts on the rear of your lot.
The first problem that arises is that of drainage since the area
is succeptable to large amounts of surface water. The most prob-
able solution to the problem would be to install an eight inch
concrete pipe from the alley, across private property, to the
storm sewer on Hillview Drive. Would you please let us know your
feelings on granting a lO-foot wide easement along the northerly
like of your property,as shown on the enclosed map, for storm
drain purposes? If you have any questions or if you have an
alternate plan please let us know. You can call at 482-3211 ext. 51
or use the enclosed, stamped envelope. Your prompt reply will be
appreciated.
Very truly yours,
James H. Olson, P.L.S.
Engineering Tech. III
JHO/em
Enclosures
----------1
Amy Anderson - Re: 960 Harmony Lane
~ U.......,
-
4IIl
From:
Richard Hackstock
Amy Anderson
12/9/2008 8=58 AM
Re: 960 Harmony Lane
To:
Date:
Subject:
Amy,
The 2008 ORSC chapter 7 allows the use of a ejector pump system or grinder pump ejector system when the
fixtures are below the main sewr level.
This is a common application when the system is below the sewer. Any other question give me a call.
Rick
>>> Amy Anderson 12/08/084:08 PM >>>
Rick,
The applicant at 960 Harmony Lane has proposed a 592 square foot accessory residential unit above a two-
vehicle garage. They have proposed to install a sewage grinder pump to take the sewage up to the existing
sewer system on the parcel out to the line in Harmony Lane.
What are the regulations pertaining to this type of proposal?
Is this an proposal adequate?
Thank you.
Amy
Amy D. Anderson, Assistant Planner
City of Ashland
Planning Division
51 Winburn Way
Ashland, OR 97520
email: andersona@ashland.or.us
phone: 541.552.2044
fax: 541.552.2050
TIY: 800.735.2900
This email is official business of the City of Ashland, and it is subject to Oregon Public Records law for disclosure
and retention.
If you have received this message in error, please contact me at 541.552.2044. Thank you.
"> .' ". : - :~,- i)
So 0" . .. :
8 {\....,...~
D cr. LUUv
LoJ
,... . . . ..... ;'.-:,,:,l"!t
(,... ; "'.
file:/IC:\Documents and Settings\andersona\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\493E3339As... 12/9/2008
-~---T
~_r~ U.-. I'
0
.....)"
0
I'V
0 ~
~
0 r
"T1 0
CD
CD -I
......
~ (J)
~
r- ~
0 ."
-I ."
r m
0 X
-I :r:
-
CD
~ ~
~ ~
r
0 r <
-I 0 m
-I CJ
)>
()
~ ~ ()
m
r- (J)
0 r- en
--f 0 -I
-I 0
-I
"tJcn I
:::ac: ~ m
Om C/}
"tJc.. C
~ mm r-
:::an 0 CD
.g ~~ --I c...
(b m
;::l
~ ()
....
s. -I
(b
C/) c: 1J
~ r') Z
~ ~ ~ ~ ;0
~ r.)oll':! 0
""'l ". t <::
Cti r m r -0
~ . .. 0 c 0 m
Cti -I (J) -I ;0
;:s
(") 0 -I -I
C\:l
0 : ~ :::u -<
...)
;:s ~ m
~ ~ m
;:s -I ~
0
'""" X
r- r-
0 0
-I -I
T--
~txhr";f Ii
0
~
0 ~
N
0
r C/)
~ 0
0
-n --i ~
CD
CD
r0+- Il
~ Il
~ m
r X
0 I
-I r -
0 ID
-
-I ~
~
~ <
~ m
0
r
0 r- )>
-I 0 ()
-f ()
m
en
~ en
~ -i
J:
r r- ;0
0 0 0
-f -f
C
G)
I
"'tJen ~ --I
:::Oc I
Om m
"'tJ(.. r
mm 0 (j)
~ ::UO -f C
.g ~~ to
~
;:t c.....
~ m
......
s. ()
~ ~ -I
~ ~
(ti X "'U
~ c r- ;0
""t' ')
<<1 !::::J r Z 0 0
r.,:,r. 0
* fT1 ~ -f "'U
;:---) -I
~ <: m
;:So
0, m :;0
~ ',' co . '
0 r--...,) C -I
;:s s;!
?: (,=:> 0 s;! en -<
C::',J
O~ -I
>< :;:u X
r m r
0 m 0
-f ~ -f
r--
\)tlA~ tl(~"t 5
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Memo
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
RE:
December 8, 2008
Amy Anderson
Margueritte LR Hickman, Fire Marshal
960 Harmony Lane
This is to follow up with your request to augment the conditions required by the Oregon Fire Code
related to this application.
The Oregon Fire Code requires fire apparatus access roads to extend to within 150 feet of all
portions of the building as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building. In
July, it was found that the site plan for this project had been modified, which changed the fire
apparatus access for the structure and increased the access to greater than 150 feet requiring an
alternative to fire apparatus access. Oregon Fire Code 503.1.1 has an exception which allows the
fire code authority to modify this requirement providing the building is equipped throughout with an
approved automatic fire sprinkler system.
If you have any questions, please contact me at 552-2229.
Ec ;"~:'...:'. "CD
DEe 8 2008
,.., .
(,.,' :.... .;. ! .,'-:;,::':~ont
ASHLAND FIRE & RESCUE
455 Siskiyou Boulevard
Ashland, Oregon 97520
www.ashland.or.us
Tel: 541482~2770
Fax: 541488-5318
TTY: 800-735-2900
r.t. ,
APPLICANT'S FINAL
WRITTEN ARGUMENT
T--
.J ~:=- City of Ashland C. ,'55' fft?
~.. +."".. Community ~ D5
Emerson Design AND Drafting Service
RECEIVED
DEe - 9 2008
PO Box 1343 . Ashland, OR 97520-0045 . (541) 482-3231 tele . emersondesign@hotmail.com
DATE: December 4, 2008
TO: The Ashland City Council, the Mayor and the City Administrator
RE: Planning Action 2008-00801 (Conditional Use Permit) Appeal to Ashland City Council
Owner/Applicant: Jendrisack and Berry
Introduction
s. a
custom homes, multi-family development designs and working drawings. I best
for historic house remodel designs and working drawings, as well as Bed and
asts and infill traditional style custom homes.
I like doing work I can be prowd of. I enjoy seeing a project years later and seeing how
it fits into the surroundings. I try to only take on work that well turnout well. I don't
always have control over what happens after the plans are drawn but at least I know the
project was started in the right direction. This Planning Action is starting in the right
direction. It will fit nicely in its surroundings. There is beautiful existing landscape
between it and the existing residence to its west and a nice alley to its east. The
proposed landscape and walkways add to livability and the exterior will be compatible
with the neighborhood.
...................
--~-~--T --
Emerson Design AND Drafting Service
Item to Discuss
Conditional Use
This application is for a conditional use permit. Chapter 18.20.020 states: "The
following uses are permitted when authoried in accordance with Cahpter 18.104,
Conditional Use Permits." One of those uses with conditions applied is an accessory
residential unit. Please see the "Criteria from Chapter 18.20 for an Accessory
Residential Unit" portion further on in these pages for the explanations of how we have
met the following additional criteria HI to H4 following additional critera.
At the City Council meeting on December 2, 2008 I was asked by Commissioner Cate
Hartzell if there could be a "Home occupation" at that residence? The ordinance does
allow home occupation but that is not what my client is appling for. p~ ~tJl.e,
~le:tt:erfyOtJ1l~SeNalc; M~~Vont'\.alBerry'A'~
~Ste.v~ Tet1dr~theA:.r ".\011t-~law. II
Setbacks:
There was a topographic map drawn by "Terrasurvey" (a group ofsurvetors) showing
exact locations of all buildings, trees, grade elevations and fences in relation to the
property line. They did not show pins on the site or on the drawing so there was no
survey completed. All setbacks including solar are shown accurately on the drawing.
They are shown in relation to the exact locations of the property the drawing. p~
~the,,~fyOtJ1lStuarl;O~ofTerr~~. In.Q
These Findings have shown that he Proposed Residential Accessory Unit is in
conformance with all standards within the R-I-7.5 zone district in which the use is
proposed to be located and is in conformance with all relevant Comprehensive plan
policies that are not implemented by any City, State or Federal law or program.
2
T
~
J~--
~._- -.=.- -
Emerson Design AND Drafting Service
The required Front Yard setback is 15 feet for residences and 20 feet for the garage.
The ordinance also allows an additional 8 feet allowed for unenclosed porches. The
required side yard setback is 6 feet. The rear yard requirement is 10 feet for every story
at the rear.
There is also an additional required solar setback required by the solar access ordinance.
(Chapter 18.70) The existing lot is 55.5' wide. There is 8'xlO' upper porch deck area
proposed on the North side of the proposed accessory residential unit. There is a 16'
high fence allowed for calculating the solar setback. With this requirement the distance
from the peak of the porch roof to the North property is 12'-6 1/16". It is actually
proposed to be at 13' -0". This will put the dwelling itself 18' from the North property
and 12' -10" from the South property line.
At the City Council meeting on December 2, 2008, I was asked by Commissioner Eric
Navickas where the Solar Shadow Plan was? I pointed out the solar setbacks, which
are shown on the Site Plan. I assme that is what I was being asked about because a
Solar Shadow Plan is only shown when asking for a Solar variance.
Paved access to and through the development
The City of Ashland has always required there to be a pedesatrian access to and from
the Assessory Unit to the main street access of the property. Please consult staff on
their on going established precedent for paving "to and through" the project.
Th~ City has also always used the main street access for the address because that is the
way the Ashland City Fire Departments wants to see the unit addressed.
Harmony Lane is paved. Ross Lane is not except for a small portion. The alley is
mostly lawn. The owner will sign in favor of a local improvement district to install
sidewalks on Harmony Lane and sign in favor of a local improvement district to pave
the alley. The drive to the proposed garage will be poured concrete. The two parking
spaces will be pavers. There is a concrete pedestian path from Harmony Lane to the
new structure.
3
1--
~
............. --
~-- +=::...
Emerson Design AND Drafting Service
As for the (TID) line running down the alley, the Talent Irrigation District will need to
relocate the valve that was hit so that it is less funerable in the future. p~ ~t;he,
e.wz.a.a,frO>>1l Wtt.f1.da,Verry ofrOl1.et1t IYr~V(..sb-U:t abou:t~ (rIV)
pip~
Urban Storm Drain
The property naturally slopes northeast to the alley. The alley will not be disturbed or
used to drain any storm water collected from the proposed roofs or new paving on the
property. All paving and roof drains from the proposed accessory residential unit will
be drained to a catch basin at the rear of the owner's property. The proposed catch
basin will drain storm water threw a proposed drain line to the existing City Storm
Drain at the north end of the alley. There is. an existing 6" or 8" storm drain line there.
The existing storm drain empties into a catch basin and storm drain at Hillview Drive.
These facilities are adequate according to the City of Ashland Engineering Department.
4
City of Ashland Planning Depmtlnent
51 Winburn Way
Ashland, OR 97520
To Whom it May Concern,
Regarding 960 Hannony LN, Ashland Oregon. We have a bobcat on or property for
landscaping. We are using it to remove dilt from our existing garden bed. We also have a
cargo trailer on the property for personal use only. We will not be permanently storing any
large construction equipment vehicles on our property.
Sincerely
Elizabeth Sevillo
Steve Jendrisak
r--
Windows Live Hotmail Print Message
Page 1 of 1
Berry Survey
From: Stuart Osmus (stuartls@bisp.net)
Sent: Tue 12/09/08 12:33 AM
To: emersondesign@hotmail.com
RE: SITE SURVEY FOR MIKE BERRY DATED 1-11-08
This is an accurate site survey of the lot located at 960 Harmony Lane in Ashland. The boundary lines shown
are based on the property legal description and survey monuments found in the area. The existing
residence. fences and garage are accurately shown on the survey based on field measurements taken on the
site.
Stuart Osnlus
Terrasurvey. I nc.
247 Fourth St.
Ashland, Or. 97520
541-482-6474
http://bl109w.bIul09.mail.live.comlmaiI/PrintShell.aspx?type=message&cpids=bbce 1360-... 12/8/2008
T--
Windows Live Hotlnail Print Message
Page 1 of 1
Harmony Pipeline
From: Wanda Derry (tid@talentid.org)
Sent: Tue 12/09/08 6:38 PM
To: emersondesign@hotmail.com
Talent Irrigation District (TID) operates and maintains the Harmony Pipeline which starts at the Ashland Main
Canal above Walker Street and cuts down to Ross Lane, then down the alley between Harmony Lane and
Hillview Drive.
TID is responsible for the maintenance of the main line only. Any service lines off of the main line are private.
The Harmony Pipeline had a problem in the alley last irrigation season and was repaired by TID personnel
and was operating at the end of the water season without problems.
If you have any questions please contact our Field Supervisor. Bo Bergren.
Thanks,
Jim Pendleton
Manager
'fa lent Irrigation District
104 Valley Vie\\' Ave.
P.O. Box 467
Talent OR 97540
tid@talentid.org
Yf\Y\Y..,tf!.l~n.liQ,-9Sg
Phone: 541-535-1529
Fax: 541-535-4108
http://bll09w.bIul09.mail.Iive.com/maiI/PrintShell.aspx?type=message&cpids=da559a9a-... 12/9/2008
l-~
Criteria from Section 18.104.050 for a Conditional Use Permit
A. That the use would be in conformance with all standards within the zoning district in which the use is
proposed to be located, and in conformance with relevant Comprehensive plan policies that are not
implemented by any City, State, or Federal law or program.
B. That adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, paved access to and through the
development, electricity, urban storm drainage, and adequate transportation can and will be provided to and
through the subject property.
C. That the conditional use will have no greater adverse material effect on the livability of the impact
area when compared to the development of the subject lot with the target use of the zone. When evaluating the
effect of the proposed use on the impact area, the following factors of livability of the impact area shall be
considered in relation to the target use of the zone:
1) Similarity in scale, bulk, and coverage.
2) Generation of traffic and effects on surrounding streets. Increases in pedestrian, bicycle,
and mass transit use are considered beneficial regardless of capacity of facilities.
3) Architectural compatibility with the impact area
4) Air quality, including the generation of dust, odors, or other environmental pollutants.
5) Generation of noise, light, and glare.
6) The development of adjacent properties as envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan.
7) Other factors found to be relevant by the Hearing Authority for review of the proposed
use.
FINDINGS addressing this criteria
A. Use Would Be in Conformance with All Standards within the Zoning District
FINDINGS A:
These Findings have shown that he Proposed Residential Accessory Unit is in conformance
with all standards within the R-1-7.5 zone district in which the use is proposed to be located
and is in conformance with all relevant Comprehensive plan policies that are not
implemented by any City, State or Federal law or program.
B. Adequate Capacity of City Utility Facilities Can and Will Be Provided
1
FINDINGS B:
The following information concludes that adequate capacity of City facilities can and will be
provided to and through the subject property.
Water
FINDINGS: There is an existing 4" water line on Harmony Lane and a 3h" inch water line
going to the service for the existing residence. The City Water Department determined this
service to meet the need for an additional accessory residence on Harmony Lane. The new
unit will use the existing service.
Water for a potential fire is also important. Because of the way the City fire department
measure for their access for a fire the hydrant which is almost directly across the street front
the existing residence in front will not be close enough. The options for the owner are to put
in another fire hydrant or sprinkle the proposed unit. The owners have opted to sprikle the
proposed accessory unit.
Sewer
FINDINGS: There exists a 6" concrete sewer line on Harmony Lane. The City Wastewater
Department has determined that existing service is adequate to meet the needs for an
additional service to the property. The proposed service will require grinder pumping.
P~.\UI~~e..m.a.afymwA~C~ f'~& M~
Irw,pectoY' 'R~iL*~ 1"eg<M"~'P~fYtKuieK prMt1p~
Paved access to and through the Development
FINDINGS: Harmony Lane is paved. The City of Ashland has always required there to be a
pedesatrian access to and from the Assessory Unit to the main street access of the property.
Please consult staff on their on going established precedent for paving "to and through" the
project. Please see the "Paved access to and through the Development" sections on the
preseeding page of this document for further information.
Electricity
FINDINGS: Harmony Lane has overhead electrical services to residences. The existing
residence has a meter at the front right comer of the existing residence. State law requires a
2
r --- --
separate electric meter for the accessory residential unit. There will be base installed.next to
the existing meter, a weather head and an additional meter with underground service through
the property to the rear for the proposed unit.
Urban Storm Drain
FINDINGS: The property naturally slopes northeast to the alley. The alley will need to be
graded for a swale to take the storm water run-off. There is a 6" or 8" storm drain line end of
the alley. These facilities are adequate according to the City of Ashland Engineering
Department. Please see the "Urban Storm Drain" section on the preseeding page of this
document for further information. p~ .\eefth&~Iro-mtCcty ofA~
A~t~ PLet:er Sm.e.et'l1ct.
Adequate Transportation to and Through the Subject Property
FINDINGS: Harmony Lane provides adequate vehicular transportation to the existing
residence. A pedestrian path will connect the Accessory Unit entrance to Harmony Lane and
the Existing Residence.
C: That the Conditional Use Will Have No Greater Adverse Effect
Cl) Scale, Bulk and Coverage
FINDINGS:
There is a mixture of one and two story residential structures in this neighborhood. The
existing residence is average in size to the other surrounding residences. The proposed lot
coverage of the residential unit is less than half of the coverage of the existing residence.
These factors demonstrate that the scale, bulk and coverage are consistent with the
neighboring structures
C2) Generation of Traffic and Effects on Surrounding Streets
FINDINGS:
3
r--
This South portion of Harmony Lane is about two blocks long. It ends at Ross Lane to the
South and opens intersects with Siskiyou Boulevard to the North. . Therefore there is virtually
no additional traffic generated by additional streets that would be beyond.
The alley access for the unit is located halfway between Harmony Lane and Hillview Drive.
The traffic count on Harmony Lane (for 2004) is 455 vehicles per day. Ross Lane (for 1992)
is 47 and Hillview Drive (for 2001) is 804.
This is a one-bedroom, 592 Sq. Ft. Residence. The size of this unit will dictate the amount of
traffic it will generate.
C3) Architectural Compatibility
FINDINGS:
The existing residence is part of the originally constructed residences in the neighborhood.
The Proposed Residential Accessory Unit is traditional in style. It is designed to resemble a
small cottage and should enhance the quality of its surroundings.
C4) Air Quality
FINDINGS:
There is nothing about this proposal, which would in any way generate more significant
amounts of dust, odors or environmental pollutants than any other existing surrounding
residence.
C5) Noise, Light and Glare
FINDINGS:
There is nothing about this proposal, which would generate more additional noise, light or
glare than any other existing surrounding residence.
C6) Development of Adjacent Properties
FINDINGS:
4
In the future more people in the neighborhood may need to have a parent living with them or
have a child move into their house with their family and have an additional living space for
themselves. As neighbors get older they may want to add an accessory residential unit for
additional income or build one to move into themselves has they get older and retire. These
are all justifiable circumstances and can happen to any of us. All surrounding property
owners should be willing to except this by accepting this proposed allowable application.
C7) Other Factors
FINDINGS:
The proposed single-family residence and accessory residential unit will not make more of an
impact on the surrounding area than the "target use" of the parcel. The target use of this
property is one single-family residence.
Without any Planning Actions for a Conditional Use permit this property is allowed to have a
single-family residence that is 2725 Sq. Ft. The existing residence is 1234 Sq. Ft. The
owners could put a 1491 Sq. Ft. addition to their residence. It would have to continue to be a
single- family residence, but there would be enough for a house more than twice as large as
the existing residence. The proposed Unit is 592 Sq. Ft. This is 899 Sq. Ft. less than what is
allowed outright with an addition.
Criteria from Chapter 18.72.070 for Site Review approval:
A. All applicable City ordinances have been met or will be met by the proposed development.
B. All requirements of the Site Review Chapter have been met or will be met.
C. The development complies with the Site Design Standards adopted by the City Council for
implementation of this Chapter.
< Multi-Family Residential Development - pp 15-16
< Street Tree Standards - pp 29-30
D. That adequate capacity of City facilities for water, sewer, paved access to and through the
development, electricity, urban storm drainage, and adequate transportation can and will be provided
to and through the subject property.
FINDINGS addressing these criteria
5
1-
A. City Ordinances Have Been Met
FINDINGS A:
The City of Ashland's Municipal Code, Chapter 18.20 allows one accessory residential unit for a lot on a R-l
zone when authorized in accordance with Chapter 18.104, Conditional Use Permits. These units must also
conform to the Type I procedure and criteria. They must also conform to the overall maximum lot coverage and
setback requirements of the underlying zone. Only one accessory unit is allowed. It must be under 1000 sq. ft.
and less than half ofthe square foot~ge of the primary residential unit on the same lot. Parking is required as
required by the underlying zone. This application is for a new accessory residential unit for an R-I-7.5 lot with
an existing single-family residence. There are other requirements for accessory residential units in Chapter
18.20. Please refer to these findings and the drawings. This proposed development meets and in some cases
exceeds all of the requirements for this zone.
B. Requirements of the Site Review Chapter Have Been Met
FINDINGS B:
These findings are submitted along with a Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Utility Plan, Topographic Survey, an
aerial, photographs and Exterior Elevations. This information addresses all of the requirements of the Site
Review Chapter have been met or will be met.
C. Development Complies with the Site Design Standards
FINDINGS C:
18.72.070 - C All requirements of tlte Site Design and Use Standards
SECTION II APPROVAL STANDARDS AND POLICIES
(B.) Multi-Family Residential Development
11-8-1) Orientation
11-8-1 a) Primary Orientation toward the street
FINDINGS: The existing residence already uses most of the street frontage for its primary orientation of the
primary residence. Primary access of the proposed rental unit will be from a covered side rear deck and the
parking area to the side of the unit. Location limits the orientation of the proposed accessory unit to the rear.
11-8-1 b) Setback
FINDINGS: The existing residence is already set back from the street by over 29 feet. The proposed residential
unit will be to the rear of the property.
6
-_.~~.------T-...-
II-B-1 c) Access
FINDINGS: Existing access to the existing residence is in the front of the property. There are two accesses to
the proposed accessory unit. The primary Entrance is from a porch to the North side of the unit toward the
side yard. From the Entry the will be a stair to a landing and then South to the West side of the unit. This
path can either go from a path to the front of the property or to the parking area.
II-B-2) Streetscape
11-B-2a) Street trees
FINDINGS: The City requires there to be one street tree for every 30 feet of street frontage. The lot is 55.5 feet
wide. This would require two or three street trees. There are three very large trees in the front yard; one
conifer and two deciduous trees. All three have a canopy that overhangs the street. This should accommodate
the street tree requirement.
II-B-2b) Front Yard Landscape
FINDINGS: The front yard landscape is residential in nature. One of the shrubs in front of the house is too
large in nature for its location. It will be removed and a suitable species will take its place. There will be
additional drought resistant plants added as well.
II-B-3) Landscaping
II-B-3a) Mature Coverage
FINDINGS: Mature landscaping already exists on the property including trees and shrubs. More than
approximately 75% of the landscaping is existing and established. More than 90% of the proposed
landscaping coverage will occur within 5 years.
II-B-3b) Landscape Design
FINDINGS: Mature deciduous and evergreen trees and shrubs and flowers already exist. More shrubs and
flowering plant species that adapt well to the local climate will be added to the existing landscape to provide a
good balance to the fmished landscape plan.
II-B-3c) Existing Trees
7
FINDINGS: There are approximately fifteen existing trees on the property. There is also one tree on the
property line to the rear of each of the adjacent properties. The owners want to retain all existing trees and
will do everything necessary to protect these trees from harm during construction.
II-B-3d) Buildings Adjacent to Street
FINDINGS: There are existing landscaped planter beds in front of the residence at a width appropriate to the
yard size. With lawn area included there is more than 10 feet.
II-B-3e) Parking areas
FINDINGS: The parking area will have new canopy trees next to the parking.
II-B-3F) Irrigating Parking Landscaping
FINDINGS: There will be an irrigation system installed for the parking lot landscaping.
11-8-4) Open Space
II-B-4a) Open Space
FINDINGS: There is a very large open space yard area to the East of the Main Residence and to the East of the
Proposed Cottage Residential Unit. It is approximately 3000 square feet and provides plenty of open space for
recreation.
II-B-4b) Qualified Open Space Areas
FINDINGS: These large yard areas are covered with lawn and are surrounded by trees and shrubs.
II-B-4c) Decks and Patios
FINDINGS: There is a large existing patio in the rear of the existing residence and a proposed deck to the
North of the Proposed Cottage. The rear patio is open to the open space yard areas.
11-8-5) Natural Climate Control
II-B-5a) Deciduous Tree on the South Side
8
I~-
FINDINGS: There are no new trees proposed that would block any southern exposure.
II-B-6) Building Materials:
II-B-Ga) Paint Colors
FINDINGS: There are no plans to change the offwhite color of existing or proposed structures on the property.
The Proposed Accessory Residential Unit will have colors to match the existing residence.
(E.) Street Tree Standards
II-E-1) Location for Street Trees
1}. Street Trees
FINDINGS: As already mentioned, there are three very large trees in the front yard. All three have a canopy
that overhangs the street
II-E-2) Spacing, Placement and Pruning of Trees
a) Street Tree Placement
FINDINGS: The two deciduous trees are approximately five feet from the street. The conifer is approximately
ten feet from the street.
b) Visual Clearance
FINDINGS: N/A
c) Light Standards
FINDINGS: N/A
d) Tree Distance from Curb
FINDINGS: As stated earlier, the two deciduous trees are approximately five feet from the street. The conifer is
approximately ten feet from the street.
9
e) Overhead Power Lines
FINDINGS: Power lines on Harmony Lane are on the opposite side of the street. The power lines feeding
power to the residence from the main power lines will need to be avoided by using tree species that will not
interfere with those lines
f) Trees near Hard Surfaces
FINDINGS: As mentioned earlier, the street trees are existing trees. They do not pose a threat to the existing
hard surface of the street.
g) Vertical Clearance
FINDINGS: The existing street trees will be pruned to provide at least 8 feet of clearance above the curb and
12 feet above street roadway surfaces.
h) Existing Street Trees
FINDINGS: There are three existing street trees to be saved.
II-E-3) Replacement of Street Trees
FINDINGS: There are three existing street trees to be saved. None of these will require protection.
II-E-4) Recommended Street Trees
FINDINGS: N/ A
D. Adequate Capacity of City Facilities Will Be Provided
FINDINGS D:
The following information concludes that adequate capacity of City facilities can and
will be provided to and through the subject property. Please see "18.104.050.B.
10
~-~~~
Adequate Capacity of City Facilities Can and Will Be Provided" section on the
pre seeding pages of this document for further information.
Criteria from Chapter 18.20 for an Accessory Residential Unit:
1) The proposal must conform to the overall maximum lot coverage and setback requirements of the
underlying zone.
2) The maximum number of dwelling units shall not exceed 2 per lot.
3) The maximum gross habitable floor area. (GHFA) of the accessory residential structure shall not exceed
50% of the GHFA of the primary residence on the lot, and shall not exceed 1000 sq. ft. GHFA.
4) Additional parking shall be in conformance with the Off-Street Parking provisions for Single Family
Dwellings of this Title.
FINDINGS addressing these criteria
1. Overall Maximum Lot Coverage and Setback Requirements
FINDINGS 1:
The required lot area of a new lot in the R-I-7.5 zone is 7,500 square feet if this lot were
being created. The total gross square footage of the existing lot area is 10,545 sq. ft.
The maximum allowed lot coverage for an R-I-7.5 District is (45%). As shown above,
the total impervious surfaces proposed and existing are 4744 Square. This means the lot
coverage is (45%). The proposed lot coverage meets the requirement.
The required Front Yard setback is 15 feet for residences and 20 feet for the garage. The
ordinance also allows an additional 8 feet allowed for unenclosed porches. The required
side yard setback is 6 feet. The rear yard requirement is 10 feet for every story at the
rear. There is also an additional required solar setback required by the solar access
ordinance. (Chapter 18.70) The existing lot is 55.5' wide. There is 8'xl0' upper porch
deck area proposed on the North side of the proposed accessory residential unit. There is
a 16' fence allowed for calculating the solar setback. With this requirement the distance
from the peak of the porch roof to the North property is 12'-6 1/16". It is actually
11
r-~
proposed to be at 13'-0". This will put the dwelling itself 18' from the North property
and 12' -1 0" from the South property line.
2. Maximum Number of Dwelling Units
FINDINGS 2:
The' purpose of this zone is to encourage and protect the suburban characteristics of the
neighborhood and "encourage a suitable environment for family life." Single-family
dwellings are permitted outright. Accessory residential units require a conditional use
permit. One requirement is to meet the overall maximum lot coverage and setback. The
proposed rental residence will take advantage of the length of the lot by being located
off the alley to provide good livability and privacy for both the main residence and the
accessory unit.
3. Gross Habitable Floor Area (GHFA)
FINDINGS 3:
The gross habitable floor area of the primary residence on Harmony Lane is 2725 sq. ft.
Half of that is 1362.5 sq. ft. This is more than the allowed 1000 sq. ft. minimum for an
assessory unit. The proposed unit is 592 sq. ft.
4. Additional Off-Street Parking
FINDINGS 4:
The existing residence requires 2 parking spaces and the proposed accessory unit will
require 2 additional spaces. (18.92.025.A) This is a total of 4 required spaces. There is
1 on street parking space allowed for every 2 off-street parking spaces provided on the
property. (18.92.025.A) There is 1 off-street parking spaces proposed to the left of the
existing drive. The owners would like to remove a portion of the existing drive between
drive and face of the residence allowing enough of the existing drive to allow for one
off- street parking space.
There is an existing alley to the rear of the property. There is a two-car garage proposed
below the proposed Accessory Residential Unit. There are 2 additional parking spaces
proposed adjacent to the proposed garage. There will be 1 space to the North and 1
space to the South of the garage. This will provide 4 new parking spaces to the rear of
12
-~-r~-
the property. This will be a total of 2 more parking spaces than required by the City of
Ashland.
Conclusion
All City zoning and setback requirements have been met including solar setbacks. There are 15
existing trees on the property. There will be two additional trees added in the parking area at the
rear. There is a nice landscaped area from the proposed entrance stairs of the accessory unit to the
parking at the rear and more landscaping along a new proposed paved walkway that stretches to the
front.
If the existing public storm drain between the end of the alley and Hillview is not in good enough
condition, the roof and the driveway drainage on the owner's property could be drained by
installing a 4" private line from the proposed catch basin in the owner's driveway to the existing
public catch basin at the end of the alley. This drain line could be used until the City did something
in the future to handle any further use of the existing storm drain system for the public alley.
Sincerely,
;ffl~
Bill Emerson
Emerson Design
13
-----r-- --
Windows Live Hotmail Print Message
Page 1 of 1
RE: plumbing grinder pumps
From: Richard Hackstock (hackstor@ashland.or.us)
Sent: Tue 12/09/08 5:09 PM
To: Bill Emerson (emersondesign@hotmail.com)
Hi Bill,
The use of an ejector pump system or grinder ejector pumpis allowed under chapter 7 of the Oregon
Plumbing Specialty Code. It is a commonly used system when the plumbing fixtures are below the sewer
main.
Rick Hackstock
>>> Bill Emerson <emersondesign@hotmail.com> 12/08/08 5:14 PM >>>
Hi Rick
This is Bill Emerson, Emerson Design. I am going through an appeal to an approved.
Planning Action with the City of Ashland. The neighbor who appealed it questioned
the use of a "grinder pump" for the sewer. The proposed Accessory Residential Unit
is planning on going in the rear of the property. The sewer for the property is at the
street up hill in front of the existing residence. Only the one bedroom, one Bath rear
unit will need the sewer pumped up to the street.
I have shown these on other projects in the past. I'm sure you have seen them used
before on other building projects. Could you please write a short paragraph
explaining whether or not you have seen them used successfully in cases like this. If
they are installed properly by a licensed plumber and the installation is inspected by a
city plumbing inspector like yourself. Thank you.
Bill Emerson
En1erson Design
Send e-mail faster without improving your typing skills. Get your Hotmail@ account.
http://bll09w.bIul09.mai1.live.com/mail/PrintShel1.aspx?type=message&cpids=f4894a93-... 12/9/2008
T~-
~
L-
o I.
en .c
~:J
g ro
<( --
I ·
C
"'0 CD
CD "'0
en --
o en
a. CD
00:::
L-
a...
Q) c
c 0
co 0)
-I Q)
~ s.....
C 0
+-' 0 _
<( E "C
s..... C
co co
I::c
o en
<0<(
en
r~
C)
c
--
3:
ro
I-.
o
U
--
..c
c..
ro
I-.
C)
o
c..
o
.-
~
Q)
2:
:J
en
ro
I-.
I-.
Q)
.-
(j':
i
!,
;~
"
.1
~
R 2
l';!~ ;,!
',.' (." ~
(t ~'l
C
6 'I-
k ;~ ~
~ ; ~/
-----$- n
~ ~
;...377"'/"
~
r
~ :1
~ k ~;
~.jl", '
- l 1 $
........_.~,~_../., . './ /".___ ........_....._..._...m.....___.
:!NV"] )..NC]f1f;>jy'H
l~
~~
il <
~" ~
I~ ~
t~ ~
~i i
~: ~
i' ~
\ld
UH
i~H
i:t' ~
t h! ~
~ :::{: ~
1<.,'t
~i
:j
,~
;i
l~
4
~.
t.
~!
;~
~f
~y,
!i
~i
J~
~i
t/-.
c::
~
I
I
Ii
. ....
O)..c
~~
~ ~
Ow
-c:
00
~ .-
~
~eo
0) >
2:J!2
~ 0)
wo)
~-o
. s.... eo
0) s....
1-0>
~-o
.cc:
-0 eo
O)w
uO)
~ 0)
-ol:;
eO)
o..E
0>0
c: en
~cn
eo 0) ·
s.... U s....
Oc:~
u ~ eo
:c - 0..
o..wc:
eo 0>0
s.... c:
0>.- en
0320)
0...- c:
O ~.-
.c -
I- C') ~
O)c:t
..c.- 0)
~ en 0..
w.- 0
. _ >< s....
en 0) 0..
.- 0) 0)
..c..c..c
I-~~
.
r---
~
I ·
--
o
(])
..c
I ·
E
o
~
'P-
I ·
::J
o
~
CO
.....J
~
I ·
--
--
I ·
::>
-----r--
Q)
c
ro
-.J
en
en
o
0::
E
o
I-.
'+-
..c
t
o
Z
C)
c
--
~
o
o
-
~
Q)
-
-
<(
T---
-c
(])
en
o
c..
o
L-
a..
E 6
o~
L- co
~ ()
..!: 0
t:::-.J
O+-'
Z ()
(])
O).~
c e
~a..
o
o
-
~
(])
-
-
<(
T
-c
c
W
..c
t
o
Z
+-'
.ro
c
--
en
ro
..c
..c
u
+-'
ro
u
~
Q)
-
-
<(
---- --- T
-c
c
W
..!:
1:::
o
Z
(])
..!:
+-'
E
o
L-
~
..!:
+-'
::l
o
C/)
0)
c
--
~
o
o
-
~
(])
-
-
<(
-c
L-
eo
~
o L-
+-' (])
-
..!: · CO
+-' L-
51-
C/)~
~ :.=
'--'J __
.~ :5
~
o (])
o..!:
- +-'
~
(])
-
-
<(
--T
~
Ii i
.! !
It) ,i J
0> l' 0>
a:> 0> 0>
"'2 a:> a:>
~
I It)
It)
lO ~
(DO
01
a u ...1
(.I) <( :<
C ~ ~Ei
Ill~
~~
CO 0
en N
a.. N
0> N N 0
t') v It)
0> 0> 0>
~
I .
--
-- en t') It) It) l' (0 ~
t') v It)
I . ~ 0> (3) (3) (3) ~ 41$
::>
c.
c ..c E (J)
-- U ::::J C
ro --
+-' a.. -
L- ro L-
0 () ~ L- (J)
L-
E en ro L- (J) ~
~ C (J) -C
+-' (J)
-- ~
L- -- C
0 (J) en c en
+-' C CO CO Q) L-
en -- m en en <.9 ~
-
. .
~--l
c
co
a..
(])
I ·
--
en
--,
It~-a?"i1!l
~~
u6!saa UOSJ~3
!
T
NVld 311S
O?SL6 i..io5aJO 'pJD4~\J' . ,H.liT1 .{UOUJJDH 096
AJiw8 ouuo0 ;>( jOB4:)!f'i
;0iJf'l A;ossl1ooV i1JOl AliOW JOH
~
I i
z
<(
o:~
w
C:~
(f) ,.,
-r
c
co
a..
(])
I ·
--
/~
I /
, ~ /
!l./
,:;
If
i
...
~~
-c
(])
C)
~
CO
C
(])
en
/
;>
/"
/
,/"
/
1/ I
(,V
Ii j
:I.'!. /. I
It,.(
/ 1
f (
,/ .
I il
I
I'
i
~
-
C
o
co
(J)
L-
<(
~
t
Q)
C.
o
L-
a..
\t-
o
~
Q)
:>
.......... ~
\
I
i'
l
f
3NVl ^NO~~:rvH{
1
--I
--
~ ~
-c
(])
C)
~
co
c
(])
'"-- ~
c
co
a..
(])
I ·
--
en
'l..d If
,'.'f
,~2
I,l
I
/
'I /
r
I I
I l
..1........../
/
I
,/
I
!
~l
I
I
~1~c
- I
3NVl ^NOVi~VH(
J
...,..:."''<.,.,<.;.;._<.,.,.,.;.,.''...----..,....~:~~,~~~;~:.<;>>..<...
(J)
u
co
C.
~en
0>
c
--
~
L-
ro
a..
(J)
>
--
L-
o
+-'
C
o
L-
U.
.
-- T
-c
(])
C)
~
co
c
(])
"-- ~
c
co
a..
(])
I ·
--
en
<.,;)
z ,
oJ
.-J !
"I
..,
r ;/
1/
t
'0-
~
;I
I
0; /'
/
~. /
) J /
//h, .. ,Jl)!fi
.il '.:5 .
" 1 l/t l
t>/ 1-
./8..'"'' "",.I...i I..
I.~.,
. ..~.i I
/
./
Q)
(J)
L-
I- c
o
..c _ .....
U......
L- co
ai g
C)....J
C ~ en
:;::;c~
C/) => u
-x ro
(J)-..c
ro......
-C:;::;(J)
c 55 C/)
CO -C C
", -- 0
o,C/):;::;
co (J) co
L.. 0::: ~
co ~ u
(!)L..ro
C)~O
c en L-
:;::; Q) co
en u _
-- t) 0
~<cen
.
.
.
~---T-
c
o
.-
+-'
ro
>
Q)
-
w
I-.
o
.-
I-.
Q)
+-'
X
W
+-'
en
ro
W
Q)
+-'
ro
c
I-.
Q)
+-'
-
<(
~ ;
!~ :i
\ . I
,~ Jt!
; " U : I;
, " . I
~.: .
i ; I
~ ~:: I
~, __,.,t . I
-~--
.' I
: :!; I
: I I . . i I. t
, I :
; I Ii. ,(
: I: j
i I I', I
. I I .
; [I 1 '11'
. . I I'
, l I" I
~ I! I
: I ! :
I , I \ :
, 'I Vi ' i
1:1 ,Vf ,! .'! I
~ I i I; :
; I {I I! ,I
: I i I ; : i
. I - r II : ;1 .. ' i
: i! i: i
l! I l I ; !
i! I I I ; ~
. I
I !)
! it
I I
I :' j
I I '
! j II
I : j
. ! ill
I ' .
,: ! ~ j
, , .. !
. ; 1( [
: I
c
co
a..
(])
Cl.
co
t)
en
-c
c
co
.....J
(])
I ·
--
en
II
NVld 3dVQSaNVl
~.t
OlSL6 lJ06f)JO 'PUDI4Slf 'fJUOI ;\tJOWJOH G96
i!Un ~j~:~)J~jl~~~i 7i^~~~~;Jn
~~
:-oa;~l""';":~
"""'O'~
ffrt IIlI9 '{Jd
u6!saO uOSJaWj
i
i:
I
I
!
I !
i i
~ ! ~I
~ ;< .l
g I ;l
.~
()
Q
I I
.
, 0
~
!ifl
tit
I!i!
dn
~I!
)d't.~~~;.s .i~nV'(1Y ~
~
A..3.'-;"7'7'
"
;1 t
1: ..
Ii I
~] I
U ~I
ii !~
~lid
~i i Ii{
~ i~"1'i
o j,h,.
~ uUI
~ -
~
is
~
'"
'"
..
~
------ 3N'v'lANOI^lH'iH--
'l:..._~
~i
I
_....1
j. ~ . i~t .
.; ~i!W ~l! !
I b h.~ M t~ ~.'.:~'
~! o!!'fi~ .1:i -J ~
;~ hut ~:.!i il .
~. . .u I. i,__~.
i1 lia~ t ~~J 1'!
;1 t~~1~ I~i;i €i
~;~!t ~;t!~ i~
~~~i; mb,H
J! .i~ ~1 I;
If ~il ii !~
ii ~! ~~ ~!
!; ill P il
d ~~ ii H
"*
U_ -- T
.5)
lil
;!I!
llH
~~
~I~
3llm~mms .i N3JVI'C\f .. i
~
i
~
~ ~ ~
~i
~ f'
,l
~!
(]) 0
C)
~
CO
c
(])
'"-- ~
C
CO
a..
(])
c..
CO
u
en
~
c
co
.....J
(])
I .
--
en
), ]''']"] 'rj
3NVl ANOVitlVH - -
<,
:z
9
':5
w
l-
fj
~
o
-<
'F
\)
II
r-
2
<I...
rl~~
~~
~6>;
~~
19;~
71t s:
-'~
~~
~~~
{. ,f'/"J~"l'<;"/) . /" ..?-
tif... 0 ~ i'::~~:l i .w~\
, 'v.l/ \([f> ~~
~ii
.3:1:
,JI.,
.N'
~---
~~
<1
~~
Kj
~,~
E'.'.~.
i.J
1l.\
i:L
\5
\rh.
Qi~
~I~
,.....J~
f. ..~ .
i ~i ~bi
t ii njl
i M ~i~;.
:::; .:s~U
i :k ill).'!i.
"l~t.!'
I 7.1 tiEd
~t :rii
:: ~.. "lii'l1~
.: ~J; ... _a .
l li l~;ij
! ;! iiJ!.
.: ~. ~~. li:!i
= · ~" ~.!l:~
! ! il$~;~l
~ ili! K=Jt1
1 J it'" =.1!. ;,.i
. --~. is.q,
t . ~ ..:lw~f
"" II s. &a.l..
,..: ..:,.; ..
-- T
~ ~
-c
(])
C)
~
co
c
(])
~
c
co
a..
(])
a.
co
u
en
-c
c
co
.....J
(])
I ·
--
en
),3-,]^7V
3NVl ^NO~tjVH
~tl
f:i:J.
:n I "Z
\N5}
3:. ~ ~
\U.~ ;z::!
z;~ ~c
~ ~.j, It:)0@~
\U.~~
~;~.
~il
;~. tl.~t.~;. ~ ~..I! ~ JI
' .. !~r'1; 1<:\. ~
tl i;)' ,.,.., "t'.. .
iL. €' ~ 1 ~: Il'!,
'..\1....'.. ~...l .~. .."'.. ..'........,.. .~..',.'.'."~..'......'.,... .,
.~ ~'~n ...... ~i
'6 i <.:...... ,..............'
V ;'~ .... ~.;
ii i~ ~ '
~ h j ~ i~j Ii
~. ~. ~.;. I. !.... ". t.. ~ ~.~. '.
ill ~I i.llj 'it ~I
2... .I.~.. ..~.IIt"" ~.
;=, F l' ..... .~
~l @ @O ei0
;('\1
~
U
(L
-- ~..l
~ ~
-c
(])
C) ,
~
co
c
(])
~~
c
co
a..
(])
C-
eo
u
en
-c
c
co
.....J
(])
I ·
--
en
3C1rl1:>ntJLS IN30Vroy
A311tl
."''"
~
II~
...
~ .."//
.........4/
u
~
c
..c
+-'
--
c
::::>
-C
(J)
en
o
C.
o
L-
a..
'+-
o
co
(J)
L-
<(
---I
COMMENTS SUBMITTED DURING
THE 7 -DAY EXTENSION PERIOD
City of Ashland
City Council
Ashland, OR 97520
December 7, 2008
RE: Appeal of Planning Action #2008-00801; 960 Hamlony Lane
Dear Mayor and Council;
In reviewing the past presentations by city staff and the applicant I am struck with how few of the issues
brought forward were addressed by the applicant with solutions.
In both the Planning Commission Hearings Board presentation and the presentation to your body, there are
multiple references made to a storm water catchment at the end of the alley between Harmony Lane and
Hillview Drive. Why then does this catchment and attaching culvert not exist on city maps? Why is the
city sending someone out there as late as last week to detennine where these drains are and from where
they are draining? (It's my understanding that the jury is still out on the latter.) As I testified at the hearing
on December 2. 2008, there is anecdotal evidence from long-time neighbors that this is a culverted creek.
There is also visible evidence of this creek on the south side of Peachy at the church (Our Lady of the
Mountain) parking lot where it is open to daylight immediately prior to entering a culvert.
As promised in my testimony I am attaching photos of the TID line that was broken by the applicant's
topsoil delivery truck. The pictures visibly demonstrate that the drainage jumps the alley, and runs into the
yards and homes along HiIlview Drive. It does not run down the alley into a "catchment". The pictures
also demonstrate that the existing TID line is not built to withstand vehicular traffic, and unfortunately
begs even more questions. This irrigation line feeds all properties north of the proposed ADU on both
Hillview and Harmony. How will this line be engineered to accommodate the additional traffic? Who
bears the cost of that engineering? If it isn't re-engineered, do we all lose our irrigation rights? If a simple
topsoil delivery truck can cause this much damage, what about the many construction vehicles arriving at
the site during the build, and future 4 to 6 trips a day for the tenants?
Until these questions are answered with workable solutions, I cannot agree to an approval of the
Conditional Use Permit for this planning action.
Sincerely,
Cyndi Dion
897 Hillview Drive
Ashland, Or 97520
PJ'
o~'. '~:D
DEe
8 2008
r.o
.:. ,~-:-~':mt
--'~-l--
''.. /!~
X"
u
UJ
Q
o
co
I
co
o
---------------...r
co
c::.<;)
~.
-- r
City Council
City of Ashland
City Hall
20 E. Main
Ashland, OR 97529
DEe 0 5 2008
RE: Public Forum and Input on Conditional Use Permit for
960 Harmony Lane
Since my name came up in the Public Hearing, I need to repeat
what was said. The natural flow of water down that alley does not
go down the alley, it goes across our property - the garden & lawn
and then onto Cindi bion's property. Hopefully, the proposed
solution works for runoffwater from the developed property.
Also, hopefully, there is/~ontingenCY plan for the pumping of
sewage uphill from that property for when the power goes off and
the pump does not work-so what happens to that sewage? NIMBY
SincerelY,. / ... / '..' /1..
t/Va
Fac and Wayne Linn j
899 Hillview Dr.
Ashland, OR 97520
/Yy
'-
l/Yl.A-t.
We, also, can document this pattern with photographs, if needed.
1
< *"
Planning Action 2008..00801 (Conditional Use Permit)
960 Harmony Lane '
Ashland, Oregon
Ronald L. Doyle, Appellant
945 Hillview Drive
Ashland, OR 97520
(541) 488-1769
J [J;@[J;l1WJ[J;
o 05 . ~
BY:d?~
Additional Evidence for the Record
Prior to the close of the public hearing at the council meeting of December 2,2008,
I Ronald L. Doyle, the appellant in this case, asked that the record be kept open for
7 days for final evidence. The council granted the request and thefoflowing
evidence is presented in opposition to this development application. I respectfully
ask the council to deny this application as it does not comply with the approval
criteria of the Ashland Code.
I. The development does not meet the approval criteria for "adequate City facilities
for...sewer, paved access to and through the devetopment,[or] urban storm
drainage. n
a. Sewer: The evidence in the record before the planning commission was a
statement by the applicant's representative that the raw sewage from this
development will be pumped uphill to the city sewer line in Harmony Lane. The
only City facilities for sewer lines near this development are the lines in Harmony
Lane, Ross Lane, and HiUview Drive. The statement by planning staff that this
proximity to City faeiUties.is all that is needed to prove that the development
complies with code sections 18.104.050.8 and 18.72.070.0 is wrong. Being close
to.& City sewer line does notavaU the applicant if the applicant cannot get to the
facUity because of a legal impossibility (no easements, etc.), or because of natural
laws such as the law of gravity. .
This development cannot get to the HUlview Drive line since there is no evidence in
the record that the applicant could get the necessary legal easements to reach
Hillview Drive. There is no evidence in the record that the applicant can reach the
Ross Lane Une (no evidence of an easement), and there is no sewer line in the
unpaved alley that leads from the development to Ross Lane. Raw sewage, like
storm water I does not flow uphill without. a mechanical. and/or electrical assist. The
development proposes to pump its sewage up a steep slope approximately 150
feet to the Harmony Lane sewer line. There is no evidence in the record that this is
feasible, and no evidence in the record to show how the sewagewiUbe pumped in
the event of electrical failure (Ashland has experienced several local outages and
1
a few severe city wide outages lasting many days in my 25 years' experience as a
resident). Absent substantial evidence in the record to prove that the development
has access to the City's sewer line, the proposal has not met its burden of proof for
approval.
b. Paved access to and through the development: Planning staff's conclusion that
proximity to a paved Harmony Lane frontage street meets this criterion is also
wrong. The proposed development is landlocked from Harmony Lane. Any
vehicle coming to the development must get to the development over an unpaved,
unimproved alley. Any vehicle approaching from Harmony Lane must also travel
over an unpaved, unimproved Ross Lane. The plain language of the Ashland
Code requires paved access to and through the development. Statements in the
record that prior approvals for different developments in Ashland were based upon
paved access to the parent parcel do not help the applicant. Each proposal must
be judged on its own merits and on the evidence in the record. There is no
evidence in this record that any paved surface to and through this development has
been considered. As I stated in the council meeting, precedent is not binding if the
precedent was wrong in the first place, or if the factual evidence in this proposal
does not fit the earlier erroneous precedent. The proposal has not met its burden
of proof for approval.
c. Urban storm drainage: As with the sewer line statements above, the only City
storm drain lines are in Harmony Lane, Hillview Drive, and Ross Lane. Getting the
development's storm water to either Harmony Lane or Ross Lane would require
mechanical and/or electrical assists to pump the water uphill. The only downward
slope is to the north east, down the slope of the alley and toward Hillview Drive.
There is conflicting evidence in the record to show how the applicant plans to get
its stormwater into the Hillview Drive line. The size of the line is in dispute--4t1, 611,
or 12". There is evidence in the record to show that the water will not flow to the
existing alley inlet that is currently blocked with a metal cover. Replacing that metal
cover with a grate will not work as the water flowing down the alley flows to the
northeast side of the alley. The inlet is on the northwest side of the alley. There is
no evidence in the record to show that the easement line across Ms. Dion's
property is an adequate size to carry the development's water even if it gets into
that line. There is certainly no engineering evidence to show that connecting other
neighbors to a proposed 12" line will not overwhelm the smaller line on Ms. Dion's
property. The applicant's evidence that everything will be fine is t1trust us to make it
work wishful thinking," not substantial evidence. The proposal has not met its
burden of proof for approval.
II. The development cannot show that it complies with city required setbacks.
There is no evidence in the record to establish the developmenfs property lines or
the city alley right of way line. Absent substantial. evidence in the record
establishing where the property lines are, this development cannot be found to
----1.-
meet the approval criteria of Ashland Code sections 18.104.050.A and 18.72.070.C
(compliance with code standards on setbacks).
III. There is evidence in the record to show that this development will generate
noise (daily increased traffic); light (vehicles turning left at night from Ross Lane will
shine their headlights directly into the bedroom of the adjacent property at 1755
Ross Lane; glare (light from this second residential unit will shine directly into the
back yards of the neighbors across the alley); and dust (daily traffic on both
unimproved Ross Lane and the alley will raise immense quantities of dust,
contributing unhealthy particulates into an already sensitive Ashland
airshed). Walking along the unpaved nearby streets of Ross Lane, Paradise Lane,
and Peachy are often pleasant experiences during the dry months until a vehicle
passes by, at which time choking clouds of dust lasting several minutes hover in
the air. Placing the access and parking spots along the unpaved alley for all
visitors and vehicles for both 860 Harmony Lane and the new development will
dramatically increase the dust problem for us. My dear friend, 90+ year old Glenna
Hanson lives at 1755 Ross Lane, directly across from the alley entrance to this
proposal. Dust pollution causes her particular health problems. There is no
evidence in the record to show how this proposal will mitigate all of these problems
to show that it meets the approval criteria of section 18.104.050. C.
Respectfully submitted this 5th day of December, 2008
- ~~.U
Ronald L. Doyle
- --_uI-
EXHIBIT SUBMITTED AT
. DECEMBER 2, 2008
COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING
-H-i--
---r -~-
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Council Communication
Meeting Date:
Department:
Secondary Dept.:
Approval:
Public Art Ordinance
December 16, 2008 Primary Staff Contact:
Administration E-Mail:
Legal Secondary Contact:
Martha Benne Estimated Time:
Ann Seltzer
seltzera@ashland.or.us
Megan Thornton
10 Minutes
Question:
Should the City Council conduct and approve First Reading of an ordinance titled, "An Ordinance
Relating to the Review of Public Art Proposals, Establishing Criteria and Selection Processes for the
Acquisition, Acceptance, or Removal from the Ashland Public Art Collection," and move the
ordinance on to Second Reading?
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends Council approval of the First Reading by title only, and Council move the
Ordinance on to the Second Reading.
Background:
In 2007, the Council adopted the Public Art Master Plan presented by the Public Art Commission and
requested the policies and procedures detailed in Appendix A of the Master Plan be codified for
inclusion in the Ashland Municipal Code. The ordinance adds a definition section and sections
2.17.100 through 2.17.180. These sections establish the following:
. Process for acquiring and removing public art,
. Method for choosing a Selection Panel to evaluate public art proposals,
. Selection criteria for works of art and site placement,
. Review process requiring Council acceptance of gifts and/or donations, and
. Process for placing public art on private property.
In 2008, the Council voted to provide three types of funding for Public Art: a percentage of funds
generated from the increase of the transient occupancy tax, one half of one percent of qualifying capital
city projects and a commercial development fee in the amount of one tenth of one percent. The
ordinance creates a Public Art Account (P AA) and establishes the purposes for which the P AA can be
used. The ordinance also specifies that all funds from the three funding methods approved by Council
and any donated funds will be placed in the Public Art Account.
The attached ordinance incorporates both the policies and procedures and the three types of funding.
Related City Policies:
Public Art Master Plan
Site Design and Use Standards
AMC Chapter 18 (commercial development fee in lieu)
AMC Chapter 4 (resolution authorized for transient occupancy tax)
Public Art 10-07-08
Page 1
~~.,
~T
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Council Options:
1. Move to approve First Reading and continue the matter to October 21, 2008, for Second
Reading.
2. Postpone consideration and provide direction to staff.
Potential Motions:
1. I move to approve first reading of an ordinance relating to the review of public art proposals,
establishing criteria and selection process for the acquisition, acceptanGe, or removal from the
Ashland Public Art Collection.
2. I move to approve first reading of an ordinance relating to the review of public art proposals,
establishing criteria and selection process for the acquisition, acceptance, or removal from the
Ashland Public Art Collection with corrections.
3. I move to deny approval of the first reading of an ordinance relating to the review of public art
proposals, establishing criteria and selection process for the acquisition, acceptance, or removal
from the Ashland Public Art Collection with corrections.
Attachments:
· Proposed ordinance
· Letter of support from the Public Art Commission
· Memo dated October 6, 2008
Public Art 10-07-08
Page 2
r~'
~T
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE REVIEW OF PUBLIC ART
PROPOSALS, ESTABLISHING CRITERIA AND SELECTION PROCESSES
FOR THE ACQUISITION, ACCEPTANCE, OR REMOVAL FROM THE
ASHLAND PUBLIC ART COLLECTION
Annotated to show delotions and additions to the code sections being modified.
Deletions are bold . and additions are in bold underline.
WHEREAS, Article 2, Section 1 of the Ashland City Charter provides:
Powers of the City. The City shall have all powers which the constitutions,
statutes, and common law of the United States and of this State expressly or
impliedly grant or allow municipalities, as fully as though this Charter specifically
enumerated each of those powers, as well as all powers not inconsistent with the
foregoing; and, in addition thereto, shall possess all powers hereinafter
specifically granted. All the authority thereof shall have perpetual succession.
WHEREAS, the above referenced grant of power has been interpreted as
affording all legislative powers home rule constitutional provisions reserved to
Oregon Cities. City of Beaverton v. International Ass'n of Firefiahters. Local
1660. Beaverton Shop, 20 Or. App. 293; 531 P. 2d 730, 734 (1975); and
WHEREAS, the City of Ashland wishes to enhance the artistic vitality of the City
through the placement of art in public areas; and
WHEREAS, processes and criteria for the acquisition and removal of public art
are needed to govern the acquisition and removal of artworks from the Ashland
Public Art Collection.
THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Section 2.01.005 [Purpose] is hereby amended to read as follows:
2.17.005 Purpose
The mission of the Public Arts Commission is to enhance the cultural and
aesthetic quality of life in Ashland by actively pursuing the placement of public art
in public spaces and serving to preserve and develop public access to the arts.
The continued vitality of the arts in the City of Ashland is a vital part of the future
of the city as well as of its citizens. The arts are an important part of the cultural
and economic life of the entire community of Ashland and enrich the participants
in the arts as well as those who observe them. Several organizations which exist
in Ashland are active in the arts and provide leadership to the community on arts
related matters. The creation of a Public Arts Commission for the City of Ashland
REVIEW OF PUBLIC ART PROPOSALS 10-07-08
Page 1 of 10
1-
will assist those organizations, and other organizations and individuals, to make
arts a more important part of the city's life. Recommendations from the
Commission regardina the aCQuisition and placement of public art should
be based upon accepted standards and auidelines as opposed to personal
opinion. This chapter will create a Public Arts Commission and adopt
standards and guidelines for selectina. commissioning. placina.
maintainina. and removina public art.
SECTION 2. Section 2.01.008 [Definitions] is hereby added to read as follows:
2.17.008 Definitions.
A. "AcQuisition" means the inclusion of an artwork in the Ashland
Public Art Collection by any means includina direct purchase. commission
or acceptance of a aift.
B. "Artwork" means visual works of public art as defined herein.
c. "Ashland Public Art Collection" means all public art aCQuired by the'
City by any means.
D. "Capital improvement proaram (CIPl" means the city's proaram for
advance plannina of capital improvements.
E. "City proiect" or "proiect" means any capital improvement proiect in an
amount over $25.000 paid for wholly or in part by the city of Ashland to
purchase or construct any public buildina. decorative or commemorative
public structure. sidewalk. or multi-use pathway construction. park facility
construction. or any portion thereof. within the limits of the city of Ashland.
"City proiect" or "proiect" does not include public utility improvements.
(e.a. electric. water. sewer. or stormwaterl. LID improvements. includina
but not limited to streets. sidewalks and associated improvements.
property aCQuisition. earth work. emeraency work. minor alterations.
rehabilitation. minor or partial replacement. remodelina or ordinary repair
or maintenance necessary to preserve a facility. Notwithstanding the above
limitation. the Council or responsible contractina officer may include any
new city street or utility proiect (limited to water. sewer and storm water
proiectsl in an amount over $25.000 as a city proiect under this article. by
either vote of the Council or inclusion in the contract solicitation
documents prepared by the responsible contractina officer.
F. "Commission" means the Ashland Public Arts Commission created by
AMC 2.17.010. consistinQ of seven members appointed bY the mayor and
confirmed bY the Council.
G. "Eliaible funds" means a source of funds for proiects from which art is
not precluded as an obiect of expenditure.
H. "Participatina department" means the department that is subiect to this
article by its sponsorship of a city proiect.
I. "Percent for art" means the program established bY this article to set
aside a percentaae of the total cost of city proiects for public art.
J. "Public art" means all forms of original works of art in any media that
has been planned and executed with the specified intention of being sited
REVIEW OF PUBLIC ART PROPOSALS 10-07-08
Page 2 of 10
1
or staged on City Property or on property owned or controlled by the City
of Ashland. usually outside and accessible to the public.
K. "Public art account" means the city of Ashland public art account in
the city budget established by this article into which all moneys donated.
appropriated or derived pursuant to the percent for art program shall be
deposited. Funds within the public art account shall be utilized for the
purposes outlined in this article.
L. "Removal" means the exclusion of an artwork from the Ashland public
art collection bY the removal and disposal throuah any available means.
such as relinQuishina title through sale. aift or destruction.
M. "Selection Panel" means a Qroup of individuals selected by the
Commission that will evaluate the proposals associated with a particular
proiect in a public meetina.
N. "TOT Funds" means the portion of transient occupancy tax funds
allocated for public art.
o. "Commercial Development Fee" means funds deposited by a
commercial developer into the Public Art account when the developer
prefers not to incorporate public art into the proiect and follow the public
art process for art aCQuisition and approval.
P. "Total cost" means the entire amount of the city's financial
contribution toward construction and maintenance of a proiect.
SECTION 3. Section 2.17.100 through Section 2.17.180 are hereby added to
read as follows:
2.17.100 Process for aCQuirina public art.
A. General. The Public Art Commission will call for entries by issuina a
reQuest for proposal. a reQuest for Qualification or by invitation. The call
for entries will include specific auidelines and criteria for the specific
proiect. Everv call for entry must comply with the City's public contractina
rules.
1. ACQuisition. ACQuisition of public art will aenerally result from:
a. The commissioning or purchasing of a work of public art bY
the city usina city funds or donated funds. in accordance with public
contractina laws and AMC Chapter 2.50: or
b. An offer made to the city to accept a work of public art as a
Qift. donation. or loan.
2. Removal. Removal of public art may be by reQuest or owina to
some damaae or destruction of the artwork.
B. Selection Panel. A selection panel. separate from the Public Art
Commission. consisting of art professionals and enthusiasts. residents
near the proposed site. community members. and city administrators will
be chosen to evaluate the proposals received from artists. A different
selection panel shall be chosen for each proiect bY the Commission after
the following notifications have been made:
1. An ad is placed in a newspaper of general circulation in the city.
REVIEW OF PUBLIC ART PROPOSALS 10-07-08
Page 3 of 10
------~ -- f
2. Postcards are sent out to all property owners located within 300
feet of the proposed site. and
3. A notice is placed on the city's website.
The Commission shall pick the Selection Panel bY examinina applications
received from interested parties.
C. Evaluation of ACQuisition Proposals. Proposals which meet the
minimum reQuirements set forth in the call for entries will be aiven to the
Selection Panel for review. The proposals for aCQu.isition shall be
evaluated based upon criteria set forth in the call for entries at a public
meetina. The Selection Panel will evaluate the proposals and make a
recommendation to the Public Art Commission reQardinQ which proposals
to accept. The Commission shall forward that recommendation to the City
Council for final selection. This ordinance does not exclude land use
approval processes when reQuired for the use or structure.
D. Removal and. Disposal Process. Except as provided in AMC
2.17.140(Bl. neither the Council nor the Commission is bound to follow any
particular process for removal and disposal of art in the Ashland Public Art
Collection.
2.17.110 Review process for Qifts or donations.
The Commission may solicit Qifts and beQuests of public art or funds to
benefit the Ashland Public Art Collection. The Council shall decide
whether to accept all such aifts of art work on behalf of the city and the
Ashland Public Art Collection on its own motion or upon a
recommendation by the Commission based on its own evaluation. or by
recommendation of the Commission after the Selection Panel has
evaluated the artwork usina the auidelines in AMC 2.17.130.
All art works or funds shall be administered by the city in accordance
with its terms. Funds donated to the Commission shall be placed in a
special account to be used exclusively for the purposes of the Commission
or as desiQnated bY the donor. Funds in this account may only be
expended after they have been properly budQeted or approved by the city.
2.17.120. Public Art on Private Property.
Before public art can be placed on private property the Commission shall
determine whether the site is appropriate for public art under the Site
Selection criteria in AMC 2.17.130. If the site is found to be appropriate for
public art. the City shall secure authorization to use and access the private
property where the public art will be located before the aCQuisition process
for public art is initiated. There shall be a written aQreement or leaal
instrument. arantina the City permission and control of the property so that
the property can be used for public art purposes. includina access for
installation. maintenance and removal of the artwork. Public art can then
be aCQuired for placement on private property bY followina the process for:
A. ACQuisition in AMC 2.17.100. or
B. Gifts and donations in AMC 2.17.110.
REVIEW OF PUBLIC ART PROPOSALS 10-07-08
Page 4 of 10
-----1-
2.17.130 Guidelines for recommendation bY the Commission.
A. Selection Guidelines for Works of Public Art.
1. Quality. The artwork should be of exceptional Quality and
endurina value.
2. Site. The artwork should enhance the existina character of the
site bY takina into account scale. color. material. texture. content. and the
social dynamics of the location.
3. Historv and Context. The artwork should consider the historical.
aeoaraphical. and cultural features of the site. as well as the relationship to
the existina architecture and landscapina of the site.
4. Initial Cost. The total cost of the artwork. includina all items
related to its installation. should be considered.
5. Maintenance and Durability. The durability and cost to maintain
the artwork should be considered and Quantified. particularly if the work is
servicinQ. repaintina. repairinQ or replacement of movina parts.
6. Permanence. Both temporary and permanent art works shall be
considered.
7. Media. All forms of visual media shall be considered. subiect to
any reQuirements set forth by city ordinance.
8. Public Liability. The artwork should not result in safety hazards.
nor cause extraordinary liability to the city.
9. 'Diversity. The artwork in the Ashland Public Art Collection should
encouraae cultural diversity.
10. Commercial Aspect. The artwork shall not promote aoods or
services of adiacent or nearby businesses.
11. Compliance. Artworks shall not violate any federal. state. or local
laws. includina specificallY AMC Chapter 18.96.
B. Guidelines for Site Selection.
1. Ownership or Control. Public art should be placed on a site
owned or controlled by the city. or there should be a written aareement or
leaal instrument. Qrantina the City permission to use the property for
public art purposes. includina access for installation. maintenance and
removal.
2. Visual Accessibility. Public art should be easily visible and
accessible to the public.
3. Visual Enhancement. Public art should visually enhance the
overall public environment and pedestrian streetscape.
4. Pedestrian Accessibility. Public art should experience hiah levels
of pedestrian traffic and be part of the city's circulation paths.
5. Circulation. Public art should not block windows. entranceways.
roadways or obstruct normal pedestrian circulation or vehicle traffic.
6. Scale. Public art should not be placed in a site where it is
overwhelmed or competina with the scale of the site. adiacent architecture.
larae sianaae. billboards. etc.
REVIEW OF PUBLIC ART PROPOSALS 10-07-08
Page 5 of 10
-I
2.17.140 Standards for the Ashland Public Art Collection.
A. ACQuisitions. The followinQ minimum standards and criteria shall
apply to the aCQuisition of artworks.
1. Artworks may be aCQuired bY direct purchase. commission. aift or
any other means.
2. ACQuisition. whether bY direct purchase. commission. aift. or
otherwise. shall occur by a leaal instrument of conveyance or other writina
transferrina title of the artwork to the City and clearly defininQ the riahts
and responsibilities of all parties.
3. The city shall obtain the riahts of ownership and possession
without leQal or ethical restrictions on the future use of the artwork upon
final acceptance of the artwork. except where expresslY provided in the
contract with the artist. The artists shall retain all riQhts and interests in
the artwork except for the riahts of ownership and possession.
4. The City shall only aCQuire artworks if: 1) the artist warrants that
he will not make a duplicate of the artwork. or permit others to do so.
without written permission bY the City. and 2) the artist Qives permission to
the City to make a two-dimensional reproductions as lonQ as all such
reproductions provide the copyriaht symbol. name of the artist. title of the
artwork. and the date of completion.
5. Complete records. includina contracts with artists. shall be
created and maintained for all artworks in the Ashland Public Art
Collection.
B. Removal.
1. The Commission may recommend removal and/or disposal based
on one or more of the followina conditions. No public hearinQ is reQuired
for a removal recommendation.
a. The site for an artwork has become inappropriate because the
site is no lonQer accessible to the public or the physical site is to be
destroyed or sianificantlY altered.
b. The artwork is found to be foraed or counterfeit.
c. The artwork possesses substantial demonstrated faults of
desiQn or workmanship.
d. The artwork causes excessive or unreasonable maintenance.
e. The artwork is damaQed irreparablY. or so severelY that repair
is impractical.
f. The artwork presents a physical threat to public safety.
g. The artwork is rarely displayed.
h. A written reQuest for removal has been received from the
artist.
2. Council Removal Process.
a. On its own motion. or followina receipt of a recommendation
from the Commission the Council may remove and dispose of any artwork
previously accepted into the Ashland Public Art Collection in their sole
discretion.
REVIEW OF PUBLIC ART PROPOSALS 10-07-08
Page 6 of 10
T--
b. Acceptance or placement of donated art by the city does not .
auarantee continuous public display of the artwork reaardless of physical
intearity. identity. authenticity. or physical condition of the site.
c. Removal officiallY deletes the work from the city of Ashland
Public Art Collection by a relinquishment of title to the artwork: thus.
eliminatina the city's obliaation to maintain and preserve the artwork.
d. Notwithstandina the above. Artwork shall be disposed of in
accordance with any specific terms for removal and disposal set forth in
the contract with the Artist.
3. Removal and Disposal.
a. The city may donate the artwork to another aovernmental
entity or a nonprofit oraanization.
b. A work that is deemed to have retained sufficient monetary
value to warrant resale. shall be disposed of throuah a public sale. auction.
or any other means as established bY city ordinance.
c. Artworks removed from the Ashland Public Art Collection may
be disposed of throuah any appropriate means. includina the city's
procedures for the disposition of surplus property.
C. Borrowina of Artworks.
1. The Commission may also recommend artworks be borrowed.
2. With the exception of ownership. the eliaibility. review criteria.
and procedure for borrowed works shall be the same as those established
in this article for acquisition.
3. The borrowina of artworks shall be pursuant to written
aQreement between the city and the artist.
4. Nothina herein prohibits the city from securinQ other works of
art or art exhibitions for display inside its facilities.
2.17.150 Maintenance of the Ashland Public Art Collection.
A. Except where expresslY provided in a contract or warranty for public
art the city shall be responsible for all maintenance of all artworks in the
Ashland Public Art Collection.
B. Within the limitation of the city budaet the city shall provide necessary
and appropriate maintenance of the Ashland Public Art Collection.
includina. but not limited to. reaular custodial care and landscape
maintenance. Maintenance shall be performed in accordance with any
special instructions or procedures necessary for the preservation of the
work.
C. Any evidence of damaae. deterioration. vandalism or theft of artworks
in the Ashland Public Art Collection shall be immediatelY reported to the
appropriate City Department. City staff shall keep the Commission and
Council informed of damaQe to City property.
2.17.160 Parks commission.
The standards and procedures in this article are in addition to. not in
deroaation of. the Ashland parks commission review responsibilities for
proiects proposed in city parks. Nothina herein exempts public art proiects
REVIEW OF PUBLIC ART PROPOSALS 10-07-08
Page 7 of 10
r---
from compliance with all applicable federal. state. and local laws includina.
but not limited to. land development reaulations and buildina code
compliance.
2.17.170 Development of auidelines.
The Commission shall have the ability to establish further auidelines
concernina its operations: however. onlY the criteria and processes of this
ordinance will be leaally bindina.
2.17.180 Creation. fundina and use of Ashland public art account.
A. Establishment. The Council hereby establishes a separate account
entitled the Ashland public art account to be reflected in the city budaet. All
funds donated. appropriated or aenerated for the purpose of public art
acquisition and education shall be deposited in this account and used
solely for such purposes. in accordance with this article and other
applicable law. Funds aenerated pursuant to the Commercial Development
Fee in lieu established in Chapter 18. as well as the Transient Occupancy
Tax Resolution authorized in Chapter 4.24. and the Percent for Art
dedication in this section shall all be deposited into the Ashland Public Art
Account.
B. Permitted Purposes of Public Art Account. The public art account
shall be used solely for the acquisition. placement. maintenance. and
removal of artworks for inclusion in the Ashland Public Art Collection and
for art education purposes. such as community outreach presentations and
workshops. in accordance with the provisions of this article and other
applicable law.
C. Requirement for Dedication of a Percent for Art. Any city official or
employee who authorizes or appropriates expenditures on behalf of a
particiDatina department for a city proiect shall. to the deQree that there are
eliaible funds. include within the budQet for the proiect a monetary
contribution for the public art account equal to one-half percent CO.50/0) of
the total cost of the proiect.
1. One-half percent CO.50/0) of the total cost of a Qualifvina city
proiect shall be dedicated to the public art account. Such funds shall be
de~osited into the public art account bY the city official or employee actina
on behalf of the participatinQ department no earlier than the time that
budaeted funds are encumbered for construction of the city proiect and no
later than final inspection of the completed city proiect.
2. The participatina department shall consider the sitinQ of public
art as part of the desian and enaineerina phase of any city proiect. If costs
are incurred by the participatinQ department to complY with this article
requirement ~rior to transfer of the one-half percent (.50/0) dedication for the
city proiect to the public art account. the participatina department may
deduct such costs Cnot to exceed one-half percent) from the one-half
percent (.50/0) dedication at the time such funds are transferred.
REVIEW OF PUBLIC ART PROPOSALS 10-07-08
Page 8 of 10
t
D. Restricted Funds. If fundina for a particular city proiect is subiect to
leaal restrictions that preclude public art as an obiect for expenditure. the
portion of the city proiect that is funded with the restricted funds shall be
exempt from the dedication requirements of this article.
E. Phased Proiects. As a aeneral rule. where a city proiect will be
constructed in phases. the one-half percent (0.50/0) dedication shall be
applied to the estimated total cost of each phase of the city proiect at the
time that funds for the phase are appropriated and encumbered. However.
nothina in this section prevents the Council from decidina to hold or set
aside all or part of the entire dedication from the funds of a particular
phase. as the Council deems appropriate. In determinina when to hold or
set aside the funds for a phased proiect. the city will consider an overall
public art plan for the proiect to ensure that art is not located on a
piecemeal basis with phase construction.
F. Monetary contributions for public art shall be deposited in separate
accounts within the public art account if separate accountinQ is deemed
appropriate bY the Administrative Services Director (Finance) or is required
by law.
G. Monetary contributions or appropriations made other than throuah the
percent for art proaram shall be deposited in the public art account and
may be dedicated to or earmarked for a specific education proaram or work
of art. subiect to acceptance by the Council.
H. Disbursements from the public art account shall be made only after
authorization of the City Administrator or the Administrative Services
Director (Finance). and shall be made accordina to this article and other
applicable city ordinances. includina but not limited to the public
contractina code (AMC Chapter 2.50).
I. The Council may adopt by resolution case specific waivers or
auidelines for administration of the percent for art proaram. includina case-
by-case waivers of the required dedication set forth herein based on the
availability of public funds. as well as any other matters not specificallv
addressed herein and appropriate or necessary to the administration of the
prOQram.
SECTION 4. Severability. If any section, provision, clause, sentence, or
paragraph of this Ordinance or the application thereof to any person or
circumstances shall be held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other
sections, provisions, clauses, or paragraphs of this Ordinance which can be
given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the
provisions of this Ordinance are declared to be severable.
SECTION 5. Codification. Provisions of this Ordinance shall be incorporated
in the City.Code and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "code", "article",
"section", or another word, and the sections of this Ordinance may be
renumbered, or re-Iettered, provided however that any Whereas clauses and
boilerplate provisions (ie: Sections 4-5) need not be codified.
REVIEW OF PUBLIC ART PROPOSALS 10-07-08
Page 9 of 10
--1
The foregoing ordinance was first read by title only in accordance with Article X,
Section 2(C) of the City Charter on the day of , 2008,
and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of ' 2008.
Barbara M. Christensen, City Recorder
SIGNED and APPROVED this _ day of
, 2008.
John W. Morrison, Mayor
Reviewed as to form:
Richard Appicello, City Attorney
REVIEW OF PUBLIC ART PROPOSALS 10-07-08
Page10 of 10
--I
CITY OF
ASHLAND
October 7, 2008
Ashland City Council
Dear Mayor and Council,
I am writing on behalf of the Public Art Commission (PAC) to urge your support for the
Public Art Ordinance.
The PAC has reviewed the ordinance ~d believes it accurately reflects our work and the
work of previous commission members over the past seven years. It codifies the process
for the acquisition and selection of public art and includes the language regarding the
various funding mechanisms approved by the Council last spring.
We look forward to continuing our work to site public art in our community. Thank you
for your ongoing support of our efforts.
Sincerely,
~ 4J7~
Melissa Markell, Chair
Public Art Commission
T---
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Council Communication
Meeting Date:
Department:
Secondary Dept.:
Approval:
Sweatshop Free Procurement Policy
December 16, 2008 Primary Staff Contact:
Administration E-Mail:
None Secondary Contact:
Martha J. Benn Estimated Time:
Martha J. Bennett
bennettm@ashland.or.us
None
10 minutes
Question:
Does the City Council wish to adopt the resolution supporting drafting of a sweatshop free
procurement policy for City uniforms and garments?
Staff Recommendation:
Staffhas reviewed and made revisions to the attached resolution, and staff believes that City
purchasing practices for garments and uniforms is consistent with this policy.
Background:
Wes Brain, Chair, Southern Oregon Jobs with Justice, contacted Mayor Morrison and the City Council
a few months ago to discuss adoption of a resolution that would specify that the City does not buy
uniforms or other clothing from any supplier who does business with a sweatshop. Both Mayor
Morrison and Councilor Navickas asked that staff study the resolution to determine whether it could be
implemented in Ashland. In August, the City of Portland adopted a similar resolution that lead to
adoption of a complete purchasing policy by the Portland City Council in October.
Staff reviewed the definition of "Sweatshop" in the proposed policy and evaluated the clothing that the
City purchases. After this preliminary review, City staff believe that departments already make
sweatshop free purchases and that requesting source information from our vendors does not constitute
a significant increase in expense. There will be extra steps that need to be put into place to ensure the
policy is implemented, and the drafting and implementation of the policy will have a cost in staff time.
Council Options:
· Adopt the resolution as drafted and begin formation of a citizen committee to develop the
policy.
· Amend the resolution prior to adoption
· Reject the proposed resolution.
Potential Motions:
· I move to adopt the attached resolution
Attachments:
Resolution
Page 1 of 1
r~'
1--
RESOLUTION NO. 2008-
A RESOLUTION FOR A SWEATSHOP FREE PROCUREMENT POLICY
Recitals:
A. The City spends approximately, $
clothing.
annually in public funds on uniforms and
B. Some vendors of uniforms and clothing obtain clothing through their supply chain from
contractors that utilize sweatshop labor.
C. "Sweatshop Labor" means serious and repeated violations of laws of the jurisdiction
where the work is performed or violations of core labor rights as defined by the International
Labor Organization pertaining to non-poverty wages; employee benefits; health and safety,
including exposure to hazardous toxic substances; labor, including collective bargaining
rights; environmental conditions; nondiscrimination, harassment or retaliation, including laws
prohibiting workplace and employment discrimination; freedom of association, and building
and fire codes. In addition, it includes work performed by any person under a contract or
subcontract that constitutes foreign convict or forced labor or abusive forms of child labor or
slave labor.
D. Contractors who engage in such serious and repeated violations are not "responsible"
contractors as defined by ORS 279C.375(3) because such contractors do not have a
satisfactory record of performance or a satisfactory record of integrity.
E. The City does not wish to purchase goods and services that depend on sweatshop
conditions that deprive people of their legal rights and dignity.
F. The City Council wishes to ensure that the firms it contracts with to provide uniforms
and clothing act with integrity and follow applicable local laws of the country of production and
International Labor Organization standards, and that other subcontractors in the uniform and
clothing supply chain also act with integrity and follow the local labor laws and International
Labor Organization standards (hereafter referenced as "Sweat Free Procurement").
G. The City Council wishes to ensure the integrity of its procurement process by not using
contractors or subcontractors who engage in Sweatshop Labor practices. Such practices
place responsible contractors at a competitive disadvantage and dissuade them from doing
business with the City.
H. By adopting this resolution, the City Council does not preclude the City or its
contractors or subcontractors from doing business with any foreign country.
I. Sweat Free procurement is a form of ethical purchasing.
J. There is a proposed State and Local Government Sweatfree Consortium that would
investigate and address working conditions of uniform and clothing suppliers' factories
through worker outreach and education, independent monitoring of working conditions, and
Page 1 of 2
by leveraging buying power on behalf of government entities affiliated with the Consortium.
SECTION 1. The City Council wishes to create and implement a detailed Sweat Free
Procurement Policy.
o{~
THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
\.\lIt ~ ~
SECTION 2. As a first step, current uniform and clothing suppliers will be asked to disclose
factory name and location information to Ashland's purchasing agent, effective immediately.
For upcoming contracts, bidders must disclose supplier factory names and locations will
qualify.
SECTION 3. The City shall support the creation of the State and Local Government
Sweatfree Consortium to collaborate with other public agencies to share information and cost
of independent monitoring of working conditions in supplier factories. The City intends to
become a member of this Consortium when it is created.
SECTION 4. The City Council creates an ad hoc citizen committee to develop and
recommend a Code of Conduct and Sweat Free Procurement Policy for the City of Ashland
no later than March, 2009. The Mayor may appoint up to seven citizens to this ad hoc
committee, the majority of whom must be workers' rights advocates, which will be supported
by staff from the City's Administrative Services Department.
SECTION 5. After adoption of the City's Code of Conduct and Sweat Free Procurement
Policy, the ad hoc committee will recommend to the City Council a process for an annual
report on the status of contractors' compliance with the policy and any proposed policy
changes that should be made.
SECTION 6. This resolution was duly PASSED and ADOPTED this
, 2008, and takes effect upon signing by the Mayor.
day of
Barbara Christensen, City Recorder
SIGNED and APPROVED this _ day of
,2008.
John W. Morrison, Mayor
Reviewed as to form:
Richard Appicello, City Attorney
Page 2 of 2
1
CITY Of
ASHLAND
Council Communication
Meeting Date:
Department:
Secondary Dept.:
Approval:
Citizen Budget Committee Appointments
December 16, 2008 Primary Staff Contact: Barbara Christensen
City Recorder E-Mail: christeb@ashland.or.us
none Secondary Contact: none
Martha Bennet Estimated Time: 15 minutes
Question:
Shall the Mayor and Council approve appointments for the two positions open on the Citizen Budget
Committee with terms ending December 31, 2011 ?
Staff Recommendation:
None
Background:
These vacancies occurred upon the term endings of Roberta Stebbins and Arlen Gregorio. Proper notice
was made in our local newspaper of the vacancies and four new applications were received.
Request for re-appointment is made by both Roberta Stebbins and Arlen Gregorio. New applications
were received by Mary Ruth Wooding, Greg Williams, Marion Boenheim and Scott ~. t{tA. ~
Related City Policies:
Oregon Budget Law ORS Chapter 294
Council Options:
Approve two applicants for Citizen Budget Committee with term ending December 31, 2011.
Potential Motions:
Motion to approve
term endings December 31, 2011.
and
to the Citizen Budget Committee with
Attachments:
Applications
!'A~
1
FR01 : GREGCR! 0
FAX NO. : 5414821445
Feb. 09 2006 04:26PM P1
CITY OF
ASHLAND
APPLICATION lOR APPOINTMENT TO
CITY COMMISSION/COMMITTEE
Please type or print answers to the following questions and submit to the City Recorder at
City HalL 20 E Main Street, or email MwI..~~t.M....us. If you have any questions.
please feel free to contact the City Recorder at 488-5307. Attae1l IIddtdo... .... If
n.....ry.
Name~y'en QY"~()r I' 0
1
Requesting to serve on:
Addl"ess 41 L/ W,., ~'QVVJ ~ D n LU tJ.. c/
I
Occupation t"")t1NJ~rcl\Q,( WJ6,J.IJOY Phone: Homo #' &2-/6 8 ~
Work
Email gr~()r"IJ"'WJ"V)', ~ ~:r
Fax ~r2-14{~~
->
1. Kd1lcatlo. ~tlllftD.d (l
What schools have you attendod'l ~ ~ t-~ ~ r d
What degrees do you hold? ~ ~ g. ) 1-. L. ~ f
What additional trainins or education have you had that would apply to this position?
2. Related EUI8.....ee .
What prior work experienoe havo you had that would help you Jfyou were appointed to
this position? l'
2O+Y~Q/<rs a~ ~'<,~ ~I'C}~L 1)'1 G.J~".~ict
Do you feel It would be acMatqeoua for youUl have turIhIlr ~~ field.lIUllh
as attending ccmfcrences 01' 1ICIIIiDara? Why? Y R. S . r w · . e..-&
"
~ lAI:1L al..GMJoCS 1"1 ~ .j).'~fcI.
,.,
I,
----- -~ 1- -
FRCX1 : GREGCR I 0
FAX t-D. : 5414821445
Feb. 09 2006 04: 26PM P2
3. ........
Why are YOllllllPlying tbrthls positioD? L t- ~~ VM ~ ~ :J ~ n J f',.t I
4. A,....bIIJty
Are you avaiJIble to IIUImd lpICial ,..-n.p, in addition to the ~~
~? Do you prefer day 01: -ma meetinp? Y f S. I
s. W....II..a.....tIoD
How Ioag have you livecl in Ibis community? 4 Yh2 f" .s
Please UBe the spICO below 10 ~ize lID)' additioual q...difi~_ you have for 1hIs
position
r~ 5 (/ me. "Y'l ..a'l'f!!!... W" tf.-, (2,'Y ch-Y'1e
()LIt.9~/d ~
DalE 6
,.,
, .
r---
01/04/2006 14:44 FAX 5414887417
ACH ADMIN
...... ....,.,~ ~.......
IaJ 013
r.-
'.-. .............................. ........ .....,.~...,....,........ ........................... ...
-. --..- -.-.-- ---.-... .
......-..,.. .... .......-........................ ..............r.... ..-.....- -., --- --
Arlen Gregorio
Portland, OR
htlD'JIwww.- ... ClDm
Edacaa.:
MMllIIOr SCInfonl tJnMnit;y AB. 1953
0416",.".,. S1aafonI U-"':"";'" 8ohool otLaw LL.8 19S5
,.iItc,""" -~-~ .
Ad"'" Act..~"__
...--. AI'- GNpiD..... twJ.Cime COGIIIICI'CiIIlMClialioa pncticc in 1985.
C6nJa fJ cIIII .......,.................. tbD first ... of~ ~ IOleIy to
o-.r_dIM .........~ ad civil crw....1IIIim-wide: 1IGW bDwa .
~J'rl!J."" CJNeIldo. ...W..... PI-. ROIIIW\ A MIdtyaIII. ill oftIccIlR ia Su
a.nr-"'" "'- . ~
1~1'"",.",
t=" = Mr. GNpiD_ a.1C .. ..,...........4IiIpIdes in. DIJIjoritJ of
tfMI EI,.. __...... u.a. He ....l'lo.......... --..... CWIY upDCI of
~ civil............ daiDeIdc...... He Is *~I>OII J*ticaIuIY
far Ids.............. ill 1Ibla1I........ cw busiDeIs
""..., --4 '.- ..., by IOIes.
I. Ids ..-_IOCI ,............. Mr. 0reJ0ri0 oftan ..... ill ·
wricIJ 0I..........1k _1CMld a. Superior Com J... pIO tan.
SpeciIl............ ~... MId Nild-Tri8J Jadac. Mr. 0IqJ0ri0
(~GICd....... cMIl1W .... tbrlWel".,.. .. putaIr in ·
law'" _dieS. PruICitco Pco.... __110 __. a local bu
......... _... fa stale ... aIf'aIn. Be.... ..vect u the
AISistIDI CiIJ MDnIey far Sa Bruno. Califonli.. for eiabt years. dealia&
~ wi6 tar: city's condnICtia8. ........ aDCllacl-ale issues.
A"cUIio-1 h ~ fi '.-.1 Experieace:
FlUID 1970 1brauIb 1m. Mr. Gn=prio srnecl-. CaIifomi8 S&Itc
s..&lor. reccivillllIIdoaI1 RlCJOIIIitioIl Cor'" piGmain& wudc ill die au.
edw:atioII........ ....aeae. bea1th. ............t 8naace and
01...... poUtica1...ronn. and prDft:llionIl...... He., also
SIIWCI. ....... of.. San.... CeaaIr Baud ofS...-..Wn and f1l
die .........~.... ................... Mr.
GNpiD........t1IeCdlas.nlDe MDdI1 tbr__ ill Cbe
1Did-195G'I.. U.s. NaVII Air 0fIiacr. He allO ICIIed IS a COU11Iel ill
..... o-at_ 8peaW Caurtl-Madial.
A FeBuwoftlle ~ CoIIep oft1W TIid t.tediUan.a
pdaaIpaI.....oL.. ~ for 0aIdIilat.,........ Mr.
<In:aDdo......... widely _ ~..lDCIdiIpa ~ III
1916. be fbuaIecl tile PoIIinsaIa Codiot a.olatiOA 0eDIer'. wblch
01'%
----....-.-.-.,---..--------.... -----..------- -..--.--..------.--------.- .....- .-----...-----.-----.----- --. .
2I2CI2OO5 '2:20 PM
r--
..~_ _ ___._ _ .__ h...__._.. __ _~_ -.._._ . .-
01/04/2006 14:44 FAX 5414887417
ACH ADMIN
-.JI -... -.I-.6~ ......-..-.
IaJ 014
,....~
.... . .--..- ..-..- ..-. . -.-. -...-.-- - -.-- ______ ...--....- 'O..
__,.0...... ...--.............. ........--.....-..-.........----- .....,-.._-..-.---
pmvidesa wide WIiety of~.... i.San MaIDO
CouIIly. He hu .... _pt ClC*IIeI ill ~ law 81 CoIIeae of SID
....... ................ at eo... of'NaIn DIDo. and urban
..... II S1aaf'ord VIIi"..,.
Mr. <Jretorio lOCI hilwifc. ~ Stone. JIve in Alblancl.
AdmlUI:d 10 PnIccice:
Supr'CIDC Com ofC&lifomia
U.s. Dbtrict Court. NortIIara Diatrict ofCalifomia
Niath an:ait Courtfll AppeU
......1
Or.-. W....blpa.1dabD. AIub. Califamla.. ........ Ari2JoM.
Newda.NewMalco.'" 01111
HollIe I About I om.. I ConIIIat 18eIvI-=-.,....bera
Cop)riaM 0 1m. 200S UIIiIId.....AIbiIadGD.... w.cJiIIioa .
Aa~""'"
EIMII: ...,.- COllI
..Tedl WcbDain
,rz
7/2Af.IOO5 1220 ""
r--- -
APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO
CITY COMMISSION/COMMITTEE
Please type or print answers to the following questions and submit to the City Recorder at
City Hall, 20 E Main Street, or email christeh.lv.ashland.or.us. If you have any questions,
please feel free to contact the City Recorder at 488-5307. Attach additional sheets if
necessary .
Name Roberta W. Stebbins
Requesting to serve on: Budget Committee
Address 111 Granite Street, Ashland, OR 97520
Occupation_Retired CPA
Phone: Home 552-1094 Work
Email robertas@mind.net
Fax
1. Education Backeround
What schools have you attended? MIT
What degrees do you hold? CPA Licensed in Nevada and California
What additional training or education have you had that would apply to this position?
2. Related Exoerience
What prior work experience have you had that would help you if you were appointed to
this position?
My husband and I owned our own CPA business for 35 years, and performed many
governmental audits, assisting with budget preparations.
I currently serve on an AICPA Board revising the CPA Examination.
Do you feel it would be advantageous for you to have further training in this field, such
as attending conferences or seminars? Why?
I have served on Ashland's Audit Committee.
.
r---
3. Interests
Why are you applying for this position?
Because I love Ashland, and feel residents should give back in kind for the good life this
city affords.
4. Availabilitv
Are you available to attend special meetings, in addition to the regularly scheduled
meetings? Do you prefer day or evening meetings?
I prefer day meeting, but would make an effort to attend diligently, when not away.
5. Additional Information
How long have you lived in this community?
5 1h years.
Please use the space below to summarize any additional qualifications you have for this
position
February 6, 2006
Roberta W. Stebbins
Date
Signature
i-n--
008) Barbara christensen - app to budget committee.doc
CITY OF
ASHLAND
APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO
CITY COMMISSION/COMMITTEE
Please type or print answers to the following questions and submit to the City Recorder at
City Hall, 20 E Main Street, or email christeb(QJ.ashland.or.us. If you have any questions,
please feel free to contact the City Recorder at 488-5307. Attach additional sheets if
necessary.
Name_Greg Williams
Requesting to serve on: _Budget
(Commission/Committee)
Address 744 Helman Street
Occupation_Housing developer
Phone: Home 482-5358
Work 261-2712
Emailgreg@verdevillage.net
Fax
1. Education Backe:round
What schools have you attended?
Ashland High School, Southern OR College_
What degrees do you hold?
~ No post high school degrees,
attended SOC (SOU) for three years
What additional training or education have you had that would apply to this position?
Many small business courses, accounting
2. Related Experience
What prior work experience have you had that would help you if you were appointed to
this position?
Small business owner for over thirty years
Served on numerous boards of civil organizations, all had budgets
Do you feel it would be advantageous for you to have further training in this field, such as
attending conferences or seminars? Why? _While I feel comfortable with the budget
--T-- .
process, I can always learn more
rA'
3. Interests
Why are you applying for this position?
can be an asset to the committee
I think with my experience with budgeting I
4. Availabilitv
Are you available to attend special meetings, in addition to the regularly scheduled
meetings? Do you prefer day or evening meetings? Should be no problem
5. Additional Information
How long have you lived in this community?
53 years
Please use the space below to summarize any additional qualifications you have for this
position
I served on the Ashland City Council for 5 ~ years, so I have served on the budget
committee. I also served on the Ashland Hospital Board for eight years, which also has a
large budget. I ran a company with up to 35 employees so I understand what being and
employer is about, and how to budget.
Nov 12, 2008
Date
Signature
Page
------r--- -
CITY OF.
ASHLAND
APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO
CITY COMMISSION/COMMITTEE
Please type or print answers to the following questions and submit to the City. Recorder at
City Hall, 20 E Main Street, or email christeb (/ ashland.oLus. If you have any questions,
please feel free to contact the City Recorder at 488-5307. Attach additional sheets if
necessary.
t
Namerf(<:,-{ VI t l(ttr CtJdOC) (/48-
Requesting to serve on: .As~ kp lJd 73w/r-e1 (Commission/Committee}
Address 7 ~ -r . fl:r r /<; S t.
Occupation R~ r-{ re c/
Phone: Home
Work
Email.
Fax
rf <f c2 /0 ft:; 6
1. Education Back2round
What schools have you attended?
What degrees do you hold?
!I f! ( t/f r:5 11 y
8 <) fkccJt{llf;~ -5 y (t1({( J P
What additional training or education have you had that woUld apply to this position?
2. Related Exoerience
What prior work experience have you had that would help you if you were appointed to
this position? t . .
Sc 1tt70 ( Br.rq 7 e. U; CJ -\ f lfS t/ se vf'i7l<5
Pl'~ C; f' '1 t / y 0 f/ ~ VT I') /; I1'JYf't
( () f1l J11! ttee
Do you feel it would be advantageous for you to have further training in this field, such
as.attending conferences or seminars? Why? eve l1r~r II,! JUS'
1-c? I\e~ f trt ( .
,.,
-'---~--_..,._..~--- -~--~ ..- .-.. "T'W'"" y
r---
3. Interests
Why are you applying for this position?
,..---.
.1 94! 1/(1 ell ~lCR Y ,
fr4'd G/;f I ft/tev~~l ''1 '1(J6ffY'IfI1?~?7t-
fl- f{ <{ V1<C! , "1 cf-
4. A vallabilitv
Are you available to attend special meetings, in addition to the regularly scheduled
meetings? Do you prefer day or evening meetings? y.<? S - tL p / v 11
Ye h ~ c I I-t' ~ c;. ( C'5:. q cI t/ l' '1' tir -?7
I-.j '( ~ 'j r-5 (!t -I ~!7-rt )
Please use the space below to summarize any additional qualifications you have for this
position
5. Additional Information
How long have you lived in this community?
Date
Signature
~A'
r~-
IV/~I/~UUH 1~:35 FAX 5415528505
ta!001/012
CITY OF
ASHLAND
APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO
CITY COMMISSION/COMMl1TEE
Please type or print answers to the following questions and submit to the City Recorder at
City Hall, 20 E Main S~ or emall chrisJobOuhland.or llA. If you have any questions,
please feel free to contact the City Recorder at 488-5307. Attach additional sheets if
necessary.
Name Ma",~ ~~~
Requesting to serve on: ~\;~ ~~~ 0' '%~~ittee)
Address \~~ ~& & ~~
Occupatio~~~ ~\"
'\
Phone: Home ~~'~"'\c::5Jc
Work ~ ;~~~
Email \. ~\.~
Fax ~~,- ~~., ~~~
1. ElIacation lacbroh4 ~~ \ _ .
What schools have youattmded? ~~, J ~~~ ."t.~~~~
Wbatdegreesdoyouhold? ~O'~ ~,~~~
What additional training or education have you had that wo:}d apply to this ~on? ~
\~\. ~\ C~,~~'- \~~ ~\~~~ .~
~~~~~.~~
z. Related Ex.,rieace
What prior work experience have you had that would help you if you were appointed to
tbJs~.tion? ~ .~~ ~ ~ '-.:... ~
~\ ~~) ~~ .
~~,~,~ ~~~\.,~~~~~ ~~~~ ~\\~...
~~'<:::l,,",," ~\~ \.~~,~
Do you fc:el it would be advantaaeous for you to have furQ1et training in this. field. suclI
as attending conferences or seminars? Why? ~e....',~ ~ \~~~ ~
.~C-~~ ~. ~ ~~ ~~ ~\~~
'A'
T--
10/21/2008 13:35 F~X 5415528505
IaJ 002/012
3. Intere.tI \._ \ _ _ \ __ ~
Why are you applying for1'hisposition? ~~O 'r-\~,~\~~~
~ ~~"'~ ~~ ~\.~~ ~ ~'\~'CcJ
"'
~~~~
"
4. AvallabUltv
Are yoU available to attend special meetings, in addition to the rc~uled
mceWJ&s? Do yOu prefer day or evening meetings? ~'":... - 'S'" ~\{\'
s. Additional Information
How long have you lived in this community?
~~ ~~ ~~
,
Please use the space below to swmnarize any additional qualifications you have for this
positiOA ~ c\ ~
. ~e. ~~~W-o.. ~~~~ J'
~ ~,,~ ~Q~,~ '
\~~~ \~ ~~~\~t"O. ~~~~
~~ ~ ~~~~,
~~~~c.s~J .
\~~ \~ \V\~ ~~ \r'\ ~~~"
~~~~,&~~~~~
~~ ~\\~,~~~~
~ ~~ ~ ~~~ '. ~~b- ~:
, -
\~\~~ ~ ~~~~~ (J~~~~~
~"'~~~~I ~~ ~~ ~\'<~
\(::) - ~\- ~~
Date
~~~.~~,~,
Sipaturc
'A'
T
10/21/2008 13:35 FAX 5415528505
1lJ003/012
October 21, 2008
To whom it may concern:
After much thought and counsel from those whom I hold in high reprd, I hereby submit my
application for appointment to a city commission for yom perusal and consideration. I have a
sincere and keen interest in facilitating the development of Ashland as we move beyond the first
decade of the twenty-first century.
My experience spans some 30 years of teachina and administration in the area of hiKher
education. Positions have included Professor, Director of Equal Opportunity Programs, Interim
Academic Vice President. Assistant to Vice Chancellor for Adlninistration, Vice President for
Human Resources for the Community Colleaes of Spokane, and Vice Chancellor for the
Community Colleaes of Ventura County, California. The duties and responsibilities concomitant
with these usipments bave been diverse. challenging, rewarding, and indicative of the work
associated with the mission of a comprehensive Community. They have included experiences in
a large university system headquarters (University of California-Dine campuses, five teaching
hospitals, three laboratories, and one-hundred field stations) to a siD&lc CIDlpul eatity, in the
areas of planning, resource development, NCAA rules and re&U1ations, developing and managing
budgets, developing and manS\gj"'g programs and facilities, consultation in the construction of
facilities plus supervision discipline, hiring of faculty, staff, and administrators, Deaotiation of
union contracts and student living-learning environments.
As a results-orlented administrator, I have bad the opportunity to work closely and cooperatively
with state, Federal, and local agency officials on issues ranging from additional funding for
colleges to increasing math skills among the entire California State College and University
system, to Department of Labor on-site investigations for Federal Contract Compliance. Most
recently my task force and committee work has included addressing issues of national standards
regarding the future of human resources, and employee relations as well as sitting on two
national committees concerned with desegregation of higher education in six southern states and
planning for growth manaaement. Additionally, I taught in the l\.mA proaram for Bentley
CollelJe in EstoDia as well as t~";~g a seminar in Budapest. Hungry.
I have been directly responsible for changes in hiring policies, Chief negotiator for both faculty
and staff Bargaining agreements. planning for and operationalizing reduction in force, as well as
implementing various state and fedcrallaws whidl impact higher education. These challenges
requite that I work with various community groups and other conatituencies to build strong
consensus and coalitions. Moreover. I consider this to be one of my great abilities. While
affording me a significant base of knowledge and understanding, these experiences have Qranted
a certain kinship to chanse and reform within a higher educational setting. My training and
experience in organizational development, research, counseling, mediation and resource
development would continue to be most helpful with this leadership role. I have served on the
Spokane City Pllmn~ng Commission. Executive Board of the American Red Cross, as well as on
state and national professional association boards.
-,
10/21/2008 13:38 FAX 5415528505
IaI 004/012
In my present position. I am often called upon to consult and nesotiate with college presidents,
faculty, staff, unions, students, Boards of Tmstces, chief executive officers of companies, state
legislators and congresspersons. I am no stranger to the governance process and can ensure
anyone that my track record is indicative of such.
I am well-focused leader with the ability to build coalitions and establish a climate of care. trust,
and confidence. Moreover. I am confident that I am prepared for the challenges of this
committee because I have a high tolerance for ambiguity, the ability to analyze the impact of a
particular action upon the system and how to impact that system, as well as a concern for the
importance of each individual.
Thauk you for your consideration.
~~
Marion Bocnheim.
182 Fourth Street
Ashland Oregon 97520
2
~---
- 1-
10/21/2008 13:3B FAX 5415528505
III 005/012
MARION" BOENHEIM, PH.D.
EDUCATION
UD~erlity of MaJ..cbastl, Ambent, MUMehusetts
Doctorate, Administration and Psychology
Dissertation: "Unionism in Academia"
Eastem Miehi.aD Univenity, Ypsilanti, Michigan
Master of Arts, Psychiatric Counseling
University of Miebipa, Ann Arbor, Michigan
Baccalaureate in Psychology, Minor: History and Social Studies
OTHER PROFESSIONAL PREPARATION
· American Bar Association-Employment Law
· Harvard Graduate School of Education-Institutes for Educational Management
· University of Cincinnati-National Civil Service League, Personnel Management
· Michigan and Massachusetts-Teaching Certificate, Grades 7 - 12
· Eastern Michigan University--Administrative Organizations and Collective
Negotiations
· University of California, Davis, Law School--Discrimination Law, Collective
Bargaining, Real Property, Business Law
· University of Michigan--Laws and Their Impact on Higher Education,
Accountina and Introduction to Computers
M B - :tIJI~1.t ~"""I~_L. ...~-oq1lJ"-'-"'NMII.."..,..urmrlllllr.''''IIUUUII'___'''''''''''''''''''--...:N''''-'''''''''---,
.19687-L~~~~~;'C~urt:-APPI; v~ii;;~ci-;2308 -760-791:.eSO;-_w,- ~M
r----
10/21/2008 13:38 FAX 5415528505
flI 008/012
2
P~OFE~IQNAL PROFILE
Extendve succes~:ful administ,.alive and academic leudtJrshlp in inslitutio1'U of higher
education, ranging from Community Colleges to Research In.~titutinns. Recognized for
adding value in areas of strategic planning, teaching, employee and labol" relations,
fl.'ical and staff management, technological iNegralion, profes~lional development,
retention. tenure and promotion. Relevant accomplishments include:
~
· Managed the staffing process (founding frJcu1ty and admini,ftrators) for nfdW four..
Year University.
· Increased non traditional student enrollment by 980%, while maintaining highest of
slandards.
· Founded High Technology Council between institution.~ of Higher Education and
industry between two states. Aided in economic development in these areas.
· SUcces~jUlly led development qf long ler", ,ftrateg;c planning fo,. multi institutional
district.
· Negotiated collective bargaining con,,.acts which were win-win and rolled ovet at
expiration qI term.
· Implemented procedures to preclude violence in the wprk place by developing
policies, p,.ocedrnes and Iraining.
· Developed grant proposals and worked with State Atto,.ney General regarding
policies and t1'aining.
· Facilitated desegregation of Higher Educalion in seven southern states per judicial
mandate in the Ayers Case.
· Instituted reviews of all work areas to prevenl ADA and saftty risles to employees.
Put aside funds for adaptive equipment, thus ensuring availability to all departments
rega,.,Jlfts., of budget C01l..ftraints.
· Investigated charges of discrimination and sexual harassment and tesponded to state,
Federal and other agencies as appropriate.
· Consulfed and facilitated approvals of morrl 'han 1/3 of all federally approved plan.t
regarding Executive Order 11246 as amentkd
· Successfully resolved disputes prior to the filing of grievances, thus saving time,
money and emotionality 0.( all parties.
· Developed new employment category along with qual~flcations and salQT)l structure
to fllllhe needs of the inlJ',Uulion I'egtll'ding co"trQCt~ and gran's without impacting
other Job classifications.
· Developed successful plan to increase salaries for employees of two-year institutions
without requil"lng legislative monte.', which was acceplable to all parties.
· Created and supervised ombudsperson position.
· Developed courses/or studentsftrst entering the instil'ulion (freshmen 101) to ensure
success. AI~'o taught o'VerSef11 in an MBA program.
lIW--_'''_.___IIIl~_IIIl'IDIJ_Im~~_Q1''lIlllll__.'''''_I__''''__I'''__'_1I
M B ~.~~~;.~~-~~~~ ~~~~.~~~;~'~~II~~. C~ 923~8 '76~ ;~~-6~'~; U_. .... ...
1--
10/21/2008 13:38 F~X 5415528505
1aI001/012
3
PROFESSIONAL eXDerienee
Vice PnaideDt Buma. R.oUree!I aad Chief Negotiator, EEO cODIplluce oflieer
Victor Valley Community College District, Victorville, CA 2006 to present
· Plan Organize, direct and supervise a comprehensive human resources program, including
recruitment, selection, record keeping; provide supervision for the district's campus police
and safety program~
· Promote, direct and implement prolrams to ensure equal employment opportunity, tolerance
and cultural awareness: assure cornplilnce with di5trict policies. and procedures, state and
federal codes and regulations.
· Serve as chief negotiator in negotiations with classitied. adjunct and full time faculty.
· Oversee personnel management information systems and assure security and privacy of
persOMel data.
· Direct the administration of programs and services such as leaves. unemployment insurance~
risk management, compensation, and retirement.
· Supervise the payroll function. Respond to allegations of discrimination and harassment.
Aetinc Vice Ptelldent lor Academic ServlcetlChicr t..tnctio.... otTacer
Imperial Community College District
312004..912004
· Developed and administered policies and practices in compliance with federal and state
regulations and Imperial Community Collep policy and procedures includina employment
contracts, student and instructor relations, tenure, promotions, scheduling. and allocation of
resources.
· Communicated with and coordinated deans and chairpersons at all system institutions. Lead
in discerning effective visioning processes, overaaw external campUSC8, boo~ vocational
education programs" 2-year transfers, adult continuing and contract education.
· Assisted in collective bargaining with Imperial Valley College CCAlCT AlNEA and
California School Employees Association (CSEA).
· Oversaw the development of College publications such as the IVC General Catalog, class
schedulc, academic calendar, and other related publications.
· Served as accreditation district liaison officer with Accreditation Commission for Community
and Junior Colleges, as assigned.
· Prepared accreditation application. presented Board Repons. attended Board meetings, and
other duties as assigned by the Superintendent/President of the College.
Dinctor of Raman Heloarces 2003 to 2006
Imperial Valley Community College District
· Served as advt~r to the Superlntendent/President on human resource manqement, staff
diversity, staff development and employer/employee Jabor relations. Planned and provided
direction for human resources operations includinl manaaement, employee health and
welfare prosrams~ budgeting_ labor relations~ stiff diversity. liability and staff development.
· Reviewcd, analyzed and evaluated pending legislation, legal mandate~ regulations and
guidelines affecting district human resource programs, functions and activities.
~1"'~~~JIII!!II!!Ilo!l!l'l'l'l~.~>IMY!!l-1I!1II! ............,=...:.......l!!'I..!lII'IIM~IIIl.'"'I~.~~~
M B 19687 Lucaya Court, Apple Valley, CA 92308 760791-6501
r-~
10/21/2008 13:38 FAX 5415528505
1Z1008/012
4
· Planned, developed and implemented audit and resources pro(P'ams to improve and increase
the efficiency and cost effectiveness of the human resources operation.
· Assessed and updated the personnel record management, stomge and retrieval system.
· Administered employerlemployee relations including negotiations and the developmentJ
administration and intmpretation of collective bargaining agreements. Oversaw the
processing of classified and academic staft' grievances as specified in nelotiatcd contract
proccdu~s. Served as chief neaotiator
· ITlVesltgated charges of dtscrimi1llJtion and sexual harassment and tesponded to the
Slate Chancellor's OjJlce and olM' grwemmental age"cles as appropriate.
Fisk University 2001-2003
· Academic review of faculty and multicultural support programs at an institution committed to
maching. the liberal arts, and to the preparation of leaders. It is one of the oldest. and most
historic and prestigious HBCUs in the country. Fisk also is committed to involving both its
faculty and its most advanced students in original research. In proportion to enrollment, a
l.-eater percentage of Fisk graduates achieve the Ph.D. degree than the minority graduates of
any other U.S. college or university.
Direetor of HlUDaa Resources
University and Community College System of Nevada
(University of Nevada, Las Vegas,' University of Nevada, Reno; Nevada State College at
He"der~oll,. Desert Research /1J8Iitute: Community College of Sou/hem NelJadtJ,' G",QI BQJ';n
College, Tnic/cee Meaduws Community College: JVutern Nevada Community College)
· Developed and administered buman resource policies and practices in compliance with
federal and state regulations including employment contracts. employee relations. payroll,
tenure, promotion, salaries, leave, diversity goals, benefits and reauitment practices.
· Communicated wIth and coordinated Directors of Human Resources at all system Instltutio~s.
Lead in discerning effective administrative policies and practices amonl the community
colleges, state col1e~ universiti~ and research institutes.
· Developed and coordinated lona-range plannina, databases and fiscal management as it
relates to system human resources.
· Represented the UCCSN to public and private organizations, including legislative
committees, other state agencies and business entities.
. Implemented the Board of Regents' guidelines and policies. the Nevada Administrative Code
and the Nevada Revised Statutes.
Vice Cb.ncellor of Human Resourea
Ventura Community College District, Camarillo, CA 1999-2002
(30,000+ PrE stJldents-three college di3trict)
. Served as advisor to the Chancellor on human resource management, staff diversity, staff
development and employer/employee labor relations. Planned and provided direction for
human resources operations including management, employee health and welfu'e programs,
budgeting, labor relations, staff diversity~ liability and staff development.
. Reviewed, analyzed and evaluated pending legislation, legal mandates, regulations and
guidelines affecting district human resource propams. functions and activities.
. Planned. developed and implemented audit and resources programs to improve and increase
the efficiency and cost effectiveness of the human resources operation.
. Assessed and updated the personnel record management, storage and retrieval system.
olM!!!."!!"~.t!!I!!!!II'lIflI'lIIfPI!I!ll~""'IlII.1'1!1. 1~.1... ~"IN:~_!,'IUI~ . ~. ~. ~_"l'.-o:.-~!II1l!!I'.~.J!!!!l!l\!IlII
M B 19687 Lucaya COU~ Apple Valley, CA 92308 760791-6507
1---
10/21/2008 13:38 FAX 5415528505
iii 009/012
5
· Administered employer/employee relations including necotiations and the development,
administration and interpretation of collective bargaining agreements. Oversaw the
processing of classified and academic staff grievances as specified in negotiated contract
procedures. Served as ch ief neaotiator
· Investigated charges of discrimination and sexual harassment and responded to the State
Chancellor's office.
Viee Chucellor of HamaD ReIoarces
Community Coneges of Spokane.. Spokane. W A 1994..1999
(3 college system wirh 164 satellite operati01&S hi six cou.nti,s,. $100 million + budget.)
· Directed the recruitment, selection process and orientation of all administrators, faculty and
classified staff.
· Provided guidance to colleges and divisions regarding the review and resolution of problems,
preparation of reprimands, urticipated dismissal or layoffs to assure compliance with
contracts and laws.
· Provided guidance regardinl staffing, reorpnization, contract and rule interpretations;
reviewed all labor relations activities including participating in labor negotiations.
. Advised the District CEO (Chancellor) in regard to legislation involving employee relations;
served as member of the CEO's cabinet.
. Developed human resources budlct and control expenditures for the District.
· Developed and implemented the personnel procedures for processing Workers'
Compensation and unemployment propunl, accident and safety reports and Management
lnfonnanoo System input to the system.
. Taupt clalllses in management and psychology.
Director 01 Buman Re8ources. Profeuor, Scllool or B..i....
Morehead State University, Morehead, KY 1993-1994
. Responsible for administration of Human ResOurces Department.
. Developed personnel policies and procedures for support staff. faculty and administration
covering recrninnent; selection and nention programs; employee and labor relations,
grievances, classification and compensation; benefits management, professional development
and trajnina; train1na and coordination.
. Responsible for maintenance and development of computerized personnel systems as well as
development and implementation of merit pay plans.
. Assessed effectiveness of varied programs and modified as appropriate.
. Taught both graduate and undergraduate courses in management and psychology.
AIIlstant to Eucutive Vice Chaacellor, Dlrcetor of Atlirmative ActiOD aad Professor
University of Mississippi, Oxford, MS 1987-1993
. Directly supervised professional staff, clerical, undergraduate and graduate student staff.
. Developed and administered department budget and chaired Chancellor's commission on
minority affairs and commission on the status of women.
. Advised staff council, exercised authority over and had responsibility for the implementation
and monitorinJ of equal opportunity, affirmative action, ADA, minority affairs and diversity
initiatives for faculty, staff and students. Handled EEOC and infonnal grievances from
faculty, staff', administration, students and potential employees/students.
. Interpreted, developed and modified various policies and procedures.
..~'!~~!*tD""''''''''''''''IIIJI!!t.r~....1'tM&f:'..,."''<I , '~R ."~""'~!f'1!a.""'". ..rr~~~..~.IIIl!I!E!'"
M B 19687 Lucaya Court, Apple Valley. CA 92308 760791-6507
-------~-T--
10/21/2008 13:37 FAX 5415528505
a010/012
6
· Taught classes in administration and supervision; presented lectures and workshops on topics
such as human rcSOUf'QCS management,. group dynami~ diversity. organiwional
development and se'tual harassment.
· Represented the university and the Office of the Chancellor at local, regional and
National ev~nts as necessary.
Director of Procraml for Adalt Students, AdmiuioD5 aDd Reentry; Coonli.ator of
ElelDeDtary LeYe) Matbemlta, Alloetate Prof....; Adminiltratin Pro&raJn Spedalillt,
0fIlee of Fa cally aDd Staft' Afraln
California State University, Sacramento, CA 1981-1987
· Co.nducted research, planned, developed and directed administrative programs for students 25
years of age and older. Supervised and trained personnel lncludlnl peer counselors;
administered special proarama for older adults.
. Counseled and advised potential or cUrrent students 25 years of age or older ex.plaining
educational options and admissions requirements.
· Provided vocational and career counseling and made referrals to campus and community
resources.
. Associate Professor in the school of Business: tBught collective barpining negotiations and
related courses.
CODlaltaat (Sabbatical Leave)
University of Alaska System, Slate of Alaska, US Department of Labor
. Fonnulated and implemented personnel and hirina procedures.
. Helped establish the Mental Health Clinic in Anchorage, Alaska.
Coordinator, PenonDel DenlopmntlAdjuDet ~late Professor
University ofCalifomia Systom-wide Administration, Berkeley. CA
1911
1978-1980
. Functioned in leadership capacity in the development, assessment and evaluation of
personnel development, collective bargaining and aft1rmative action policy programs.
. Worked with faculty in the sysu:m'. overan personnel development to ensure effective
integration of policies and procedures into the total personnel system of tile University.
. Served 85 liaison between Regents, President, Administration and nine UC campuses, five
teachina hospitals, three laboratories and one hundred field stations. Also provided high-
level analysis on the desip of proprams and assistance
. Provided principal mlnagement support and coorclination in full range of duties and
responsibilities including policy, compliance and data evaluation of human resource
problems.
. Reviewed. assessed and evaluated existina and proposed academic and staff personnel policy"
identified implications/ramifications of University-wide personnel development objectives
and impact related to collective bargaining.
. Faculty member at UC BeIkeley; taught both graduate and undergraduate courses.
Senior Administrative Aaalyri; Director, Olllcc of a.maD Rclationa; AISIstaDt Assoeiate
Profasor. School 01 BUllnaa
California State University. Sacramento. CA 1974-1981
. Planned, developed, coordinated and administered human relations and affinnative action
prosrams. Worked cloely with administrators, deans.. directors., department chairs, Staft
students and local community as well as federal and state agencies.
h....IMtIl.,...-.!"!IlI!~--lIll~~IlIllll",J~.........,IIlIfl'!IlI!Io!~........,I!l'~~.~_~I..."""".I'.I~.~
M B 19687 Lucay. Court, Apple Valley, CA 92308 760791-6607
T---
10/21/2008 13:31 FAX 5415528505
1lI011/012
7
· Conducted trainina programs; developed positions relative to California State University
Classifications and Qualification Standards; developed presentations: and wrote. published
and disseminated pamphlets concerning management and personnel procedures.
· Acted as Informal grievance officer for individual and systemic personnel problems.
· Identified and chanaed personnel procedures and policies to ensure affinnative action/equal
opportunity and good management procedures.
· Responsible for university compliance to Title IX of the Civil Rights A~ 503/5041 Vietnam
Era Veterans Readjustment Act, Equal Pay, Age Discrimination and other state and federal
lawl, Monitored all hiring and recruiting efforts.
· Served as member of President's cabinet, determining priorities; represented tbe President as
necessary and served as legislative liaison with state legislation.
· Tonured faculty. Taught in Business School and PsycboloiY department
CONSULTANT
Advisor to Speaker of the House, California House of Representatives
City of Anchorap1 Alaska - Municipal Codtts
City of Columbus, Ohio, Police Department
Fifth U.S. Circuit Court
Government of Australi~ Consultant on Faculty Collective Bargaining
Government of Bolivi, Management Consultant
Government of Italy. Manapment Team, University of Cali fomi a
United States Civil Rights Commission
U.S. Department of Labor and U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare
Various Colleges and Universities on HUf!lan resource issues and BEO
AFFILIATIONS
American Association for Affirmative Action . Charter Member, Board of Directors, National
Conference Chair, Board of Directors. State Coordinator
American Association of Higher Education
American Association of University Women - Vice President
American Association of Women in Community CollcFS - Treasurer
AmeriCUl College Personnel Association - Commission III Directorate
American Council on Education
American Institute of Research
California Women in Higher Education - Legislative Consultant and Vice President
College and University Personnel Association Human Resources - Foundation Board
College and University PerSonnel Association. NV Rep. to the Nerl Exec Committee
National Msn. of Public Sector Equal Opportunity Officers ~ Board of Directors
National Ann. of Student Personnel Administrators - Prof. Standards/Devel Com.
State of Mississippi Personnel Commission
State of Washington Higher Education Association - Executive Committee
Soc. for Human Resource Management - Employee and Labor Relations Committee
Washington Assn. of Community and Technical Colleges. Executive Board Member
COMMUNITY SERVICE
~~-....,.r~ell~~t-.!"!~"~"~~. -....;-.......~-::--..................~~~~,~~~~
M B 19687 Lucaya Court, Appl. VaU.y. CA 92308 780 791-6507
r---
10/21/2008 13:37 FAX 5415528505
1aJ012/012
8
American Red Cross, Inland Northwest Chapter- Board of Direetors
Arts Council - TRluurer and Fundraisina Chair
Bar Association - Alternative Dispute Resolution Trainer
Chamber of Commerce
City Human Relations Council - Board Member
City of Oxnard Commission on Community R.elations
City of Spokane Planning Commission
Coordinator, Combined Fund Drive
Exchanp Club
Friends of the Museum
Girl Scouts, Co. leader
Governor's Task Force on the Status of Women
Mothers March of Dimes
NAACP
Rape Crisis Services ofN. Mississippi - Board of Directors and Foundina Member
Rotary International- (one of the first toO women internationally admitted to Rotary)
San Juan Unified School District - Advisor to the School Board
Spokane County Sign Ordinance Comm lttee
State House of Representatives Advisory Committee - Member
The American Committee on Foreign RelaIions - Steering Committee
Vallcy High Technology - Advisory Committee Chair
SPEAkERI.f ACUL IT
American Association for Affinnative Action, Regional and National Meetings
Bar Association, Continuing Legal Education
Bentley Con cae MBA Faculty - Estonian Business School, Tallinn
Hungarian University ofTcchnololY, Budapest - MBA faculty
Kilkenny. Ireland - Society for Intercultural Education. Training and Research
London. School of Economics - l..ectura'
Lt. Govemor's Women in the Economy Symposiwn
National Association ofWomon Deans, Counselors and Administrators
National Civil Service League - Workshop leader
University of Oklahoma - National Conference on Racial and Ethnic Relations
Urban League- Panelist and Discussion Leader
Women's Hi,tory Week
AWARDS
Center for Educational Management Studies - Award in Innovation
College and University Personnel Association -Quality in Human Resource Practice
Community Building Award National Assauh in Illiteracy
Directory of Distinguished Americans - Higher Education Award
Exxon Education Foundation Fellowship
International Who's Who Outstanding Young Women of America
Soroptoml~ Award for Helping Women
YWCA Award for Community Services - Education
Association of HR Executives - Outstanding Human Resource Executive of the Y e~
",IJ .. . . ..~....~........".,.~_ ~ ~~M"!"""'~'::;... .. . HI . ~-:,... ... """": ..JIl''!'n-!f\~'~!.~!IfIII''''''
M B 19687 Lucllya Court, Apple Valley, CA 92308 760791-6507
CITY Of
ASHLAND
APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO I
CITY COMMISSION/COMMITfEE ~ ~@~1lty7~
Please type or print answers to the fonowing questions and submit to the City Reco!IPJ at-' 7 2008 ~!iiJ
city Hall, 20 E Main Street, or email christebiQ)~or-us. If you have any qu~ /!!J
please feel free to contact the City Recorder at 488-5307. Attach additional sheets I'......................
necessary. ..........
Name $c.o~ \<e:~
,
Requesting to serve on: C-dt 3~ 13~* -L (Commissi~~--=:>
Address_(q&:> (" r>(~.:17',,^-1 Qd- ;t14.~ ,Oa. &f752D
Occupation -sr-~~ /VtA-/U.A~ Phone: Home t:("6'i - 7 6erD
A-Jl,t~ ;1!~/!t1M ~,P/y =~~~~;t~ ~t-~_~
Fax
1. Education Baclurround / / / a.( ~'2-G(- ~S-.2.~
What schools have you attended? rrp~ltbt/f ::$'('A-7e Upf~"u Af'~r>41 ~..
What degrees do you hold? ~--.:....f~ ~J~
D:1.ff!J ~~fd .5t-~ ~~ I nFPA Fife t-'f~;r:
What additional training or education have you had that would apply to this position?
af ,..~. ~ ~-d~ g~-rt- ?1w/ 4l4(&>( ~ "b.....'f;
1. Related Emerience .
What prior work experience have you had that would help you if you were appointed to
this position?
~ ~ ~~~ .'-4 ~,v(e6.:5I'~,,~~-r-=t
#/~J( Ilubbr/l2.:5
Do you feel it would be advantageous for you to have further training in this field, such
as attending conferences or seminars? Why?
$/111$"'", b A/v4'''~H.1-5 fi'tf' I'/bl t-I"~7d-~'T f,4re.
r.,
1-
3. tnterests
Why are you applying for this position?
'"""G. b---'"~ 1~ter" f)1,bIt.V~ Idi14 tile
JtJ1fer-~f ",f \ ~ Y /~-1ify.
4. Ava@abDitv
Are you available to attend special meetings, in addition to the regularly scheduled
meetings? Do you prefer day or evening meetings?
-*":1} elJevG~.
5. Additional Information
How long have you lived in this collllllUDity? _1 i ~~
Please use the space below to summarize any additional qualifications you have for this
position
.-r- UAiJe. '2b (A'Al'1" 42Xpetl~ A(/f',V-tr~ -~
1:~~P; X:::~;-f- ;~~;=.:~<<U~
{2;pU(~1e?<F)~:->' "e.s(pAhl(k. k -,rl<\.ti'(l
1tJ,t/~ i'1 ,q')(r.t:.~ ~f? (PI-j ((,;.,... I ...J..J (",..~ ,
~ ~~ ~~~.~(~; ~ /v-~~~
~~. ~~~;;~,~ 'A: Vd~f~4( f~~+i~
~/(,~ (gift< oOf) O/:J1n-<'t-TiJ'! ~ Cqf-r;vWI 1?u/4(.
r~ ,'3 <:"u~VNUIJ fYI ftte. A:.,q~ :5L( O;:ll'.;;;"
J.- t#~/~ (i~. -t> he ~ f.A~ t; "*lr /-p_~(M; T~_
U /7!t>f,
Date
.5e....-rr- 'K<.#
Signature
F.l'
_~~__._-------'TI ,
T-----
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Council Communication
Meeting Date:
Department:
Secondary Dept.:
Approval:
ODOT Aesthetic Advisory Committee for Bridge Improvements at
Exit 14 and Exit 19
December 16, 2008 Primary Staff Contact:
Community Develo ment E-Mail:
Administration Secondary Contact:
Martha Benn Estimated Time:
Ann Seltzerr
ann@ashland.or.us
Bill Molnar, Mike Faught
new
Question:
Will the Council approve a request from the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) to appoint
an Aesthetic Advisory Committee (AAC) for bridge improvements at Exit 14 and Exit 19?
Will the Council approve the appointments of the following to the AAC with each representative to be
determined by the respective group?
Council Liaison as appointed by the Council
Planning Commissioner Michael Dawkins (appointed by the Commission)
Public Art Commissioner Jennifer Longshore (appointed by the Commission)
Bike-Ped/Transp. Commissioner as appointed by Commission
Tree Commission as appointed by the Commission
Visitor and Convention Bureau as appointed by the Chamber of CommerceNCB
lAMP CAC member Dave Dotterer (tentative) plus one more
2 Area Business Owners To be determined
2 Citizens at Large Jerome White (local architect who previously contacted the
Planning Department asking to participate in the aesthetics
discussions) plus one additional
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends Council approve the membership listed above to serve on the Aesthetic Advisory
Committee for ODOT.
Background:
In early November 2008 staff from the Oregon Department of Transportation met with city staff and
Mayor Morrison to discuss the timeline for bridge improvements at Exits 14 and 19. The engineering
designs have been initiated and ODOT is seeking local input on the aesthetic designs, particularly for
Exit 14. Aesthetic design will include at a minimum: lighting, landscaping and structure surface
treatments.
Exit 14 is the primary gateway to Ashland and Oregon on Interstate 5 northbound. This is an
opportunity to influence the look and create a sense of place welcoming travelers to Ashland and
Oregon.
ODOT has requested the formation of a local Aesthetics Advisory Committee (attached letter) to meet
with the ODOT project team over the next several months to identify desired aesthetic improvements.
At ODOT's request, staff has identified the above list of AAC representatives who will each bring a
Page 1 of2
~~,
r----
CITY Of
ASHLAND
unique and professional perspective to the committee. It is anticipated the AAC will meet four times
with the ODOT design team and final decisions will be made in July of2009. The ODOT proposed
timeline is included in the attached letter.
ODOT will staff the committee and provide administrative and technical support and serve as a
resource to the AAC. They will not be a voting member. ODOT has stressed that they do not want to
"drive" the project and will rely on the AAC to represent the Ashland community and provide aesthetic
input that meet City standards.
ODOT has a predetermined budget for aesthetic improvements and does not guarantee that all the
AAC desired aesthetic improvements will be incorporated. However, should the committee identify
improvements beyond the current budget, ODOT will work with the City to incorporate those items
and look to the City to fund the cost difference.
City staff will mail letters to the proposed AAC members with information about the project and
meeting schedule and will invite lAMP CAC members and Exit 14 and Exit 19 area businesses to
participate on the AAC.
Related City Policies:
It is the practice of the City to work collaboratively with regional partners.
Council Options:
. Approve the AAC and proposed membership as presented.
. Do not approve the AAC and provide direction to staff.
Potential Motions:
. Move to approve the appointments of the Aesthetic Advisory Committee to work with City
Staff and the Oregon Department of Transportation on bridge improvements for Exit 14 and
Exit 19.
. Move to take no further action on this item at this time.
Attachments:
. Letter from Art Anderson, ODOT Area Manager to Mayor Morrison
Page 2 of2
!'~,
r-~-
Department of Transportation
Rogue Valley Office
100 Antelope Road
White City, OR 97503-1674
(541) 774-6299
Fax: (541) 774-6349
regon'r--'~ ,-:- --.
Theod~e R. Klliongoo~, Govemor\\~ ~ 0 ~C L~ ~ ;00; \ ~ J
November 25,2008 ILL) lIl)
Mayor John Morrison ~~\i -. . ..__..~.-_..
Ashland City Hall
20 East Main St.
Ashland, OR 97520
File Code:
RE: Ashland Exits 14 and 19 Bridge Projects
Dear Mayor Morrison:
As we discussed earlier this month, the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT), through
the Oregon Bridge Delivery Partners (OBDP), is about to embark on bridge improvements on
Interstate 5 at Exits 14 and 19. These are not interchange projects per se, but improvements to the
bridges and associated ramps.
The project scope includes repairing the existing Exit 14 bridge, widening it to accommodate a
center turn lane, sidewalks and bike lanes as well as signalizing the ramp terminals. The scope at
Exit 19 includes replacing the existing bridge, adding a center turn lane and a 10 foot multi-use
shoulder.
On each of these bridges, there are opportunities for aesthetic improvements that could reflect the
Ashland and Southern Oregon area, especially at Exit 14 since it is the first full interchange into
the state for northbound travelers. ODOT and OBDP desire to partner with the City in developing
these aesthetic concepts, and look forward to sharing examples of treatments used elsewhere in
Oregon.
We know you would agree, the decision making process on these aesthetic improvements should
be a collaborative one where the best ideas come from the City and its stakeholders. We request
your help in establishing an Aesthetics Advisory Committee (AAC) of key stakeholders. This
Advisory Committee, selected by the City, and managed by it, would serve as a sounding board
to the members' constituents and provide input to the Project Design Team (PDT). This project
is on a tight schedule. We propose the following timeline:
December 2008: City identifies and recruits AAC members. ODOT would be happy to provide a
sample invite letter and project fact sheet to you.
Mid-January: (Meeting #1) Kick-off meeting of the PDT, AAC and other stakeholders. This
meeting will include project information, schedule and timeline. Various aesthetic features will be
presented. Discuss Visual Performance Standards.
Mid-March: (Meeting #2) Present concepts and receive feedback on aesthetic features within the
bridge program's Visual Performance Standards or listen to what additional/different features the
AAC would like to see.
April-May: Two public open houses will be held to get feedbackfrom the broader community.
--~T~~
@
Page 2- Ashland Exits 14 and 19 Bridge Projects
June-July (Meeting #3) Final input from the AAC on what aesthetic treatments will be used on
the project. Two additional public open houses will be held later in 2009 based on AAC feedback.
We understand this is an ambitious schedule to consider and decide on aesthetic improvements,
but the milestones on the plan are such that we need to make these decisions to get to bid and
construction in 2011. The project team welcomes your input and partnership as we come up with
aesthetic treatments for these bridges that everyone can be proud of.
Sincerely,
t2t-~
Art Anderson
ODOT Area Manager
cc: John Lowe, ODBP Project Manager
Tim Dodson, Bridge Delivery Unit
Tim Fletcher, ODOT Region 3
Karen Tatman, Quincy Engineering
Gary Learning, ODOT Public Involvement
Mark Baker, OBDP Public Involvement
r-
CITY OF
ASHLAND
Council Communication
Local Improvement District (LID) Ordinance Amendment: AMC 13.20
Meeting Date: December 16, 2008 Primary Staff Contact: Michael R. Faught
Department: City Attorney's Office E-Mail: faughtm@ashland.or.us
Secondary Dept.: Public Works Secondary Contact: Jim Olsen
Approval: Martha Benn Estimated Time: 15 minutes
Question:
Should the City Council conduct and approve First Reading of an ordinance titled "An
Ordinance Amending Chapter 13.20, Local Improvement and Special Assessment, Amending
Sections 13.20.010 thru 13.20.050 and Section 13.20.210, Relating to Definitions, Initiationof
Improvements, Resolution Notice and Content, Waivers of Remonstrance and Remedies; and
Amending AMC Section 13.20," and move the ordinance on to Second Reading?
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends Council approval of First Reading by title only and move the Ordinance on to
Second Reading scheduled for January 6, 2009.
Background:
On April 2, 2007, the Council began a process to review and discuss proposed amendments to
Ordinance 13.20, Local Improvements and Special Assessments. The Council continued their
review at both the November 5, 2007 and the October 20, 2008 Council meetings and the
December 1, 2008 Study Session. In addition, during the Study Session the Council discussed
the impact of potential LID subsidy reductions as outlined in Resolution No. 1999-09 .
Based on Council input, staff drafted proposed amendments to AMC Chapter 13.20 Local
Improvement and Special Assessment for Council action. The proposed AMC amendments
impact four sections of the existing LID code: Section 1, 13.20.020 (B) Definitions; Section 2,
13.20.020 Initiation of Local Improvements; Section 5, 13.20.050 Notice of Hearing Regarding
Improvement Resolution; and Section 6, 13.20.210 Remedies / Review of Assessment.
Specific areas addressed by the proposed LID amendments include a clear definition of "Local
Improvement" Chapter 13.20.010(B). The proposed amendments also specifically define the
types of eligible local improvement projects (street, transit, parking, sewer, water, irrigation, etc.)
as shown in Section 2, Chapter 13.20.020. The Section 2 Chapter 13.20.020(B) amendment
increases the percentage of property owners required to sign a petition to initiate an LID from
500/0 to 60%, and requires property owned by the City within a proposed LID to pay the same
rate as other property owners using the same methodology.
Other amendments include Section 5 Chapter 13.20.050 (C) adding language that explains the
process if the Council suspends an LID for six months and language that provides owners or
successor's the right to appear at LID public hearings (exercising their First Amendment right),
Page 1 of2
rA'
--1-
CITY OF
ASHLAND
but still insure the validity of existing contractual waivers of remonstrance. Section 6, Chapter
13.20.210 adds language that redefines "Remedies and Review of Assessments" in accordance
with ORS.
It is important to note that the proposed LID amendment in the "Definition" section has been
edited since the council last reviewed the document. The new edits are located in Section 1
Chapter 13.20.010 (B) (1), thru (3). The previous version included a Subsection (A) in the
"Local Improvement" definition. On final review by legal, it was determined that there were two
subsections missing from the ORS reference. Those ORS references are now added to the
proposed ordinance in numeric form rather than alphabetically.
In addition to AMC amendments, there will be proposed amendments to Resolution 1999-09
reducing LID subsidies presented to the Council at the second reading of the proposed ordinance.
Related City Policies:
City Charter Article 10, Ordinance adoption provisions.
Council Options:
1) The City Council could approve the First Reading and set the matter to January 6, 2009
for Second Reading.
2) The City Could direct staff to make further edits and place the revised ordinance on the
next Council meeting agenda for First Reading.
3) The City Council could decide to postpone consideration of the proposed ordinance.
Potential Motions:
Staff: [Conduct First Reading of Ordinance by Title only]
Council: Motion to approve First Reading and set Second Reading for January 6, 2009.
Attachments:
· Proposed ordinance
Page 2 of2
r.l'
--~-r-
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 13.20, lOCAL IMPROVEMENT AND
SPECIAL ASSESSMENT, AMENDING SECTIONS 13.20.010 THRU 13.20.050 AND
SECTION 13.20.210, RELATING TO DEFINITIONS, INITIATION OF
IMPROVEMENTS, RESOLUTION NOTICE AND CONTENT, WAIVERS OF
REMONSTRANCE; AND REMEDIES
Annotated to show deletions and additions to the code sections being modified.
Deletions are bold . and additions are in bold underline.
WHEREAS, the City of Ashland wishes to modify its Local Improvement District
ordinance to make changes to definitions, to modify provisions regarding improvement
resolutions, and remedies and to modify provision regarding waivers of remonstrance to
more closely conform with case law regarding freedom of speech and expression; and
THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOllOWS:
SECTION 1. Section 13.20.010 is hereby amended to read as follows:
SECTION 13.20.010 Definitions.
The following words and phrases whenever used in this chapter shall be construed as
defined in this section unless from the context a different meaning is intended.
A. "Improvement resolution" means that resolution adopted by the council declaring
its intention to make a local improvement.
B. "Local Improvement" has the meaning given under ORS 223.001 310.140 (9}(a)
means a capital construction proiect. or part thereof. undertaken by a local
aovernment. pursuant to ORS 223.387 to 223.399. or pursuant to a local
ordinance or resolution prescribina the procedure to be followed in makina
local assessments for benefits from a local improvement upon the lots that
have been benefited by all or a part of the improvement:
(1) That provides a special benefit only to specific properties or
rectifies a problem caused by specific properties: and
(2) The costs of which are assessed aaainst those properties in a sinale
assessment upon the completion of the proiect: and
(3) For which the property owner may elect to make payment of the
assessment plus appropriate interest over a period of at least 10 years.
C. "Local Improvement District" means the property that is to be assessed for all or
any portion of the cost of a local improvement and the property on which the local
improvement is located. .
D. "Lot" means a lot, block or parcel of land.
E. "Owner" means the owner of the title to real property or the contract purchaser of
real property of record as shown on the last available complete assessment role
in the office of the County Assessor.
LID Ordinance
Page 1 of 6
r--
SECTION 2. Section 13.20.020 is hereby amended to read as follows:
13.20.020 Initiation of Local Improvements
Whenever the council in its discretion deems it necessary to make any local
improvement to construct. alter. repair. or improve any street. transit.
parkina. sewer. water. irriaation. sidewalk. electric. fiber network. street
liahts. storm drain or any other local improvements to be paid for in whole or
in part by special assessment, the council may declare its intention to make the
local improvement by adopting an improvement resolution. The proposed local
improvement may be initiated by either of the following methods:
A. By the council, at its own initiative; or
B. By written petition requesting the local improvement signed by the owners
of property that would benefit specially from the local improvement and that
would have at least 600/0 5Q!k of the anticipated assessment as estimated by
the city engineer. Property within the proposed district boundary. owned
by the City shall be counted in support of local improvement district
formation at the same rate as any other broperty owner usina the same
methodoloay proposed for the local improvement.
Whenever all of the owners of any property to be benefitted benefited and
assessed for any local improvement have signed a petition directed and
presented to the council requesting such local improvement, the council may
initiate and construct such local improvement without publishing or mailing notice
to the owners of the affected property and without holding a public hearing
regarding the proposed local improvement. -
SECTION 3. Section 13.20.030 is hereby amended to read as follows:
SECTION 13.20.030 Content of Improvement Resolution.
A. Mandatory Provisions. The improvement resolution shall contain the following:
1. A description of the improvement;
2. A description or map of the boundaries of the local improvement district to be
assessed;
3. A declaration of the council's intention to undertake the improvement;
4. Provision for a date, time and place for a hearing regarding the improvement;
and
5. A direction that notice be given of the improvement and of the public hearing.
6. The amount of the estimated cost of the improvement made by the city
engineer and a proposed allocation of the cost of the improvement among the
owners of the property to be specially benefitted benefited;
B. Optional Provisions. The improvement resolution may include the following:
1. A determination whether the property benefitted benefited shall bear all or any
portion of the cost of the local improvement, based upon the estimated cost;
LID Ordinance
Page 2 of 6
r~~---
2. Alternative proposals relating to the local improvement, but only if each
alternative contains all of the information required to be contained in the
resolution if that alternative proposal were the only proposal put forward; and
3. Any other information that the council deems relevant to the improvement.
SECTION 4. Section 13.20.040 is hereby amended to read as follows:
SECTION 13.20.040 Notice of Hearing Regarding Improvement Resolution.
A. Notice. Notice of the hearing regarding the improvement resolution shall be given at
least 30 days prior to the scheduled date of the hearing.
B. Method of Deliverina Notice. Notice shall be made by publication in a newspaper of
general circulation within the city and by mailing copies of the notice by first class
mail to the owners of lots affected by the improvement.
C. Content of Notice.
1. The notice shall contain:
a. A general description of the proposed improvement;
b. A description or map of the local improvement district to be created;
c. A description of the property to be specifically benefitted benefited by the
improvement; and
d. The date, time and place of the hearing when the council will hear and
consider objections or responses to the improvement.
e. A statement that if two-thirds of the property owners to be benefitted
benefited object to the improvement, the improvement will be suspended for
six months.
f. A clear explanation on how and where property owners may object to the
improvement.
g. The amount of the estimated assessment proposed on each particular
property.
h. Any other information the council may direct to be included.
D. Effect of Failure of Notice. Any mistake, error, omission or failure with respect to a
good faith mailing of any notice shall not be jurisdictional or invalidate the
improvement proceedings.
SECTION 5. Section 13.20.050 is hereby amended to read as follows:
13.20.050 Hearing on Improvement Resolution
A. Testimonv Considered. At the hearing regarding the improvement resolution,
the council shall hear and consider testimony, both oral and written, on the
improvement.
B. Approval in Discretion of Council. The council may implement the
improvement resolution and undertake completion of the improvement only if, in
its sole discretion, the improvement is in the best interest of the city. The
LID Ordinance
Page 3 of 6
r~---
council's discretion shall not be limited by the fact that a majority of the
bonefitted benefited property owners have requested or indicated their support
for the improvement.
C. Effect of Remonstrance. If at the hearing, the owners of two-thirds of the
property to be specially assessed for the improvement, or the owners of property
which will be assessed for two-thirds or more of the proposed assessment,
deliver to the council a remonstrance to the improvement, then action on the
improvement shall be suspended for 3 period of six {ID months. Once the six
months has expired. unless the Council initiates the improvement on its
own initiative. it is the petitioner's responsibility to re-submit a new
petition for the proiect that meets the reauirements outline in 13.20.020 (B).
Action on sidewalks or on improvements unanimously declared by the council to
be needed at once because of an emergency shall not be subject to suspension
by a remonstrance of the owners of the property to be specially assessed.
Notwithstanding any document or agreement obligating an owner, or the owner's
successor in interest, to be in favor of improvements or in favor of a local
improvement district, or any document of agreement waiving an owner's or
successor's right to remonstrate against improvements of a local improvement
district, such owner or successor may appear at the public hearina and
exercise their First Amendment riaht to oppose or support the proposed
local improvement district. but such exercise shall not invalidate or nullify
existina contractual waivers of remonstrance. remonstrate and such
remonstration shall qualify as a remonstrance under this section.
D. Modifications. At the hearing, the council may direct any modification of the
improvement that it deems appropriate. If the council modifies the scope of the
improvement such that the local improvement district would be enlarged, or, if
estimated assessments have been made by the time of the hearing, the
assessment is likely to be increased by more than ten percent upon one or more
lots, then a new improvement resolution shall be adopted by the council, and
new notices mailed to all of the owners of properties within the local improvement
district. No new publication regarding the amended improvement need be made.
E. Creation of Local Improvement District. If the improvement is approved by the
council, the council shall by resolution create the local improvement district to be
served by the improvement.
F. Determination of Allocation. The council shall determine whether the property
benefitted benefited shall bear all or a portion of the cost. The council shall then
direct the city recorder to prepare the estimated assessment to the respective
lots within the local improvement district and file it in the lien records of the city.
The council shall then hear any objections that have been filed with the recorder
concerning the amount of the assessments, and may adopt, correct, modify or
revise the estimated assessments.
LID Ordinance
Page 4 of 6
1--
SECTION 6. Section 13.20.210 is hereby amended to read as follows:
13.20.210 Remedies I Review of Assessment.
Notwithstandina any of the provisions of this ordinance or ORS 223.387 to
223.399, and consistent with ORS 223.401, owners of any property aaainst
which an assessment for local improvements has been imposed may seek a
review thereof under the provisions of ORS 34.010 to 34. 1 OO.:-Subject to the
curative provisions of this chapter and the rights of the city to reassess, all
actions of the council taken pursuant to this chapter are re\'ietJ.'able solely and
exclusi':ely by ':Jrit of re\'iew in accordance 'J/ith the procedures in ORS 31.010
to 34.100.
SECTION 7. Severability.. The sections, subsections, paragraphs and clauses of this
ordinance are severable. The invalidity of one section, subsection, paragraph, or clause
shall not affect the validity of the remaining sections, subsections, paragraphs and
clauses.
SECTION 8. Codification. Provisions of this Ordinance shall be incorporated in the
City Code and the word "ordinance" may be changed to "code", "article", "section", or
another word, and the sections of this Ordinance may be renumbered, or re-Iettered,
provided however that any Whereas clauses and boilerplate provisions (Le. Sections 7
and 8) need not be codified and the City Recorder is authorized to correct any incorrect
cross-references and any typographical errors.
The foregoing ordinance was first read by title only in
accordance with Article X,
Section 2(C) of the City Charter on the day of
, 2008,
and duly PASSED and ADOPTED this day of , 2009.
Barbara M. Christensen, City Recorder
SIGNED and APPROVED this _ day of
, 2009
LID Ordinance
Page 5 of 6
T~~
John Stromberg, Mayor
Reviewed as to form:
Richard Appicello, City Attorney
LID Ordinance
Page 6 of 6
r